Tell me why mid-major D-1 is better than other levels

Who ever said mid-majors are better? There are only so many athletes that can be on Power 5 college teams, so that's why there are other options for runners. Runners still want to compete, still want to try to get as fast as they can, etc. There are many athletes on mid-major D1 teams who could have made a Power 5 team, but they chose the mid-major for other reasons. Perhaps they wanted a smaller school or one closer to their home, or they got more money, or it had the degree they wanted, etc.

I hear kids just saying they want to go D-1 and then considering pretty mid-major schools instead of much more competitive programs in other levels.

And this is without any significant difference in school cost or major availability, etc. Many kids assume right from the beginning of their college search that they only want D-1. I’m just wondering if there’s something there they really want or if they just don’t realize that mid-majors aren’t really on the same level as the P5

Having competed and coached at the P5 D1 level and the Mid-Major D1 level there exists an over-generalization of each category. There are roughly 65 "Power 5" schools and another roughly 65 "Group of 5" schools. While there is most certainly a difference in athletic program quality among the top P5 schools vs. the bottom G5 schools in terms of financial support, there isn't a huge difference between the bottom P5 schools and the top G5 schools. In fact, in some instances there is better funding in some G5 schools than bottom-tier P5 schools (not that funding is the end-all, be-all, for a quality collegiate athletic experience).

There are another 200 or so D1 programs beyond this 130 that also have support varying quality levels of SA experience. Those schools that emphasize the Olympic sports provide a great level of support for SAs not enjoyed by Track/XC kids at some P5 and G5 schools.

I'm not sure categorizing P5 vs. G5 vs. Other D1 schools is the best way to look at SA experience given the wide variety of support and opportunities unique to each institution.

Care to tell us which bottom P5 schools you believe are underfunded? I don't believe that is true.

Coe or Vid wrote:

Care to tell us which bottom P5 schools you believe are underfunded? I don't believe that is true.

probably depends on your definition of 'underfunded', don't you think?

No. It means anything less than 12.6.

Oh, by that definition, yes, you are probably correct.

Personally, I think funding for a program goes beyond that. And, of course, the use/placement of those 12.6 scholarships plays into it as well.

But again, using the 12.6 as the definition of proper funding you are probably correct

I appreciate the comments here as a longtime hs coach that explains options to kids that want to continue training/competing at college.

A couple factors that kids consider when choosing a D1 school include but not limited to:

1. How their talent will be received, fit into the program and be developed.

2. Will they be part of a traveling squad sooner than later.

3. "TEAM" atmosphere.

4. Level of other sports on campus. Some kids want to be a part of an overall successful athletic program.

Personally, I love it when a mid-major athlete does well at the national level. The MVC conference in the 90's-00's had several champions and high place winners in T&F. I've been an NAU CC fan since 87 after seeing some smaller school in blue and gold walk off with a runner-up trophy.

The schools that come to mind are: Rutgers, Purdue, Northwestern, Maryland, Vanderbilt, South Carolina, West Virginia , TCU, Oregon State and Cal

Like a Cyclone wrote:The schools that come to mind are: Rutgers, Purdue, Northwestern, Maryland, Vanderbilt, South Carolina, West Virginia , TCU, Oregon State and Cal

Let me give specific examples. Take schools like Louisiana-Monroe or Colgate or Winthrop or Cleveland State.

These are Division 1 schools. Do they offer an experience superior to other divisions?

They are not in any way competitive on the national level. A monumental year is getting 3 kids to the regional level where they get knocked out round 1. And those are the BEST kids on the team.

But many HS athletes see these as superior because they are D1. I just want to know why? I suspect it’s all about social validation but not sure.

In T&F the path to NCAAs is the same. No coaches polls, no selection committees. You have to line up, run the time and beat people.

If you are talented, you get to be a "bigger fish in a smaller pond." An All American from a mid major is likely a future Hall of Famer at that school, whereas they are just a normal teammate at a Power 5. They may be a full scholarship kid at the mid major and only a partial at a Power 5.

At the power 5 the football or basketball game may be more fun. Maybe you get more gear.

It's got to be nice to graduate with no student debt and come back for your Hall of Fame induction. You decide if that is better or worse than am extra sweatsuit and some tailgates.

It is completely about social validation! They would rather have a miserable time and say they ran D1 than enjoy the experience and get faster at some still pretty decent schools at other levels.

Maybe not high profile but still P5 wrote:

Like a Cyclone wrote:The schools that come to mind are: Rutgers, Purdue, Northwestern, Maryland, Vanderbilt, South Carolina, West Virginia , TCU, Oregon State and Cal

Oregon State and Cal are part of the PAC-12, a "P5" conference.

Those are ALL P5 schools (Big 10, Big 10, Big 10, Big 10, SEC, SEC, Bis 12, Big 12, Pac 12, Pac 12) . This was a list of underfunded and/or underachieving P5 programs.

Bis 12? I meant Big 12.

genuinely curious wrote:

Let me give specific examples. Take schools like Louisiana-Monroe or Colgate or Winthrop or Cleveland State.

These are Division 1 schools. Do they offer an experience superior to other divisions?

They are not in any way competitive on the national level. A monumental year is getting 3 kids to the regional level where they get knocked out round 1. And those are the BEST kids on the team.

But many HS athletes see these as superior because they are D1. I just want to know why? I suspect it’s all about social validation but not sure.

Well, the truth is probably closer to the fact that most high school athletes have no real idea what it will be like in college (no matter the level). They have an idea in their mind but can't know until they actually get to college. Certainly, many, and probably most, lean towards the 'D1 sounds better to their friends'... and beyond that a 'name' program sounds even better... so 'social validation' seems likely and it makes sense from their stand point given that in high school your friends and what they think of you, are the most important things in your brain.

I'd also guess that very few of them think, well, I'll go here and never run a step for the team but it will sound good to my friends.. I'd guess most think they will make the travel squad at some point.

Sure if they were to think about it logically many would go to any number of schools at all the levels... Because running is basically you against your competitors or you vs the clock, success can happen anywhere but they are high school seniors and most don't process it that way yet. That's my opinion anyway.

D2 FTW wrote:

It is completely about social validation! They would rather have a miserable time and say they ran D1 than enjoy the experience and get faster at some still pretty decent schools at other levels.

There are some lame people who’s actually have “D1 athlete” in their IG bios. A deeper dive shows they were just part of a team and not a major contributor.

Every year our college would lose recruits (49 to 4:20s types) to a non P5 D1 school never to be heard from again.

Sometimes it works out better for the athlete if they end up running slower in high school and go to a lower level d1 school. Here is an example:

A 4:20 kid and a 4:30 kid both want to run in college. The 4:20 kid has tremendous amounts of opportunities that the 4:30 kid does not have access to. The 4:30 kid can usually walk on to or run at a lower D1 or D2/D3 school, but they would have no shot running at the schools the 4:20 guy is.

So now let’s say that 4:30 guys picks a school that isn’t that fast but has athletes he is able to run with and progressively move up and make an impact. Since the 4:30 guys team isn’t that good he is going to be able to run at a lot more meets then the 4:20 freshman that picked a Major D1 school where they are just another fish in the pond.

Now since the 4:30 guy is racing a lot more and gaining fitness that they thought they would never have they are progressively getting their times down. The 4:20 guy isn’t racing as much and when they do they are probably running around the same or if not a little slower then they were in high school because of lack of attention/diminished team role. The coaches at a major school are more focused on their sub 4:10 that have a shot at scoring at conferences.

Many of the 4:20 guys that barely make the major D1 school team will eventually fade away and be injured quit or cut. Now the 4:30 guy that didn’t quite hit his potential is running 4:15s and progressively getting faster and starting to run at bigger meets.

Will the 4:30 guy be an all American or make this great break through? Probably not, but because they chose to run at a lower tier school where they were actually a contributing member of the team and if they keep at it maybe they could do some good stuff on the conference/regional level. At the end of the day with both runners careers are over the 4:30 high school guy that chose to run at the lower tier school ends up with a better lifetime PR then the 4:20 guy that went to a major school only to disappear and quit.

Experience: I was a 4:35 high school miler that never broke 2 and ended up a 4:10, 1:52 guy. Many of the 4:25 and lower guys that destroyed me in high school and went to bigger schools then I did ended up with slower PRs

genuinely curious wrote:

So what is it about them that makes the experience better than other levels where there is much greater competitive parity?

For the non national level DI programs (there are roughly 260 of them) the answer is scholarships.

At a mid major you do not need to be a national guy to earn big money, just be all-conference in a few events. DIIIs, no matter how competitive, can not pay tuition or cost of living.