Help assessing odds...

I would believe perhaps that 2/3 play varsity high school sports maybe? But agree that 2/3 are recruited athletes doesn’t ring true. Or actually even make sense. One thing to keep in mind is that recruiting/committing /signing as typically understood by most, doesn’t occur at SA’s. There are no ‘athletic’ scholarships. A Coach can get a couple kids with a ‘blue chip’, but that’s a very few number. For select athletes. Think “each sport has a few”. Football and basketball probably more than a few. A total guess though.

DS was a recruited athlete for USNA (a different SA, but appointment process is similar). He still competed on his own merits for a nomination and appointment (which he received). Of our state appointments that year, he was the only ‘recruited athlete’. So less than 1 pct. In fact in the whole Brigade, from our state, I’m thinking there are a total of two varsity athletes from our state, point 5 pct.

Point is, don’t be concerned about not being a recruited athlete. Your DD has her own special package to present!

@ChoiceEcon, if I’m following the bouncing ball, your DD has had WP in her sights for several years and visited almost two years ago. That’s when you got the information about recruited athletes.

Since then, there’s been ample time to dig into the many information resources to truly educate yourself on this very intricate and different path. If you’re not already doing so, read every page, link, tab and pulldown on the USMA website. Seek cadets and graduates, as well as officers from every commissioning path, to interview either in person or on the phone. Grab every opportunity to learn more about academy life and active-duty life. My DD declared in 7th grade her intent to attend an SA and did all of the above. It was immensely helpful. And for you, I trust this process would have quickly put lie to the claim of “2/3 recruited athletes.”

Anyway, at the risk of piling on, let me ask this: Even if the 2/3 stat was true, should that deter someone who truly wants to become a commissioned officer via the WP path? Simple math says 1/3 are not recruited athlete. So you can call it an “opportunity” instead of a “problem.” Rather than “woe is me,” how about “I’ll show them!” Again, best wishes.

MidCakePa said:

@ChoiceEcon

Click to expand...

She sees and has seen the 1/3rd as an opportunity and she's held this view for years, even knowing the long odds she faces. She's had the confidence and dedication to continue to work for it day and night, but also knows more than 90% of admits between the two academies at the top of her list are varsity athletes, most often multisport lettermen. Their class profiles send a strong and clear message about their goals and needs. I don't fault her for observing this. She's collected information for years. That said, she had no reason to doubt what she was told there at West Point.

Just to be clear, she has never adopted a "woe is me" attitude. Self-centered attitudes just aren't in her, that's just not who she is. She looks out for herself by doing what she needs to do and looks out for others, making sure they're on track for what they need to be doing as well, for instance carefully guiding her brother to make sure he knows how to reach his best levels of performance.

Instead, what she's thinking is having assessed their class profiles and presentations as schools and what they really prefer, want, need, call it what you want, are athletes, especially team captains. Her concern is that while she loves sports that her strongest trait and talent isn't being a team captain (though her comments about the team dynamics of her wrestling team suggest to me she'd make an excellent team captain). Seeing this she started making what I see as a mature assessment, wondering whether she might be trying to fit a complex polygon, one that doesn't fit their typical profile, into a roundish hole. This wasn't about her or any hurt feelings. She's seeing this objectively and based on her perceptions of the needs of the Army based upon their class profiles.

Academies can only tell interested applicants they aren't wanted so many times before applicants believe them, especially when the admitted pool is so different than what an applicant has to offer (more than 76% male, 90% lettermen - most multisport, 60% team captains and a huge percentage recruited athletes vs. mature, academically talented, hard-working, but less athletically talented single letter female with limited opportunities to demonstrate leadership due to her year abroad) and the academies were clear to the entire roo every time we heard them talk that they don't need the students, students need them. She still wants to go just as badly as she ever has and continues to work as hard as she ever has but it's not easy to disagree with her that her path to the academy if she makes it is not the usual path and that it's not clear that she's a fit with their needs, desires and class profiles.

Having posted here was very helpful because it was clear that others were able to help her interpret the environment, their needs, and assess her potential fit from a third party perspective, as well as correcting what seems to have been some misinformation. Thank you all everyone for that!

ChoiceEcon said:

MidCakePa said:

@ChoiceEcon

Click to expand...

She sees and has seen the 1/3rd as an opportunity and she's held this view for years, even knowing the long odds she faces. She's had the confidence and dedication to continue to work for it day and night, but also knows more than 90% of admits between the two academies at the top of her list are varsity athletes, most often multisport lettermen. Their class profiles send a strong and clear message about their goals and needs. I don't fault her for observing this. She's collected information for years. That said, she had no reason to doubt what she was told there at West Point.

Just to be clear, she has never adopted a "woe is me" attitude. Self-centered attitudes just aren't in her, that's just not who she is. She looks out for herself by doing what she needs to do and looks out for others, making sure they're on track for what they need to be doing as well, for instance carefully guiding her brother to make sure he knows how to reach his best levels of performance.

Instead, what she's thinking is having assessed their class profiles and presentations as schools and what they really prefer, want, need, call it what you want, are athletes, especially team captains. Her concern is that while she loves sports that her strongest trait and talent isn't being a team captain (though her comments about the team dynamics of her wrestling team suggest to me she'd make an excellent team captain). This wasn't about her or any hurt feelings. She's seeing this objectively and based on her perceptions of the needs of the Army based upon their class profiles.

Academies can only tell interested applicants they aren't wanted so many times before applicants believe them, especially when the admitted pool is so different than what an applicant has to offer (more than 76% male, 90% lettermen - most multisport, 60% team captains and a huge percentage recruited athletes vs. mature, academically talented, hard-working, but less athletically talented single letter female with limited opportunities to demonstrate leadership due to her year abroad) and the academies were clear to the entire roo every time we heard them talk that they don't need the students, students need them. Seeing this she started making what I see as a mature assessment, wondering whether she might be trying to fit a complex polygon, one that doesn't fit their typical profile, into a roundish hole. She still wants to go just as badly as she ever has and continues to work as hard as she ever has but it's not easy to disagree with her that her path to the academy if she makes it is not the usual path and that it's not clear that she's a fit with their needs, desires and class profiles.

Having posted here was very helpful because it was clear that others were able to help her interpret the environment, their needs, and assess her potential fit from a third party perspective, as well as correcting what seems to have been some misinformation. Thank you all everyone for that!

Click to expand...

"Academies can only tell interested applicants they aren't wanted so many times before applicants believe them, especially when the admitted pool is so different than what an applicant has to offer (more than 76% male, 90% lettermen - most multisport, 60% team captains and a huge percentage recruited athletes vs. mature, academically talented, hard-working, but less athletically talented single letter female with limited opportunities to demonstrate leadership due to her year abroad) " I beg to differ! SA's LOVE applicants who show determination, grit, and tenacity as a re-applicant! There are stories all over the forums of kids who have picked themselves up after being told 'not yet', and pushed forward. And a "HUGE PERCENTAGE" of recruited athletes is wrong. Period. I have said DS's story...he is the ONLY recruited athlete our BGO has ever had. There are mids/cadets, parents, BGO's, athletes, sponsor parents, admissions people all here on the forums. They know. Pose the question in a new thread if you are wanting to really know, but to continue to say or believe that your DD is disadvantaged bc she isn't a 'recruited athlete' is so inaccurate. Especially combined with your statement that they are "vs. mature, academically talented, hard-working, but less athletically talented single letter female with limited opportunities to demonstrate leadership due to her year abroad" is also inaccurate. I suspect a female wrestler is a bonus. There is no more difficult a sport, IMO, than a wrestler (but that's a whole different subject. And DS wrestled 4 years, so I know).

"Seeing this she started making what I see as a mature assessment, wondering whether she might be trying to fit a complex polygon, one that doesn't fit their typical profile, into a roundish hole." Welcome to the world of the SA applicant!! EVERYONE is the square peg in the round hole!! Yes, class profiles are there. But what I read in all of your posts, is that you/she are making decisions using that as a determining factor. Or relying upon it too much. IMO. I think sometimes we can have TOO much information. And those published profiles do not take into account essays. Hardship statements. And then there is the whole MOC process!! What if your DD received a principal nomination??? Class profiles wouldn't even matter.

And regarding class profiles: those are the kids they got. Meaning don’t look at those numbers as ‘benchmarks’. What if the SA actually wants 50pct female? I have no idea, but to think that DD falls short in a profile using their numbers more as a ‘quota’ than a result is not necessarily correct thinking. Maybe they only have 25pct females Bc they don’t have enough females apply. Or maybe they have 60 pct captains Bc that’s who tends to apply. Vs the SA requiring a team captain (which is nit the case).

There are no guarantees to the SA process. People try and make inferences based upon statistics. And if she (you) wants it all figured out and buttoned up neatly ahead of time, this is not the process for her (you). It's long and stressful. If she doesn't apply, The appointment process is incredibly complex, and there are intangibles that cannot be addressed in a class profile. Someone can actually tell you what percent of a persons score is based upon different criteria, but academics is number one (?). And your DD needs to FIRST take some standardized tests before deciding. IMO. Good luck to her should she decide to pursue this challenging and rewarding path. And thank her for her willingness to serve.

The only thing that is for certain, is MOC's cannot nominate her, and SA's cannot appoint her if she doesnt apply. Period.

My DS was not a varsity athlete. Most of his close friends at WP are not athletes.

I think you and your DD are missing the point as to why USMA values athletes who are successful and are team Captains. It has nothing to do with winning sporting events during their four years as cadets or even their athletic ability. The primary mission is to develop leaders for the Army. Once they commission, these young 2LTs will be the Captain of a much more important team. Most USMA graduates will be platoon leaders as their first position and are responsible for leading 20-40 soldiers. The skills learned as being part, succeeding as a team or leading an athletic team directly translate into the more important mission of leading soldiers.

Since your DD has not had the opportunity to demonstrate leadership potential through team sports, she needs to find other ways to show she has the required leadership traits.

This is a confusing post.

West Point admissions is incredibly sophisticated and knowledgeable about high schools, curriculum offered, competitiveness, etc. If your DD has wanted this since 6th grade (which sounds like some parental influence, IMO), I would imagine she (and her parents) would not be surprised that the service academies value athletics and leadership. Leadership and athleticism are incredibly important.

As many have pointed out, 2/3 are not recruited athletes but service academies value sports and athletics for several reasons not related to their NCAA teams: first, the service academies require athleticism and the passing of physical fitness thresholds; two, all cadets must do some athletic activity whether it is NCAA, club or intramural; three, athletic teams thrive on cooperation and teamwork (kind of important in the military); and four, class rank at the service academies has a physical fitness component.

I will also give you a snapshot of two candidates for class of 2023: Candidate One is an actual IMG Academy student with appointments to both West Point and the Naval Academy but NOT recruited for sports but is top of the class, 32+ ACT, leadership, athletics, max CFA, etc. Candidate Two has an LOA to both WP and NA but has no athletics and a 36 ACT. Both are highly desirable candidates for the service academies.

Final advice for your DD is to take the ACT and take it early and often. The ACT score is a proxy for class rank. And lastly, the service academies are looking for great females. The percentage of males isn't a mandate and if you look at the statistics the acceptance rate for females is a good bit higher than the acceptance rate for males.

So when is she going to start taking the ACT and SAT tests? What are her plans for this summer and leading into her Senior year to secure leadership opportunities?

Your DD has a great qualifications. Nothing ventured, nothing gained. Most everyone will have doubts and uncertainty when chasing dreams-encourage her to continue to chase this one. I am a numbers and stats lover. When reading this thread and comments it made me ask "How many female cadets are recruited athletes?" I would think it is a higher percentage than male cadets. When my DD attended many of her friends were recruited athletes. Female numbers have increased slightly since then though. I do not think this lessens your DD chances as whole package is important but to those commenting on percentage of recruited athletes- I honestly believe that stat would be interesting.

The only obstacle that an applicant may not be able to overcome is a medical condition.
And even that can be surmountable.

All the recruiters told my son he didn't have a chance. They said he never would get a medical waiver.
Guess what?
They were only half right.
He now has a choice between an appointment to a SA or acceptance to an Ivy league university with a 4 year ROTC scholarship.

He could of left his high school's military night with his tail between his legs after what the recruiters told him. But instead he applied to nearly every program, proactively dealt with his medical condition, and continued to improve his SAT scores in order to make himself more attractive for a waiver.

Remember, its 60/30/10. If you're not as strong in leadership excel in academics and physical fitness.

I fear the way you have communicated your daughters experience has done her a bit of a disservice. It came across as condescending and a bit arrogant. I'm sure that was not your intent but based upon my observation, was taken in that manner.

As for you daughter, she sounds like an excellent candidate. Grit and determination seem to be the hallmark of many fine cadets, athletes or not. I would temper your concern about the athletics, West Point values the whole stora child brings to the table. Just be sure they see the whole picture, the guidance recommendation is an excellent opportunity to define the reasons why she had a different experience.

As an aside, my DS was not a fabulous athlete, his transcript was much stronger academically and experience wise. He was accepted and has gladly accepted the opportunity. Like your daughter, he believed that his lack of athletic experiences would prove a difficult barrier to overcome. Instead of blaming the system, he wrote the regional commander and asked to be considered for civil prep if he was not accepted, it was important enough for him that he was willing to take another year and reapply...just saying'