Trying to understand the US running system

Yes, they are runners not getting any financial assistance.

So if you meet a standard time (clearly each school will be different) you are given something like a scholarship then?

Is this just in the High School system and College?

Just in College, highschool runners do not get any money for running at their highschool.

There is no standard time. A coach is given a set number of scholarships set by the university and perhaps the NCAA. That coach is then free to give scholarships to whoever he pleases and for whatever reason. Conceivably a runner could have a slower time than a walk on but a coach might like the slower runner's attitude and see more upside in him and gives him the scholarship.

Not from around here wrote:

So if you meet a standard time (clearly each school will be different) you are given something like a scholarship then?

Is this just in the High School system and College?

The High school system generally allows anyone attending the high school to compete and train with the team. Almost all schools have track as a non-cut sport, with many athletes who got cut from other spring sports (baseball) joining the team. The team numbers can also be inflated if a football coach is also the track coach and has the whole football team compete in track as training for their fall football season.

Good high school runners will get recruited by a college based on their high school times. If you are recruited by the coach and given athletic aid you are not a "walk-on". Walk-ons don't receive athletic aid initially, and usually have to meet an arbitrary time standard they would have run in high school, or during a time trial before the college season. The need for this is because college teams have a limited number of spots on the team, unlike high school. Walk-ons would be anyone not recruited by the coach to come to the school with the intention of running (and possibly include people told they could be on the team, but wouldn't be receive athletic aid - not receiving aid is very likely because track budgets are so small).

D1 and D2 universities can give athletic aid. D3 cannot, but still recruits athletes under the knowledge the athlete will not receive an athletic scholarship.

These are very informative answers, thanks.

Next Question and you have touched on it.

What's D1, D2 an D3? I assume they are abit like a ranking sytem for colleges/Universities right? Who ranks them if they are ranked?

Not from around here wrote:

These are very informative answers, thanks.

Next Question and you have touched on it.

What's D1, D2 an D3? I assume they are abit like a ranking sytem for colleges/Universities right? Who ranks them if they are ranked?

Not ranking exactly. Colleges and universities more or less self select which division they want to compete in for a given sport, based on how high a level they want to compete at, with 1 being the most competitive. The best D2 teams are often competitive with all but a few D1 teams. I don't know about D2.

NCAA D1 and D2 schools are allowed to give out athletic scholarships, while D3 schools are not. D1 and D2 schools tend to be state schools or larger private schools. Most D3 teams out there are smaller, liberal arts colleges. As you may guess, D1 is the most competitive, followed by D2 and then D3. However, it is not uncommon to see excellent individual performances in D3 and especially D2. I hope this helps.

Concerned Citizen wrote:

Not ranking exactly. Colleges and universities more or less self select which division they want to compete in for a given sport, based on how high a level they want to compete at, with 1 being the most competitive. The best D2 teams are often competitive with all but a few D1 teams. I don't know about D2.

Is this true? I guess I have been ignorant for quite some time assuming it was an issue of university student population rather than choosing what division to be in.

Chris Wasnetsky wrote:

Concerned Citizen wrote:

Not ranking exactly. Colleges and universities more or less self select which division they want to compete in for a given sport, based on how high a level they want to compete at, with 1 being the most competitive. The best D2 teams are often competitive with all but a few D1 teams. I don't know about D2.

Is this true? I guess I have been ignorant for quite some time assuming it was an issue of university student population rather than choosing what division to be in.

It probably does generally correlate with student population. Here are the official requirements:

So what's the incentive for a Uni to choose D1 over D2. Is it prestige, bragging rights, extra funding etc.

Not from around here wrote:

So what's the incentive for a Uni to choose D1 over D2. Is it prestige, bragging rights, extra funding etc.

Yes, yes, and yes.

Schools want to compete against the best teams in the country. And beat them. High levels of athletic achievement are often highly visible among alumni and lead to more donations. This is often less true in sports like cross country or whatever.

For several reasons it costs more money to be competitive in DI, so it's more likely that the larger schools to be able to fund them.

I think it's also easier for the more prestigious schools to attract talent, so that allows them to be competitive.

Honestly I don't understand why any schools are DII. There's barely any prestige difference from DIII and a lot of the best small colleges in the country are DIII as well.

Two things that seem to have been a bit overlooked in my scan of this thread:

1. Walk on doesn't necessarily mean anybody on no athletic scholarship. Some people will be recruited without aid. They aren't walk ons. Walk ons come to the school with no guarantee that they will make the team, come to open tryouts, and make the team.

2. D1/2/3 also have big differences in things like how many sports the university must compete in, minimum game requirements, some conference type restrictions. So, a lot of times, it would be really difficult for a smaller school to be DI, and many small schools that do it have to go out of their way. Lots of schools in geographically isolated regions (Alaska Anchorage, for example) would have a hell of a time trying to be DI. For instance, having 14 athletes (min) compete in 6 scored meets per season could be tough. Being in a conference with other DI schools could be tough. There are more of these types of things that I'm not remembering.

Right, so when a DI Uni cuts its athletic program back it could potentially cease to be D1 school by not sponsoring enough sports program. I'm assume D1 schools wouldn't be that careless but every other week on the boards some school has cut a sports program, clearly there's a monetary issue helping that decision. Surely they need to replace it with another sponsored sport to maintain their Division status.

I'm over simplifying the process but you get my point?

Where are you from? From your first post, I thought you might be trolling but after reading the whole thread I realize that you really do have these questions. It's funny because not many of us American runners could sufficiently answer your questions. Most of us just assume the meanings of these things without ever really defining them.

Australia

And yes no trolling. I actually wanted to know these things and more. I've been reading letsrun for some time and it occurred to me that I didn't fully understand the concepts of D1 and walk-on etc.

I think the answers have been quite helpful, I was certainly not completely off the mark on my understanding but I was fully correct either.

Consider me a student of all running whether it be Jack Daniels, Cerutty, Noakes and even how a country sets up their system.

I love Australia. I wish the US could be more like it.

I think we share a common thought!

Next question:

What is redshirting? This one I don't have any preconceived ideas.

Red shirting is actually easy to explain. College athletes have 5 years to complete 4 years of eligibility. When an athlete redshirts, he chooses not to compete for his school for a season, saving a year of eligibility for later. The term "redshirt" comes from the old days of football, when members of the team who were sitting out the season would sit in the stands wearing red shirts.

Athletes can redshirt one season at a time. For example, they could compete during cross country, then redshirt indoors, and compete again outdoors. Generally, competing once in uniform during a season means the athlete waives the right to redshirt. If the athlete becomes sick or injured early in the season, he may apply for a medical redshirt to maintain the year of eligibility. This is rare but does happen.

Athletes redshirt for various reasons. Many freshman athletes in sports that require physical maturity (track and football are the main ones) redshirt to allow them to catch up with older, more developed athletes before using their eligibility. In theory, they will be much better athletes in their 5th year of college than their first year.

Sometimes, coaches choose to redshirt athletes for strategic purposes. If a coach knows his team will have a bad season, he may redshirt his top athletes to set up a much better year in the future. Athletes have also redshirted in Olympic years so they could focus on training without the need to compete for their schools.

Redshirted athletes are still allowed to race, but only in non-scored meets and not in their team's uniform. They are also allowed to practice with their teams and may also receive scholarships.