When did your D1 track athlete start hitting D1 college recruiting time? (sprinters especially)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The difficulty with high-academic options is that they tend to prefer using most of their admissions help on mid and long distance runners who also run XC. Other teams, like football, will often help provide sprinters for the track team.

So i have a freshman in college - engineering major - who faced a similar dilemma. Was a very strong student in high school and ran competitive track and xc for 4 years. His best times were in mid distance where he ran at both regionals and states as well as invitationals.

He was getting recruitment letters from D3 schools. But as someone interested in engineering, he didn't want to go a D3 school. No matter what anyone says, liberal arts schools are not competing with Michigan, Cornell, Berkeley, Rice, Duke, Georgia Tech, Northwestern, Texas etc when it comes to engineering. For those schools his times in his most competitive events were at the "walk-on" level - not the "recruitment" level.

So he focused on the very good D1 school he wanted go to. Got in during the ED round. Spent the summer training. And when he arrived at college, he reached out to the track coach. The were no roster spots at all for his distance. This is D1. There are fifth and sixth year students running. And there are very few 18 year olds who are going to be competitive with 22/23 year old runners. But given his abilities, he was given a training regimen and put on a squad with other competitive freshman and team runners coming back from physical therapy. He needs to bring his time down by a few seconds.

So it's worked out so far. He gets to go to the engineering program he really wanted to. And he trains and becomes familiar with what it takes to run at the D1 level. And hopefully he joins the formal team next year.

May I ask, what is wrong with being on the walk on level? Sure you don't get a scholarship but you make the team and get all the perks and responsibilities that come with that, correct? My kid (not OP) isn't looking for money but just wants to run, but at a school with engineering like OP's kid. My kid would like to do computer science which falls under engineering in many schools. If it seems that would be too demanding with a sport, they'd would be open to majoring in math to avoid the lab aspects that make playing a sport and engineering hard.

I'm really happy it worked out for your son but isn't what he is doing essentially walk on level or is it try-out level? My limited understanding is walk-on is a guaranteed spot with no money. Try out is you essentially trying out to see if you make the team. In both instances, (walk-on and try-out) you could get a scholarship later (D1_ but it's unlikely.

[Anonymous]

There are lots of good engineering schools competing at Div 3. Just off the top of my head—
Hopkins
Carnegie Mellon
RPI
Union
Bucknell

[Anonymous]

To the Carnegie Mellon poster, yes those are great schools. You also need to be able to get in, and pay $80k a year. Both of those may be tougher than hitting the times. There are essentially no track scholarships either.

[Anonymous]

How good are the runrecruit times at predicting recruit/walk on/try out for specific schools? Where is this data based on? Do they take running times for athletes from those schools from the past year or more?

[Anonymous]

FWIW, I had two nephews run track in college in the last decade. The one who ran D3 ran all three years and took time off to study abroad. Got a great job. The one who ran D1 only ran two years then quit because it was too much. Also got a great job.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The difficulty with high-academic options is that they tend to prefer using most of their admissions help on mid and long distance runners who also run XC. Other teams, like football, will often help provide sprinters for the track team.

So i have a freshman in college - engineering major - who faced a similar dilemma. Was a very strong student in high school and ran competitive track and xc for 4 years. His best times were in mid distance where he ran at both regionals and states as well as invitationals.

He was getting recruitment letters from D3 schools. But as someone interested in engineering, he didn't want to go a D3 school. No matter what anyone says, liberal arts schools are not competing with Michigan, Cornell, Berkeley, Rice, Duke, Georgia Tech, Northwestern, Texas etc when it comes to engineering. For those schools his times in his most competitive events were at the "walk-on" level - not the "recruitment" level.

So he focused on the very good D1 school he wanted go to. Got in during the ED round. Spent the summer training. And when he arrived at college, he reached out to the track coach. The were no roster spots at all for his distance. This is D1. There are fifth and sixth year students running. And there are very few 18 year olds who are going to be competitive with 22/23 year old runners. But given his abilities, he was given a training regimen and put on a squad with other competitive freshman and team runners coming back from physical therapy. He needs to bring his time down by a few seconds.

So it's worked out so far. He gets to go to the engineering program he really wanted to. And he trains and becomes familiar with what it takes to run at the D1 level. And hopefully he joins the formal team next year.

May I ask, what is wrong with being on the walk on level? Sure you don't get a scholarship but you make the team and get all the perks and responsibilities that come with that, correct? My kid (not OP) isn't looking for money but just wants to run, but at a school with engineering like OP's kid. My kid would like to do computer science which falls under engineering in many schools. If it seems that would be too demanding with a sport, they'd would be open to majoring in math to avoid the lab aspects that make playing a sport and engineering hard.

I'm really happy it worked out for your son but isn't what he is doing essentially walk on level or is it try-out level? My limited understanding is walk-on is a guaranteed spot with no money. Try out is you essentially trying out to see if you make the team. In both instances, (walk-on and try-out) you could get a scholarship later (D1_ but it's unlikely.

This is PP. He just wants to run. He's not doing it for the scholarship. But D1 running, particularly at mid-distance like the 800 and the 1500, is at whole different level than high school. There aren't a lot of 18 year olds that can hit those times. So he was put on what I take to be the "training squad." He gets the individualized training with a coach. He has a program. It's structured. But he's not on the formal team that competes. He needs to lose 5 seconds on the 800, which I'm sure he'll do. And they'll will see.

This is at a top 15 school. We looked up the bios of the track team. Almost all are in hard majors and have all-academic honors. So clearly the school knows how to work with students that have a demanding work load. But he's only two weeks into freshman year. Being a scholarship athlete would be very nice, but he's not there yet. Will see how it goes. But he's happy with the way things are rolling along.

[Anonymous]

This post makes me realize that my HS sophomore should not aim to make the track team in college and just do club. Sounds like running for the school (being a D1 athlete) and majoring in electrical engineering would be too much for her. Does anyone know, do you you have to try out for club teams or can you just join because you want to?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This post makes me realize that my HS sophomore should not aim to make the track team in college and just do club. Sounds like running for the school (being a D1 athlete) and majoring in electrical engineering would be too much for her. Does anyone know, do you you have to try out for club teams or can you just join because you want to?

^ I'm talking about the track club teams in college

[Anonymous]

My DD did it in her late junior year but started the sport as a sophomore. Had she started earlier she would have hit the times earlier.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:My DD did it in her late junior year but started the sport as a sophomore. Had she started earlier she would have hit the times earlier.

Not necessarily, and it’s a little silly to say that. We have juniors and seniors that hit top times in their first year on the team.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My DD did it in her late junior year but started the sport as a sophomore. Had she started earlier she would have hit the times earlier.

Not necessarily, and it’s a little silly to say that. We have juniors and seniors that hit top times in their first year on the team.

You need to inform as to the times the athlete has achieved. Went to college on D1 scholarship. This was the 70's. 4:13 as a soph in the mile, 4:08 as a junior, 4:06 as a senior Ran a 9 minute two mile as am 11th grader. Ran 49 for a 400 in 11th grade, 48 in 12th grade. Ran all four years on my college's average 4 x 4, running 47 seconds but no faster. But i was viewed as a point scorer in college as early as 11th grade. So that is what it takes at the top of D1. Not that much different between recruited scholarship guys today and very good walk ons given Title 9. There are 9:10 two milers rejected for walk-on spots at Stanford (a mistake - a kid from Fairfax 15 years ago ran 9:15 and was accepted and won the Pac-12). Sprinters can improve late, so any discussion with a coach has to revolve around trajectory and how much the kid has trained. If lightly trained, a coach will become more interested than not.

Top level D3 entering times likely will be good enough to meaningfully walk-on at a school like Lehigh or Bucknell. Plenty of engineering, but expensive. Good luck.

[Anonymous]

I mentioned my DD being interested in a school for D1 track and people have commented how bad their team is (in terms of winning, not the people or coach). I am confused as to why that matters. My kid likes the school, the people are great, she's not ever going "pro" (and there isn't even really any pro in track). So why not join a team, despite its losing record, if you like the college (passes "broken leg test") and the people? Is there a consideration I'm missing/not thinking about?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The difficulty with high-academic options is that they tend to prefer using most of their admissions help on mid and long distance runners who also run XC. Other teams, like football, will often help provide sprinters for the track team.

So i have a freshman in college - engineering major - who faced a similar dilemma. Was a very strong student in high school and ran competitive track and xc for 4 years. His best times were in mid distance where he ran at both regionals and states as well as invitationals.

He was getting recruitment letters from D3 schools. But as someone interested in engineering, he didn't want to go a D3 school. No matter what anyone says, liberal arts schools are not competing with Michigan, Cornell, Berkeley, Rice, Duke, Georgia Tech, Northwestern, Texas etc when it comes to engineering. For those schools his times in his most competitive events were at the "walk-on" level - not the "recruitment" level.

So he focused on the very good D1 school he wanted go to. Got in during the ED round. Spent the summer training. And when he arrived at college, he reached out to the track coach. The were no roster spots at all for his distance. This is D1. There are fifth and sixth year students running. And there are very few 18 year olds who are going to be competitive with 22/23 year old runners. But given his abilities, he was given a training regimen and put on a squad with other competitive freshman and team runners coming back from physical therapy. He needs to bring his time down by a few seconds.

So it's worked out so far. He gets to go to the engineering program he really wanted to. And he trains and becomes familiar with what it takes to run at the D1 level. And hopefully he joins the formal team next year.

You don't think Hopkins, Harvey Mudd, Carnegie Mellon, and MIT are good engineering schools?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I mentioned my DD being interested in a school for D1 track and people have commented how bad their team is (in terms of winning, not the people or coach). I am confused as to why that matters. My kid likes the school, the people are great, she's not ever going "pro" (and there isn't even really any pro in track). So why not join a team, despite its losing record, if you like the college (passes "broken leg test") and the people? Is there a consideration I'm missing/not thinking about?

The big hiccup would be if the coach gets fired while your DD is being recruited. There is no guarantee that a new coach would honor commitments

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I mentioned my DD being interested in a school for D1 track and people have commented how bad their team is (in terms of winning, not the people or coach). I am confused as to why that matters. My kid likes the school, the people are great, she's not ever going "pro" (and there isn't even really any pro in track). So why not join a team, despite its losing record, if you like the college (passes "broken leg test") and the people? Is there a consideration I'm missing/not thinking about?

The big hiccup would be if the coach gets fired while your DD is being recruited. There is no guarantee that a new coach would honor commitments

Fair point. But with a good team a coach can leave for better pastures. Same risk.