3200 high school tiers

In 2019 there were 114 juniors who ran sub 9:20. That’s it.

I’ve got to think there were a lot more than 114 D1 signings out of the class of 2019.

It’s borderline common for a senior running in the 9:20s to get a scholarship to some D1 schools. Bower woman and others here are way off base.

yawn wrote:

It’s borderline common for a senior running in the 9:20s to get a scholarship to some D1 schools. Bower woman and others here are way off base.

Has the availability of scholarships changed that much? When I ran, 9:20 guys ran for a JC and that's if they wanted to even compete in college.

Why would any D-1 school want to give a scholarship to someone that can't score any points in most meets?

Not even close. It was laid out in another thread the times of the worst distance team in the Big 10 who won the indoor track championships with all other event groups. When teams have multiple guys running 3:45 for 1500 and 8 flat for 3k and 14 minutes for 5k who are walk-ons and not scoring at a conference meet, 9:20 guys are not getting anything. The math has been reviewed many times. There are 12.6 scholarships. If each scholarship scores 10 points, teams are doing pretty well. That means 8th place earns 10% of a scholarship. Some teams have 8 guys who can run 14 flat for God's sake. There may be 25 guys in the conference who can run 14 flat. Some of you need to broaden your scope to look at all event groups. 1 point in the 100 is the same as 1 point in the 5k. We would all love for some of you to list a school that is paying for a 9:20 guy because we can make that coach a hero by sending him some 9:10 guys who would be happy to take that scholarship. But you won't do that because you shoot from the hip.

Bower Woman wrote:

It was intentional to show that the time is not great for high school. Good programs won't take a kid who runs 9:20 junior year. The thread is about times for high school in any grade. So a kid who runs 9:30 junior year and 9:20 senior year is headed to D3 even though the OP thinks that 9:20 is great.

9:20 is great. What is better? A kid who runs 9:19 off of 50 mpw max or the kid who runs 9:09 off of 80-90 mpw. What about the sub-9 kid who ran 100 mpw? Which athlete has more upside versus the ability to contribute right away? The 9:20 needs to be put in context. Heck, even 9:30 is great if it’s done on 30-40 mpw.

Also, what about high altitude kids? Plenty of examples of 9:20 +/- kids who, when given the rare opportunity to race at sea level, manage to crack 9:00. Especially if that kid was a soccer player who got a late start in “running.” Any coach who overlooks a 9:20 kid without context is a fool, D1 or otherwise.

I doubt if it works that way. Many sub-9 guys that trained hard in HS continue to improve in college and running that fast is indicative of rare talent. How would the coach know if the 50 mpw 9:20 guy is suddenly going to become dedicated in college or might even be lying about their training?

For the most part, recruiting begins and ends based on PRs.

Coach watching wrote:

I have 3 friends who are D1 college coaches so I know the landscape pretty well. They have told me that there are no coaches today who offer anything for runners slower than 9:20 junior year. Mid-majors don't offer more money for slower runners. In fact. they may even offer less. Those programs are slow because they are underfunded. In today's environment where many teams have multiple guys running sub 14 who won't even score at a conference meet, 9:20 guys need to prove that they can run fast before they will be given anything.

Thinking through a number of D1 examples I know of that don’t fit this statement. Mostly, I think you are discounting results away from the 3200. Maybe it’s right that you need a really fast 3200 if everything else is subpar.

- two kids with solid XC results who focus on the 800 in track and two kids with solid XC results who focus on the 800 and 1600. They all have slowish 3200 times on the books because they never really tried there.

- kid with a history of injuries in track but some great XC results when healthy

- kid with subpar times but proven family results at the D1 level

- small school kid that never races top competition or goes to big meets to help push the pace

Look at something other then big 10 genius. I just did a half effort search, Illinois State has 3 guys on the team who never broke 9:20. One never broke 9:30. There are so many D1 colleges out there that are perfectly fine taking someone who runs in the 9:20s.

Do a little research next time.

You need some work on reading comprehension.

"We would all love for some of you to list a school that is paying for a 9:20 guy because we can make that coach a hero by sending him some 9:10 guys who would be happy to take that scholarship. But you won't do that because you shoot from the hip."

Do you understand the difference between a roster spot on an average team and a scholarship? They are not paying for the guys you listed.

Coach watching wrote:

You need some work on reading comprehension.

"We would all love for some of you to list a school that is paying for a 9:20 guy because we can make that coach a hero by sending him some 9:10 guys who would be happy to take that scholarship. But you won't do that because you shoot from the hip."

Do you understand the difference between a roster spot on an average team and a scholarship? They are not paying for the guys you listed.

I think you fail to realize there is a big difference between the big dawgs of D1 and the rest of D1. I guarantee you you will EASILY be offered money from a lot of schools in RMAC or Big Sky if your athletes are running 9:10 or even 9:20 for that matter. Here in Utah we’ve had a couple meets where the 5k is won in 14:50, with a few guys not breaking 16 in D1 meets. Obviously altitude and tactics play a role but I just want to point out not every D1 meet nor team is full of sub 14 5ks and sub 3:50 1500s

Coach watching wrote:

You need some work on reading comprehension.

"We would all love for some of you to list a school that is paying for a 9:20 guy because we can make that coach a hero by sending him some 9:10 guys who would be happy to take that scholarship. But you won't do that because you shoot from the hip."

Do you understand the difference between a roster spot on an average team and a scholarship? They are not paying for the guys you listed.

You need to work on your common sense. You think all those guys I listed are walk one? I know from experience. I was given a fairly generous scholarship to a school and my pr was just under 9:30.

You seem to think that schools like Akron and other small D1 places don’t need 9:20 guys.

There are plenty of scholarships for slower guys. I gave you an example with ISU and an anecdotal case with my own story. Just accept you are wrong

Thise teams are very underfunded. Supply and demand levels everything. Do you realize that D3 schools are slow because they don't have scholarships?