Maybe. But 99% of D2 schools don't. The running analogy would be that women are slower than men but you come here and tell us that you are a woman who has run 14:30.
Maybe. But 99% of D2 schools don't. The running analogy would be that women are slower than men but you come here and tell us that you are a woman who has run 14:30.
D2 has some good guys but the depth is not there at all. I’d rather be an ok D1 runner than a D2 podium finisher. There’s a 2 next to the D for a reason. Sub Elite. D2 is filled with a bunch of party dwellers who get rewarded for terrible work ethic because they’re D2 and compete at 60% effort.
The best option depends what the individual wants out of college.
There are three reasons to go to college
1. Knowledge
2. Degree
3. Experience
How much a student learns depends a lot more on themselves than the institution. A student who goes to a top tier school but always uses chegg has wasted a great opportunity. Compare that to a passionate student who goes to a "bottom of the barrel D2 school" and actually learns the material, talks with their professors, and even tries to learn more outside of the classroom. Granted the better the school the higher the potential learning ceiling, but that only really matters for someone staying in academia. For someone going into industry 90% of what they learn in school is useless anyway.
The value of a degree is dependent on the prestige of the university and the field the degree is from. This is where D2 has the biggest disadvantage. Most D1 schools rank higher on lists so their degrees are viewed as better. This depends on what you study at the school though. An engineering degree from a bad school is better than a archeology of internet forum viewers degree from a great school.
What kind of experience an individual wants out of college is completely subjective. There are amazing research schools, party schools, and running schools across all divisions. Do not let the arbitrary distinctions make you think that just because a school is D1 they don't have fun or just because a school is D3 they don't care about running.
DsubElite wrote:
D2 has some good guys but the depth is not there at all. I’d rather be an ok D1 runner than a D2 podium finisher. There’s a 2 next to the D for a reason. Sub Elite. D2 is filled with a bunch of party dwellers who get rewarded for terrible work ethic because they’re D2 and compete at 60% effort.
This isn’t close to true. I assume your a HS athlete.
beodnight wrote: I would have probably been Top 5 in XC my JR and SR years at D2 and would have been a “legend” but in D1 I got to race some of the guys we talk about constantly here on LRC and I have amazing memories being a national and regional contender.
If you weren't at least top 50 at XC Nats and a sub-14 guy then you would not be Top 5 in D2.
This idea of "I wanna race the best" only applies if you're also among the best. If you finish 20 seconds behind the leaders you aren't really racing them, are you? Finishing 5th or 6th isn't exactly "mastering your craft".
Also, decent D2 schools still race D1 schools all the time. Its not like you are only allowed to race kids in your divison. Unless you are a regional-qualifier-in-track type talent, you will almost always have someone to press you. I know a guy that's run 150:xx twice this season only to finish 2nd.
Finally, "most burned out, got injured, or never progressed. Doubt they had any regrets"... dude have you ever met a runner? They had MAD regrets.
- You insisted on D1
- They didnt give you personalized attention cause they have 15 other freshmen who could also run 9:30 in HS
- You burned out, never progressed, and now you dont even really like running.
But they dont have regrets... really? At the very least they have grievances.
This choice is very similar to the NFL draft that just occurred. An NFL coach is going know and trust the experience of a guy who played for Alabama and will have to spend more time evaluating a guy from ND State.
It could work out that the 49ers got a great QB but it’s a gamble.
Employers will see your degree the same way.
wow who is the 9:50 guy? Curious because thats a pretty inspiring story
another opinion wrote:
DsubElite wrote:
D2 has some good guys but the depth is not there at all. I’d rather be an ok D1 runner than a D2 podium finisher. There’s a 2 next to the D for a reason. Sub Elite. D2 is filled with a bunch of party dwellers who get rewarded for terrible work ethic because they’re D2 and compete at 60% effort.
This isn’t close to true. I assume your a HS athlete.
I think you are right.
whats the point of being an ok d1 runner if you don't compete for anything. You just make the faster guys look even better
If you can get a better education than D2 then do yourself a favor and don't put running first.
I was mediocre in HS and went to a D2 school in PA. I became exponentially better (2 x all american in the steeple- 8:58) in college but ended up training by myself because of teammates lack of talent or lack of seriousness. I was a rather big fish in a small pond and would have traded that for a D1 little fish in big pond experience in order to train hard with serious teammates thus running faster. Nothing about my school was impressive athletically or academically. Also would now like to be attached to the overall positive benefits of a relationship with a prominent D1 athletic school. My wife went to Penn State and I see the difference.
You know what they say about assuming. I’m sorry you couldn’t get into a D1 program and are bitter. The end of the day the talent and hardworking guys are in D1. The depth pushes people to be better. D2 there is nothing pushing you if you aren’t a top guy. You’ll still be a nobody in D2 why not be a nobody in D1.
And be at a worse school academically.
bruhmoment wrote:
wow who is the 9:50 guy? Curious because thats a pretty inspiring story
Andrew Dumm. He also won the Marine Corps Marathon a year later but Marine Corps Marathon isn't elite or anything.
To be fair winning the ACC in 2007 wasn't as hard as the other 5 power conferences (there were 6 back then).
Kevin McHale (not the basketball player) I believe ran 3:44 or 3:43 and he qualified for either the 2009 or 2011 world championship trials and was the ACC runnerup in the mile and maybe 3rd in the 800
DsubElite wrote:
I’d rather be an ok D1 runner than a D2 podium finisher. There’s a 2 next to the D for a reason. Sub Elite.
Its not about the division. You aren't magically elite just cause you ran a 14:3x in D1 instead of D2. This is exactly the OP's point. An okay D1 runner is significantly slower than a D2 podium finisher. At the end of the day no one cares that you ran D1 if your PR's are worse than theirs.
Untrue. Not close. The 8th best guy in D2 has run 13:54. An okay runner in D1 at 100th place who isn't fast enough for regionals, has run 13:53.
Big Timer wrote:
Untrue. Not close. The 8th best guy in D2 has run 13:54. An okay runner in D1 at 100th place who isn't fast enough for regionals, has run 13:53.
He was 34th at XC Nats. That's better than ok, guy.
Big Timer wrote:
Untrue. Not close. The 8th best guy in D2 has run 13:54. An okay runner in D1 at 100th place who isn't fast enough for regionals, has run 13:53.
If you look at practically any other year, a sub-14 made regionals. That is well above "okay" status. To pretend that regional qualifiers are in anyway representative of an average D1 runner is ridiculous. That is the top 15% of athletes in D1. Yet the top 8-9 runners in D2 are all capable of making regionals in D1. A D2 podium runner is factually faster than an okay D1 runner.
Big Timer wrote:
Untrue. Not close. The 8th best guy in D2 has run 13:54. An okay runner in D1 at 100th place who isn't fast enough for regionals, has run 13:53.
Exactly my point. I have more respect for the 100th best guy because he’s grinding it out to be ok. It’s easy to be motivated if you have a chance to win a national title. You’ll always be left wondering what you could’ve done in D1. I’ve never wondered what I could’ve done in D2
DsubElite wrote:
Exactly my point. I have more respect for the 100th best guy because he’s grinding it out to be ok. It’s easy to be motivated if you have a chance to win a national title. You’ll always be left wondering what you could’ve done in D1. I’ve never wondered what I could’ve done in D2
What? How is that specific to D1? You know Divsions 2 and 3 have average athletes too, right? Do you feel the same way about okay D2 or D3 guys grinding it out to be mediocre? By your own logic you should have the most respect for slow D3 guys putting in the miles. They don't even have the chance for a scholarship. Just pure love of the sport.
No I have respect for people running good times without the promise of even going to a regional meet. Also D1 allows for those 9:20 guys to work their way up and be a top D1 guy. D2 has a limited ceiling. I’m sure Dave Ribich would love to talk about how awesome D2 is with you. If you’re a schmuco who doesn’t care about running that much. Go D2. If you want to be the best and want to work for it. Go D1.
I’m a D2 female runner. Our coach explicitly told us not to visit LetsRun forums.
Great interview with Steve Cram - says Jakob has no chance of WRs this year
Guys between age of 45 and 55 do you think about death or does it seem far away
2024 College Track & Field Open Coaching Positions Discussion
RENATO can you talk about the preparation of Emile Cairess 2:06
adizero Road to Records with Yomif Kejelcha, Agnes Ngetich, Hobbs Kessler & many more is Saturday