I'm a former SEC runner who's coached D1 for many years and had Olympic Trials Qualifiers. Pretty well connected in the coaching world.
Not enough people talk about the fact that most top D3 programs coach circles around the majority of D1 coaches. Think of how many mid major programs are tossing scholarship money at 4:10-4:15/9:00-9:15 HS kids and signing a bunch of them, then you look at their TFRRS page and they struggle to even have their 5th-7th guys under 15:00.
Meanwhile, the elite D3s are scraping together a roster of 4:25-4:40/9:40-10:20 walk-ons, and two years later those guys are outperforming those aforementioned D1 kids.
If you were to take the top-10 D3 coaches and top-10 D1 coaches and swap their programs, the D3 coaches would adapt to coaching the blue chip 4:05/8:50 kids, but I don't know if the D1 coaches would be able to help less talented kids find those breakthroughs.
Just my two cents, not trying to knock anyone! But having seen a lot of these "elite" D1 programs up close, there's such a surplus of talent that it's hardly surprising when some pan out and become studs. I'm always impressed with what top D3 coaches are able to do with a bunch of local kids who can't even make their HS state meets, and don't even have money to offer them.
D3 programs are like mid-level teams in pro sports that make the post season: good coaching, emphasis on player development, moderate budget, a "Moneyball" approach to building a roster, plus passion and a positive culture.
Top D1 coaches are more CEO than coach. They manage a large budget and big egos. It's easier to buy free agent talent than to develop it. Need a 4:05 1500 woman? Sub 28 10K man? Just go purchase one. Win now instead of hoping that NXN winner pans out in a couple of years. The assistants do the hard work in the shadows while the "Director of Track & Field" claims all of the credit.
D3 programs are like mid-level teams in pro sports that make the post season: good coaching, emphasis on player development, moderate budget, a "Moneyball" approach to building a roster, plus passion and a positive culture.
Top D1 coaches are more CEO than coach. They manage a large budget and big egos. It's easier to buy free agent talent than to develop it. Need a 4:05 1500 woman? Sub 28 10K man? Just go purchase one. Win now instead of hoping that NXN winner pans out in a couple of years. The assistants do the hard work in the shadows while the "Director of Track & Field" claims all of the credit.
there are <50 of those d1 programs, most have to work with far less, that being said there are a lot of terrible coaches that don't develop most runners at d1 schools and because the focus is often scoring points in track and roster limits depth isn't a priority
I'm a former SEC runner who's coached D1 for many years and had Olympic Trials Qualifiers. Pretty well connected in the coaching world.
Not enough people talk about the fact that most top D3 programs coach circles around the majority of D1 coaches. Think of how many mid major programs are tossing scholarship money at 4:10-4:15/9:00-9:15 HS kids and signing a bunch of them, then you look at their TFRRS page and they struggle to even have their 5th-7th guys under 15:00.
Meanwhile, the elite D3s are scraping together a roster of 4:25-4:40/9:40-10:20 walk-ons, and two years later those guys are outperforming those aforementioned D1 kids.
If you were to take the top-10 D3 coaches and top-10 D1 coaches and swap their programs, the D3 coaches would adapt to coaching the blue chip 4:05/8:50 kids, but I don't know if the D1 coaches would be able to help less talented kids find those breakthroughs.
Just my two cents, not trying to knock anyone! But having seen a lot of these "elite" D1 programs up close, there's such a surplus of talent that it's hardly surprising when some pan out and become studs. I'm always impressed with what top D3 coaches are able to do with a bunch of local kids who can't even make their HS state meets, and don't even have money to offer them.
I think it's obvious that D3 has to settle for late bloomers and they know what to do with them in 4 years or less. Those kids are somewhat talented with a good work ethic but still growing in their maturity. Most wont ever be able to improve enough to compete with top level D1 guys from around the world but they can improve a lot more from where they started college. And if they are in the right program that has a tradition of development vs participation/hobby, winning is what they want to do anyway. They are motivated. I was one of those kids. Nobody that beat me in hs ever beat me again in college. I grew 3 inches my first year and trained like I never had before. As a hs coach whose had many D1/NCAA qualifiers/and a few OT qualifiers, I had a lot more that went to D3 and qualify for Nats xc and track that couldnt make our varsity squads all 4 years. They were highly motivated late bloomers I wish I had for another 4 years. Turns out, some of them have made great teachers/coaches as well.
I'm a former SEC runner who's coached D1 for many years and had Olympic Trials Qualifiers. Pretty well connected in the coaching world.
Not enough people talk about the fact that most top D3 programs coach circles around the majority of D1 coaches. Think of how many mid major programs are tossing scholarship money at 4:10-4:15/9:00-9:15 HS kids and signing a bunch of them, then you look at their TFRRS page and they struggle to even have their 5th-7th guys under 15:00.
Meanwhile, the elite D3s are scraping together a roster of 4:25-4:40/9:40-10:20 walk-ons, and two years later those guys are outperforming those aforementioned D1 kids.
If you were to take the top-10 D3 coaches and top-10 D1 coaches and swap their programs, the D3 coaches would adapt to coaching the blue chip 4:05/8:50 kids, but I don't know if the D1 coaches would be able to help less talented kids find those breakthroughs.
Just my two cents, not trying to knock anyone! But having seen a lot of these "elite" D1 programs up close, there's such a surplus of talent that it's hardly surprising when some pan out and become studs. I'm always impressed with what top D3 coaches are able to do with a bunch of local kids who can't even make their HS state meets, and don't even have money to offer them.
Iowa is the local P4 D1 that gets 4:10-4:15/9:00-9:15 guys with no scholarships. Here are the PRs of their guys
Knepp 8:34 steeple
Kuhn 14:00
Ryan 14:05
Burnett 14:06
Wilson 14:15
Arbuckke 14:29
Montgomery 14:37
Wolfe 4:05 mile
Lane 4:04 mile
The steeple is the best and they have 6 5ks at 14:37 or better and 2 young milers. This is arguably the worst distance team in the Big 10. Your statement is false.
I'm a former SEC runner who's coached D1 for many years and had Olympic Trials Qualifiers. Pretty well connected in the coaching world.
Not enough people talk about the fact that most top D3 programs coach circles around the majority of D1 coaches. Think of how many mid major programs are tossing scholarship money at 4:10-4:15/9:00-9:15 HS kids and signing a bunch of them, then you look at their TFRRS page and they struggle to even have their 5th-7th guys under 15:00.
Meanwhile, the elite D3s are scraping together a roster of 4:25-4:40/9:40-10:20 walk-ons, and two years later those guys are outperforming those aforementioned D1 kids.
If you were to take the top-10 D3 coaches and top-10 D1 coaches and swap their programs, the D3 coaches would adapt to coaching the blue chip 4:05/8:50 kids, but I don't know if the D1 coaches would be able to help less talented kids find those breakthroughs.
Just my two cents, not trying to knock anyone! But having seen a lot of these "elite" D1 programs up close, there's such a surplus of talent that it's hardly surprising when some pan out and become studs. I'm always impressed with what top D3 coaches are able to do with a bunch of local kids who can't even make their HS state meets, and don't even have money to offer them.
After 2 years, 4:40/10:20 guys are beating D-1 runners that ran 4:15/9:15 in HS? I seriously doubt that’s true and thats even if they were grossly undertrained. When I ran, those times were below average even for a frosh/soph, while there were some years where someone would qualify out the Sac-Joaquin section for the state meet with a 9:15.
The walk-ons you describe are lacking in talent for either leg speed or strength, and no coaching is going to change them into D-1 level runners.
I'm a former SEC runner who's coached D1 for many years and had Olympic Trials Qualifiers. Pretty well connected in the coaching world.
Not enough people talk about the fact that most top D3 programs coach circles around the majority of D1 coaches. Think of how many mid major programs are tossing scholarship money at 4:10-4:15/9:00-9:15 HS kids and signing a bunch of them, then you look at their TFRRS page and they struggle to even have their 5th-7th guys under 15:00.
Meanwhile, the elite D3s are scraping together a roster of 4:25-4:40/9:40-10:20 walk-ons, and two years later those guys are outperforming those aforementioned D1 kids.
If you were to take the top-10 D3 coaches and top-10 D1 coaches and swap their programs, the D3 coaches would adapt to coaching the blue chip 4:05/8:50 kids, but I don't know if the D1 coaches would be able to help less talented kids find those breakthroughs.
Just my two cents, not trying to knock anyone! But having seen a lot of these "elite" D1 programs up close, there's such a surplus of talent that it's hardly surprising when some pan out and become studs. I'm always impressed with what top D3 coaches are able to do with a bunch of local kids who can't even make their HS state meets, and don't even have money to offer them.
That's a pretty idiotic statement.
It's actually really easy to recruit dozens of undertrained 9:40 guys and give them high mileage and double threshold. With a big enough roster, many will reach the top levels of D3.
Wartburg has 1 guy under 14:20 and most of those 5k guys they brag are 14:45 or slower. Good for D3 but not comparable to D1 in any way.
I'm a former SEC runner who's coached D1 for many years and had Olympic Trials Qualifiers. Pretty well connected in the coaching world.
Not enough people talk about the fact that most top D3 programs coach circles around the majority of D1 coaches. Think of how many mid major programs are tossing scholarship money at 4:10-4:15/9:00-9:15 HS kids and signing a bunch of them, then you look at their TFRRS page and they struggle to even have their 5th-7th guys under 15:00.
Meanwhile, the elite D3s are scraping together a roster of 4:25-4:40/9:40-10:20 walk-ons, and two years later those guys are outperforming those aforementioned D1 kids.
If you were to take the top-10 D3 coaches and top-10 D1 coaches and swap their programs, the D3 coaches would adapt to coaching the blue chip 4:05/8:50 kids, but I don't know if the D1 coaches would be able to help less talented kids find those breakthroughs.
Just my two cents, not trying to knock anyone! But having seen a lot of these "elite" D1 programs up close, there's such a surplus of talent that it's hardly surprising when some pan out and become studs. I'm always impressed with what top D3 coaches are able to do with a bunch of local kids who can't even make their HS state meets, and don't even have money to offer them.
Wartburg have 59 men on their XC roster. They are not scraping together sh1t. UW-Lacrosse have tryouts and cuts every year. These elite D3s are throwing eggs at walls just the same way the D1s are, they just have better PR (thanks D3 Glory Days!) and the eggs just weren’t as talented in HS
Here's an example of a low ranking D1 xc team, Georgia Tech, in a major conference where everyone who has run 5000 or xc has run sub-15, 11 out of the 13 guys on the roster. Most of those guys ran 14:20s. This is typical of low-ranking major conference teams, in my sense. You may very well have small conference teams that do not get many sub-15s, but the vast majority of major conference teams are more like GT. You do get a lot of disappointments in college in D1, but my belief is that a lot of that has to do with the fact that coaches set very hard training programs in order to compete with the talent out there and that burns out or injures a lot of those guys. The D3 coaches know that they have the luxury of bringing people along with the idea of long-term development and a considerably lower bar. What Wartburg, Pomona-Pitzer, Lacrosse, and others have done with their depth is very impressive, and I don't think that merit is really that much of a determining factor in becoming a D1 coach.
At Cal, a much maligned distance program here, 15 out of 16 xc guys either broke 15 or 25, so I think it is a myth that major conference D1 teams aren't having a lot of sub-15s. Maybe the SEC is one of those conferences.