1. Ability to attend my university (grades and money. If they can’t afford it they can’t)
2. Times and training. You are the average of your 3 best times not you PR. Also running well at your large xc meets. Great if you are undeveloped but why are you undeveloped? Do you do anything outside of HS practice? Body type does help (with women ED?)
3. Personality, and yes social media counts. If you are dumb enough to post yourself snorting pills or using slurs you probably aren’t a good investment.
2 is important. I'd say that I've seen coaches look at programs' consistency and reputation too - someone running under 9:00 from a school whose former record was 9:50, who doesn't have a history of good coaching, has more upside than peak Loudoun Valley or whatever the top HS team is now. Obviously ED is a big concern with women too
It's also a bit more difficult to determine, but looking at how physically developed someone is is used as well but not that much. Think Cade Flatt who looked like he was 25 vs Will Sumner who actually looked 18. The 17 year old with a full beard will be viewed as more physically mature than the 5'6" and still growing athlete if everything else would be the same.
They take the fastest kids they can get. It is that simple. No top program passed up an 8:45 for an 8:55.
Unless the 8:45 guy is a head case or prima donna.
Mike Smith is notorious for passing up a faster guy for one a bit slower if he thinks the slower guy will mesh better with the team culture. He did an interview a bit ago that I was looking for and he explained all of that. I looked for it and couldn't find it. He does not like guys having attitudes that "they're better than everyone else."
Good coaches also have a knack for looking at a guy and getting an idea of how they'll develop. If the 8:45 guy seems to be a bit at his limit he'll take the 8:55 guy if it looks like there's more potential there. Additionally, perhaps the 8:45 guy was training at a higher level than the 8:55 guy. That would tell me there's some more room for improvement for the 8:55 guy.
Coaches of all sports consider the parents of the prospect as well. If a high-level athlete has parents that seem that they might be a bit intrusive, that athlete will get overlooked for a kid that has parents that are more laid back and not as intrusive. XC & track are not as subjective as some other sports. The best times, distances heights, etc, are all objective. Other sports like soccer or other teams sports have more of a subjective factor and parents can be more of a pain.
I'd add rate of improvement. A high schooler who ran 9:35 3200 as a freshman and is now running 9:15 as a senior is not looking as promising as someone who only ran 10:30 as a freshman and is now running 9:15 as a senior.
Also, lack of DUIs or similar red flags is a good sign. If the athlete is getting in trouble in high school it's probably going to get worse in college.
I'm still waiting to hear from the coach who said, well we had Fisher and Cheserek on campus, but we didn't like their form, development curve and community citizenship, so we passed on them. Coaches take fastest athletes they can recruit.
I'm still waiting to hear from the coach who said, well we had Fisher and Cheserek on campus, but we didn't like their form, development curve and community citizenship, so we passed on them. Coaches take fastest athletes they can recruit.
On the other hand, look at Newbury Park’s improvements excluding those who went to NAU. Basically nothing. Still top recruits but there’s a reason Birnbaum was viewed as having more upside
Newbury Park is by far the best program in history. The Youngs amd Sahlmans had their pick of every school in the NCAA because they ran fast even though they had the best coaching and support structure.
3. Lets not complicate things. Winning Coaches take who they can get. They aren't taking someone who will "develop" with their expert coaching, they just want the fast people.
A lot of people look at an athlete's mileage and decide whether or not they have potential. That is rarely the deciding factor. Can any D1 coaches provide insight into what they look for in athletes at the high school level that may lead to collegiate success?
Here are some things I've been told by some coaching friends:
- Size in the mid distance events. A lot of coaches like tall, lanky, strong mid distance athletes. They look for kids who haven't had much speed development since most high school coaches just throw mileage at them for the 800.
- Distance athletes with grit. Not so much the training they've already done, but how they perform in imperfect situations (like a hot state meet championship or after being sick all week)
- Good grades since it shows the athlete can make sacrifices and have discipline, but also understand cues you give them more deeply than other athletes. Their memory retention is better.
- Leader types. People who get along with many and have leadership qualities.
What do you guys think?
I cant imagine any coaches giving a damn about mileage. What college coaches want is competitors. They want that kid who says "gimme the baton and get out of my way." They want that kid who simply wills his way to the finishline.
Unless the 8:45 guy is a head case or prima donna.
Mike Smith is notorious for passing up a faster guy for one a bit slower if he thinks the slower guy will mesh better with the team culture. He did an interview a bit ago that I was looking for and he explained all of that. I looked for it and couldn't find it. He does not like guys having attitudes that "they're better than everyone else."
More crap. Smith took slow people early on, but not now when he can get top recruits. This changing now on the women's side too.
Smith is a very good coach and has developed athletes, but he wasn't choosing these people over stars.
Now he's bringing on Young, Sahlman, Las Heras, Quax, Hasty, Jacobs, Baloga, Moore sisters, Gaitan, Stutzman, Smee, Larkin.
Unless the 8:45 guy is a head case or prima donna.
Mike Smith is notorious for passing up a faster guy for one a bit slower if he thinks the slower guy will mesh better with the team culture. He did an interview a bit ago that I was looking for and he explained all of that. I looked for it and couldn't find it. He does not like guys having attitudes that "they're better than everyone else."
More crap. Smith took slow people early on, but not now when he can get top recruits. This changing now on the women's side too.
Smith is a very good coach and has developed athletes, but he wasn't choosing these people over stars.
Now he's bringing on Young, Sahlman, Las Heras, Quax, Hasty, Jacobs, Baloga, Moore sisters, Gaitan, Stutzman, Smee, Larkin.
I think he's referring to, just to use hypothetical times, 8:45 vs 8:48 or 4:02 vs 4:04
Not all good D1 programs are “good distance programs.”
If you’re talking about distance coaches at top performing D1 programs that prioritize distance, that’s a subset of D1 coaches. These coaches say, “Show me the top 20 in the nation, I mean wait, the world (as long as they can pass the TOEFL).” They look at recruits differently than the distance coaches at top performing D1 programs that do not prioritize distance.
So much of a coach’s recruiting behavior depends on scholarship resources. Universities with lower admission standards can utilize academic scholarships along with athletic money (incoming Texas residents with a 3.0 high school GPA get free tuition at Texas A & M for example).
Also, there are more HS boys and college men fighting for fewer athletic scholarships than HS girls and college women. It’s harder to find high performing women because there is not the same depth. This puts more lower tier D1 programs in a position to develop women, and more pressure on those women’s coaches to know how to develop.
A lot of people look at an athlete's mileage and decide whether or not they have potential. That is rarely the deciding factor. Can any D1 coaches provide insight into what they look for in athletes at the high school level that may lead to collegiate success?
Here are some things I've been told by some coaching friends:
- Size in the mid distance events. A lot of coaches like tall, lanky, strong mid distance athletes. They look for kids who haven't had much speed development since most high school coaches just throw mileage at them for the 800.
- Distance athletes with grit. Not so much the training they've already done, but how they perform in imperfect situations (like a hot state meet championship or after being sick all week)
- Good grades since it shows the athlete can make sacrifices and have discipline, but also understand cues you give them more deeply than other athletes. Their memory retention is better.
- Leader types. People who get along with many and have leadership qualities.
What do you guys think?
I cant imagine any coaches giving a damn about mileage. What college coaches want is competitors. They want that kid who says "gimme the baton and get out of my way." They want that kid who simply wills his way to the finishline.
Yes. Hence "grit" as stated already. So you agree.
3. Lets not complicate things. Winning Coaches take who they can get. They aren't taking someone who will "develop" with their expert coaching, they just want the fast people.
Sorry, but top coaches do actually look deeper into athletes than just those two things. You're thinking like a small time coach.
I would think coaches would want to know what kind of training someone has been doing to get to the the times they've got. if there are 2 kids, both ran 9:05 by senior year but kid 1 has been running competitively since middle school and putting in 80mpw and kid 2 just started running in HS and is only on 40mpw, i'd want kid 2.
We've updated our BetterRunningShoes.com web site to make it easier to find good deals on the best shoes. To keep it great we need new shoe reviews from you.
Fill out a review to be entered into a drawing to win a free pair of shoes.