What D1 programs should be great but aren't?

Stanford, they should win every year with the recruits they get

OHIO STATE!!!!! end of discussion

Illinois is a top 3 HS XC state, but is absolutely garbage at the D1 level.

Oh wow, I’ve ran several races with Pfruender over the last couple years, had no clue he was a physical therapist.

You’re last statement about bouncing around to clueless PT’s hit home with me. These guys aren’t bad PT’s by a long shot, but in regards to running specifics forget about it. I think I’ll be making an appointment soon, thanks for the info!

Despite the great weather and access to trails, Cal has developed a reputation as a kooky political university. Antifa protests, riots, etc. The reputation of the town alienates 49% of the country. Good runners tend to be pretty focused and need an environment that allows them to relax, focus on studies and their sport. I can't imagine the average even keel runner wanting to step into that environment. Throw in the gridlock traffic of the bay area and the cost of living and it's easy to see why their program is kinda , meh.

PSU has a solid rep as a great mid-d program, but for whatever reason they don't attract top distance talent (Tessa Barrett being the recent exception on the ladies side). It seems like they just don't even try to seriously compete at XC. Top PA distance runners always end up elsewhere.

chargeoff wrote:

What's the pitch to attract an out-of-state recruit to Illinois or an SEC school?

Illinois doesn't need to attract out of state kids, they need to keep in state kids. They did that for two years (with Davis, Raiser, and Dale) and will likely make the NCAAs this year because of that.

The school itself attracts plenty of out of state students so that is not an issue. A program without a plan or identity is the issue whether you are talking in state or out of state.

There's a new coach so we'll see what happens. If she can get the men to NCAAs and do well there while not having the women embarrass themselves that would be a good start. Pitch that performance, a sub4 miler on the roster to a kid interested in engineering or one of the other good programs at the school and you should be heard out.

Penn State wrote:

PSU has a solid rep as a great mid-d program, but for whatever reason they don't attract top distance talent (Tessa Barrett being the recent exception on the ladies side). It seems like they just don't even try to seriously compete at XC. Top PA distance runners always end up elsewhere.

Given the fantastic 800m runners going through PSU recently, it is a bit strange that they have not been able to attract a few studs in the 3K-10K range.

PSU XC wrote:

Penn State wrote:

PSU has a solid rep as a great mid-d program, but for whatever reason they don't attract top distance talent (Tessa Barrett being the recent exception on the ladies side). It seems like they just don't even try to seriously compete at XC. Top PA distance runners always end up elsewhere.

Given the fantastic 800m runners going through PSU recently, it is a bit strange that they have not been able to attract a few studs in the 3K-10K range.

I think PSU just got a bad rep, especially after their last crop of distance runners didn’t really “endorse” the university’s program. Mike Slagowski ended up going there as well and never got up to much, last I heard he went NAIA I believe?

Tldl; they have a bad track record with distance runners. Great for mid-distance though.

Marquette should be much better. Wisconsin usually signs the top state kid but there are many 9:10 guys every year that don’t go to Marquette.

Ruh roh wrote:

PSU XC wrote:

Given the fantastic 800m runners going through PSU recently, it is a bit strange that they have not been able to attract a few studs in the 3K-10K range.

I think PSU just got a bad rep, especially after their last crop of distance runners didn’t really “endorse” the university’s program. Mike Slagowski ended up going there as well and never got up to much, last I heard he went NAIA I believe?

Tldl; they have a bad track record with distance runners. Great for mid-distance though.

PSU has a reputation for burning out runners.

Also, with the trail system and local running resources that Pitt has, they suck. Improving, but they should be better than mediocre to at worst poor. They struggle in-state and Webb focuses too much on sprints for a team without their own track.

Drake hired a group of world class coaches. I expect that they may come out of nowhere to be a real force. They have Drake relays, US champs, AAU champs held there so there already is name recognition at least. People are afraid of schools that they have not seen or heard of.

Illinois kids would rather win D3 ships at NCC than go to UIUC

NCC doesn’t get the top ranked kids from Illinois. There were 29 guys in the state who ran 9:20 or better and I am betting none are going to NCC. They are very good for a D3 program but don’t compare to D1.

UCLA. There are tons of sub 4:20 guys and sub 5:00 girls within 50 miles of campus. The academics are great. The weather is amazing. Great campus with major athletic funding. Even if you just recruited from socal you should still be top 10 every year in xc. No other school has as much going for it but does less. Seriously, it's not even close.

Bettingfool wrote:

UCLA. There are tons of sub 4:20 guys and sub 5:00 girls within 50 miles of campus. The academics are great. The weather is amazing. Great campus with major athletic funding. Even if you just recruited from socal you should still be top 10 every year in xc. No other school has as much going for it but does less. Seriously, it's not even close.

They told my son 4:12/9:16 to pound sand.

On your Pitt comments... Yep. Schenley, Frick, and the Jail Trail are all right there, and then we've got long trails like the Panhandle Trail for long runs.

I ran for Webb, and I agree he should focus more on distance. During track season it felt really cliquey, like distance was a totally separate team from the rest of the track team. We just barely interacted. Even on the distance side, almost all the scholarship money went to the 800 guys. Throughout my time there, the biggest scholarship any of the long-distance guys ever got was books. Plus Pitt's had a revolving door of distance coaches recently. I will say finishing first for the team at races as a walk-on was a huge ego boost since there were no studs on the team. I know it's gotten better as far as studs go since there are plenty of guys that go sub-15 now, but it was pretty bad.

Fun fact: A guy on our team was recruited on the promise that we'd have a track on-campus by 2011. As far as I know, we still don't have a track. Kind of funny our options as a D1 school are to invade a D3 school's track (CMU), trade time with running clubs at a local park's track (Schenley), or run the tight banks of our 200m indoor track (Fitz).

They told my son 4:12/9:16 to pound sand.[/quote]

smh

Datesjat wrote:

Bettingfool wrote:

UCLA. There are tons of sub 4:20 guys and sub 5:00 girls within 50 miles of campus. The academics are great. The weather is amazing. Great campus with major athletic funding. Even if you just recruited from socal you should still be top 10 every year in xc. No other school has as much going for it but does less. Seriously, it's not even close.

They told my son 4:12/9:16 to pound sand.

1600/3200 or 1500/3000?