Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is a spot on the application to estimate the average hours per week spent on each activity. The point of that is to see how much time was spent on non academic activities to put the grades effort into perspective. (a 4.0 with 15 hours in sports =/= a 4.0 with zero ECs, for example). So this is a point in his favor.

The other thing they are looking for in the activity column is to see how your child might contribute to the life of the college, so if the only thing there is something they know you won't be doing at the school (assuming the school doesn't have club level in the sport), it doesn't hurt, but it also isn't helpful. If he truly did nothing else with his time at all, then find a way to morph his sports into something related that he might be interested in doing in the life of the school, like team manager, or sports writer or announcer, or work in the athletic facility, or start a club team, etc. etc.

And the best part is, they have no way of validating this <wink> <wink>. I realize that they may look to the counselor's reco. letter for this validation but the counselor goes off a boilerplate that the student fills out.

so you are suggesting lying? excellent. such a noble way to teach your kid
btw, most admissions folks have been doing their thing for a very long time. they've seen it all and if they sense a non-honest application they will put it on the "denied" pile. they have way too many applications these days than to spend any time one there is a question of their integrity. on to the next

Sure! They have a sixth sense to ferret out lies. That's why they are stuck at a low paying job at Haverford or whatever..

DP. What is your issue with Haverford PP?? You keep bringing this school up. Ahh, right, your kid probably didn't get in

Anonymous wrote:OP, you aren't alone! My DS is VERY focused on one sport. He may get a few looks from recruiters, but not a ton. I can't get him to do ANYTHING but this sport. And even his summer activities are focused on the sport (he's a volunteer coach for kids, his summer paid work is in the sport). His grades are very good, so he has that going for him. I can't make him into something he isn't, so hopefully colleges can appreciate his passion.

Curious about this post. My DC is very similar. But I do not consider the volunteer and paid positions coaching this sport to be the exact same EC. In addition to competing in the sport, those are two other activities involve different skills than just practicing the sport day in and day out. I don't see how it is any different than Sport, Volunteer at pet shelter, paid job at smoothie place. Three different activities.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is a spot on the application to estimate the average hours per week spent on each activity. The point of that is to see how much time was spent on non academic activities to put the grades effort into perspective. (a 4.0 with 15 hours in sports =/= a 4.0 with zero ECs, for example). So this is a point in his favor.

The other thing they are looking for in the activity column is to see how your child might contribute to the life of the college, so if the only thing there is something they know you won't be doing at the school (assuming the school doesn't have club level in the sport), it doesn't hurt, but it also isn't helpful. If he truly did nothing else with his time at all, then find a way to morph his sports into something related that he might be interested in doing in the life of the school, like team manager, or sports writer or announcer, or work in the athletic facility, or start a club team, etc. etc.

And the best part is, they have no way of validating this <wink> <wink>. I realize that they may look to the counselor's reco. letter for this validation but the counselor goes off a boilerplate that the student fills out.

so you are suggesting lying? excellent. such a noble way to teach your kid
btw, most admissions folks have been doing their thing for a very long time. they've seen it all and if they sense a non-honest application they will put it on the "denied" pile. they have way too many applications these days than to spend any time one there is a question of their integrity. on to the next

Sure! They have a sixth sense to ferret out lies. That's why they are stuck at a low paying job at Haverford or whatever..

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is a spot on the application to estimate the average hours per week spent on each activity. The point of that is to see how much time was spent on non academic activities to put the grades effort into perspective. (a 4.0 with 15 hours in sports =/= a 4.0 with zero ECs, for example). So this is a point in his favor.

The other thing they are looking for in the activity column is to see how your child might contribute to the life of the college, so if the only thing there is something they know you won't be doing at the school (assuming the school doesn't have club level in the sport), it doesn't hurt, but it also isn't helpful. If he truly did nothing else with his time at all, then find a way to morph his sports into something related that he might be interested in doing in the life of the school, like team manager, or sports writer or announcer, or work in the athletic facility, or start a club team, etc. etc.

And the best part is, they have no way of validating this <wink> <wink>. I realize that they may look to the counselor's reco. letter for this validation but the counselor goes off a boilerplate that the student fills out.

so you are suggesting lying? excellent. such a noble way to teach your kid
btw, most admissions folks have been doing their thing for a very long time. they've seen it all and if they sense a non-honest application they will put it on the "denied" pile. they have way too many applications these days than to spend any time one there is a question of their integrity. on to the next

Anonymous wrote:Make sure the coach actually has influence. At some schools "recruited players" at not accepted (looking at you Haverford). It's rare, but some kids have been burned by this...

Haverford is a DIII sports school. With any DIII school the NCAA does not mandate that verbal commitments from coaching recritiment is binding. It is with DI and DII but not DIII. All this is explained on the NCAA website.

This means some DIII coaches may have influence with their school's admissions office while others have absolutely none and the recruited athlete/applicant must apply and be admitted to the school completely on their own as any other applicant. I am in the middle of this now with my kid and his teammates and as of present there have been 4 situations where one of the boys had prior rec'd a verbal commitment to play their sport from the coach at the school and in the end the recruited athlete did not make it through the application process by being admitted to the school. So while they may have a roster spot on the team waiting for them, they are not able to take it as they in the end did not gain admission to the college. Unfortunately it is not as uncommon as you think.

Anonymous wrote:Make sure the coach actually has influence. At some schools "recruited players" at not accepted (looking at you Haverford). It's rare, but some kids have been burned by this...

Three kids alone in DC's class had this happen this year: one @ an HYPMS and the other two at T20 schools (not Haverford though there are 2 going for sports). Admissions should've told the coach, "nah, not gonna happen" than waste an ED.

Make sure the coach actually has influence. At some schools "recruited players" at not accepted (looking at you Haverford). It's rare, but some kids have been burned by this...

Anonymous wrote:DS is a junior and his primary ECs have been two sports, for which he will not be recruited. He has no other meaningful ECs. How are applications like his looked at by admissions offices? Do kids like him (sports focused, but not recruit-able) have a chance at top tier schools?

Not much I suspect. My DS (last year) had other EC with leadership roles (non STEM) and a minor role in a STEM EC. He went into a STEM area in college and I don't think his sports or non-STEM leadership roles mattered. I suspect this because his friends that went into business school or other non-stem areas were able to leverage similar roles and got into "better" schools. I think schools are looking for alignment between ECs and what the kids want to study, unless they get overruled by the all powerful athletic department and forced to accept a sports team member.

Anonymous wrote:There is a spot on the application to estimate the average hours per week spent on each activity. The point of that is to see how much time was spent on non academic activities to put the grades effort into perspective. (a 4.0 with 15 hours in sports =/= a 4.0 with zero ECs, for example). So this is a point in his favor.

The other thing they are looking for in the activity column is to see how your child might contribute to the life of the college, so if the only thing there is something they know you won't be doing at the school (assuming the school doesn't have club level in the sport), it doesn't hurt, but it also isn't helpful. If he truly did nothing else with his time at all, then find a way to morph his sports into something related that he might be interested in doing in the life of the school, like team manager, or sports writer or announcer, or work in the athletic facility, or start a club team, etc. etc.

And the best part is, they have no way of validating this <wink> <wink>. I realize that they may look to the counselor's reco. letter for this validation but the counselor goes off a boilerplate that the student fills out.

OP, you aren't alone! My DS is VERY focused on one sport. He may get a few looks from recruiters, but not a ton. I can't get him to do ANYTHING but this sport. And even his summer activities are focused on the sport (he's a volunteer coach for kids, his summer paid work is in the sport). His grades are very good, so he has that going for him. I can't make him into something he isn't, so hopefully colleges can appreciate his passion.

The answer depends on what kid of school and major your son is considering. But, I agree with the PP that top D3 schools are very competitive for athletes. So many kids play sports in HS, including mine, that it's just not a determining factor for students who aren't recruited. Hopefully your son is getting good grades in classes that challenge him.

If you kid got top grades while maintaining commitments to sports, that will speak to his ability to multi-task and focus, which should reflect well on his application.

Not that much different that a job or another highly time consuming EC, but still very good.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Any jobs? Volunteering? District/regional/state level recognition in the sport? Team Captain?

If no to these questions, than the sports are just any old EC.

But aren’t all athletes self-disciplined and leaders?..

Please stop already. You are beyond annoying beating on this over and over. Go find something fun to do with your day.

On the contrary, I find these posts delightful.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Could he play d3 and getting a nod from the coach?

Recruiting is extremely competitive at the high academic D3 level - even without athletic scholarships. It's not just getting a nod from the coach because you played a sport in high school.

Just went through this with my now senior and, wow, is the bolded above the truth. Most kids are not recruited for sports regardless of being their HS team captain (which so many think is this big ticket to recruitment when it is not) so try manage your kids' expectations.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Any jobs? Volunteering? District/regional/state level recognition in the sport? Team Captain?

If no to these questions, than the sports are just any old EC.

But aren’t all athletes self-disciplined and leaders?..

Please stop already. You are beyond annoying beating on this over and over. Go find something fun to do with your day.