D1 runners thoughts on D3 running

Sliding Scale wrote:

I was DI and work with DIs.

On the way back from a meet I once had a conversation with a girl who had developed from a very average All State (small state) HS athlete into a DI All-American. She could not grasp why athletes bothered with DIII.

It made a little more sense to her after I reminded her that in high school and before she moved onto a big college scholarship she too ran for the competition and enjoyment of the sport. Somewhere along the line it became about the money.

DIII is for guys who like to run and can't get a scholarship to do it. I think that is what most people think of the level.

I have always been more curious about athletes who walk on to scholarship level teams...why not go somewhere you can contribute?

Many people that walk on to scholarship teams are primarily students...and also want to run. So they try to walk on to the team.

And yes, some have a dream of becoming a top runner on a big team and think they just need a shot.

I was an AA at a top D1 program. My son was an AA at a top D3 program. In terms of the experience, his was far superior to mine. In fact, if I had it to do over again, knowing what I know now, I’d seriously consider a top D3 program. I don’t think running in a junior division would hinder my development at all if the coaching and the team culture is right. Unless you are capable of sub-4:10 and sub-9:00 in high school, I’ve come to the conclusion that you’re better off in D3 (or at an Ivy). Case in point: Charlie Marquardt, 4:16 in HS (didn’t make state), 3:43 at Haverford, 3:55 mile post collegiate this year while holding down a full time job. Would he have done the same at a D1 program? Maybe, maybe not.

My high school teammate is a great guy and an average .H.S. runner 17:30 5k. He went to Wesleyan and ran mid/ high 27 8k he had a great experience. He loved the team and had great friends on the team. He was competitive on the team. I got the impression that D3 was like high school lite but nobody really cared except the teams that won.

I ran mid 15's in high school thought I was gonna be a d1 stud(no cool schools offered much). Went to a JC that was #2 in the country and was super competitive (11 of the my JC guys went D1 and made varsity letters at those schools) I did talk to a lot of other JC kids at other local schools and talked about how their teams were fun but they didn't care much cause they were not the teams winning.

Went to ASU ran, disliked the town and coach(drunk) and track coach was stealing money from XC program, we complained and AD told the XC guys to bug off, transferred to UA, ran as 7/8th man had a great time and much better team experience.

Most d3 are like some solid JC's but with much better academics.

what is gaf wrote:

Bonepicker70 wrote:

If you're from Midwest and east coast, the small private schools are GAF. Certain geographic regions don't have a lot of D3s. Round here they're legit.

Sorry but what is GAF?

Good as fck

This is a really douchey post. Just saying.

Reminder here that 90% of D1 runners are recreational runners with no scholarship. The number of D1 distance runners who break 15min for a 5k on the track is probably still less than half of them (true at my D1 school that was 6th in SE Region CC). Some D3 schools are serious programs with a bit less talent than D1 schools. Some D1 programs are pitiful and get trounced regularly by decent D3 schools. At the top, D1 runners are faster. That does not make them better people, smarter, harder working, etc. It just means faster. Track and Field is like that.

DIII should not share the same title of All American, as if its the same thing.

The only thing that pissed me off about DIII runners was when they referred to themselves, or other as AAs.

They had no idea what that title really means, and take away from it by handing it out to 14:50 guys.

Here was last year's podium

1 # Grant O'Connor 14:26.026

2# Will McDermott. 14:26.06

3# Andy Reischling 14:37.84

4# Dhruvil Patel 14:47.26

5#Mason Wicker 14:48.33

6# Walker Rynes 14:50.14

7# Sam Pinkowski 14:51.02

8# Greg Arabagian 14:56.85

In what appears to be not a tactical race.

I'm sorry but 14:56 is ridiculous to make national podium and act like it means anything even related to the NCAA or AA

Myissue... wrote:

DIII should not share the same title of All American, as if its the same thing.

The only thing that pissed me off about DIII runners was when they referred to themselves, or other as AAs.

They had no idea what that title really means, and take away from it by handing it out to 14:50 guys.

Here was last year's podium

1 # Grant O'Connor 14:26.026

2# Will McDermott. 14:26.06

3# Andy Reischling 14:37.84

4# Dhruvil Patel 14:47.26

5#Mason Wicker 14:48.33

6# Walker Rynes 14:50.14

7# Sam Pinkowski 14:51.02

8# Greg Arabagian 14:56.85

In what appears to be not a tactical race.

I'm sorry but 14:56 is ridiculous to make national podium and act like it means anything even related to the NCAA or AA

Patel was fourth and ran sub-14 that season. It was a very slow race you nincompoop.

OLD AND FAT wrote:

From my perspective, if you are fast you are fast. The division you run in doesn't matter. If you have competitive times, I respect you. But I always just kind of scoffed at DIII AA awards. I would run with DII and DIII guys when I went home for the summer, and they would be multi AA's and couldn't fathom the level of competition at DI. A 14:00 5k guy was like a superhero to them. While certainly a good runner, 14:00 for 5k gets you jack squat as far as DI awards go.

Most knowledgeable D3 runners know that D1 is a hugely different level... They are acutely aware since they were never recruited by D1 schools while in high school. Just making top seven on a good D1 team means you're likely at least a 14:30 type. However, there are some really bad D1 XC programs, but that's not the norm. IIRC, you have to run a sub 4:00 mile / 1500 equivalent to qualify for Nationals, right?

Let me Know wrote:

As a former D3 runner and a very passionate D3 fan, I am curious what Divison 1 runners think of Divison 3 runners and running. What are your honest opinions? Do you respect it? Do you think its a joke? Let me know, I am a D3er through and through and absolutely loved my experience!

Finally, a decent thread. I can admit that I was a bottom 10% D1 runner who looked down on D2 & D3 back then, the former mostly for academic reasons. I had a good experience that I can fondly look back on, no bitterness at all from it. However, I do think I would have had a more meaningfully enjoyable personal experience if I had gone D2 or D3 at a situation that met my needs well. TBH, college running was more of an afterthought for me, my chief focus was on my challenging academic program. I have nothing but respect for D2 & D3 athletes and worry about what D1 has become.

I think "DI vs D3" is kind of a vague way to put the argument. D1 includes the very best, and D3 includes the very worst. But there's a lot of overlap in the middle. Obviously the ethic at Michigan is going to blow your mind in comparison to some podunk school in Nevada. Still, if you "belong" on a top-20 D3 team (in the sense that you were casually recruited, aren't top seven but aren't the worst runner on the team), you would probably also "belong" on about 60% of D1 programs. There even power-5 schools that wouldn't make XC Nationals in D3 (I'm looking at you, Rutgers).

Also, obviously you have to wade through about 200 DI runners in the national rankings before you hit the 8th DIII All-American. But if you go to the middle of the pack- which is in the tens of thousands, not in the hundreds, you'll see its much, much more of a mix.

Former D3 Bum wrote:

. Still, if you "belong" on a top-20 D3 team (in the sense that you were casually recruited, aren't top seven but aren't the worst runner on the team), you would probably also "belong" on about 60% of D1 programs.

.

I find this very hard to believe, can we break this down further?

Sliding Scale wrote:

I have always been more curious about athletes who walk on to scholarship level teams...why not go somewhere you can contribute?

I'm currently a freshman at a P5 regionally ranked (low ranking) school. I was a recruited walk on. Because of a few long injuries in high school, I was never able to consistently get my mileage above about 40 mpw. The reason I went d1 is because I wanted a larger school environment and the opportunity to see how much better I could get if I could stay injury free and build up my mileage. Redshirted this season but haven't had any injuries and am consistently at 60 now, which is a big step forward for me. I also got a small academic scholarship (probably as much as the athletic scholarship most guys get). For reference, my junior year times were 4:23 and 1:57. My freshman year of high school PR was 4:36, so I was pretty frustrated not being able to build mileage and improve. Only ran the 3200 once - my freshman year, 10:02.

Would you mind telling me what conference or at least what part of the country. I really am so confused. Thank you.

How do similar high school talents, some going D1, some going D3, typically develop?

It would be interesting to see what, if anything, is the D1 training/racing advantage.

My bet is that it is very significant but that there is a lot more overtraining in D1, leading to more missed time.

Former d1 runner guy wrote:

My opinion of D3 running is it's a continuation of a high school team's mentality and atmosphere. Anyone can be on the team, and as long as they tried their hardest, they've accomplished something. Success is subjective based on the individual person. Comparatively, with D1 success is objective based on running a certain time or place.

People can enjoy and be successful in both envirnoments.

But really the second your last race ends, it's the exact same except for the tiny fraction who make a living running. Except the D3 guys probably had more fun partying and did better academically. It may seem important to finish 27th at the Big 10 XC championship, but it's not.

If you don't get paid, it's just a hobby.

Some of you guys are really annoying.

D1 is another reality for the most-talented. There are many, many runners out there not born with that DNA, and no matter how hard they train or tough they are, or how much they prioritize their sport, they will never be on that level. But they still train their asses off and compete and kick butt at their level.

Anyone realize that D3 runners are way faster now than 15 years ago? Back then you could run 26:20 XC and make All-American D3. Now it takes 24:20. Major upsurge.

I’ve realized that I like D3 except to the extent that some D3 people outright refuse to accept that the quality of athletes and level of competion is vastly different. Many in this thread have already mentioned how a lot of D3 people genuinely don’t realize how much faster D1 actually is. That doesn’t bother me, because most D1 people have no idea what a good D3 time is, either. Why would either really pay much attention to the other? But what does bother me is the people who ignorantly assert that D3 is “just as good”, or that D3 people are “just more focused on academics”, or similar sentiments. It’s not “just as good”, because it’s not supposed to be, and that’s fine.

I know that D3 occasionally produces an athlete like Nick Symmonds (who obviously could have gone to a D1 school if he'd wanted) but in general, I always thought that a top tier high school team could defeat the typical D3 squad.