I'd be wary about running in San Antonio. The Riverwalk is a dirty creek, and good luck with the women, because they've got a lot of big 'ums there. That's why Victoria is a secret.
Freshmen are always a crap shoot. I see a few decent improvements here (4:22 -> 3:55, 4:24 -> 4:01, 1:53 -> 1:52). I would say go for it and if you hate the coach when you're there, it's never been easier to transfer. The fact that everything else checks your boxes is a big thing and harder to find than a decent coach. If you were a 4:00-type then you could prioritize running but the simple fact is that an amazing college career would still get you nowhere close to making a living off of running, and everything else about college is going to be far more important to your long-term future.
Freshmen are always a crap shoot. I see a few decent improvements here (4:22 -> 3:55, 4:24 -> 4:01, 1:53 -> 1:52). I would say go for it and if you hate the coach when you're there, it's never been easier to transfer. The fact that everything else checks your boxes is a big thing and harder to find than a decent coach. If you were a 4:00-type then you could prioritize running but the simple fact is that an amazing college career would still get you nowhere close to making a living off of running, and everything else about college is going to be far more important to your long-term future.
4:24 to 4:01 is barely an improvement, same with 1:53 to 1:52. I'd expect a healthy 18 year old male to drop ~4 seconds in a 1500 with one more year of training.
Go to the school you like. not because of the coach. Focus on the best schools you can get into considering your athletic and academic credentials and be realistic about it.
Freshmen are always a crap shoot. I see a few decent improvements here (4:22 -> 3:55, 4:24 -> 4:01, 1:53 -> 1:52). I would say go for it and if you hate the coach when you're there, it's never been easier to transfer. The fact that everything else checks your boxes is a big thing and harder to find than a decent coach. If you were a 4:00-type then you could prioritize running but the simple fact is that an amazing college career would still get you nowhere close to making a living off of running, and everything else about college is going to be far more important to your long-term future.
4:24 to 4:01 is barely an improvement, same with 1:53 to 1:52. I'd expect a healthy 18 year old male to drop ~4 seconds in a 1500 with one more year of training.
I have to disagree just a little. You shouldn't go to a school because of a coach but it can be one of the many factors that decides if you should or shouldn't go to a school. It shouldn't be a non-factor, you have to work with this person for four years.
Don't raise it with the coach. That's obnoxious. ("Hey, I've noticed your athletes are all getting worse. Care to comment?") Plus you wouldn't get a useful answer from him anyway.
I would look harder at the team's history: how have the juniors and seniors done compared to high school? Feels like you need to look at the longer-term record. Also, if you really like the school, plan to take a visit and talk to the athletes about it, i.e., what's training like, what do they think of the coach, etc etc.
At the end of the day, if running is important to you -- and if you're not sacrificing academics in any significant way because, let's face it, you're not going to be a pro/olympic runner -- then there's nothing wrong with making running part of your college decision. And it may turn out that another college has a better mix of academics/running than this one does.
somewhat disagree with this. Its incumbent on the coach to address athlete concerns and a coach who is secure in themselves/their process isn't afraid to answer questions like this. Have to ask it the right way, I wouldn't go down the roster and call out every single athlete by name who isn't performing well, but definitely fair game to ask about how athletes typically progress or how they help athletes improve. People shouldn't be afraid of asking direct questions/having direct conversations about things that matter.
Why in the world do you care about how this coaches team is doing? Running is not a team sport. There is absolutely nothing about track or xc that is team related in any regard UNLESS you are on the relay. I also shouldn't have to be explaining this, but then again you are just a kid.
The important factor needs to be whether you care about the elevation (or lack thereof) of the school. If that's not an issue for you and you like the campus, then go there. You can't rely 100 percent on a coach and old internet results to predict your future. Either you're going to improve or not. Coaches just write the workouts. Some college runners don't even do the workouts to the best of their ability. Or they overdo it and don't give me 100 percent on race day. These are the ones I boot off the team in San antonio.
quick and easy version of research is look at nationals and d3 conference meets, and see who is winning conference and who is progressing kids on. but that's sports first. but you can then run them through a sieve of sorts based on academic demands. which will get you quality academic schools who are good at track.
or look up a few dozen good academic schools and cross reference by their track teams. figure out which track teams fit you.
re "visits," i'd start over. look up a bunch of schools with what you want, a few dozen. get in touch with their coaches. run your analyses on those schools. if you still like this first idea among the new ones, go visit and maybe ask questions -- though i'd save the tougher ones for the kids and not the coach. if you do some research and it's no longer one of your top choices, treat it as a backup plan and pursue harder the schools that make more sense. but you don't have to make any choices now, and i wouldn't be tossing out schools that want you until you are literally admitted someplace better. until then, "i am learning about what's out there, doing my research, i like your school, but i am learning all i can about all my options and i'll get back to you...."
also, particularly at a strong academic D3, i'd be more attentive to how runners "like you" do. typical D3 will be a range of kids from ones who could have walked on a weaker D1 to kids who might have been JV level in HS where i grew up. to me it's like another varsity HS team again, except smarter kids across the board. you want to see kids like you progressing. ideally you want to see everyone progressing, as it hints the team's success is more universal coaching and less recruiting.
but, you don't know if x runner that regressed is an engineering major who misses practices, or if it's that they all make practice and the coach runs them in the ground or otherwise does his job wrong.
Go to a DII school to get a fat scholie & basically the same education as everywhere else without going into debt.
If this is a DI school recruiting you, that says it all right there (No “DI” school should be recruiting you).
If this is a DIII school recruiting you, you’ll likely go into crippling debt to get worse for the same education basically as everywhere else.
Research DII schools that fit your parameters & save money for your real education after undergrad is over kid. If this is it, then fine, this sounds like your average DII coach actually.
to you: definitely look at how other people on the team have progressed. a lot of times adjusting to college means first years don't improve a ton off their high school times. at least that is the case on my team, yet we still develop well overall.
to the other people in this thread: Idk why the one guy is obsessed with D3. Your times are very good for a high school junior, pretending you would have to walk on anywhere not d3 (or couldn't walk on to a decent d1, depending your xc times, grades, etc) is dumb. people on here love pretending only stanford and nau exist, and if you can't run there you suck. with that said d2 is lit check it out. To the legendary coach 430miler, what do you think about UIW? 5th at regionals last year, idk what kinda guys they are bringing in tho
to you: definitely look at how other people on the team have progressed. a lot of times adjusting to college means first years don't improve a ton off their high school times. at least that is the case on my team, yet we still develop well overall.
to the other people in this thread: Idk why the one guy is obsessed with D3. Your times are very good for a high school junior, pretending you would have to walk on anywhere not d3 (or couldn't walk on to a decent d1, depending your xc times, grades, etc) is dumb. people on here love pretending only stanford and nau exist, and if you can't run there you suck. with that said d2 is lit check it out. To the legendary coach 430miler, what do you think about UIW? 5th at regionals last year, idk what kinda guys they are bringing in tho
U mean for xc? Ya they were 5th in their division at regional. Obviously they need to be top 3 at regional to be seriously considered for a title. I applaud the small number of their kids who qualified individually. That's all they can do, then that's all they can do.
We are actually having a lemonade sale soon at a large local park in San Antonio, probably the one on the n.e. side, to benefit my teams summer training camp at snow mountain ranch Colorado.
Don't raise it with the coach. That's obnoxious. ("Hey, I've noticed your athletes are all getting worse. Care to comment?") Plus you wouldn't get a useful answer from him anyway.
I would look harder at the team's history: how have the juniors and seniors done compared to high school? Feels like you need to look at the longer-term record. Also, if you really like the school, plan to take a visit and talk to the athletes about it, i.e., what's training like, what do they think of the coach, etc etc.
At the end of the day, if running is important to you -- and if you're not sacrificing academics in any significant way because, let's face it, you're not going to be a pro/olympic runner -- then there's nothing wrong with making running part of your college decision. And it may turn out that another college has a better mix of academics/running than this one does.
somewhat disagree with this. Its incumbent on the coach to address athlete concerns and a coach who is secure in themselves/their process isn't afraid to answer questions like this. Have to ask it the right way, I wouldn't go down the roster and call out every single athlete by name who isn't performing well, but definitely fair game to ask about how athletes typically progress or how they help athletes improve. People shouldn't be afraid of asking direct questions/having direct conversations about things that matter.
The OP can ask, but the record speaks for itself. But one year can be an anomaly, for one reason or another. Go back and look at previous years or the coach's record at other programs. Has he had success in the past or have the teams always been bad? Try and piece together a bigger picture instead of focusing on the results of one year and one frosh class.
Don't raise it with the coach. That's obnoxious. ("Hey, I've noticed your athletes are all getting worse. Care to comment?") Plus you wouldn't get a useful answer from him anyway.
I would look harder at the team's history: how have the juniors and seniors done compared to high school? Feels like you need to look at the longer-term record. Also, if you really like the school, plan to take a visit and talk to the athletes about it, i.e., what's training like, what do they think of the coach, etc etc.
At the end of the day, if running is important to you -- and if you're not sacrificing academics in any significant way because, let's face it, you're not going to be a pro/olympic runner -- then there's nothing wrong with making running part of your college decision. And it may turn out that another college has a better mix of academics/running than this one does.
As I recall, a guy named Frank Shorter only ran 4:35 in high school. He won the 1972 Olympics Marathon and finished 2nd place to a cheater in 1976.
Don't raise it with the coach. That's obnoxious. ("Hey, I've noticed your athletes are all getting worse. Care to comment?") Plus you wouldn't get a useful answer from him anyway.
I would look harder at the team's history: how have the juniors and seniors done compared to high school? Feels like you need to look at the longer-term record. Also, if you really like the school, plan to take a visit and talk to the athletes about it, i.e., what's training like, what do they think of the coach, etc etc.
At the end of the day, if running is important to you -- and if you're not sacrificing academics in any significant way because, let's face it, you're not going to be a pro/olympic runner -- then there's nothing wrong with making running part of your college decision. And it may turn out that another college has a better mix of academics/running than this one does.
somewhat disagree with this. Its incumbent on the coach to address athlete concerns and a coach who is secure in themselves/their process isn't afraid to answer questions like this. Have to ask it the right way, I wouldn't go down the roster and call out every single athlete by name who isn't performing well, but definitely fair game to ask about how athletes typically progress or how they help athletes improve. People shouldn't be afraid of asking direct questions/having direct conversations about things that matter.
Yes, there's probably a way to ask the question that isn't overtly "obnoxious," but I probably undersold the second part, which is that imo the answer wouldn't be all that useful short of the coach saying, "yeah, I suck, go elsewhere if you want to improve." Any coach who is decent at selling the program will have all kinds of explanations.
Big picture is still that the only way to know (as best as one can know) is to look at the track record over the course of years, not just the current crop of freshmen and a few sophs, plus get info from the coach and team about the training, culture, etc.