Why Were Collegiate Times in the 1990s So Slow?

There was a huge emphasis on annihilating yourself in track workouts in the 90s at all levels while racing too often. Coaches also did a terrible job of catering their training to individual athletes. That freshman who ran 4:15 in high school off of 25 miles/week and pickup basketball would inevitably be thrust into 70 mile weeks with lots of intensity as soon as he arrived. An athlete like Parker Valby who obviously needs special coaching would be told that she was a weak crybaby and kicked off the team if she didn't shut up and go cripple herself in the name of (insert random university that nobody cares about).

as far as NCAA times… in the 90’s it was rare to see an International runner. Now, watching the NCAA’s you might as well call it junior World Championships, as so many competitors are International. I used to love watching the NCAA’s to see the next crop of American talent. Now, it’s just a weird.

Ugh, this post literally triggers me. Exactly my situation. So stupid in retrospect.

From what I gathered people started doing dumb training in the 90's, got away from volume and overworked themselves with a ton of short workouts. Then when threshold workouts and volume started coming back in the mid 2000's and then a decade later 'double threshold' started entering the chat.

More high schoolers ran sub 4 from 2011-2017 than ALL of the time before 2011, and they didn't have the new shoes. So no, it's not the shoes. Training shifted back to what works (threshold and more volume) in the mid/late 2000's, and now you have way more people focusing on running and training in the off season at an early age. I was recently at a youth cross country thing and there were 50 elementary kids doing cross country practice in August. I'm pretty sure there wasn't participation like that at a young age 30 years ago.

The 1990s had many international runners at the top of the NCAA, especially from Ireland and Kenya. Arkansas, the dominant team then, was especially known for their international runners.

From 1965-2011, 5 HS boys ran sub 4:00.

From 2012-2017, 5 HS boys ran sub 4:00.

From 2020-2024, 13 HS boys have run sub 4:00.

How does it feel to be so wrong?

Only one problem with your coaches beliefs -- Seb Coe didn't train like that. There's a thread on LRC that repeated the words from Seb Coe himself.

I did but not before I took about 12 years off and then got back into running.

Thinking back, everyone on my team was so prideful of how fast they ran their easy days. lmao

We were a really good team a few of the years I was there. For division 1.

I'd love to say I feel ripped off for the way we were training but I don't at all. It was just a sign of the times. Most of my friends on other D1 teams were doing something in the same ballpark. Seems stupid now but it seemed like cutting edge training then!

I remember running magazine stories back in the day describing the low mileage and gym/circuit training that Sebastian Coe and Joachim Cruz did. It turned out the Coe and Cruz camps actually ran more mileage than they let on (didn't count warmup/cooldown or neglected to mention higher offseason mileage). Even Bill Dellinger wrote stories about circuit training as if it was significant to Oregon runners success, which was never true (arguably the opposite the few years they did it).

I'm looking at one of Graham Blanks workouts before his National Championship.

Oct 2, 2023 - Oct 8, 2023 he did 100.5 miles. I know a little different than we're talking about in the 90's with shoe and recovery advancements, but he was still doing intensity for most of his miles. Yes, he also ended up inured after this season, but with a Championship.

M - 13.4 at 5:55 pace

T - 5 at 7:09 pace / 16 at 5:48 pace * 5k/2.5k/5k at sub 4:50

W - 16 at 6:02 pace

R - Rest?

F - 17 at 5:53 pace * 2 x 800 2:00 pace / 6 x 1 4:25-4:40 pace

S - 20 at 6:05 pace

N - 13 at 6:05 pace

Mostly it was because there were fewer rabbited collegiate races back then. The Stanford meets and their spawn didn't really dominate until the very late '90s and '00s. The focus was far more on competing to win, not chase records or qualifying marks.

There is a significant difference between a senior with a 13:03 PR running 5:55 pace on easy days and a guy with a 15:45 PR who’s previously only run 35 miles per week running 5:55 pace for 10 mile easy runs his freshman year.

Of course he didn’t. In 1998 though, no message board to look that up. My coach was no doubt going by some magazine puff piece article. That’s all he had. In a nutshell, the difference between then and now.

It’s always confused as to why people are so off about this 90s stuff. Reminds of Trump quote repeat lies enough some people will believe it.

Bowerman coached a 4x 1mi relay team in the early 60’s all were moderate mileage, record stood for years No question in my mind those guys could go 15:50 in this era.

Comparing <4 by era is a bit silly You do realize the US population has doubled since 1960?

As for Dellinger’s his complaint to me was that many of his runners were piling up useless mileage on their other runs and not following his guidance. Remember Chapa cut his HS mileage and replaced it with more 5’miles, McChesney same thing.

Agree with a lot of the previous comments. I ran at a lower mileage/high intensity program where we qualified for D1 NCAAs three of my four years. Our workouts were intense and it worked for some guys as we had All Americans. But i plateaued and it wasn’t till after college I raised the mileage and lowered the intensity that I began to PR again.

1. No super shoes 2 bad HS coaches3. Mostly low mileage at college4. No prospect for pro career unless the very elite and then low pay .barely internet 4. Still was mostly a sport for unathletic people5. Only a few fast meets that were hard to get into

Your really going to try? It wasn't 1998. I think the guy who spoke to Coe was a fella named Martin. A regular here 20 years ago.