Warning on Recruiting

Parents Forum
41

<p>latetoschool; I agree completely. We first screened for quality schools that would pass the broken leg test, then narrowed down based on the coaches, fine points, etc.</p>

<p>Actually, given that D3 has no scholarships & no committments to continue with the sport (besides one's personal integrity,) it is surprising that athletics is such an admission bonus. In fact, it would not surprise me if the kid's obvious desire to continue the sport, plus their character & integrity, would outweigh a kid with slightly more talent but less likelihood to continue 4 years.</p>

42

<p>Latetoschool - EXCELLENT post - it sure sounds like you and your D approached things in a very positive way - and it worked out in the end. Way to go. My S had the same type of approach to the 1 and only elite D3 school he applied to - and was accepted. He participated in his sport for 2 years. He decided the coach was a 'dorf' when he got sick - at the ER daily - and the coach was demanding him to go to practice!!! - but in the long run it worked to S's advantage - he ended up coaching a high school team and a US team for the remainder of his college career - so it all worked out for him - that 'broken leg' thing is exactly what happened to him - as he LOVED the school and the academics.</p>

43

<p>JeepMOM - what exactly is a "dorf" lol? Is that a New England expression? And yes to your point we know students - now juniors all - at MIT, Weslyan (or maybe it's Wellesley), Notre Dame, Syracuse, UF, and several D-3s who matriculated with great enthusiasm to play all four years but all have dropped. Mostly it's because as a group they wanted to experience other activites at their colleges, but several have dropped because their coaches are also "dorfs". </p>

<p>D's new assistant coaches are "dweebs". Or one is a "dweeb" and the other is a "ditz". Happily, the head coach runs a tight program, so they cannot mess things up too badly. </p>

<p>SBmom, I didn't know that about D3s. I wonder how colleges can possibly predict which applicants will participate all four years. I can easily see where in many cases the intended collegiate athletic participation might be more of an emotional/identity "security blanket" rather than a true passion for the sport; the student approaches college carrying an element of their former life where they are guaranteed success, based on past experience. After all, they have wowed the cheering crowds, won the medals, etc.; they absolutely know they can and will win again, whereas the new roommate might be a "dorf", and the new classes might yield mediocre or failing grades. They take the sport to college because it's a guaranteed ticket to new friends, measurable success, etc. But then they quickly discover that the world is much bigger and offers opportunities of far greater potential interest than the sport, so they drop it, and go off to try some of the new, interesting stuff - and rightly so. </p>

<p>I wonder how this impacts D3 and Ivy teams.</p>

44

<p>Damn ornary royal f***!!! </p>

<p>And - nope - not a New England thing at all - sorry to say - haha.</p>

45

<p>In my S's case - he was very passionate about his sport -and was at a D3. It was a difficult decision for him to leave the team - but felt he could no longer participate under the new coaches philosophies or behaivours. When he originally looked at this school - he researched the coach and really liked what he found - his philosophies and team management and wanted very much to be on his team - because this particular coach was the type that valued every athlete's abilities. Sadly for my S - the original - and long tenured coach left after my S's freshman year.</p>

<p>But on a happy note - my S was able to participate in his sport in other ways for his last 2 years there - and has gone on in grad school and there-after to continue to be very active - he is now a college coach - so I guess I would have to use that old adage - things happen for a reason - sometimes unbeknownst to us at the time.</p>

46

<p>LOL @ JeepMOM I learned a new word today! Had no idea, I'm going to start using it immediately since unfortunately it has broad application right now. </p>

<p>I hear you completely - D's first assistant coach was a Duke graduate (summa cum laude), internationally recognized, had a master's, worked 20 hours a week all through undergrad while a varisty athlete and maintaining the grades to graduate with honors. </p>

<p>Back to the point of the thread, as D was narrowing her decision, this is the person who wrote reply email back that stopped just short of saying "don't come here". Not in a negative way, but rather in a very honest, forthright, clear statement "here is our program; your stats are low, and we cannot see how you would add value to our varsity given how you compare with our existing talent; if you expect to compete on a collegiate team this is probably not the place for you, from what we see in the numbers". </p>

<p>Of course, D signed right up, proved her wrong, made varsity right away. And this assistant coach was awesome, "wicked smart", respected by the team members, and a terrific role model for an 18 year old. </p>

<p>So she leaves, and is replaced by - believe it or not, two people who together don't have even half the resume, and they lack a few other things as well. The only good news is that - unlike your son's experience with the difference in philosophy, these two people have rather a total absence of any philosophy at all. But their contract is only for one year so who knows - maybe they'll be gone by next year - or - with one year left, D will continue to find a way around. Plus, the head coach will still be in charge, so hopefully it will all work out. </p>

<p>This was one of the challenges for D in selecting schools in the first place - one school in the northeast where she was accepted, also with academic money, she loved the coach - six time Olympian, world renown, very nice, kind man, etc. However, the rumor had been in play for some time that his peer at Harvard was about to retire, and he was viewed as heir for that job. AND the university in question was getting a lot of bad press for budget problems at the time, so we could not see how they could attract an equal quality replacement coach - we also sensed that there weren't really any available. So we did this thing of trying to read the tea leaves and guess - having been deferred and then rejected from Harvard in the RD round, D thought it unlikely that she would be able to transfer to follow this coach, and she wasn't really into the idea of transferring anyway - decided when the rejection arrived "there is a reason why Harvard is Harvard", and decided to stay in one place for four years, and keep them in sight for terminal degree or other education later in life. </p>

<p>As luck would have it, the Harvard coach has not retired after all, so the chain reaction we imagined has not happened. </p>

<p>But it's the same process as the "choose your boss, not your job" issue - when choosing a school, it makes sense to look carefully at the credentials and career paths of the coaching staff. </p>

<p>In conclusion, it seems as if all of the coaches D had exchanges with during her decisioning process took "underpromise - overdeliver" positions - from the Harvard coach's clear, precise, honest answers, to the school where she ultimately matriculated, and all the coaches in between.</p>

47

<p>SBmom, such a great post. I have never read such a clear explanation of the process. Will you please write a book or go into consulting for those of us who still have to go through this?</p>

48

<p>thanks, dcmom3 :) PM me any time!</p>

49

<p>Anyone else suprised that the Ivy League schools have such relatively low standards for athletes? </p>

<p>The Ivy League sports website purports that they: "admit all candidates including athletes on the basis of their achievements and potential as students and on their other personal accomplishments"</p>

<p>However, I don't consider an academic index of 171 (1100 SAT/2.9 GPA) by itself to pass either their stated criteria or the "broken leg" test. Yet those unexceptional stats fall within one of the four acceptable academic index bands for Ivy League admission.</p>

<p>It's frustrating to see average students suddenly obtain the ivy imprimatur just because of their physical prowess. I don't mind athletics being one of the possible "hooks" for a prospective student, but does it have to be such a big hook?</p>

<p><a href="http://www.ivyleaguesports.com/admission-statement.asp%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://www.ivyleaguesports.com/admission-statement.asp&lt;/a>
<a href="http://www.collegeconfidential.com/academic_index3.htm%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://www.collegeconfidential.com/academic_index3.htm&lt;/a>
<a href="http://www.johntreed.com/matsdad.html%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://www.johntreed.com/matsdad.html&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

50

<p>Very few ivy athletes have an AI of 171. That's just the lowest possible AI an athlete can have. Each Ivy also has an average AI for athletes which is much higher and based on the average AI of other admitted students. My S is an admitted ivy athlete and his AI is 237.</p>

51

<p>SBmom,
I will! D is a junior so I hope you will still be checking CC next year.</p>

52

<p>tactics22,</p>

<p>I agree with cookiemom. </p>

<p>Also remember there will be a handful of dud students in several catagories: some dud legacys, some dud development admits, some dud URMs, and possibly some others providing other EC sizzle besides athletes (i.e. "famous" child actors, progeny of senators, & such).</p>

<p>Great teams, generous alumni, new buildings, a diverse class, and a sprinkling of notables on campus are reasonably worthy goals for any school-- as long as the #s are quite low & the kids are not being ill served by being admitted to a place where they won't thrive.</p>

53

<p>Actually I was being nice lol
Damn ornary rotten f*** is more descriptive fit</p>

<p>actually came from a high school kiddo lol</p>

54

<p>LOL @ JeepMOM. Do you know any other fun new words? </p>

<p>Tactics we experienced no evidence of lowering of standards at Ivys. I have no idea how to calculate AI, but D was rejected from both Harvard and Yale with 1400 SATs (one sitting), 34 ACT, 700's SAT IIs, 3.8 UW, 4-5's in eight APs - all the school offered - and varsity letters in two sports, plus community ECs and a few national awards, and excellent recs, including one from an overly enthusiastic but well-meaning teacher who actually wrote that D will "one day lead this country as president". (Her essays were probably mediocre, but still.) And actually, my recollection is that Yale coaches did not return her telephone calls or answer her emails. </p>

<p>D was and is o.k. with it - at the time she reacted with stoic resolve - "there's a reason why Harvard is Harvard" - but if there truly are 1100s/2.9s getting in, my guess is they very likely have some other compelling accomplishments or abilities, and in any case they are surely the exception.</p>

55

<p>latetoschool,</p>

<p>At an Ivy a 1100/2.9 would surely be a star football player. I believe that football is the sport that gets the most leeway & the highest number of coach slots.</p>

56

<p>The point of the 1100 was to show how low the bar is for some athletes on campus. I don't dispute that there are bright athletes. My contention is with the admission of those who in terms of test scores/gpa don't pass the broken leg test.</p>

<p>Worse, we're not talking about a sprinkling of students. The average Ivy League school supports 32 varsity sports - that's a sizable percentage of the incoming class. </p>

<p>The average athlete has an SAT score 150 points lower than the average non-athlete (which includes all those with lower scores but other hooks). Given that coaches are limited as to how many athletes they can put on their admissions wish list, that implies that the average score differential for a RECRUITED athlete is substantially higher than 150 points. BTW, according to a Cornell study, it's Ice Hockey players who have the lowest scores for the men.</p>

<p>My contention remains that recruited athletes get too much of a break for schools that purport to be above the fray of D-1 recruiting.</p>

57

<p>If you take out the "helmet" sports and basketball (at some of the schools) you will find that the average SAT for recruited athletes is quite high. The runners, swimmers, rowers etc. do not have 1100 SATs. There is no question about that. There aren't even many "helmet" players with those kinds of scores, because most of those student/athletes choose an athletic program which gives them a scholarship.</p>

58

<p>The sports that produce the most revenue are the ones who get the largest support form admisssions. If you are talking to coach in a non revenue sport they probably have very little admissions influence. Each Ivy must have an average academic index in the athletic department. Revenue sports seem to be able to get players through the admissions doorI know fotball at the IVies are allowed 7-2 band students That is about a 12OO Sat the other players need to be highter to average out the academic index. "Playing the Game" best recruiting book I read and everyhting they say in there does really happen!! Recruiting is a game and you really need to be an educated player !!</p>

59

<p>
[quote]
Revenue Sports get most attention...

[/quote]
</p>

<p>That's not been my observation in the last few years. Of the four HYS athletes I know, three got October likely letters. All three were women. The sports were soccer and rowing.</p>

<p>The fourth was a quarterback. He wasn't a recruited athlete but was admitted EA.</p>

<p>All four were stellar students. Two were NMF. One was NMSF. The other was an international with SAT scores over 1400.</p>

<p>The coaches have their budgets and they recruit accordingly. Football might have a higher budget for a larger number of players but that doesn't mean the women rowers are ignored.</p>

60

<p>Comment on Ivy League Sports - really depends on which school you look at. Go to a University of Pennsylvania football game. Their players are 40 pounds heavier and 4 inches taller than their Ivy opposition. Penn is notorious for "cheating" on Ivy League standards and they've been censured by the Ivy League several times. I'd be surprised if their linemen averaged 1000 on their SAT's.</p>