1 vs 2 Nominations

A1Janitor said:
The question was does two noms increase your chances for appointment.

My answer was not necessarily. It might. It all depends on the competitiveness of the candidate on the slates.

We just don’t know if it does or not.
Click to expand...

Agree, it doesn't necessarily increase chances, but it certainly doesn't decrease them. The MOCs in the House and Senate make an effort to select top candidates from their respective districts and states. They have an application process and conduct review boards and interviews to build their slates of nominees. Plenty who seek a nomination may not get one, some simply due to availability of slots, some due to the relative strength of their application or performance in an interview. It's logical that having multiple noms can only help in the academy admissions selection process since multiple nominating sources have already screened those candidates. For competitive (non-prinicipal) nominees, it will be the WCS and the decisions made during the selection process that determines if an appointment is offered. We're all just along for the ride in this weightiest of waits.
 
TimFlyer said:
My 1st gut feeling is this is wrong. I understand it gives others a chance BUT if a 2nd nomination helps a kids chance getting the appointment then the system seems broken.
Click to expand...

There is no question that having the opportunity to compete in two different competitive pools gives an individual candidate a better opportunity for appointment (to any Service Academy). However, from the MOC standpoint, coordinating the nominations allows them to provide the opportunity for appointment to a broader range of constituents. Put another (more cynical way), they are reaching out to quantity, at the expense of making it more likely the best quality candidate gets in. That said, I have had the opportunity to explain this scenario to both local Congressman and Senators aides, and they understand the argument, but choose to coordinate anyway. This is of course their prerogative, so I can't agree the "system is broken"
 
Seems to be a debate on this topic without any clear answer. It’s my 1st time going through this for my son and it’s been a learning experience to get the facts, states doing there own nomination procedures handing out 1 or 2 and even some kids getting
nomination to 2 separate SA.

It’s to bad we continue to not reward the kids that have worked the hardest in and out the classroom.. such a great reward to attend the SA and if a kid can’t get 2 nomination then they have been hurt in the process

the SA should set the policy of handing out nominations Not the individual states.. IMOP
 
TimFlyer said:
Seems to be a debate on this topic without any clear answer. It’s my 1st time going through this for my son and it’s been a learning experience to get the facts, states doing there own nomination procedures handing out 1 or 2 and even some kids getting
nomination to 2 separate SA.

It’s to bad we continue to not reward the kids that have worked the hardest in and out the classroom.. such a great reward to attend the SA and if a kid can’t get 2 nomination then they have been hurt in the process

the SA should set the policy of handing out nominations Not the individual states.. IMOP
Click to expand...

With all due respect - this just isn’t true.

You need one nomination. If you are a strong candidate, you are not hurt by having only one.

My son had one. And he told his Senators up front he had one - and they don’t like to duplicate.
 
Dad_2024 said:
I've read dozens of threads on this topic. My DS has 2 noms, 1 from MOC, and 1 from one of our senators. In the other senator's TWE, it was clear that there is coordination between MOCs and Senators in our state. Here's the thought, since most candidates seeking a nom apply to the MOC in their district, they also typically apply to both senators. So senators are drawing from a larger pool of candidates to nominate, many (most? all?) of whom have already received a nom from MOC. There are 19 congressional districts in our state. Let's assume each district nominates a full slate of 10, that means both Senators are drawing from the same pool of 190 candidates to nominate. Senators will be looking to nominate highly qualified candidates, so these logically would come from the MOCs top ten already on a slate. So I think the coordination would have to occur primarily between the Senators. Unless an MOC is told by a Senator's office that candidate A is a principal, that MOC can then nominate someone else (allowing their #11 choice an opportunity). Am I thinking this wrong?
Click to expand...
We live in a small state where we only have 1 Rep for the whole state so the same amount that apply to the 2 senators also apply to the rep. Ours will give multiple noms for diff SA. Currently have both senators nominations but not the rep
 
The 1 vs 2 nomination seem to be the rules so we just need to live with it and see what happens.
Its a shame the SA don't have control and guidance of how the states are to award these nominations. Congressman doing what the want to do seems a bit fluky. I still say the best man or women should get the best chances to earn a Nomination...
 
TimFlyer said:
It’s to bad we continue to not reward the kids that have worked the hardest in and out the classroom.. such a great reward to attend the SA
Click to expand...
I don't disagree with a lot of what you've written in this thread but you are off base in this comment. Service Academy admission is not supposed to be a prize to the kid who worked the hardest or has he greatest story or did the most fabulous community service. It is supposed to be choosing the best potential leaders and officers. I knew kids in high school who worked tremendously hard every day and even in the summer to have the absolute
top grades but would have been terrible officers for any number of reasons.

If life were "fair", the person who worked the hardest would get the best results but talent and ability (among other things) get in the way of that. As an athlete at USNA, I was pretty good at my sport but not at the top of my team. One teammate from a class above mine was frequently absent from practice for a litany of reasons (a cold, a test, etc) but after missing a week or more of practice would show up and within a day would be up among the leaders and well above me. I worked a lot harder than he did but he was just more talented/skilled. When my son captained his Cross Country team, he was pretty good and made the all conference team but he had one kid on his team who missed at least half of the practices but was a whole minute faster than him on the race course.

As a military commander, do I want the hardest worker or the best officer? I think that the answer is obvious.
 
OldRetSWO said:
I don't disagree with a lot of what you've written in this thread but you are off base in this comment. Service Academy admission is not supposed to be a prize to the kid who worked the hardest or has he greatest story or did the most fabulous community service. It is supposed to be choosing the best potential leaders and officers. I knew kids in high school who worked tremendously hard every day and even in the summer to have the absolute
top grades but would have been terrible officers for any number of reasons.

If life were "fair", the person who worked the hardest would get the best results but talent and ability (among other things) get in the way of that. As an athlete at USNA, I was pretty good at my sport but not at the top of my team. One teammate from a class above mine was frequently absent from practice for a litany of reasons (a cold, a test, etc) but after missing a week or more of practice would show up and within a day would be up among the leaders and well above me. I worked a lot harder than he did but he was just more talented/skilled. When my son captained his Cross Country team, he was pretty good and made the all conference team but he had one kid on his team who missed at least half of the practices but was a whole minute faster than him on the race course.

As a military commander, do I want the hardest worker or the best officer? I think that the answer is obvious.
Click to expand...
I agree 100% - but they gotta be able to pass Calculus!
 
OldRetSWO said:
I don't disagree with a lot of what you've written in this thread but you are off base in this comment. Service Academy admission is not supposed to be a prize to the kid who worked the hardest or has he greatest story or did the most fabulous community service. It is supposed to be choosing the best potential leaders and officers. I knew kids in high school who worked tremendously hard every day and even in the summer to have the absolute
top grades but would have been terrible officers for any number of reasons.

If life were "fair", the person who worked the hardest would get the best results but talent and ability (among other things) get in the way of that. As an athlete at USNA, I was pretty good at my sport but not at the top of my team. One teammate from a class above mine was frequently absent from practice for a litany of reasons (a cold, a test, etc) but after missing a week or more of practice would show up and within a day would be up among the leaders and well above me. I worked a lot harder than he did but he was just more talented/skilled. When my son captained his Cross Country team, he was pretty good and made the all conference team but he had one kid on his team who missed at least half of the practices but was a whole minute faster than him on the race course.

As a military commander, do I want the hardest worker or the best officer? I think that the answer is obvious.
Click to expand...

I would also add one thing to this.

We don’t know that there weren’t other kids that were just as good or better on the slates in terms of results and effort. It leads to a fallacy that because someone else got two noms and another only got one, that the person with one nom would have been a better candidate but for the second nom.

It all comes down to what the SA wants to build their puzzle. They have given appointments without noms (rarely), they have denied admissions to people with multiple noms (I suspect less rarely). They assign appointments to different districts.
 
A1Janitor said:
LOL True. But I suspect the majority of 3Q candidates have passed calculus. And the majority of them with As.
Click to expand...
Without a doubt. The point is that there are undoubtedly many, many potential GREAT "leaders of men" in our country who are summarily eliminated from attending an academy because they just "can't pass Calculus". Something in my gut tells me that Audie Murphy or Alvin York couldn't have passed Calc.
 
Does having an LOA impact the 1 or multiple noms at all? I can imagine if all MOC know from portal that a candidate has a LOA contingent on receiving a nomination AND they see that same candidate has a nomination from another source why would they use up their limited resources on that candidate that has already cleared all their hurdles and is headed for the finish line? This is the conversation my child had with his FFR about receiving one nomination for USMA and not multiples. He was assured that he only needed one and that the Senator's committee knew that he had already received what he needed and had an LOA. More nominations it seems would not have made a difference. He was told not to expect one from either of the Senators since they knew he was taken care of and he cleared all his hurdles. They were going to use their slates to help others who were 3Q to get to the academy.
 
TimFlyer said:
It’s to bad we continue to not reward the kids that have worked the hardest in and out the classroom.. such a great reward to attend the SA and if a kid can’t get 2 nomination then they have been hurt in the process
the SA should set the policy of handing out nominations Not the individual states.. IMOP
Click to expand...

I'm sorry, but this is 100% off base.

A.) Not getting more than on nom does not "hurt" anyone in the process. The overwhelming majority of all SA appointees EVER got only one nom.
B.) Having more than one nom allows the candidate to have any extra lottery ticket in the game but says nothing about the strength of his/her application.
C.) No one in admissions sits there and says "Oh boy look, Sally/Sam has two noms" and that somehow makes them a better candidate.
D.) SA's do NOT make policy about handing out noms. Period! Members of Congress are authorized BY LAW to nominate candidates for appointments. How they choose to do that e.g. principal vs. competitive slates is left to them to decide, BY LAW.

You can have four noms, but in itself isn't going to get anyone in.
 
tryingmybest said:
Does having an LOA impact the 1 or multiple noms at all? I can imagine if all MOC know from portal that a candidate has a LOA contingent on receiving a nomination AND they see that same candidate has a nomination from another source why would they use up their limited resources on that candidate that has already cleared all their hurdles and is headed for the finish line? This is the conversation my child had with his FFR about receiving one nomination for USMA and not multiples. He was assured that he only needed one and that the Senator's committee knew that he had already received what he needed and had an LOA. More nominations it seems would not have made a difference. He was told not to expect one from either of the Senators since they knew he was taken care of and he cleared all his hurdles. They were going to use their slates to help others who were 3Q to get to the academy.
Click to expand...

Yes. This was my son’s situation.
 
Sydney C. said:
Not getting more than on nom does not "hurt" anyone in the process.
Click to expand...
Respectfully disagree with this. Allowing one candidate multiple noms disadvantages others who would have received those noms but instead received none. Moreover, multiple noms provides an advantage over those who have only one because there are more opportunities for appointment. And, although many will disagree, there ARE intangibles in every competitive process. Having multiple noms yields a tactile impression that a candidate is very strong, even though it has no effect on WCS.
 
tryingmybest said:
Does having an LOA impact the 1 or multiple noms at all? I can imagine if all MOC know from portal that a candidate has a LOA contingent on receiving a nomination AND they see that same candidate has a nomination from another source why would they use up their limited resources on that candidate that has already cleared all their hurdles and is headed for the finish line? This is the conversation my child had with his FFR about receiving one nomination for USMA and not multiples. He was assured that he only needed one and that the Senator's committee knew that he had already received what he needed and had an LOA. More nominations it seems would not have made a difference. He was told not to expect one from either of the Senators since they knew he was taken care of and he cleared all his hurdles. They were going to use their slates to help others who were 3Q to get to the academy.
Click to expand...
This makes a lot of sense on why reps and sens coordinate. Top candidates with an LOA before the end of nom. season only need the one nom. It allows reps and sens to nominate from other highly qualified candidates who have applied, interviewed, etc for a nom. It makes more opportunities available.
 
Dadx4 said:
Respectfully disagree with this. Allowing one candidate multiple noms disadvantages others who would have received those noms but instead received none. Moreover, multiple noms provides an advantage over those who have only one because there are more opportunities for appointment. And, although many will disagree, there ARE intangibles in every competitive process. Having multiple noms yields a tactile impression that a candidate is very strong, even though it has no effect on WCS.
Click to expand...

You didn’t disagree with him.

He said “Not getting more than on nom does not "hurt" anyone in the process.”

You responded with getting more than one nom hurts others who didn’t get a nom. That’s a different premise.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top