D1 Distance Athletic Scholarships - what are we talking?

"People only go D2 because they weren't able to go D1."

Just completely false. "Going D1" means nothing. I've seen 4:30 milers get D1 scholarship offers. Do you really think the person who runs D2 at GVSU is jealous of the person who runs D1 for San Jose State (average 8k team time of 29:35)?

"They see the better travel and facilites and doctors and trainers and gear."

You keep mentioning this. You realize non-D1 teams are allowed to stay in hotels right? Yes the other amenities you mentioned might differ, but that would also be the case for a low-tier D1 school. I know of some D1 schools that don't have a locker room for their XC team.

"They are jealous all through college. Most are bitter 20 years later."

Then they're dorks that need to grow up.

"But then there are a few like you who convince yourself that the experience was better than D1."

I didn't convince myself. I can say with 100% confidence that it was better than anything I would've experienced running at a D1 school. That just me though. Results may very.

"TAlk to some of your buddies now who ran D1 and they will still look down on you for being a D2 guy."

First of all, if your buddies are looking down on you because you went D2 then they aren't really your buddies.

Secondly, no this is not my experience. In fact I've heard the opposite from friends who regret going D1, but I'll stop there because I know you'll say that is physically impossible and would never happen.

Look at any D1 roster and you'll see a list of distance kids. Now take a look at trffs all performances and see how many of them are racing and how frequently. What you will see is that the studs (top 20% of team) race frequently and compete at the elite / conference events. the others nothing. They invest same level of time and effort. If you are not a Dq stud all you are getting is bragging rights. I would argue those folks would have more fun competing at a slightly lower level

Exactly what I'm trying to argue. Yes, if you are one of those top 20% studs, then absolutely go D1. My argument is not that Nico Young would enjoy running more if he ran in the NAIA at Milligan university or something.

My argument is that the urge to "go D1" regardless of the school is really dumb and a lot of folks would have a better experience competing at a lower level.

Correct. No respect for them due to poor academic requirements so we would not have enjoyed the daily training runs with those guys. I think that Nico is smater than the average guy there though. He put his future professional career above the academics or the intellectual comradery and it working out for him.

You had a better experience but the average kid is way too smart to be surrounded by the kids who attend D2 schools. They would hate it. That is why they chose D1. D2 was good for you but D1 is good for the kids who go D1. Maybe they like vanilla and you like strawberry. I enjoy my new BMW You enjoy your used Corolla that you were able to pay cash for. We all enjoy different things.

Is it way easier/better for girls?

There's more money available?

Even better yet for a distance girl that can do track and XC?

Is that what they taught you what average meant at your fancy DI school?

Yeah I get nothing lmao

This whole D1 > D2/D3/NAIA stuff again?

Newsflash - most of your mid-major D1 state universities are no better than any other academic institution. An undergraduate degree from Southern Illinois University is no better/no worse than one from Chico State University.

Where does the rubber meet the road for student-athletes and their parents? Cost of education, post-college debt, and the ability to compete as a collegiate.

My kid had offers from both D1 and D2 institutions. The generic D1 state schools all touted their "D1 cred" as a sales point and made offers ranging from "Preferred Walk On" to as high as 10% athletic aid. The D2 schools that we talked to offered anywhere from 10 - 50% athletic aid.

What did we choose? A D2 program in a neighboring state that offered in-state tuition reciprocity and 50% athletic aid. My kid loves the school, the program, and is thriving. The team routinely travels to larger meets and competes against D1 programs. Best of all, we can pay for that education out of our earnings - no crippling loan debt. Ultimately, beginning adult life debt free means a lot more than wearing the D1 badge that only seems to matter to running nerds or having six figure debts haunting you for the next 10-20 years.

Yes that’s my understanding. there are more athletic scholarships available for girls vs boys. by about 50% I think. regarding xc vs track, unfortunately they are essentially considered one sport - track. so you’re competing for scholarships with jumpers, hurdlers, sprinters etc.

What if I take out $100k loan to attend best possible academic school. Pay it off 3 years out of school, and make partner in my firm after 10 years, looking to earn $1 million+ annually for next 25-30 years?

Should I have gone D2 with no loan debt?

According to the D2 guys, the 3 years of enjoyment far outweighs a future lifetime of job satisfaction and earnings.

I went to a D2 in-state school and graduated in 4 years with very little college debt. Did an internship my final year of college and then got hired on full time by the same company after graduating. After a few years I was hired by another company at a significant raise. Now I make over $250K annually and manage a team who all make $100K plus annually. Guess what, when I look at resume's to hire people for my team, I make sure they have a 4 year degree and then I interview the person, I could care less where they went to school. Show me you have a 4 year degree, that you were motivated enough to get that degree, and then I will determine the type of fit you will be for my team. All the managers that hire and manage people in my company feel the same way. After a few years of work experience no one cares where you went to school.

My son goes to a Big 12, D1 school but that was his choice I did not push him one way or the other. Where you went to school means less and less to the people who are actually doing the hiring. Go to the school that is the best fit for you financially and socially. At the end of the day, adults in the work place who actually hire people rarely care about the name of the school.

Obviously in certain profession this may not be the case, but for most in the business world this is the reality.

Also, the extra COVID year most likely increased the number drastically over the past few years, as athletes had even extra seasons to transfer to D1 schools for grad school.

This is all true however a national championship caliber d2 team is much better than a mid tier p5 team and the third guy would not be the 12th... Points all very valid though.

That's great. Sounds like you are smart which means that you understand that anecdotal information is meaningless. Data is meaningful. The founder of My Pillow was homeless and a drug addict and now is very wealthy. That doesn't mean that we should recommend that path for high schoolers. According to College Simply, the average salary of an Adams State grad after 10 years is less than $40K while the average salary for a Stanford grad is $122K.

So the student who attends Stanford and the student who attends Adams State are coming from the same socioeconomic background? Not likely. Many students who attend Stanford are already set with a career path when they leave the university based on who their parents are, while that is not the case at Adams State.

As you stated, data is meaningful, and using an example from College Simply that doesn't take into consideration all these data points doesn't seem very meaningful. Yes, my example was anecdotal, but my point is still valid for the vast majority of the population that don't have the parental resources and connections like many of those that attend Stanford.

True. The students are much smarter than the students who attend Adams State so it makes sense that the parents also would be much smarter and therefore have better jobs. That's how genetics and the world work. You insinuation that attending Stanford will not greatly improve the chances of a high paying job is incorrect. Attending a D2 school greatly decreases the chances of ever earning a high salary.

I'm not stating that attending Stanford doesn't improve your chances of a high paying job, I am simply stating that you don't need to go to Stanford to get a high paying job. The thread started by comparing D1 schools in general to smaller schools. Not just the elite schools like Stanford.

Your last sentence is blatantly false. Attending a D2 or smaller school does not greatly decrease your chances of ever earning a high salary when compared to your average D1 schools. Most hiring managers don't care if you went to a D1 state school or a D2 or smaller school. A degree is a degree, you are hiring the person not the school.