<p>DOES ANYONE KNOW JUST how much input athletic coaches have in the admission process if any. I have been told a number of different responses. Some say none, some say they make a list of athletes but that list is sent to admissions and ultimately,,adcom makes the decision. some say they recomend certain students and it is admissions decisions. Some people say coaches have a great deal of pull and they can get athletes in. </p>
<p>DOES ANYONE HAVE ANY legit info?</p>
<p>I truly beleive it depends on the school. I also do know of one school where the coach of a sport was not happy because a couple of her PG recruits didn't get in (I know this coach personally).<br>
Beyond that, sorry I can't be of much help.</p>
<p>Depends on the sport and it depends upon the school's priorities. In looking back at your most recent posts, it may not matter in your son's case as he regards himself as a "B" team athlete. Coaches probably only go to bat for impact players on the "A" team. The admissions committee, however, will likely regard your son as a well rounded potential contributor to the school community due to his athleticism and willingness to participate on school team sports.</p>
<p>I don't think anyone has and "legit" info because each school's policy differs from the others and can change over time as well. And quite frankly, I don't think admissions wants us parents to know that they use a dart board to determine admissions because someone might include a magnetic application to attract darts (jk). Really, we parents all want to game the system, so the schools try hard not to give us any real information.</p>
<p>What I can tell you is that every school asks coaches for lists of recruits ranked top to bottom and most (but far from all) ask how many players you "really" need this year (or risk not having a team in certain cases). </p>
<p>At the larger highly selective schools, being at or near the top of the coach's list almost guarantees admission for a student falling into the mainstream of accepted applicants (above the bottom quartile) as they want successful teams and don't need ever student to raise the average score. It may also get you a more favorable FA read from the better endowed schools.</p>
<p>Occasionally, you will see schools where certain coaches are on the admissions staff. These coaches don't need to do as much arm twisting to get what they need for their team. Often their teams are very competitive. Some coincidence??? </p>
<p>In our personal experience, the coaches at these schools don't seem to claim that they have a particular pull with admissions, although they do admit to sending in a list of preferred recruits. </p>
<p>I think that schools don't act alike on this matter. Different schools, different priorities. Some may look for full-pay, some (especially smaller) schools may look for multi-sport (multi coach recomendations) types over single-trick ponies.</p>
<p>And of course the sport does matter. Different sports are more important at different schools. In addition, one basketball player, or one ice hockey player can have a bigger impact on a school's athletic profile than one football player or track team member, as these are smaller teams where one player does make a bigger impact. Exceptions apply for skill players in football, though when the player is D1 college material.</p>
<p>Bottom line is that it is highly unpredictable because schools vary and they don't want you to game them (despite our best efforts ;) )</p>
<p>Sorry if I cannot be more helpful.</p>
<p>Holy cross-post Batman! I think we are thinking alike here!</p>
<p>ICY(FF*
At those particular schools, yes he would be a varsity B player, however; he will be applying to a day school and another bs where he would make the varsity hockey team. It was at these two schools I more wondered about. At the other bs, he knows he won't make varsity A but most likely will get in as one his sister now attends. He will be happy to play varsity B there, however, still unsure about boarding.
thanks for the iput</p>
<p>In my experience, it does depend on the school. My sense is that at least my boys' sports, coaches have signficant influence, but the number of players they can tip or put on their list varies. My older son was recruited for 2 sports as a junior and got in 5/5I including Andover-decided to go elsewhere---his academic profile was well above average for only 2 of the schools, for the other 3 he was average.</p>
<p>Son #2 is now in the process of applying and is recruited for one sport, although wil play at least one other---we will see how that goes. Has only applied to 3 schools--one a safety, one a "match' where he is a legacy and one is a reach. He has better grades than his older brother in all honors courses, but much lower SSATs. Better athlete--nationally ranked in his sport but not an impact athlete in 2 sports as was his brother</p>
<p>Goaliedad were was your daughter on the recruit list? and how were SSAT scores? In other words, would she have been a good candidate without the sport , anyway?</p>
<p>My son was highly recruited for two sports (both coaches told us he was the top one on their list). Both coaches were in frequent contact by both snail and e-mail, and one of the coaches even showed up unannounced at a game. The coach for my son's main sport made it very clear that he was in contact with the admissions office and wanted my son in. He was not on the admissions committee, however. Funny thing is, once my son got to the school, a coach for a different sport (in a different season than the two sports he was recruited for), encouraged him to go out for that team. He pretty much made my son feel obligated to go out for the team by telling him, "I don't want to sound like a jerk, but I pulled for you to get in." This coach had called my son at home during the winter to guage his interest in the sport (my son had listed it under "interests" on his application as it was something he did recreationally). I think he would have been a solid candidate for admission anyway, however we did need substantial fa, so the sport thing probably helped there. I do think being a potential contributer on a sport that is important to the school would definitely have some pull. It certainly does at all colleges....Ivies included.</p>
<p>Without getting into too many details about my daughter's school, I think she would have been accepted to her school without being a recruited athlete, although my D's school is not on the list of highly selective schools. Her test scores were adequate, but she also (when SSAT national test scores are compared against other school administered normalized test scores) had a very bad day. She had a late hockey game the night before (got back to the hotel at 10:30) and had to get up early for the drive to another city to take the test, so I wasn't surprised. She is in honors classes at her school pretty much across the board, although not the top student in her classes, so that would confirm that she would have been accepted otherwise.</p>
<p>I do think that being the top recruit (no uncertain terms here, as evidenced by the coach's words and her subsequent performance) did help when it came to FA, though I've come to learn. Let's just say with girl goalies (there are lots of boys around in comparison), they tend to line up one to a school, so it kinda leaves a school vulnerable if they don't have one when the music stop while playing musical chairs. So I would say that with our particular school and our particular situation we benefitted. YMMV</p>
<p>Not to be cynical here, but as athletes go, if you've got 2 of the 3 (top recruit, academic credentials, wealth) the 3rd is not hard to overcome. The trick is finding the school where your child is high enough either in the academic or athletic department (or both) that you have the 2 out of 3.</p>