Allyson Felix . . . Ajee Wilson . . . so, it can be done . . . but for 1500m on up, college development, at least for a couple years, is an absolute must . . .
I meant in the distances, as indicated in my prior post.
Drew Hunter made the USA team in 2019, but injured his foot and did not compete.
I don't necessarily disagree with your conclusion however-
1] Rupp is number 19 all-time performer in the 10,000 m and second non African born after Fisher. You choose the marathon to make your case, beee...cause?
2] I think it is generally understood that we are discussing American runners.
3] of course Rono once held multiple WR's
As you suggest, I think you see that T&F in general is dominated by non-NCAA-participants. This is demonstrated by records, all-time lists, medals, etc. I'll tell you why I used the marathon as an example to illistrate the insignificance of NCAA participants.
Start with the 100. You'll see a few in the top-10. Hardly proves it is 'essential' but it is not a complete barrier to success. Still, the absolute best don't seem to be on your list (of collegians). You'll notice something similar in the 200, and as you get longer, they'll (NCAA athletes and former ones) get sparser.
Get into the distances. At events longer than 2k, you can go way down before you find any...culminating in the marathon. It's unremarkable I used the event which best illustrates my point. That WAS my point. It may be good for sprints but is definitely NOT for distance. It is less true - but true nonetheless - the shorter you get.
What's funny is that you picked an event which is not all that much better. Is the top-10 at 10k mostly NCAA alumni? How many are in the top-100? Using that event to illustrate your point is ironic because it actually illustrates mine. The greats didn't run in the NCAA. Find a field event to illustrate your point because 10000 certainly doesn't.
By the way, I realized Duplantis is not unique as an NCAA-affiliated WR holder.. (For field events I might actually recommend going collegiate, by the way.) McLaughlan-Levrone. Is that the only runner who both ran in the NCAA and has a WR?
Here is quote from author Chris Lear, best known as the reporter behind 'Running With The Buffaloes'.
".... I met with El Guerrouj, the world record holder in both the 1500 meters and the mile, and his coach, Abdelkada Kada. I asked coach Kada what's necessary for an American to rise to El G's level. He replied that the American collegiate system must be dismissed as a developmental ground for world-class milers. For sprinters, he said, it's OK. But for milers, he believes the demands of racing for three seasons are too great. He believes that collegiate coaches too often compromise the training of their milers in favor of short-term gain - a conference title, an invitational title, and so on. He stressed the need for a limited racing schedule with no more than three or four races indoors and six races outdoors."
Lear recounts various details about El G's year-round training and periodization, a schedule which is very incompatible with participation in the NCAA.
"Adherence to this strict, ascetic training program - a lifestyle, really - is why El Guerrouj has transformed the mile to its highest form, on the Grand Prix circuit, from a tactical affair to a long sprint, a rythm race.
"It was no surprise then that when I spoke to El G, he agreed with his coach, dismissing the collegiate system as 'not good at all' for developing middle-distance talent. 'Athletics is a professional sport,' he told me. 'Either go to school or be a professional runner.' "
Considering the young lady in question's primary event was the 1500m, these opinions seem particularly relevant. The school of thought summarized above is one reason my posts stand out among a sea of negativity. I do not believe the decisions she made were mistakes. Most of you do.
Considering the young lady in question's primary event was the 1500m, these opinions seem particularly relevant. The school of thought summarized above is one reason my posts stand out among a sea of negativity. I do not believe the decisions she made were mistakes. Most of you do.
It isn't the 90s any more. Kids rarely race much these days. 1 qualification race, conference, and nationals isn't a killer schedule. And it should be pointed out that a NCAA guys have done ok. Off the top of my head Lagat medaled. Rono won a gold. Kerr medaled. Centro got Gold. That stacks up pretty well. On the woman's side Rowbury and Simpson did pretty good through the years...
Was it a mistake for her to go pro? Who knows. Maybe a different training group (pro or college) gets her down to 3:57. But that is a huge if. Tons of HS kids get lost with the college transition.
Has there ever been a high school record holder who turned pro then never improved their HS PR besides Efraimson?
Jeffery Demps, Derrick Florence both in 100m. Michael Granville in the 800m. Rudy Chapa in the 10,000m. Wayne Davis in the 110 Hurdles. Candace Hall in Women's 100. Caitlan Chock in the Women's 5,000. Mary Shea in the Women's 10,000.
Her kick to win NXN was a thing of beauty. Lets not forget how dominant Sarah Baxter was at that time. And Alexa has certainly had a much better career than Baxter who did go to college to run.
I don't necessarily disagree with your conclusion however-
1] Rupp is number 19 all-time performer in the 10,000 m and second non African born after Fisher. You choose the marathon to make your case, beee...cause?
2] I think it is generally understood that we are discussing American runners.
3] of course Rono once held multiple WR's
As you suggest, I think you see that T&F in general is dominated by non-NCAA-participants. This is demonstrated by records, all-time lists, medals, etc. I'll tell you why I used the marathon as an example to illistrate the insignificance of NCAA participants.
Start with the 100. You'll see a few in the top-10. Hardly proves it is 'essential' but it is not a complete barrier to success. Still, the absolute best don't seem to be on your list (of collegians). You'll notice something similar in the 200, and as you get longer, they'll (NCAA athletes and former ones) get sparser.
Get into the distances. At events longer than 2k, you can go way down before you find any...culminating in the marathon. It's unremarkable I used the event which best illustrates my point. That WAS my point. It may be good for sprints but is definitely NOT for distance. It is less true - but true nonetheless - the shorter you get.
What's funny is that you picked an event which is not all that much better. Is the top-10 at 10k mostly NCAA alumni? How many are in the top-100? Using that event to illustrate your point is ironic because it actually illustrates mine. The greats didn't run in the NCAA. Find a field event to illustrate your point because 10000 certainly doesn't.
By the way, I realized Duplantis is not unique as an NCAA-affiliated WR holder.. (For field events I might actually recommend going collegiate, by the way.) McLaughlan-Levrone. Is that the only runner who both ran in the NCAA and has a WR?
It’s hard to study this because the NCAA is the college system in a single country and T&F medalists come from all over the world. So yeah most medalists, runners, and just people in general will never be part of the NCAA.
Honestly I’m not sure how you disentangle whether the NCAA is good or bad when almost every US athlete competes in it. How many US high schoolers go directly pro in track each year? Like 3? And the ones that do were the best of the best in high school - so how can we even compare them against the kids not good enough to go pro immediately?
Very tough question to answer given the sample sizes and self selecting nature of going pro early.
I have to agree with Ryun. Name a WR holder who's ever even watched an NCAA race. Even the multi events, the disciplines for which it could be argued it is worthwhile, seem populated by athletes unaware that the NCAA exists. It apparently is not just unnecessary but an impediment to success.
Mondo Duplantis
Meanwhile, can anyone name someone who's even made a USA team for Olys or WC who didn't compete in college?
Cain made a a team and a WC final without competing in college
I fear that a core element here is developmental biology. There are lots of female (mostly 800/1500m) runners in countries without college sports (and often without highly competitive HS sports either) who peak in the under 20 age group. Some are always beset with injuries when they crank up the volume later, others seem pretty healthy but just don't improve anymore. I suspect that for some women there is a window in their late teenage years where they can keep a balance of fitness, weight, health that allows "prematurely" good marks but many cannot keep this advantage into their 20s or only for another two years or so). Efraimson did much better than many of these cases, her 1500m times from 2015-19 would all have been competitive at the college (or u23 stage) and national class in most countries. She had a bit of bad luck in that the US is so strong that a 4:05 runner will not be among the top 3 nationally.
Name a USA medalist in distance events in the past 20 years who didn't run in the NCAA. Even pro-then-collegian-then-pro Rupp and his shady coach found value in it.
Not a good season for Julien: Shannon Osika, Craig Engels and Alexa Efraimson left the group.
to be fair, it seems Osika and Efraimson were clearly past their best when they joined and in hindsight it seems more surprsing they joined in the first place.
How about Centro? Nick Willis? NCAA products with 5 global medals between them.
How about Emmanuel Korrir? Clayton Murphy, Athing Mu, Paul chelimo, Emma Coburn, McLaughlin, Freirichs, Ashton Eaton, Mondo, Kerley, Rupp, Seidel. I could list 50 more.
NCAA products that won many gold silver and bronze global senior outdoor medals. Medals from 100-marathon and everything in between. NCAA is the best league outside of diamond league in world.
Ok I think we got it now. Whoever said NCAA was a waste of time is clueless.
As in most (all?) sports, there is an extremely high correlation between being an elite U20 athlete and a good-to-very good pro athlete, and a very low correlation between between being an elite U20 and an elite pro.
The reason we can all sit here and come up with examples, counter-examples, and counter-counter-examples, is that a small but very memorable group of U20 athletes turn out to be extremely good, a slightly larger group gets right to the edge of greatness, and then the vast majority just never really make it. Identifying that first group is so difficult -- I guess kudos to Nike for taking a shot, but you're going to miss more than you hit.
But why someone would blame a young athlete for taking the money, I don't understand. No NCAA program was going to make her any better than she ultimately was.