Coordination and Competition

[bubblehead#22]

Assuming all MOC in your state coordinate nominations so as to only give 1 candidate a single nomination, and assuming the Senators name their slates first.......isn't it a disadvantage to be named on one of those Senator slates vs getting named to your congressional district slate? I know all nominations are equal. But, all else being equal, aren't your odds better being on a slate of 10 from a single congressional district vs. on a slate from a state. The chances of another, "more qualified" candidate getting the slate vs you are much greater just given the larger pool of candidates that the Senators look at. Am I missing something?

 

[texdad2023]

The Aide for our MOC called us before Thanksgiving and said that our DS was put on the USMA, USNA and USAFA slate. Everyone was so ecstatic. She also added that we are in a rural district and the slates are never full. She would coordinate with our Senator to take him off his slate - to do the senator a favor so he could have more slots. We didn't say anything, because we were excited to get the "nom". We go to a information session for one of the academies, and they started talking about principal slates and the advantage of being on more than one slate. The guy said "there are 535 MOC - and if everyone fills all 10 on all there slates that is 5350 -- for like 1200 spots. So being on slate doesn't really matter unless you have an LOA or you are the primary. So we call the aide for the congress person back and ask her if she could reconnect with the Senator's office and ask if she could put our DS back on the slate. This is where it was confusing. 1) was he really ever on the slate, 2) did they do it, or had they already taken him off. 3) does that Senator rank their slate or is it unranked. 4) do they have principal noms. We don't know. We haven't heard one way or the other from the Senator. Nor have we heard from our other Senator.

I think she was confusing a couple of things. My understanding is that say Senator has two people on their slate that the school really likes, they may assign one of those "nominations" to the MOC when it is all said and done so that they can give both kids an appointment. So yes - the Senator and MOC sometimes coordinate, but that should be done by the academy. Not by the aides. This doesn't actually increase the odds of the kid getting in. It actually hurts them, imo.

The reps for the school said it was helpful to be on as many slates as possible because it increases the bites at the apple. However, being the principal is the best.

The rep also said that being on a Senator's list (depending on the senator) was better than just being on an MOC list. But I don't know about that. it sounds as though the Primary designation is the most important.

So we are still waiting on both senators. I have thought about whether to reach out to the senator to see if they cleared it up. But it sounds so presumptuous to call them up and say "hey - can you put him back on the list", when we never were supposed to know he may have been on the list.

 

[Capt MJ]

The Aide for our MOC called us before Thanksgiving and said that our DS was put on the USMA, USNA and USAFA slate. Everyone was so ecstatic. She also added that we are in a rural district and the slates are never full. She would coordinate with our Senator to take him off his slate - to do the senator a favor so he could have more slots. We didn't say anything, because we were excited to get the "nom". We go to a information session for one of the academies, and they started talking about principal slates and the advantage of being on more than one slate. The guy said "there are 535 MOC - and if everyone fills all 10 on all there slates that is 5350 -- for like 1200 spots. So being on slate doesn't really matter unless you have an LOA or you are the primary. So we call the aide for the congress person back and ask her if she could reconnect with the Senator's office and ask if she could put our DS back on the slate. This is where it was confusing. 1) was he really ever on the slate, 2) did they do it, or had they already taken him off. 3) does that Senator rank their slate or is it unranked. 4) do they have principal noms. We don't know. We haven't heard one way or the other from the Senator. Nor have we heard from our other Senator.

I think she was confusing a couple of things. My understanding is that say Senator has two people on their slate that the school really likes, they may assign one of those "nominations" to the MOC when it is all said and done so that they can give both kids an appointment. So yes - the Senator and MOC sometimes coordinate, but that should be done by the academy. Not by the aides. This doesn't actually increase the odds of the kid getting in. It actually hurts them, imo.

The reps for the school said it was helpful to be on as many slates as possible because it increases the bites at the apple. However, being the principal is the best.

The rep also said that being on a Senator's list (depending on the senator) was better than just being on an MOC list. But I don't know about that. it sounds as though the Primary designation is the most important.

So we are still waiting on both senators. I have thought about whether to reach out to the senator to see if they cleared it up. But it sounds so presumptuous to call them up and say "hey - can you put him back on the list", when we never were supposed to know he may have been on the list.

It may be helpful for you to go re-read the pinned post at the top of the Nominations forum.

The reason the SAs encourage applicants to apply for as many nom sources as possible is if they wish to offer the applicant an appointment, they have more flexibility as to where the appointment can be charged (“bites at the apple”). SAs may also offer additional appointments to fully qualified candidates on a slate and charge the appointment not to the Senator or a Representative, but to other nom authorities they manage.

I agree with your conclusion don’t call the Senator’s staff.

 

[bubblehead#22]

It may be helpful for you to go re-read the pinned post at the top of the Nominations forum.

The reason the SAs encourage applicants to apply for as many nom sources as possible is if they wish to offer the applicant an appointment, they have more flexibility as to where the appointment can be charged (“bites at the apple”). SAs may also offer additional appointments to fully qualified candidates on a slate and charge the appointment not to the Senator or a Representative, but to other nom authorities they manage.

I agree with your conclusion don’t call the Senator’s staff.

Hi Capt MJ, just wondering if you agree with my original post. I think my reasoning is sound but just wanted confirmation. Basically, the odds favor a person with a congressional nomination vs. a senatorial nomination. I understand you never know, there may be outstanding candidates in one district, a "light" senatorial slate, etc. But, in general, since your competition on the senatorial slate is from a much larger population, the odds favor a congressional nomination.

 

[MidCakePa]

Adding to @Capt MJ response: There’s zero indication than one MOC’s nomination — whether from senator or representative — is worth more than another’s. All indications over the years say that a nom is a nom is a nom.

 

[justdoit19]

Honestly? It’s not worth the brain power to spend on this. BC you may, or may not, stack up better than, or worse than, a senator, or congressional slate. One may present their slate principal, or ranked. Or unranked. They may do it one way this year, and another way next year. Candidates may, or may not, be medically, academically or physically qualified. They may, or may not, interview worse or better that you.

There are so many differing scenarios, that I don’t think you can make a generalized assumption that a congressional slate has a better chance of an appointment, than a senatorial slate.

I understand your point, but I don’t think you can make that connection. And in the end, it really doesn’t even matter. Perhaps your congressional slate is presented as a ranked principal slate, and your senatorial ones are presented as unranked competitive. Boom….unless you are the principal, you would seemingly have a better chance on the senatorial ones. Although I personally don’t subscribe to that logic. Bc there are so many unknowns, moving pieces and parts, and intangibles that I don’t feel you can even assign a “statistical chance”. I subscribe to the ‘100 pct chance if you get one, 0 if you don’t’ thinking.

Also team ‘don’t call senators’. They are versed in all the nuances of slate presentation. If they don’t double nom, and they coordinate? That’s their methodology.

There is a lot about this whole process that you simply have no control over. All you can do, is be the best candidate you can be. If you think about all this too much, you can drive yourself bonkers.

Good luck!

 

[bubblehead#22]

Honestly? It’s not worth the brain power to spend on this. BC you may, or may not, stack up better than, or worse than, a senator, or congressional slate. One may present their slate principal, or ranked. Or unranked. They may do it one way this year, and another way next year. Candidates may, or may not, be medically, academically or physically qualified. They may, or may not, interview worse or better that you.

There are so many differing scenarios, that I don’t think you can make a generalized assumption that a congressional slate has a better chance of an appointment, than a senatorial slate.

I understand your point, but I don’t think you can make that connection. And in the end, it really doesn’t even matter. Perhaps your congressional slate is presented as a ranked principal slate, and your senatorial ones are presented as unranked competitive. Boom….unless you are the principal, you would seemingly have a better chance on the senatorial ones. Although I personally don’t subscribe to that logic. Bc there are so many unknowns, moving pieces and parts, and intangibles that I don’t feel you can even assign a “statistical chance”. I subscribe to the ‘100 pct chance if you get one, 0 if you don’t’ thinking.

Also team ‘don’t call senators’. They are versed in all the nuances of slate presentation. If they don’t double nom, and they coordinate? That’s their methodology.

There is a lot about this whole process that you simply have no control over. All you can do, is be the best candidate you can be. If you think about all this too much, you can drive yourself bonkers.

Good luck!

All valid points. Thank you.

 

[Capt MJ]

Hi Capt MJ, just wondering if you agree with my original post. I think my reasoning is sound but just wanted confirmation. Basically, the odds favor a person with a congressional nomination vs. a senatorial nomination. I understand you never know, there may be outstanding candidates in one district, a "light" senatorial slate, etc. But, in general, since your competition on the senatorial slate is from a much larger population, the odds favor a congressional nomination.

I don’t usually venture into areas of speculation and theories, trying to stick to known facts and primary sources, especially when there are so many variables both on Admissions side and elected officials’ processes. The only opinion I will venture is Admissions has long, broad and deep experience in mining for diamonds, in any setting. If they really want someone, they will figure out how to get them, no matter what nom bucket(s) they are swimming in.

If diamonds could swim. In buckets.