<p>Great point, leoti. I suggest that if Admissions calls and asks why you did not follow instructtions and pursue every nomination eligible, that you reply “dump dump dump dump dump dump dump da dump da, Whistle Pig told me to do it.” Since it is the responsibility of your BGO to ensure that you understand the nomination process, it will probably come via him. I am sure he will appreciate it.</p>
<p>Sorry leoti, but I am just attempting to get all future LOAs to make a phone call before they start second guessing the admissions process.</p>
<p>I am the one who started this tread…so please allow me to distill all the replies down to one simple question…which should be answered by just a simple YES or NO…this YES or NO answer is all that I need and really want…</p>
<p>Does anyone have a real live example, where a USNA candidate received a LOA, applied and interviewed with his/her: (1) local district Congressman/woman, (2) two State Senators and has a (3) confirmation receipt of an application from the VP (*note) and did not qualify for a Presidential nomination…who did NOT secure a nomimation and hence was NOT admitted into the incoming class.???..(also the candidate did not withdraw, was medicaly qualified, passed all the physical qualifications and all other requirements were completed)</p>
<p>Real life examples will eliminate all the speculation with this issue…if no one knows of a real life example…this is a good indictation that LOAs absolutely get nominations if they applied to all of their available sources and everything else was in order and completed…</p>
<p>If someone can identify a real life example where a LOA did NOT get a nomination while eveything else was complete…then we have to accept the fact that LOAs can = NO NOMINATIONS can = NO ADMITTANCE…(someone suggested like completely flubbing of all the nomination interviews which = no nomination, irrespective of the LOA)</p>
<p>Don’t you worry about me - No misunderstanding on my part. Admissions won’t be calling because I did pursue every nomination and upon receipt of my congressional nomination, I stopped my pursuit. I received an LOA and a nomination which = a GUARANTEED appointment so Admissions and/or my BGO will only be calling me to congratulate me. Now please stop worrying your pretty little head over this, OK?</p>
<p>Oh, and by the way, trust me - future LOAs certainly will not need your advice about the admissions process. They will turn to a more responsible poster. You have yet to state your credentials so why would anyone listen to you - Oh, that’s right. It’s because you are an expert so I guess I should be waiting for that admonishing phone call from the Admissions Office or my BGO!</p>
<p>“dump dump da dump”!! Thanks for the advice, Whistle Pig!! Mombee told me to give you the credit! “And the beat goes on…”</p>
<p>Mombee-
Now I know that you always have to have the last word, so please, entertain us…</p>
<p>Just to let you know that your credentials are going down the drain…</p>
<p>I received this letter today - It was in the mail when I made my last Friday afternoon phone call to the Senator’s office so the letter and my phone call crossed over -</p>
<p>As quoted in the letter:</p>
<p>“While screening your application, I was informed that you have already received a nomination from another source. To give other qualified applicants from our state an opportunity to compete for the limited number of appointments, an effort is made to avoid duplicate nominations. Therefore, I am unable to nominate you.”</p>
<p>So are you sure that you want to stick with your oh-so “knowledgeable?” post -</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Would you care to get your facts straight before we discuss this any further or do you still need to be the “sound of reason” for future LOAs?</p>
<p>Maybe you should get your facts straight before you accuse other people of “second-guessing” the admissions process.</p>
<p>I don’t want to clog this thread any more than it already is, but just want to clarify the point with our experience. Our son had an LOA in hand with no nomination when we attended a CVW in January a few years ago. When I brought our situation up to admissions in front of all the parents during the seminar their reply to all was that a NOMINATION was a nomination no matter from what source. My sons problem was all noms had been given out by our MOC’s and VP noms were not due out till March and we were told his name was on the slate for a VP nom but only 5 are given out and it wasn’t a guarantee. To make a very long story somewhat short by the time we left that weekend USNA made alot of phone calls and had arranged a nom for my son. I hope this clears up some things for the readers of this post because it can be quite confusing GOOD LUCK to all !! BEAT ARMY OHH RAH</p>
<p>so, basically my chances of getting an LOA is better if i turn in my whole application before the deadline on March? from a source i found out that usna tries to get a quota, so turning in my application early will give me a better chance for an appointment. did i get that right?</p>
<p>i have received a nomination from 51st district congressman Bob Filner in California, and i am working on my usna application. but next week is finals week in school, and there are other things keeping me from working on my usna application.</p>
<p>Pasquinel - in response to your specific question I sent you a PM. </p>
<p>In brief: I am aware of more than one case where an LOA did not result in a nom. Off the top of my head I very clearly remember one USNA LOA candidate that did not get a MOC nom a few years ago (maybe 2 or 3). Reason MOC refused to give this nom: failure to apply for all noms for which he was eligible.</p>
<p>korab-alahabjab: You make no sense whatsoever.</p>
<p>"so, basically my chances of getting an LOA is better if i turn in my whole application before the deadline on March? from a source i found out that usna tries to get a quota, so turning in my application early will give me a better chance for an appointment. did i get that right?</p>
<p>i have received a nomination from 51st district congressman Bob Filner in California, and i am working on my usna application. but next week is finals week in school, and there are other things keeping me from working on my usna application."</p>
<p>If you do not turn in your application (yes, the WHOLE thing) by the deadline, you will not be considered for an appointment. That’s why they call it a DEADLINE. </p>
<p>I would imagine USNA will not be handing out LOA’s in March. Or even February. Heck, in January, they are bound to be more busy handing out appointments. At that point, nominations are in, so qualified candidates who might have merited an LOA in September will receive an appointment. </p>
Pasquinel, the sample here is infinitesimal. Probably less than 0.1% of the population. And an unsuccessful candidate or parent would not be likely to continue to participate. Therefore, a negative response would mean very little. USNA Admissions says it happens. Believe them.</p>
<p>A MOC who handles maybe twenty or thirty candidates per year does not necessarily an expert make. Adding marginally qualified candidates to the national pool may cause him to look good to his constituents but it does nothing for the quality of the incoming class. And just causes extra work for Admissions. There is already about an 8:1 ratio of total candidates to successful appointments in the pool. Do you honestly think adding a few more at the bottom of the list will increase the odds of an appointment?</p>
<p>Bottom line. EVERY Senator and Representative by submitting ALL the best candidates in a competitive slate will result in the absolute best candidates to the class. Any further manipulation by the MOCs can only equal this effort but present many opportunities to degrade it.</p>
<p>leoti, everything I have posted on these threads is an absolute fact. Since you are ignoring it, perhaps it would be more prudent for you to examine the credentials for those with whom you agree.</p>
<p>leoti, the following appears to be something along the lines of what is happening:</p>
<p>Let’s assume that this letter was sent by the Senator after all the Representatives had comprised their slates, and that it was sent to every candidate who had received a prior nomination. Even if this isn’t true, it seems to be the norm in a lot of cases. Now let’s further assume that each of the Representatives did a superb job and selected the absolute ten best of the candidates in their district to fill each slate. This then leaves only the far lesser qualified candidates in each district eligible for the Senator’s slate. Next step. One and only one candidate from each of the slates will be offered a principal nomination. From the Representative’s slates, this is great. But from the Senator’s picks, they were all subpar. However, if a single candidate is minimally qualified, he will be offered a principal nomination. He will be offered a nomination at the expense of every 2-10 on every other slate in the state. All these remaining district nominees will be relegated to alternate status and the highly competitive national pool. Totally unfair. It is probably a good thing that no one understands the nomination procedures. There would probably be a few MOC public lynchings. If the Senator had simply submitted the names of the top candidate in each district as his slate, since no one needs two appointments, Admissions would have been able to sort it out and they would have been able to offer a principal nomination to the top second district qualifier in the state. The way it should be. And the way that is almost impossible to make happen the more that the MOCs attempt to become ‘involved’. Also, by only accepting subpar candidates and with the ability to slip in one definite ‘ringer’, it is a practice ripe for cronyism, either with a constituent or with a favored Representative. </p>
<p>leoti, barring your LOA, how would you like to be #2 in your district and lose out on a principal nomination to #11 who just happened to be #1 on a Senator’s subpar list.</p>
<p>Yes, the nomination certainly belongs to the MOC in this case. However, in many cases they turn the responsibility over to the Academy to select the best candidate, offer them an appointment, and if they don’t accept, offer it to someone else. They are required by law at the end of the year to appraise each MOC to whom their nominations were offered. Can you think of a better word?</p>
<p>I don’t want to clog this thread any more than it already is, but just want to clarify the point with our experience. Our son had an LOA in hand with no nomination when we attended a CVW in January a few years ago. When I brought our situation up to admissions in front of all the parents during the seminar their reply to all was that a NOMINATION was a nomination no matter from what source. My sons problem was all noms had been given out by our MOC’s and VP noms were not due out till March and we were told his name was on the slate for a VP nom but only 5 are given out and it wasn’t a guarantee. To make a very long story somewhat short by the time we left that weekend USNA made alot of phone calls and had arranged a nom for my son. I hope this clears up some things for the readers of this post because it can be quite confusing GOOD LUCK to all !! BEAT ARMY OHH RAH </p>
<hr>
<p>Dear srhcasper,</p>
<p>Thank you for this reply…as this tread is going off in the weeds and has disintegrated into small personal conflicts…quite harshly I might add…</p>
<p>This is a very good example with a happy outcome…it would seem that if the MOC’s don’t come thru for a LOA candidate, the USNA will get to work and try to pull a rabbit out of their hat, like they did for your son…</p>
<p>Three follow-up questions, (1) were the MOCs aware of your son’s LOA when they gave all their noms out to other candidates, (2) did your son eventually get a VP nom or did he retract his VP nom application once he had a nom in hand from the efforts of the USNA, and lastly (3) where did your son’s nom come from that was “secured” by the USNA, out of your Congressional District and/or State…or from the Academy Super?</p>
<p>Thank you again for your friendly and concise reply…Merry Christmas!!!</p>
<p>I think that is pretty much exactly what I stated 51 posts ago along with the probable scenario which led to srhcasper’s sons nomination:</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>The VP is not allowed five nominations. He may have a total of five midshipmen at the Academy at any one time. Therefore, typically he either has only one or two nominations annually. Furthermore, the VP is not authorized to select alternates.</p>
<p>And for a candidate not eligible for either a ROTC or Presidential nomination and whose WPM warrants selection from the national pool, all nominations are the same. Don’t assume this applies to everyone.</p>
<p>No disrespect intended, but how many different ways do you want you question to be answered? Aside from the “bickering” that is occuring on this thread, there have been plenty of reasonable answers and situations and opinions posted here that should have satisfied your curiosity. I believe that you are looking for too specific of an answer to your question.</p>
<p>You said it yourself -
</p>
<p>I would just say to you - “Relax”!! Your child received an LOA so he is already one step ahead of the majority of the candidates. Try not to analyze the situation too much as your son is very fortunate to have received the LOA - he has one less thing to worry about in regards to his acceptance into the Naval Academy. It appears that a nomination is more in his favor than not, based on his LOA so just think good thoughts … and enjoy the holidays!</p>
<p>I like real life case examples…as nothing speaks better for definitely answering a question than an event that has actually occured (this surely trumps speculation and educated guessing) …so…let’s wait for srhcasper to respond to my three questions with her real life case example concerning her son…as I believe we will all benefit from her reply…then I am out of this tread…a little too much harshness by good, well meaning, individuals…</p>
<p>Thank you for your well wishes for our son…I am sure we will have a happy ending!!!</p>
<p>Pasquinel, have you ever heard the old Indian tale about the six blind men who were asked to describe an elephant. The one who touched the leg said that an elephant was like a tempel with large pillars; the tail, a rope; the trunk, a tree; the ears, a fan; the tusks, a pipe. Were they all correct or were they all wrong? I am afraid your search for examples of admissions practices will be similar. It is a very complex system administered by a very secretive department. And those you are asking can only provide bits and pieces, often conflicting and sometimes irrelevant. You could find out everything, you might find out nothing. And then you have to figure out which is correct. Listen to Heycow. Relax. There is absolutely nothing further that you can do except worry.</p>