LOA and Appointment trends

I'm no expert, but it seems to me with all of the information and details on this board (and there is a TON of it throughout the years) it would be possible to mine the data and find some trends as to when and why a candidate receives an LOA, or an appointment. there must be commonalities amongst these people over the years that might lend itself to helping others understand the process. Of course its not a given, but I think comparing this forums data from the pre-admission process (which is here and maybe no where else) and finding significant data trends would be super interesting at the least. Id be shocked if it was completely random or changed year to year.

For example, you might find that all the people that got an LOA in September all completed their application 100% before the end of August AND all had GPA as a 4.0 AND SAT scores above 1500 (I'm making this up but you get the point)...

I wish I had time to pull it together but I have a job LOL. anyway it would be informative and keep us all busy comparing and contemplating while we wait the long wait.

mcfamilyof4 said:

it would be informative and keep us all busy comparing and contemplating while we wait the long wait.

Click to expand...

Informative for what purpose ? Does it matter ? If you want to boil it down to one factor, an LOA is given to someone USNA /Admissions really wants to admit....for one reason or another. It might be stellar academics, outstanding leadership, underrepresented areas, or something else in their record that makes them highly attractive to the USNA. If a Candidate were applying from Alsaska as a four sport , team captain all American athlete with straight A's, 1600 SATS and 20 AP classes, Admissions will find a way to give her an LOA, but there are alot of other reasons USNA might want to give an LOA.

I'm being a little facetious here. Having been a BGO for over 15 years, and watched these Boards for 5 years (just realized thats too long), I recognize that too many brain cells are expended on the the LOA issue. Sure, I get that it makes Candidates and parents feel good, but you are all the same come I-Day. Applicants should focus their attention on what they can control, and if an LOA comes --great,, if not, don't waste time thinking about.

+2 (yes, 2) to @Old Navy BGO. I get the desire to receive an LOA; it’s a tangible step closer to the goal in an otherwise long and tedious process. But I don’t get the obession that some folks have with it (@mcfamilyof4, not pointing at you because I don’t know you).

My DD had >4.0 GPA and >1500 SAT plus all the other bells and whistles for athletics and leadership, but one SA sent an LOA in the last week of April — long after her application was completed! It clearly has little to do with having the application 100% done, because many of the LOAs we hear about here are contingent on some incomplete part of the application. And to the point made by @Old Navy BGO, a hypothetical candidate from inner-city Detroit or the nether regions of North Dakota may get an LOA while another hypothetical candidate with the same credentials but from Northern Virginia doesn’t.

A very big reason for not bothering to extrapolate data found here to predict LOAs is that we don’t know how representative tbis forum is. Statistically speaking, how reliant is the sample, both in size and composition? Some have hypothesized that this forum attracts overachievers who are highly committed to attending an SA. Maybe true, maybe not. Perhaps it could be an interesting exercise, but not for me. I have to go pick lint out of my elbow creases.

If you get an LOA, celebrate and go take care of the contingency. If you don’t get an LOA, join the other ~98% who didn’t and strap in for the wait.

I'm not sure there is any point in trying to figure out the algorithm (if one even exists) that the Naval Academy uses in deciding whether a candidate should be offered an LOA or not. One's energy could be better spent in other areas. However, there's nothing wrong with a candidate having a goal of achieving an LOA. In this forum, whenever LOAs are mentioned, the poster is often criticized with, "It doesn't matter! Stop thinking about LOAs". I think that criticism is unfounded.

How does one obtain an LOA? Although we don't know the exact answer to that question, it's fair to say that those who are offered an LOA tend to have some of the highest marks in just about every category: academics, leadership, AP courses, etc... So, when somebody says, "I'm shooting for an LOA" - what they are essentially saying is "I'm going to try to beef up my application such that I'm competitive for an LOA." Bravo! Because, even if they fail to get an LOA, they may end up simply earning an off-the-shelf appointment as an outstanding candidate. Coming up short of an LOA can still end up being a very good thing. Most successful candidates do not get an LOA.

There's nothing wrong with shooting for the stars. It shouldn't be allowed to become an obsession, however. Nor, should it be considered a failure if a candidate does not receive an LOA. The goal is to get nominated and earn an appointment. If it takes the desire to get an LOA to make one's candidate portfolio as impressive as possible - fine! It certainly can't hurt and it will likely help.

Sure, thinking about earning an LOA might be a little wrongheaded, but it's certainly not going to hurt. I've seen far more candidates who are not energetic enough in beefing up their credentials than I have seen candidates dysfunctionally obsessed with obtaining an LOA.

maybe Im thinking that the LOA is so unusual as I don't think colleges do it at all. its a mystery and I guess will remain one. I certainly don't stress about it but I do like to solve puzzles and this one just seems like there is more to it than just a SWAG

it seems like there should be a way to look at the appointments in the same way. lots of data here, so the information could be statistically representative. but im no statistician

mcfamilyof4 said:

it seems like there should be a way to look at the appointments in the same way

Click to expand...

Admissions publishes its Class Profile every year. That's a pretty good guide to what USNA is looking for.

Memphis9489 said:

There's nothing wrong with shooting for the stars.

Click to expand...

Of course not, but the "star" is not an LOA, the star is an Appointment. The LOA is like one of those highway rest stops on a long trip -- it provides some temporary relief and satisfaction , but a lot of people pass it by, and they all end up in the same place at the end of the day.

mcfamilyof4 said:

For example, you might find that all the people that got an LOA in September all completed their application 100% before the end of August AND all had GPA as a 4.0 AND SAT scores above 1500 (I'm making this up but you get the point)...

Click to expand...

FWIW, can say for certain that that not all who met this criteria got LOAs! We gave up a long time ago worrying about LOAs. Doing all that can be done to be competitive for appointment is more than enough time commitment.

In my own humble and, in many ways, uninformed opinion... the LOA is used as a marketing tool to help lock-in applicants that have characteristics that help build a balanced and diverse class. The potential makeup of an incoming class changes with each appointment, so the criteria for each LOA is likely to change as the composition of each incoming class changes.

I don't believe that it is as easy as A + B + C = LOA. But, then again, my opinion plus $5 just might get you a cup of coffee.

Son received an LOA in late October of his senior year in HS pending Dodmerb completion. Within 2 weeks of that he received appointment.
Since he already had been accepted to another college, he just figured USNA was also rolling admission. Knowing he had a lot going on
in the fall of his senior year of high school he did get the application completed & submitted by Labor Day. He also had a Presidential nomination
which I think was a huge factor in the earlier decision

FMHS-79 said:

In my own humble and, in many ways, uninformed opinion... the LOA is used as a marketing tool to help lock-in applicants that have characteristics that help build a balanced and diverse class. The potential makeup of an incoming class changes with each appointment, so the criteria for each LOA is likely to change as the composition of each incoming class changes.

I don't believe that it is as easy as A + B + C = LOA. But, then again, my opinion plus $5 just might get you a cup of coffee.

Click to expand...

Actually, I think the genesis of the LOA was a response to competing colleges giving out early admissions - something relatively new in the college quest. The service academies realized that they were losing some outstanding candidates to these universities as these candidates were being accepted by colleges very early - well before they had a chance to finish the academy application process. After all, what college requires all that is required of a service academy applicant? A CFA? A medical exam? A nomination? An interview? Many of these outstanding candidates would simply stop pursuing the academy as they would often be satisfied with their admission to the civilian college. Why go through the hassle for something that is far from a certainty? Take the bird in the hand!

So, the response by the service academies was to assure them ... "If you successfully finish the entire application process - you will get an appointment. Keep going!" That's the primary intent of the LOA.

I think you'll find the LOA process is more about pursuing quality than it is about pursuing diversity. In fact, the academy often has to make concessions in quality in order to achieve diversity. There are reasons why underrepresented areas are underrepresented. The LOA is simply the service academies' response to civilian early admission. It's to prevent truly outstanding candidates (regardless of ethnicity) from being lured away from Harvard, Princeton, MIT, etc ... The service academies want some of those applicants and they often lose them to the early admission process. Ergo ... the LOA!

Having been a BGO for many years, I've yet to understand why some candidates receive LOAs and others don't. I've seen stellar candidates get them -- and even more stellar candidates not get them. I've seen athletes get them -- and not. I've seen underrepresented minorities get them -- and not.

Also, the criteria can change from year to year as can the number of LOAs offered. Thus, the fact that someone with X statistics received an LOA 5 years ago may or may not have any bearing on whether someone with similar statistics would receive one today.

I've also seen LOA candidates who failed to secure a nom receive turndowns. So it's not a complete golden ticket.

In my own humble and, in many ways, uninformed opinion... the LOA is used as a marketing tool to help lock-in applicants that have characteristics that help build a balanced and diverse class.

Click to expand...

I've seen no evidence of this in that I've rarely seen LOAs used for diversity purposes. I tend to agree with Memphis that LOAs were introduced to combat/counter the early decision/acceptance process of civilian colleges. Because of the nom system, USNA can't offer early decision. Thus the LOA was born in order to provide as much assurance as possible to highly qualified candidates.

usna1985 said:

I've seen athletes get them -- and not.

Click to expand...

Recruited, blue chip athletes don't really need an LOA. They were told very early on that, "You're in!" - just finish all the requirements of the application process. And, even with that, many of these athletes are coddled through the application process. For instance, football and basketball recruits are not subjected to a BGO interview.

I have seen a number of recruited athletes receive LOAs. Not sure if they were blue-chip but know they were being recruited (not football or basketball either). Ironically, in most cases, the candidate was strong across the board (academics, leadership, etc.). Thus hard to know how much of the decision to give the LOA was based on athletics. Many football and basketball recruits end up at NAPS, so an LOA -- or even a nom -- isn't needed.

Memphis9489 said:

And, even with that, many of these athletes are coddled through the application process. For instance, football and basketball recruits are not subjected to a BGO interview.

Click to expand...

That is due to NCAA rules as to the NCAA, BGOs are "Boosters". Who from an institution is actually allowed to contact an athletic recruit is closely defined due to many abuses by "win at all cost" programs.

OldRetSWO said:

Memphis9489 said:

And, even with that, many of these athletes are coddled through the application process. For instance, football and basketball recruits are not subjected to a BGO interview.

Click to expand...

That is due to NCAA rules as to the NCAA, BGOs are "Boosters". Who from an institution is actually allowed to contact an athletic recruit is closely defined due to many abuses by "win at all cost" programs.

Click to expand...

Yet, why are baseball and lacrosse recruits, for instance, subject to BGO (booster!) interviews? Very odd. I never could understand that. Both of these sports are Division I NCAA programs, as well.

Memphis9489 said:

Yet, why are baseball and lacrosse recruits, for instance, subject to BGO (booster!) interviews? Very odd. I never could understand that. Both of these sports are Division I NCAA programs, as well.

Click to expand...

The explanation from Admissions (during BGO training) is that Football and Basketball (as the largest revenue producing sports) are subject to greater scrutiny from NCAA. The status of a BGO as a "booster" is probably not as clear cut under NCAA regs as we are told -- I haven't researched the NCAA regs, but I would expect that participant colleges have the right to establish their own admissions programs and the BGO role as an representative of Admissions is probably permitted. I don't think USNA (or the other Service Academies) want to have that fight with the all powerful NCAA, so they are either 1) prohibiting BGO's from interviewing Football and Basketball recruit in order to stay under the radar, or 2) probably more likely, this has been discussed with NCAA, and is a compromise to avoid problems going forward.

Old Navy BGO said:

Memphis9489 said:

Yet, why are baseball and lacrosse recruits, for instance, subject to BGO (booster!) interviews? Very odd. I never could understand that. Both of these sports are Division I NCAA programs, as well.

Click to expand...

The explanation from Admissions (during BGO training) is that Football and Basketball (as the largest revenue producing sports) are subject to greater scrutiny from NCAA. The status of a BGO as a "booster" is probably not as clear cut under NCAA regs as we are told -- I haven't researched the NCAA regs, but I would expect that participant colleges have the right to establish their own admissions programs and the BGO role as an representative of Admissions is probably permitted. I don't think USNA (or the other Service Academies) want to have that fight with the all powerful NCAA, so they are either 1) prohibiting BGO's from interviewing Football and Basketball recruit in order to stay under the radar, or 2) probably more likely, this has been discussed with NCAA, and is a compromise to avoid problems going forward.

Click to expand...

Do you really think the NCAA would have a problem with the United States Naval Academy interviewing all their applicants to see if they understand what they are getting into and are suitable for military service? Not in a million years!

The purpose of the BGO interview is not to convince the candidate to attend the Naval Academy or to promise them any perks. You said you went through BGO training. Then you should know that this is not the purpose of the BGO interview.

My wife is a BGO. She did not attend the Naval Academy and did not serve in the military. She knows a lot about the Naval Academy and the Navy. She would think the "shot clock" is the time at which a bar stops serving drinks. The notion that she is a "booster" and her interaction with a football recruit could be an NCAA violation makes me laugh. My wife thinks the "triple option" is three difference ways to pay for a new dining room set.

In my opinion, I think the Naval Academy does not want some of their marquee athletes put under a microscope with regards to suitability for an appointment and they pretend that they are concerned with an NCAA violation. Yeah, I'm sure the NCAA has a big concern that the service academies are offering unfair perks and enticements to their recruits in order to build a power house program. Pfft!

Memphis9489 said:

Do you really think the NCAA would have a problem with the United States Naval Academy interviewing all their applicants to see if they understand what they are getting into and are suitable for military service? Not in a million years!

The purpose of the BGO interview is not to convince the candidate to attend the Naval Academy or to promise them any perks. You said you went through BGO training. Then you should know that this is not the purpose of the BGO interview.

My wife is a BGO. She did not attend the Naval Academy and did not serve in the military. She knows a lot about the Naval Academy and the Navy. She would think the "shot clock" is the time at which a bar stops serving drinks. The notion that she is a "booster" and her interaction with a football recruit could be an NCAA violation makes me laugh. My wife thinks the "triple option" is three difference ways to pay for a new dining room set.

In my opinion, I think the Naval Academy does not want some of their marquee athletes put under a microscope with regards to suitability for an appointment and they pretend that they are concerned with an NCAA violation. Yeah, I'm sure the NCAA has a big concern that the service academies are offering unfair perks and enticements to their recruits in order to build a power house program. Pfft!

Click to expand...

#1 The answer is NO to the NCAA.
#2 Agree on BGO interview.
#3 Agree USNA does not want the public or anyone else to know that the majority of the football and Basketball are unsat for the majority of their time at USNA. The concern about a BGO as a booster is B.S. They even have a person from the athletic department who does the write-up and present them to the admissions board. It is a joke! Good player, decent grades, you are in! Very sad. Why not just have them all go through the same process as everyone else. Before that get in and also after.
Just my opinion.

So,
I attended the NASS this past June.
I did NOT get a LOA this past summer.
I received an APPOINTMENT offer in my portal last Friday, Oct 26th.

I listened to the great advise of my BGO, which was to AIM for the APPOINTMENT, and NOT for the LOA.

DS didn't attend NASS or receive a LOA. But USNA gave him something better than both of those, a medical waiver!