This last post is the most unbelievable thing I have heard of. Most d3 schools have much better academics than d1 schools. Also my father works as a d1 university and the student athletes that are in his classes always have softer requirements than the rest of the students. This is not nearly as common in the other divisions. Please don't compare the academics between schools because there are broad differences in each division and to make such large comments is ignorant.
d2 d2 d2 wrote:
The Adams team this year was amazing. Mwei is an 8:45 SC/13:52 guy (recovering form injury). Braun has run 13:36. Medigovich has run 13:40. These three can compete with any top three at the D1 level. I don't know the PR's of all of the other guys on the Adams team, but I do know that Florian didn't make the nationals team and he's a 13:58 guy. Yeah, a 13:58 guy. So all of you D1 wannabes out there, ask yourself if you've run faster than 13:58. If not, you might not have even made the ASC national team.
Congrats to the Adams team for all of their hard work and accomplishments. You are one of the top teams in the country, regardless of classification. It will be exciting to see how you do this spring.
Ok, so to clear a few things up, Adams St. could make the Division I podium in any given year, but you don't go there for the degree. See how easy that was?
Daddy Nationals wrote:
So why are you bring D3 into this? If you want the best education you can get, you look at D1 schools. If you want to face the best xc competition you can get, you go to D1 schools. That's the rule. Are there exceptions to this? Yes, of course. It's still the rule, though. Hypotheticals and wishful thinking don't change that one bit. If you want to be considered the equal of a D1 student athlete then you have to do what it takes to become a D1 student athlete. If you can't or just don't want to, then consider the alternatives, D2, D3, NAIA. D2 schools are notoriously soft on academics, they're 4-year junior colleges. There's good reason that a degree from UCLA or Cal or Colorado carries a lot more weight than one with a similar GPA from Chico State or Western State or Adams State, even in the same major. Place-for-place at the respective national championship meets, you will find that the D1 athlete is academically superior to the D2 athlete almost all of the time. The D1 student athlete has the ability to handle both high athletic rigors and high academic rigors and the D2 student athlete usually has the ability to handle just one or the other. That's what sets D1 apart, the best students AND the best athletes. You don't have to like it and you can even keep the irrational delusion alive that you D2 scrubs are magically every bit the equal of D1 men, but that's the fact, jack!
MIT, Carnegie Mellon,Chicago, Wash U, Emory, Rochester, Brandeis, Tufts, etc...just a bunch of scrubs.
Meanwhile D1 is comprised of such academic powerhouses as Oregon and ASU.
Don't kid yourself. Runners at most top D1 schools aren't working too hard (look at their majors). How many engineers are there in Oregon's top 7?
Hock o Ham wrote:
MIT, Carnegie Mellon,Chicago, Wash U, Emory, Rochester, Brandeis, Tufts, etc...just a bunch of scrubs.
I'll put Harvard, Yale, Princeton, Stanford, Duke, Penn, Rice, and Northwestern up against any of them. Athletically as well as academically.
kdfjgldfkj wrote:
This last post is the most unbelievable thing I have heard of. Most d3 schools have much better academics than d1 schools. Also my father works as a d1 university and the student athletes that are in his classes always have softer requirements than the rest of the students. This is not nearly as common in the other divisions. Please don't compare the academics between schools because there are broad differences in each division and to make such large comments is ignorant.
Most D3 schools have men's athletic teams that would be dominated by D1 women's teams. If you want the best of both academics and athletics, you go D1. If you want the athletics without the academics, go D2. If you want the academics without the athletics, go D3. Believe it, fool, and go tell your daddy.
Hock o Ham wrote:
Daddy Nationals wrote:So why are you bring D3 into this? If you want the best education you can get, you look at D1 schools. If you want to face the best xc competition you can get, you go to D1 schools. That's the rule. Are there exceptions to this? Yes, of course. It's still the rule, though. Hypotheticals and wishful thinking don't change that one bit. If you want to be considered the equal of a D1 student athlete then you have to do what it takes to become a D1 student athlete. If you can't or just don't want to, then consider the alternatives, D2, D3, NAIA. D2 schools are notoriously soft on academics, they're 4-year junior colleges. There's good reason that a degree from UCLA or Cal or Colorado carries a lot more weight than one with a similar GPA from Chico State or Western State or Adams State, even in the same major. Place-for-place at the respective national championship meets, you will find that the D1 athlete is academically superior to the D2 athlete almost all of the time. The D1 student athlete has the ability to handle both high athletic rigors and high academic rigors and the D2 student athlete usually has the ability to handle just one or the other. That's what sets D1 apart, the best students AND the best athletes. You don't have to like it and you can even keep the irrational delusion alive that you D2 scrubs are magically every bit the equal of D1 men, but that's the fact, jack!
MIT, Carnegie Mellon,Chicago, Wash U, Emory, Rochester, Brandeis, Tufts, etc...just a bunch of scrubs.
Um, how many of those are D2 schools? And how did they place at D2 nationals?
for the record i dont go to a d3 school, im just saying that academics is really not belong in this topic cause it doesn't make a difference and also since you brought it up, d1 student athletes have a ton more priveledges then us d3 do, tutors, mandatory study hours with upperclassmen, not to mention that the teachers obviously might take it alittle easy on the starting quarterback for tennesee the day before a game..
Daddy Nationals wrote:
Hock o Ham wrote:I'll put Harvard, Yale, Princeton, Stanford, Duke, Penn, Rice, and Northwestern up against any of them. Athletically as well as academically.
Out of all those only Stanford is any good in running. Harvard, Yale, Princeton, Penn are awful in most sports. They are essentially D3.
Hock o Ham wrote:
Daddy Nationals wrote:I'll put Harvard, Yale, Princeton, Stanford, Duke, Penn, Rice, and Northwestern up against any of them. Athletically as well as academically.
Out of all those only Stanford is any good in running. Harvard, Yale, Princeton, Penn are awful in most sports. They are essentially D3.
Princeton has very good xc teams, they'd win D3 easily. If your point is that the best academic schools suck at athletics, I certainly agree. However, you're not going to find a combination of great athletics and great academics in D2 or D3. You will in D1. Texas, Cal, Stanford, Michigan, Notre Dame, UNC, William & Mary, Georgia Tech, Illinois, Wisconsin, Washington, Florida, Syracuse, and many others.
midwaste wrote:
I have heard of instances of select teams competing in DI, while the school as a whole remained DII, but I don't think it's very common. The only example I know of is in collegiate hockey. UND competed in DI when the rest of the sports were still competing in DII competitions. Maybe it's just an exception for hockey. Then again, maybe ASC could pull it off.
Also John Hopkins, their lacrosse is DI while everything else is DIII (I think its DIII)
Daddyio
You said that D1 has the best academics and athletics. Not that they have the be best academics with athletics. There is a difference there and one that I will agree with. I don't believe however that you can say that overall they have the best of both. Also for a lot of jobs a degree is a degree and your masters degree is more important than your undergrad. My d2 degree got me into a d1 school for my masters no prob and now I am doing just fine.
That's what I meant, the best combination of the two. As a rule a Stanford or Michigan undergrad degree (all other things being equal) will open more doors, both professionally and academically in terms of graduate opportunities, than a Western State or Abilene Christian undergrad degree will.
Daddy Nationals wrote:
kdfjgldfkj wrote:This last post is the most unbelievable thing I have heard of. Most d3 schools have much better academics than d1 schools. Also my father works as a d1 university and the student athletes that are in his classes always have softer requirements than the rest of the students. This is not nearly as common in the other divisions. Please don't compare the academics between schools because there are broad differences in each division and to make such large comments is ignorant.
Most D3 schools have men's athletic teams that would be dominated by D1 women's teams. If you want the best of both academics and athletics, you go D1. If you want the athletics without the academics, go D2. If you want the academics without the athletics, go D3. Believe it, fool, and go tell your daddy.
You know that that is just not true. I was on a d3 team that never was close to making it to nationals. However, our top 5 were all sub-16, our top guy was sub 15, and I was sub 15:20 (two others in 15:30's, and the other in the 15:50's) on the track. Name a D1 team that could beat that on the womens side. Because if they couldn't beat us, they couldn't beat most D1 men's teams.
Apparently those D1 academics didn't do you any good.
PS - my stupid D3 degree got me into a top PhD program for chem.
Go to UCLA if you can gain admission. It has everything. Top five public school and world renowned in many areas academic, great sports tradition in general (basketball and football), close to the ocean with a great climate, and has, at times, been a great place to run. Meb proved that you can be competitive coming out of Westwood, even if the depth has been sparse as of late. Great OVERALL experience and well respected institution.
PBR33 wrote:
O I wonder wrote:This is true! Unlike Oregon
Do you mean Oregon or Oregon State???
O hahah by Oregon I meant Iona! Your mom raised you to be a great individual!
kdfjgldfkj wrote:
This last post is the most unbelievable thing I have heard of. Most d3 schools have much better academics than d1 schools. Also my father works as a d1 university and the student athletes that are in his classes always have softer requirements than the rest of the students. This is not nearly as common in the other divisions. Please don't compare the academics between schools because there are broad differences in each division and to make such large comments is ignorant.
Daddy Nationals wrote:
Most D3 schools have men's athletic teams that would be dominated by D1 women's teams. If you want the best of both academics and athletics, you go D1. If you want the athletics without the academics, go D2. If you want the academics without the athletics, go D3. Believe it, fool, and go tell your daddy.
just not true wrote:
You know that that is just not true. I was on a d3 team that never was close to making it to nationals. However, our top 5 were all sub-16, our top guy was sub 15, and I was sub 15:20 (two others in 15:30's, and the other in the 15:50's) on the track. Name a D1 team that could beat that on the womens [sic] side. Because if they couldn't beat us, they couldn't beat most D1 men's teams.
Apparently those D1 academics didn't do you any good.
PS - my stupid D3 degree got me into a top PhD program for chem.
Did I say that D3 has poor academics? Where? Show me!! I don't give a crap about your chemistry degree.
And I would put even money on the Washington women or the Villanova women beating your team over 6k or even 8k in xc!
Daddy, you've got to be kidding if you think that DI women's teams could beat DIII mens' teams. Even Angela B. would be pressed to make the top 5 of an average DIII mens' team so obviously, unless you've got an entire team made up of Bizarri's you aren't even going to be close to an average DIII team.
Jenny Barringer would smoke most of the men on D3 teams in her area.
you d1 pricks have hyperinflated egos. The fact is that a lot of d2 and d3 athletes on this board are/were much better runners and more intelligent than many d1 athletes. I was a top runner at a d2 school and one of my favorite things was running at some of the bigger d1 meets and kicking most of the guys butts at them. They would never admit that the d2 guys smoked them though. Always had excuses like we are peaking for nationals. Well believe it or not everyone is.
That's fine, congratulations on being an exception to the rule.