My opinion has mostly been formed by my son and others like him (Ivys) as well as his travel team friends who went on to play at Power 5 conference schools.  For me, It isn't so much about the school as it is about the recruit/student knowing or having an idea about what he wants to do after graduation.  Overwhelmingly, my son's  Power 5 friends wanted to be professional baseball players after their college junior year and they were given that 3 year opportunity in college.  Some succeeded and most failed.    As for my son and others like him, I think they had more academic goals in mind but were also slightly hedging on a possible career in professional baseball if the opportunity presented itself.  It never presented itself for my son as he was injured his junior year and he was a long shot among long shots to get drafted even after earning first team all-conference the prior year.  For those few like him, the opportunity to get drafted  out of the ivy presents itself (and is made financially worthwhile) to only a couple players a year.  On the other side of the ledger is the Ivy opportunity to have a good paying job with an established global corporation prior to graduation.   At the end of the day no matter which path is selected baseball remains a business, and a very challenging one on the labor side of the balance sheet.

To parlay off my first point, it is also extremely important to know what majors are strongly encouraged or "silently" discouraged for any recruited athlete.  Your major will have a large impact on how you are viewed by the coaching staff at just about any school not to mention how many hours you will need to invest in studying.  There is more "major leniency" with Ivys as they are more accommodating with a players study & lab schedule.  

Also, I think there is one school that is the apex of both Power Conference baseball and high academics.  That is Stanford.  If there is no question someone has extraordinary baseball skills, and off the charts intelligence and academics then you need to introduce yourself to Stanford.

As always, JMO and experiences.

As usual, Fenway nailed it. 

When my son was a freshman year in high school I attended an Ivy game. I had the fortune of having a conversation with an Ivy dad who was also in the front office of a MLB team. He told me if his son's coach finds out a potential recruit is talking to major conference programs he drops all efforts to recruit the player. He said experience proved to him he's wasting his time if he doesn't get through to the prospect right away on the value of an Ivy education.

Goosegg posted:

As usual, Fenway nailed it. 

I agree, and as a east coast native who has lived on the west coast for years I think that many easterners really have no idea how powerful Stanford is both as an institution and an icon.  Their grads are dominant in business, govt, education, etc.  But I also would say that in reply to the OP's question, on the left coast you have to include USC, Cal, and UCLA in the same category, and on the east coast Vandy, UVA, UNC, and, especially, Duke, which I think sees itself as the Stanford of the east as much as it sees itself as the Harvard of the south. I know little about the mideast but I'm guessing Notre Dame, Michigan, and a couple others would want into this category as well.

RJM posted:

When my son was a freshman year in high school I attended an Ivy game. I had the fortune of having a conversation with an Ivy dad who was also in the front office of a MLB team. He told me if his son's coach finds out a potential recruit is talking to major conference programs he drops all efforts to recruit the player. He said experience proved to him he's wasting his time if he doesn't get through to the prospect right away on the value of an Ivy education.

My direct and recent Ivy recruiting experience was exactly the opposite.  All the Ivy coaches recruiting my son knew very well he was being recruited by high level conference coaches. Didn't slow them down one bit, rather they made their case for the Ivy League advantages.  They continued to recruit him over an extended period of time on that basis and continued to attend games to see him play. 

JCG posted:

Goosegg posted:

As usual, Fenway nailed it. 

I agree, and as a east coast native who has lived on the west coast for years I think that many easterners really have no idea how powerful Stanford is both as an institution and an icon.  Their grads are dominant in business, govt, education, etc.  But I also would say that in reply to the OP's question, on the left coast you have to include USC, Cal, and UCLA in the same category, and on the east coast Vandy, UVA, UNC, and, especially, Duke, which I think sees itself as the Stanford of the east as much as it sees itself as the Harvard of the south. I know little about the mideast but I'm guessing Notre Dame, Michigan, and a couple others would want into this category as well.

In the Midwest, Notre Dame and Northwestern are the elite colleges with the lowest acceptance rates, along with big conference baseball, then it would be Michigan. In the South, Rice University has the toughest acceptance rate and elite top baseball.  Don't forget Wake Forest in the Southeast.

9and7dad posted:

RJM posted:

When my son was a freshman year in high school I attended an Ivy game. I had the fortune of having a conversation with an Ivy dad who was also in the front office of a MLB team. He told me if his son's coach finds out a potential recruit is talking to major conference programs he drops all efforts to recruit the player. He said experience proved to him he's wasting his time if he doesn't get through to the prospect right away on the value of an Ivy education.

My direct and recent Ivy recruiting experience was exactly the opposite.  All the Ivy coaches recruiting my son knew very well he was being recruited by high level conference coaches. Didn't slow them down one bit, rather they made their case for the Ivy League advantages.  They continued to recruit him over an extended period of time on that basis and continued to attend games to see him play. 

I didn't say all. A travel teammate of my son was recruited by this Ivy. It was a natural. Is older sister was a just graduated D1 athlete there. The kid mentioned Wake and Duke. The coach told him he better make up his mind quickly if interested in his program.

fenwaysouth posted:

My opinion has mostly been formed by my son and others like him (Ivys) as well as his travel team friends who went on to play at Power 5 conference schools.  For me, It isn't so much about the school as it is about the recruit/student knowing or having an idea about what he wants to do after graduation.  Overwhelmingly, my son's  Power 5 friends wanted to be professional baseball players after their college junior year and they were given that 3 year opportunity in college.  Some succeeded and most failed.    As for my son and others like him, I think they had more academic goals in mind but were also slightly hedging on a possible career in professional baseball if the opportunity presented itself.  It never presented itself for my son as he was injured his junior year and he was a long shot among long shots to get drafted even after earning first team all-conference the prior year.  For those few like him, the opportunity to get drafted  out of the ivy presents itself (and is made financially worthwhile) to only a couple players a year.  On the other side of the ledger is the Ivy opportunity to have a good paying job with an established global corporation prior to graduation.   At the end of the day no matter which path is selected baseball remains a business, and a very challenging one on the labor side of the balance sheet.

To parlay off my first point, it is also extremely important to know what majors are strongly encouraged or "silently" discouraged for any recruited athlete.  Your major will have a large impact on how you are viewed by the coaching staff at just about any school not to mention how many hours you will need to invest in studying.  There is more "major leniency" with Ivys as they are more accommodating with a players study & lab schedule.  

Also, I think there is one school that is the apex of both Power Conference baseball and high academics.  That is Stanford.  If there is no question someone has extraordinary baseball skills, and off the charts intelligence and academics then you need to introduce yourself to Stanford.

As always, JMO and experiences.

Follow up question to the first highlighted section, we know chances of success in the MLB draft are very slim... Do the players who have gone through this feel like choosing High Academic Power 5 vs. Ivy League (or vice versa) had any meaningful affect on their end result in the draft? (i.e. Did the ones that got drafted feel like they would have still made it if they went Ivy?) 

As to the second highlighted section... If your son answers the question "What is your favorite subject?" with "Math,"  What majors may be more palatable to a coach? (I read that Kyle Hendricks majored in Economics at Dartmouth...)

Thank you to everyone for their insights!

As for the first f/u question I don't honestly know how to answer.  The bottom line is if you want to play professional baseball your best chances and opportunities are going to be with what you are calling the "High Academic Power 5".  That is not what I'd call them but that is for another day.  You go to these schools to develop and become a polished baseball player.  Hopefully along the way you're given opportunities to play in elite summer baseball leagues and make a name for yourself.  These coaches have power and influence with scouts and baseball people.  The Ivys are required to play under a different set of rules and their focus is similar but different all at the same time.  Sure, there are ivy guys that make it to the Cape every year but not nearly as many and their "leash" is a lot shorter.

As to the second question that is something you have to figure out.   In our experience, very few D1 Coaches told my son that engineering was or wasn't going to work at their school, but it certainly was implied it would not.  We had to do some research, and read between the lines.  We kept our eyes on former players in our area that were going off to D1 schools and found out within a month many had changed their majors to something more general or manageable.  One of my son's best friends was at an elite D1 baseball school and for the most part told what he was going to study.  THis young man did everything he was told to do for fear of crossing the coaches.  Yes, that was very eye opening.  The Ivys are a different matter altogether.  Athletics doesn't hold your academics back, and the coaches work within a system to help you get your work done.  Certainly, pitchers have an advantage with challenging majors as they will not have as much practice time.  This is one of the reasons my son selected an Ivy school.  We figured this was his best chance to succeed with a difficult major and still play at a mid-D1 level of baseball.   I would suspect that Kyle Hendricks had similar thoughts cross his mind when he was being recruited by Dartmouth.  Again, these were my experiences and my son's thought process.  It worked for him.  Your mileage may vary.

Fenwaysouth, thank you so much for your detailed response. It really touched on many of the little questions that were popping around my head and more... I truly appreciate the thought and time you put into all your posts.

I am biased, so understand that as you read on.

My son's Ivy had three MLB pitchers and one hitter this year.   My son was drafted out of HS and again as a budget single digit round senior. He is out of baseball now and really enjoying his real world career (his first 2 week paycheck was more then he made in any MILB season - which btw, is what you earn for the year).

There are, IMO, 9 d1 schools where the degree the baseball player brings to the job market is viewed the same way as every other typical student from that same school. Those schools are Stanford and the 8 Ivies.  That doesn't mean that you cannot do it at other schools, but think of your son as in the middle of the pack, not an outlier and then look where the middle of the pack ends up.  I know athletes and non-athletes who graduated from Northwestern, UCLA, USC, Vandy); the job market (especially in anything connected to banking , financing) is easier for the 9 schools.

The middle of the pack at those 9 schools (I am speaking of d1 only) has a dream job waiting for them whenever they decide to enter the workforce. and also realize that even at those schools most of the players graduated with a different major then they matriculated.  For some reason most players did change from engineering to economics - which makes Fenways' son so remarkable - but an economics degree from say Yale has big big value in getting the first real world job (beyond that it's up to them)

I have the view that a pro prospect who doesn't blossom as a freshman (the least important year ironically) stands a better chance at an Ivy.  Why? Rosters are smaller, so guys get way more chances. Winning isn't a true pressure (although a coach must be Ivy competitive) on the coach. Fewer guys go to summer leagues because most of your teammates  are working internships on wallstreet or wherever; but all guys who are legit prospects play where they want (i.e., cape, Northwoods,etc).  It's easier to be an all-round developing student/athlete at an Ivy.

Conversely, the pressure on a scholarship guy to perform as a freshman is way more intense outside the Ivy; and (again, IMO) there is a lot going on in the lives of these young men.  I'd like to give their athletic talent time to delelop but let's just admit, they are learning to drink, fend off drugs, meeting new people, getting buried in the classroom, working a full time job etc. In the big time baseball conferences, for the coaches it's all about winning.  A tough combination for a kid growing into adulthood.

Not only is getting drafted hard enough, succeeding is even harder. I believe hedging the bet of a17-year old is warranted. In another thread, the transfer rate of baseball players was fleshed out; some where like 1/3. I followed my son's roster for 7 years; his team lost two seniors (who graduated on time) and one freshman (mh issues).  Moreover, everyone graduated on time except those who were drafted as juniors - both graduated in 6 years.

Roughly 56 players are recruited each year;  if you draw the lucky straw there is no need to trade it for what's behind door number 2 (except Stanford).

9and7dad posted:

RJM posted:

When my son was a freshman year in high school I attended an Ivy game. I had the fortune of having a conversation with an Ivy dad who was also in the front office of a MLB team. He told me if his son's coach finds out a potential recruit is talking to major conference programs he drops all efforts to recruit the player. He said experience proved to him he's wasting his time if he doesn't get through to the prospect right away on the value of an Ivy education.

My direct and recent Ivy recruiting experience was exactly the opposite.  All the Ivy coaches recruiting my son knew very well he was being recruited by high level conference coaches. Didn't slow them down one bit, rather they made their case for the Ivy League advantages.  They continued to recruit him over an extended period of time on that basis and continued to attend games to see him play. 

I will agree with 9&7. The same happened to my son during recruiting. I think that if an Ivy HC likes a player (that fits the academics) he will try his best to try to recruit him, even if SEC or ACC, high academics or not, are looking at the kid. The HC best card is the famous, not 4 but 40 years decision. And if the kid is good, he may have a chance of getting drafted, just as if was in another school. Regardless, you have to be good to get drafted and then nothing is either guaranteed. And if the kid gets and Ivy degree, well, his future will always look bright. This is what Ivy HCs try to put on the table.

Goosegg posted:

I am biased, so understand that as you read on.

....

There are, IMO, 9 d1 schools where the degree the baseball player brings to the job market is viewed the same way as every other typical student from that same school. Those schools are Stanford and the 8 Ivies.  That doesn't mean that you cannot do it at other schools, but think of your son as in the middle of the pack, not an outlier and then look where the middle of the pack ends up.  I know athletes and non-athletes who graduated from Northwestern, UCLA, USC, Vandy);the job market (especially in anything connected to banking , financing) is easier for the 9 schools.

...

 

Just wanted to follow what Goosegg mentioned about the 9 D1s with an interesting interview and inside from Tom Ashbrook on Public Radio (link below) with Lauren Rivera on the subject of her book "Pedigree: How Elite Students Get Elite Jobs" which gives an inside to what Goosegg what talking about about these schools. 

On-Point Interview on WBUR Public Radio

Can someone define "High Academic Power 5"? Does it mean "power" in baseball or "power" in academics?

A related question: I know the Ivies hold their athletes to some standards (Academic Index); Stanford probably also have some standards, although I haven't seen it discussed explicitly. Are there any other schools that have an explicit or implicit academic standard? How about Patriot league? or NESCAC?   

Power Five refers to the five major conferences. An example of high academics in these conferences would be Duke, Vanderbilt, Stanford and Michigan.

The Power 5 Conferences dont necessarily mean the best baseball teams. Just the "accepted" term for the five biggest money conferences for sports in the NCAA.

RJM got it right with what my original post was referring to. The Power Five major conference schools that intersect with high academic labels (I was using the list of Tier One academic colleges that I had been led to from this site in the past). Schools that intersect the two categories include those RJM listed above, as well as Cal Berkeley, Notre Dame, Virginia, Boston College, Wake Forest...

NXT LVL also hit on the other aspect I mentioned. Most of the intersect are not the "best" baseball teams. (Does "best" equal going to Omaha? A top 25 rank?) When the intersect are currently one of the "best" baseball teams, they tend to finish fishing the pond first. Once they are done, it sounds like a lot of the same players are recruited by both Power Five Conference/High Academic intersect schools that are currently not the "best" in baseball as well as the Ivy League.

If your son is being recruited by both, I am sure there are many points to be addressed in your personal cost/benefit analysis fit to your child. I was looking to hear what points those who have already been through or are currently going through considered.

Boston College is not an elite academic institution. It's a good college academically. The Catholic connection may do more for a job seeker out of college than some better schools. In Boston mentioning BC in the same breath as an Ivy would get you laughed out of the conversation. I question whether BC is any better than BU or Northeastern academically.

How long would a thread be debating whether or not a college is a high academic?

RJM, disagree.  Pre Flutie days I would have agreed with you.  Look at the acceptance rates: BC is as strong as UVA and WF, and ahead of UNC.  Kids trying to get into ND, will opt for BC.  BC is ahead of Nova.

(typo)

RJM posted:

Boston College is not an elite academic institution. It's a good college academically. The Catholic connection may do more for a job seeker out of college than some better schools. In Boston mentioning BC in the same breath as an Ivy would get you laughed out of the conversation. I question whether BC is any better than BU or Northeastern academically.

Certainly not when you compare to an Ivy, that would be laughable.  Thought we were talking top academics in the big conferences.  

Northeastern beats out BC with their lower acceptance rates.  BU and BC have almost identical acceptance rates.  From the Midwest BC has greater perceived academic status.  

Interesting posts - I guess everyone has their own idea of elite academic schools, perhaps beyond the obvious accepted 10 or 12 schools.  What's a good measure?  Maybe incoming SAT/ACT average?  I wonder.......

Edit - As I was typing Gov mentioned acceptance rate - maybe that's a good measure.  I don't know.

I wouldn't put Villanova on the top shelf either. Acceptance rate isn't the only way to rate a college. The area 100 miles around BC is very Catholic. BC is the top choice near a great city. Almost every Catholic kid applies to BC.

I realize US News isn't the absolute end all for deciding college rank. But they have BC at #31. Pre Flutie BC came very close to going bankrupt. They're were accepting anyone who could affford to pay 100%.

RJM posted:

I wouldn't put Villanova on the top shelf either. Acceptance rate isn't the only way to rate a college. The area 100 miles around BC is very Catholic. BC is the top choice near a great city. Almost every Catholic kid applies to BC.

I realize US News isn't the absolute end all for deciding college rank. But they have BC at #31. Pre Flutie BC came very close to going bankrupt. They're were accepting anyone who could affford to pay 100%.

RJM, I was living in Boston at the Flutie timeframe.  I had never even heard of BC at the time.  Then fast forward 20 years later, kids in our area north of Chicago are talking about applying to BC; a lot of them because they didn't get into ND.    Anyway - concur with the Catholic orientation and appeal.

US News has been the standard bearer for such things but there are a lot of competing lists out there.  Others have different criteria so I suppose it depends which criteria is valued.

Great discussion - actually, really great initial post and questions!!  A few thoughts...

fenwaysouth, as usual, nailed it.  "What he said" certainly applies here.

Stanford vs. say...Vandy?  I think it depends on where you see yourself living after school.  I knew a really solid kid from CA who chose Vandy over Stanford.  Wanted to get away from CA, thought the degrees were the same.  He came back, with a degree in Econ, super smart kid and began looking for jobs in CA.  He told me he was totally surprised that many CA employers didn't know what a Vanderbilt degree meant, compared to say, Stanford, Cal, UCLA.  Now that even surprised me quite a bit, but it might be relevant to a kid from out West?

Stanford has tremendous standing nationally, but especially on the West Coast.  Vandy may have the same in the South?  But the story above is absolutely true.

Math?  What majors are acceptable to a coach?  Great question.  I think they will all tell you they'll let your kid pursue a math-based major, even engineering.  But when the chips are down, well....  With our second son, I do remember my wife calling the UW coach and very specifically telling him that for our son to attend his school, he was going to have to allow him to major in something more difficult.  Something math-based.  Coach didn't argue at all, but I'm just saying my wife felt the need after some experience with this.  Younger son ended up an Econ major - did really well in school and on the field.  I think my wife's conversation set expectations both for the coach, but more importantly, for our son.

9and7dad posted:

US News has been the standard bearer for such things but there are a lot of competing lists out there.  Others have different criteria so I suppose it depends which criteria is valued.

Agree, and there is plenty of controversy over the rating methods used by any and and all of them.

Even with the US News rankings it's not as simple as saying that BC, for example, is #31, because that's just their National University category. They also have Regional University and Liberal Arts College categories, both of which include many fine schools. 

It is my observation that we can sit here all day saying this school is high academic, or elite, or academic power 5, and so on. The reality is that all schools are a great source of education and of building the future and character of our sons and daughters. All provide an education that ten years after graduation, it really does not matter the school anymore but the route taken by the student.

On the baseball subject, all schools want to be competitive and win regardless of how high/low academic it is. A lot of the 'Power 5' schools (that make money on sports as correctly stated earlier) try to get the best kids from their state to come and put them in the 'best' major that will be convenient for the HC and the program, and that onto itself I could categorize it as not being in the best interest of the student/athlete. We have to remember that not all the studs that go to these schools get drafted, and while many from the conference are drafted, there are also so many schools in the conference (e.g. ACC has 15 teams).

Now, it is my humble believe that the term 'elite academic' (D1) concerns really the 9 D1s that Goosegg pinpointed earlier. I was astonished, but not surprise, when I heard the radio interview about elite jobs and elite schools, and that is how the corporate world is wired. Now, if a kid is a great pitcher and also throws 90+ and he has an incredible gpa and scores, and the Columbia HC comes to him to recruit him (with Likely Letter) as well as the HC of the power State U, what happens? What would we as parents recommend, suggest to our kid?...Tough question? Perhaps 9and7dad could inject an answer based on experience. According to the research study done, elite academic D1s are those schools that can catapult a kid at the start, the schools where elite firms are hiring recent graduates. If anyone wants to hear a possible answer to the question of elite academic schools, listen to this interview and it will answer the question. And being a student/athlete in these institutions attract even more the elite corporations.

http://www.wbur.org/onpoint/20...ers-higher-education

justbaseball posted:

 

He came back, with a degree in Econ, super smart kid and began looking for jobs in CA.  He told me he was totally surprised that many CA employers didn't know what a Vanderbilt degree meant, compared to say, Stanford, Cal, UCLA.  Now that even surprised me quite a bit, but it might be relevant to a kid from out West?

Stanford has tremendous standing nationally, but especially on the West Coast.  Vandy may have the same in the South?  But the story above is absolutely true.

One of the overlooked aspects of many of the college choice threads is alumni network. I told my kids if they didn't do better academically or financially they were going to Penn State (state university). It's alumni association is one of the largest group organizations in the world. As the saying goes, you can't swing a dead cat without hitting a PSU alumnus. I've heard of people getting a job interviews based on sitting next to.PSU alum on a plane.

JCG posted:

9and7dad posted:

US News has been the standard bearer for such things but there are a lot of competing lists out there.  Others have different criteria so I suppose it depends which criteria is valued.

Agree, and there is plenty of controversy over the rating methods used by any and and all of them.

Even with the US News rankings it's not as simple as saying that BC, for example, is #31, because that's just their National University category. They also have Regional University and Liberal Arts College categories, both of which include many fine schools. 

My daughter's undergrad is ranked #159. But it's in the top five in her major. It did hurt her applying to law school even though she graduated PBK. She worked for a couple of years in a top law firm, developed contacts and references and got accepted to any Ivy.

As I mentioned, an older thread directed me to the Tier One Athetics website when looking into high academic colleges and athletics. (They created the 'Essential Guide to Ivy League Athletic Recruiting.')

http://www.tier1athletics.org/

This site lists 27 Div 1 schools as "Tier One Colleges" plus the 8 Ivy. I definitely think that you can further micro-tier these "high academic" schools. I also think that the highest D1 micro-tier, referring to academic levels, would be the Ivy's plus Stanford. Choosing any other schools from this "high academic" list, you will likely be sacrificing a micro-tier or two in academic levels (one of the potential costs to consider in any athletes analysis).

Here is the mission statement from the Tier One Athletics site and their selection methodology. Their list may not be perfect to everyone...but it is where I started from.

The Mission

RJM posted:

Boston College is not an elite academic institution. It's a good college academically. The Catholic connection may do more for a job seeker out of college than some better schools. In Boston mentioning BC in the same breath as an Ivy would get you laughed out of the conversation. I question whether BC is any better than BU or Northeastern academically.

Just a note on BC (and I'm someone who turned down a BC football scholarship to go Ivy).  I've worked on Wall St for 20+ years and I'd have to say that in my little slice of the world BC alums are as plentiful as the Ivies and Stanford.  The NYC investment banks sell to the Boston based money managers, and I think that they want Boston guys selling to other Boston guys.

Here is what I'll recommend to my son when its time - go to LinkedIn and filter on recent grads from a particular school. Then add a filter on the keyword "baseball".  This will give you a view into where the recent baseball players from a particular school are working.  Use this as a data point when considering your options.

K9 posted:

RJM posted:

Boston College is not an elite academic institution. It's a good college academically. The Catholic connection may do more for a job seeker out of college than some better schools. In Boston mentioning BC in the same breath as an Ivy would get you laughed out of the conversation. I question whether BC is any better than BU or Northeastern academically.

Just a note on BC (and I'm someone who turned down a BC football scholarship to go Ivy).  I've worked on Wall St for 20+ years and I'd have to say that in my little slice of the world BC alums are as plentiful as the Ivies and Stanford.  The NYC investment banks sell to the Boston based money managers, and I think that they want Boston guys selling to other Boston guys.

Here is what I'll recommend to my son when its time - go to LinkedIn and filter on recent grads from a particular school. Then add a filter on the keyword "baseball".  This will give you a view into where the recent baseball players from a particular school are working.  Use this as a data point when considering your options.

That's the street talking there.. Excellent 

RoyalRooter,

I was having side discussion with another poster about his topic.   Everybody has their own criteria or lists.   Years ago, I got to know the gentlemen behind TierOne athletics noted above, and the trials and tribulations he and his daughter (track) went through back in 2009.  I was going through them with my son at the same time.   We traded some notes about some of these schools.  At the end of the day, you still have to have an idea of what you want to do when you graduate.  So, often I trade notes with people that really haven't thought about the end game,  but they want to dive into a discussion about high academic baseball recruiting.  You've got to put the cart after the horse, and specifically look at the major.  Different colleges within the University can have vastly different metrics.

Second, when you are looking at these schools how does admissions work.   Here is my measuring stick for these schools...try to compare the admission metrics of the general population versus the admission metrics of a recruited athlete....that is the "tell" in my book.  As you go through the process and look at all the published numbers, ask yourself that question.  If the numbers aren't even close, then you have your answer.  JMO.

FourBases posted:

It is my observation that we can sit here all day saying this school is high academic, or elite, or academic power 5, and so on. The reality is that all schools are a great source of education and of building the future and character of our sons and daughters. All provide an education that ten years after graduation, it really does not matter the school anymore but the route taken by the student.

On the baseball subject, all schools want to be competitive and win regardless of how high/low academic it is. A lot of the 'Power 5' schools (that make money on sports as correctly stated earlier) try to get the best kids from their state to come and put them in the 'best' major that will be convenient for the HC and the program, and that onto itself I could categorize it as not being in the best interest of the student/athlete. We have to remember that not all the studs that go to these schools get drafted, and while many from the conference are drafted, there are also so many schools in the conference (e.g. ACC has 15 teams).

Now, it is my humble believe that the term 'elite academic' (D1) concerns really the 9 D1s that Goosegg pinpointed earlier. I was astonished, but not surprise, when I heard the radio interview about elite jobs and elite schools, and that is how the corporate world is wired. Now, if a kid is a great pitcher and also throws 90+ and he has an incredible gpa and scores, and the Columbia HC comes to him to recruit him (with Likely Letter) as well as the HC of the power State U, what happens? What would we as parents recommend, suggest to our kid?...Tough question? Perhaps 9and7dad could inject an answer based on experience. According to the research study done, elite academic D1s are those schools that can catapult a kid at the start, the schools where elite firms are hiring recent graduates. If anyone wants to hear a possible answer to the question of elite academic schools, listen to this interview and it will answer the question. And being a student/athlete in these institutions attract even more the elite corporations.

http://www.wbur.org/onpoint/20...ers-higher-education

For those weighing a high academic path vs other, I'd recommend the podcast in the link.  It's long, but you can get the gist of it in 10 or 15 minutes.  It's all good stuff but the general point is pretty well made early in the recording. 

Every recruiting experience is different for every kid.  Every different kid and their family have different goals and measures for success for what they want out of the experience.  High level power conference schools can be very intoxicating for a player being recruited.  The facilities, travel, gear, support and the like can be very alluring.  I think players should at least consider the "cost" of those things against what the long term outcome of their education will likely be.  Kids generally have very short outlooks and have trouble seeing results past the next four years.  The percentage of kids coming out of even the highest power baseball schools in the highest power conferences still have a small percentage shot at ever making any real money playing baseball.  Their training and development will likely be the best available, but the success percentage over the long haul remains low.  Kids coming out of true high academic schools, with real majors and real business connections and real alumni bases and real career services support at the school have a pretty high percentage chance of making real money.  For a long time.  And although there is a valid argument that their baseball future opportunities may be smaller, they definitely still exist.  Kids get drafted out of the Ivy every year and some make it.  Kyle Hendricks was at Dartmouth four or five years ago and is certainly in the mix for a Cy Young this year.

I would add one other possible measurable: what are the players' majors and how does that stack up to the school profile.

"Everybody has their own criteria or lists."

Data gathering to formulate this list, with regards to baseball, is where we are at as a family. We have already gone over general academic and environmental criteria for colleges and have a list of focus schools completely separate from baseball...D1's to D3's. When it comes to adding baseball into the picture we (both as parents and athlete) are trying to figure out what belongs on our personal criteria list. Hearing about what others have considered and what they have found to be important helps those of us still in the data gathering phase a lot. Through this thread and pm's, I have learned of new points to think about, points I may have thought were more important than they likely are, points that perhaps deserve more consideration than I thought before, as well as points that may not apply to my son but could definitely benefit someone else's.

I understand how much a major can narrow your options, but unfortunately my son has been uncooperative with that at this point. Hopefully over time with more coursework and electives he'll be able to narrow down to something beyond baseball. In the meantime, we are exploring all kinds of campuses when we are "in the area." Sometimes that includes my son meeting with a coach.

I really appreciate the different views and experiences that people have posted. We have been learning a lot that will help us get more out of our college visits and help my son get more out of his conversations with coaches. 

RoyalRooter - just want to note that the Tier One list is no more valid than a list you or I might make. Like us, he's just a guy on the internet, and he's clueless on West Coast schools.

UC Davis but not UCLA or UCSB?  

C'mon.

A lot of people equate Elite Colleges with higher paying jobs. However, that's necessarily true. According to a WSJ study, it depends more on the field of study:

Do Elite Colleges Lead to Higher Salaries? Only for Some Professions

A diploma from a highly selective college means higher pay in certain fields. In others, it makes almost no difference at all

......

Specifically, for business and other liberal-arts majors, the prestige of the school has a major impact on future earnings expectations. But for fields like science, technology, engineering and math, it largely doesn’t matter whether students go to a prestigious, expensive school or a low-priced one—expected earnings turn out the same. So, families may be wasting money by chasing an expensive diploma in those fields.

.....

For example, if an engineering student chose to attend the University of Pennsylvania instead of Texas A&M, the average starting salary would differ by less than $1,000, but the tuition difference would be over $167,000. At that slightly higher salary, you’d have to work for more than 150 years before you make up for that vast tuition difference.

......

In business, more prestigious schools may offer better alumni networks and other connections with potential employers. In other fields of study, more prestigious schools may offer better peer connections, faculty, university resources and, at least in social science and the humanities, access to better graduate programs. Whatever the reason, parents and students may be justified in looking for a prestigious degree in these majors.