Principle Nom

[wannabeplebe]

So I received a nom from my MOC, but not his principle nom. As of now, I'm kinda losing any hope that I'll get in on this slot. I understand he may have more than one available slot at USNA but as there's now way of knowing, I'm preparing for the worst. Is not getting the principle nom as bad as I'm making it out to be? Please don't take this the wrong way either. I'm very grateful to even have received a nomination.

 

[Capt MJ]

Even if you did not get the principal nom in your slate, you have a nom. That means, as long as you are triple qualified, you are still in play. If you haven't already done this, browse this and other SA threads about this topic and how the NWL works. That's where all with noms and 3Q hang out. USNA will shop that pool for a certain number of candidates, and charge the appointment to a different category.

You have no control over the process at this point, so focus on things you can: tending Plans B-D, doing your best in HS or wherever you are now, working on PT skills, and enjoying being in the present moment.

 

[wannabeplebe]

Thank you for the advice! @Capt MJ I've been looking through NWL threads but there's one answer I can seem to find. Does having multiple noms vs one have any impact in your standing on the list because I know more noms = more slots you can fill? Or do noms become somewhat insignificant on NWL since everyone who is on it has one and is probably not going to be appointed to the slate they were nominated to anyways.

 

[Capt MJ]

Thank you for the advice! @Capt MJ I've been looking through NWL threads but there's one answer I can seem to find. Does having multiple noms vs one have any impact in your standing on the list because I know more noms = more slots you can fill? Or do noms become somewhat insignificant on NWL since everyone who is on it has one and is probably not going to be appointed to the slate they were nominated to anyways.

IMPO, once you're in that pool, along with all other 3Q+nom folk, it's everything else you bring to the table that is what is being looked at.

 

[Old Navy BGO]

Did your MOC designate a Principal Nom , or Competitive Noms ? As I understand it (its been awhile since I have heard it directly), if the MOC has a Principal Nom, and he /she is 3Q, they get the slot. Most MOC (at least in my State) use the Competitive Nom, where they nominate up to 10 per slot, and CGO select who among the slate is most qualfied. Politically, this give the MOC the opportunity to "share the love" by nominating as many as possible, and leaving it to CGO to be the bad guy and make hard decisions.

 

[wannabeplebe]

Did your MOC designate a Principal Nom , or Competitive Noms ? As I understand it (its been awhile since I have heard it directly), if the MOC has a Principal Nom, and he /she is 3Q, they get the slot. Most MOC (at least in my State) use the Competitive Nom, where they nominate up to 10 per slot, and CGO select who among the slate is most qualfied. Politically, this give the MOC the opportunity to "share the love" by nominating as many as possible, and leaving it to CGO to be the bad guy and make hard decisions.

My MOC has designated a principle nomand I didn't get it. I also know that someone from my district (with his nom) has gotten in because it was publicized.

 

[usnabgo08]

USNA does not have to offer an appointment to a candidate who is 3Q + principal nomination, although it is common practice to. This was put out by Admissions two or three years ago.

 

[CaliNavyMom]

USNA does not have to offer an appointment to a candidate who is 3Q + principal nomination, although it is common practice to. This was put out by Admissions two or three years ago.

Really? My understanding and reading the boards is that someone who is the Prin Nominee and fully qualified is guaranteed that Congressman's open spot at the academy.

 

[usnabgo08]

Yes, this was addressed by Admissions either at the BGO summer training in 2015 or 2016...can't remember which year. There was a fiasco a few years back when there was re-districting and it caused some principle nominees (3Q'd) not to receive appointments. I would say that a candidate, who is 3Q + principle nomination, not receiving an appointment is more the exception than the rule. However, USNA is not obligated to offer an appointment to the principle nominee.

 

[jl123]

Really? My understanding and reading the boards is that someone who is the Prin Nominee and fully qualified is guaranteed that Congressman's open spot at the academy.

That is correct for USMA. USNA has slightly different wording in the regulation - it is not mandated, but in practice a P-Nom + 3Q will get an appointment.

 

[ktnatalk]

USNA is not obligated to offer an appointment to the principle nominee.

...unlike USMA which does. It's in the law. I can't find it at the moment. I think @5Day or @time2 has posted that a few times.

 

[Maplerock]

USNA has this 100% right. The MOC usually doesn't see, talk to, or even read the applications sent to his/her office. A committee interviews and a small group or even one person makes the recommendations. The MOC usually rubber stamps it.

Principal nominees may be triple qualified and thus a "sure thing" at Army & Air Force. That makes the road to an Academy much tougher for #2 through 10 on the slate. I have said for years that principal nominations should be abolished. I believe the academy is much more qualified than a team of interviewers that spend an average of about 15 minutes with each applicant.

It's a flawed system.

 

[mpete2150]

USNA has this 100% right. The MOC usually doesn't see, talk to, or even read the applications sent to his/her office. A committee interviews and a small group or even one person makes the recommendations. The MOC usually rubber stamps it.

Principal nominees may be triple qualified and thus a "sure thing" at Army & Air Force. That makes the road to an Academy much tougher for #2 through 10 on the slate. I have said for years that principal nominations should be abolished. I believe the academy is much more qualified than a team of interviewers that spend an average of about 15 minutes with each applicant.

It's a flawed system.

I agree, I would think it would even make the SA's resentful. "Look, your butt is covered, you nominated your constituent's kid. Now, please let the professionals do the ranking and choosing"

 

[sa2021]

USNA has this 100% right. The MOC usually doesn't see, talk to, or even read the applications sent to his/her office. A committee interviews and a small group or even one person makes the recommendations. The MOC usually rubber stamps it.

Principal nominees may be triple qualified and thus a "sure thing" at Army & Air Force. That makes the road to an Academy much tougher for #2 through 10 on the slate. I have said for years that principal nominations should be abolished. I believe the academy is much more qualified than a team of interviewers that spend an average of about 15 minutes with each applicant.

It's a flawed system.

Sorry to hear there are abuse. However, there still exist a serious team of interviewers & MOC's that spend more than 15 mins on decision and P-nom's that spend many hours over their essay's for review. My district required more than a CFA-NASS, Academic and Medical. Further requested push/pull video. Everyone on slate worked hard to be there. I am sure the SA's take that into consideration. I hope all who give a P-nom that intensity. I know my Senatorial did. If abuse, think SA's are aware. Good Luck.

 

[jl123]

USNA has this 100% right. The MOC usually doesn't see, talk to, or even read the applications sent to his/her office. A committee interviews and a small group or even one person makes the recommendations. The MOC usually rubber stamps it.

Principal nominees may be triple qualified and thus a "sure thing" at Army & Air Force. That makes the road to an Academy much tougher for #2 through 10 on the slate. I have said for years that principal nominations should be abolished. I believe the academy is much more qualified than a team of interviewers that spend an average of about 15 minutes with each applicant.

It's a flawed system.

While using a Principal Nomination may make it more difficult for others competing for an appointment, making appointments based on other non-merit based criteria also makes it more difficult for other candidates.

As long as all appointees are 3Q, advantage based on whatever criteria a MOC uses to identify a Principal Nominee is no more flawed than other non-merit based criteria used to establish advantage - whether that criteria is how well someone throws a football, race, gender, or any other attribute that is not merit-based.

I am not arguing for or against using non-merit based criteria, merely pointing out that the Principal Nomination is just one of several sources of advantage.

 

[HopefulDad3210]

While using a Principal Nomination may make it more difficult for others competing for an appointment, making appointments based on other non-merit based criteria also makes it more difficult for other candidates.

As long as all appointees are 3Q, advantage based on whatever criteria a MOC uses to identify a Principal Nominee is no more flawed than other non-merit based criteria used to establish advantage - whether that criteria is how well someone throws a football, race, gender, or any other attribute that is not merit-based.

I am not arguing for or against using non-merit based criteria, merely pointing out that the Principal Nomination is just one of several sources of advantage.

Does anyone know whether the academies track success rates among principal noms against those among candidates that come from NWL? If there's no material disparity, why indict the paradigm on the basis of anectodal evidence or vague sense of fairness?

 

[mpete2150]

Does anyone know whether the academies track success rates among principal noms against those among candidates that come from NWL? If there's no material disparity, why indict the paradigm on the basis of anectodal evidence or vague sense of fairness?

Are those the only two choices, though? I think I've heard that maybe 1/3 (?) of MOC use the Principal Nomination method so that leaves a bunch that are ranked but not Principal or an un-ranked slate. Again, just trying to remember what I've read here.

 

[NavyHoops]

MOCs can use principal, ranked or unranked.

 

[wannabeplebe]

@NavyHoops Do you know when they start appointing from the NWL

 

[Sydney C.]

Does anyone know whether the academies track success rates among principal noms against those among candidates that come from NWL? If there's no material disparity, why indict the paradigm on the basis of anectodal evidence or vague sense of fairness?

Clearly, I can't say whether the academies track that or not, but regardless, I would wonder why they would spend the time or energy to do so. As Hoops points out, it's either principal, ranked or unranked, and that's all in the purvey of the MOC's that the academies have no input or control over. With that said, what would be the point even if they had that evidence? It's not as though they would be in a position to change it.