Thanks for sharing. Did your player give up ED1 at another school for MIT EA or was it all or nothing thing for MIT?
All or sort of nothing. The coach said he understood if you wanted to ED I but then he would only support you during RD. So in other words D22 was unable to ED or SREA to any of the other top academic schools. Now that she’s deferred she can and the coach support will still be there.
1 Like
My understanding is that MIT differs considerably from other schools in the relative value of coach support compared with other D3 schools. I would be very interested to learn the experience of recruits that are deferred, and I think it would be quite a help to others in the future considering MIT.
You might also dig down now with the coach. I would avoid coach questions that are answered with estimated results (unless they are based on discussions with the admissions folks). Rather, I would want to know the specifics of last year’s experience. How many recruits were deferred? Was there any relationship with the coach list and recruit ranking and being accepted v. deferred? How many referrals ultimately ended up with rejection and wait listing? Was there any communication with admissions as decisions are made (both this year and last).
MIT is such a great institution - no doubt about it, but two things do concern me: 1) the 50% admissions number that has been repeatedly reported (I suspect it’s lower); and 2) that MIT does not do pre-reads, which could help athletes choose other options if appropriate.
Best of luck to all.
I have experience as the parent of a deferred recruit at MIT. My son was told by the coach that she supports 20 athletes with the expectation of getting 8-10. She only supports athletes who swear to her that MIT is their first choice. In his recruit class, 2 or 3 were accepted during EA and as far as I know the remaining were all deferred rather than rejected. The coach does a pre read in the sense that several of the other recruits were told to get their SAT scores up before she would support them. After the EA round, the coach does meet with admissions, but claims to still not know which athletes will be accepted. The coach stayed in constant contact with him, each time saying that there was definitely still a good chance and that every year many recruits are deferred then accepted. He was ultimately rejected. He stayed in touch with many of the other recruits, several of whom ended up at CMU with him. One claims he was told he was in the top 3 recruits (and based on times it makes sense) and was still ultimately rejected. The coach did end up with 10 accepted recruits his year, and not necessarily the fastest 10. I imagine it is a mix of being high on the list and having the best fit for MIT and then somewhat of a crap shoot. For what it’s worth, CMU was a much better fit for my son and he graduated in 3 years with a 4.0 and is starting at his dream job in NYC soon. MIT’s loss in his case:)
14 Likes
Thanks for sharing. In your son’s year, the 7-8 more recruits accepted in RD round are mostly from EA defer pool, or the coach support more new applicants in RD?
In his recruit class, the coach did not support any swimmers who did not apply EA. About 30 recruits were offered “official visits” (not really official since it’s division III) in September and then she offered her support to 20 of those. The ones she offered support to were told to apply EA. I can’t say they would never support someone who didn’t apply EA, but in his recruit class it was definitely the case.
1 Like
Ditto. S22, recruited athlete with similar stats to TXfamily1968’s daughter, also deferred from MIT EA. Had been told he had a 60% chance. Coach called us after the deferral saying that 5 of his recruits were rejected and ‘most’ of the rest deferred. Coach was very frustrated with admissions and used the word ‘disaster’ to describe the recruit class. Wanted S22 to hang in for RD. Fortunately, S22 also had a coach-supported EDII option that was a very close no. 2 on his list. He pursued that.
5 Likes
Given that MIT deferred approximately 9,500 of 14,700 candidates that is fairly surprising and would make me question how many recruits did the coach have and how specific and or meaningful his/her endorsements are.
Translation either this coach had a ton of recruits and the 5 rejects is in line with the general population or the coaches endorsement is meaningless.
Good luck and congratulations on the deferral. Remaining in the running in and of itself is an achievement to be proud of.
@Catcherinthetoast, I interpret it the other way around. It’s no secret that coach support at MIT isn’t the same as it is at other schools. It is because the coach doesn’t have much pull with admissions that recruiting lists are long, with coaches tending to over-recruit.
Luckily @mbinacan44 has provided important detail. For 2021-22, there are 7 first years (not including 1 diver) on the team. Assuming no cuts or other departures, and assuming 20 supported recruits, that is pretty much exactly what the coach told mbinacan44. The consequence, however, is over-recruiting with lists of 20. While I totally understand why someone would really want to go to MIT, recruits should understand that it is not the typical coach support scenario and admission remains a crap shoot.
With 5 having been rejected that leaves approximately 10-15 based on coaches comments that “most” were deferred. Last year 1.8% of deferred MIT applicants were accepted. Coach insisted they all apply ED. Coach called it a “disaster”. Not a great fact pattern.
I stand on my comment that the coach didn’t have much influence and or over recruited in the hopes of filling a roster.
I wonder if the op @Txfamily1968 D got in for ED2 at HMC.
I hope so…
2 Likes
Yes, MIT coaches recruit based on the assumption that they won’t get everyone in. That means a large list. I view that as prudence not over recruiting. They usually tell the recruits it’s a coin flip for each recruit, which is better than the admit rate for unsupported recruits. So I’d say the coach support does matter, but totally agree it isn’t definitive. Personally, I wouldn’t give up other, more predictable, options for it.
Most athletes know the situation I think, which is why they have backup plans or decide against proceeding with MIT. If MIT coaches were giving the impression that they had a system like the Ivies then that’d be very misleading. But I don’t know that any do that.
2 Likes
It appears we are largely in agreement.
In this case they told the recruit who had been deferred and is 1 of 10 to 15 remaining recruits that “He had a 60% chance.”
I would approach with guarded optimism at best.
1 Like
There is agreement here all around about the amount of pull that MIT coaches have with admissions and that the lack of pull results in a long list. I also agree that – from the coaches’ perspective – having a long list is prudent, as you suggest. In my view, however, any time a coach actively recruits more athletes than he or she knows will get in (or that have a very good chance of getting in) it is over recruiting. In fact, if the coach had extraordinary luck and all the 20 recruited athletes were admitted, he or she probably would have to cut some. I view that as over recruiting.
You don’t really hear of that happening at, e.g., NESCAC schools. You hear of disappointment because an athlete didn’t make the recruited group. You hear of recruits who for some reason didn’t get in. You hear of athletic ability that didn’t pan out. You hear of students who think they are recruited athletes when the coach said that they can try out for the team if they are admitted and then are disappointed. But, I have never heard in the NESCAC of 10 athletes who are actually being recruited and encouraged that they should not apply ED elsewhere with only a 50% chance of getting in.
2 Likes
Yes, I understand your point now. Thanks for clarifying. I think we’re all generally in agreement, just slightly different perspectives.
One thing I wonder about MIT, maybe someone knows… For sports like Track and Swimming I don’t see a major problem for coaches in having to operate with this coin flip approach. After all, those rosters are fairly flexible and a Track coach can live with getting 5 sprinters and no high jumper for example. But for sports where the team really can’t function without particular positions filled this is a crazy approach. Is the football coach with a graduating QB really guessing about whether any of the QB recruits will be admitted, year after year, or the soccer coach with GKs? Or a hoops team full of centers…There is a point at which it gets ridiculous not to nail down a few of these positions. Otherwise the school is risking not fielding a team for those they do admit. So I do wonder if something different happens in a few cases, maybe a more definitive conversation between coach and admissions. No first hand knowledge of that though.
1 Like
In cases that @politeperson described, I do think MIT coaches will have a list of recruits with rankings of preferences submitted to admissions. This will allow admissions to understand coaches needs. Additional supports are then given to the higher ranked athletes, but by no means slam dunk admissions guarantee.
3 Likes
I am not sure how I should read how much pull MIT coaches have.
I happened to know a girl who only initiated a contact with a MIT coach after she already submitted EA application on her own, telling the coach she was willing to join his team if admitted. Then she got a surprising email in November from the coach offering letter of support. And she was eventually admitted EA. Is this evidence of strong pull or the girl was simply a strong applicant anyway and the coach support was icing on the cake? After all, the girl was willing to apply EA without knowing any coach support.
How strong of an athlete is she? Was she recruited by other schools?
She would make a very strong addition to MIT’s team, and could be strong for some other D3 programs, but she is not a D1 level athlete. Didn’t think she attempted to be recruited by any other schools other than MIT.
1 Like
Coaches have less pull at MIT because MIT has higher minimum academic standard than most other schools. Coaches generally can’t judge their recruits’ academic readiness accurately, a task that is more challenging at a place like MIT.
1 Like