our son was recruited - but we see a lower level of play than expected; some players on team clearly not high level - curious if parent donations are impacting playing time - how much do people donate?
Highly unlikely that donations have anything to do with it. I’ve had several conversations with coaches and they all say the same thing - they hate involved parents.
And remember, everyone sees things differently and your “inferior” player may have a specific role on the field that a more talented/skillful player may not be able to fill.
I do believe that I saw this occur at some schools. However, the donation has to be substantial, not the minor donation that parents give for extra chocolate milk after games.
I have never heard of this. While a D3 coach may not be getting paid for his record the way an SEC football coach might, they are expected to run good programs that are competitive in their conferences. The school doesn’t want to lose the excellent scholar who also happens to be an excellent athlete because his sport is run like an after school rec league.
What CAN happen is that a coach will promise a recruit playing time and feels morally bound to uphold that promise - even if better walk-on show up. This, to me, is more of a hazard for a walk-on. Note that such “promises” rarely extend beyond freshman year.
Coaches may also reward players who work really hard with playing time. In a sport like crew, a coach may put a great team member in a second or third boat over a slightly stronger new rower to reinforce the values of the team. (Probably wouldn’t do it for a first boat, though.)
Also note that in team sports, learning the system and style of play can take time. Some of the top D1 football programs have key players (QB) who spend a few games looking like they don’t quite belong, but the coach and the team need to give them the time to work it out. And the coaches usually know who, with a few games, will make it. As a fan, let me say, fans are less good at spotting potential.
Your son’s team may also value something different than what was valued in high school. Many years ago, in my first collegiate game, I scored and was promptly benched by the coach. As a defender, I was out of position, snd while my high school coach would have loved that the opportunity was taken, the college coach felt it showed total lack of discipline and respect for the “system”, And to be fair, for most of the teams we played, that system was critical.
If your kid wants more playing time, he should ask the coach what he needs to do to earn it. What does he need to work on? Put that way, I would be surprised if the coach wouldn’t tell him. It’s usually a jump up to college sports, even at the D3 level, just because of size and strength.
At least all the D3 coaches we met with, and my kid’s current coach, were up front that playing time was based on player contributions on the field and not seniority, past promises, parent donations etc. We’ve scratched our heads at a few decisions and rooted for our kid to get put in, but don’t doubt the integrity of the decision making process. We figure that we don’t see kids’ effort at practice, including who shows up early for extra work or is living the team’s values in their day-to-day choices, or who is disorganized, skipping out of mandatory lifting, disciplined for breaking team rules etc.
M kid’s program has individual meetings with players to discuss expectations, what to work on, why they are, or are not playing etc. Has the OP’s player asked for a meeting with coach to understand what needs to do to get on the field more?
We did have parents who were more involved and I do think that if it came down to which of two similarly talented kids would play, the one whose parent was more involved (not necessarily money donation but who organized the tailgates, who helped with travel arrangements, who helped the coach with personal matters) might see the field over the other kid. And there was a lot of complaining in the stands about playing time. Most kids who go on to play/compete at college were tops on their high school or club teams. They were all used to starting every game or being in every meet or race. It was very hard for parents to accept when their kids sat on the bench. On a team of all stars, some have to sit on the bench.
But, and this is a big BUT, the kid’s attitude has much more to do with it than parent donations of time or money. My child played 99% of the time for 4 years and I was not an involved parent. She put in twice the work of almost every other kid on the team. She returned to school in shape after the summer (and she trained at altitude all summer) having completed all the assigned workouts. She didn’t miss practice. She asked others to go hit the wall with her or play catch or go for a run or hit the gym for an extra workout. Often they would not so she did it alone or worked with the guys on the men’s team. Others didn’t put in as much time, they didn’t know the drills, they didn’t watch film endlessly. She played when her legs hurt, when she had the flu (twice!), when she was bruised. When she had strep throat, she went to practice and watched from the stands. She put in the time.
We did have one girl who was clearly a favorite. I liked her but didn’t see her as better than the other available players for the spot. I think there was some parent contact that kept her in the spotlight. Some coaches like the parent contact, others don’t.
This. One of the big differences between college sports and high school sports is that in college, all of the athletes come in within a very narrow talent band. This is not how it works for most kids coming in, because they are used to being just flat better athletes than their peers. The extra work some kids are willing to do above and beyond the already grueling schedule imposed by college athletics is in my opinion the biggest predictor of success in college.
Conversely a kid with good skills who is having a bad week might get benched until her head clears or he regains his confidence. The margin for error is such that teams can’t always afford to let a player work things through on the field. There are plenty of factors, both good and bad, that can’t be seen from the parents’ section or the internet broadcast.
D3 coaches are usually hired and fired for the same reasons most coaches are- to win games. Unless parents are sticking $$ directly in their pocket, and they are willing to risk their reputation in College coaching, then I doubt that donations have anything to do with playing time.
Parents are usually the worst at evaluating their kid's talents.
If you think you see this, take a look at the coach’s fundraising record. If it is substantial, then most likely some of the parents are contributing more than the usual. One coach told us about a mid five figure donation by a parent to the team. That kid found some playing time, although not a starter. Not saying that this is pervasive or that it alters game outcomes, I am just saying it would be hard to cut or never play a kid whose parent made that kind of donation.
@gointhruaphase take a look at the coach’s fundraising record.
This is actually important. There are programs, more frequently in D2, where fundraising is a part of the job description. And not just major New Stadium money, but basic money for things like staff salary. I could maybe see a coach extending a roster to let Johnny Warbucks wear the sweater, but once the game starts I’d expect winning to be paramount. If you think losing wrecks a reputation, try losing after selling off your roster spots or playing time.
One other thing to consider is that different coaches like different sized rosters. Some like a tiny bench, some like having lots of people around. My DD’s team went from 21 to 14 when the new coach took over.