quote:I attended a JUCO, my son did not, didn't make much of my education, (especially English),
Fo
You could have fooled ALL of us.....
Fo
You could have fooled ALL of us.....
Fo
You could have fooled ALL of us.....
Historically, I am not very Economical with my English........
TR,
Let me explain what I meant. GPA and SAT's are listed by info given by the player for showcases, teams, etc. Coach asks to have a copy of transcript (in our case coming directly from the school marked official). The actual transcript (current) is sometimes way off from the listed GPA.
In other words, the player listed his 9th grade GPA as 3.2 but by the time he reached his junior year it was way below 3.0, the coaches requirement. This seems to occur a bit.
I suggest to parents to update their sons GPA/SAT each year. I find it interesting that parents make sure their sons BA and ERA and velocity is updated annually, but not the GPA.
Let me explain what I meant. GPA and SAT's are listed by info given by the player for showcases, teams, etc. Coach asks to have a copy of transcript (in our case coming directly from the school marked official). The actual transcript (current) is sometimes way off from the listed GPA.
In other words, the player listed his 9th grade GPA as 3.2 but by the time he reached his junior year it was way below 3.0, the coaches requirement. This seems to occur a bit.
I suggest to parents to update their sons GPA/SAT each year. I find it interesting that parents make sure their sons BA and ERA and velocity is updated annually, but not the GPA.
TPM
I agree that an official transcript can be forwarded to a school prior to graduation. It is official, to that point in time, and comes directly from the guidance office, appropriately stamped....official.
I agree that an official transcript can be forwarded to a school prior to graduation. It is official, to that point in time, and comes directly from the guidance office, appropriately stamped....official.
TxMom-Agree with your last post 100%. I think we as parents lots of times get wrapped up
in "status" and "names" (what will impress our peers) as opposed to what will best meet the needs of our sons.
Example-Local prep school has the "name", "status", IVY league schools clammering for its
graduates, very expensive,etc. We thought this should be the route to take our son's freshman year. Bottom line-they were not as advanced as the public school-didn't open a book and had virtually no home work and "breezed through the year and basically got little or no "education". But, we could SAY he was a "preppie" and everyone would be impressed???? He was not happy at the school and next year went back to the public system and he actually had to study to make his grades.
I guess what I'm saying is that an "education" is in the eyes of the beholder and some of the most educated people I know went to schools I've never heard of. I say if your son loves baseball and has "some" ability, choose the program where he will be able to
compete and fit in with players and coaches of similar values. My fondest memories of college were not of doing term papers and study groups, but of the times spent on the
diamond. There's always graduate school to get that "name" diploma.
BTW, this post is not meant to denigrate those who value education over athletics, both can be accomplished at the same time but from experience it's a lot more enjoyable when
one is sitting in English 101 and knowing fall practice starts at 2:30 and you can't wait to get there.
in "status" and "names" (what will impress our peers) as opposed to what will best meet the needs of our sons.
Example-Local prep school has the "name", "status", IVY league schools clammering for its
graduates, very expensive,etc. We thought this should be the route to take our son's freshman year. Bottom line-they were not as advanced as the public school-didn't open a book and had virtually no home work and "breezed through the year and basically got little or no "education". But, we could SAY he was a "preppie" and everyone would be impressed???? He was not happy at the school and next year went back to the public system and he actually had to study to make his grades.
I guess what I'm saying is that an "education" is in the eyes of the beholder and some of the most educated people I know went to schools I've never heard of. I say if your son loves baseball and has "some" ability, choose the program where he will be able to
compete and fit in with players and coaches of similar values. My fondest memories of college were not of doing term papers and study groups, but of the times spent on the
diamond. There's always graduate school to get that "name" diploma.
BTW, this post is not meant to denigrate those who value education over athletics, both can be accomplished at the same time but from experience it's a lot more enjoyable when
one is sitting in English 101 and knowing fall practice starts at 2:30 and you can't wait to get there.
Moc,
Good post. For me it's not necessarily putting the value of education first. My son lives for his time on the field, it makes his experience better, what he lives for each day, NOT going to class.
Bottom line is, you HAVE to attend classes, whereever you go, make sure they are classes you can handle.
Good post. For me it's not necessarily putting the value of education first. My son lives for his time on the field, it makes his experience better, what he lives for each day, NOT going to class.
Bottom line is, you HAVE to attend classes, whereever you go, make sure they are classes you can handle.
Moc
I was a "preppie". I am sure you are very impressed.
I was a "preppie". I am sure you are very impressed.
Academics and education are two different things. I have to agree with BEE and many others on the topic of education: The responsibility of an education rest with the “student” no matter where that student is...D-1, JUCO, prep, public, ivy, or even those NOT in college. My wife and I are opposites. She has a degree from a D-1 college and I have never attended college.... If I remember correctly I barely made it through Algebra I in high school and I know I flunked at least one English class. I think she minored in communications but last week she admittedly tried to text message my son on his cell phone by putting in his email address. By society’s standards she is educated and I am uneducated. (thank goodness she has trouble finding the HSBBW) 
No matter where we are or what we’re doing, everyday day of our lives is an opportunity for education. We can either choose to accept it or we can ignore it.
Fungo
By society’s standards she is educated and I am uneducated. (thank goodness she has trouble finding the HSBBW) No matter where we are or what we’re doing, everyday day of our lives is an opportunity for education. We can either choose to accept it or we can ignore it.
Fungo
Dad, I KNOW you.....and you're no John F. Kennedy!!!!
It's your LONG drives that impress me.
It's your LONG drives that impress me.
Initially, we didn't believe a JUCO "lined up with our son's academic ability." He was a top student with a high SAT score and I feared that he wouldn't be challenged. However, HIS top priority out of high school was baseball and he chose to make the best of the academics in order to follow his dream.
I guess that brings me back to my point. If the kid is allowed to make the college choice based on what's important to him, the odds of his success greatly increase. I've sometimes wondered how he would have done if we had insisted on academics first in the selection. Would he have felt as positive about his experience? Would he have done as well in the classroom? Hard to say.
What I do know is because he made the choice and the commitment, he had an emotional investment in his overall success.
I guess that brings me back to my point. If the kid is allowed to make the college choice based on what's important to him, the odds of his success greatly increase. I've sometimes wondered how he would have done if we had insisted on academics first in the selection. Would he have felt as positive about his experience? Would he have done as well in the classroom? Hard to say.
What I do know is because he made the choice and the commitment, he had an emotional investment in his overall success.
quote:I guess that brings me back to my point. If the kid is allowed to make the college choice and commitment based on what's important to him, the odds of his success greatly increase.
Thank you for that.
The kid has to do the work on and off the field. At 18 it's time for him to learn to make decisions. He is old enough to decide to go to Iraq with weapon over his shoulder, if he chooses to.
Fungo - I think Gloria and I have had the same technology class!
that sums it up!!quote:If the kid is allowed to make the college choice and commitment based on what's important to him, the odds of his success greatly increase.
I hate to beat a dead horse, but for a kid wanting to play college baseball, I can't imagine the "net positives" of 4 yrs of study coupled with 4 yrs of "misery in baseball" - if other choices exist
also an important point to keep in mind regarding academics
(a modified baseball quote)
college is supposed to be hard, if it wasn't hard ANYBODY could do it!!
.
Excellent posts by all regarding academics and athletics! That is why the college search process is unique for everyone.
Another question however that I feel has been answered before but I cannot find it. Let's suppose a school has 10 full baseball scholarships (not the 11.7 granted by the NCAA). Are these scholarships based on in-state our out of state tuition or neither?
For example if in-state tuition is $15,000 per year and out of state is $20,000 per year would the school only have $150,000 to work with if they had 10 scholarships or would they have $200,000 to work with based on out of state tuition? Maybe it doesn't matter. Maybe the school is just given 10 scholarships in my example and the school administration doesn't care if they are all out of state or in-state players? I realize that all schools do not charge the same for tuition but I am trying to figure out the in-state vs. out of state scenario.
Another question however that I feel has been answered before but I cannot find it. Let's suppose a school has 10 full baseball scholarships (not the 11.7 granted by the NCAA). Are these scholarships based on in-state our out of state tuition or neither?
For example if in-state tuition is $15,000 per year and out of state is $20,000 per year would the school only have $150,000 to work with if they had 10 scholarships or would they have $200,000 to work with based on out of state tuition? Maybe it doesn't matter. Maybe the school is just given 10 scholarships in my example and the school administration doesn't care if they are all out of state or in-state players? I realize that all schools do not charge the same for tuition but I am trying to figure out the in-state vs. out of state scenario.
.
TxMom...Impressed with your posts...clean concise, little agenda, lots of humanity. Only 100+ posts but I would like to nominate you for "All Star" Status..... keep up the good work...keep raising the bar....
Rounding third...Good question. I'm sure that someone here has a concise answer...
.
TxMom...Impressed with your posts...clean concise, little agenda, lots of humanity. Only 100+ posts but I would like to nominate you for "All Star" Status..... keep up the good work...keep raising the bar....
Rounding third...Good question. I'm sure that someone here has a concise answer...
.
Rounding third,
Been a while since I researched this but if I recall the in-state and out of state scholarship are both considered one scholarship by the NCAA. I think a college can offer 11.7 full rides to out of state students and be in compliance with the NCAA. State funding may influnce how in-state vs. out-of-state scholarships are awarded within that particular state.
I'm sure there are those that can shed more light on this.
Fungo
Been a while since I researched this but if I recall the in-state and out of state scholarship are both considered one scholarship by the NCAA. I think a college can offer 11.7 full rides to out of state students and be in compliance with the NCAA. State funding may influnce how in-state vs. out-of-state scholarships are awarded within that particular state.
I'm sure there are those that can shed more light on this.Fungo
Roundingthird,
Fungo is right (as usual), it is a maximum of 11.7 full scholarships. The actual dollar value of in-state vs. out of state scholarship only matters with the school's budget, the NCAA still counts it as "1" against the 11.7 total. There is no NCAA "penalty" because the player is out of state and costs the school more $'s. 
Fungo is right (as usual
), it is a maximum of 11.7 full scholarships. The actual dollar value of in-state vs. out of state scholarship only matters with the school's budget, the NCAA still counts it as "1" against the 11.7 total. There is no NCAA "penalty" because the player is out of state and costs the school more $'s.
For scholarships, a school will chop up full scholarships into small parts, or percentages, to spread the money out. For instance, if it costs $20,000 to attend in-state, one player gets $5,000, another gets $7,000, a third might get $3,000, and the fourth also gets $5,000. That's four players splitting one scholarship. Out of state guys will generally receive more scholarship money to make up for the difference in out of state tuition costs, even though it might be the same percentage scholarship.
Schools have different standards for academic money that can be added onto baseball money. Some schools, many that you see competing for Omaha each and every year, can add money for low ACT scores or lower GPAs. This allows those schools to more easily recruit nationwide and get in out of state players at a much lower cost. For instance, let's say that a prominent southeastern school can offer an additional $5,000 off tuition for a player who scores a 21 on his ACT and an extra $3,000 for having a 3.0 GPA, they are at a distinct advantage over a midwest school whose standards are 25 and 3.5. If it costs $20,000 at the midwest school, and $25,000 at the southeastern school, then the midwest school has to spend more baseball money to get out of state players. Therefore quality of players is not as high at the midwest school because of the need to "fill in" with invited walk-on's and guys who will go to a school for less money or pay more out of pocket tuition.
As a guy who has coached at both the JUCO and DI levels, if a player has the chance to get into a DI school out of high school, I would advise to take the offer. The two big reasons for going the JUCO route should be if the player is not ready academically for a four year school, or if the player is a draft and follow and has been "sent" to a JUCO by an affiliated team. (Which, by the way, will no longer be the case with the new rule change that will not allow "draft and follows".) There is not a whole lot of "getting better" going on at junior colleges, and you will get into the four year school's program and start to fill a role with good instruction. Guys coming from JUCO's trying to go DI have to be ready to step in right away a fill a role. There has to be a lot of trust from the coaching staff that it will happen. I think the trend at the DI level is to "home grow" your own talent.
Schools have different standards for academic money that can be added onto baseball money. Some schools, many that you see competing for Omaha each and every year, can add money for low ACT scores or lower GPAs. This allows those schools to more easily recruit nationwide and get in out of state players at a much lower cost. For instance, let's say that a prominent southeastern school can offer an additional $5,000 off tuition for a player who scores a 21 on his ACT and an extra $3,000 for having a 3.0 GPA, they are at a distinct advantage over a midwest school whose standards are 25 and 3.5. If it costs $20,000 at the midwest school, and $25,000 at the southeastern school, then the midwest school has to spend more baseball money to get out of state players. Therefore quality of players is not as high at the midwest school because of the need to "fill in" with invited walk-on's and guys who will go to a school for less money or pay more out of pocket tuition.
As a guy who has coached at both the JUCO and DI levels, if a player has the chance to get into a DI school out of high school, I would advise to take the offer. The two big reasons for going the JUCO route should be if the player is not ready academically for a four year school, or if the player is a draft and follow and has been "sent" to a JUCO by an affiliated team. (Which, by the way, will no longer be the case with the new rule change that will not allow "draft and follows".) There is not a whole lot of "getting better" going on at junior colleges, and you will get into the four year school's program and start to fill a role with good instruction. Guys coming from JUCO's trying to go DI have to be ready to step in right away a fill a role. There has to be a lot of trust from the coaching staff that it will happen. I think the trend at the DI level is to "home grow" your own talent.
I was under the impression that any "institution monies", such as academic grants and need-based PRIVATE grants count toward the 11.7................(except HOPE/TAPS)type State programs.
That being considered, say the average cost of attendance at D1 University is $20,000. When you multiply by 11.7, you get a pool of allocable dollars of $234,000.
That can be spread to the roster in the form of athletic grants, academic grants, and need-based blind-based private institutional grants, but capped at $234,000.
NO?
That being considered, say the average cost of attendance at D1 University is $20,000. When you multiply by 11.7, you get a pool of allocable dollars of $234,000.
That can be spread to the roster in the form of athletic grants, academic grants, and need-based blind-based private institutional grants, but capped at $234,000.
NO?
Slugger,
Only when combined with baseball money. The standard is a 26 ACT or lower. If academic money is granted to a player with a 26 ACT or lower, and baseball scholarship money is also awarded, then the acedemic money will count towards the 11.7 most likely depending on the academic scholarship.
The more likely scenario that I was talking about, is if a school can offer a $5,000 academic scholarship for scoring a 22 ACT, but they don't offer "baseball money", that academic money will not be counted against the 11.7. As opposed to another school where a player needs to score a 27 ACT in order to receive $5,000. For the player who scores a 23 ACT, he can go to the first school, get $5,000 off tuition, or go to the second school, and need to get baseball money to match that.
Only when combined with baseball money. The standard is a 26 ACT or lower. If academic money is granted to a player with a 26 ACT or lower, and baseball scholarship money is also awarded, then the acedemic money will count towards the 11.7 most likely depending on the academic scholarship.
The more likely scenario that I was talking about, is if a school can offer a $5,000 academic scholarship for scoring a 22 ACT, but they don't offer "baseball money", that academic money will not be counted against the 11.7. As opposed to another school where a player needs to score a 27 ACT in order to receive $5,000. For the player who scores a 23 ACT, he can go to the first school, get $5,000 off tuition, or go to the second school, and need to get baseball money to match that.
OLDSLUGGER8
Member
Posted November 13, 2006 11:07 AM Hide Post
... "institution monies", such as academic grants and need-based PRIVATE grants"
Could someone please explain: need-based blind-based private institutional grants? What does "blind-based" private institutional grants mean?
Member
Posted November 13, 2006 11:07 AM Hide Post ... "institution monies", such as academic grants and need-based PRIVATE grants"
Could someone please explain: need-based blind-based private institutional grants? What does "blind-based" private institutional grants mean?
quote:Originally posted by bleacherfan:
OLDSLUGGER8
Member
... "institution monies", such as academic grants and need-based PRIVATE grants"
Could someone please explain: need-based blind-based private institutional grants? What does "blind-based" private institutional grants mean?
PM
After going through the last year of dealing with the college recruiting process with my son, I have come to one conclusion that is probably different from a number of others on this board.
To me, the comfort level with the coaching staff (particularly the head coach) is more important than scholarship percentages, numbers of recruits, or any other factors.
The reason I feel this way is that I have seen some bizarre behavior at the college level from coaches in some programs recently. I have a fairly good understanding of player talent, but particularly prior to this year, had little real experience with colleges. I have relatively more experience with MLB, but have not tried to use this experience directly in my son's recruiting, just as I have tried to provide some distance between myself and my son during the time he has played baseball over the past few years--I want it to be an experience he enjoys, not one too wrapped up in parental expectations and pressure.
I will advise my son to consider MLB if drafted this year out of high school. This is something I would not have believed I would do prior to this year.
If my son is not drafted, or opts for college, I will do my best to discuss a program's reputation for the treatment of players with as many parents as possible, and pass that information along to my son for his evaluation. To me, if a coach says my son would probably benefit by a year of redshirting, I have no problem with that--so long as my son is on board. If a coach tells my son it is unlikely he will play much, but can contribute thoughtout his career, and my son is okay with that, I have no problems with it. But, I do not under any circumstances want my son to go anywhere where I feel there is any lack of honesty or integrity in the coaching or athletic program.
Personally, if a college coach has a reputation of being straight with his kids and giving them a shot regardless of their status (ie, high scholarship % or invited walk-on) that program will get my support. I realize scholarship dollars is an important consideration in some cases, but we are talking about something extremely important to these kids as it has been a central focus of theirs for years. I do not want to send my son to a program, and a coach, who has a reputation of showing excess favoritism to certain high school programs because of historical relationship or cutting players because he thinks he can "upgrade".
I don't want to go into too many details about the "bizarre" behavior I have witnessed, but one such incident bears repeating. My son was being recruited by a mid to lower level D-1 program that I only supported from an academic point of view (my son liked it and it was within his academic parameters). After several conversations with this program's assistant coach, my son was invited for a campus visit. The coach said he wanted to show my son around the campus personally. Despite my feelings about the program's baseball adequacy, I was pleased for my son as he had handled this completely on his own. However, just before his planned visit he received another communication from that same coach telling my son his visit coincided with a pitching camp being held on campus at that time and that although he was not being recruited as a pitcher, he would still need to pay the camp fee prior to his visit. I am proud to say that my 17 year old son saw this for what it was and dealt with it accordingly.
As for my reasons to have my son consider MLB if drafted, I now believe it is more of a merit based system than college. I believe there is more of an opportunity to succeed or fail than in college. I regret that, but that is how I feel after this year.
My apologies for such a long-winded post.
To me, the comfort level with the coaching staff (particularly the head coach) is more important than scholarship percentages, numbers of recruits, or any other factors.
The reason I feel this way is that I have seen some bizarre behavior at the college level from coaches in some programs recently. I have a fairly good understanding of player talent, but particularly prior to this year, had little real experience with colleges. I have relatively more experience with MLB, but have not tried to use this experience directly in my son's recruiting, just as I have tried to provide some distance between myself and my son during the time he has played baseball over the past few years--I want it to be an experience he enjoys, not one too wrapped up in parental expectations and pressure.
I will advise my son to consider MLB if drafted this year out of high school. This is something I would not have believed I would do prior to this year.
If my son is not drafted, or opts for college, I will do my best to discuss a program's reputation for the treatment of players with as many parents as possible, and pass that information along to my son for his evaluation. To me, if a coach says my son would probably benefit by a year of redshirting, I have no problem with that--so long as my son is on board. If a coach tells my son it is unlikely he will play much, but can contribute thoughtout his career, and my son is okay with that, I have no problems with it. But, I do not under any circumstances want my son to go anywhere where I feel there is any lack of honesty or integrity in the coaching or athletic program.
Personally, if a college coach has a reputation of being straight with his kids and giving them a shot regardless of their status (ie, high scholarship % or invited walk-on) that program will get my support. I realize scholarship dollars is an important consideration in some cases, but we are talking about something extremely important to these kids as it has been a central focus of theirs for years. I do not want to send my son to a program, and a coach, who has a reputation of showing excess favoritism to certain high school programs because of historical relationship or cutting players because he thinks he can "upgrade".
I don't want to go into too many details about the "bizarre" behavior I have witnessed, but one such incident bears repeating. My son was being recruited by a mid to lower level D-1 program that I only supported from an academic point of view (my son liked it and it was within his academic parameters). After several conversations with this program's assistant coach, my son was invited for a campus visit. The coach said he wanted to show my son around the campus personally. Despite my feelings about the program's baseball adequacy, I was pleased for my son as he had handled this completely on his own. However, just before his planned visit he received another communication from that same coach telling my son his visit coincided with a pitching camp being held on campus at that time and that although he was not being recruited as a pitcher, he would still need to pay the camp fee prior to his visit. I am proud to say that my 17 year old son saw this for what it was and dealt with it accordingly.
As for my reasons to have my son consider MLB if drafted, I now believe it is more of a merit based system than college. I believe there is more of an opportunity to succeed or fail than in college. I regret that, but that is how I feel after this year.
My apologies for such a long-winded post.
quote:As for my reasons to have my son consider MLB if drafted, I now believe it is more of a merit based system than college. I believe there is more of an opportunity to succeed or fail than in college. I regret that, but that is how I feel after this year.
My apologies for such a long-winded post.
Virginia Dad - no apologies necessary as I enjoyed what you had to say
I think yours is a GREAT debate question and hopefully others will see this and comment about whether or not pro ball is more merit-based that college. I am going to read between the lines a bit here but it sounds like maybe you think that in college there may be some preferences given based on such factors as how much money a player got or what high school they previously attended, etc. I am not sure that the same thing doesn't exist in the pros but in a different form. For instance, the higher round draft choices - the money guys seem to get many more opportunities than the lower round guys even though some of the lower round guys wind up being more successful. I think Fungo has said that some players have to prove they can't play whereas other must prove they can. I am wondering out loud here whether or not the same type of "political" considerations have to be dealt with in the pros but maybe under different circumstances. Interesting questions and I appreciate your thoughts on the subject
.
Would agree for the most part...and I have preached this consistently...
DI, DII, DIII...IMO, a good fit, and heavy research includes the coach...The fact is my son will likley spend more time on the field as he does in class...His baseball coaches may, in the end be some of the most influential people ever in his life...He will grow nearly as close to his teammates and coach as he has his family...Arguably most of what he needs to learn about life happens on a collegiate baseball field...
Lots of transfers happening because players did not finish their homework...
44
.
Would agree for the most part...and I have preached this consistently...
DI, DII, DIII...IMO, a good fit, and heavy research includes the coach...The fact is my son will likley spend more time on the field as he does in class...His baseball coaches may, in the end be some of the most influential people ever in his life...He will grow nearly as close to his teammates and coach as he has his family...Arguably most of what he needs to learn about life happens on a collegiate baseball field...
Lots of transfers happening because players did not finish their homework...
44.
ClevelandDad,
Thanks for the post, and I am sure you are right that not all minor leaguers are treated the same, and in a lot of ways there are very strong similarities. It just seems to me that with professional baseball the players have a better idea of where they stand at times---even if its way at the back of the line.
I think most major league scouts would be laughed out of a room if they told some 18 year old 23 rd pick anything serious about the expectations the major league club had for him. Maybe a few scouts do this, but I've never seen it. Yet you see it all the time with colleges where recruitors use all kinds of buzzwords about how the recruit will "help them", "contribute right away", etc. I doubt many talk about thoses cases in which a player loses his scholarship after one year because the coach thinks he might be able to upgrade.
I really don't want to paint all college programs with one brush and I know many student-athletes would not exchange the experience for the world. I would just like to see a little more consistency and integrity in the system.
You are right that I believe preferences are there for players recruited from pipeline schools. Gosh, I've seen some kids at D-1 that I don't think would have a prayer in D-3. They may not get much scholarship money and little playing time but clearly do prevent other kids from having the opportunity to compete.
As I mentioned in my previous post, I think the camp system at colleges is also getting out of hand. If you want to teach a kid something, and he wants to pay to attend, that fine. But I've seen one posting on this site where a kid has been asked to come back to camp for a forth time for further evaluation. That isn't evaluation or recruiting, its almost criminal.
I never expected that I would be a proponent of professional baseball over college until the last couple of years. To me it is a real shame and I would love to the influential college coaches try to clean up this mess, but I'm not sure I know how to advise them.
Thanks for the post, and I am sure you are right that not all minor leaguers are treated the same, and in a lot of ways there are very strong similarities. It just seems to me that with professional baseball the players have a better idea of where they stand at times---even if its way at the back of the line.
I think most major league scouts would be laughed out of a room if they told some 18 year old 23 rd pick anything serious about the expectations the major league club had for him. Maybe a few scouts do this, but I've never seen it. Yet you see it all the time with colleges where recruitors use all kinds of buzzwords about how the recruit will "help them", "contribute right away", etc. I doubt many talk about thoses cases in which a player loses his scholarship after one year because the coach thinks he might be able to upgrade.
I really don't want to paint all college programs with one brush and I know many student-athletes would not exchange the experience for the world. I would just like to see a little more consistency and integrity in the system.
You are right that I believe preferences are there for players recruited from pipeline schools. Gosh, I've seen some kids at D-1 that I don't think would have a prayer in D-3. They may not get much scholarship money and little playing time but clearly do prevent other kids from having the opportunity to compete.
As I mentioned in my previous post, I think the camp system at colleges is also getting out of hand. If you want to teach a kid something, and he wants to pay to attend, that fine. But I've seen one posting on this site where a kid has been asked to come back to camp for a forth time for further evaluation. That isn't evaluation or recruiting, its almost criminal.
I never expected that I would be a proponent of professional baseball over college until the last couple of years. To me it is a real shame and I would love to the influential college coaches try to clean up this mess, but I'm not sure I know how to advise them.
VD,
Great post and I do beleive that CD followed it up with a great post as well.
I am awaiting replies on your post from infielddad, Fungo, and a few others whose sons play pro ball.
I am sorry about the experiences that you have had, they are not unique. The way I look at it, schools need money to exist, camps are a good way to achieve this goal, one needs to take it for what it is. I recently heard from a parent who thought that her son had a chance at a school and my understanding was coming to camp would haelp. I know she was frustrated as to results.
There is good infromation posted here to help us figure this all out about the recruiting process, hopefully it helps parents to understand college baseball IS a business and unfortunetly in business, any business, these things go on.
MLB is a business also, bigger business, so I have been told, something that needs to be considered as well, when making choices?
Most important thing, whatever decision that is made, should be made by your son and for only the right reasons.
JMO.
Great post and I do beleive that CD followed it up with a great post as well.
I am awaiting replies on your post from infielddad, Fungo, and a few others whose sons play pro ball.
I am sorry about the experiences that you have had, they are not unique. The way I look at it, schools need money to exist, camps are a good way to achieve this goal, one needs to take it for what it is. I recently heard from a parent who thought that her son had a chance at a school and my understanding was coming to camp would haelp. I know she was frustrated as to results.
There is good infromation posted here to help us figure this all out about the recruiting process, hopefully it helps parents to understand college baseball IS a business and unfortunetly in business, any business, these things go on.
MLB is a business also, bigger business, so I have been told, something that needs to be considered as well, when making choices?
Most important thing, whatever decision that is made, should be made by your son and for only the right reasons.
JMO.
VaDad, I think your posts are thought provoking. They bring some observations that should be recognized by all high school parents, players, and recruits.
While there are things about the "business" of professional ball that, personally, I think could be changed to benefit the club and the player, I know my views don't make a darn bit of difference.
On the college side, I think you are hinting at recruiting situations that are troubling. In a different thread, PG noted they give far more DI grades to attendees than there are DI spots available each year. In another thread started by TR, there are excellent posts on the importance of DI. You put together a situation where lot's of folks want something for which there is a shortage, combine it with coaches needing camp income and the like to supplement their income, have little to no regulation or oversight, and you can certainly end up with difficulties of the type you describe.
I wonder how many folks who do not have a baseball background as solid as yours fail to understand when their son is truly a camp invitee, not a recruit.
While I think it takes a pretty special 18 year old to be able to adapt to minor league ball, I also agree that option, with the college scholarship plan in place, may be better than some DI college choices.
While there are things about the "business" of professional ball that, personally, I think could be changed to benefit the club and the player, I know my views don't make a darn bit of difference.
On the college side, I think you are hinting at recruiting situations that are troubling. In a different thread, PG noted they give far more DI grades to attendees than there are DI spots available each year. In another thread started by TR, there are excellent posts on the importance of DI. You put together a situation where lot's of folks want something for which there is a shortage, combine it with coaches needing camp income and the like to supplement their income, have little to no regulation or oversight, and you can certainly end up with difficulties of the type you describe.
I wonder how many folks who do not have a baseball background as solid as yours fail to understand when their son is truly a camp invitee, not a recruit.
While I think it takes a pretty special 18 year old to be able to adapt to minor league ball, I also agree that option, with the college scholarship plan in place, may be better than some DI college choices.
VD look at it from the point of view of the coaches.
I do agree the paying for a camp should be upfront and yes many are nothing more than fubd raisers.
You have to understand what goes on out there and learn the ques such as the buzz words you mention. Baseball in college and Pro can be equally ugly. You either understand and embrace the reality of this level of BB or you will have a tough time going down the road. It is the tough road that makes it exciting.
I do agree the paying for a camp should be upfront and yes many are nothing more than fubd raisers.
You have to understand what goes on out there and learn the ques such as the buzz words you mention. Baseball in college and Pro can be equally ugly. You either understand and embrace the reality of this level of BB or you will have a tough time going down the road. It is the tough road that makes it exciting.
BHD,
In terms of "recruiting/player evaluation," I agree with Va.Dad that professional ball is more "merit" based or pure than what seems to be evolving in certain college programs.
Professional tryout camps are usually free and it is pretty clear cut whether they see you as a prospect or not. It isn't always pretty when they make these very sharp distinctions but it is clear. In professional ball, the evaluators usually come and see you. From our experience, our son knew exactly which teams liked his skills and which did not. While the draft itself presented some vagaries, we were pretty certain he would be drafted. We knew some teams didn't consider him at all, some considered him an organizational type, and a few considered him a player. Clear cut for the most part.
What Va.Dad seems to find objectionable, and I agree is using camps/fundraising through camps as a disguise that someone is a recruit.
I have absolutely no problem with college coaches running camps and making money. I have a huge problem with the "ethics" in suggesting/implying that someone is a recruit and it may help if you pay for a few camps. The "Why DI" thread makes it clear that DI college baseball is a "seller's" market and there are vastly more buyers than spots. I think it is perfectly reasonable to insist that college camps clearly state whether they are developmental or for potential recruits. IMO, this is going to get worse and eventually will be regulated if the coaches don't do it now.
For the past several years I have attended the Stanford Camp to sit with our son's former coach and several others I have met along the way. That camp makes a lot of money for the Stanford coaches, and I have no problem with that. It is well run and provides visibility to a number players. It is very upfront in letting players know that not everyone is a Stanford recruit but other colleges are there.
On the other hand, those same coaches run a different 6-8 weeks of camps during the summer and make it clear the purpose of those is skill development and the like. I don't think anyone attending the other 6-8 weeks of camps thinks they are going because Stanford is recruiting them.(I am aware of several parents of 9-10 year olds who miss that point however.)
In terms of "recruiting/player evaluation," I agree with Va.Dad that professional ball is more "merit" based or pure than what seems to be evolving in certain college programs.
Professional tryout camps are usually free and it is pretty clear cut whether they see you as a prospect or not. It isn't always pretty when they make these very sharp distinctions but it is clear. In professional ball, the evaluators usually come and see you. From our experience, our son knew exactly which teams liked his skills and which did not. While the draft itself presented some vagaries, we were pretty certain he would be drafted. We knew some teams didn't consider him at all, some considered him an organizational type, and a few considered him a player. Clear cut for the most part.
What Va.Dad seems to find objectionable, and I agree is using camps/fundraising through camps as a disguise that someone is a recruit.
I have absolutely no problem with college coaches running camps and making money. I have a huge problem with the "ethics" in suggesting/implying that someone is a recruit and it may help if you pay for a few camps. The "Why DI" thread makes it clear that DI college baseball is a "seller's" market and there are vastly more buyers than spots. I think it is perfectly reasonable to insist that college camps clearly state whether they are developmental or for potential recruits. IMO, this is going to get worse and eventually will be regulated if the coaches don't do it now.
For the past several years I have attended the Stanford Camp to sit with our son's former coach and several others I have met along the way. That camp makes a lot of money for the Stanford coaches, and I have no problem with that. It is well run and provides visibility to a number players. It is very upfront in letting players know that not everyone is a Stanford recruit but other colleges are there.
On the other hand, those same coaches run a different 6-8 weeks of camps during the summer and make it clear the purpose of those is skill development and the like. I don't think anyone attending the other 6-8 weeks of camps thinks they are going because Stanford is recruiting them.(I am aware of several parents of 9-10 year olds who miss that point however.)
Thanks very much for sharing your thoughts. At times, I wonder if I'm seeing the same thing as others and it really helps to get a different perspective.
I guess one thing that we should not lose sight of is how fortunate we are to have son's who have achieved at this level. We are blessed with healthy kids that wouldn't be where they are today if it were not combined with some good inner drive.
By the way infielddad, I also know those 9-10 year olds' parents. I think they also have the Stanford Admissions office on speed dial as well. Thanks for the laugh.
I guess one thing that we should not lose sight of is how fortunate we are to have son's who have achieved at this level. We are blessed with healthy kids that wouldn't be where they are today if it were not combined with some good inner drive.
By the way infielddad, I also know those 9-10 year olds' parents. I think they also have the Stanford Admissions office on speed dial as well. Thanks for the laugh.
I agree Infield dad. This is probably one of the best topics that all parents need to understand as their sons consider college BB. We have all had those invites to camps and need to make an informed decision on which ones to attend. There is a learning curve that sometimes has devastating results. This site provides a lot of insite and hopefully it will help people deal with the pit falls of recruiting.
quote:To me, the comfort level with the coaching staff (particularly the head coach) is more important than scholarship percentages, numbers of recruits, or any other factors.
Dad - I'm not sure that many can fully appreciate this. I agree with you 100% and you're so ahead of the game with your son because you understand.
quote:Originally posted by Bear:
Now that's interesting:
What it means to me is the College Coach offers the student a 'walk on' status (ie ability to tryout at Fall Walk-On Tryouts....which are open to entire college campus students.
There is absolutely zero committment from the Head Coach.
I went thru that. Their was commitment from the head coach however, he basically guaranteed to keep me in the program thru my frosh year, and progress development.
I've always thought that I should write something here, but I also felt that those who did, really said most of what I could have written. However, thought that this article (with a small blurb about someone I know ) had some useful perspectives from athletes from several different sports. Also, this might be somewhat unique to Stanford, for reasons stated in the article:
http://www.stanfordalumni.org/news/magazine/2007/novdec/features/walkons.html
) had some useful perspectives from athletes from several different sports. Also, this might be somewhat unique to Stanford, for reasons stated in the article: http://www.stanfordalumni.org/news/magazine/2007/novdec/features/walkons.html
Camps aside, I have been whipped on previous ocassions for throwing out a jab or two on the subject of recruiting.
All I will say is the lack of integrity extends all the way to the authoritative publications also.
A recruiting class gets a great ranking and the main recruiter has a method of calling 20 kids on the same day and telling them all that "you are my #1 choice".
Well, that means 19 kids were told a lie. No getting around that. I suggest you or your kid ask what the offer is immediately when you hear that line of ****. If you get no offer, then you can choose how much fun you want to have with them, "string them along" if you choose, or just say don't call back unless you have an offer.
By the way. Any opponents get a preemptive shot. Tough ****!!
All I will say is the lack of integrity extends all the way to the authoritative publications also.
A recruiting class gets a great ranking and the main recruiter has a method of calling 20 kids on the same day and telling them all that "you are my #1 choice".
Well, that means 19 kids were told a lie. No getting around that. I suggest you or your kid ask what the offer is immediately when you hear that line of ****. If you get no offer, then you can choose how much fun you want to have with them, "string them along" if you choose, or just say don't call back unless you have an offer.
By the way. Any opponents get a preemptive shot. Tough ****!!
Bordeaux,
Great article, thank you. Wishing your D a successful year.
Having other opportunities and deciding to walk on is a tough decision. Walking on with no other options can turn out great.
Last fall, two players walked on and got roster spots for the season. One was a senior who had played 2nd base on the club team, one was a catcher. After the first game our ss had to leave for the season for medical reasons so the 2nd baseman moved to ss and the walk on was given a chance to compete with a freshman for 2nd base. The catcher was strictly used in the bullpen but he didn't care he was so happy to be on the team. The walk on trying for 2nd base eventually lost his start to the more talented freshman but he had huge crowds that came and when he did get put in as a sub, the crowd loved it. He made the ACC travel squad and ESPN did a short segment on him. The catcher was needed for awhile in season as our third catcher had surgery.
During the summer two catchers decided to transfer, as the starting catcher decided not to go pro. This opened the opportunity again for the walk on catcher to come back this year for bull pens. He spends his time in the pen, and very happy to just be on the team.
For both of them it worked out well. Maybe if their expectations had been higher and been unhappy it would not have been worth writing about it, but sometimes, there are happy endings.
Great article, thank you. Wishing your D a successful year.
Having other opportunities and deciding to walk on is a tough decision. Walking on with no other options can turn out great.
Last fall, two players walked on and got roster spots for the season. One was a senior who had played 2nd base on the club team, one was a catcher. After the first game our ss had to leave for the season for medical reasons so the 2nd baseman moved to ss and the walk on was given a chance to compete with a freshman for 2nd base. The catcher was strictly used in the bullpen but he didn't care he was so happy to be on the team. The walk on trying for 2nd base eventually lost his start to the more talented freshman but he had huge crowds that came and when he did get put in as a sub, the crowd loved it. He made the ACC travel squad and ESPN did a short segment on him. The catcher was needed for awhile in season as our third catcher had surgery.
During the summer two catchers decided to transfer, as the starting catcher decided not to go pro. This opened the opportunity again for the walk on catcher to come back this year for bull pens. He spends his time in the pen, and very happy to just be on the team.
For both of them it worked out well. Maybe if their expectations had been higher and been unhappy it would not have been worth writing about it, but sometimes, there are happy endings.
Thanks TPM. For a minute I got confused about "D" and thought you were talking about my daughter, but then I realized we had the name thing going! Same to your D!!!
Yeah, few of us here got "D"s.
That's really true--true on S's college team too I've noticed. There are days (I hate to admit it) when I would have been willing to put up one or two for adoption for daughter-hungry moms though!