Which well known NCAA D1 distance programs are struggling

Sounds like someone didn’t get into a D1 program...

Greek Yogurt wrote:

Lenny Leonard wrote:

How long has it been sense Michigan had a sub-4 guy? That was a middle distance powerhouse not that long ago.

So true about Michigan’s middle distance fall.

My guess is the programs lack of funding for middle distance (on the men’s side), the women seem to do okay. Perhaps it has to do with the head coaches background. The assistant coaches are very good.

I believe the University of Michigan to be too hard a school academically to build a balanced team in all events. Call that statement what you may but that is the reality.

Let's not pretend like Michigan is doing bad by any stretch of the imagination. Their Men's and Women's teams finished 7th and 13th this year at XC Nationals. Yeah, maybe this isn't like the Nate Brannen/Nick Willis/Kevin Sullivan (head coach, btw) eras of running the mile at UM, but if you call those results "struggling," you're delusional.

For roster spots. Here is an example. Nebraska was looking to up their football

spots a couple years back. Not sure what route they took:

____

https://nebraska.rivals.com/news/moos-says-nu-will-boost-roster-to-150-one-way-or-another

The main issue facing that task is continuing to abide by the rules of Title IX, which require schools to have an equal number of athletic roster spots for women’s sports as there are for men’s.

“If we go that route, and I want to hopefully do that, we’re going to have to be creative with what we’re doing with our numbers in regards to the gender equity,” Moos said. “We’ve got to look at some options, which we are right now, and whatever we do to get to 150, it’s probably going to have to be implemented over two or three years.”

The most obvious ways Nebraska could add 15 players to its football roster would be to either eliminate or reduce the numbers from another men’s sport or add another women’s sport.

“I don’t like to cut sports,” Moos said. “So either we’ve got to trim some down on the men’s side, or add a women’s sport, if indeed we’re going to go up to 150.”

Moos declined to say what potential new women’s sport could be added but said in previous cases at other schools one option has been to cut some roster numbers from men’s track and field. Moos didn’t say that was what NU might do, but he also didn’t rule it out, either.

_______

Distance running can take a disproportionate hit, or enhancement in

women's roster spots, as typically one runner would be 3 spots: cross, indoor

and outdoor track. So one way to add 15 football spots would be to cut

five male distance runners.

Title IX, in theory, was a good idea that allowed equal scholarships across men and women. Unfortunately, it caused programs that didn't have the budget to add more women's sports teams to cut men's programs. Also, the programs that could make do with reduced scholarships now only take most of the elite kids out of high school which by the time they get to college they have already reached the peak potential as an athlete. This is why only 2 high school boys that won Footlocker went on to win NCAA. That being said before Title IX, kids that didn't have the best training that were still relatively fast could walk-on to these programs to later be developed to sub-8 3k's, sub-4 miles, and so forth. The argument you make about gaining weight and joining the football team is absolutely absurd and demonstrates your lack of knowledge on this subject.

Stanford U.

(liberals are ruining this school)

Alabama BSS wrote:

To give scholarships for something as meaningless as running to a foreign student is stupid. There are American athletes who could benefit from the coaching and the money. To those that say “maybe they should get better”, well you are right. They should. But that opportunity would exist if they didn’t have foreigners in their way taking up roster space and money. The foreign athletes can run in their own country.

I would like to see an NCAA ban on using scholarships on foreign athletes. Foreign athlete can self-finance ( personal/family funds, homeland government provided money, etc.) and are welcome to walk on and compete. University and taxpayer funds that count against your scholarship total should only be allocated to domestic athletes.

That article pisses me off so much. Nebraskas football team has been garbage and 15 roster spots won't make the different. The 135th best player on the roster is already trash and adding 15 more won't do anything except to cripple the track team. And Nebraskas track team is actually a powerhouse in the big ten unlike the football team

Distance guru wrote:

That usually results in stronger distance programs though. Look at the Ivies for your evidence.

Precisely; however, the head coach at Michigan thinks he can have a balanced team with sprints, jumps, throws, mid distance and distance and compete with southern schools for a national title. Not possible at tough academic institutions. Of the tough academic institutions, there isn’t enough talented 800 m runners down to 100 meter, hurdlers and jumpers to spread around that can make the grade.

Michigan would be far better off to assess their strengths weaknesses and realities then go recruit.

Florida, USC, and Stanford seem to do okay at nationals.

Mounty Pylon wrote:

Good one. It’s a trick question, and the answer is:

There are no well known NCAA D1 distance programs.

This.

New Mexico men

Duke

Distance guru wrote:

Wisconsin 4:04 8:06

Villanova 8:08

Princeton 4:12 8:09

Notre Dame 4:08 8:09

Do your research. Wisconsin and Nd haven’t run their top dogs yet in mile / 3 / 5. Nova has comber and barr sometimes. Princeton has never been a powerhouse. Get a clue.

It sure is fun to deal with Letsrun guys. Merely stating facts can result in hurt feelings and insults. All of the times are accurate. You can make your predictions about how they will look when Nuguse and Hoare put up some numbers, but the numbers are what they are whether you like it or not.

What about UTEP... remember when they were good?

Columbia

reasonableperson001 wrote:

For someone with a lot of opinions, you seem to have nothing to back those outlandish opinions.

* Went to a P5 school

* Ran

* Graduated

* Well Read

* Sees the bigger picture

You?

I like this response! I was a 4:08 guy who received virtually no recognition and there was really nowhere to go from there. I'm not complaining, I relish my accomplishments and improvement but the college level is pretty skewed right now. You either have to be a genetic freak running 4:0x in hs or a 25 year old Australian to make an impact on the national level. We are inundated with social media about said athletes. Scholarships are few and far between especially for Mid D runners. It's just a new era of the sport. It made me appreciate things like HS conference meets and road races. Forget trying to make a dent in the mass of older foreigners breaking 4 in the NCAA, go win something at the D3 level or on the roads and have fun.

Ru-du-du-du-du

Cornell hasn’t been producing like early 00s