Best way to get into USAFA

Ahh...gotcha!

Yep, you're correct; there is a "diversity" focus group at USAFA and they do go "searching" in areas that are under-represented.

And for ALL to see...I was WRONG!!! :eek:

When I quoted 32 CFR 575.3 I was actually quoting from the USMA admission numbers (serves me right for working too quickly)...when you look at 32 CFR 901 for USAFA...it says a maximum of 65 cadets at the academy may be from the category "Sons/Daughters of Deceased or Disabled Veterans."

For those that do NOT know of this category, here's the statement from the Gov't:

(2) Children of Deceased and Disabled Veterans: This category is for children of deceased or 100 percent disabled Armed Forces veterans whose deaths or disabilities were determined to be service-connected, and for children of military personnel or federally employed civilians who are in a missing or captured status. Candidates holding a nomination under this category are not eligible for nomination under the Presidential or Medal of Honor category. The Veterans Administration determines the eligibility of all applicants. The application should include the full name, date of birth, and address of the applicant (complete service address should be given if the applicant is in the Armed Forces), and the name, grade, social security number/service number, and last organization of the veteran parent, together with a brief statement concerning the time, place, and cause of death. The claim number assigned to the veteran parent's case by the Veterans Administration should also be furnished.

Good stuff Mongo!!!

Steve
USAFA ALO
USAFA '83
Steve, I think most of us get the point. It's getting harder to be appointed and if you are not given a direct appointment, it is getting really dicey in the national pool. Additionally while there are some categories of nominees who will get more "favorable" treatment, these folks still must meet the requirements of the SA's (i.e. GPa, SAT, ACT, CFA, etc).

If I am not mistaken, this is really no different than other years, except that there are now several hundred less appointees per class over the next couple of years and this is what is impacting otherwise very qualified nominees from the national pool because there are appointments that are mandated by diversiy and such. But I am wondering if all of this will continue to hold true. i.e. Do you think there will be as many recruited athlete slots in the next couple of years? Do you think the overall quality of the cadet corp will improve or diminish because of these constraints? That is perhaps a greater concern than just the size of the class or how people can get in. Just my two cents.
 
I've been swamped with family stuff (hospitalized 81 yr old mom) and am first able to sit down and read the rest of the thread. So glad I did. This discussion did ultimately turn into one that is educational, helpful, and interesting. Thank you! Carry on. I'll be reading from the sidelines. :smile:
 
As both a participant and a moderator I'm in a difficult position with this thread. I think this is a valuable topic to discuss, when it's kept accurate and non-personal, but I fear it's coming close to veering off-track due to some personal frustrations with the system.

BUT...as a participant and as an ALO, I need to step in and make a couple comments regarding some statements made here.

Gotoplay2...I normally won't "pick" at any comments if I can avoid it, but in this case, I can't. Your facts are simply wrong. I will cut/paste a quote from you: Current applicants should know that it's not just about "working your !!! off" - don't think for a minute that you have a good chance of getting in. As of this year... If there's only one spot open w/your MOC and you're in a state that only gives one nom - you may be competing with a prep school candidate who is guaranteed that one spot. If you don't get an LOA early on - (DS had a pulled muscle and couldn't take the CFA until Nov.) you have virtually no chance of being offered an appointment. I think those getting their hopes up should know that this is the way things are now. Even with a class of 1050 - The Academy must keep their diversity situation in check and the recruited athletes will get their appointments.

Okay...where do I begin?

First...there were only approximately 10% of appointments given out by LOA according to USAFA/RRS. That's the selections division of the office of the Director of Admissions. So the statement "...if you dn't get an LOA early on you have virtually no chance of being offered an appointment..." is wrong.

Second...your comment about the MOC and numbers of appointments/nominations, etc., really isn't accurate. A MOC is afforded 10 nominations per opening at each SA. By law an MOC may only have 5 "charged" appointees at any SA at any time. If your MOC has 1 opening, then they will be allowed to nominate 10 candidates. One of those candidates will be selected (unless in the extremely rare case, none of the candidates meet the legal requirements for admission) and will be "charged" to that MOC. The other 9 candidates will, as CC stated, go into the "qualified alternates" pool. USAFA, pretty much like all the other SA's (can't speak for USCGA) draw almost half of their incoming class from this pool. Perfect example: Senator Jon Kyl of AZ nominated 20 students @ 2004 to fill his 2 openings. At the end of the admissions process, his 2 charged appointments were filled HOWEVER 12 other candidates of his 18 remaining were offered appointments to USAFA! He had 14 appointments out of 20 nominee's! (We AZ ALO's received a very nice letter of appreciation from Sen Kyl).

Third...I can fully appreciate your frustration in your DS not receiving an appointment. Trust me, having been the recipient myself of a "QNV" letter, I know exactly what that feels like and how crushing it can be. But let me say a couple things after that. First...it's not the end of the world. I chose to attend a prep school after HS and I was able to raise my SAT's to rather lofty levels and that was the "tip over the edge" in my case. I was accepted to USAFA my second try. Second...your DS is NOT ALONE this year. While it won't make him or you feel any better, there are quite a few candidates that scored higher than your DS that didn't receive an appointment...we didn't get him or them into USAFA, and that's our loss. :frown:

FYI...I had 11 candidates this cycle; 5 would be mirror images of your DS (yes, I'm serious, including one valedictorian of a school class of 900 students) I was CERTAIN that all 5 would be offered appointments.

WRONG.

As of tonight...only one (1) has an appointment (not the valedictorian). In my 17 years as an ALO, this cycle was the most brutal for the candidates that I have ever seen. Because we made offers to (my numbers, I haven't seen USAFA/RRS' official results yet) approximately 18% fewer candidates, the competition was beyond brutal, it was...well, I'm not sure I have a word that fits it.

Fourth (and last)...you commented "...The Academy must keep their diversity situation in check and the recruited athletes will get their appointments." Yes, this is true but...and this is a biggie, the total number of recruited athletes receiving appointments isn't overwhelming and realize that those that go directly to USAFA had to meet the entrance requirements. I'm not going to blow smoke at you and say they also had to "beat" the other candidates...that'd be untrue. HIGHLY recruited athletes...what can I say? I'm one of those rare AF types that thinks the academy shouldn't focus that much on athletics (IC type) and instead should focus on turning out the finest AF officers...but that's a different soapbox.

Bottom line re: athletic recruiting? It is what it is...its not going to change anytime soon.

Diversity you also mentioned. Please understand that USAFA's definition of Diversity isn't what most folks think. It's not a "can't be a white anglo saxon male" issue. It's about the individuals situation in life; all encompassing. It may be a minority member, or not, that's not the key issue; their "situation" is. The eldest child in a single parent household with siblings who works after school at a job to help keep a roof over the family's heads, helping with their siblings while that single parent works 2 jobs, etc...THAT is a diversity candidate that we want to meet and if they meet the criteria, they are the ones that we want to bring to the MILITARY, not just USAFA. We want to give them the opportunity to achieve...but their situation in life may not afford them the opportunity to try.

I could go on and on on this topic but...

I feel your pain and frustration, I truly do. The fact I've been there, all the more so. But...realize that your facts just aren't completely accurate. And that's what we need to make sure we give to all the members here: facts as accurate as we can so they can make good decisions. And next year...it's going to be as hard or even more so as the incoming class will probably be only on the order of 1050.

Steve
USAFA ALO
USAFA '83


CC & Steve,
I appreciate you keeping my math in check :wink:, however, I was letting those in a similar situation know that this is what's going on in a competitive state, with the downsizing, with the diversity needs, with the recruited athletes, etc.. etc.... I understand that in general, there is a process for the national pool, however, my point was that those who get picked up from the national pool are not necessarily going to be the most qualified candidates. I want those who start this process to understand that this is not 2004. Back then, sure! More appointments were given out so, fewer highly qualified candidates were sent QNV letters. As you (Steve) discovered with your 5 highly qualified candidates, the chances of getting an appointment these days are significantly diminished unless you fit into the right category. That is the message I wanted to communicate. DS has moved on and is excited about his new path. Thanks to you both for your help, advice, and support on this forum.
 
It should also be mentioned, that the air force and other academies are not that much different than most other colleges/universities. Especially the more prestige schools. Percentage rates of acceptance is going down at most schools, because the applications are going up. Yale admits at about 7.5%. 1941 students out of a pool of 25,869. They too, like all others, are interested in diversity, athletics, etc... It's a lot easier for a student from wyoming, South Dakota, or Montana to get accepted to harvard or yale than a student from Mass or other New England area. Why? Because there's a lot more applicants from the north east. There aren't as many students represented from montana, wyoming, or the Dakotas. So the schools look for diversity in geography. Just wanted to point out that the military academies aren't the only ones that look for diversity or have a lot more applications.
 
It seems that the national pool is going to be pretty small with a class size of 1050. MOC charged appointments = 535*1.25=669 add in 100 Presidentials and a hand full of others and subtract from 1050. It seems like the national pool next year may be down to 250 or so. Am I close?
 
It seems that the national pool is going to be pretty small with a class size of 1050. MOC charged appointments = 535*1.25=669 add in 100 Presidentials and a hand full of others and subtract from 1050. It seems like the national pool next year may be down to 250 or so. Am I close?

And of those 250, how many fit into the right categories? Case and point.
 
Steve, I think most of us get the point. It's getting harder to be appointed and if you are not given a direct appointment, it is getting really dicey in the national pool. Additionally while there are some categories of nominees who will get more "favorable" treatment, these folks still must meet the requirements of the SA's (i.e. GPa, SAT, ACT, CFA, etc).

If I am not mistaken, this is really no different than other years, except that there are now several hundred less appointees per class over the next couple of years and this is what is impacting otherwise very qualified nominees from the national pool because there are appointments that are mandated by diversiy and such. But I am wondering if all of this will continue to hold true. i.e. Do you think there will be as many recruited athlete slots in the next couple of years? Do you think the overall quality of the cadet corp will improve or diminish because of these constraints? That is perhaps a greater concern than just the size of the class or how people can get in. Just my two cents.

There are actually no slots mandated by diversity, etc. The folks in the pool are the ones not "tagged to a specified slot" (MOC, MOH, etc...)

And I do not think any of the SA's will "cut down" their recruitment of specific athletes although they may cut down the "overall" numbers. I saw that this cycle...some candidates were originally "recruited..." but later in the cycle, they were "dropped" by the athletic department. Perhaps they were "cutting back" but I don't know.

I do not think the qualify of the AF Cadet Wing will decline; on the contrary its high and will stay that way because the "typical" entering cadet is a pretty amazing young man/woman!

Steve
USAFA ALO
USAFA '83
 
FWIW a coach my son and I spoke with at USAFA said that for this year they lost some of their alloted "blue chips" and thought that it was likely they would lose more for next year. Coach was very interested in athletes that could get in "on their own". Whether or not the coach can help without using a "blue chip" was not clear.
 
Just as a recent Alumnus, I wanted to add something on the USAFA diversity side. In all my interactions with "diversity" recruited cadets at USAFA, I had at least 10 great interactions for every bad one. I've said earlier that I have a friend in the diversity recruiting office which has improved my knowledge of that area and further gained more respect for it. I cannot speak for the other SAs, but I was and still am impressed with USAFA's view of diversity and the candidates they selected from diversity recruiting.

Not to add more flames to the fire, but the only single group which persistantly aggravated me in quality, attitude, appearance, etc. was the football team. Being near ramps at lunch if I was near them I was perpetually annoyed (I sat close occasionally within my squadron or when I would go sit with friends occasionally at the special diets tables (like the vegetarian one, if food was yummy that day!) or the other ramps tables (girls tennis lol). They propogated racial stereotypes, IC stereotypes (the number of times I saw uniforms that were embarrassing is mind boggling), behavioral issues (throwing food, language, topics of conversation), and always undermined the class system (I couldn't actually figure out the freshman, no distinction in uniform, behavior, seating arrangement, etc.).

While I respected diversity recruitment and many of the IC teams (basketball, tennis, soccer, track, and many others), to this day I can't stand the cadets that were football ICs, in general and would relish the day that the D1 football team was dismantled. I don't care how great the press, advertisement, etc. it provides. I could not see it as developing AF officers I wanted to serve with.
 
Well, I just found out about another story of a recruited athlete that already got his LOA..what is it 1st week September already. Kid's never mentioned AFA until this summer...doesn't have the grades for sure. Was recruited strictly for his athletic talent. Seeing that the Prep school is loaded up, too, I think a lot of academy admissions is not any more "rigorous" than any other school for the athletes. The regular admissions...yes, they have to spend years getting ready for the opportunity but someone who can play with a piece of leather is more valuable to the school than someone who can pass Calculus. :thumbdown:
Amazing...pathetic... but amazing...
 
Well, I just found out about another story of a recruited athlete that already got his LOA..what is it 1st week September already. Kid's never mentioned AFA until this summer...doesn't have the grades for sure. Was recruited strictly for his athletic talent. Seeing that the Prep school is loaded up, too, I think a lot of academy admissions is not any more "rigorous" than any other school for the athletes. The regular admissions...yes, they have to spend years getting ready for the opportunity but someone who can play with a piece of leather is more valuable to the school than someone who can pass Calculus.

You must take into consideration the telos of the Academy(ies).
 
I'm going to bet there is more to the story.

Do I have issues with how some ICs are recruited? Yes! Do they take HS dropouts when they realize they can play football? No.
 
I can understand the animosity expressed here towards recruited athletes. My son is not one of the top blue chip recruits but falls into the category below that. While his grades may not be up to some others mentioned on this forum that did not get an appointment they are definitely very good. While his friends that had higher GPA's were out having fun this summer he was working out 6 days a week. When they are going places on the weekends he is traveling to tournaments. He comes home from practice eats dinner and studies, most of the time until late at night. I am new to this forum but isn't that what the SA's are trying to instill in every candidate? Aren't they trying to teach 18 year old's how to be focused, ambitious, disciplined hard working military officers in just 4 short years? My son has been offered a trip to check out the campus, he is already sure he will love it and has pretty much made up his mind that he is going to tell the coach that he wants to commit to the USAFA. I am confident he will do well since he already has proven to have the qualities that the Academy strives to teach their cadets.
 
This topic gets brought up so many times that it probably should have it's own sub-forum. And guess what? It's not just the academies. The "Academics vs Jocks" is a debated topic in just about every college and university in the country. And it's brought up by applicants as well as those who didn't get selected. Again, both the academies and civilian schools.

There's faculty and staff in universities all over the country that complain about athletics. Yet most of them don't want to admit how much money the athletics department brings into their school. Plus all the publicity and advertising. And contrary to what many people believe; no, the academy's athletic programs aren't funded with all of your tax dollars. Matter of fact, the majority of the funding is self supporting.

But the part I'm having a big problem with, is the assumption by some, especially in the civilian schools, that a jock automatically equates to lower gpa's, standardized tests, and academic capabilities. Well, hate to break the news to you, but a good percentage of these athletes are also carrying high gpa's and test scores. I normally never talk about my son on the forums, but one of the things he and I was so grateful for, was that he actually received an early nomination and appointment PRIOR to being recruited as a football player. This way, when people ask about his qualifications, we don't have to bring up sports. We bring up is 4.0 unweighted gpa in the IB program. His #1 class ranking. His ACT scores. His 200+ volunteer hours. Class officer. Boy's State. etc... All of this at the same time as playing 4 years of varsity football, soccer, and summer baseball. And he's not the only one. I'll embarrass Fencingmama and point out that both her boys were also outstanding students in high school. And they too were recruited athletes.

I know some people can point out that one or two athletes who they believe shouldn't have received an appointment because of their grades or test scores, but welcome to the real world. I know there are individuals who get into the academy, harvard, yale, universityofwhateverthehell, etc... who didn't get in because they had the highest gpa and test scores. There were other diversity factors involved. And NO, diversity doesn't almost mean affirmative action and minorities. Well; for colleges and the academies, diversity also includes athletics. And it RIGHTFULLY SHOULD. Just like schools want to spout that the humanities, social sciences, arts, etc... are just as important as the sciences, math, etc... well so are athletics. Half the problems with kids today is that they don't have PE classes or even recess in elementary school. Our kids have become fat, lazy, and unhealthy because of the lack of athletics. But that's another subject all together.

But to top it all off; at least at the academies; these student athletes that many want to believe shouldn't be there, have to take the same Calc, Aero, engineering, etc... classes that everyone else has to do. And they're doing it with 3+ hours a day LESS TIME to do it with. Because they also have to do their sport. And when they are doing poorly in a class, they have to GIVE UP their summer vacation to take extra classes. And prior to Coach Calhoun coming here, they had away games sometimes on opening day. Which meant they never had a parent's weekend.

I'm not trying to rationalize a 2.3 gpa student getting to the academy because they are an athlete. I don't have to. Such a student isn't going to come here. The coaches aren't stupid. It does them no good to recruit a player who can't make it through the academics of the academy. And there are no BIRD-Classes (Degrees) at the academy. But athletics is just another diversity that helps make the academy a better place. It helps financially. It helps with individual diversity. It advertises and recruits future cadets. (Including no athletes). And the majority of these athletes are also very good students too. If you want, I can list football players who went on to grad and medical school. But yes, there is going to be those players who probably wouldn't have gotten into the academy if they weren't an athlete. Then again, there's 4.0gpa students who don't get into the academy because that's all they had. They had nothing else. You need to look at the individual. Not stereotypes. There are plenty of athletes with excellent academics, test scores, volunteer time, class officers, etc...
 
Christcorp, that was perfectly positioned. As I mentioned on another thread, my DS is a recruited athlete entering 2012 that would probably be on the edge of being admitted without athletics...very strong grades, so so test scores. But the experiences she gained as an elite athlete are also a part of her many facets that she will be able to contribute to her class and the Air Force. The lessons of leadership, tenacity, teamwork, achievement, disappointment and resilience learned on the field are different than lessons learned by a non athlete and will go far in making an outstanding officer. Maybe even further than a 5.0, 2400 SAT student that offers an outstanding aptitude but poor communicative or leadership skills, maybe not. Bottom line, don't we need all types of outstanding young Americans to create the best officer base possible?
 
It's amazing how neive people can be when it comes to athletes at this school. I was not a recruit. I walked onto the wrestling team, my limitis have been pushed day in and day out. I don't yet have an ic schedule I go to class 1-5, then sprint down to the gym, work out for a couple hours, then exhausted, I have a good 4-5 hours of homework. The kids here who don't have ic status frankly work half as hard, and complain twice as much. They have beat sessions twice a week for 2 hours, boohoo, we do that in a day, and I'll bet it's worse. Everyone here has equal opportunity to do something. The fact that you choose not to doesn't give you the right to nit pick ICs. Besides football, no one really gets out of anything. And let me emphasize what I told my classmates, practice is worse and more time consuming than most of what you will do. Dont believe me? You're welcome to come down and deity me places for a day.
 
Back
Top