@gointhruaphase Yikes! That seems so forward but I guess it makes sense. S19 isn’t sending any ED apps so I’m not worried about that. Mostly just curious if he’ll have any type of support at all through the athletic offices for these schools. S19 is in the dark just like a non-athlete applicant would be for RD. It would be interesting to know if there’s any communication at all to the admissions office from these coaches. I’ll run it past S19 and see if he’d like to send that email to coaches. I think we will wait until the end of the season. It’s just five weeks away and his times are improving with every race.
@homerdog You might also have S make sure to tell his AOs when he meets them at his HS, or visits the college or has an interview, etc. that he does want to be on the XC team, even though not a slotted recruit. Every little bit can help when tipping the scales in the admissions game, where the finest of distinctions are often made.
@homerdog, there is no such thing as being “so forward” in athletic recruiting. The system is based almost entirely on accurate communications between coach and recruit. In my view, there simply is no room for a recruit not understanding exactly where he or she stands. If a kid wants to play at the college level, it is pretty much the only way to choose where to apply. You should know from the coach – not us – exactly what the coach is offering. If it is nothing, then it is nothing. I’ll wager the coach won’t have a problem in the world saying “I can’t support you with admissions because my support has been used up with other recruits, but you will be on the team if you get in on your own.” Wouldn’t you want to know?
As an aside, most NESCAC coaches expect ED applications when they support athletes through admissions.
@homerdog , I agree with @gointhruaphase that there is no such thing as being too forward when clarifying the coach’s level of support and the recruit’s status. These discussion boards are filled with sad tales about recruits who thought they had full support but did not, leading to disappointment. Yes, coaches are prepared for this discussion. In my experience, if you ask, they are willing to answer. They go through it all the time, and they really don’t want to sully their personal or school’s reputation by misleading you. Inquire about what level of support is being offered, and what does that mean… inquire what the coach’s level of support and what success that generally leads to (how often does that level of support result in admittance, how often does it not). In my experience, speaking with multiple NESCAC coaches, they did not mind at all this level of inquiry.
@homerdog there are ways to word the inquiry that aren’t forward at all…I’d like to learn more about your program, especially the recruiting process. Are you able to offer admissions support to recruited athletes? Are my times at the level you would support?
Some variation on that is going to get a response that will let you know very clearly where you stand, or will start a conversation that leads to that clarity pretty quickly. In my experience, if a coach wants you and is willing to use resources to get you it will be clear.
Keep in mind that XC times are not going to mean much so there’s not much point in waiting. Most coaches are going to be more interested in track times and will use XC to supplement. However, placing at big XC meets can matter. State meet in a competitive state, NXR, Foot Locker. Those last two can move the needle a lot but don’t happen until November.
@politeperson S19 feels strongly that his XC times will matter because he had an injury most of sophomore year and only now has a solid full year of training behind him. He went from a 5:30 1600 to a 4:43 1600 this last track season but he knows he can run an even faster mile now. His 3 mile XC time went from 18:00 as a junior on maybe four months of solid training to a 16:22 in the last race and he still thinks he can beat 16:00. He’s grown six inches in 18 months and been healthy for a year so his times are bound to keep going down with the high mileage training he’s doing. Granted, his timing on this isn’t great. There are three sub 4:20 milers on his team and they are all likely going to Ivies to run. If he had one more year, he could maybe compete with that but he’s a late bloomer so coaches have to look at his tragectory and assume he will get even faster.
@homerdog what I mean is that unless a coach is very familiar with a particular XC course, and the conditions on the day of the race, s/he won’t make decisions based on that time. Courses can vary so much from year to year and place to place that it is like comparing apples and oranges. So even if your son runs 15 flat at the next meet, the first thing a coach will do is see if track times support that kind of time. If not, it’ll likely be viewed as a short or fast course. If it’s at a big invitational though, place matters. If your state meet is competitive, that’s a great opportunity for your son. But I’d definitely take a look at your regional NXN or footlocker race as another good opportunity. Some coaches also schedule track time trials late in the XC season. It’s used partly as training, but also to get track times from the fall. This might be helpful for your son and others if the coach is open to it. A solid track 1600 time couldn’t hurt. I definitely agree that your son’s trajectory is good. It’s just tough to document in XC.
@politeperson We are in Illinois. I think it’s a very competitive XC state and we are in the most difficult conference. Our team typically places well at state. I may PM you with a few more questions so this thread doesn’t get off track!
@Mwfan1921 and @bigfandave - thanks for the reference! I agree, some ambiguity, but still seemingly a ‘recruited athlete.’ I also have the Dr. Card analysis (hired by Harvard to debunk SFFA) which is an interesting analytical paper but does not seem to have as many provocative tables as the original Arcidiacono document for SFFA.
hi @SoCal4TA and @gointhruaphase - very helpful, thank you. We had been thinking that Bowdoin didn’t have slots; we have now directly asked and we’ll see what the situation is. A little worried now about the “tips.” Seems like the best situation is Slots, followed by Tips, followed by Support (all in the context of a “supportable” pre-read). Should know in a few days!
@DataDad Ooh. Report back about what you hear from Bowdoin!
@DataDad, Bowdoin – like the rest of the NESCAC – definitely has slots and tips. Some NESCAC schools may call them something else (e.g., athletic protect), but they exist at all the schools. Where folks take a wrong turn is thinking that slots have a different impact on admissions than tips. The result with admissions (i.e., the recruit is accepted) is the same for both tips and slots. The difference is that for a slot the coach can go further down in the athletic band. In other words, if you need a 3.8 GPA and 33 ACT to get into Bowdoin as a recruit, the slot will have a 3.6 GPA with a 30 ACT (the example is for illustration purposes only, not the real numbers, obviously). Thus, you could have the number one recruit as a tip because he or she is in the A band, but the best athletic talent. The slot in a B band night be number 4 talent wise. The reality is that I would be shocked if the coach told you whether your kid was a slot or a tip, and for your purposes it is immaterial. What matters is where you are on the coaches list and whether the coach agrees to support your kid with admissions.
Tips are not “soft support.” Soft support is an athlete who the coach could use on the team, but is not high enough up on the list to be either a slot or a tip. You could argue that soft support really isn’t a recruited athlete, particularly if they don’t get invited to an OV or get a preread done. The jury is out on how helpful soft support is, and I certainly wouldn’t rely on it tipping the scales with admissions.
So the Bowdoin coach who offered my DD a “tip” because he “needed his 3 slots for x,y and z position” stated that at Bowdoin, 2 out of 2 admissions officers must want the applicant for the student to be accepted. For a slot, the coach takes place of 1 of the 2. Another member of the AdCom must still approve the admit.
That’s what he told us.
We also were told later that Bowdoin was on a “ diversity push” to make athletic teams “reflect the same diversity as the college as a whole”, which was why my DD ended up being rejected-to show the coach he needed to present a more diverse slate of candidates, or his “tips” were going to be rejected.
How’s that diversity thing going with the hockey team?
1 Like
@OldbatesieDoc Interesting info that a coach can basically fulfill role as 1 of the 2 required AOs for slotted recruits. I have never heard that. Same with diversity quote. Did your D have a pre-read at Bowdoin?
@gointhruaphase Hm. I do wonder then if S19 will get any soft support from Bowdoin, Williams, or Hamilton. WIth a 1540 SAT, 5s on all APs, NMSF, and a 3.85 GPA unweighted in all honors and AP classes, he definitely meets the academic cut offs. He is well rounded in other ways too. He’s just probably not quite as fast yet as the kids getting recruited. His times keep dipping, though, and he’s been updating coaches. They still respond that they’d love to see him on the team and congratulate him on his new times. I think they just think he can get in on his own merits. But I will have S19 ask at some point if he will receive any type of support.
Why would Bands matter per se there is a de facto policy: 2 people must approve, and if you’re a tippy too Athlete, only 1 must be from Admissions. Thus, the Pre-Read, hence if “positive” and Coach has a vote (for 1-3 or how ever many “slots”), then game over, you are in ED. If AdCom is on fence of a Pre-Read, then it really should be a candid conversation w athlete/parent that “I want you, but Adcom sees issues”. That is basically…get your full app in and maybe ED 1 or 2. Or do something to “prove” your salt to Adcom ahead of that date: interview, letter of rec, new test score, 1st qtr grades, whatever “tips” you in good graces of Adcom vote #1; not limiting my comments to one School here.
So, if we know the process and policy, then who really needs to get caught up in nomenclature as long as everyone is a straight-shooter.
@twoinanddone That is what other sports are for, which is BS frankly.
@homerdog Could be that Coach has already recruited and filled that need and that your S is awesome and would be a huge bonus to team but Coach has used up all his chips. That said, kids change their mind, money or aid doesn’t pan out, injuries occur, team needs can evolve. Stay positive and courteous always.
The way the recruiting was explained to us was that admissions gave the coach a set amount of spots and a set amount of currency to use. The lower the recruits academic stats, the more of his currency the coach would have to use on that particular recruit with admissions. So it is a balancing act of finding recruits that you can afford to get through admissions. If you spend too much on one recruit, you won’t have much left to spend on the others.