EA

[MaritimeGirl11]

I was wondering do you know if canidates that get accepted to NAPS onlly find out during rolling admission or can they find out during Early Action?.

[justawife]

The AFA send out their invites to the Prep school and Civ prep schools in March. In general they go to folks who have some small problem--lower test scores, maybe a weak grade in math or chem but would be a strong cadet. Or a football player/lacrosse player/hockey goalie who need the extra year of academics. Also they like to bring in URM and women.

[MaritimeGirl11]

Okay. Thanks!

[ColbyBuss]

Oh so if you got an alternate status than you are still legible for a prep school correct?

[MaritimeGirl11]

I guess so. but I havn't gotten anything yet! I still need to get my waivered cleared.

[bossf51]

I am sure you are eligible for prep or CGRIT off the alternate list. However I think you are less likely to get this kind of offer unless you are: a minority male; a female; or a recruited athlete.

[MaritimeGirl11]

I'm minority Female! They told me i'll know in Feb 2007. I just have to wait some more. This is frustrating...

[bossf51]

Hang in there! My son didn't hear until late March! But it can come at any time.

[ColbyBuss]

man that would be soooo scary waiting that long!

Were his test scores not high enough or what was it?

[bossf51]

No that's when a lot of kids hear. He had 1400 SAT on the old test.

[USNA69]

I am sure you are eligible for prep or CGRIT off the alternate list. However I think you are less likely to get this kind of offer unless you are: a minority male; a female; or a recruited athlete.

I am not sure about Div I-AA, but for Div I-A, the NCAA frowns heavily on prep school scholarships for recruited athletes. I would suspect it is the same for USCGA. USAFA got in trouble a couple of years ago for abusing this. Present USNA guidelines are that the percentage of recruited athletes at the various prep schools cannot exceed the percentage of recruited athletes in the Academy student body as a whole.

[Whistle Pig]

I would doubt for Div III that it makes any difference at all.

A friend told me that every one of this year's USAFA football team starters were prep school alums. Seems a bit extreme, but I've no reason to not believe him.

[bossf51]

There are usually something like 200 athletes at USMAPS for example. Look at the rosters for the men's and women's basketball teams, football, baseball etc. You'll see what I mean.

[Just_A_Mom]

I could be wrong, but the way I understand it is this:
NAPS and USMAPS are actually a year of post graduate high school. Recruited athletes that need to be redshirted (for various reasons) can go and play here without losing a year of NCAA eligilility.
If an athlete goes to a civilian prep school that is a junior college (MMI or NMMI) they lose a year of eligibility.

About getting chosen for prep schools - I have known of several white males who are not recruited athletes at NMMI or MMI.
In fact, as far as women go, NAPS is 14% women while the USNA brigade is about 20% women and the CGA is about 30% women.

Keep in mind the whole point of Academy Prep or civil prep schools is to give an otherwise highly qualified candidate another year of necessary academics. I seriously doubt a candidate with high SAT scores, a high class rank, who is also strong in math and science would get a prep school offer, recruited athlete or not.

[USNA69]

There are usually something like 200 athletes at USMAPS for example. Look at the rosters for the men's and women's basketball teams, football, baseball etc. You'll see what I mean.

I did. Quickly. 5 minutes. So the numbers may not be exact, but they are close. The official WP athletics website. men's basketball-6/20, women's basketball-4/17, baseball-3/30, football approx 70/240 (approximately 20 of 50 of those earning letters). These numbers are in line with the 20% or so at NAPS. Divide the above totals by 4 and one gets 21 per year. Double it for attrition and other sports and one is still in the neighborhood of 20% athletes for the total MAPS student body. This is also completely discounting MAPS walk-ons, which for football can be quite a few.

I repeat from above. SA prep schools are under close NCAA scrutiny and recruited athlete percentages must be the same as those of the sponsoring SA. They are not there being "red shirted". They are there to gain qualifying academic eligibility.

Additionally, a blue chip athlete at one of the prep schools has absolutely no SA obligation upon graduation and retains full NCAA eligibility. They can, and do, walk.

[USNA69]

About getting chosen for prep schools - I have known of several white males who are not recruited athletes at NMMI or MMI.
In fact, as far as women go, NAPS is 14% women while the USNA brigade is about 20% women and the CGA is about 30% women.

Agree. While not stastically significant, I am very familiar with 7 past and present NAPSters. 1 athlete and, additionally, 1 woman. Unfortunately, none of the seven were minorities.

[USNA69]

A friend told me that every one of this year's USAFA football team starters were prep school alums. Seems a bit extreme, but I've no reason to not believe him.

Hog, of all people, I am surprised that you are so gullible. A very quick perusal of the USAFA football website indicates that 8/20 seniors are from the AFA prep school. They don't list starters but a quick overview of the leaders in each of the statistical categories (a pretty good indicator of starters) is that about one third are from the prep school.

[USNA69]

I would doubt for Div III that it makes any difference at all.

Do Div III athletes lose a year of eligibility when transferring to a Div I school?
If they do, NCAA is probably concerned about that athlete's background.
I honestly don't know and am not about to dig through all the NCAA rules and regulations to find out.

[USNA69]

The SA prep schools are an extremely viable method of becoming prepared for the rigors of the academic loads at the academys. The Admissions Board completes the selection process from the normal SA application. They select women, athletes, minorities, and white males. The typical candidate, athletes included, will have one or more of the following characteristics:
-High grades/Low SATs
-High SATs/Low grades
-Average grades/Good leadership potential
-High grades/Weak leadership potential
-Away from academics for a year or more
-No chemistry or physics

[Whistle Pig]

69, I'll quickly defer to you on these topics and confess that mine are mostly hearsay. However the person who told me of the AF situation is a 30 year AF retiree with 2 sons @ USAFA. So I was inclined to believe he was informed.

I confess to gullibility. In fact every 02 Feb, I'm even inclined to believe my own shadow. :yllol: :shake:

Many thanks for debunking mine and others urban ... or in this case SA mythology. :thumb: You and a couple other pro's ought to start an SA Snopes. Lord knows there's enuff bunk floating around out there about this complex process.

All that said, I remain a bit skeptical that the NAPS and foundation programs are not used substantially for assisting in recruiting and preparing special interest groups, notably athletes. Perhaps I've just heard too much of Fork Union, Masanutten (sp?), Oak Hill, etc.

[USNA69]

Thanks for the kind words.

College athletes playing five years of post-secondary sports is a very touchy subject with NCAA. The prep schools must walk a very thin line in order to avoid any sense whatsoever of impropriety. There are actually recruited athletes who attend prep school and do not play sports. These prep schools are not like the private ones in that you and I are paying for them so they have a double standard by which they must abide. We have to remain skeptical but trust that they are doing the correct thing. All indications that I can see is that they are.

Cleaning up all the misconceptions of a very complex and varied selection process? Surely you jest. That is the main reason I stay off the other "SA" site. I do try to keep this forum as knowledgable as I am able with my limited expertise.

Good luck to your son. I am sure he is very happy and that you are very proud. You both should be.

[Whistle Pig]

Thank you very much, USNA69.:thumb:

He could hardly be any more joyful, nor his CO any prouder. Smiles are the uniform of the day ... month ... year ... lifetime. :beer1:

Or at least until June 27th, at which time, as his BGO noted ...

"Your A** belongs to someone else!" :spacecraft:

At least he didn't call him "maggot." :rant2: :hammer:

[USNA69]

the person who told me of the AF situation is a 30 year AF retiree with 2 sons @ USAFA. So I was inclined to believe he was informed.

There seems to be an insidious undercurrent at all the academies that athletes (read football players) get undeserved special treatment. I read somewhere recently that it is particularly bad at USAFA this year.

What people should realize, in no particular order, is:
-Football is the revenue-producing sport that allows all the other sports to exist. Athletics cannot, in any way, shape, or form, come from federal funding. Football pays for the rowing shells, the volleyball road trip hotels, wrestling, baseball, fencing, squash, and all the other sports, even including basketball.

-The same reasons that candidates list sports on their applications as examples of teamwork and leadership also applies once they get to the academy. A healthy intercollegiate sports program further promotes leadership and teamwork which will be beneficial once they graduate and become officers.

-Football success is free public advertising for the academies.

-Football success increases alumni donations to the academies.

-Football players receive absolutely no additional benefits as they would at other colleges. At any time they may quit with no penalties and have a much easier life at the academy.

-Football players graduate and become officers. They get orders to Iraq and Afghanistan and fly on and off carriers just like the rest.

Instead of looking for misconceived examples of how athletes degrade from the missions of the academies, they should be thanked for the extra efforts they make in order to increase the overall success of the academies as a whole.

[Just_A_Mom]

I read somewhere recently that it is particularly bad at USAFA this year.


Not to completely disagree with the rest of your comment or completely hijack the thread but I read the same about USNA.

[USNA69]

Not to completely disagree with the rest of your comment or completely hijack the thread but I read the same about USNA.

I wouldn't doubt it. Where did you read it?

[Just_A_Mom]

Well If you show me your sources I will show you mine.

Actually, there were a couple of articles last fall during football season. At a time when the team was winning and a couple of former football players found themselves in serious legal trouble.
However, my point is those types of "insidious undercurrents" occur at every school at every level at one time or another. Kind of unfair of you to pick on USAFA.

[USNA69]

Well If you show me your sources I will show you mine.


I had no intentions of picking on USAFA. My initial comment was that it was at "all the academies". I merely mentioned USAFA as a possible explanation to the comments of the AF veteran with 2 USAFA cadets.

Here is my source.
http://www.gazette.com/usafa/display.php?id=1328479&secid=50

[USNA69]

One of the major reasons not to use the prep schools as a place to "red shirt":
Linebacker, Jacob Biddle, NAPS leading tackler last season, is leaving for Colorado State with four years of eligibility remaining.

[Whistle Pig]

He's obviously forgotten that USNA whooped up on CSU a few years back.

Oh well, his loss. Wisdom is not wasted on youth.

And not to debate (too much) your clearly made points, but I don't buy several of them, some based upon personal experience. Athletes do seem to get some preference, beginning in the appointment, nomination processes. Favor is given. While ancient history, I can personally speak to that.

Also re: the revenue issue ... mostly that's conventional wisdom gone awry/urban mythology ... and is made at many places to defend the extraordinary expense and is accurate in but a few institutions like PSU, Tennessee, Michigan. Nearly all NCAA Div I progams are revenue dranes ... UNLESS ... they get a significant bowl game. And I'll guanantee it's a money loser at USMMA, USCGA countering the notion that in the absence of football, there'd be no more athletics at USNA. The football program has lost $$ for decades there. And even now I'll bet it's closer to break even @ a USNA than it is to being a revenue windfall. Of course really knowing would require accurate accounting of allocation of people time. And facilities. Rarely done. Coaches become part of staff. Stadiums built for football become part of the physical plant. Equipment becomes part of phys ed program budgets.

Urban mythology, 69 on the football thing, at least re: it being a great investment. That said, Go Goats! I love 'em!!

With exceptions like those noted above, I don't buy the revenue argumentation aside from the alumni interest/donations. No doubt winners attract $$.

I fully agree that the vast majority of athletes are contributors ... and that they'd have life easier were they to bag the ball games.

[USNA69]

. Athletes do seem to get some preference, beginning in the appointment, nomination processes. Favor is given.
Favor? Preference? I am not sure those are the appropriate terms. They are all triple qualified. And I am sure, by now , we all realize that the 1200 appointments each year do not go to the top 1200 whole person point gatherers in the nation. One would be surprised how few true blue-chip athletes there are. The most come in under the normal nomination process.


. Also re: the revenue issue ... mostly that's conventional wisdom gone awry/urban mythology ... .

Did not mean to imply that football was a money maker, only that it was the primary revenue producer. Again, we taxpayers pay for the academies. They are under extra scrutiny. Accounting and complex time cards aside, a successful football program, combined with sponsorships and alumni donations, is what makes all the various athletic teams possible.

[repIII]

Who cares if you think football is a money drain Whistle Pig. Football been a big part of the academies for more years then you been around. Go hijack someone elses thread.

[Whistle Pig]

Ohio State's operating profit margin is a bit less than 47 percent of revenue, which is pretty much equal to the average for the 63 teams reporting results. (Navy and the other military academies are not required to report.) Georgia and Ohio State's rival Michigan are the profit margin kings, according to the reports, as they pocket $3 out of every $4 of revenue. Florida, which has a 67 percent profit margin, is No. 5 in that measure.

On the other end of the financial spectrum from Ohio State and Florida, there are 15 schools that went to a bowl this year that reported losses on their football program last season.

The biggest loss among this year's bowl participants was at San Jose State, with expenses of $4.6 million against revenue of only $949,214. Of the 15 money-losing football programs, only three came out of a BCS conference - the ACC's Maryland and Wake Forest, which both reported narrow losses of 3 percent or less, and Cincinnati, the Big East school that had expenses exceed revenue by 61 percent. Another Big East school, Rutgers, broke even on its football program.

The other money-losing schools come from conferences like the WAC, MAC, Conference USA and Sun Belt, which don't have a way to tap into the big television dollars, either through regular-season game broadcast deals or by receiving automatic bids to the big-dollar BCS bowls, which spread the $17 million payout to each team between the members of the school's conference.


I wonder if this CNN snipit today suggests that Navy has LESS public scrutiny of its football program?

Any insight as to why this would be?

I understand the major revenue issue, but if the program loses $$$ it does not fund other sports and it seems most are money-losing propositions aside from a handful of biggies.

[USNA69]

I wonder if this CNN snipit today suggests that Navy has LESS public scrutiny of its football program?

Any insight as to why this would be?

Like many things with other colleges, the SAs cannot do an apples-to-apples comaparison. For example, scholarship dollars are not an issue. Makes a different ball game.

The entire Academy structure is under federal law. Should Papa Joe at Penn State do some creative bookkeeping, they would probably reduce his halo polishing schedule to bimonthly instead of monthly. Should CG do the same at USNA, he might find himself "promoted" to another federal institution learning first hand the intracies of the hammer toss (into a pile of rocks). The Acaemies are under very close scrutiny, from Congress to GAO.

The entire athletic budget is public record. I am sure you can find it on the internet if you search hard enough.

[MaritimeGirl11]

Quick question about sports. athletes are not recruited for scholarships to the sevice academies right ..Its just on how good of a player they are...Like USCGA . I want to do crew and I know they are loosing a lot of members this year because they are graduating this year.

[USNA69]

I understand the major revenue issue, but if the program loses $$$ it does not fund other sports and it seems most are money-losing propositions aside from a handful of biggies.

I think I expressed myself poorly on the above post. Money for athletics comes from three primary sources: sponsorships, ticket and TV revenue, and alumni support. All expenses come from this pot of money. The larger it is, the less the teams have to scrimp, the better the holiday tournaments they can attend, the better (and further) they can travel, the nicer and newer the eight-oared shells they can buy, etc. etc.

Bottom line: Since the expenses of football will always be there, the better the team does, the more money for athletics at the SAs. This not only includes revenue but donations. In the past, I have been able to get good A/N and post season tickets with an annual $50 contribution. It just went to $1000.

[bossf51]

Lesya a lot of kids are recruited for sports to the Academies...not scholarships per se as everybody's on scholarship. But many kids are also "walk-ons," that is kids who weren't specifically recruited but try out for the team anyway. Many are very successful, especially in sports like crew where many of them never did it before. WE NEED COXSWAINS DESPERATELY!:thumb:

[MaritimeGirl11]

I know you do. Tell the coach I'd be perfect. Small and im light!

[bossf51]

Are you loud when you talk? That is important in the cox position.:director:

[MaritimeGirl11]

YES I AM VERY LOUD!