Recent High Area Girl's Soccer College Commits

4-3-3 wrote: Maybe this forum can create a college section and we see more beneficial input like this in the future.

I second the motion. That is one heck of a great idea.

banana kick wrote:So, here's a sincere question.  I see that a student-athlete from Greenhill will be playing soccer next season at Bucknell and student-athletes from Ursuline will be playing at Boston College and Rhodes College.  Congrats to these girls, first of all, as these are wonderful schools.  Now the question: How much does playing soccer help a student who's applying to very selective schools?

Adding to this impressive list is the student-athlete from Hockaday who was talented enough to receive offers from Princeton and Stanford!  Don't know her personally, but I understand she chose Princeton.

In my experience, the highly selective schools view athleticism as another type of diversity they want to have in their student body.  If a student-athlete can qualify academically through GPA and test scores, then there is a "admissions bucket" for athletes, just like there is a bucket for mathematicians and a bucket for writers.  Got to qualify academically first though.

I've seen that DD play several times and have been fortunate enough to have my DD train with her in off season skills. She is the real deal and could have opted to go anywhere. She wanted to focus on academics and use soccer as a tool for admissions as well as all the other benefits listed in the posts above.

I can tell you that she is as good as they get on the field as well as off the field. When she was doing off season skills, she was the ONLY one near her age group. My DD and her friends were all 3-4 years younger and there were a few younger than that. That did not matter. She got there by doing her skills and she did them regardless of the group. It was a real eye opener for my DD to see the dedication to the craft. This was AFTER Surf Cup Champion ship. AFTER Nationals and AFTER ECNL National Titles. Simple touches on the ball with a bunch of younger athletes but she was helpful, pleasant and was / is a joy to watch. I'd encourage anyone who has not seen that team play to take out the younger DD's. It's a special group and they don't have teams like that on a regular basis. Final performances this Spring...

Scholarships are all fine and dandy, but to me the more important questions are about what kind of person the Coach is and what kind of team dynamics does that Coach support.

If the Coach is only interested in what the athlete can do for him or her, that usually ends badly for the athlete.

Unless your kid is supremely talented or very talented and supremely hardworking, then they aren't going to play sports for a living. That means the education is the priority. Since the education is the priority for about 99.9% of the athletes, then the Coach should be supporting that. If the Coach isn't making the education the #1 priority, then the Coach is in fact working against the athletes long term best interests.

I think that's why most atheletes quit. I think if you can find a Coach at a good school, that takes an interest in his or her athletes as people, then you have found a truly rare gem.

AbEnd wrote:

banana kick wrote:So, here's a sincere question.  I see that a student-athlete from Greenhill will be playing soccer next season at Bucknell and student-athletes from Ursuline will be playing at Boston College and Rhodes College.  Congrats to these girls, first of all, as these are wonderful schools.  Now the question: How much does playing soccer help a student who's applying to very selective schools?

Adding to this impressive list is the student-athlete from Hockaday who was talented enough to receive offers from Princeton and Stanford!  Don't know her personally, but I understand she chose Princeton.

In my experience, the highly selective schools view athleticism as another type of diversity they want to have in their student body.  If a student-athlete can qualify academically through GPA and test scores, then there is a "admissions bucket" for athletes, just like there is a bucket for mathematicians and a bucket for writers.  Got to qualify academically first though.

Kind of...exceptions, to a certain degree, are made.

Right. If a great athlete can keep it close to admission standards, basically show they they will be competitive academically, then coaches can make it work. I am NOT saying that academics don't matter, far from that, especially at elite schools, but that if you are academically viable (scores within range), then coaches can work with you. This is not as true at academically selective schools like Yale or Princeton, but is true for most of the rest.

And, right about coaches, but remember...coaches only keep their jobs if they produce competitive teams, so just like the NTX microcosm, a nice guy who doesn't win will be on the hot seat, and a new regime will want to cook with their own vegetables.

Best bet is to take all the academic money you can...AND play sports. The academics will be there even if the ACL isn't.

dadof3 wrote:Right. If a great athlete can keep it close to admission standards, basically show they they will be competitive academically, then coaches can make it work. I am NOT saying that academics don't matter, far from that, especially at elite schools, but that if you are academically viable (scores within range), then coaches can work with you. This is not as true at academically selective schools like Yale or Princeton, but is true for most of the rest.

Could you further elaborate the highlight above? I heard different story:

"Since Princeton cannot provide scholarship, they have to lower the academic requirements in order to lure better student athletes."

This may be also true for some private high schools in Dallas because they want to compete.

Basically those elite schools will make exceptions, but they're not the kind of exceptions you would see at less academically prestigious schools. The thinking is that eventually, the more you lower the standard for admittance, the students ability to make the needed grades while in college becomes prohibitive/problematic.

Gunners wrote:Basically those elite schools will make exceptions, but they're not the kind of exceptions you would see at less academically prestigious schools. The thinking is that eventually, the more you lower the standard for admittance, the students ability to make the needed grades while in college becomes prohibitive/problematic.

Exactly...here is an example. A school takes a 31 on act for incoming freshmen, they may not take a 23 no matter how good the kid is. The student academically is a high risk to fail or drop out. The kid will struggle in school if every other kid in all their classes is that 31, but a 28 is significantly closer and grades etc can bend things a little in that players favor. Also, the 28 that is a player can probably get some academic money and cut the burden on the athletic program. If they can get her a half academic scholarship and add athletic money to that to sweeten the deal (depending on the player-a quarter or a half), then everyone wins. It is a bad investment to give academic money to the 23 when it likely will not pan out. Now if the kid is a 31, then there won't be any reservations on any of it if the coach wants the player. The academic money can be found and that money is generally not lost if the girl quits or gets hurt.

The school has a legit student and the coach has a legit player. Also the kid won't be frustrated and have to spend every waking moment stressed about grades or trying to close the gap on classmates academically.

I tell kids all the time that they need to find schools in their academic range. If a kid can't produce the grades in hs, likely won't in college. If the kid can't test well enough, then it will be tough when your 3 grades in a semester are all tests and you don't produce in that arena.

Colleges know this. Much of the time if you have to jump too many hurdles, in hindsight they look like red flags anyway.

Agree. "lower standard" is a relative term.

From the Princeton Website. (I did not make the chart so I cannot explain why it does not total to 100%)

Statistics for Applicants to the Class of 2018

APPLICANT OVERVIEW
Total Applicants: 26,642 Total Admits: 1,983 Total Enrolled: 1,314
Admit Rate: 7.4%
PERCENTAGE OF APPLICANTS ACCEPTED BY GPA RANGE
GPA % ACCEPTED
4.0 9.9
3.90-3.99 9.8
3.80-3.89 6.8
3.70-3.79 5.9
3.60-3.69 4.9
3.50-3.59 3.1
Below 3.50 2.0
PERCENTAGE OF APPLICANTS ACCEPTED BY SAT RANGE
SAT SCORES % ACCEPTED
2300-2400 14.8
2100-2290 7.7
1900-2090 5.2
1700-1890 2.2
1500-1690 0.5
Below 1500 0.2
No CEEB Scores 6.5


Ultimately, let's be real. They have a TON of really really smart and driven kids. They also have some that are well connected, wealthy or provide the school some other type of benefit. Not talking at all about the DD that is going to Princeton because while I know she is an excellent student, I know nothing of her grades / GPA. IN GENERAL, if Princeton has a 7% admission rate, they admit kids on other things than simply test scores. If an athlete fits and has acceptable scores or grades and they think she can graduate AND the soccer coach wants to bring her in, she moves ahead of a general admission kid in the same tier group. Is she geographically diverse, racially diverse, culturally diverse, athletically diverse... You need a certain number of doctors, computer engineers, english majors etc etc.

I talked to a person on the Admissions board at Harvard (who is from Dallas and did play a sport) and she gave great insight as to how those schools review the tens of thousands of applications they get each year. MUCH MUCH more than an accumulation of grades and test scores.

DDdad wrote:Agree.  "lower standard" is a relative term.  

From the Princeton Website.  (I did not make the chart so I cannot explain why it does not total to 100%)

Statistics for Applicants to the Class of 2018

APPLICANT OVERVIEW
Total Applicants: 26,642 Total Admits: 1,983 Total Enrolled: 1,314
Admit Rate: 7.4%
PERCENTAGE OF APPLICANTS ACCEPTED BY GPA RANGE
GPA % ACCEPTED
4.0 9.9
3.90-3.99 9.8
3.80-3.89 6.8
3.70-3.79 5.9
3.60-3.69 4.9
3.50-3.59 3.1
Below 3.50 2.0
PERCENTAGE OF APPLICANTS ACCEPTED BY SAT RANGE
SAT SCORES % ACCEPTED
2300-2400 14.8
2100-2290 7.7
1900-2090 5.2
1700-1890 2.2
1500-1690 0.5
Below 1500 0.2
No CEEB Scores 6.5


Ultimately, let's be real.  They have a TON of really really smart and driven kids.  They also have some that are well connected, wealthy or provide the school some other type of benefit.  Not talking at all about the DD that is going to Princeton because while I know she is an excellent student, I know nothing of her grades / GPA.  IN GENERAL, if Princeton has a 7% admission rate, they admit kids on other things than simply test scores.  If an athlete fits and has acceptable scores or grades and they think she can graduate AND the soccer coach wants to bring her in, she moves ahead of a general admission kid in the same tier group.  Is she geographically diverse, racially diverse, culturally diverse, athletically diverse...  You need a certain number of doctors, computer engineers, english majors etc etc.  

I talked to a person on the Admissions board at Harvard (who is from Dallas and did play a sport) and she gave great insight as to how those schools review the tens of thousands of applications they get each year.  MUCH MUCH more than an accumulation of grades and test scores.  

They do not "total to 100%" because those percentages represent the percentages of applicants who are offered admission for each GPA/SAT range. For example, of all applicants with SAT scores 2300-2400, 14.8% were admitted (not necessarily matriculated) and 85.2% were rejected.