I found this interesting in the context of an earlier discussion on early recruiting in women’s lax and soccer. It is a quote from Bob Scalise, Harvard’s AD
While I can appreciate the Harvard AD’s stance and understand that it is consistent with Ivy policy, if the Ivy is intending to compete for top students who also happen to be D1 quality athletes, they may need to recognize that recruiting timelines are moving up appreciable in many sports. I know the timelines are accelerated in my sons’ sport. Times change and approaches must as well. Top athletes have so many great choices at high academic schools - Stanford, Duke, Vanderbilt in addition to many, many others. These schools offer great athletic competition as well as top of the line academics. If the Ivy schools want any shot at all at any some of these top tier athletes, they need to consider moving with the times. Kids have so many choices, especially if they are bright and solid athletes.
nhparent9, good point, however Stanford for one has a similar dilemma as the Ivies as it does not issue Likely Letters until (at the earliest) the summer before senior year.
So it’s not too different from what people have described in the Ivies, with coaches in some sports making various kinds of conditional offers, but admissions not giving an official decision until later.
Obviously they are not having trouble filling their rosters but I also wonder how their recruited athletes (and coaches for that matter) are handling this. Putting all your eggs in the Ivy basket seems very risky in this scenario. By Senior year, virtually all other schools would have no roster spots left. So if the Ivy doesnt work out, the plan B could be not playing your sport at all…
Regarding the top D1s (Stanford, Duke, etc) the top recruits are already going there instead of Ivies for the most part. For example, Stanford (W Soccer) already has at least 7 juniors, and 2 sophomores committed in addition to the 8 HS seniors.
The Ivy turned its back on competing for “top recruits” a long time ago. In fact, getting away from big time sports was one of the reasons the league formed. It will be interesting to see how much the league adjusts, if at all, to the earlier recruiting calendar.
I agree Ohiodad51. While there are some sports (like crew and ice hockey) where the Ivies compete at the highest levels, and in others (like track) there is a smattering of NCAA champion level athletes, I don’t think the Ivies are trying to go head to head with scholarship schools on the pure athletic dimension.
I know when this was brought up previously it seemed to upset some as it appears to go against the spirit of the Ivy recruiting rules, but as this topic has been brought up again I think it would be remiss for potential recruits not to know that some people do declare themselves “committed” to Ivys in their sophomore and junior years in sports such as women’s soccer and lacrosse. Two that I am currently thinking of for this year in our area have been listed as Ivy recruits for the last couple of years, and clearly the coaches had communicated to them some serious level of support, of course contingent upon maintaining grades. I don’t bring this up to be argumentative, but because potential recruits might look to this thread as the “definitive” experience of all Ivy recruits. I know others in the prior thread weighed in with knowledge of similar cases. In the cases of the families I’ve known where this occurred, these are very athletically savvy families with prior children, in some cases, who have been through athletic recruiting. They are not families that are going to interpret a coach’s comment of, “I can see you here and really want you,” to be on the level of a commitment of any type. They were definitely told something fairly concrete by the coaches, and those girls have LLs now, to the places they “committed to” during their sophomore and junior years. So however this is working, some Ivys are effectively going after desirable recruits earlier in the process.
And no, I don’t think any potential Ivy recruit should count on anything happening outside of the process that has been clearly outlined above, by very knowledgeable posters. But it is indeed happening that at least some Ivy coaches are communicating pretty solid levels of support to recruits earlier on , to the degree that fairly savvy families are reasonably confident that their child has indeed “committed” (but honestly, who is ever 100% confident until written confirmation is in hand). And that those commitments, at least in the handful of cases of women’s lacrosse and soccer that I’ve seen, mature into real offers of admission the fall of senior year.
I realize these are just anecdotes and bear little weight in discussions of the official process of Ivy League recruiting, but since the earlier discussion of women’s soccer and lacrosse recruiting was referenced and there seemed to be an acceptance here that no recruiting was done prior to the stated written rules, I wanted to weigh in with what I know to be true, on a purely anecdotal level.
I have no desire to debate this, and agree that recruits should maintain a healthy wariness of a “commitment” until they have written confirmation of admissions support in hand. But once women’s soccer and lacrosse were referenced, I thought that the entire picture should be presented as comprehensively as possible.
@ccsouth - I think your point about Stanford W Soccer is the point I’m trying to make. How many of those Stanford juniors (7), 2 sophs, etc. would have chosen an Ivy instead of Stanford if the Ivy rules weren’t so restrictive. Stanford admissions aren’t any easier than the Ivies, so if they can make it work, why can’t the Ivy make some adjustments so they might be in the running for some of those kids too. I’m sure most of those Stanford commits are top students who are desirable to all universities and the Ivies are blocking themselves out for no apparent reason.
@Ohiodad51 - While the Ivies might be turning their backs on top recruits in mens football/basketball, I’m not sure that is true at all in the other 20 or so sports. JMO.
@nhparent9, maybe. Maybe the Ivy schools collectively find football and men’s basketball too plebeian, maybe they think it was bad for the brand when Yale was putting 50,000 in the Yale bowl and Penn was selling out the Palestra. Maybe the Ivy Presidents care a lot more about water polo and field hockey, I really don’t know. But the idea that you need to chuck your raison d etre in order to be competitive in certain sports seems counter intuitive. Harvard at least seems to be able to compete at an adequate level in men’s basketball, where early recruiting has been going on for a long time (I think they are ranking fourth graders now, saints preserve us). They are doing it somehow. Other schools have done it in other sports. Cornell is a very good wrestling school and has been for years. Obviously Yale (and Cornell) compete at the highest levels in men’s and women’s hockey, Princeton in men’s lacrosse back in the day and fencing now, etc., etc.
One would think that if there was pressure to bend at all it would be in the revenue sports, not only because of the greater general interest but because the athletes at the tippy top of those sports are sometimes looking at schools not for an education but to maximize their potential draft status, a consideration that kind of evaporates when you are talking about some of the other sports. I have no idea.
As far as other top academic schools, I have seen Stanford lose a kid to another tippy top football school because they wouldn’t bend on the requirement that the athlete go through a truncated admissions process ( like the likely letter process in the fall. The dad was smoking over it, but that was the rule and the kid is now elsewhere. Maybe the AD has a different policy for other sports the school may care more about where this can be avoided, I have no direct experience. I do have direct experience in other top academic schools (Notre Dame, Vandy, Northwestern) not requiring revenue athletes to go through any further admissions process than checking NCAA eligibility.
It is an interesting dilemna. Given the earlier thread, I thought it worth posting the comments here. Obviously a whole lot of people believe that there is something not entirely above board, or at least something different than what Scalise says, going on in some of these sports. One thing is certain, recruiting isn’t getting any later, so whatever pressure exists is only going to increase.
On a different note: what is your opinion of athletes announcing “commitment” before they get the LL? My son’s friend is spreading the news all over their school but my son is waiting till he has LL in hand. Is he being too cautious…
@doubtful are you out there?
You participated in this identical discussion in a different thread less than two weeks ago. This discussion has been started again here. I think one of your posts in the other thread is very relevant, especially in connection with the recent comment that “a whole lot of people believe that there is something not entirely above board…”. I think your comments are very useful for recruits and their families, therefore I would like to re-post your comments here.
http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/athletic-recruits/1815636-ivy-league-recruiting-p3.html
Apologies, @doubtful, in advance if you do not want to get involved re-hashing this in a second thread. (I can sure empathize with that!) Just thought your comments in the other thread were helpful for recruits and their parents, and if the topic is being raised again in another thread, they should have the benefit of seeing your comments again.
Personally, I’m with your son, tonymom. I know these athletes have been told they are “in,” but I am a cautious person myself. One of my daughter’s best friends did sort of a “compromise” and told friends and family over the summer (and boy did it get around fast), but made no “official” pronouncement until she saw the LL (i.e. didn’t want it posted in writing anywhere and didn’t want her swim club announcing, although she saw other swim recruits announcing publicly after their verbal commitment and the coach’s assurance that they would be supported for a LL). It’s difficult when others announce though, and you stay silent. But in the end, it’s just a small difference in time before he can announce.
@tonymom, my kid made his decision public in the summer before senior year, after the pre reads were done. I think the reason he did so was because he was tired of the recruiting questions from the people around his HS program. I don’t think we worried about it at the time, but it can be risky. Two other kids who publicly announced their commitment around the same time as my son ended up not getting admitted. I don’t think there is a right answer, just whatever makes your son the most comfortable. And not to jump the gun, but congrats to him and you.
All offers, commitments, blood oaths made to sophomores, juniors and even freshmen are all premature, contingent, non-binding whether made by a d1 or d2 or d3 school coach, asst coach, or AD. The Ivy ADs may be tiptoeing along the rules and not committing, not offering, not signing, only stating that the athlete has ‘committed to the process’ but I can tell you there are plenty of athletes out there hanging up their Yale and Princeton banners and proudly telling everyone they are off to be a Bulldog or Tiger. Those athletes haven’t gotten the word that ‘committing to the admissions process’ is not the same as ‘you’re in’ but they don’t care, and the odds seem to be with them that the 8 or so sophomores who ‘commit’ seem to be the same ones who end up being accepted the fall of senior year. Also, they don’t seem to ‘overcommit’ by allowing the lax coach to allow 20+ to ‘commit to the process’ and post on these lists 1-2 years before they enter college. No, you usually find 6-8 on the early lists of commits (whereas on some D1 or even D2 schools you’ll find 15 names). The numbers just don’t seem to support the idea that the Ivies aren’t recruiting sophomores for the lax and soccer and rowing and other teams. If these sophomores have no better chance of ending up with a likely letter 2 years later than any other sophore player, you’d think the numbers would show that only 1 of the 8 claiming to have committed would get admitted, but that doesn’t seem to be the case from @doubtful’s very unofficial charting of the lax commits for a few years. My own very (very) unofficial following of the recruits (not all Ivies or even many Ivies, but many top D1 programs) just from the kids I know is the same - most go to the school originally announced and ‘committed’ to in sophomore or early junior year.
For 2016 on the Laxpower girls recruits, several of the Ivies had blocks of early commits in the low ID numbers. To explain, on laxpower, they have a page that posts info - ID # (in order of posting), name, home town, hs, position, chosen college. The ID# are generated as you post, so the lowest numbers posted early. Brown, for example, had #3-5, two from NY, one from NJ, different towns, hs. Harvard has #31-34, two from NY, two PA (and the PA girls are from the same high school). All of these with these low numbers were posted the first day the 2016 list was opened (about 200 are listed immediately, somewhat alphabetically by school for the first 200 or so names so someone was keeping a list somewhere and posted them all as soon as it opened) probably in late 2013/early 2014 when these kids were sophomores.
I can also tell you that these girls immediately start wearing pink arm bands at tournaments and showcases to show they are ‘taken’. That is their choice, to take themselves off the market, but most schools respect this even for sophomores. You can go to a club showcase, where they play by class year, and several sophomores will have arm bands on, and on the junior fields more than half will. They consider themselves committed.
Hey @twoinanddone, just a question. Why go to a showcase as a committed kid? Aren’t showcases kind of recruiting events? Or is it more like a travel baseball tournament (if you are familiar with those)? Lax in this part of the world is still mostly a h.s. based sport rather than a club one.
@Ohiodad51 While I’m not a particular fan of the condescending and unnecessarily sarcastic nature of your response to my post, I will play along. You said the Ivy long ago turned their backs on top level recruits, and that may be true, but my direct experience suggests otherwise. I’m well aware of the Ivy and it’s rules and traditions, as well as the history of some of the more successful programs at different schools. I am a parent of a currently enrolled active Ivy recruited LL athlete. I am in the middle of the recruiting process with son two, so I’m quite familiar with the process and how it works for my sons’ sport, both in the Ivy and at the Power 5 conference level. I have dealt with it directly and with multiple schools in both. My point was simply that an examination of the rules and perhaps some modifications that allow the Ivy League to more effectively align with accelerated recruiting timelines might be beneficial to the League in terms of acquiring not only better athletes but perhaps an even higher profile overall student. It wasn’t intended to create an unsolicited history lesson or a snide remark about Ivy Presidents caring about water polo more than sports that are loosely termed as revenue generating.
Well, I will admit to sarcastic, but I did not intend to be condescending. I just don’t know what modifications can be made outside of giving the athletic department control over a certain number of admission slots (like certain schools do in certain sports). At some point you run into the reality of the single digit admission rates. Nor do I see evidence of a will to do so within the framework of the sports which with I am familiar. Maybe it is there in other sports.
The showcases in lacrosse are the big summer ‘tournaments’ (usually you play 4 games, win/lose/draw so there is no champion) where the club teams play. Girls want to continue playing on their club teams. Also, the entire team has not committed yet, so they are still playing as a team showing off the girls who are still looking at colleges and having colleges look at them. It’s not like a football combine where they are watching one player in different drills or skills tests, it is playing full field games (usually two 25 minute halfs, running clocks, so a short game). College coaches have a roped off observation area (no talking to them) and a binder with all the info about the players. Having those committed wear arm bands lets the observing coaches focus on the players still available. Even though girls have ‘committed’ as sophomores or juniors, and have even signed to play with a college in fall of senior year, they still play for their club teams (which include the summer showcases and one in the fall), regional teams, and high school teams because, of course, the commitment is really nothing at all. They still have to prove themselves over and over until they sign the NLI.
Do you know committed athletes who quit playing high school or club as soon as they have that likely letter in hand?
There are just over 100 D1 schools that have women’s lacrosse teams. The Ivies are competitive, most in the top half of the rankings, but they don’t often break top 10 (Penn and Princeton top 20, Harvard, Yale top 50). I think most students know even by sophomore year if they are Ivy material or not, but if not, gee, they have to settle for those other lax powerhouses of Hopkins, Duke, Northwestern. If they want a big school, Virginia, Maryland, UNC. It is not the same as football when in order to pick a #1 national championship school you have to go big and give up your ‘type’ of school. You can play for a great team and still go to a top school, or you can go to an Ivy and play for a pretty good team. Win/win.
No, I was just confused by the term showcase. If I remember my travel baseball coaching days, showcases were where kids went as individuals and played on teams made up at the event, and usually happened independently of the tournaments. As I said, lacrosse isn’t really a mature sport in this part of the world yet. I think there was one kid in my son’s class who is playing at a D2 school, but I think that is it.
And girls lacrosse is very different from boys, in both rules and how recruiting is handled.
I think it is growing in Ohio faster than you know. I swear my daughter was recruited by every LAC in Ohio.