Disagree with 8bagels. In my experience, many more kids I know are getting into great schools because of athletics than settling for a school (and I won’t say inferior) just for sports. They might have been accepted at Yale or BC or Georgetown or Virginia without the sport because some are elite students as well as elite athletes, but without the athletics they would have been in the same 5-10% pool as everyone else with a 3.8 and a 2100 on the SAT. Their sports pushed them over the top for acceptance. I know one guy right now headed to Air Force and everyone admits he wouldn’t have lasted two seconds in the acceptance pile without being a top recruit. He’ll probably end up in the prep school for a year as it is because his academics are not strong. His athletics are tops, but pushing him to Hopkins or Cornell is just not the right academic fit for him even though he could be a starter on any top 20 team. His parents also have to consider the finances. Duke may be the best athletic fit but academically and financially, it’s not even close for this student or his family. He’s picking the best deal academically, athletically and financially. Athletically, he could get a better deal.
We had quite a few high school peers heading to play baseball at Santa Fe college, or soccer at Troy, lacrosse in W Virginia. Would those students have gone to those schools without sports? Probably not, but they didn’t have the option of going to Davidson or Duke or Florida or FSU, either for academic reasons or financial ones, so picked the schools where they could play, afford, and maybe even fit better academically. Not one picked Santa Fe college just for baseball when they could have gone to Princeton but not played sports, but may have picked playing at Santa Fe over going to another community/junior college that didn’t have baseball, or even picked Santa Fe and whatever that financial aid package offered over one of the directional 4 year universities because they LIKE playing. I don’t see that as a bad choice even if the 4 year school is ranked higher.
What are all these inferior schools the athletes you know are picking over the much superior schools?
I would agree with @twoinanddone in that, the athletes we have seen from my kid’s sport, are mostly middling-academically, so were not looking at top 20 or even top 50 kinds of schools. Their sport gave them a reason to choose one school over another, but didn’t generally change the overall academic quality of the school they could attend. While no one can say for sure, the amount of time committed to the sport did not seem to detract from their academic achievements – these were kids who were 2.5-3.0 students with or without the time committed to their sport (we have spent years on the bleachers with these families, and shared experiences since the kids were in grade school).
All of which is another reminder to me about how incredible it is for a kid to be able to be a top academic achiever who is also a highly desirable recruit – it is just very difficult to do both at the highest level.
When we set out on the “recruiting athletic journey” two years ago the school our daughter ultimately picked was definitely not even on the list at the beginning. She looked at over 30 schools… visited half… all levels D1, DII and DIII. She is a great student top of her class at a competitive high school and strong test scores, ec’s and essays. She would have been a strong recruit (academically) for several top 20 schools and was recruited (athletically) for two schools in that category. However, neither of the academic school (LAC’s) had exactly the degree she wanted to pursue or the strongest coaching/training given her sport. She ended up picking a school that is not as selective, yet has an honors program within her major. Furthermore, the coaching for her sport will be exceptional. Is she going to pursue her sport “professionally” probably not… BUT for her the opportunity to reach her full potential athletically was more important then the “prestige” of going to a school considered more academically desirable. As a parent of an athlete the line one walks between the academic piece and athletic pursuit is quite fine. Ultimately we counseled her to go with her gut and choose based on what was most important to her. She starts her journey this fall and we are excited to see where it takes her!
Twoinanddone and Midwestmom, how did the players you knew do who chose schools where their academic profile was lower than the regular admits? My son will probably either choose one of two selective public universities (30-45%admitted) if they are affordable (athletic aid may not be enough and he gets offer (knows he will at one) or he will choose one of several public universities (50-75% acceptance) where he will qualify for merit and athletic aid. There are a couple privates as possibilities too but those did not have the best location or best outlook for future career. His favorites are the more academic schools, but the other schools have acceptable programs in his double major. At the more selective schools, he would not-be able to do the double major-one college does not have one of the majors and at the other he could not get in the school for one of the majors. He would not be admitted at all at either of those schools without sports.Both selective schools have a reputation of giving athletes the academic support they need to maintain grades and graduate. Son has a 3.6+ with college prep and honors courses and is taking one AP (Calc) this year.
At the B level colleges, he is probably 75%ile for their Math SAT and 50%ile for verbal so they may be a better academic fit considering all the time he will spend on his sport. The B colleges are more affordable even without aid so if it takes an extra year to get the double major it will be OK for us financially. If he goes to the more selective schools, he will only be able to do the single major. The B colleges will accept CLEP courses, while the selective schools only take AP credit. Our eldest child who is now in grad school double majored in 2 sciences and minored in a 3rd. Our son is not interested in a STEM career but we like the option of two majors or a major/minor-it just increases the job opportunities. Our daughter who was accepted into a competitive PhD program straight out of college did not go to the most prestigious undergrad, but she went to a college which had a very good program in one of her majors (most schools only offered her major for grad students), so from her experience, we know students can do well without attending a top 100 school, and they may have a better balance of academics, social, and sports.She was not an athlete but she was highly involved in Greek life while taking STEM courses in 3 fields. If son gets an affordable offer from a top 100 school should he take it or should he choose a school where he fits the average student profile?.
I think students whose academics are within the range at the school do fine, or even better than expected. I know two who played at Virginia. Both graduated on time, majored in business or social sciences, were academically challenged but not overwhelmed. Another went to Notre Dame and it’s possible she might have been accepted without her sport because of family connections (her two cousins attend there now), but she wasn’t a tippy top student. She went to summer school to lighten the load during the season (many do that). I know several who have gone to BC, Georgetown, Army, Syracuse. Most would have been in the 50% range academically, but we all know that doesn’t give them a great chance of getting into those types of schools with just a good gpa and test scores. These are mainly students from very good college prep private schools or outstanding public schools. They have good college prep foundations, good stats and scores, but not at the top of their classes because there are so many outstanding students at those schools. The high schools do send many non-athletes to these elite schools too, so the athletes are used to competing academically with a top crowd. They were B+ or B- students (sometimes a little lower) in high school, and they’ll be that in college too.
Personally, I happen to agree with you. However, priorities in college admission vary greatly, and there are different theories about going to the best school that will let you in. The book, “David and Goliath” has some interesting stats on performance in STEM, suggesting that it is not always best to the most selective school. From afar, some of the decisions may seem crazy, but likely people may have very rational decisions for their choices.
Thanks twoinanddone. Good to hear that B/B+ athletes had success at selective schools-son is an A- student but that is with not taking the most rigorous curriculum-some kids at his high school take 5APs a year. At one of the selective universities, a lot of players were virtually schooled so if they can keep a 3.0 (coach says they do), hopefully my son can too. At that school, the regular admits have 10+ AP courses, and my son will only have 2. However at most of these selective schools, the athletes are almost all business majors so there isnt really a need for a ton of APs. Daughter took 5-6 APs-mostly STEMs and then at the university, the advisor said if you are majoring in X, you need to retake X in college even if you made a 4 so I think she only got credit for half of them with her 2 1/2 majors but she graduated with highest honors. That is why I didnt push son to take more APs-also state playoffs and major outside competitions were always held during the week and the weekends before APs. We will leave it up to son if he gets selective offers if he wants to go to the hardest schools or if he wants to go to a B level school and maybe have more balance.
If players go to summer school, they still have to take a minimum of 12 hours to play right? So they just take one less course in season? The athletes all have to do their internships or foreign study during the summers too. My son’s sport is both seasons but one season is shorter. Do all college sports practice both semesters or for some sports are players actually able to take a full semester abroad during the off season semester?
You shouldn’t compare your son to your daughter. Your daughter didn’t play a sport and could arrange her schedule how she liked. Your son will have different priorities.
My daughter tries to take a lighter load in the spring, her season, but it doesn’t always work. She’s in engineering, and the schedule is pretty set. She could do study abroad in the May term or summer, but it is very expensive (no scholarship money to offset it). One teammate took the fall off to do an internship, but she doesn’t see much playing time and I don’t think the coach cared. The coach would have an issue with a starter missing the fall semester. She doesn’t even like them participating in other activities (sororities, professional groups). This year she’s requiring them to take afternoon labs rather than morning ones, and I think that’s going to backfire on her as she’ll have no flexibility with starting practices early.
Yes, NCAA players have to take at least 12 credits, but there is a big difference between 12 and 17 (my daughter’s typical load). If someone would pay for those 5 credits in the summer, she’d definitely do that. One semester she dropped a class and only had 14 or 15 credits - said it felt 100x easier.
@kdbugalpha, not sure what NCAA division your son is considering, but Div 1 requires that athletes complete 6 credit hours of course work in the prior semester to be eligible to participate. They are also subject to the academic progress rate (40% of courses needed to graduate completed by end of second year, 60% by end of third year, 80% by end of fourth). Unless there is a new rule this year, there are no specific rules covering minimum hours to participate in the then current semester. Sounds like from what @twoinanddone posted that Div 2 has different rules, which would not be surprising. I would assume that Div 3’s rules would differ as well.
As far as summer school, one of the many differences between my son who is playing at a selective school, and his high school buddies who are playing at more sports focused schools, is that his school does not offer summer classes, so he takes a relatively full load in his season. Everyone else takes a full load in the summer (2-3 classes) and then the minimum in the fall. Not only does that reduce the academic load in season, but it keeps the kids on campus in the dorms during the summer, where the S&C coach can get to them easily Assumedly another difference between Div 1 and Div 2 (and Div 3 for that matter) is that those summer classes are covered under the scholarship.
I don’t know if NCAA rules allow D2 schools to allow the scholarships to cover the summer tuition, but I know I can’t make it work because most of her scholarship is from non-athletic aid, some which is not available for summer terms. If we used the athletic money in the summer, we wouldn’t have it for the spring and fall. Any way you slice and dice it, the same money won’t cover the extra summer costs too.
@twoinanddone - “What are all these inferior schools the athletes you know are picking over the much superior schools?”
Your post was interesting. As I thought about it, it may be somewhat state dependent. California, for example, has many, many good state schools (UC, Cal State/Cal Poly) for the 3.5-3.8 GPA student.
I agree with a lot of what you posted. The kids I’m talking about are generally 3.6-3.8 GPA, upper 20s (27/28/29) level students from fairly high achieving high schools, who take at least some AP classes (generally not a full AP load, though). They would have some good options in the mid-level UCs and upper level Cal State/Cal Poly schools. They’d get in to many as regular applicants, but they aren’t good enough to play on the sports teams at those schools (the level of play at UC and Cal State generally ranges from high to very high/national elite).
But they sacrifice that to go to schools that are far lower academically to play their sport. In addition to being more expensive, further away and in generally undesirable locations. I don’t want to mention specific schools (I’ll PM you if you’re interested) for privacy reasons, but they are generally “unknown” regionals with 75-100% acceptance rates, low graduation rates, and average 3.0 gpa, 20-22 ACT type places (i.e., places that would make the average CC reader/poster recoil in horror, lol).
I agree that some parents are overly enamored with the concept of a “full ride” for their athlete. A student athlete will generally only get a free ride at a school that is beneath his academic or athletic capabilities. So yes, some parents will happily send junior to N/S/E/W State U or Podunk Private for the scholarship money. But then if there’s an injury, or junior loses playing time or interest in playing, the kid is stuck at a school he would never have considered attending without the sport because it isn’t a great academic fit.
My D was a top athlete who was offered full rides at the type of schools 8 bagels is referring to, as well as some pretty decent schools like the state flagship. It was tempting sometimes, but she chose to use her athletics to beat the odds at the Ivies and their counterparts. That way, if the sports went south, she was still going to be perfectly happy at Stanford or Harvard and would have a highly respected degree. In our state in her sport, I see more and more kids are choosing that path now over the free ride at the below average school.
@TheGFG - It’s worse than that. The kids I’ve seen going to those schools are not receiving any athletic scholarship money. They aren’t good enough in their sport to receive money from anywhere. It’s the weirdest thing.
@8bagels yes the one I know is exactly what you described. The mom got mad at my quick response one time when she was telling some teammate’s mom we just met that her daughter was signing a contract to play the sport in her school. I questioned why she needed to sign when our daughters are both playing at a D3 level. Oops… I made her look bad…but not my intention.
Some people like to ‘sign’ because it is an exciting day. Our high school let everyone participate in the ‘signing’ ceremony in April even though about half had already signed in Nov, some were going to D3 schools or D1 schools without an NLI (Navy). We had a couple going to junior colleges, and maybe even one or two at an NAIA. Everyone was celebrated as if they were headed to Stanford.
We can just disagree. I think sports are a good thing for college kids, and think they help many more kids get into colleges than steer them toward inferior colleges they can’t afford. If a few choose to go to a cc or smaller college to get some playing time, so be it. I know a few guys who picked minor league baseball or junior pro hockey over any college at all. Was that the wrong decision, were they settling for a sport over college?
And then there’s this scenario: Mom and Dad are ecstatic over the “free ride” at Northern State U. But sadly, Junior doesn’t finish his degree in 4 years because the school doesn’t allow him to carry a full credit load while in season. Junior now has to take classes in the summer rather than get an internship or paying job, or stay an extra year and a half at the family’s expense. Too often the great deals aren’t that great. It’s tough, but kids can be top athletes at difficult schools like Harvard and Stanford and still graduate in 4 years, so I’m not sure why it’s not possible at Northern State.
@twoinanddone
I totally agree with you! “Signing day” at our school was the same… and we (parents, coaches, friends) celebrated each one of those kids choosing to pursue their athletic passion in college whether Ivy League or CC. One girl in particular chose a CC for her sport… even though is was “academically inferior” as some other posters have commented. She is a great student/athlete but does not have the finances to afford the “big” school since her sport is not a full-ride kind of deal. Life is short pursuing your passion at whatever level is definitely a better decision than looking back and wondering " What IF"…
Interesting fact I just learned. Only about 1/2 of Div II athletes receive any scholarship money. Very very few full rides. Coaches spread the scholarships out to the players who need the most aid/financial support.
Interesting, as I thought more kids would get at least some money for putting in all of that effort.
@RightCoaster While you referred specifically to D2, which I think is all “equivalency” – this is a good reminder about the mis-perception many parents have about athletic scholarships.
Many people assume everyone gets a full scholarship, whereas scholarships actually depend on the sport, and gender – the D1 “head count” (football, basketball and ?) sports are the traditional “full” scholarships for recruits, whereas other sports are “equivalency” sports – the coach has the “equivalent” of a specific number of full scholarships (the number is set by NCAA) to distribute across the team. Men’s soccer, for instance, has the equivalent of 9.9 scholarships to distribute across a roster of 22+ players. Given that there are 11 players on the field – not even all the starters can get full scholarships, everyone is one some kind of proportionate award. Often, the unproven first years have less, and scholarships may increase as players make more of an impact. But the common mistake among parents on the high school bleachers is that “being a recruit means a full scholarship.” (And don’t get me started about what some people think about D3 sports . . . . )
Great discussion. I wouldn’t put too much weight into selectivity; the Ivys will also be higher and the small regional schools will always be lower. IMO it’s more important to look at average GPA and test scores of incoming freshman.
My daughter is a very high academic achiever (4.0 non weighted, 33 ACT etc) + requisite ECs and believe would be an attractive candidate to most top tier schools. She is an above average but not elite athlete. She has visited schools (some recruited, some not) at all levels. She really disliked the culture and feel of the elite schools (Johns Hopkins, Bates, Colby etc.) and gravitated toward the small, lesser known schools (Denison, Centre, Wooster) where she feels she could make an impact both on and off the field. Final decision still to be made, but I am very glad she is looking beyond the “name brand” to determine what is right for her based on % accepted to grad school, graduation rates, culture, etc
It’s a little frustrating as a parent to hear she’s “selling out” and “with her grades she can go anywhere.” Sports is one part of the overall decision making process, but not the only factor. One of her teammates decided on a D1 school that is not known for its academics. She has a very similar academic and athletic profile, and I’ve also heard people say she is “selling out” to chase sports. She has an opportunity to be a leader both on and off the field, and the school has a very select honors program that addresses her academic needs. I guess that’s my long way of saying there are a lot of factors to consider beyond just face value.
Assumedly another difference between Div 1 and Div 2 (and Div 3 for that matter) is that those summer classes are covered under the scholarship.