It was supposed to be a time to celebrate as the top finishers in the NCAA Division III 5,000-meter title race lined up on the eight-tiered podium to receive their trophies.
Instead, when winner Seth Clevenger鈥檚 name was announced, the other seven runners stepped off their perches and walked away.
With the NCAA holding its biggest party of the year at , the protest over Clevenger鈥檚 alleged use of performance enhancers at one of its smaller championships is a telling illustration of what critics see as a glaring weak spot in college sports.
They point to an NCAA anti-doping policy , all of which undercut the association鈥瞫 ability to provide a level playing field — a responsibility that means more than ever with that raise the stakes for players.
鈥淚n the NIL era, failing to have a robust anti-doping program doesn鈥檛 just invite doping into college athletics 鈥� it undermines fairness, the very heart of the game,鈥� said Travis Tygart, the CEO of the U.S. Anti-Doping Agency.
USADA has no authority over the NCAA, though college athletes who also compete on national and Olympic teams are subject to the world anti-doping protocols.
on the podium has garnered more than 10 million views on social media, part of a mushrooming protest against the former Iowa State distance runner who moved down to Division III Rowan University earlier this year. More than 750 D-III runners have since signed a letter to school and conference officials demanding a 鈥渇ull and public investigation鈥� into Clevenger.
Last month, Clevenger won NCAA indoor titles at 3,000 and 5,000 meters, setting meet records in both. His wins allowed his new school to eke out the team title by one point.
Clevenger did not respond to multiple requests for comment from The Associated Press. In response to a series of questions about its anti-doping measures, the NCAA said it has a 鈥渞igorous drug-testing policy.鈥� Shawn Tucker, the athletic director at Rowan, declined to comment on Clevenger specifically.
鈥矷n line with Rowan athletics and NCAA policies, we assure you that all rostered student-athletes competing for Rowan have been both academically and athletically eligible to compete this academic year,鈥� Tucker said.
Clevenger is not known to have tested positive for either of the banned drugs he is alleged to have used: a hard-to-detect that some believe is key to injury recovery; and erythropoietin (EPO), a well-known red blood cell booster detectable through blood tests, the likes of which the NCAA is not known to administer.
Because Clevenger let his membership to Olympic-affiliated USA Track and Field lapse after 2023, he only needs to follow NCAA rules, which are far less demanding than the system that governs international sports and is helmed by USADA in the United States.
With that agency on the sideline, the NCAA鈥檚 handling of cases like Clevenger’s has largely stayed under the radar, below about the eligibility lawsuits and, more recently, the new college landscape’s impact on a that was built on underdog stories but has tilted recently more toward deeper-pocketed programs.
Those who track doping issues have taken notice. They see the Clevenger case as something with implications far beyond a single D-III school.
鈥淚n this case, there was enough conversation, and you had people walking off the podium,鈥� said researcher Oliver Catlin, president of the . 鈥淚f you ignore something like that, that鈥檚 going to send a horrendous message through the rest of the ranks. And people pay attention and it鈥檚 going to get repeated.鈥�
A supsension at Iowa State and a move to Division III
The seeds of this saga were planted at Iowa State, where Clevenger spent most of his three years low on the depth chart for the highly rated Cyclones.
Given a chance to race at the Nuttycombe Invitational in Wisconsin last October while Iowa State rested its top runners, Clevenger ran the 8-kilometer championship in 23 minutes, 37.9 seconds. That was 4.5 seconds better than a personal best he had topped by 28 seconds only three weeks earlier.
Eight days after that, Iowa State suspended multiple athletes, including Clevenger, 鈥渇or breaking team rules.鈥� The school did not specify which rules had been broken but Clevenger did not race for Iowa State again and wound up at Rowan, less than 20 miles from his childhood home of Haddonfield, New Jersey. Cyclones coach Jeremy Sudbery did not respond to requests from AP for an interview.
Since then, Clevenger has admitted to using BP-157, a person close to the case told AP, speaking only on condition of anonymity because that detail has not been made public by the runner or his attorney. The track website letsrun.com published a story last month about the allegations; an Instagram page soon after carried a post that purportedly shows a receipt for an order of EPO placed through Clevenger鈥檚 email account.
The AP could not confirm the authenticity of the email, nor of a letter to Iowa State administrators that has also shown up on social media and appears to be from Clevenger鈥檚 mother, who insists her son never took EPO.
The email and letter are among evidence that Catlin and other anti-doping experts said could be used to investigate a case under world anti-doping rules. The ability to investigate potential evidence other than blood and urine samples led to the ban of cyclist Lance Armstrong and dozens of other athletes even though they did not test positive for drugs.
The NCAA鈥檚 lack of tools to open those sort of investigations is viewed as a big hole in its drug-fighting program.
鈥淎n effective anti-doping program can鈥檛 just test — it must also investigate,鈥� Tygart said. 鈥淲ithout both, cheaters game the system and clean athletes may be falsely harmed on just suspicion, not evidence.鈥�
The NCAA has a difficult history with anti-doping efforts
Five years ago, the NCAA got great reviews for putting on a successful post-COVID version of March Madness in Indianapolis 鈥� the site of this year鈥檚 Final Four 鈥� filled with constant testing and a solid list of protocols to handle players who fell ill.
It received virtually no blowback when AP reported that for performance enhancers had been conducted the entire tournament.
Six years before that, the NCAA鈥檚 own medical chief at the time, Brian Hainline, said the association鈥檚 drug-fighting program 鈥渃ould be improved considerably.” That was in response to AP reporting that revealed the Final Four teams were subject to different drug-testing policies based on their on-campus policies.
College sports still operates under essentially the same system, leaving schools in charge of the bulk of their anti-doping efforts and how to sanction those who get caught.
The NCAA said its program 鈥渦ndergoes regular review by the membership, including two reviews in the past five years.鈥�
鈥淓ach academic year, 10,000 NCAA student-athletes are tested without notice in year-round testing or at one of the 92 NCAA championships in 24 sports,” the association said. Privacy laws typically prevent schools from making public statements about doping cases and the NCAA doesn’t disclose test results.
Year-round, out-of-competition testing is considered the gold standard, and while the NCAA does have a program for that in Divisions I and II,, officials in Division III studied a year-round program but never adopted it. The NCAA drug testing handbook says D-I and D-II athletic departments are, under most circumstances, notified at least two days in advance of a visit from testers.
鈥淕iving notice of testing, even a couple of hours before the collection, is mostly theater 鈥� just to say you test,” Tygart said.
The lack of a true investigatory arm also denies Clevenger the chance to clear his name if, as his school claims, he has done nothing wrong.
鈥淭here鈥檚 got to be due process,鈥� Catlin said. 鈥淵ou鈥檝e got to protect the athletes to one degree. And, from the NCAA’s perspective, you have to protect your sports environment. And based on this case, it certainly doesn鈥檛 sound like that鈥檚 happening.鈥�
___
AP college sports:
Copyright © 2026 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, written or redistributed.
