Is St. John's Becoming an IMG?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Basketball announced the same 2-team model last week.

So is this correct: WCAC is for the recruits. The independent league is for regular kids like it used to be back in the day? And this 2-team model means that some kids who would have been edged out by the recruits might now have a chance to play? What's the down side?

Only potential downside is to the student body overall if they will recruit for these varsity B teams.

Just looking at FB, basketball and baseball (girls too for basketball?)…that’s like another 100 kids just for those three sports, so nearly 10% of the school.

Is that too much? For those of you who seek out the SLACs....what is their model of recruited athletes as a % of the entire student [academic] body? Checking online, if appears to be > 10%, at schools many of you love.

At highly selective SLACs (the “elite” tier), it's frequently 30%–40%+
Examples:
- Amherst ~33%
- Bates ~39%
- Williams ~40%

Well, that’s another 10% on top of like the current 25%.

It’s also safe to say that SJC athletes aren’t all that interested in playing for D3 schools…so not sure why you interjected those.

The poster was clearly just using it as a point of comparison of student bodies.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Basketball announced the same 2-team model last week.

So is this correct: WCAC is for the recruits. The independent league is for regular kids like it used to be back in the day? And this 2-team model means that some kids who would have been edged out by the recruits might now have a chance to play? What's the down side?

Only potential downside is to the student body overall if they will recruit for these varsity B teams.

Just looking at FB, basketball and baseball (girls too for basketball?)…that’s like another 100 kids just for those three sports, so nearly 10% of the school.

Is that too much? For those of you who seek out the SLACs....what is their model of recruited athletes as a % of the entire student [academic] body? Checking online, if appears to be > 10%, at schools many of you love.

At highly selective SLACs (the “elite” tier), it's frequently 30%–40%+
Examples:
- Amherst ~33%
- Bates ~39%
- Williams ~40%

Well, that’s another 10% on top of like the current 25%.

It’s also safe to say that SJC athletes aren’t all that interested in playing for D3 schools…so not sure why you interjected those.

The poster was clearly just using it as a point of comparison of student bodies.

I get that but they had to say “at schools many of you love”. It’s safe to say many SJC kids don’t love D3 schools.

[Anonymous]

Not necessarily. There are some great D3 programs that are strong academically. DC plays a Varsity sport at SJC. I would prefer a D3 program at a stronger school than a D1 program.schools like MIT, University of Chicago, Caltech, Williams, Amherst, Carnegie Mellon, Swarthmore, and Johns Hopkins University,etc.

Most athletes are not going pro after college.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Not necessarily. There are some great D3 programs that are strong academically. DC plays a Varsity sport at SJC. I would prefer a D3 program at a stronger school than a D1 program.schools like MIT, University of Chicago, Caltech, Williams, Amherst, Carnegie Mellon, Swarthmore, and Johns Hopkins University,etc.

Most athletes are not going pro after college.

And I assume Harvard or Princeton or another academic D1 would work too and your DC would prefer.

Again, it’s safe to say the SJC athletes in football, basketball, baseball, hockey, lax et al would prefer to play at the D1 level if given the chance.

It has little to do with going pro but rather getting to compete at the highest level in college.