Have you had any contact with the coach? This would be a great question to ask him. At the Coast Guard Academy recruited athletes are held to the same academic standards in admissions as non-recruits. Those who are on the borderline academically may be considered for prep school.what scores/gpa would I need to be able to be accepted as a recruited athlete? I’m assuming they’re the same as other academies and normal applicants, I just thought maybe there would be lenience with a recruited athlete.
There are no slates at USCGA. No congressional nomination is required.To clarify, recruited athletes appointed with low scores do not replace slate winners or Qualified Alternates. At least for USMA they are appointed as Additional Appointees - a category that, by law, allows for appointment out of order of merit. I assume the other academies have similar procedures.
Also, many recruited athletes have excellent academic credentials.
Does USCGA have categories of appointments that would allow a recruited athlete to be appointed out of order of merit without replacing a more qualified candidate?There are no slates at USCGA. No congressional nomination is required.
They appoint who they want. You are assuming a recruited athlete is less qualified than another. Who is most qualified is decided by USCGA and they don’t tell us how they decide that. I’m sure their ability to help a sports program is factored in.Does USCGA have categories of appointments that would allow a recruited athlete to be appointed out of order of merit without replacing a more qualified candidate?There are no slates at USCGA. No congressional nomination is required.
By the way, approximately 50% of USCGA is recruited athletes. They are leaders on the field, in the classroom, and in the fleet. Don't fall for conventional "wisdom" that athletes are somehow less qualified. Many of them could have gone anywhere they wanted - many of them turned down D1 offers to attend the Academy and serve.They appoint who they want. You are assuming a recruited athlete is less qualified than another. Who is most qualified is decided by USCGA and they don’t tell us how they decide that. I’m sure their ability to help a sports program is factored in.Does USCGA have categories of appointments that would allow a recruited athlete to be appointed out of order of merit without replacing a more qualified candidate?There are no slates at USCGA. No congressional nomination is required.
It is not conventional wisdom, but simply a fact that some recruited athletes are appointed with academic credentials far below other appointees. I can't speak to USCGA, but if consistent with other D-3 schools recruited athletes have a lower academic bar than other applicants. However, D-3 schools do not generally lower standards to the extent that D-1 schools do.By the way, approximately 50% of USCGA is recruited athletes. They are leaders on the field, in the classroom, and in the fleet. Don't fall for conventional "wisdom" that athletes are somehow less qualified. Many of them could have gone anywhere they wanted - many of them turned down D1 offers to attend the Academy and serve.
Some students who are appointed will always have lower scores than other students who are appointed. Don't denigrate every member of a class of cadets just because some of them may have received some extra consideration. Special considerations are made for minorities, gender, and to fulfill the needs of the academy - its not a pure meritocracy.It is not conventional wisdom, but simply a fact that some recruited athletes are appointed with academic credentials far below other appointees. I can't speak to USCGA, but if consistent with other D-3 schools recruited athletes have a lower academic bar than other applicants. However, D-3 schools do not generally lower standards to the extent that D-1 schools do.By the way, approximately 50% of USCGA is recruited athletes. They are leaders on the field, in the classroom, and in the fleet. Don't fall for conventional "wisdom" that athletes are somehow less qualified. Many of them could have gone anywhere they wanted - many of them turned down D1 offers to attend the Academy and serve.
I can speak to D-1 service academy standards: the USMA Class of 2019 admitted football players with ACT English scores as low as 16 and Math scores as low as 18; wrestling had appointees as low as 20 in both English and Math. No candidates are admitted with scores that low unless they are recruited athletes or fall into another category given special consideration.
To be fair both the football and wrestling team Class of 2019 teams have respectable average and median test scores: English/Math - 23/25 average and median for football; 26/26 average and 26/25 median for wrestling. Also, several members of both teams had excellent scores and would have been competitive regardless of athletic recruitment.
I have not denigrated any member of any class of any institution. I merely presented a fact - recruited athletes at almost all institutions, including USCGA, may be admitted with lower academic credentials than non-recruited athletes - and supported with evidence that some athletes are admitted with far lower academic credentials.Some students who are appointed will always have lower scores than other students who are appointed. Don't denigrate every member of a class of cadets just because some of them may have received some extra consideration. Special considerations are made for minorities, gender, and to fulfill the needs of the academy - its not a pure meritocracy.
The statistics from USMA, USAFA and USNA are inapplicable to the USCGA. Since 50% of USCGA is recruited athletes, their institutional average SAT/ACT/GPA scores would be a heck of a lot lower if the athletes were as low performing as you suggest.
I have personally talked to one of the recruitment coaches at USCGA. Recruited athletes at USCGA is a little bit of a misnomer as no one is accepted who doesn't meet the academy's strict admittance profile. The academy is looking to recruit well rounded individuals where no particular item outweighs another. JL123 you are saying that some recruited athletes are allowed lower academics, that could be rephrased to say some none athletes are allowed to join the academy if they have good academic scores. Rather we should look at the individual as a whole, not piece by piece.I have not denigrated any member of any class of any institution. I merely presented a fact - recruited athletes at almost all institutions, including USCGA, may be admitted with lower academic credentials than non-recruited athletes - and supported with evidence that some athletes are admitted with far lower academic credentials.
In other words they look at the whole candidate. You can try and spin it any way you want the truth is that the academy is not only looking for good academics, they are looking for leadership, community service and athletics. For USCGA they are definitely cadets first and athletes second. If they could not satisfy the requirements for admission then they would not be accepted.Those candidates would not have been admitted to USCGA or any other highly competitive college without heavy emphasis on a credential other than academics.
You assume that bottom 25 is recruited athletes - why isn't it prior enlisted or minorities or women or 1st gen college students or whatever other group admissions wants more of?Academics is the most heavily weighted factor at all service academies.
USCGA 2017 - 2018 admissions cycle
ACT (25-75th Percentile)
Composite: 25-32
English: 25-33
Math: 26-30
25% have ACT composite above 32. Competitive for most highly selective colleges.
25% have ACT composite below 25. Those candidates would not have been admitted to USCGA or any other highly competitive college without heavy emphasis on a credential other than academics.
Recruited athletes do not have to meet the same academic standards as non-recruited athlete candidates, but high academic performers still have to meet the same rigorous physical standards. That's the price all colleges pay to field intercollegiate sports teams.
I made no such assumption. Recruited athletes is just one category that receives a break on academic credentials and since the topic is recruited athletes, I limited my comment in the above post to that group.You assume that bottom 25 is recruited athletes - why isn't it prior enlisted or minorities or 1st gen college students?Academics is the most heavily weighted factor at all service academies.
USCGA 2017 - 2018 admissions cycle
ACT (25-75th Percentile)
Composite: 25-32
English: 25-33
Math: 26-30
25% have ACT composite above 32. Competitive for most highly selective colleges.
25% have ACT composite below 25. Those candidates would not have been admitted to USCGA or any other highly competitive college without heavy emphasis on a credential other than academics.
Recruited athletes do not have to meet the same academic standards as non-recruited athlete candidates, but high academic performers still have to meet the same rigorous physical standards. That's the price all colleges pay to field intercollegiate sports teams.