Wesleyan--not a good player

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If they truly had an "athletic career" at you say, rejection from one school does not "end" it.

Unfortunately, it most certainly can and does. For collegiate/varsity level sports. Now if the kid wants to go out for club level that is still on the table for them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I find no small amount of enjoyment that rich, privileged athletes didn't get what they want in this instance.

They will be fine, just not at Wes.

You sound like an awful person. Karma can be something.

[Anonymous]

When I went there the athletics were terrible. Maybe they’ve improved. But it was not a sports school that anyones athletics “career” would be ended. But sad to not get in if you thought you would.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I would be fine with ending athletic admissions but obviously that should be done up front, not telling kids one thing and then changing your mind.

Likewise I don't get why the school would ever ask kids to move from ED1 to ED2? Either you think they are good enough to be an early admit or you don't. Seems pretty crappy to string kids along like that.

The answer is the school is more concerned with yield than the applicants. I was skeptical when the point was first raised but there are enough CC posters to confirm W actually does this. What a second-rate BS practice. The admins are garbage people.

Lol…..what does yield have to do with an ED applicant?

That's the point. They are pushing ED1 into ED2, guaranteeing higher yield numbers if they choose to accept the ED2 student they already rejected. Then they compare the hold over to any new ED2 applicants and apparently toss them aside. But they give themselves the option of picking from folks guaranteed to come, even though they are not that interested in them.

[Anonymous]

As a parent of junior hoping to commit to a NESCAC (not Wesleyan but one of the other more athletic ones), this thread intrigued me. My kid has lower stats for the schools she is looking at, but is hoping to earn a "slot." Mind you, she's a strong student and capable of being a valued member of the community at any school she goes to, for a variety of reasons, which I believe should be the bar. Mistakes freshman year should not prohibit strong student athletes from pursuing excellent schools. In any event, I perused that CC thread and my hunch is this: the main poster whose kid was deferred never said she was promised a "slot." I would guess that most of those athletic "recruits" were not the strongly supported athletes because coaches assumed they would get in on their own. They put too much stock in the coach liking them and didn't confirm that they were one of the one or two coveted "slots."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:As a parent of junior hoping to commit to a NESCAC (not Wesleyan but one of the other more athletic ones), this thread intrigued me. My kid has lower stats for the schools she is looking at, but is hoping to earn a "slot." Mind you, she's a strong student and capable of being a valued member of the community at any school she goes to, for a variety of reasons, which I believe should be the bar. Mistakes freshman year should not prohibit strong student athletes from pursuing excellent schools. In any event, I perused that CC thread and my hunch is this: the main poster whose kid was deferred never said she was promised a "slot." I would guess that most of those athletic "recruits" were not the strongly supported athletes because coaches assumed they would get in on their own. They put too much stock in the coach liking them and didn't confirm that they were one of the one or two coveted "slots."

I had the same impression....that the athletes in question were not in the category of slotted all the way through admissions and instead were in the less secure category of just being on the coaches wish list but without any protection.

[Anonymous]

This article is informative

http://wesleyanargus.com/2019/08/29/red-light-green-light-the-stoplight-of-wesleyan-recruiting/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:As a parent of junior hoping to commit to a NESCAC (not Wesleyan but one of the other more athletic ones), this thread intrigued me. My kid has lower stats for the schools she is looking at, but is hoping to earn a "slot." Mind you, she's a strong student and capable of being a valued member of the community at any school she goes to, for a variety of reasons, which I believe should be the bar. Mistakes freshman year should not prohibit strong student athletes from pursuing excellent schools. In any event, I perused that CC thread and my hunch is this: the main poster whose kid was deferred never said she was promised a "slot." I would guess that most of those athletic "recruits" were not the strongly supported athletes because coaches assumed they would get in on their own. They put too much stock in the coach liking them and didn't confirm that they were one of the one or two coveted "slots."

+1. It does seem that the OP is angry DC did not get in, which is understandable, but the anger is misplaced if a coach did not indicate that they were using a chit on their behalf. But then asking the kid to switch to ED2 only to reject them seems indefensible no matter what a coach said.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As a parent of junior hoping to commit to a NESCAC (not Wesleyan but one of the other more athletic ones), this thread intrigued me. My kid has lower stats for the schools she is looking at, but is hoping to earn a "slot." Mind you, she's a strong student and capable of being a valued member of the community at any school she goes to, for a variety of reasons, which I believe should be the bar. Mistakes freshman year should not prohibit strong student athletes from pursuing excellent schools. In any event, I perused that CC thread and my hunch is this: the main poster whose kid was deferred never said she was promised a "slot." I would guess that most of those athletic "recruits" were not the strongly supported athletes because coaches assumed they would get in on their own. They put too much stock in the coach liking them and didn't confirm that they were one of the one or two coveted "slots."

+1. It does seem that the OP is angry DC did not get in, which is understandable, but the anger is misplaced if a coach did not indicate that they were using a chit on their behalf. But then asking the kid to switch to ED2 only to reject them seems indefensible no matter what a coach said.

But ED2 isn't out yet. So that hasn't actually happened.

[Anonymous]

Once again ED is for the advantage of colleges and universities who use it. Shameless!

[Anonymous]

It’s actually simple - and this thread is a crock of excrement.

Kids looking to play a college sport will consider several schools. You put in applications at all of them. Since we are not talking big time D1 football or basketball here - kids, and parents, will have several conversations with administrators about costs, financing, scholarships (no athletic money for D3), and the specific team requirements and fit.

Schools and coaches are open about what they can and cannot do for prospective athletes. Yes - particularly with D3 and Ivies, you can get kids who decide they are going to that school whether they can make a team or not. But, all athletes keep options open for as long as possible until a final decision is made. The big thing is assessing playing time potential. Even at D3, being on a team is a big time commitment and absolutely not worth it if you are not playing (or likely to play).

Conversely, from the school’s perspective, they just want someone who will be there 4 years and contribute to the school community. Again, for D3 no scholarships are at issue, so it is more a matter of making sure kids who are coming to play a sport will stay after they quit playing (or get cut). Typically, about 50% of non- full ride athletes will quit by the start of their junior year. If they also leave the school at that point - that’s revenue lost for a D3.

[Anonymous]

What advice would those of you who have been through the d3/nescac recruiting process give to high school juniors - what specific questions should they be asking coaches? my dc is in early stages of this for his sport and is trusting what he is being told by coaches, but also likely isn’t asking them the precise questions to avoid being caught unawares like perhaps is what happened to the Wesleyan prospectives. Thanks for any advice, as it will all be very helpful if/when he decides to which college to apply via ED.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As a parent of junior hoping to commit to a NESCAC (not Wesleyan but one of the other more athletic ones), this thread intrigued me. My kid has lower stats for the schools she is looking at, but is hoping to earn a "slot." Mind you, she's a strong student and capable of being a valued member of the community at any school she goes to, for a variety of reasons, which I believe should be the bar. Mistakes freshman year should not prohibit strong student athletes from pursuing excellent schools. In any event, I perused that CC thread and my hunch is this: the main poster whose kid was deferred never said she was promised a "slot." I would guess that most of those athletic "recruits" were not the strongly supported athletes because coaches assumed they would get in on their own. They put too much stock in the coach liking them and didn't confirm that they were one of the one or two coveted "slots."

+1. It does seem that the OP is angry DC did not get in, which is understandable, but the anger is misplaced if a coach did not indicate that they were using a chit on their behalf. But then asking the kid to switch to ED2 only to reject them seems indefensible no matter what a coach said.

But ED2 isn't out yet. So that hasn't actually happened.

Ummm, Ed 2 came out 3 days ago.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As a parent of junior hoping to commit to a NESCAC (not Wesleyan but one of the other more athletic ones), this thread intrigued me. My kid has lower stats for the schools she is looking at, but is hoping to earn a "slot." Mind you, she's a strong student and capable of being a valued member of the community at any school she goes to, for a variety of reasons, which I believe should be the bar. Mistakes freshman year should not prohibit strong student athletes from pursuing excellent schools. In any event, I perused that CC thread and my hunch is this: the main poster whose kid was deferred never said she was promised a "slot." I would guess that most of those athletic "recruits" were not the strongly supported athletes because coaches assumed they would get in on their own. They put too much stock in the coach liking them and didn't confirm that they were one of the one or two coveted "slots."

+1. It does seem that the OP is angry DC did not get in, which is understandable, but the anger is misplaced if a coach did not indicate that they were using a chit on their behalf. But then asking the kid to switch to ED2 only to reject them seems indefensible no matter what a coach said.

But ED2 isn't out yet. So that hasn't actually happened.

Ummm, Ed 2 came out 3 days ago.

Oh, I was just going by that CC thread. I don't see any discussion there about that one woman whose kid got rejcted at ED1.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It’s actually simple - and this thread is a crock of excrement.

Kids looking to play a college sport will consider several schools. You put in applications at all of them. Since we are not talking big time D1 football or basketball here - kids, and parents, will have several conversations with administrators about costs, financing, scholarships (no athletic money for D3), and the specific team requirements and fit.

Schools and coaches are open about what they can and cannot do for prospective athletes. Yes - particularly with D3 and Ivies, you can get kids who decide they are going to that school whether they can make a team or not. But, all athletes keep options open for as long as possible until a final decision is made. The big thing is assessing playing time potential. Even at D3, being on a team is a big time commitment and absolutely not worth it if you are not playing (or likely to play).

Conversely, from the school’s perspective, they just want someone who will be there 4 years and contribute to the school community. Again, for D3 no scholarships are at issue, so it is more a matter of making sure kids who are coming to play a sport will stay after they quit playing (or get cut). Typically, about 50% of non- full ride athletes will quit by the start of their junior year. If they also leave the school at that point - that’s revenue lost for a D3.

This is wrong. Kids who want to play their sport at a NESCAC school get 1 ED bullet. If the coach tells the kid that the coach is using a slot for that kid, admissions does a pre-read and gives a thumbs up, and the kid applies ED and then the kid does not get in, that’s a real problem. That’s what happened at Wesleyan as related on CC. The kid could have tried to use the ED bullet at another NESCAC school they were considering but was misled by Wesleyan.