OLIN HACKER IS THE SAME AGE AS CONNOR MANTZ

if that strikes you, wait till you find out how it works for team sports .... you;d be floooreed

College Track, specifically Middle and LD running has become a joke. 24-25 year olds much more commonly competing against 19 years olds has become way too commonplace, instead of the 1-2 off situations. The women's 10K winner is turning 25 in three weeks, Hacker is a 7 year guy, not even a Redshirt and CoVid 6th year guy. The 800 winner should be in Diamond League meets for his development, not taking a full ride from a potential young promising prospect. All of College sports has become a joke, with NIL, Transfer Portal etc and this? It is way out of hand and much different no matter what anyone says than years ago. If you talk to any knowledgeable fan of College sports and are objective you should come to the same conclusion.

Fisher graduated HS after turning 18 the end of April. He graduated University just after turning 22. He smashed two American records at 24. Guess he could have rewritten the NCAA records books if he stuck around in University.

Yes except Grant Fisher wasn’t improving in college at all. He never broke 13:20 in college and was basically stagnant in his development. But once he joined BTC and got on that Shelby burrito diet. Bam he never looked back.

Conner Mantz Dec. 8, 1996 = 25

Olin Hacker May 21, 1997 = 25

Mercy Chalangat July 11, 1997 = 24 and almost 25 (Listed as a Junior)

Marlee Starliper July 21, 2002 = 19 Marlee is a Soph at NC State (red shirt Freshman)

Mercy Chalangat is 5 years older than Marlee and yes she will provide good competition for Marlee but is being 5 years older really a fair playing field for recognition of achievement in the NCAA

Maybe Marlee should set up a championship race where only people born on July 21, 2002 are in it so we don't have to worry about competitors being older or younger.

Thank you for blessing us with this enlightened opinion, great knowledgeable sports fan commenting on an Internet forum. It really sucks to see young athletes getting the most out of college athletics, wether that’s using up all 4 years of their eligibility or striking a big NIL deal.

I certainly agree that the NCAA is kind of a joke. Difference between me and most of you is that I've always thought so. I ran in high school (probably averaged above 60mpw for the whole time, maybe closer to 70 for a year or more) and was decent. Nevertheless, like a lot of folks my generation, I never considered participating in the NCAA. Most of my training was alone, but not once during all the runs with my partners - and this would be a lot of miles - did anyone mention collegiate running. Why is this attitude so rare these days?

If you feel you 'have to' run for a college, well, you're stuck with whatever you consider 'unfair'. If you feel you must start right after high school, you may be offended that plenty of guys start older. To avoid even the need for discussions of this sort, avoid the system. Train and compete. Don't tell any school about it. None of this age stuff will affect you. It really is that easy to NOT be beaten by 28 year old students.

You are most welcome, if you had a clue, you would have seen it for what it was.

Can we stop pretending the shoes are the only reason people are running fast and acknowledge how much age is a factor too?

All true, I have said so on here and on other site before. I I looked at the descending Indoor Mile list, which I believe had 79 or over sub 4's. Of those 30%+ were 5th year or 6th . Now, 5th is not uncommon, but getting a full year fifth, of eligibility is. Some got their red shirt back plus a CoVid year, An older college guy used to be 23 or so, now they are 24/25, if still running DI , they should be good by now, if they were a prospect at some point.

You know, I am probaly even older and have noticed K-12 ages getting older. This would have to effect college ages. Look at the 'How is Natalie Cook19' thread. Plenty of posters mention turning 19 soph year of college. I imagine a fair amount turned 19 between 1st and 2nd years, but 19 in high school simply didn't exist when I was in. In fact, 18 prior to graduation would put you near the older end of the class.

I remember reading an article in a general interest (not sports) news magazine a while back now. It mentioned 'redshirting' Kindergartners. We know where the parents and writers got the term, of course, and this isn't really news anymore. Still, back when I read it, conciously starting school a year older than those who will be your peers was just catching on. Now, it's unremarkable.

One of the HS sub-4s several years ago was significanty over 19. Might have been Slagowski, but I don't have a birthdate for him, so sorry if it's not. This has got to be how he and Cook got there. Being 'held back' (replaced the term 'flunked') a grade is unlikely in these cases. Either Nat had to repeat a grade (could have happened) or started late (much more likely).

So, that's one of the reasons these older ages are more and more common: they start Kindergarten later now.

Yeah, king999, 23 WAS old; 22 was probably as old as a most were. I would have been 21 at Outdoor Nationals if I'd gone the route many of you do (running in NCAA, starting Fall after HS, and doing it in 4 years). Correspondingly, 18 WAS old for high school. Not real uncommon, but 18-1/2 would be the old end of the spectrum. I was not yet 17-1/2 upon graduating. Now, 18 is a given and 19 is no longer unknown. Older college students HAS TO be related to older Kindergartners.

Man I wish I could have not improved in College and been stagnant like Grant Fisher as you claim. Add an NCAA title, NCAA record, a few NCAA runner up finishes, several PAC 12 titles, and not being over trained from his coach add an Electrical Engineering degree from Stanford and a massive pro contract.

I have gone back and fourth around the age issue and I feel indifferent. Most of tracks world records were set by 21-23 year olds, so pretty much the age of kids in the NCAA. A few years ago I saw a thread that the average wr age was 23.2 or something like that. The problem I personally have is how long they have to compete at their "best"

If you do everything right and normal you should graduate at 22/23, giving you two years to run at what your best is. If you graduate at 25/26 you pretty much have 2-3 extra years of significantly better running then the kid that graduates at 23. A 23 year old and a 25 year old are pretty much on the same fitness level, so there is not really an advantage there. But there is a big difference between an 18 year old and a 25 year old physically.

The kid that graduates at 23 has less time to compete at their best since they have two years competing as an under 21 year old. The older athlete has a significant advantage in terms of winning titles since they have 4 years to compete at their physical best rather then just 1 or 2 years that the typical kid has. Lots of titles come down to luck, whos racing and how the race was run so if you are running in the NCAA for almost 4 years and you are over 21 for most of that time you have so many more chances to win a title then the kid that starts at 18 and finishes at 23.

Hacker is a 7th year guy but he wasn't granted any eligibility that anyone else in his position would have been. He used a traditional redshirt and had already been granted a medical redshirt prior to the onset of the pandemic and then received and chose to use his COVID year. Like it or not, it was all within the rules. He graduated and went to graduate school at Wisconsin.

I am relatively indifferent about the rest of what you said. I would argue that the rules prior to the transfer portal were unjust for student-athletes and there is absolutely no reason student-athletes should be barred from making money on their name, image, and likeness. Sure, the rules could be tweaked but it never was and probably never will be a perfect system.

Funny to watch USA (NCAAs) become more like Canada's (USports) university system where 30 year-old law and PhD students are common place. Morgan Beadlescomb probably older than a few coaches.

Yeah it's gotten a little weird when first and second in the 5000 have been in the NCAA for a combined 13 years. Silver lining - we only have to wait about 5 years for a third generation Hacker.

when byu does it, it is cheating