<p>i think mr. greenapple said right about my posts: *** are you talking about.
I just read back and I realised my posts make no sense. Uhm, but yeah- as for cadet for 7, I think it should be the other way around. I;m sure a lot of candidates come in with some sense of entitlement and that they are high up or whut not. More so than other cadets, who don;t call themselvs soldiers. getting an appointment straight out of high school doesn't let you know the STRUGGLE of reapplication or prior service or living in texas. lol. ft bliss DUI is like 90 this year or more. nuts man.</p>
<p>ft. bliss DUI? Elaborate. </p>
<p>How is ft. bliss over in the dry, mountain areas? Probably nice compared to the humidity here. :D</p>
<p>ft bliss is depressing man. and people just drink too much here. hell, its a demon I've had to confront too. it's tough, everyone gets down sometimes. a lot of people take anti-depressant, but you can't do that in the military. some drink too much and wrecks families and wrecks careers. the army is a hard knock life. i've gotten a lot of help from the chaplain and you gotta stay strong out there. they got a digital sign at the gate saying don't drink and drive and how many DUI's this month. there are like 30 a month</p>
<p>drinking is everywhere. DUI's are everywhere. You can take anti-depressants in the military. Alcohol doesnt wreck families, people wreck families. A drunk mans words are a sober mans thoughts.</p>
<p>oh, i agree with you man- i dunno what the regs are about anti-depressants, cant enter with them and its a different culture</p>
<p>you don't talk to a shrink, you talk to clergy or chaplain
don't get me wrong, i still throw a few back- but people will always struggle with their demons and the military is a tough life. i think it's about as "real" as you can get. i didn't mean to say alcohol was wrong, its just one way to mess your self up. beat your wife, you loose your security clearance.</p>
<p>"most of the preps i know were qualified to be direct appointees but the politics of the system screwed them over"</p>
<p>I thought the system was fairly straight forward. Please explain how "politics" prevents a candidate from being accepted into the academy when they are as qualified (same or better WCS) as a direct appointee? Are you saying that admissions is breaking the rules in favor of "politics"? Im curious. I can see where that argument could be made in the past when MOC's appointed candidates based on "who they were" but those issues must be rare nowadays--I doubt most candidates know their MOC personally, most have never even met them.</p>
<p>He's wrong, shogun, and you're right.</p>
<p>There's nothing wrong with prep-school, but it's for people who are, in general, deficient in some area (usually academically) but qualified in all others. USAFA prep is often used to red-shirt athletes, while USAFA-sponsored prep is used for the academically deficient (in most cases).</p>
<p>Again, there is NOTHING wrong with prep-school. HOWEVER, to remain bitter about it, that you somehow got "cheated" out of an appointment, is ludicrous and placing the blame in the wrong direction. If you were more qualified than another direct-admit, then you'd be in, simple as that.</p>
<p>Wow. I love how absolutely, wonderfully wrong you are. </p>
<p>One of my friends here is an Air Force Prep. I'll use his case as an example. He was completely qualified, above average SAT's and GPA requirements, athletics and extracurricular activities. When his liason officer told him he would have to do a prep year, because the appointment was given to a female in his district, my friend asked, "why sir, aren't I more qualified?" His liason pulled out an admission form, and circled the "F" for female. </p>
<p>And thats really only one example. To simply say 'oh well if you were really qualifed you would be in' is COMPLETE crap. Politics is a huge factor in the admissions game. </p>
<p>and another thing. I was not 'academically deficient'. My GPA in high school was above the West Point average. So were my SAT scores. The same goes for most of the preps I know, with a handful of exceptions (of the 80 or so i know).</p>
<p>If you want to talk about being bitter, you spend a year in Roswell.</p>
<p>That's what I like to see, the Old Post fighting spirit!!</p>
<p>I don't agree that civil prep is always for people who are academically deficient (I cannot speak about USMAPS since I have no experience with that). My son is fully qualified and not lacking academically. He was offered the civil prep option and is taking it. He does not qualify for a presidential nomination and, unfortunately, we live in the most competitive legislative district in our state. His admissions officer flat out told him: "If you were in ANY other district in the state you would be in the class of 2010." This leads me to believe civil prep is sometimes used for people they want at West Point but cannot get into the current class for nomination reasons.</p>
<p>i dont want to get into the "politics" arguement, but i know i met or went above the averages, recieved, and accepted a civil prep spot. According to the letter i recieved, EVERY sponsored civil prep slot went to someone who was triple qualified.</p>
<p>You have to realize that there are almost 800 or so kids who were also triple-qualified and didn't get in right away (be it not at all or just not straight in). For some reason (be it gender, race, demographics, etc), someone else was accepted straight in. In addition, there are other factors such as leadership, extracurriculars, and athletics to be considered. It doesn't necessarily mean you weren't qualified, it just might be out of those 800 or so triple qualified someone who came in was just a little more qualified, according to the numbers game.</p>
<p>If you didn't get in, it's because someone else had a better application than you. It's that simple. Sure, if you lived in Alaska maybe you'd get a congressional appointment, but the fact is you live in XX and, based on the people competing, you didn't get it.</p>
<p>As I said in my post, there's nothing wrong with going prep. I'll have no more and no less respect for a prep schooler than anyone else.</p>
<p>However, I will have less respect for someone who thinks they got "cheated" out of an appointment. If only you had lived somewhere else. Yeah, but how about, if only you had scored 2 more points on your ACT composite. Put blame on things you can change, not on those you can't.</p>
<p>Blaming the system is just about rock-bottom on the ladder of accountability. That is NOT the type of person who I want to see become a leader of military troops.</p>
<p>One person controls what happens to me: ME. I am my destiny.</p>
<p>I do not think my son was cheated out of an appointment nor do I blame the system. I am grateful they have the civil prep program and I appreciate the opportunity that was given. My point is that you cannot say prep school is for the "academically deficient". I agree with M4M that it is a numbers game and apparently my sons' number was just a little too low to get a direct admit.</p>
<p>The point is that it is for individuals academically deficient [to the Academy's standards] but meeting all other standards, and someone the Academy particularly wants.</p>
<p>Nope. That's just wrong. Very many have no academic deficiencies.</p>
<p>Of note...USNA reports that Foundation preps have the highest grad rate of any subgroup.</p>
<p>TacticalNuke, you are absolutely wrong. USMAPS deals with some people that are academically deficient, but the AOG civic preps are COMPLETELY QUALIFIED and would have recieved a slot had fewer people accepted their appointment. In many cases, this comes down a numbers game.</p>
<p>However, you are completely incorrect saying the program is for people who are academicaly deficient.</p>
<p>Look folks, the most qualified individuals receive appointments and nominations, period. That's how the system works. As I said in my previous post, of course some areas are less competitive for nominations, and that's the name of the game. To say that "if only I lived in another, less competitive state, I'd be more competitive" is like saying "if only I had money, I'd be rich".</p>
<p>And again, I added that, when I say deficient (and I'm not sure why this wasn't obvious to begin with) I mean in relation to Academy standards. What that means is that in relation to all those accepted (appointed) they are deficient. The academy has minimums, they have standards, and they have the real distribution. Minimums allow you to compete, standards mean you're part of the "usually accepted" crowd, and being part of the real distribution means you made it. Just because you meet standards doesn't mean you'll get in, as you may be "deficient" to how that class year's real distribution ends up.</p>
<p>The best people win. Again, saying "qualified" means NOTHING. It just means you're above minimum standards. This is a competitive process, and qualified just means you're eligible to compete. They're not going to give your appointment to a blind quadriplegic with an IQ of 50. Likewise, if you're competing against someone with 2 more varsity letters, an ACT composite 3 points higher, a GPA .3 points highers and 2 more leadership positions, you're going to lose out to them. That's how the system works. It's been created to give nominations and appointments to the best, not just those who are qualified.</p>
<p>Admissions personnel don't play darts with qualified names, they objectively and quantitatively analyze each applicant against all others. Certain years will be more competitive than others for appointments, and certain areas for nominations. Those're the facts of the game. Take control of those factors you can (how your package looks) and leave those you can't control to rest (where you live, gender, race, etc.).</p>
<p>Since you all obviously view it as a "threshold" application process, whereby once you get above a certain point you're all equal, versus the competitive process it actually is, this isn't worth discussing further.</p>
<p>When you think you know more about it than someone who was enlisted, went to prep, and now is a few days from graduation-you are right, this isn't worth discussing.</p>
<p>NMMI sucks...</p>
<p>and YEAH, you try living in roswell.</p>