Did Your Athlete End Up With Plan B?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Use sports to networking and make connections to get yourself a career that both rewarding and financially successful. You don't want to be homeless like this former Olympian at the age of 56. I used to watch her in the 80's and 90's. She was arguably the most successful cyclist in the history of the United States:

https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/homeless/olympic-medal-winning-cyclist-rebecca-twigg-is-homeless-in-seattle/?utm_source=pocket-newtab

You notice that this woman didn't respond to the question about whether she had mental health issues.

[Anonymous]

"How do you know they think all this? That was not my DC's experience nor the feedback from his college counseling office. Fortunately he had some decent long term non-sports ECs as back up. In fact, he was advised NOT to write about the injury and his journey to focus in on other endeavor in his essays."

He was advised to NOT write about the injury BECAUSE he had some decent long term non-sports. Remember, his application still read something like 20 hrs per week 50 weeks a year XXX sport as a freshman and as a sophomore, then XXX sport disappeared. Most likely it also read something like VARSITY as a freshman or 3rd in the state JV tennis championship as a freshman. The schools know what that takes and give credit for it.

You don't have to point your love and pining for the missing sports part out. Your counseling office correctly said that pining for what your can't have anymore is a turn off. What you have to do is show that you are applying the same drive that got you to a spot near the top of your sport as a freshman to your new (or formerly second tier) activities. What they want is people who will throw themselves 100% into whatever they do.

[Anonymous]

I have a daughter who played soccer for 4 years in college. For her it was good thing, although she seriously was going to quit after her Sophomore season when she only played in 9 games.

I tell people all the time now -- write down 3 schools that your kid might be able to play at (be realistic). Now, go to the sport's athletic website for that school and look at the number of seniors (and redshirt juniors) on the team. Count them up. Now go back 4 years on the website and look at the number of freshman. How many survived to play as seniors? For women's soccer a "good" number would be 50%. Most schools are less than that. So, of the say 8 freshman recruits maybe 3 or 4 will still be there playing as seniors.

Why did they quit particulary if they were getting money? Injuries, time requirements, lack of playing time, just not liking the coach, the team, the school. All of those are common.

It is a very different atmosphere in college sports. The coach is not getting paid by parents. His or her job is graded by (a) how well the team does, and (b) are the players doing okay academically and staying out of trouble. Actually or even potentially screw up any of those factors and there will be lots of pressure on a kid to quit or transfer.

My kid liked most of her teammates, but there was always an undercurrent of continuing competition. There is no I in "team", but there are two in "Playing Time". Sometimes that can be less than friendly.

[Anonymous]

My daughter played her sport. Found the school she wanted without using her sport. She wanted to find the right fit for her and her major. She ended up at a D3 and walked on freshman years. Has played 2 years and loves it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:My daughter played her sport. Found the school she wanted without using her sport. She wanted to find the right fit for her and her major. She ended up at a D3 and walked on freshman years. Has played 2 years and loves it.

Nice! Mine will likely try to walk-on at her first choice if the recruiting thing doesn’t work out. How many walk-ons are there, typically?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My daughter played her sport. Found the school she wanted without using her sport. She wanted to find the right fit for her and her major. She ended up at a D3 and walked on freshman years. Has played 2 years and loves it.

Nice! Mine will likely try to walk-on at her first choice if the recruiting thing doesn’t work out. How many walk-ons are there, typically?

Nothing is "typical" when it comes to number of walk-ons taken (if any). Depends entirely on the sport, coach, recruiting success/failure, injuries, players quitting, quality of the walk-on, position played by the walk-on, etc.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My daughter played her sport. Found the school she wanted without using her sport. She wanted to find the right fit for her and her major. She ended up at a D3 and walked on freshman years. Has played 2 years and loves it.

Nice! Mine will likely try to walk-on at her first choice if the recruiting thing doesn’t work out. How many walk-ons are there, typically?

Nothing is "typical" when it comes to number of walk-ons taken (if any). Depends entirely on the sport, coach, recruiting success/failure, injuries, players quitting, quality of the walk-on, position played by the walk-on, etc.

+1 We had no walk ons my fresh/soph/senior years -- but took 3 my junior year because the recruiting class sucked.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I have a daughter who played soccer for 4 years in college. For her it was good thing, although she seriously was going to quit after her Sophomore season when she only played in 9 games.

I tell people all the time now -- write down 3 schools that your kid might be able to play at (be realistic). Now, go to the sport's athletic website for that school and look at the number of seniors (and redshirt juniors) on the team. Count them up. Now go back 4 years on the website and look at the number of freshman. How many survived to play as seniors? For women's soccer a "good" number would be 50%. Most schools are less than that. So, of the say 8 freshman recruits maybe 3 or 4 will still be there playing as seniors.

Why did they quit particulary if they were getting money? Injuries, time requirements, lack of playing time, just not liking the coach, the team, the school. All of those are common.

It is a very different atmosphere in college sports. The coach is not getting paid by parents. His or her job is graded by (a) how well the team does, and (b) are the players doing okay academically and staying out of trouble. Actually or even potentially screw up any of those factors and there will be lots of pressure on a kid to quit or transfer.

My kid liked most of her teammates, but there was always an undercurrent of continuing competition. There is no I in "team", but there are two in "Playing Time". Sometimes that can be less than friendly.

This is helpful, thank you.

I know the time commitment is different, but do people think there also is a positive difference in the competitiveness, team dynamic, etc. at D3? Does anyone have experience with their D1 level athlete (with attractive D1 options) choosing to play D3?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My daughter played her sport. Found the school she wanted without using her sport. She wanted to find the right fit for her and her major. She ended up at a D3 and walked on freshman years. Has played 2 years and loves it.

Nice! Mine will likely try to walk-on at her first choice if the recruiting thing doesn’t work out. How many walk-ons are there, typically?

Nothing is "typical" when it comes to number of walk-ons taken (if any). Depends entirely on the sport, coach, recruiting success/failure, injuries, players quitting, quality of the walk-on, position played by the walk-on, etc.

+1 We had no walk ons my fresh/soph/senior years -- but took 3 my junior year because the recruiting class sucked.

So they didn't even look at walk-ons those years? What if a walk-on coming in is better than even your good recruitments. I can't imagine in a D3 setting a coach would turn away anyone unless they have seen them at a practice at least once. Heck, there are kids that walk-on D1.

[Anonymous]

Personal experience for me / not my children. Was a decent HS athlete in a team sport. Lightly recruited at a few D1 schools - no scholarship or anything, just preferred walk on level so by no means a super star but good enough to be a team captain / team leader as an upperclassman in HS. I tend to be a bit of an introvert and I think the experience of being a leader on a sports team in high school helped develop more self confidence and more well rounded as an adult and a better manager and leader professionally.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have a daughter who played soccer for 4 years in college. For her it was good thing, although she seriously was going to quit after her Sophomore season when she only played in 9 games.

I tell people all the time now -- write down 3 schools that your kid might be able to play at (be realistic). Now, go to the sport's athletic website for that school and look at the number of seniors (and redshirt juniors) on the team. Count them up. Now go back 4 years on the website and look at the number of freshman. How many survived to play as seniors? For women's soccer a "good" number would be 50%. Most schools are less than that. So, of the say 8 freshman recruits maybe 3 or 4 will still be there playing as seniors.

Why did they quit particulary if they were getting money? Injuries, time requirements, lack of playing time, just not liking the coach, the team, the school. All of those are common.

It is a very different atmosphere in college sports. The coach is not getting paid by parents. His or her job is graded by (a) how well the team does, and (b) are the players doing okay academically and staying out of trouble. Actually or even potentially screw up any of those factors and there will be lots of pressure on a kid to quit or transfer.

My kid liked most of her teammates, but there was always an undercurrent of continuing competition. There is no I in "team", but there are two in "Playing Time". Sometimes that can be less than friendly.

This is helpful, thank you.

I know the time commitment is different, but do people think there also is a positive difference in the competitiveness, team dynamic, etc. at D3? Does anyone have experience with their D1 level athlete (with attractive D1 options) choosing to play D3?

I think D3 kids are closer because academics matter. They study together and get tutors to help them. They can't have a coach year round, so captains will set up work-out schedules during the off-season, that the kids have a lot of fun at. They also do not have to room together so they have space too.

D1 is like a job. It comes first. College and friends come second. So you may have a great team dynamic, but you might not either. But you are with that team SO much, it can be hit or miss. You live with them, you have meals with them, you have 1-2 daily practices with them, you are on buses and planes with them. You go to meetings with them, and many are in your exact classes because you are all taking pretty basic classes that can go around your schedule. Also, some D1 kids are a dumb as rocks. And with that usually comes some ignorance about how other people are around the world. Egos and personalities clash

It depends on what the player wants. Is classes and the college experience the #1 priority or is playing the sport. Possibly succeeding after in a professional world.

There is room for both.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have a daughter who played soccer for 4 years in college. For her it was good thing, although she seriously was going to quit after her Sophomore season when she only played in 9 games.

I tell people all the time now -- write down 3 schools that your kid might be able to play at (be realistic). Now, go to the sport's athletic website for that school and look at the number of seniors (and redshirt juniors) on the team. Count them up. Now go back 4 years on the website and look at the number of freshman. How many survived to play as seniors? For women's soccer a "good" number would be 50%. Most schools are less than that. So, of the say 8 freshman recruits maybe 3 or 4 will still be there playing as seniors.

Why did they quit particulary if they were getting money? Injuries, time requirements, lack of playing time, just not liking the coach, the team, the school. All of those are common.

It is a very different atmosphere in college sports. The coach is not getting paid by parents. His or her job is graded by (a) how well the team does, and (b) are the players doing okay academically and staying out of trouble. Actually or even potentially screw up any of those factors and there will be lots of pressure on a kid to quit or transfer.

My kid liked most of her teammates, but there was always an undercurrent of continuing competition. There is no I in "team", but there are two in "Playing Time". Sometimes that can be less than friendly.

This is helpful, thank you.

I know the time commitment is different, but do people think there also is a positive difference in the competitiveness, team dynamic, etc. at D3? Does anyone have experience with their D1 level athlete (with attractive D1 options) choosing to play D3?

I think D3 kids are closer because academics matter. They study together and get tutors to help them. They can't have a coach year round, so captains will set up work-out schedules during the off-season, that the kids have a lot of fun at. They also do not have to room together so they have space too.

D1 is like a job. It comes first. College and friends come second. So you may have a great team dynamic, but you might not either. But you are with that team SO much, it can be hit or miss. You live with them, you have meals with them, you have 1-2 daily practices with them, you are on buses and planes with them. You go to meetings with them, and many are in your exact classes because you are all taking pretty basic classes that can go around your schedule. Also, some D1 kids are a dumb as rocks. And with that usually comes some ignorance about how other people are around the world. Egos and personalities clash

It depends on what the player wants. Is classes and the college experience the #1 priority or is playing the sport. Possibly succeeding after in a professional world.

There is room for both.

Great post. I have one at a SLAC with D1 sports and another at a D3 SLAC. At the former the athletes are an entity unto themselves and largely strangers to the population at large. (Me: so do you have any classes with (athlete name)? Son: I’ve never even seen him on campus. And he’s 6’9”.) At the D3 SLAC many of the athletes are friends.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My daughter played her sport. Found the school she wanted without using her sport. She wanted to find the right fit for her and her major. She ended up at a D3 and walked on freshman years. Has played 2 years and loves it.

Nice! Mine will likely try to walk-on at her first choice if the recruiting thing doesn’t work out. How many walk-ons are there, typically?

Nothing is "typical" when it comes to number of walk-ons taken (if any). Depends entirely on the sport, coach, recruiting success/failure, injuries, players quitting, quality of the walk-on, position played by the walk-on, etc.

+1 We had no walk ons my fresh/soph/senior years -- but took 3 my junior year because the recruiting class sucked.

So they didn't even look at walk-ons those years? What if a walk-on coming in is better than even your good recruitments. I can't imagine in a D3 setting a coach would turn away anyone unless they have seen them at a practice at least once. Heck, there are kids that walk-on D1.

There were 1-2 kids who tried to walk on at the beginning of each year, but none were offered a roster spot (except my junior year).

[Anonymous]

I walked on to a D3 baseball program. Almost walked myself right off again by issuing way too many...walks.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Use sports to networking and make connections to get yourself a career that both rewarding and financially successful. You don't want to be homeless like this former Olympian at the age of 56. I used to watch her in the 80's and 90's. She was arguably the most successful cyclist in the history of the United States:

https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/homeless/olympic-medal-winning-cyclist-rebecca-twigg-is-homeless-in-seattle/?utm_source=pocket-newtab

You notice that this woman didn't respond to the question about whether she had mental health issues.

Had not heard her name in many year, but she was one of the best. I get the feeling that depression is a major part of her issues.