Originally posted by Unregistered
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
college targeting advice
Collapse
X
-
Unregistered
- Quote
-
Unregistered
Originally posted by Unregistered View PostAgreed here 100%. Very good analysis. I'll give a bit of a different take from personal experience. To me academics comes first. Period. My child had opportunities for some D1 programs that were not an academic fit. Not even close. Was also injured most of the junior year, which made getting a spot more challenging. A NESCAC opportunity came along. No money but a tip to get into the school. Took some time to decide, but jumped on it and applied ED. During senior year health came back, playing time was there and was seen by many coaches and received a couple of invites to campus, but it was too late. No offers from the ivies, though, and wouldn't have considered the other offers because academics didn't compare. Bottom line is that the ivies and top academic schools like Gtown, Duke, Vandy and Stanford would likely not have been options. NESCAC offers a nice combination of athletics and study and thankfully we saved enough to put it within reach. Pretty sure could have attended an ivy to join brother on campus, but soccer was a top priority and the NESCAC school compares well academically. Will always wonder if the ivies would have been an option without the injury, but am certain a DI opportunity would have been there though would have been turned down. Many reasons players choose D3 programs and D1s not always the right fit.
- Quote
Comment
-
Unregistered
college targeting advice
Originally posted by Unregistered View PostI know plenty of kid who tore ACLs and still made it to D1. Women's college coaches see enough of them to understand the rehab process. If academics truly do come first in your family and your kid could have gotten into an Ivy academically as you suggest I would suggest that you let soccer weigh WAAAY to heavily in the decision if you let them drop down to a NESCAC so they could play soccer. Totally different story if your kid didn't have the combination of soccer and academic chops to land at one of the Ivies. I makes sense you pick the best of what is available. Your story however is a dime a dozen in club soccer.
- Quote
Comment
-
Unregistered
Originally posted by Unregistered View PostPersonally I think the squabble has always been between parents who have to have their kids on top teams that are built for the sole purpose of chasing scholarships. Those types see their kids at the top of the heap whether it be for soccer or academics and would never utter anything remotely close to what the first poster wrote. I seriously doubt anyone has anything negative to say to that chap because he comes across as fairly objective and balanced. My bet is that all of this discord is really just amongst the folks that have kids at the bottom of rosters of those top level teams. They're quibbling about choosing places like Tufts over Holy Cross. The thing that none of them here seem to realize is that when you are on one of those top level club teams they both relatively "lost" in their game of one upsman because there usually are kids on those very same teams that go to higher level programs with sizable scholarships.
- Quote
Comment
-
Unregistered
Originally posted by Unregistered View PostYou are simply wrong because your whole premise is based upon the notion that those "mid major" D1 prospects are getting small scholarships. That just is not correct. There just aren't the funding limitations on the women's side that you find on the men's side. That changes the whole scenario on that side of the ledger radically. The average soccer scholarship on the girls side is 50%. Many players do actually get more athletic money and they are just as eligible for merit money as any other student. The economic decision you lay out just doesn't line up that way because the incentives are actually much greater than you imagine. The issue really comes down to how well the family targets. What you describe is what happens when the family "over reaches" and targets a program that is realistically beyond their kid's ability level. The most common scenario is when a legit D3 prospect reaches and targets a low level D1 program. Way too many parents here like to think those levels are equal when they really aren't. The lack of money tells the true story. The D1 coaches look at that kid as exactly what they are to them, a bottom of the bench level player and don't really offer them much money, if any at all, because of that fact. The reason why some posters here always seem to claim there is no money is not because there isn't any out there to be had, but rather because they never got offered any. They looked in the wrong places. They would have heard a much different story if their kid was a legit scholarship level prospect for a higher D1 ranked program and chose to select a lower one for a myriad of reasons like the economics of their deal were better, they saw the likelihood of more playing time, or the school was just better fit for them. Contrary to what some here foolishly believe you don't have to be a NT level player to get offered near a "full ride" you just have to be judged to be an impact level player at the college level you are targeting. It all comes down to being objective which many parents fail to be.
Why are so, so ticked off that a kid might pick Middlebury over Bucknell? Just because that would never make sense to you????? And that gives you the right to act offended in some truly bizarre way??
- Quote
Comment
-
Unregistered
Originally posted by Unregistered View PostYou just outed yourself as nothing more than a gossiper. You know nothing so please confine your posts to what little you know. BTW got MY stats from guiding two kids through to 80% packages at D1 level schools.
- Quote
Comment
-
Unregistered
Originally posted by Unregistered View PostThere was always town soccer for this group. Even a D or E club team would have been a better fit. No reason to spend the money and commitment on a high level club team if soccer was just for fun. There was always an alternative path for those folks. Some of those folks spit on a $200-300K scholarship as though it were cat food and promote the virtues of education first only after there kid didn't achieve one. They can't accept that the kids simply were not good enough. That's what actually is simply ridiculous.
- Quote
Comment
-
Unregistered
Originally posted by Unregistered View PostBut....wait.....folks get to choose what they do....no matter if approve or not.
- Quote
Comment
-
Unregistered
Originally posted by Unregistered View PostAnd folks get to laugh when the choices are obviously foolish and ego driven.. so what’s your point? We get you chose to be foolish and then pretend you were actually wise.
- Quote
Comment
-
Unregistered
Originally posted by Unregistered View PostSo, this is a thing then? Like, people really do sit and laugh at others other choices they made? Car they drive, clothes they wear, clubs they play for, etc.?
When he is not putting others down, he can offer some good advice. Unfortunately that advice is virtually drowned out by his relentless negativity.
- Quote
Comment
-
Unregistered
Originally posted by Unregistered View PostAbove applies to women. Between there being fewer programs, + fewer scholarships + far more international players (all = more competition for fewer spots and $) men won't get nearly the same level. I know the board is dominated by parents of girls but let's keep this in perspective.
- Quote
Comment
-
Unregistered
Originally posted by Unregistered View PostAnd folks get to laugh when the choices are obviously foolish and ego driven.. so what’s your point? We get you chose to be foolish and then pretend you were actually wise.
As for foolishness, my kid picked his school for multiple reasons and he wanted to play soccer. I suppose I should have prevented him from doing that, even though playing contributed significantly to his current very bright non-athletic future.
- Quote
Comment
-
Unregistered
Originally posted by Unregistered View PostMen definitely have lower options for athletic money because a.) Fewer programs, b.) fewer scholarships at each program and the # of internationals. However, the number of internationals (even in D3) are rising quickly each year for women .... look at any level womens roster and I bet you get 20-33% at least of internationals. For scholarship players, those players are likely getting big hits of athletic money of the total amount. For a fully funded program of 14 scholarships, if you lost just 20% of them to internationals and i feel they actually get more than that to make it worthwhile for them (lets call it 30%), then you lose 4.2 schollies right off of the top, leaving each incoming class less than 2.5 schollies per American player. Even for women, there isn't a ton of money in this situation. People also need to factor in whether their scholarships are truly athletic or a combination of merit and athletic. http://www.diycollegerankings.com/ca...larships/6267/ I think most people hear that my kid got 75% and assume it is 3/4 of the 14 athletics that a program has and it often is a blend of merit and athletic. For private universities that are accepting really bright kids, I would bet that 75% is probably a combination of 50% merit and 25% athletic. I am not sneezing at this amount by any means but suggesting that a really smart kid often starts with about 50% money from any most privates that offer merit. My point is that we all hear so and so got a full ride and the average is 75% when the math simply can not support those numbers and that most strong kids with great offers are getting lots of merit mixed in there. As a parent or player it really doesnt matter how it gets paid for, but i think folks should get caught up in the numbers they are hearing as they just aren't highly accurate IHMO and they should set more realistic purely athletic schollie numbers (like 20-40% for girls) and probably 10-33% for boys. Either can get the merit from most other schools that they qualified for at school X and then just have to focus on a smaller atheltic amount to make up the difference.
- Quote
Comment
-
Unregistered
Originally posted by Unregistered View PostYou are off target with the whole internationals thing because that really doesn't have anything to do with the scholarship count. The number of scholarships is the number of scholarships. Who they go to is a talent level thing. Ultimately coaches don't really care where their talent comes from, just that it can help them win games. On the men's side the sad fact is we just don't produce enough high enough quality players so the coaches look elsewhere. That's really a condemnation of our youth system. It's pretty sad that for all the money some parents drop on club soccer we can't produce enough players who are capable of beating out what is effectively a failed player from other countries (even at D3). On the women's side that really hasn't yet become the case.
- Quote
Comment
Comment