He ran 1:48 mid and sub 3:50 1500s during Covid in 2021. With the XC performances I don’t think it should have surprised anyone that he might be capable of this. Especially given that he’s been focused more on the 8 in the past. It’s exciting, yes, but not out of nowhere by any means.
This thread was about more than Wilson, so here's a more general update. As of today, this season MIT mid-distance and distance guys have run this (remember: we are talking division 3):
- 8 different milers at 4:15 or lower (including best ever D3 mile in history by Wilson at 3:55)
- 2 800 guys at 1:51.5 or lower (this does not include their top 2 800 guys from last year's, one of which was Wilson who has not run an 800 this season)
- 3 3000 guys at 8:15 or lower (including number 3 D3 time in history)
- 5 5000 guys at 14:25 or lower (including number 5 and number 8 D3 time in history)
- Number 5 DMR in history
I think that the original poster was underestimating the depth and strength of (mid)distance at MIT, compared to (any) other D3 programs.
This thread was about more than Wilson, so here's a more general update. As of today, this season MIT mid-distance and distance guys have run this (remember: we are talking division 3):
- 8 different milers at 4:15 or lower (including best ever D3 mile in history by Wilson at 3:55)
- 2 800 guys at 1:51.5 or lower (this does not include their top 2 800 guys from last year's, one of which was Wilson who has not run an 800 this season)
- 3 3000 guys at 8:15 or lower (including number 3 D3 time in history)
- 5 5000 guys at 14:25 or lower (including number 5 and number 8 D3 time in history)
- Number 5 DMR in history
I think that the original poster was underestimating the depth and strength of (mid)distance at MIT, compared to (any) other D3 programs.
It helps to run a BU as much as they do, with expensive spikes that they can afford. We'll see what happens at Nationals.
To be clear, I don't think that's the *sole* reason. They do lots and lots of things right. I felt like it's worth mentioning that because it feels like this board has a difficult time understanding nuance and that multiple things can simultaneously be true.
It sounds like you didn't belong D1 anyway because you weren't committed 100%. That's not an insult, it's ok to rather be doing other things. But there are a lot of people that are 100% committed where D1 is perfect and D3 would feel like high school track.
There isn't a clear division between how much commitment is required of runners in D1 vs. D3. Some D3 programs are casual, but most of the programs that go to XC nationals are training just as seriously as D1 programs, just with less overall talent. Conversely, there are tons of D1 programs that are a total joke. Other D1 programs are just meat grinders, as evidenced by athletes who graduate and suddenly get a lot faster once they train a bit less and recover a bit more. You really need to research each program carefully; don't rely on blanket generalizations about D1 and D3.
It helps to run a BU as much as they do, with expensive spikes that they can afford. We'll see what happens at Nationals.
To be clear, I don't think that's the *sole* reason. They do lots and lots of things right. I felt like it's worth mentioning that because it feels like this board has a difficult time understanding nuance and that multiple things can simultaneously be true.
I agree about the lack of nuance. But I'm afraid that your comment seems to fall in that category. You make it sound like MIT students are entitled rich kids who are there because their parents are rich (or like the athletics department is swimming in money). Both wrong. And also like the times are not legitimate, since they are run at BU. Lots of D3 schools ran at the BC track this past weekend. Some did better than others. And conversion does not exactly penalize flat track times.
Lots of things can happen at Nationals. Last year, Williams had the top D3 miler ever and he did not make the 1500 final. MIT sent 4 guys to Outdoor Nationals and came back with 4 golds. This year may be different, who knows.
Since I don't think I've seen a source for the 50% (or any other percentage) chance of an admissions offer, I don't feel comfortable assuming it's accurate, but from what I've read, you are right that the MIT coach is expected to voice support only if the applicant has an academic record consistent with "normal" accepted applicants.
What I'm not sure about is why a strong candidate with the desire to go to MIT would choose not to even apply to MIT merely because the candidate already has been assured of a 99% chance of acceptance into one of HYPS. (I know that NCAA rules allow D1 schools to put some pretty tight limits on the length of time within which a coach or athletic director's endorsement can remain open, but I'm not aware of what, if any, such limits are use by any of HYPS. And considering that a high percentage of MIT's successful applicants apply and receive offers of admission in the fall, it seems to me that there's no big problem in adding MIT to the list of applications.
Receiving coach support at Ivies and MIT typically involves applying EA/ED and committing to attend if accepted. You really can only apply ED/EA to one of these schools and even if you could take a shotgun approach with apps, no coach is going to support the app of an athlete that is getting support elsewhere. At Ivies, those apps can be in early and a likely letter received as early as Oct. 1. At MIT, one has to wait until Dec 15 to hear, with a roughly 50% chance (that number is what the prior coach suggested the odds were).
So it isn’t as if these Ivy recruits are just submitting a bunch of apps like a typical applicant. They’re taking visits, narrowing to one, getting support and a likely letter by November, and then they’re done. The MIT recruits are sweating it out past the point where they could get support from an Ivy coach. That’s why it’s pretty rare for an Ivy-recruited athlete to opt for MIT and the related uncertainty. But most MIT recruits don’t have Ivies as an option, so there’s less opportunity cost.
It helps to run a BU as much as they do, with expensive spikes that they can afford. We'll see what happens at Nationals.
To be clear, I don't think that's the *sole* reason. They do lots and lots of things right. I felt like it's worth mentioning that because it feels like this board has a difficult time understanding nuance and that multiple things can simultaneously be true.
I agree about the lack of nuance. But I'm afraid that your comment seems to fall in that category. You make it sound like MIT students are entitled rich kids who are there because their parents are rich (or like the athletics department is swimming in money). Both wrong. And also like the times are not legitimate, since they are run at BU. Lots of D3 schools ran at the BC track this past weekend. Some did better than others. And conversion does not exactly penalize flat track times.
Lots of things can happen at Nationals. Last year, Williams had the top D3 miler ever and he did not make the 1500 final. MIT sent 4 guys to Outdoor Nationals and came back with 4 golds. This year may be different, who knows.
Do you care to disclose your obvious affiliation with MIT?
The idea that MIT athletics isn't swimming in money relative to other D3 programs is preposterous at its core and isn't worth refuting. If you honestly think that MIT has a similar budget and similar resources to, say, Bethany Lutheran or East Texas Baptist, or Immaculata, you are truly beyond arguing with. MIT operates 17 sports just on the Men's side; want to guess what the average is across D3? Want to guess what it is on a per-student basis? I would assume not because it would make your already dumb argument even more ridiculous.
As far as whether or not his, or anyone from MIT's, or anyone else who has gotten fat off of BU's track's times will hold up at Nationals, as I said, we shall see. No one is saying dude isn't a great athlete; a track won't propel you to 3:55 just by showing up. (Hence the nuance.) But you will be very hard-pressed to get me or anyone who isn't affiliated with MIT to honestly believe that Wilson is 13 seconds faster than another D3 miler like Justin Krause on an apples-to-apples basis.
My kid in a similar situation but with mile time low 4:20s. Also, STEM, though not CS. Carnegie Mellon, Harvey Mudd, Johns Hopkins all have pretty good running programs with very strong academics and, if the mile time gets down into low 4:20s, then the coaches might be interested (my kid has had interest from these and a number of other schools). Also, places like Williams, Amherst, the Ivies (really need to be sub 4:20 to have any strong input from a coach, and ~4:10 at Harvard, Princeton). University of Chicago apparently has a few guys coming in with ~4:15 - 4:20 mile times. Given the strength of MITs running program right now, I doubt the coach would put in much of a word unless sub 1:55 800m, sub 4:20 mile, sub 9:20 2 mile or sub 16 low on a tough northeast XC course (Derryfield, Thetford, Van Cortlandt, Bowdoin Park, Holmdel, etc.