Which college programs are good but shouldn't be. For example, the school is not prestigious, not located in an ideal training environment, or doesn't have any historical significance related to running.
An example that comes to mind is Iona.
Which college programs are good but shouldn't be. For example, the school is not prestigious, not located in an ideal training environment, or doesn't have any historical significance related to running.
An example that comes to mind is Iona.
CBU
Eastern Kentucky
Butler
Portland
Gonzaga
Wyoming
Utah State
Furman
Butler
New Mexico
Tulsa
Iona
EKU
NC State
Notre Dame
UVA
Georgetown
Furman
LittleGuys wrote:
Portland
Gonzaga
Wyoming
Utah State
Furman
Butler
New Mexico
Tulsa
Iona
EKU
Portland especially a few years back. Like 3rd and then 2nd and then 3rd in the nation for XC nationals. Such a small program and competing against teams based at altitude (NAU, BYU). Impressive. I agree with these other programs you list as well.
here are a few wrote:
NC State
Notre Dame
UVA
Georgetown
Furman
Only speaking for NC State here. With respect to the criteria of "historical significance related to running" mentioned by the OP, the NC State women (and men) have a notable history of high level success in cross country, going back decades, and with the women to the very beginning of cross country on the D1 collegiate level. The NC State women won the team national title in cross country under the AIAW in 1979 and 1980, just before the sport came under the governance of the NCAA in 1981. And while they didn't win any national titles again until the three from 2021-2023, they were consistently a very good or elite program for most of the ~41 years in between those national titles -- eg, coming in 2nd in 1987, 2001, and 2020.
Cappella
ITT Technical Institute
University of Phoenix
Full Sail university
here are a few wrote:
NC State
Notre Dame
UVA
Georgetown
Furman
Notre Dame, UVA, and Georgetown are all fairly prestigious, both academically and athletically due to their success in other sports.
A university in San Antonio
Illinois
You keep listing fully funded programs.
If you have 12.6 full scholarships invested in distance, why not just go the Alabama/Arkansas route and just grab a bunch of Kenyan road racers? The NCAA doesn't seem to care how old these athletes are or that they've been making money running road races for years. Getting though the eligibility center isn't a challenge anymore. Hell, Oregon's Olympic 800m runner had a 1.6 GPA in Kenya, but it was converted to a 2.2 in the "new" system. Why recruit a 9:00 HS guy when you can bring in a man who's already run 13:30? Schools like Iona are wasting their time with 8:20 3k guys from the UK. They should just get a couple 7:45 guys from Kenya.
University of Incarnate Word. Shoutout to Griffin Neal, gave me some great training advice this summer.
Honestly NAU. A team from the Big Sky should not be beating down the best of the Pac12, Big10, Big12, and ACC year after year.
Notre Dame is fully-funded distance only with a ton of very easy financial aid. They should be even better. They get free graduate transfers every year. 6th at ACC is horrible.
Duke probably most-underperforming.
Iona is good example. 10 scholarships with stacking aid allowed, but terrible facilities and no American has heard of or wants to attend.
Furman 8 scholarships with no stacking allowed, but beautiful campus. $80,000 pricetag is tough though. too redneck to have foreigners?
Portland fully funded, but same play won't work. They have to be better early and have more talent instead of playing numbers to get 5 studs. Expensive too and zero facilities (I don't believe they even have a track).
Gonzaga fully-funded, but talk about a second-tier sport, I won't be surprised if their resources get cut significantly.
Basically, anybody without altitude, foreign recruiting services, easy school, and limited graduate programs to capture older "student-athletes" is doing an awesome job.
In D3, all those Wisconsin hyphenated colleges.
Lenny Leonard wrote:
Honestly NAU. A team from the Big Sky should not be beating down the best of the Pac12, Big10, Big12, and ACC year after year.
And before anyone points out NAU's home base altitude, better funded D1 schools like Colorado, New Mexico, Wyoming, Montana and Montana State, and every D1 school in Idaho and Utah also have the built-in advantage of having to live and train at relative altitude.
SURROUNDING TIMES wrote:
Portland fully funded, but same play won't work. They have to be better early and have more talent instead of playing numbers to get 5 studs. Expensive too and zero facilities (I don't believe they even have a track).
UP track facility was demolished in 1982? Haha I was told the coach in the early 80s promised incoming freshmen they’d have a track by their senior year.
A new track & field facility down on the Willamette River is finally in the queue and looks impressive. Don’t know if they are fundraising but I’d make a donation.
Insider knowledge, Portland and Gonzaga are not even close to being fully funded. They are also super expensive. No school in the WCC has a facility (WSU and OSU excluded).
I don’t think Gonzaga had ANY scholarships until maybe 10 years ago.
Notre Dame is very hard to get into. And cost is $90K. There essentially is no financial aid because it is need based. I was recruited but didn't want to spend $350K for a degree.
Those schools have no admittance standards and 12,000 students.