<p>What are the schools out there where athletics recruiting doesn't even help much with the admission process? I have heard a lot about the University of Chicago being one of those schools where a coach's "push" is more of a "nudge" than anything. Any other top DIII or LACs where this is true? </p>
<p>In this year's recruiting process, I was told by several UAA (DIII) coachs (not naming names) that "Oh yeah, most of our recruits for sure get in." After doing some digging, I have discovered that this is really not the case. In fact, from articles I've read it seems that at these schools athletes don't receive much priority at all. Like a fool, however, I followed and believed these coach's e-mails blindly and felt confident I would get into a top-notch academic dream school. </p>
<p>Now I feel stupid. I should have known not to believe everything a coach tells me and I should have researched for more schools. If it turns out I don't get into these schools and can't continue with my athletic career, I'll be devastated. Anyone else have a similar experience or words of advice?</p>
<p>MIT is another, I hear, and yes, that is the word re U Chicago and the UAA schools generally. How much of that reputation is due to the books written about athletic recruiting in the Ivies, NESCAC, UAA and other top LACs, which are based on data from the late 90s, and how much is based on current fact, I can’t say. For coaches that have limited influence in the admissions process at schools of this high academic level, certainly it’s in their interest to recruit students whose academic stats give them a good shot at getting in w/ or w/o coach support. A reason ED often is urged, and why coaches may get an early read from Admissions on the academic resume of a top recruit. Another aspect of this, too, is that there can be situations in which the ED process yields a disproportionate number of admits whose “claim to fame” is athletic prowess, so in the RD process at such a school, not as many athletes may be admitted, the view being, well now it’s time to get the musicians, artists, etc. into the class.</p>
<p>It seems to me (now in hindsight) that I was pretty much “lied” to by these coaches. None of them attempted to caution me that they had a very limited influence on admission and when I asked strait up “How many of your recruited athletes are accepted?” the response (especially from the coach at the school I really want to go to) was “I can’t say off the top of my head, but almost all.” </p>
<p>Were these just lies I was fed? At these schools I would be a varsity member and the 2nd or 3rd best athlete in my sport as a Freshman. Were they being honest that I would get in because I am (not being cocky) probably their best recruit (judging off past recruits) in a while?</p>
<p>Kafka – Definitely it’s better to know directly how much influence a coach has in the admissions process, but I wouldn’t say that you were lied to necessarily when you asked about how many of the recruits are accepted. If the coaches are smart in their recruiting, they will not heavily recruit athletes whose academic credentials make admission unlikely, so it certainly could be true, and even likely, that “almost all” of their recruits get in. If you look at the Admissions profile of the school’s students and see how you stack up academically, you may see whether the coach could be fairly confident of your admission. I would say, anyway, that being on a coach’s list for Admissions will be of some benefit to you in the process even if the coach has limited pull, because it highlights how high a level you perform at in your sport and the amount of dedication you have to the activity.</p>
<p>KalkaDream, Sorry to hear your case but I have a different view about recruiting athletic at Ivies, NESCAC, UAA and other top LACs. It seems to me that coaches have some weight there I believe. My DS applied those schools but there were no responses from those top schools and his academic is very competed. If admission is based on academic that DS should get some responses from coaches. I think there is a balance between athletic and academic and how much weight on admission will be vary from school to school. Generally speaking coaches do have say so otherwise how coaches fill the teams if all based on number of students randomly admitted (from coaches point of view). Once again sorry to hear that. I wish you continue your sport career and at the end you will be happy for your decision.</p>
<p>Many of the schools you refer to are DI. Coaches have significant pull at those schools, but that is not always the case at a DIII school. In my experience, Ivy’s can pretty much get you in, and all other DI’s have the letter of intent, so there is not question of acceptance. However, DIII’s don’t work the same way. I was talking to a girl who plays my sport at a DIII top LAC, and her coach had two slots. Keep in mind, this sport recruits 9-12 girls a year. Everyone else had varying amounts of support. Those with the slots were used on top recruits that had iffy stats. But his support on your application was SUPER helpful - it’s one of the top sports at the college. </p>
<p>Also, keep in mind that the amount of support a coach has is related to how good his sport is. If they constantly win NCAA championships then yeah, they get almost whoever they want. If it’s a background sport that isn’t particularly good, the support will have less impact. However, there are some schools that are re-vamping certain sports. Those sports, while still not being great, will have the pull of a top sport. (this is DIII)</p>
<p>Frosty6, help me to understand that “her coach had two slots. Keep in mind, this sport recruits 9-12 girls a year. Everyone else had varying amounts of support. Those with the slots were used on top recruits that had iffy stats”. Therefore coach will use two slots to recruit top players and rest of them/7-10 left to admission office to decide which one get in if there are players apply. Correct me I am wrong. There is a myth that how a team got filled? by random number of students who apply or a hand pick by coach? If it is a hand pick by coach then they must have a pull from coach. Help me here.</p>
<p>two girls get in no question. They obviously can’t be failing, but they are essentially handed an acceptance. Everyone else gets the DIII coach pull - mention on application, general (and solid) pull from coach. I’m sorry if I didn’t make that clear. </p>
<p>As an example, some people are told by coaches that they have their support, blah blah, we hope you get in. MOST of those recruits get in. However, some just aren’t strong enough academically so they won’t get in. which is really too bad. But these two girls would be protected from that. This coach does a really good job about only recruiting those who can get in… but there are always those girls he would die to have but just aren’t academically competitive. He’ll say no to all but two and give those two the slots. Done deal. </p>
<p>There was a coach who told my DS that if you were in I would take a look on you otherwise go somewhere else. Thanks for your help. We will knock some doors once admission arrive. Nothing to loss.</p>
<p>Thanks guys (or girls), you’ve been very imformative. I’ll be straight up, I’m in the bottom 50th percentile of most of the top DIIIs, with a 30 ACT, but 4.0 GPA and rigorous classes. I don’t think that I’m “too weak academically” to be recruited, but I’m by no means directly on-par with all other applicants. From what I read in several articles about the sport I’m being recruited for, is that the coach contacts “around a hundred” recruits, of which 50% should get in, of which 50% matriculate. That kind of acceptance rate for athletes is freaking me out- not going to lie, I’m very concerned. </p>
<p>To add to the discussion, I know of a kid who got in to a UAA school for football with a 27 ACT but also several with 30+ who were not admitted. There are obviously fairy tales, but also nightmares. </p>
<p>This is probably a stupid question to ask, but does anyone know which UAA schools have that kind of roster spot where they automatically get 1 or 2 recruits, independent of academics?</p>
<p>We found there was different degrees of support and it very much was dependent on when you applied, especially if the school offered ED. There are tips and slots. Accurately, as frosty points out, slots have more weight than a tip. But I will offer one caveat… if the kid isn’t at least close in stats/readiness, I highly doubt that coach will use a slot on a kid what may very well not be able to do the college level work and not be at the school the following year, let alone the roster. No one wants to waste their time, especially a coach. And this is true during the recruiting process as much as on the field. And even at some schools where teams win championships etc, coaches don’t always get their full wish lists. And for DI, DII, Rarely are athletic scholarships FULL ride and it’s all about managing that budget in conjuction with the talent. S did not get very far into the recruiting game due to his preference to apply ED to a school where he was not being recruited, but he was commended by all the schools for his honesty with them. Other kids play the game, and some don’t play it very well. Some trust too much or frankly, hear things that are not being said at all, and some, unfortunately, fall victim to the pressure of the coach who says if you don’t apply ED, I am moving on. Most tips, slots and any weight whatsoever are long gone by the RD round. The only thing a coach can THEN help do is MAYBE put their finger on the scale if a player of his has been waitlisted. </p>
<p>From what has been told to me, at the schools that put academics first (Ivy, UAA, NESCAC, etc), the coaches do not like to waste their time on prima dona head cases that don’t have the discipline to do the work of college AND sport. And for them to take any kind of chance on a kid like that, the kid better live up to the athletic reputation and lose the attitude so they can do the academic work. Because look at it this way… if the kid flunks out, it only hurts the coach in the next round of admissions. But those schools who really have a breadth of academic challenge for recruits (Georgia, Florida, Tenn), you better be BEST of the BEST in talent; grades not so much. Still, even that entire roster is NOT there on a free ride due to only “Athletic Scholarship.”</p>
<p>Crossposted with OP:</p>
<p>So let me quickly ask. 100 recruits a year? Not a chance. He’s limited by NCAA rules on team size, isn’t he? or the guy over- recruits and so “recruiting” holds little weight? Maybe I am not getting the size of these schools, am I missing something?</p>
<p>I should have clarified, the coach is the HC of both the women’s and men’s team. </p>
<p>It said in the article (I’d rather not give a link as it would reveal the identity of the school) that the coach is contacted by “over a hundred” athletes (male and female combined) of which he pursues “around a hundred.” I’m not sure how many of these apply (it doesn’t say) but then around 50% are admitted and 50% matriculate. So in the end there are about 25 (combined male and female) athletes for the teams every year.</p>
<p>someone mentioned MIT and i am not sure if this is true. my friend said a guy at her school is going their to play basketball and that he is definitely not smart enough otherwise. now i wonder if she misunderstood something, or if he was making it up. so this may or may not be true, but thats what she told me.</p>
<p>^i could see it with a basketball player more than others, but supposedly this kid wasnt just below average for mit, but below average for highschool students in general</p>
<p>Re Caltech, agree that coach not much help. However, interestingly, Caltech coach forwarded an e-mail he’d gotten from admissions following DS’s EA deferral, which looked like part of a spreadsheet, in which they’d noted sport, applicant, and the area of application they wanted more info on. So they actually seem to keep track which surprised me.</p>
<p>It is pretty clear that the MIT basketball coach has significant pull. Not that the kids admitted aren’t still real smart. As I’ve said before, in the UAA I believe that CMU outright cheats on merit aid.</p>