Which DI Program Ruins The Most Talent?

Rupp will retire in a few years with a net worth in excess of $5M and he will spend the rest of life giving back. I retired at age 50 with a net worth of $4M after making only 100k per year. Rupp is probably smarter than an LR poster.

How would you be able to tell if a jumper is already near their limits, based off their 100m times? What about the other events these athletes did? For distance runners I look at 400/800 times to get a better idea of their ceiling.

I ran for the Razorbacks when they were winning national championships. There were a few guys that made it...(ie tyson gay, wallace spearmon) but they also had many many top runners in the country that are now just sitting at a boat dealership.

As a D1 runner, every single athlete comes in with talent and gives everything they can too succeed. This is such a stupid question perpetuated by people sitting behind a screen judging the most talented runners in the country because they have nothing better to do. Use message boards for constructive conversations.

Hummm.....

Ivies, Stanford, Cal, the Academies....

I wonder, could there be circumstances unique to these schools as opposed to say

Q State Tech, or Compass Point State U...

It isn't true. The academies do not ruin talent. That one makes no sense. Yes, Cal and Stanford are on the list. Both schools are whacked out and they warp most of the brains of he kids there so it makes sense that they lose their way. The Ivies do not ruin talent.

I've been coaching D1 for about a decade. This is the first time I've seen anyone express what I've observed and tried to rectify to this much detail. Sure there are coaches who are developers and there are coaches who try to connect with the athletes, but doing both along with taking the time to address the source of these issues is underrated and underappreciated.

I often find myself trying not to view myself as being bitter, jealous or any other adjective but I always circle back around to the fact that being a good collegiate coach to most is simply a product what school you're at. It has nothing to do with what you're actually doing.

commissioned officer wrote:

military academies.

As a graduate from Air Force’s program, which has made the national meet the past 5 years, I can definitely say that the program does not ruin recruits (which someone else asked if they do recruit - they do!), but I can also say that you have to be in the right mindset for it in order to succeed both on the track and off of it... it’s not an easy place to be at if you wanna succeed at everything. But, I was able to run faster than my HS 2 mile PR as an average 2 mile in my 10k on the track. We’ve also had several All Americans and such, so I would say they do the opposite of ruin. Coach Cole said that the program is pretty development, but the program has also seen quite a bit of success at the national stage.

I can’t speak for Army or Navy, but I’m sure they’re in a very similar situation.

Wolverine M wrote:

Michigan had 35 guys on the XC roster last year. Just by the shear number, they ruin more guys by having multiple former 9 flat guys sitting at home on conference weekend.

Michigan is definitely an interesting case. Not sure of the exact source, but one newly-removed wolverine runner (former Michigan state champ) had a tweet not long ago essentially putting the program and coach on blast. I've never known much about the coach, but it seems like there's an outside rebellion (probably more common than we think in D1).

Georgetown Mens program

Wisconsin men

Stanford men

Oregon woman

Georgetown both

Oregon

Among those who continue competing, the typical athlete might well run the same pace for 5000m in college as he or she ran for 2M in high school. So, they do improve on average and the best college performances in a given year are almost always better than the best high school performances all-time, e.g. 9.9, 19.8-19.9, high 43 or low 44, 1:44, 3:36, 7:40s, 13:10s-13:20s, 28:20s.

I ran for a military academy. No one pays to go to an academy, so that’s taken care of. They do have blue chips which they will fight to help get in (coaches) if they’re on the fence for admission. The recruiting is different because they know some kids just won’t get in.

REAL. wrote:

I would say BYU.

Dozens of phenomenal NCAA talents that just aren't inspired and motivated to make running part of their Mormon lifestyle upon graduation. For every Jared Ward, there are probably 50 Cougars that leave the sport in life.

This isn't a BYU problem, it's a problem across collegiate running. This is a common thing for basically all high level programs. The number of guys who continue to train at a high level after graduation, whether it is D1 or D2, is really low. I ran in college, and still love to run and train. I can only count 1 or 2 teammates who still train hard after college. Most just want to do other things than run hard, which I respect.

I agree with those who stated that some kids train harder than others in high school just to get the scholarship. It isn’t that they stop trying in college, but there just might not be a lot of room for improvement. Meanwhile, some walk-on who never trained properly might develop into a college phenom.

College coaches, it would seem, would try to determine who has the most upside, but I don’t think it is always very obvious. Many top kids probably under-report how much training they really did to get where they are.

Cal Cal wrote:

I agree. Stephanie Jenks was about the top recruit in 2016 running 4:40 and competing several times in NXN and Footlocker nationals. She disappeared at Cal.

Some of that kind of stuff is because we over train and over race them in high school. Many of us warn about this but how many high school coaches listen?

My spirit animal wrote:

I've been coaching D1 for about a decade.

...but I always circle back around to the fact that being a good collegiate coach to most is simply a product what school you're at. It has nothing to do with what you're actually doing.

This is our sport. Career D1 coaches say coaching doesn't matter.

You missed my intent.

Was implying that the mentioned institutions have this in common, rigor outside of practice that the average school does not...