We must have different coaches in Indiana . . . .
Oh D’s coach did bench some for breaking the rules (one game suspensions) and did dismiss one from the team for basically causing trouble (told the freshmen going to a tailgate was allowed when it wasn’t) too many times. She was a pretty good player, but the coach had just had enough. Coach had to eat that scholarship for an entire season too as the player was dismissed in September. I admire the coach for enforcing HER rules (not NCAA rules) but it sure hurt at the time. We also lost 3 other kids during the year who just didn’t put in the effort and the coach did not bend the rules for them as far as conditioning and practices. Our team was NOT deep, we really felt the loss of these players.
twoinanddone,
I never said ban them or eliminate them…I am not one of those students on campus trying to force their latest cause on everyone else. it is just my opinion. I am very tolerant. also I think that college could/should be reduced from 4 years to 3 years. get rid of the extra stuff not related to your major .
Having gone through D3 recruiting with my kid, so having spent a lot of time in coach meetings, camp parent meetings etc – we saw two distinct types of coaches: (1) the coach/program who was exclusively interested in the best talent that they could bring in and (2) the coach/program that had a threshold talent expectation but also had further requirements regarding culture and fit with the program. There were a number of programs (NESCACs, looking at you), which communicated a vibe through individual meetings and camps, that they were looking only at pure talent/results. But there was a second group, where my kid realized he wanted to be, which the coaches really focused on character, leadership, team culture and expectations, beyond the expectation of contribution on the field.
.
I am of the school that finds this letter patronizing and highly inaccurate. Part of the inaccuracy comes from the circumstance that the ‘offending’ recruit is a composite of just about every possible recruiting faux pas in the book. The patronizing tone, however, is specific to the writer. What I find most annoying and ironic about the tone is as @TheGFG correctly identifies, the recruitment process can be extremely opaque and without guidelines for the average parent and his/her child. I am not in the business of aiding parents in the recruitment process. Yet I receive at least a communication each week from parents in my child’s sport asking to talk about the recruiting process. These are smart, high-functioning parents with smart, high-functioning kids and yet they are remarkably ignorant as to the recruiting process. While sometimes their ignorance can be attributed to a lack of research, more often it is because there is no consistent guidance in the process. Coaches are notorious for not responding to emails and other communications. Schools are remarkably ‘hedgy’ when asked about the recruiting process and criteria. Outside sources, including paid services, offer inconsistent and often conflicting advice. IMHO, as several posters in this thread have already indicated, I would like to see a coach as concerned and critical as the author of this article, do something positive towards publicizing the recruiting process and specifying some of the primary dos and don’ts from her experience. That will be a lot more productive than lampooning parents and students who may simply not understand the way this all works.
Yes, coaches are deliberately opaque because they are trying to hold on to as many recruits as they can until the last minute. That is why you see parents posting on the CC athletic recruit sub-forum questions in the format of “What does it mean when the coach says __________?” I know I did that a few times.
Also, coaches have different personalities, recruiting styles, and levels of work ethic and thus it’s very hard to interpret their signals. Some show lots of interest with weekly phone calls and e-mails, while others are just as interested in the athlete and don’t do any of that. The school where D eventually committed was not of the first school, so we almost wrote them off as disinterested. It turned out that the coach’s philosophy was that he wanted the athlete to really, really want to go there and to be the one to do the pestering. Meanwhile, we considered that sort of behavior as being a nuisance, kind of like a teenage girl with a crush who’s oblivious to the fact that the boy thinks she’s annoying and ugly.
In our experience, there were no reliable rules to the interactions. It was a dance.
I agree that the tone of this letter is pompous, and in places unduly critical of athletes (and parents) trying to navigate a process that is not easy to fathom for those with no prior experience. Especially when, as noted above, some coaches are deliberately hard to pin down and that can be hard for a teenager to understand.
There are some good points but for me they kind of get lost due to the author’s tone.
I agree that the process is opaque. However, even if the coach won’t state what the recruitment guidelines/performance expectations are, a simple search of past results should give you your answer.
Harvard is surprisingly open to their prospective athletes––at least for golf. This is very much appreciated, and I wish more schools were like this:
Found this fictional response to the coach’s letter on another community website:
Dear Coach,
Thank you for attending one of my games. It meant a lot to me. I hope you had a cupcake, my mom was up until 3 am making them. She is a semi-professional baker and likes to entertain. I also appreciate you and your staff reading the emails and watching my videos. I needed to use my parent’s account due to attachment limitations. The videos were produced through a friend of mine who is starting his own company. I’ll pass on your feedback about including more negative plays and they looked “parentish”. I was asked not to participate in too many huddles due to a recovering bout of conjunctivitis. I was texting with the hospital that I volunteer with to reschedule my pediatrics guitar sessions.
Again, thank you for attending one of my games. It meant a lot to me and I wish your team the best of luck in the next season.
I liked it the first time I read it and liked it more the second time. Sorry if the tone rubs some the wrong way but sometimes blunt truths are better than sweet fantasies. If you can’t take the truth as this coach sees it, then maybe this coach is not a match. Coaches are recruiting people that they will be spending many hours with over 4+ years. They have an absolute right to build the team they want and if they don’t get the results, the AD will handle that.
I do agree that the carp about the highlight video was a bit over the top. It is called a highlight video, after all! We always had full games available for coaches to watch but none ever asked for it, although it is on You Tube so they may have seen it without asking or got it through other venues. I totally agree on the parental influence points. Too many parents do too much for players and they often end up in a situation where the parents are happy but neither the player or the coach is.
Regarding the opacity of the process, my experience has been that if you ask direct questions and respond to questions directly, you get direct answers. Parents and players who try to tip-toe around the process or want to use the recruiting process as leverage will often get what feels like a run-around from coaches. But if you are leading coaches on about your level of interest or being unclear on your objectives, why are you surprised that coaches are also cagey with information?
D1 and D2 coaches are limited in communication by NCAA rules, so some of the lack of response is out of their control. But there are always channels for communication.
@BobcatPhoenix - Sometimes hard truths are best, but this letter is not that. What this coach has done is created a fictional, composite monster of a student-athlete. This exaggeration exacerbates the sense and stereotypes of the entitled recruit and his or her helicopter, over-interfering parents. In any case, I think the sarcastic tone is unnecessary. Why do it in such a snarky and, frankly, unrealistic manner? Why not write a straightforward article providing some guidelines for parents and recruits based on the coach’s experience? Instead, at the risk of turning off many who read her perhaps well-intentioned diatribe, she presented an abrasive fiction. Yes, coaches are free to build their teams as they deem fit and recruits are free to reject offers from coaches whose manners they don’t like. But if this coach thinks she is going to filter out only the elite of elite recruits by rejecting those who only include highlights in their video footage, who work with their parents to present themselves appropriately, or who somehow don’t meet this coach’s exacting standards of communication, she has quite another thing coming.
I am very glad, genuinely, that your experience has been so open and honest with the coaches with whom you interacted. Perhaps this is a function of your child’s sport, the coaches involved, and/or a tribute to your way of communicating. In my experience, in my child’s sport, at the D1 level, I have found a distinct pecking order where responsiveness on the part of coaches is tied directly to the importance of the recruit. Those lower down the depth chart get nowhere near the attention, responsiveness or candidness as those at the top. But when I previously wrote about opacity, I was not really referring to candor in terms of a list from each coach as to their recruiting priorities. I am at a loss to explain the simple reality that so many parents and students really don’t know how to navigate the recruiting process. Why is that? How can coaches better serve this process by educating parents?
And there are not always channels of communication. Some coaches simply do not respond to any form of communication. They are on their own timetable with their own agenda. Some simply don’t respond if they are not interested. In this area I think the coaches are not so far above the monster-recruits whose foibles, real and conjured, the author is so quick to point out.
Of course responsiveness is tied to the level of interest. Why would it be otherwise? Life is not fair and coaches don’t have time to talk to players they aren’t interested in at the risk of losing players they are interested in.
It is the player’s job to force the hand of the coaches. Ask them where you are on the list. They will tell you or if they don’t then that is all you need to know. Then you need to move on.
If your club or HS coach can’t get a coach on the line then they aren’t doing their job. At least in the sport I am familiar with. College coaches depend on club and HS pipelines so they ignore those actors at their own risk.
Most sports have way more demand than supply so coaches can pick and choose for most players except the truly elite prospects. I suspect the tolerance for bad behavior is a direct function of how good a player you are. Which is totally fine with me.
I think the point about supply and demand is a good one. It’s probably no accident that the author, who seems to have an attitude that she holds all the cards, is coach at one of only four colleges with D1 varsity women’s rugby as of 2014. So just about the worst supply/demand equation of any sport from a recruit’s perspective.
http://www.scholarshipstats.com/rugby.html
I guess the other end of the spectrum is football or men’s basketball, where the stars have large numbers of schools hoping they’ll accept a full ride. And where a coach probably wouldn’t post this kind of letter.
If responsiveness is tied to the level of interest (and I agree that this is the case), then there are not always channels of communication. Such channels are only regularly open to top recruits. That is my point above.
Is it the job of the player to “force the hand of the coaches?” A question such as this is exactly my point. Assuming, like me, that you are the parent of a recruited athlete, then this advice is something you learned on your own, either by talking to people or by successfully implementing such a strategy. But how is a parent to know that? From the tone of the Quinnipiac coach’s article, such hand-forcing might be deemed rude, pushy or otherwise inappropriate. A recruit might be on the cusp of the recruitment list and the coach doesn’t like his/her in-your-face attitude. How is a recruit to know?
Not all recruited sports are strong in HS. My son’s high school did not have a team in his sport. What if a recruit goes to a small, less competitive high school or to a school in a small town not close to a major city? I can think of many reasons why a high school coach might not be able to just “get a coach on the line” having nothing to do with effectively doing his/her job. Of course, I don’t know your child’s sport. It may be much more popular than my son’s and much more common throughout high schools in the US.
Agreed also that tolerance of bad behavior is in direct proportion to the talent of the player. There are limits, but one need look no farther than professional sports to see how far a good player can push the envelope, promoting illegal dog fighting, carrying an illegal firearm, or beating the crap out of his girlfriend, and still survive the cut.
@bluewater2015, I think you are right about the money sports but even there the stories you hear about players changing commitments are almost always the elite players. The rules are different for them. For anyone else who isn’t a difference maker, personality and fit are at least as important as athletic ability. The coaches that I have spoken with generally feel that they would rather work with someone on their sport vs. work with them on their attitude. They will accept the latter when the ability is high enough but there’s no reason to do that in other cases when there are multiple other candidates out there who you can work with and don’t have to have heartache over.
I always reflect back on this article when these topics arise:
I thought the article was interesting, but I find this thread fascinating. My take, as a former D1 athlete in a headcount sport with a son who is a current D1 athlete in the same sport, and having spent a bit of time as a coach several years ago:
-
It is not the college coach’s job to “help” recruits or parents. It is the coach’s job to win games/matches without embarrassing the university. Admittedly, the last is a sliding scale.
-
It is the recruit’s job (not the parents’ job-see below) to look out for their own interests and present themselves in the best possible light. How to write an email, or speak with an adult, should not require specialized training. Some things are just normal life skills. Yes, parents can and should help, and advise. But unofficial visits are not supposed to be conversations between the parent and the coach.
-
College athletics is very different than high school. There is no know it all dad at every practice or cupcake baking mom at every game. The athlete is required to function, motivate and adapt primarily on their own. Parents who “manage” their kids are a huge red flag.
4)Just because a kid really likes a particular school/coach does not mean the feeling is reciprocated. The same applies in reverse. This is why coaches often press kids for concrete expressions of interest - come to our junior day/camp/OV/unofficial - and why recruits should do the same. Too often I have watched kids and their parents not ask direct questions because they are afraid of the answer they may get. It reminds me of my experience asking out girls in high school.
-
Except in the primarily regional sports of lacrosse and hockey, fewer than 10% of high school athletes go on to compete in the larger NCAA sports. Women’s hockey is the only recognized and significant NCAA sport which even approaches 10% of high school athletes moving on to play in D1 at 9%. By contrast, 2.6% go on to play D1 football, and 1% go on to play men’s basketball at the D1 level. In other words, competition is fierce, and the higher up the food chain you go, the tougher it gets. And yes, I know that the numbers for crew and the more “niche” sports will be different. But those sports are often even more regionalized than lacrosse and hockey, and very few institutions participate.
-
Yes, there are kids for whom the normal rules do not apply. But far fewer than people assume. There are a total of 50 five star and 250 four star recruits in football every year (based on Scout’s system), out of a pool of over one million high school football players. My son was fortunate to graduate with four guys ranked at that level, and their recruiting experience was completely different than that of their more “normal” but still D1 teammates. The numbers may vary a bit by sport for those sports that have a useful or recognized star ranking system, but one thing is certain. Kids and parents at that level know who they are, and they are not reaching out trying to drum up interest with college coaches.
Selectively quoted:
“Is it the job of the player to “force the hand of the coaches?” A question such as this is exactly my point. Assuming, like me, that you are the parent of a recruited athlete, then this advice is something you learned on your own, either by talking to people or by successfully implementing such a strategy. But how is a parent to know that? From the tone of the Quinnipiac coach’s article, such hand-forcing might be deemed rude, pushy or otherwise inappropriate. A recruit might be on the cusp of the recruitment list and the coach doesn’t like his/her in-your-face attitude. How is a recruit to know?”
There is no secret formula; asking questions for which you want to know the answer in a polite way is all that is required. You do not have to be in your face at all. Asking a coach how far along they are in the recruiting process is perfectly reasonable. If the coach says they have a class of 8 and 7 commits, you get a sense of the situation. If the coach is offended by that question, then It is time to move on as the coach clearly does not want to interact productively with you.
“Not all recruited sports are strong in HS. My son’s high school did not have a team in his sport. What if a recruit goes to a small, less competitive high school or to a school in a small town not close to a major city? I can think of many reasons why a high school coach might not be able to just “get a coach on the line” having nothing to do with effectively doing his/her job. Of course, I don’t know your child’s sport. It may be much more popular than my son’s and much more common throughout high schools in the US.”
My experience is that HS coaches are hit-or-miss but can help in some situations. To be honest, though, I can think of no reason a high school coach can’t make an appointment to call a college coach, but if you know of some please share.
Geography and size of school don’t matter that much in general, although they might matter a lot in particular.
The real action for us is with the clubs which I assume your son must be involved in too. If one doesn’t play their sport in HS or a club I find it hard to see how they will be able to play in college at the varsity level. The club should be able to call any coach within reason and get a discussion.
Adding one point: If we are talking D1 or D2, then I think it is required to have a parent in the discussion when talking about financial support. If the coach has a problem with that then you as the parent probably want to take a good look at your level of interest in the school.
I do think there’s a difference between club-focused vs. school-focused sports. In a club-focused sport like volleyball, first of all kids should get a realistic sense from their club coaches of are they possible college material, and if so for what level of competition. So less chance of bothering coaches at colleges where they have no chance.
Second, the coaches at the top clubs have recruitable players every year and so college coaches have to keep that in mind and treat coaches and players with respect, even if they’re not interested in a particular player.
I think of one Pac 12 basketball coach who got fired a few years back, according to the rumors at least in part because AAU coaches didn’t trust him anymore, after he pulled a scholarship offer for a recruit, in the opinion of the AAU coaches too late in the process. So all of a sudden that school had a harder time getting recruits.
I think there is also a big difference between the author’s sport - women’s rugby, with literally only a handful of D1 varsity programs, so even the best players have very few options - and sports where hundreds of colleges, and in some cases over 1,000 colleges, have varsity programs. In the latter case, even though only 1-2% of high school players will play D1 in most sports, there are still a lot more chances to find a fit with one or more colleges.
What I find particular interesting is the difference between sports and the accompanying recruiting experience. The article author writes from the perspective of a D1 Women’s Rugby coach. Bobcat sounds as if his experience is with D1 Women’s Lacrosse. Ohiodad, much less clear, but apparently coming from a more mainstream, non-regionalized sport? My son is a fencer where more than 1/3 of high school athletes compete in the NCAA. There are only 20+ D1 teams. Being more club-focused, as Bluewater points out, the coaches can play a more significant role in the recruiting process. Being smaller and more intimate, there is consistent overlap among athletes, parents, club coaches and college coaches and teams. Am very interested in specifics of your experiences if people are willing to share…