Athletic recruits at Haverford-beware

Colleges and Universities A-Z Haverford College
141

@TheGFG I think the problem stems from believing Haverford is like the others in athletic recruiting.

The schools you mention above are Div 1 schools who assign a higher priority to athletics than Haverford. Each entering class at Haverford numbers around 300. In a school that size, fit weighs more in the admissions process than at schools 6 times its size (or more).

Beyond pre-reads, each applicant at Haverford should interview with admissions. If a prospect hasn’t heard it from the coach, the admissions interviewer at Haverford will stress the unusual if not unique admissions dynamics at Haverford.

The mistake I have seen is in failing to understand Haverford is not like the others.

142

While I mentioned Div. I schools, my youngest is being recruited by academically strong Div. III schools, such as several in NESCAC. Our conversations with those coaches give me the impression the system works almost the same way there as at the Ivies, minus the likely letter.

By the way, what do you all mean by “fit” as it relates to Haverford? Again, I get the impression they think they are extra special and need the absolutely perfect student for them which seems to entail some je ne sai quoi vague concept of community acceptability beyond excellent academic preparedness and EC accomplishments.

143

@TheGFG I think it’s important to remember that Haverford is truly tiny. Smaller than many high schools. They only have about 150 seats or so for women each year - so they have to be more careful than most school to craft their class carefully. They have roughly ten varsity Women’s sports, if they “gave” each of these sport 5 admits that would be a third of their class filled with athletes. If they want a well rounded class they have to be very very careful - moreso than most other LAC’s.

144

Well, then maybe Haverford needs to start doing what I hear MIT does–say outright that their coaches have no pull in admissions.

145

My son’s and I learned to corner ball players and ask them directly. I get answers ranging from 90 to 100 percent. In addition, I talk to coaches about ED2 as a back up. An uncomfortable question but they completely understand. I also let coaches know that with any outcome , others will know what a great program they have.

146

Yes @TheGFG , I definitely agree coaches should be upfront with recruits - just pointing out why indeed "fit’ gets more important the smaller the student body overall.

147

Yes, but your post #142 reflects an annoying but common bias against recruited athletes. There’s an assumption they are one-dimensional and only bring their skill in sports to the table. That may be true of the average student-athlete, but excellent students with the stats to get into Haverford often have some interesting and unique interests and EC involvements outside of their sport. Certainly, my D2 does. Thus the prospect of a third of the class being athletes wouldn’t necessarily entail shortchanging Haverford’s academic community in any way.

148

I agree with GFG, the student athletes who are applying to these top academic schools are usually top ranked both in and out of the classroom with a resume full of ECs. Going forward regardless of what was said or not said hopefully the coaching staff will be crystal clear going forward. If there are many comments again next year I think it would be obvious that there is an issue.

149

No @TheGFG - actually that’s my exact point in post #142 - you HAVE to “fit” in other ways than just sports. That IS what they mean by “fit”. Athletes at Haverford must be at least two dimensional and even then there are just so few spots. Everyone at a school like Haverford has to bring multiple things to the table to be admitted no doubt. I have no bias against student athletes - did you miss the post where I said my daughter was A high level runner soccer player, and Salutatorian in HS? On top of that I was a student athlete on scholarship at my D1 school.

150

@TheGFG-Question…if Haverford is so “tiny” with its enrollment of 1200 vs Swathmore’s 1500 and thus is a factor in many of the problems described above, wouldn’t it imply that Haverford to be EXTRA clear and EXTRA precise, maybe evening issuing letters to all these parents as TBull says cannot delude themselves?

151

People are still failing to see the issue and wanting to pronounce Haverford and CB “bad” and “wrong”. They are “crystal clear and precise” in describing their unique process. Parents aren’t listening and want a certain, predictable systematic process like they perceive exists in some other places - where one simply does not exist. Wake up.

152

It seems many of the complaints about the Haverford lacrosse coach, and even their AD, on this site and others, come from 3 or 4 years ago. The defenders seem to be more recent. Maybe the negative backlash over the last couple of years has made Haverford try to be more clear. However, as THE GFG correctly states in #138, if a Div 1 coach or Div 3 coach gives a positive pre-read, barring something drastic coming up, that kid is pretty much done at that school. If Haverford is different, and god bless them if they are, but one would think that a school with an honor code, with the stakes so high, being that kids only have ONE ED BULLET, that Haverford would bend over backwards, forwards, sideways, not to have a kid apply into a system that is different from every other Div 3 school without be 100% sure that kid understands it, when that kid might be leaving his ability to leverage a decade of athletic training to get into a better school. THAT TO ME IS THE ISSUE! Clearly, for whatever reason, there seem to be a ridiculous number of Haverford lacrosse recruits over the years that have “heard what they want” as tbull posts, documented on multiple lacrosse sites, that other schools don’t seem to have.

While the 17 year olds, and their parents might need to do more research, to pretend a first time lacrosse dad will have as much knowledge as the Haverford lacrosse coach and AD about their being a different methodology based on “fit” is a bit unrealistic. At the end of the day, we all want our kids in the best school possible, and for whatever reasons, many parents seem to think Haverford lacrosse has severely hindered those plans.

And while it seems reasonable for those parents that won the “Haverford lottery” would defend the Haverford Lacrosse coach, for them to pretend that those that lost due to a lack of clarity, caused the problem thru self-delusion or “hearing what they wanted to” without them being privy to personal conversations between the coach and those parents is pretty presumptuous. Clearly tbull in post #150 seems to think his experience is totally representative of every experience and all these complaints that he considers “piling on” from so many people, over many years, with few if any other schools having the problems, is just stupid parents that aren’t as worldly and as savvy and experienced as him Just because the coach conducted himself with his kid one way in one year doesn’t mean he had consistently conducted himself in that fashion. As Oxbelha1 said over a year ago in post #16, “Haverford lacrosse has developed a reputation for leading them on only for them to be rejected by admissions”. Clearly something is not working here. As to parents that “want a certain, predictable systematic process like they perceive exists in some other places - where one simply does not exist” shows how little he knows about other schools. The Ivies have “likely letters” that are 99.99% predictable, MIT tells you clearly sports wont help, and the absolute vast majority of Div 1 and Div 3 schools are consistently predictable with their lacrosse recruits year in and year out. Tbull, your heart seems to be in the right place, but you appear to be just plain wrong.

Signed,

Someone that played Div 1, has 3 children that played college lacrosse and helps recruits from his college that will be playing in the tournament in Providence this Friday.

153

As a D3 soccer parent at another school, and a BMC grad so someone with affection for Haverford, I would simply like to add that the potential for misunderstanding and misconstruing coach speak, in any sport, is significant. When my kid started soccer recruiting process, we researched the D3 process as thoroughly as we thought possible, made notes about questions to ask, things to push for clarification about, and felt extremely well-prepared, particularly as we know several college coaches well and thought we had mapped out the process thoroughly with their advice. Nevertheless, my son and I both walked out of a few meetings believing we had heard one thing, only to discover on follow ups, that we misunderstood, usually because we heard the good and didn’t pay attention to the “ifs” and “buts.” It all worked out, but not before my kid believed incorrectly that a coach had him ranked as his top recruit at one school and I believed that he had a roster spot offer at another – when that decision hadn’t been made yet.

As I said in another athletics thread, D3 recruiting is not for the faint of heart because there are not the same milestones found in D1, where there are letters of intent, likely letters etc. I hope that the interpretation is correct that the Hford lax coach has changed his communications more recently to reflect the limits of his ability to assure admission for an ED candidate. And lax parents are certainly on notice that this has been an issue and are hopefully probing to get clarity. Hford is a very particular kind of school, and fit within that community matters, given the small size of the entering class.

154

Thanks for the input, midwestmomofboys. Still, it’s disturbing that both of you received the same impression from the same meeting and it was the wrong impression. Yes, I understand the innate desire to hear only the positive, but presumably a seasoned, intelligent adult would have picked up on some of the “but’s” if the coach had been as clear as he should have been. That said, I do understand that it is not in the coach’s best interest to be crystal clear to prospective recruits. He needs to keep a lot of plates in the air to hedge his bets.

155

@TheGFG yes, one school, my kid --without me – spoke with coach after a small, invitation-only camp, and then reported to me. We went some time thinking one thing, only to discover from later communications (and lack thereof), that he was not at the top of the list. Even having learned from that, when I realized how important it was to listen carefully and ask follow ups, we both came out of another meeting thinking he had a roster spot. Only later did we realize we had not heard the “magic” words --“you are my recruit, you have a roster spot on my team…” Again, it worked out for the best, but I did feel some frustration that, as we were the novices, the coach could have said, without waiting for us to ask, “here’s what happens next, I have more guys to see and I will make roster decisions by x date.” We definitely heard what we wanted in that conversation, and in the excitement of the positive feedback, filled in the blanks ourselves when we should have been asking more questions.

156

I personally think prior to the “pre-read” from admissions, everyone should take everything with a grain of salt. The coaches don’t know what kids are really interested, the grades, or how many spots admissions will allow them to get help on for that year. (It can vary greatly year to year). So I would never hold anything against a coach during that period. However, the “pre-read” does imply a level of INSTITUTIONAL COMMITMENT, and at that point the coach should be conveying the admissions officers report clearly and accurately and should even quantify what his interpretation is and his “success” rate of getting kids in at the level of commitment admissions is conveying.

157

DivIII - Reasonable points all. FYI - I won’t go into my background but suffice it to say that I am quite knowledgable about D1 and D3 recruiting. The fact is that Haverford doesn’t use the same roster spot “allocation” methodology that, say, the NESCAC schools do. The coach cannot guarantee or “give” anyone a roster spot. There are no “likely” letters. He can encourage an ED application for those he believes are promising candidates who meet certain criteria. That then puts him in a strong position to advocate on their behalf as part of his “list” with the admissions office. I have heard from parents of other Haverford recruits in recent years that CB and other Haverford coaches go out of their way to make all this clear. Bottom line: being an “official recruit” at Haverford, even with a “pre-read” application, definitely improves admissions chances especially for those near the top of the list, but it is still a “lottery” play to a more significant degree at Haverford than is the case at other schools. This is owing largely to size and “fit.”

My issue is with the ongoing character and integrity assassination of the school and coaches and the impugning of their whole honor code. Perhaps the “truth” is somewhere in the middle here. Haverford may not have been consistently clear to the point of hitting applicants and their parents between the eyes as to how the process works, and parents and recruits may have not asked the right questions, and/or heard what they wanted to hear. None of this, in my mind, warrants the type of vehemence that seems to have taken hold out there toward the school and coach.

So…rather than anyone being “flat wrong”, perhaps there is a middle ground reality rooted in communication (or lack thereof in some cases), misunderstanding and misinterpretation. Where Haverford is concerned, all need to not “beware” but, rather, be aware that Haverford is different. Now, that would be a breakthrough in civil discourse - don’t you think?

158

Oh, and you really don’t need to attack me personally here. I’m really not being arrogant - just offended.

159

@3girls3cats ,

“admissible” means truly admissible in D3. Someone who belongs there academically.

But as you know, there are thousands of kids who are admissible who are turned down at these schools because they do not present something the admissions committee is looking for: geo diversity, racial, ethnic or gender diversity, unique skill, experience or perspective.

The athlete has something to offer that the school wants … but they’re not admitting people who shouldn’t be there - not in D3 recruiting.

D1 - entirely different story.

160

tbull, I appreciate you agreeing I made reasonable points. and we can all agree to the facts, but it seems here that the conclusions each reaches, are, and can be different. My personal view is closer to Laxworld than tbull. A college choice is the most important decision a kid and family will ever make, or almost. For a college to get lacrosse kid A, kid B and kid C vs Kid D, E, and F, makes very little difference. For a kid to potentially blow his ED bullet to a school, with an honor code that is ANYTHING LESS THAN 100% CLEAR AND UPFRONT, is inexcusable. The downside for that lacrosse kid is enormous, unless he finds a ED II school still looking for his position, he has lost 100% of his leverage and will end up in a significantly lessor school, and all that goes with it. If a kid knew Haverford was a “lottery” but Middlebury, Skidmore, Vassar, etc were 99% sure, why would ANY KID that Haverford honestly conveyed their system where these were not “locks” like the other schools, ever take this risk? The downside for Haverford is minor, the downside for that kid is enormous. A school that touts it’s honor code and says on the tour “we dont have and honor code, we LIVE IT”, should probably have handled this a bit better the last couple of years. Particularly 2012 and 2013 when this issue was in almost every lacrosse blog in america, and actually when this thread started. We pretty much agree on facts, just reach different conclusions. SO you think people should be “aware” and I think people should “beware” that Haverford lacrosse isn’t 100% clear. Please don’t view this as a personal attack or get offended. I don’t view this as a character assassination, but yes, I cant help but conclude that Haverford Lacrosse, the AD, and the school which had to be aware of this problem, at one time was not honoring its honor code and in my book lacked integrity.