What should we expect after Showball?

@NotABaseballGuy posted:

This is such an interesting discussion because we all obtain different information from different sources at different times.

I have some real world data points to offer that make me doubt some of the content above. My 2022 was admitted to four of your Tier 3 schools without submitting test scores. The 2022 had athletic pre-reads (different sport) at three of the four and lack of test scores was not identified as a problem at the time of the pre-read. (There was no pre-read or coach support at the fourth school.) Of these four admits, one was via EA and the other three were via RD. 2022 did not apply ED anywhere. Didn't want to commit. But I'm confident that an ED application would have yielded admission to at least some of your Tier 2B even without scores. For what it's worth, 2022 graduated from the same school with roughly the same GPA as the 2024.

Is the 2022 an outlier? I don't know. But these are facts.

This isn't meant to be argumentative, but for those other parents of 2024, 2025, etc., who might be reading this, I think we need to acknowledge some significant uncertainty (which Dadbelly does) vis a vis the need for test scores. The admissions landscape is changing and I expect test scores to be further deemphasized going forward as a means of offsetting the recent Supreme Court decision on affirmative action.

As to coach outreach, nothing yet. I'll post an update about that in a week or two for those who might be interested.

Not to be a toad but almost no 2022 grad had test scores due to the pandemic. Not sure that grad year is comparable to any other.

This is a good list.  Bogeyorpar's that I linked above lists 100 schools, thus 50 more than NotABaseballGuy's.  It's also particulary useful because he puts the academic ranking (which relates to admissions) and the baseball ranking, side by side.  That makes it possible to identify schools that broadly fit both the academic skills and the baseball skills.

@SpeedDemon posted:

Not to be a toad but almost no 2022 grad had test scores due to the pandemic. Not sure that grad year is comparable to any other.

Bingo. MIT completed a study last summer and realized test optional was a disaster for them. They implemented mandatory test scores with basically no warning for the 2023 admission cycle. They had a significant number of freshman who couldn’t do MIT calculus. On my son’s OV he was actually helping some of the kids with their calc problem sets.

From what I’ve seen talking to parents of recruits from other sports, baseball players get scrutinized more than any other athletes. In some cases admissions makes it even harder than a normal student admission.

There are coaches on that list that can get a kid through admissions without a score. It makes it harder on the coach though. I can also say from first hand experience, every single coach asked for test scores early in the process. Then they asked about transcripts, AP scores, and finally senior year schedule. Some asked for a screen shot, some wanted the full score report. Baseball coaches want it a simple as possible to get a kid through admissions. I can also say a school that required a 1500+ for a baseball player only required a 1450 for a female soccer player. I’ve heard even slightly less for a couple other sports.

College admissions right now is a complete crap shoot. Kids with perfect SATs and GPAs are getting shot down at schools like UVA and UMich while other kids are getting in with much lower academic profiles but different EC’s.

@SpeedDemon posted:

This is really good.

I would just be a bit more explicit re: Tier 1 and Tier 2 - the coaches at MIT, CalTech, UChicago, and Johns Hopkins do not have athletic chits through admissions. Meaning, the student has to be of an academic profile that they could get into the school without sports. And generally, the more sought after you are as a recruit, the more there is flexibility on the academic side except at those 4 schools.

well done!

I wanted to share some more recent information (last couple of months) that we've learned through a couple of different (but legit) venues - a college admission consultant from Stanford All-Star Camp (Coach Stotz's daughter) and a conference call hosted by PTW with Coach Tyrrell sharing his recruiting thoughts:

• CalTech - absolutely true; the coaching staff has 0 influence on admissions. I've PM'ed a couple of parents on this board and they also validate this. The consultant shared a very recent conversation with the CalTech coaching staff talking about how they had to form a team with "the best available" on campus - a couple of kids on the team haven't played baseball since 14U...
• MIT - unlike CalTech, the consultant shared their coaching staff does have influence here. She stated high test scores/academics are required of recruits just like their non-athletes - no specific details here because she pointed us to the 25/75 percentiles of their accepts for test scores & GPA guidance
• UChicago - on the conference call, Coach said they have a maximum of 8 spots each year that he can vouch for to admissions. 1/3 of the recruits last cycle were test optional, but shared the ones that did submitted scores of 1500+ SAT/34+ ACT. He also said they issue "likely letters" a couple of weeks after the EA due date

@TerribleBPthrower posted:

From what I’ve seen talking to parents of recruits from other sports, baseball players get scrutinized more than any other athletes. In some cases admissions makes it even harder than a normal student admission.

I can also say a school that required a 1500+ for a baseball player only required a 1450 for a female soccer player. I’ve heard even slightly less for a couple other sports.

Care to offer a theory as to why the above might be so? I can't make sense of that. Not saying it isn't true. It just doesn't seem to have any logic behind it.

What I've heard through our college counselor about HA admissions generally is that girls need higher academic metrics than boys do because girls mature at an earlier age and tend to be better high school students than boys. But the colleges still want to be gender balanced, so they admit boys with slightly lower academic metrics than girls. So, I'm having trouble reconciling the extra scrutiny given to baseball players. Even at Brown, most baseball players are boys.

"Even at Brown, most baseball players are boys."  Classic. For the daily win

BB players kinda have a stereotype of not being the most serious students.  Maybe thats why? 🤷

@NotABaseballGuy posted:

Care to offer a theory as to why the above might be so? I can't make sense of that. Not saying it isn't true. It just doesn't seem to have any logic behind it.

What I've heard through our college counselor about HA admissions generally is that girls need higher academic metrics than boys do because girls mature at an earlier age and tend to be better high school students than boys. But the colleges still want to be gender balanced, so they admit boys with slightly lower academic metrics than girls. So, I'm having trouble reconciling the extra scrutiny given to baseball players. Even at Brown, most baseball players are boys.

There are far fewer girls applying to schools like MIT/Caltech/etc. With a smaller applicant pool they need to do something to even out the gender balance, especially with sports teams.

Baseball teams are typically not the most diverse group of kids. Schools are trying to be more diverse. Look at the questions on the applications. They are mostly geared towards identifying underrepresented applicants. Most baseball players applying to these schools don’t fit many, if any at all. Walk around and ask parents at Showball where their kids go to HS. Most will say a prep school that costs $30k+/year and they are paying full price.

@txbball25 posted:

I wanted to share some more recent information (last couple of months) that we've learned through a couple of different (but legit) venues - a college admission consultant from Stanford All-Star Camp (Coach Stotz's daughter) and a conference call hosted by PTW with Coach Tyrrell sharing his recruiting thoughts:

• CalTech - absolutely true; the coaching staff has 0 influence on admissions. I've PM'ed a couple of parents on this board and they also validate this. The consultant shared a very recent conversation with the CalTech coaching staff talking about how they had to form a team with "the best available" on campus - a couple of kids on the team haven't played baseball since 14U...
• MIT - unlike CalTech, the consultant shared their coaching staff does have influence here. She stated high test scores/academics are required of recruits just like their non-athletes - no specific details here because she pointed us to the 25/75 percentiles of their accepts for test scores & GPA guidance
• UChicago - on the conference call, Coach said they have a maximum of 8 spots each year that he can vouch for to admissions. 1/3 of the recruits last cycle were test optional, but shared the ones that did submitted scores of 1500+ SAT/34+ ACT. He also said they issue "likely letters" a couple of weeks after the EA due date

Caltech doesn’t have influence once the application is submitted, but they will do prereads and let the coach know an applicants chances and what they need to demonstrate on their application. Admissions will keep the coach aware of whether an applicant gets cut at a certain point in the process. Any “support” the coach has is only for RSA. If you wait for RD you are flying solo. They are doing much better the past couple years and have recruited a few decent players. At least one recent recruit is up to 90 on the mound.

Admissions will give all of these coaches guidelines each year for what they need to target academically. They have a basic idea from the previous year and then fine tune it once the first wave of applicants come in. Meeting these academic requirements and having support is no guarantee you’ll get in. Getting a likely letter is the best way to keep your mind at peace while you wait for a decision.

I misspoke and am feeling the need to weigh in. It's also really hot outside so I'm sitting in the AC.

- At every NCAA school, in every sport coaches have a certain number of slots which allows them to sponsor desirable athletes through the admission process. The number of slots varies by sport, with football having the most.

- What varies (greatly) is how much admissions is willing to flex their standards to admit prospective athletes. Per @Dadbelly2023 it seems like CalTech is the least flexible, with MIT right behind and Johns Hopkins and UChicago after. So while these super HA D3 schools technically do have slots (also called chits or spots) the coaches don't have much influence, even as they seek to build a competitive team.

Which lead me to think: is a chit without influence really a chit? Why bother trying to build a winning team if winning doesn't matter?     

Which lead me to - it must be because of safety and liability.  Because even the lowest level of college sports (D3) is not a place where you want a student first learning how to stand in the box and hit a 80mph fastball, or learning gymnastics or learning say how to dive off a platform. In other words, as long as they sponsor sports the HA institutions will need to give special consideration to qualified athletes and they really don't have a choice, unless they want to open themselves to liability.

Anyone agree or disagree?

@TerribleBPthrower posted:

Admissions will give all of these coaches guidelines each year for what they need to target academically. They have a basic idea from the previous year and then fine tune it once the first wave of applicants come in. Meeting these academic requirements and having support is no guarantee you’ll get in. Getting a likely letter is the best way to keep your mind at peace while you wait for a decision.

^ this

The earlier and more frequently the coach contacts your son in the HA admission process, starting anytime after 8/1 junior year, the more they want him. If he receives only tepid calls or emails, he's on the bubble: don't give up, but he needs to work harder and expand his sites. If the college responds with only canned camp invites, move on. They don't want him. 

I think it's extremely important for parents to realize that if your son is not being given a pre-read i.e. a chit in the summer or fall of senior year then it's more than likely he is not a top recruit due to his athletic skill. As @TerribleBPthrower states above, coaches are given guidelines for admissions. Grades/test scores are easy to ascertain, most athletes list them in their bio or in the signature on their email. Most coaches pride themselves on their ability to get students they want admitted.

Anecdote 1: I once heard an MIT coach (not baseball and no longer a coach there) brag about an 85% success rate with admissions. Clearly that long-tenured coach knew what would fly and what wouldn't and screened carefully. On the flip side, I was told directly by a HA coach (not baseball) that he averaged only 1 out of 20 recommended students getting admitted. This was CMU/CS so very specific to a school and a major. That coach was fairly new to CMU. My guess is his success rate will go up as he gains more experience with admissions there.

Awful anecdote 2: I've seen parents be so persistent and so browbeat an MIT coach into using a chit that he finally agreed to do it (wasn't baseball). The coach then offloaded the family onto admissions. The kid got deferred out of ED1 into ED2, and then out of ED2 into regular decision. He received a rejection in late March. The family thought the whole time that their kid was a shoe-in at MIT and telling everyone he was going there. The student did not apply to many other schools. The Dad admitted all of this to me as we sat in the stands because he was panicked and beating himself up. It was terribly sad.

All of this said, I can tell you 100% that nearly every HA school mentioned in this thread is looking to improve the competitiveness of its sports teams. The schools have learned that a certain segment (alumni, current parents/relatives) who wouldn't donate otherwise will donate to a specific sport.

@SpeedDemon posted:

Why bother trying to build a winning team if winning doesn't matter?  Which lead me to - it must be because of safety and liability.  . . . .Anyone agree or disagree?

Seems to me you just answered your own question:

@SpeedDemon posted:

All of this said, I can tell you 100% that nearly every HA school mentioned in this thread is looking to improve the competitiveness of its sports teams. The schools have learned that a certain segment (alumni, current parents/relatives) who wouldn't donate otherwise will donate to a specific sport.

Which is what I was going to say!

@SpeedDemon posted:

I misspoke and am feeling the need to weigh in. It's also really hot outside so I'm sitting in the AC.

- At every NCAA school, in every sport coaches have a certain number of slots which allows them to sponsor desirable athletes through the admission process. The number of slots varies by sport, with football having the most.

- What varies (greatly) is how much admissions is willing to flex their standards to admit prospective athletes. Per @Dadbelly2023 it seems like CalTech is the least flexible, with MIT right behind and Johns Hopkins and UChicago after. So while these super HA D3 schools technically do have slots (also called chits or spots) the coaches don't have much influence, even as they seek to build a competitive team.

Which lead me to think: is a chit without influence really a chit? Why bother trying to build a winning team if winning doesn't matter?     

Which lead me to - it must be because of safety and liability.  Because even the lowest level of college sports (D3) is not a place where you want a student first learning how to stand in the box and hit a 80mph fastball, or learning gymnastics or learning say how to dive off a platform. In other words, as long as they sponsor sports the HA institutions will need to give special consideration to qualified athletes and they really don't have a choice, unless they want to open themselves to liability.

Anyone agree or disagree?

They have chits, they are just different. A kid with a 1510 SAT can apply to JHU and have less than a 10% chance of getting in. That same kid gets a 100% chance with Babb’s support. In previous years a kid with a 1520+ at MIT had a 50% chance with coach support. This past year it was lower than 20% of their chits were admitted. We know a 1580, #2 in his class at an elite prep school who didn’t get admitted with support. UChicago also has a very high % of successful supports. Caltech is probably the lowest on an annual basis.

In order to receive these chits an athlete typically needs to be above the 50% of the current applicant pool. Basically the coach is getting your application a guaranteed look and as long as your application is on par with the rest of the class you get in. MIT rejected over 1000 perfect SAT’s this year. I imagine those same kids were likely also rejected from a number of Ivies, Stanford, Duke, Caltech, etc.

If a player is getting support they will also get essay writing assistance. The coaches will know which topics admissions is looking for. UChicago is notorious for having prompts that make you think, “WTF am I going to write for this?” The coach can tell you what they want to see and not see.

@anotherparent posted:

Seems to me you just answered your own question:

Which is what I was going to say!

Ha, thanks.

I was having a hard time reconciling these two things -

HA schools don't flex on admission for athletes

HA schools are trying to build up their sports teams

Seemed like a setup for a lot of schools to be fighting over a tiny number of very HA athletes.

But what @TerribleBPthrower wrote makes the most sense - athletes with an average profile for their class stand a much higher chance of being admitted, although admissions won't drop below the average profile to admit an athlete.  The coach also helps with the essay.

So they do flex a bit on admissions for athletes.

Thanks all!

Coach helps with essay?

They aren’t going to write it for you, but they can tell you topics to avoid or hot topics they want to read about.

@SpeedDemon posted:

Seemed like a setup for a lot of schools to be fighting over a tiny number of very HA athletes.

Yes.  And that's why the action gets hot and heavy in mid-August through October.  Just as players are trying to find schools that match their academic aspirations and athletic skills, coaches are doing the same thing.  Each player can only commit (via ED application) to one school, and that prompts cascades down other schools' boards.

@SpeedDemon posted:

Ha, thanks.

I was having a hard time reconciling these two things -

HA schools don't flex on admission for athletes

HA schools are trying to build up their sports teams

Seemed like a setup for a lot of schools to be fighting over a tiny number of very HA athletes.

But what @TerribleBPthrower wrote makes the most sense - athletes with an average profile for their class stand a much higher chance of being admitted, although admissions won't drop below the average profile to admit an athlete.  The coach also helps with the essay.

So they do flex a bit on admissions for athletes.

Thanks all!

@SpeedDemon - "Flex" isn't really the word I would use.  I would use "categorize" as the NESCAC schools do.  It seems a lot of schools had adopted that model when my son was being recruited.  Coaches categorize their recruits into buckets.  This is an (NESCAC hockey) example I grabbed 13+ years ago off of a consulting service presentation that was "publically" available....I don't think they knew it was publically available.    PM me if your interested, and I'll try to dig it up out of my archives.   From the banding system, coaches decide which recruit they really want to support or which recruit really needs his assistance (lower bands) with admission.

Each NESCAC school is different, it is very difficult to lump them together when you discuss NESCAC bands. For example, a “C” band athlete for Amherst could be a “B” band athlete for a different NESCSAC school.

I thought the presentation was excellent and very good at explaining NESCAC bands and NESCSAC athletic recruiting in my opinion. Banding can differ between schools, and coaches are not involved in the process except for recommending an athlete and negotiating their positions within the banding system.

A Band:
SAT Scores 700+ average all above 680
SAT II 720
GPA: Mostly As/Top 5%

B Band:
SAT scores 650+ average, all above 610
SAT II 640
GPA: Mix of A/B/Top 15%

C Band:
SAT scores 630+ average, all above 580
SAT II 600
GPA: B Record/Top 20%

D Band:
SAT scores below 1800-1880 (depending on school) all greater than 530
SAT II < 560
GPA: Below a B average/Top 25-35%

So, bottom line in talking with a coach from a NESCAC would be for your son to ask what band or category he is in. Remembering that bands differ from school to school.  That would be a quick way to figure out how much leverage you have in their recruiting plans.

JMO.

@NotABaseballGuy posted:

I think kids that come from reputable high schools are doing just fine at top tier liberal arts colleges, even without test scores. I'm not really worried about getting him in to school. I'm worried about getting him a roster spot.

Your son has time to get bigger, stronger and faster to boost his metrics.

Hey all,

It's been about two weeks since Showball. I thought I'd provide an update and ask for help interpreting some of the communications below. So far, son has received silence from six, one clear rejection, one partial rejection (see below), and a few camp invitations. It's hard for me to gauge the level of interest from the camp invitations. So, I've anonymized one of them and included it below for you all to comment on. I've also done that with the partial rejection because I'm interested in your thoughts on that too. One invitation (not the one below) came to my son via a text message from a coach that had his number from when we visited. For what it's worth, my son's SAT score is about 40 points lower than this school's pre-COVID 25th percentile score. As always, thanks in advance for your thoughts.

Below are from the coaches:

College #1 – Camp Invitation

Hey [name],

Great to hear from you and thank you for shooting over these videos.

We are still in the process of evaluating recruits for our 2024 class, and our pre read date is August 1st. We are looking for a catcher in the 2024 class, someone that can really throw it, swing it and have the ability to play catcher and other positions.

Since we have only seen you at Showball, I think it would be great if we could get you out to our Fall Prospect Camp coming in September. Here is the link if you are interested: [link]

Let me know if you have any questions.

_____________

College #2 – Partial Rejection

[name],

I hope you're having a good summer, and as our recruiting efforts are progressing, I wanted to get back to you with some feedback.

I won't be able to support your application or guarantee you a spot on our roster. If admitted to [college], the best opportunity that I can offer is for you to try out as a walk-on during our five-week fall season. You'd have every opportunity during those five weeks to show what you can do and compete for a spot on our roster.

I wish that I could guarantee opportunities for everyone, but I think it's important for me to provide honest feedback that you can use to help frame your college search.

Good luck and best wishes!

[name]

How does his SAT compare with the recent admitted class? I didn’t hear any coaches comparing anything to pre-Covid last summer. Their requirements were all based on the recent classes.

The camp invite seems semi-legit. It’s not a mass email, but also doesn’t really say anything he likes about your son or any concrete details on what they are looking for. I would put it on the back burner for now or see if they are willing to get on a call. If no better options pop up he can go and see what happens.

The second one is a good thing. He is telling you he doesn't need you, so you don't need to waste more time, and he is NOT trying to get you to pay for a camp.  Trying to walk on, especially for a specific position like catcher, when he's already told you they don't need you, is not a chance I personally would take. If your son loves the school and would go there regardless of baseball, then maybe that's different.

The first one is pretty generic. Is he still going to Headfirst next week? Is this school going to be there?  In that case, tell them that.  Is going to this camp a big expense/journey?

If you can afford it go to the next Headfirst camp. Doing so will show the HA schools your son is serious about playing in college. It helps that pre-reads have started, coaches will be getting a better idea of how many of their top choices will be admitted, which could create some openings for your son.  Good luck.  

How much interest in school #1 does your son and you have as a student? Is it close enough to visit? Given the SB results, I think you should plan on attending school camps.  

Your son attended Showball.  That was not a cheap event.  Your son received responses.  Before signing up for another comparable event with a similar hefty price tag, I think it is time for your son to pick up the phone to talk to the coaches that did respond to gauge their true interest level.   Feel free to reach out to the coaches that have not responded as well...you have nothing to lose.  Your son needs feedback before the two of you take the next step whether that is a camp or another showcase.  There is still time especially with D3 schools.

In my experience and other's experience, it is very typical for a school to see someone play at a showcase or tournament and then invite them for a camp.  Yes, camps can be about making a few bucks for the volunteer coach.   In a lot of cases, they want ALL the coaches to see the recruits they've brought to camp to evaluate them as a coaching team.   This is why I suggest your son talk directly to the coaches that reached out.   Another tactic can be to schedule an academic visit to the schools your son is most interested in.  When you get the academic visiti scheduled, reach out to the coaches to mention you will be on campus on Aug x or Sept x, and you want to stop by to introduce yourself.   I'd do that for his top 3 choices on his list.

JMO.   Good luck!

Way back in the spring, we registered him for the July Showball and the August Headfirst. This seemed necessary because there's very few colleges that attend both. My son was interested in some Showball schools and some Headfirst schools. So, the plan from early on was to do both. But this will almost certainly be our last major showcase.

I agree with the suggestion to try and get the coach on a call. My son will probably dread that, but if the coach can't take the time to talk with him on the phone, there's probably no point is a cross country trip to attend their camp.

We're also hoping his HS and travel coaches can move the needle a bit. They both sound happy to try, but they're both a little green when it comes to getting their players spots on college rosters. And they don't have established relationships with these schools. So, we'll see.

@fenwaysouth posted:

Your son attended Showball.  That was not a cheap event.  Your son received responses.  Before signing up for another comparable event with a similar hefty price tag, I think it is time for your son to pick up the phone to talk to the coaches that did respond to gauge their true interest level.   Feel free to reach out to the coaches that have not responded as well...you have nothing to lose.  Your son needs feedback before the two of you take the next step whether that is a camp or another showcase.  There is still time especially with D3 schools.

In my experience and other's experience, it is very typical for a school to see someone play at a showcase or tournament and then invite them for a camp.  Yes, camps can be about making a few bucks for the volunteer coach.   In a lot of cases, they want ALL the coaches to see the recruits they've brought to camp to evaluate them as a coaching team.   This is why I suggest your son talk directly to the coaches that reached out.   Another tactic can be to schedule an academic visit to the schools your son is most interested in.  When you get the academic visiti scheduled, reach out to the coaches to mention you will be on campus on Aug x or Sept x, and you want to stop by to introduce yourself.   I'd do that for his top 3 choices on his list.

JMO.   Good luck!

This is good advice but it requires focus - knowing which 2-3 schools the player has a realistic shot at.

I don’t think this player is there yet.

Because without having received direct, positive, enthusiastic feedback in the form of a text or DM, he’s on the bubble, at best, from the schools that have reached out. Many schools also have camps during the same weekends in Fall so it’s important to target appropriately.  

I suggest the parents pay for one more general camp (Headfirst) where you know son will get exposure in front of coaches who are actively recruiting. A good showing there could generate more interest and is cheaper than trying to get noticed at individual camps. Player could follow up there directly with the coaches who previously reached out.