USNA Principal Nomination Candidates - Timing & Success Rate?

[jl123]

I have never heard of an SA pulling an appointment under such circumstances. However, athletic LOA's are a scarce resource and it is not unheard of for a coach to tell a candidate that he will get them an LOA if they agree to accept an appointment. Generally not a one time, take it or leave it offer - can be a weeks or months process of talks between coach and candidate. But there does come a time when a coach has to move on to other prospects.

 

[Korab]

If I understand this thread, I must confess that I find it very disturbing that any SA would condition an offer of appointment (and limit its timing for acceptance) on a candidate's willingness to commit to a sport and make an immediate decision. I fully understand why this happens at civilian schools (limited scholarships, etc). However, this is a SA. EVERYONE is on "scholarship," and -- once you show up -- there is no way the SA can condition your staying or your "free" education on playing your sport. Quite a few highly recruited athletes at SAs end up quitting their sports for various reasons. Thus, every SA had better be taking candidates that it wants regardless of whether they play their sport.

It was my understanding that all candidates have until May 1 to make their decisions on a SA (at least that is the case for USNA). To condition a candidate's appointment on an immediate decision or "threaten" a candidate who doesn't decide immediately on something SO important is, IMHO, a disgrace.

I don't know which other SA is involved, but I can guess. And is sickens me. I can't say whether USNA does the above, but if it does, my view / reaction is exactly the same.

Finally, don't attend any SA that you don't 100% want to attend. I've written before of numerous time this has happened with my candidates. Not once has the candidate ended up loving a SA that he / she wasn't super excited about attending. Rather, they end up miserable and bitter.

So, for the OP, if you really want to attend the SA offering the limited time appointment, go there. But if you don't, hold out for USNA. If you have a principal appointment, you are extremely likely (not certain, but as close as you can get) to an appointment. Also, if you're that great of an athlete, you should be able to play your sport at USNA (unless it's not a D1 sport there).

I'm not reading that he has an appointment from another service academy, but an officer from a coach - there's a major difference between a service academy conditioning an offer of appointment on a commitment and a coach placing a time limit on a decision and the use of a blue chip. I am sure what is happening here is the latter. Blue chips are a limited resource. If someone won't commit, the coach will move on to next recruit. Remember, the coach's jobs depend on recruiting, competing, and winning

Yep, this leaves a bad taste in my mouth. And if reading between the lines, is how it’s going down? Same feelings as @usna1985 post.

But we all know the world of recruiting is, at times, questionable. Personally, if that coach is willing to put that much pressure on them, and unethically (imo) bc he is representing this whole thing incorrectly it seems (at least through omission of important info about the whole process), it would be bothersome to me.

There is nothing questionable about a coach placing a time limit on an offer and commitment. It happens all the time at every level. College coaches are paid to win. They have limited capital to recruit kids who will help them achieve that goal. If a kid chooses not to commit, it isentirely reasonable for the coach to pull that capital and use it on someone who will commit.

 

[usna1985]

College coaches are paid to win. They have limited capital to recruit kids who will help them achieve that goal. If a kid chooses not to commit, it isentirely reasonable for the coach to pull that capital and use it on someone who will commit.

I recognize that SA coaches, like coaches at civilian schools, are paid to win. But SAs are federally funded schools and are, at least in theory, supposed to operate differently.

If the OP is a principal nominee, that suggests he is a very strong candidate (at least in the mind of the MOC's committee). That tells me this person should be able to secure an appointment even without the blue chip designation. I don't have a problem if the coach says, "If you don't commit now, I won't wast my coach's / blue chip capital on you," vs. "If you don't commit now, you have no shot an appointment (or I'll make sure you don't get an appointment)." What bothers me is that there is an implication that, if the kid doesn't commit to A SPORT (vs. the SA), his appointment will be pulled or he will no longer be in line for one. Or, in the same vein, that a very strong candidate is potentially being "punished" in terms of an appointment b/c he won't commit right now. That's just wrong.

For the OP, here's the question. If you can't play your sport at the other SA, will you still be happy there? You may get injured. You may lose interest (have seen this happen numerous times with h.s. standouts who don't like the SA team members, the coach, or just burn out). You may not be able to handle the sport and your academics & military duties. You're still at the SA. So, as stated above, be sure you want the SA for it, not just for playing your sport.

 

[Korab]

I recognize that SA coaches, like coaches at civilian schools, are paid to win. But SAs are federally funded schools and are, at least in theory, supposed to operate differently.

If the OP is a principal nominee, that suggests he is a very strong candidate (at least in the mind of the MOC's committee). That tells me this person should be able to secure an appointment even without the blue chip designation. I don't have a problem if the coach says, "If you don't commit now, I won't wast my coach's / blue chip capital on you," vs. "If you don't commit now, you have no shot an appointment (or I'll make sure you don't get an appointment)." What bothers me is that there is an implication that, if the kid doesn't commit to A SPORT (vs. the SA), his appointment will be pulled or he will no longer be in line for one. Or, in the same vein, that a very strong candidate is potentially being "punished" in terms of an appointment b/c he won't commit right now. That's just wrong.

For the OP, here's the question. If you can't play your sport at the other SA, will you still be happy there? You may get injured. You may lose interest (have seen this happen numerous times with h.s. standouts who don't like the SA team members, the coach, or just burn out). You may not be able to handle the sport and your academics & military duties. You're still at the SA. So, as stated above, be sure you want the SA for it, not just for playing your sport.

I agree that a service academy shouldn't be playing games with an appointment based on whether a kid commits or not, but it isn't clear at all that is what is happening - posters are reading that into the situation. The OP only refers to an offer from a coach, not an appointment in hand in danger of being pulled. As to the qualification of the candidate, the 28 ACT makes him a borderline candidate in the absence of a blue chip, and a potential prep offer with it.

 

[MidCakePa]

For the OP, here's the question. If you can't play your sport at the other SA, will you still be happy there?

This is the core issue, in a nutshell. Does OP want to play college sports, with a side benefit of becoming a commissioned officer? Or does OP want to become a commissioned officer, with a side benefit of playing a college sport?

I’ve personally known of numerous star high-school athletes who went on to college athletics with great fanfare and some level of free ride. Many of them stopped competing within a year or two, for various reasons: burnout, new interests, injury, lack of playing time, dislike of coach, focus on academics, etc. Most of those who moved on also transferred schools, because they realized that, if not for the sports-driven scholarship, they never would’ve gone there.

 

[justdoit19]

I'm not reading that he has an appointment from another service academy, but an officer from a coach - there's a major difference between a service academy conditioning an offer of appointment on a commitment and a coach placing a time limit on a decision and the use of a blue chip. I am sure what is happening here is the latter. Blue chips are a limited resource. If someone won't commit, the coach will move on to next recruit. Remember, the coach's jobs depend on recruiting, competing, and winning

There is nothing questionable about a coach placing a time limit on an offer and commitment. It happens all the time at every level. College coaches are paid to win. They have limited capital to recruit kids who will help them achieve that goal. If a kid chooses not to commit, it isentirely reasonable for the coach to pull that capital and use it on someone who will commit.

Complete makes sense. Hadn’t thought of it from this perspective. Using a blue chip, needing a decision.

Hopefully the candidate understands all the nuances of a SA appointment. Including how they could be appointed differently, blue chip vs not for example, by two SA’s.

And hopefully their main goal is to serve!

 

[14mccpa]

Any update here Parent_of_P? Interested to hear how it has worked out for your DS, and whether or not blue chip status was discussed with your son?

Good Luck to him!

 

[Parent_of_P]

Thanks for all of your feedback and perspectives. Apologies for the delay in responding I have been away with work.

To confirm DS had an offer from the other Coach and he described it as the Appointment was 'ready to be sent'. There was not an Appointment which was being pulled back. The other Academy moved quickly in the application portal and the MOC nomination etc. was updated quickly. The other Academy also utilizes the entire ACT which is an advantage where DS has Science/Reading 33+.

Unfortunately they would not grant him additional time so he declined the offer as he wasn't 100% sure. He is now waiting on official word from Navy.

 

[Capt MJ]

Thanks for all of your feedback and perspectives. Apologies for the delay in responding I have been away with work.

To confirm DS had an offer from the other Coach and he described it as the Appointment was 'ready to be sent'. There was not an Appointment which was being pulled back. The other Academy moved quickly in the application portal and the MOC nomination etc. was updated quickly. The other Academy also utilizes the entire ACT which is an advantage where DS has Science/Reading 33+.

Unfortunately they would not grant him additional time so he declined the offer as he wasn't 100% sure. He is now waiting on official word from Navy.

Glad he followed his heart.
Lo these many years ago, DH was offered a USMA appointment early in the process. Navy had not made an offer yet. His thinking had clarified along the way, and he knew his path lay with the Navy, whether via USNA or NROTC at Penn or Northwestern. He declined USMA. Navy came through with an appointment not long before I-Day, one of those nail-biters. He focused on what he felt was right for him and made his decisions accordingly. He was also a varsity recruit, but not a blue-chipper.

Best wishes for the path he desires to open up.