The Only College Fencing Recruiting Thread You Need to Read

@RRRtex - SevenDad got it exactly right.

@Happylife4 - there’s some flux in top 10 schools from year to year, but you can see the men’s and women’s top 10 from last year here:
https://www.ncaa.com/rankings/fencing/nc

As far as admissions help at D3 schools, I think this varies significantly from school to school. Perhaps coaches can help at some of the more selective schools like JHU, Vassar, and Brandeis. I believe people have commented here in the past that there’s less possibility for support at uber-selective schools like MIT and Cal Tech… your mileage may vary, and others here may have more direct experience.

@stencils thanks for all the information!

To @RRRtex and others regarding concerns about going to national tournaments and missing school: I echo others’ comments and say “it depends.” If your student is eager to participate (even with the prospect of losing), and you have the means (not something to be assumed), national tournaments can provide good experiences, and help with both the fencing and demonstrating commitment. I too was initially concerned about missing so much school junior year and credit advice received on this forum with supporting the decision to go ahead and try to do as much as possible. Granted, we were in a stronger position fencing-wise but for us, academics always came (and comes) first. There was no problem with the high school permissions – as long as he kept up with his work, and communicated with the teachers, he could miss school days. I have spoken with other parents who have had similar experiences, and would advise going to the school administration, explaining the situation and asking. Of course, this is if a student can indeed handle it; it’s better not to necessarily stress a student out for this, of course. For those who can, I agree with @SevenDad; the fact that a student can successfully manage a rigorous academic load and serious fencing schedule can demonstrate that the student would be able to do the same at the college level.

And back to the National tournaments: many high school juniors are still age eligible for Cadets, so opportunities to do Cadets and Juniors together (e.g., November NAC) is good. Also, look to see whether you can do Div 2 events - those can be good for many fencers. Also, with the new 2-day Div 1 format, more fencers get to fence again even if a fencer doesn’t make the top the 64; there is the classification tournament.

And then thinking about regional tournaments: in addition to the RJCCs, the ROCs are good opportunities.
hope this is helpful …

Thanks, @SpaceVoyager and others! The Div1 2 day format only applies to epee, from what I can see — not my guy’s weapon. He has aged out of Cadet and fenced out of Div2 (as he’s a B18 fencer). His school will be fine with missed days, so I guess it just comes down to cost vs payoff in experience. Really appreciate everyone’s input!

Can any of the parents with kids fencing for college programs comment on how fencer is supposed to be registered (club/university affiliation-wise) when they renew USA Fencing rmembership?

I’ve seen people only associated with their U, associated with a U and a club (with no consistency on which is listed as primary), people (that I know are fencing for an NCAA program) only listing a club. I’m sure there is a way USA Fencing prefers it to be…though I’m not sure how much it matters, ultimately.

@SevenDad I think it depends on the coach. One of my friends was required to keep the university affiliation during the season, another kept university affiliation throughout the years, and another one maintained club affiliation throughout college, all of whom attended top programs.

On an unrelated note, can a D1 coach “overstep” a given recruiting boundary in terms of slots? I am somewhat of a match fencing wise, but not so much academically, and the school has a very small amount of recruiting slots. I feel as if I connected really well with the coach, so is it a possibility that I can get some pull with admissions through the coach even if all the slots are used?

@SevenDad - The general protocol is NCAA (college), USA Fencing sanctioned events (club), and international designated events (USA). There are occasionally politics involved, but a fencer is not required to register or event to identify his/her college affiliation. I have seen confrontations between college and private club coaches when it comes to which jacket a fencer wears on the podium. There are some restrictions. For instance, you cannot wear college ID at international events. You cannot wear club or USA ID at NCAAs.

@cashcarti - There is a lengthy discussion on this thread about the differences between formal recruitment, i.e., a likely letter or letter of intent, versus “support”; having a coach back your application. The latter, which is what I assume to which you are referring, is definitely a thing, but impact depends on the coach and on the program. In any case, the coach is not overstepping anything by supporting an application. He/she has a limited number of recruiting slots. A fencer who is ultimately accepted with the help of coach support is not an official recruit.

@SevenDad - An added couple of thoughts on the crossover between NCAA and club. First, remember that there is an attempt to separate fencers from the same club in pools. I don’t know if this extends to college teams. So surrendering or even diluting the club identification, may have an impact in this area. Second, many kids like to show off their NCAA colors, logo and swag. It’s also nice to have your college teammates cheering you on. Often the college coach may be your strip coach. There’s nothing wrong with this and it can be quite exhilarating.

As @BrooklynRye mentioned, the FencingTime software used to manage almost every domestic event automatically makes sure there are no primary club-mates in the same pool unless unavoidable due to event size. I forget whether it also tries to avoid secondary club conflicts as well, or just identifies them to the bout committee for review.

@SevenDad at my DDs school, the coach asks all teammates to update their primary affiliation to the university. I’m guessing this is because they do a couple of NACs and she doesn’t want them in the same pool. I think whether you keep your old club as secondary or not is up to the fencer. When my DD renewed her USA membership a couple of days ago, it asked if she wanted to update her home division to be based on her NCAA team’s home division or the division of our home address.

@SevenDad For my DD, she is registered with the university team as primary (per coach’s request), local club as secondary, and her division aligns with the university (again, per coach’s request). I think he asked them to register in the local division for racking up regional points and/or going to local qualifiers - but I could be mistaken on this.

After last year’s membership renewals, did anyone else whose kiddo was on a Collegiate membership tier get an email from USA Fencing that seemed to question whether your kid was actually in college? Maybe I read too much into it, but I felt their wording suggested they thought my DD didn’t qualify for the Collegiate Competitive membership. We did get it quickly sorted out.

Thanks for chiming in, all. I guess it depends on school/program/coach…and will send an email with question. Maybe we should even wait until she get there to do the USA Fencing membership renewal? I totally forgot about the college competitive membership tier.

Since Sahara has already done the CCM, I believe he can confirm that the fencer must appear on the college’s official roster for the upcoming seasons. These are not always published in synch with USA Fencing renewals so there may be some gap in renewing. If this stretches out for some reason, it can affect early season competitions. Just something to keep in mind…

@BrooklynRye Thanks for the response. So is it possible that a coach can guarantee admission for a non “recruit?”

Also, are pre-reads decisions made in comparison to other athletes in one’s respective sport? I’m nervous as to how my pre-read will go as my stats aren’t too high for fencing (SAT is a low/mid 1400) but in comparison to college recruiting in general given the multitude of recruited athletes, it’s not too bad.

@cashcarti: To answer your first question in post #712…I think that’s the $64,000 (more, actually) question. It is debatable how much pull a coach has for a non-recruit, and I think it can really vary from program to program and even year to year. I doubt any coach could “guarantee” admission to any of the super-selective schools. In a previous discussion, someone suggested asking something to the effect of “Of the prospects you’ve supported but not used a recruiting slot for, what’s been their track record with getting in?” How a coach answers that question could be very telling.

FWIW, I would err on the low side when guesstimating how much impact non-slot “support” might have. In my daughter’s case, she was offered this sort of support at two schools but did not pursue, as she had equally attractive options with more definite/concrete levels of support.

Unfortunately no coach can guarantee admission no matter how desperate they are to admit a particular recruit. The AO has the last say. The only thing the coach can do is to give the recruit the probability of being admitted, even after a positive preread. That goes for the slotted recruit at a top Div 1 school as well. Everyone has heard of at least one recruit who most likely was a “guarantee” to get in, but for myriad of reasons, likely academics, was rejected by the AO.

@noanswers - At the risk of beating a dead horse, this goes back to earlier discussions on this thread differentiating between formal recruiting offers, as opposed to offers of support. Although there are nuances to this (I believe some posters have related these), the ‘hard’ recruiting offers most generally come in the form of likely letters (Ivies) or letters of intent. An offer of support, whatever its weight, is neither of these. It is conceivable that an offer of support turns into a formal recruiting situation, and this is even the way some schools operate as they filter out their seasonal recruitment, but it is not the norm for most, particularly for DV1, programs.

In any case, as you point out, none of these are an absolute guarantee of admission and the AO indeed has the final say. That said, however, on a relative probability scale, holding a letter of intent or receiving a likely letter holds a far greater probability of admission than any support offered and, of course, greater than applying with no connections at all.

Yes, for the Collegiate Competitive Membership, a fencer is supposed to appear on the official roster for that school.

And perhaps this is what happened when they questioned my daughter’s membership. It wouldn’t be shocking if her coach was a little behind in submitting the team roster. Everything was cleared up with a brief email exchange.

It’s important to differentiate between a LL vs NLI. The former is an official notice from the admissions committee informing the recruit of their likely (impending) acceptance, whereas the latter does not necessarily imply acceptance but only a contract between the athlete and the AD.

It’s funny - @noanswers - I have heard it often said that the recruiting process totally favors the schools. They often get kids to commit, to the exclusion of all other potential recruitment opportunities, and yet hold all the cards when it comes to the ultimate admissions decision. However, there is no written contract and there is no binding agreement between the recruit and an Ivy. Either party can walk, whatever the political fallout. The receipt of an LL, however, is more “impending” than “likely”…lol. However, in the case of an NLI, you are indeed correct. There is literally a binding contract; certainly binding on the recruit and, in a more limited way, on the school. Most notably, the kid still has to gain admission to the school or all bets are off.

I think the fact that both parties can “walk” in the Ivy recruitment process is what puts a lot of nerve racking stress on the recruit and to a lesser degree on the coach. Since a commitment is only a verbal exchange, nothing binding, until that LL appears on the computer screen, the recruit is always on edge whether things are going their way or not. The coach will never commit to a guaranteed admission, only his support as a slotted recruit. Although this support will exponentially increase the recruit’s chance for getting into an Ivy, but knowing that it’s never a 100% is not going to make one at ease until the LL is at hand.