In that '76 race in Philadelphia Jeff Bradley from Millersville was thrid.
You meant to say 1976 AAU Nationals?
Bradley's Senior year at Millersville (NAIA) was 73/74 where he place 3rd in the 1973 IC4A College Division in 25:13, a decent time. I ran 25:17 the same day in the University Division as a Freshman.
I have a lot of respect for you Malmo, but you have to look at this from a wider perspective. To the general public, the title "D1 athlete" simply carries a lot more cache than saying you ran for a random college. This is true when applying for jobs, grad schools, or just watercooler conversations. Most people do not know the difference between a 14:30 5k or a 13:30 5k, they just know that being Division 1 is rare and difficult.
I know this makes a lot of D3 and D2 guys mad, but it is just reality. It's just like someone mentioning they have an Ivy League degree (even if it's in basketweaving) will garner more respect than an aerospace engineering degree at no name state. Is it fair? No, but that's just how it is. I'm proud I earned the D1 title and will keep using it.
But I am the one looking at it from a wider perspective, you're not. Saying that you're D1 means you are trying to include yourself with the extreme minority of the 6000 D1 runners who are actually good when you (not saying you specifically) are not. That's shameful.
I made the point about D1 University of Washington vs D3 Washington University to make another point. A UDub degree is a Party Degree, with the exception a few STEM majors. A Washington U degree, on the other hand, is World Class. And now looking at the extreme grade inflation scandals within the California education system, those once highly regarded colleges are now junk.
FWIW, Ivy League degrees are way over-rated in 2025, and you know it.
95% of D1 runners suck. "Former D1 runner" implies that they are part of the other 5% when they are not. By saying that they are not part of the 95% of D1 or D2, D3, NAIA or JUCO is an attempt at unearned gravitas. If you were the real deal you would simply say "I was a college runner". Thats it. No need to create a class hierarchy that doesn't exist.
For years the brojos used to label nationals not D1, "the Baby Nationals" which was extremely offensive, especially considering that they themselves competed in the "Baby Conference" and were nowhere near the top 80% of NCAA D1. I used to make that point for decades until the message finally sunk in about 5 years ago when they stopped with the baby nationals shtick.
We don't have a class hierarchy in college athletics like social casts in India or other cultures. We don't need to wear a red bindi on our foreheads to show our status. We are all just runners.
Quit saying you are "D1". You are a former college runner, or just a "runner". Why isn't that good enough?
"D1 runner", although true, is really not much better than claiming false times or coaching credentials at a University in San Antonio.
Truth be told, if you were DFL in NCAA D1 XC you were actually better than 99% of all D1 runners. Think about that.
I have a lot of respect for you Malmo, but you have to look at this from a wider perspective. To the general public, the title "D1 athlete" simply carries a lot more cache than saying you ran for a random college. This is true when applying for jobs, grad schools, or just watercooler conversations. Most people do not know the difference between a 14:30 5k or a 13:30 5k, they just know that being Division 1 is rare and difficult.
I know this makes a lot of D3 and D2 guys mad, but it is just reality. It's just like someone mentioning they have an Ivy League degree (even if it's in basketweaving) will garner more respect than an aerospace engineering degree at no name state. Is it fair? No, but that's just how it is. I'm proud I earned the D1 title and will keep using it.
It's also worth noting that in the post NIL and House settlement era, there are not really a lot of the 4:30 mile stragglers left on D1 teams. Getting a roster spot now requires a very high level of ability to and most of the guys there are legitimately better than most D2 or D3 guys. The days of 2 minute 800m guys just hanging out of D1 teams for 4 years are over.
But the question isn't being asked around a water cooler. It's asked on a message board filled with people who more or less understand the levels of competition at the divisions. And there's no need to draw a distinction unless you're trying to set yourself above others. It's pointless. I don't know when it's too late, if ever, for a one time college runner to get back into shape but I do know that whatever it might be whether the runner ran in D1,2,3, NAIA,JUCO, or high school makes no difference.
This post was edited 5 minutes after it was posted.
Reason provided:
addition
“most of the guys there are legitimately better than most D2 or D3 guys”
No one is arguing that D1 is, on the whole and especially up front, the fastest division. But claiming that most D1 athletes are faster than most D2/3 runners is kind of laughable. There are plenty D2/3 guys who can spank a fair number of D1 runners. There are plenty of slow D1 runners out there.
I think a lot depends on weight and if you are at a relatively fit weight. If so, a few months. If not possibly up to a year. If you are coming back heavier you'll also have to build up slower to prevent injury.
This ^ I like to call it, for myself, the “Uncle Rico Effect” I am nowhere near the fitness I was when I was running competitively in college, but after a week of running…..boy do I think I can do a cool little fartlek workout. It never ends well. Did that cycle for about 4 years, until finally this year I put away the garmin and grabbed my timex ironman. Solely running off of time, never looking at the distance, never caring about the pace, just getting out for a run. I am nowhere near my competitive running shape, but I have not felt this good in a long while. Moral of the story, if you gained weight (guilty), slow down and run off of time for a while. You aren’t impressing anyone, no sponsorships are coming your way. Just run for you, and if you do want get in shape, take it slow, give yourself a year.
But claiming that most D1 athletes are faster than most D2/3 runners is kind of laughable.
This thread has had its share of hyperbole and now we've moved into the nonsensical.
In 2025 how many college runners ran sub-14 for 5000m? D1: 241 runners D2: 31 runners D3: 4 runners
See the tffrs.org performance lists. This disparity is true at each percentile on the performance lists.
OP said they were a D1 runner back in the day. This carries information about their likely performance level. I know that D3 Nick Symmonds was an Olympian, but he's the exception to the rule.
And I've never in my life, not even once, said I was a D1 XC runner. I've always characterized it as, "I ran cross country." Or if I wanted to make a point, "I ran XC Nationals four times."
For perspective, in 2025 how many college runners ran sub-14 for 5000m?
D1: 241 runners
D2: 31 runners
D3: 4 runners
Conclusion: "I ran XC Nationals four times." means a hell of a lot more if you are a D1 runner versus D2/D3.
But claiming that most D1 athletes are faster than most D2/3 runners is kind of laughable.
This thread has had its share of hyperbole and now we've moved into the nonsensical.
In 2025 how many college runners ran sub-14 for 5000m? D1: 241 runners D2: 31 runners D3: 4 runners
See the tffrs.org performance lists. This disparity is true at each percentile on the performance lists.
OP said they were a D1 runner back in the day. This carries information about their likely performance level. I know that D3 Nick Symmonds was an Olympian, but he's the exception to the rule.
You’re missing the argument, and are arguing something entirely different.
Is the 90th percentile D1 5000m runner faster than the 10th percentile D3 runner? I guess it depends on your definition of “most”, but the fastest D3 guys are very much faster than the slowest D1 guys. That’s all I’m saying.
In fact, OP is just as likely to be the slowest 5000m D1 runner as he is to be the fastest… not hyperbole, fact.
This post was edited 4 minutes after it was posted.
In that '76 race in Philadelphia Jeff Bradley from Millersville was thrid.
You meant to say 1976 AAU Nationals?
Bradley's Senior year at Millersville (NAIA) was 73/74 where he place 3rd in the 1973 IC4A College Division in 25:13, a decent time. I ran 25:17 the same day in the University Division as a Freshman.
Yes, that's what I meant. Thanks. I raced Jeff many times over four years, outcome was always the same.
This thread has had its share of hyperbole and now we've moved into the nonsensical.
In 2025 how many college runners ran sub-14 for 5000m? D1: 241 runners D2: 31 runners D3: 4 runners
See the tffrs.org performance lists. This disparity is true at each percentile on the performance lists.
OP said they were a D1 runner back in the day. This carries information about their likely performance level. I know that D3 Nick Symmonds was an Olympian, but he's the exception to the rule.
You’re missing the argument, and are arguing something entirely different.
Is the 90th percentile D1 5000m runner faster than the 10th percentile D3 runner? I guess it depends on your definition of “most”, but the fastest D3 guys are very much faster than the slowest D1 guys. That’s all I’m saying.
In fact, OP is just as likely to be the slowest 5000m D1 runner as he is to be the fastest… not hyperbole, fact.
Originally you wrote this nonsense: "claiming that most D1 athletes are faster than most D2/3 runners is kind of laughable."
2025 5000m 500th best time (tfrrs.org) D1 14:21 D3 15:19
Now you are moving the goal posts and saying "the fastest D3 guys are very much faster than the slowest D1 guys. That’s all I’m saying."
Never too late to return to running, get in shape, enjoy the sport, and even achieve age-group success if you work at it. I quit running for 40 years, resumed running, won multiple age-group national championships, and set multiple age-group American records.
I ran middle distance in college, and started doing half marathons at 58, and my first marathon at 62. So it ain't too late! It's like a new sport, to be able to get PRs in new events when you are a GEEZER!
It's a lot of fun to tackle these distances (I'm building now for a winter marathon), but I limit myself to one hard workout per week, and 1-2 days off per week. You can still ramp up the volume just fine with 5-6 days per week.
Overtraining (in my case, too frequent hard days) led to achilles and plantar f. problems. Happily, P.T., arch support inserts and adjusted training have sent these problems away. Good luck, but above all have fun.
As one ages, it's all about avoiding injury and consistency. Race time and training pace become less relevant. Improvements can be made into 50s and 60s, for former college runners, esp in longer distances. No one cares about times except you and your spouse - and the latter just plays along, lol.
2 points; 1) I didn't see what "into shape" meant. Is it to repeat your college pr's? Or just to win local 5k races? 2) Are you implying it is easier or more difficult for a D1 to get in shape than a D2 or D3? If we have three runners who all ran the same time in college, for the same distance, in the same year but each from a different division, would it be easier for the D1 person to get into shape than the other two? Why specify D1?
This entire thread was derailed. The OP wants to know how/if he can get back into shape and very few have answered or given there perspective.
I say go for it. Does it matter how close you come to your past results? It’s easy to compare to your former self, but is it wise? or is the success in the journey?
This entire thread was derailed. The OP wants to know how/if he can get back into shape and very few have answered or given there perspective.
I say go for it. Does it matter how close you come to your past results? It’s easy to compare to your former self, but is it wise? or is the success in the journey?
Many people have given their perspectives, a common one being that it's never too late.