It's been a while since a D3 is bad thread has popped up, it's always good to be reminded of how fragile people's egos can be.
Damn, I really should have pushed the low end of D3 thing way harder from the beginning. That is what I was talking about from the start. I have VIT saying a made it a global analysis of D3, a D3 guy much faster than the people I was talking about, and faster than me thinking this was about him, and also this.
I saw the full spectrum when I ran for a D3 XC in Michigan back in the 80s. We had All-Americans in our conference (including 2 top 5 NCAA guys) and top 10 teams among the best schools, but the worst two schools had guys running well over 6:00 pace for 8ks. They were barely fielding teams while we had 20-30 on our squad. A couple of the bad teams were really small schools, though (less than 1000), while the best ones were 2000-3000. I think that spectrum could be found in a lot of conferences.
The HBCU schools and conferences generally do not have good distance running traditions unless they're getting Africans (Kenyans who would not make a good D1 team, but can run 24-25 for 8k and be D3 All-Americans), or have a coach who really is committed to getting decent kids and developing them. Often they have better track programs in the sprints, hurdles and jumps.
Can you imagine being one of the 50 sub-9:00 guys at Arcadia, going to NAU or Oregon on a partial scholarship, and then figuring out one day that you can't make a living running? It's amazing to me how bad bad D1 schools are academically.
Not all D3 conferences are that bad. There are some that are REALLY bad sut some that are decent. MIT, Johns Hopkins, U of Chicago, WashU, North Central, some of the WIAC teams, and others, mostly have solid athletic teams. The UAA & NESCAC schools are pretty solid across the board as well.
In women's soccer some of the top D3 schools can beat some of the D1 mid-majors. Some of those that are on play for the UAA & NESCAC schools, as well as some of those outside of those conferences, could play at a P5 (or I guess it's P4 now) school. They're at the schools they chose because they wanted a great education without attending an Ivy.
The 2 bads in a row were intentional. I'm sure the best D3 could be D1. But the worst D3 are running times I could beat and I didn't even run in high school.
D3 really is bad. In fact so bad you really have to ask what is the point. I'm pretty sure if you took the top 7 from D3 in a given year when I was in school they wouldn't have beat my D1 team any year. We were good, ranked team but not top 3.
The 2 bads in a row were intentional. I'm sure the best D3 could be D1. But the worst D3 are running times I could beat and I didn't even run in high school.
D3 really is bad. In fact so bad you really have to ask what is the point. I'm pretty sure if you took the top 7 from D3 in a given year when I was in school they wouldn't have beat my D1 team any year. We were good, ranked team but not top 3.
The point is those athletes are going to school to do something with their lives other than talk about times they ran two decades ago. You tell me who the real loser there is, champ!
I think we need to cut D3 runners a little slack on their times. There should be some sort of lifestyle handicap in place, maybe a running calculator that factors in things like the number of beers consumed. A day in D3 land: you wake up for your Sunday long run with a bad headache and a girl in your bed who you got to know real well the night before, but you're only about 70 percent sure of her first name. The run is rough, and while you might regret the last shot you did, the thought “if only I ran D1” does not cross your mind. You just grind out the miles and hope the girl you left in your bed doesn’t steal your things.
This entire discussion has nothing to do with the title of this thread. It should have been called D3 Cross Country is terrible. That being said, D3 distance running is very competative in most years. The loss of NCC as a dominant force has weakened it. However, in regards to the actual title of this thread. D3 Track and Field is straight garbage. D3 XC can compete. D3 sprints, jumps, and throws cannot. They are behind the rest of the NCAA, NAIA, as well as JUCO from that standpoint.
P.S. The track and field world barely acknowledges distance events. With the exception of the mile and down the rest of the events could disappear and your every four year olympic fan will not miss it. When talking track no one outside of Letsrun thinks distance. I like it all but it is true. I said what I said.
i think most of us were being fairly factual and not exactly doing one of those emotional "why D3" PSAs NCAA runs periodically. at which point i am bored with trolls going well beyond the OP and dissing the whole division, which they know some of us were in, then acting like any response, including a considered explanation, is fragile ego.
re SLIAC, if you look at the full meet, i think the conference is actually quite good at the 100m for D3, 7 sub-11 in the final, winner at 10.56. the 400 winner went to NCAAs and finished 11th. greenville has pretty good relays. it does take a turn >800 but some of the races they are barely entering enough kids to give out full points. the hurdle times are rubbish, field is mediocre. bad is a bit broad brush.
i personally think skyline is worse from stem to stern it's just not as bad at 5k.
and in terms of this distance argument, NESCAC is pretty quick at many things but the 100m times are meh.