What division builds its runners best?

people always seem to say that you won't improve as much in D3, but I think that's wrong. A lot of the top d3 schools develop kids who could kick most d1 guys butts (not the top top level but most of the guys after that). It's hard to say that those guys would have been better in D1.

I know a sub 30 minute D3 guy and he basically does D1 level training. 100 mile weeks, lifting, intense workouts. The only thing holding him back is maybe a lack of competitive meets but most teams go to meets with D1 runners in track.

If you have the talent and the motivation, you can be good anywhere you go. People need to stop blaming their coach and their program for their underachievement.

Dee Tree wrote:

anyone wrote:

...While I obviously can't prove it, I think it's very reasonable to believe that he wouldn't be running the times he's running if he went DIII...

What times is he running? He'd have to be running sub-14:00 and sub 29:00 to be at the top of the DIII heap.

Not the point. I didn't claim that, because he went DI, he would be at the top of the DIII heap. He's only beginning his second year in College after walking on as a Freshman.

My point is that he's almost certainly running faster times now that he's DI vs if he went DIII.

And, FWIW, the best DIII times last year were 14:11 and 29:39, not sub-14 and sub 29. Top 10 was 14:25 and 30:33. My son's 10K time is better than that. 5K a little worse, but he only ever ran one 5K on the track.

did not get hurt or burned out wrote:

anyone wrote:

Or, rather than being burned out, the DI guy knows that he gave everything and is satisfied with his accomplishments and doesn't need to prove himself against hobby joggers.

Again, I like the DIII option. The additional downside though, is that you'll never really know how good you could have been...

A lot of people who go D1 get hurt or burned out, quit, and never really know how good they could have been.

Fair point.

Getting back to the OP, this is actually the key point, in my opinion. DI is cutthroat. You better be on track to scoring points in conf meets by RS Soph year or you're expendable. No coach wants an upperclassman that can't score points taking up a roster spot.

With DIII, I'm sure you could still get cut, but the bar is typically much lower. If you show up, do the workouts and are a positive influence, you can participate.

$$NJ wrote:

D1- a place good kids go to get a little bit better or great.

D2- developmental.

D3- where smart kids go to maybe get better.

I think region plays a big role here. In the entirety of middle america there are only a couple D3 schools that even pretend to have academics on par with the major schools.

The smart kids are sitting in engineering classes at Michigan, Purdue, Iowa State, Texas, UW-Plattville, Oklahoma, etc, not sitting in their 5 person creative writing seminar at Saint Nobodies-ever-heard-of-it.

D3 is where people who weren't good enough athletically to get a scholarship, weren't good enough academically to get accepted to a competitive program or weren't good enough socially to thrive in a big school go to spend their parents money for a few years while still being allowed on the team like in high school.

anyone wrote:

Dee Tree wrote:

What times is he running? He'd have to be running sub-14:00 and sub 29:00 to be at the top of the DIII heap.

Not the point. I didn't claim that, because he went DI, he would be at the top of the DIII heap. He's only beginning his second year in College after walking on as a Freshman.

My point is that he's almost certainly running faster times now that he's DI vs if he went DIII.

And, FWIW, the best DIII times last year were 14:11 and 29:39, not sub-14 and sub 29. Top 10 was 14:25 and 30:33. My son's 10K time is better than that. 5K a little worse, but he only ever ran one 5K on the track.

Why do you suppose your kid wouldn't run the same times in a good D3 program? I would wager that D3 on the whole does a much better job of developing the talent it gets than D1. I could cite numerous examples of 4:40-9:45 type HS runners that go on low 14:00 and sub 30:00 at D3.

I ran DI wrote:

Why do you suppose your kid wouldn't run the same times in a good D3 program? I would wager that D3 on the whole does a much better job of developing the talent it gets than D1. I could cite numerous examples of 4:40-9:45 type HS runners that go on low 14:00 and sub 30:00 at D3.

We'll have to agree to disagree. It's not provable anyway.

But, I will say that only 3 DIII guys went sub 30 this year. 6 guys did it in 2014.

anyone wrote:

I ran DI wrote:

Why do you suppose your kid wouldn't run the same times in a good D3 program? I would wager that D3 on the whole does a much better job of developing the talent it gets than D1. I could cite numerous examples of 4:40-9:45 type HS runners that go on low 14:00 and sub 30:00 at D3.

We'll have to agree to disagree. It's not provable anyway.

But, I will say that only 3 DIII guys went sub 30 this year. 6 guys did it in 2014.

Well I don't disagree with any of the points you made in your earlier post, e.g., with a 4:20/9:20 you can walk on to most DI teams but the odds are it will take years to make an impact, if you ever do. So given the choice between scoring a point or two at your conference meet and having close to -0- chance to advance to D1 nationals and having an impact and maybe a chance to contend for individual and teams titles at D3 nationals, the vast majority of kids are going to have a much better experience running D3, notwithstanding the fact that every kid who walks on to a DI team dreams of becoming the next Eric Jenkins.

When you are looking at teams, I suggest looking at the size of the team and how long the numbers have been big.

If there aren't a lot of runners on the team then usually there's something going on that chases people who aren't currently in the top 7 away. If there are 15-25 men or women (not combined) on the team who are committed to doing the workouts and sticking with it, that's evidence that there is a positive culture on the team. (Note: those are d3 numbers, roster limits & "counters" do weird things to D1 numbers)

Running in college is hard. There's no off season and there are a lot of things that are going to compete for your time and focus. Having a support network is a big deal. If the team isn't drawing a lot of people, then that's a sign that it may not be healthy. If there are negative forces on the team, it can be hard to stick with it. On the other hand, if the team is big, friendly, and supporting then it becomes a positive force and makes it easier to balance training and studies.

Rule of thumb: you've got your studies, your training, and your social life. You can pick two. It helps a lot when the team can provide two in one.

Last thought: there are a lot of elite runners who stop running in college because it stops being rewarding. My advice is to find an environment where running will be the most rewarding, because you'll never find out how far you can go if running stops being rewarding.

I agree with you.

I wanted my son to seriously evaluate (and, ideally go) DIII. He didn't. So far it's working out, but he could still wash out.

Here are some great DIII schools with great to decent distance running programs: Haverford, Wash U, Williams, CMU, Johns Hopkins, MIT, Carleton, Rose-Hulman, Amherst, Tufts, Middlebury, Emory, Claremont, Pomona, Chicago. I'm sure I missed some.

I can name quite a few D3 schools in middle america that have academics as good or better than the major schools.