Will high school class rank and standardized tests make up for lacking sports participation?

I think it’s a stretch that no one at West Point (from GEN Gilland down) can design an application the doesn’t involve…shall we state….”creative manipulation” by the applicants or the RCs. And if this “creativity“ IS the job, why aren’t they, as a group, pounding on doors?

Example for a new application:
Did you receive a Varsity Letter in Sports? ______Yes ______No
If yes, which sport(s) and how many years?
If no, are there any other athletic activities that you wish us to consider that doesn’t include fabricating an answer to the first question above? _____Yes ____No
If “yes”, please explain….

I guess, in all fairness to everyone involved, the applicants haven’t accepted the Cadet Honor Code at this point in the process, huh?

If there is an “extras“ section as mentioned in a previous post, why the need to check the “varsity letter” box when it does not apply? …….never mind rhetorical question……
 
I really do not think that many (although some might) candidates are overstating sports activities on their applications. First, most do not need to and in most cases would involve convincing school personnel to fabricate experience as well. Part of the application is a verification, by school personnel, of what the candidate lists in his application. Although both of my sons played lacrosse (and each was a team captain) and both were competitive swimmers they were also volunteer firefighters and EMTs. One son (now a USMA Plebe) had been credited with a number of rescues and was awarded “Firefighter of the Month” several months. Although there is no specific box on the application for this activity, West Point’s RC asked my son to submit an activities resume and letters to make sure he was awarded all of the “points” that he deserved.

I believe that all RCs make a valiant effort to credit each candidate with all of the possible points they deserve (sports or any other activity) but you must be proactive and reach out to them. Let them know the specifics, provide them with an activities resume, and if things change during that senior year - update them (preferably through a school official or guidance counselor) to make them aware of new activities or leadership positions. Every candidate is a unique makeup of experiences and activities and that is what makes West Point (and others SAs) great! Having been a parent through this process twice now I can say that I never experienced any attempt to “fudge” the numbers, to the contrary- only an effort by the RC to make sure each of my sons was awarded credit for what they deserved and to attempt to include credit for any “square peg” in round hole activities not commonly listed on the application. I believe if you reach out to the RC with specific activities and questions they will make every effort to inform and assist you. Good luck and thanks to all the candidates for their willingness to serve!
 
I’m making an observation and comments about RCs based on what has been posted here! Others have stated that their RC recommended “fudging”….
 
For future readers: providing false statements or intensionally inaccurate information are clear grounds for a SA or Nomination Board to immediately withdraw or reject an application. Don't do it.
 
I’m making an observation and comments about RCs based on what has been posted here! Others have stated that their RC recommended “fudging”….
Nobody is fudging.

Varsity sports have letters. My son had like 9 of them.

In the other sections he also had athletic type activities that didn’t qualify for letters - but could add points to his wcs as extracurricular activies. Adding those activities isn’t fudging. It is presenting your best possible application.

Read Capt MJ again.
 
Are there really four pages of discussion on this topic? It is hard to believe...
LOL. Reads like some of the threads I see on sports forums. Lying can result in some short term wins and usually are long term losses.
 
I’m making an observation and comments about RCs based on what has been posted here! Others have stated that their RC recommended “fudging”….
No RCs are recommending fudging. They are recommending applicants to report activities (either in the extras box or directly to the RC) that don't neatly fit into the application so that the RC can accurately evaluate candidates. No one is suggesting checking boxes that do not apply.
 
You are assuming your situation is the rule and not the exception.

Maybe on your slate your wcs was tops. Maybe on a different slate it wouldn’t have been - others with top grades and activities plus sports might have edged you out?
No, I am stating the fact that academics are weighed heavier. Just included my situation to provide an example of the fact that varsity letters aren't the end all be all. Your argument that I might have been edged out on another slate doesn't make much sense, what would the chances be of a top 13% WCS of admitted applicants one year being an inadmissible WCS the next?
 
No, I am stating the fact that academics are weighed heavier. Just included my situation to provide an example of the fact that varsity letters aren't the end all be all. Your argument that I might have been edged out on another slate doesn't make much sense, what would the chances be of a top 13% WCS of admitted applicants one year being an inadmissible WCS the next?
Maybe you would have gotten in. Probably even.

If you aren’t the top on your slate, you would be pushed into the NWL.

There are plenty of people with top academics that don’t get in.
 
Maybe you would have gotten in. Probably even.

If you aren’t the top on your slate, you would be pushed into the NWL.

There are plenty of people with top academics that don’t get in.
You do understand that the whole idea of ‘winning your slate’ isn’t actually correct? If you exist outside of a competitive district, where there is just one individual who will be selected, chances are the academics OP listed will edge him out over the others. If he lives in a competitive district, there are multiple people who are admitted to the class every year, not just one. I have personally met 4 people who are from my district and class year at the academy. Not arguing that he shouldn’t do sports, but that he should prioritize academics.
 
You do understand that the whole idea of ‘winning your slate’ isn’t actually correct? If you exist outside of a competitive district, where there is just one individual who will be selected, chances are the academics OP listed will edge him out over the others. If he lives in a competitive district, there are multiple people who are admitted to the class every year, not just one. I have personally met 4 people who are from my district and class year at the academy. Not arguing that he shouldn’t do sports, but that he should prioritize academics.

-1/117 for class rank
-1500 on SAT (only my junior year so I can probably improve it)
-Perfect 4.0 unweighted, only one AP as that all our school offers, plus about 5 college courses by the time I graduate.

As a BGO, I've literally have had several candidates who more than met this level and not all got in.

One who did get in more than met this at a much larger school with more APs while being Team Captain of Soccer and Basketball and being 1st team All County in one of them. His team captaincy of soccer was particularly noteworthy as it had some very impressive things done in the off-season.

Same High School, different year, I had one with 1600 SAT, first in class but only 1 season of JV Cross Country who did not get in.
 
You do understand that the whole idea of ‘winning your slate’ isn’t actually correct? If you exist outside of a competitive district, where there is just one individual who will be selected, chances are the academics OP listed will edge him out over the others. If he lives in a competitive district, there are multiple people who are admitted to the class every year, not just one. I have personally met 4 people who are from my district and class year at the academy. Not arguing that he shouldn’t do sports, but that he should prioritize academics.
You do realize winning your slate is actually correct?

Then you compete on the NWL. Many people with great academics and records don’t get in.

I don’t know my son’s WCS. I am quite confident he would have won many slates, competitive or not. I also think he would have gotten in had he lost his slate.

The point is there are plenty of top academics that also have sports, etc.

Put forth your best application.
 
You do realize winning your slate is actually correct?

Then you compete on the NWL. Many people with great academics and records don’t get in.

I don’t know my son’s WCS. I am quite confident he would have won many slates, competitive or not. I also think he would have gotten in had he lost his slate.

The point is there are plenty of top academics that also have sports, etc.

Put forth your best application.
I'm not sure how else to explain it to you. Competitive districts are afforded slots from non-competitive districts. Yes, the NWL exists. However, it is still possible to have multiple people 'win the slate' (this information is direct from my congressman). In my district, I know of at least 4 people who were accepted in the first wave of appointments.

My posts were not to say that physical achievements are not important. I am arguing that picking back up a sport, given it will cause them to slip academically, is not worth it.
 
I'm not sure how else to explain it to you. Competitive districts are afforded slots from non-competitive districts. Yes, the NWL exists. However, it is still possible to have multiple people 'win the slate' (this information is direct from my congressman). In my district, I know of at least 4 people who were accepted in the first wave of appointments.

My posts were not to say that physical achievements are not important. I am arguing that picking back up a sport, given it will cause them to slip academically, is not worth it.
We can agree to disagree.

Each member of the house and senate are allowed 5 slots (for all four years).

They also are allowed to nominate 10 candidates for each open slot.

You also have VP, President, ROTC, Children of Deceased or Disabled Veterans, etc.

How they are charged is a different matter.

Although there can be multiple appointees from the same MOC, only one gets charged to the MOC.

You compete to win your slate, and if you don’t win - you get appointed through other nominating or discretionary slots.

Someone with a better understanding can correct me if I am wrong.
 
This reference may help with mild cases of Nominationitis:

It is not unusual to have several candidates from a District or on the same slate receive offers of appointment. Where those offers of appointment are actually charged will vary. Typically only one from a slate of up to ten is charged to the elected official, counting toward the max of 5 appointees spread across four classes. Elected officials tend to claim all appointees from a District as theirs, regardless of actual nom source for their appointments - makes for better press releases and photo ops.

USMMA, as a non-DoD SA, has its own unique rules for nom sources and state quotas.

I would expect the staffers know the details of how it all actually works. I would not necessarily expect the elected official to have more than a superficial understanding, unless they make an effort.
 
There are only 538 congressional slates and about 1400 acceptances each year, so "winning" is clearly not the only path even if it is the simplest. There are many routes to a BFE, and trying to become the person they want instead of the person you are adds a layer of artificiality that is usually pretty transparent. So assemble the best app possible, get it turned in on time, be proud of your record and achievements, and then go enjoy your senior year until you hear back.
 
I'm not sure how else to explain it to you. Competitive districts are afforded slots from non-competitive districts. Yes, the NWL exists. However, it is still possible to have multiple people 'win the slate' (this information is direct from my congressman). In my district, I know of at least 4 people who were accepted in the first wave of appointments.

My posts were not to say that physical achievements are not important. I am arguing that picking back up a sport, given it will cause them to slip academically, is not worth it.
Many members of congress do not fully understand the nomination and appointment process. Not a knock on them; it's just that the process is extremely complicated and most gain their understanding through communication with the SA's, rather than studying the law covering the process. It is likely that your MC is confusing winning a slate with nominating a candidate who then receives an appointment in a different category.

There is only one slate winner for each slate, although all other nominees that do not win the slate can use the nomination from that slate to be appointed under a different classification. This most commonly occurs when candidates are appointed as Qualified Alternates (top 150 from NWL after slate winners are determined) and Additional Appointees (number of appointments remaining to fill the authorized class size after legally mandated appointments are made). These categories do not have their own slates of nominations - the nomination must come from another source. Candidates appointed as QA or AA may be one of the of ten nominees on an MC's slate, but are not slate winners.

The process is governed by law and an MC cannot create an extra nomination or appointment by getting it from another district. However, an MC can ask another MC to nominate a candidate that they did not have room for on their slate. But that does not happen often. In such a case the candidate would not be nominated from the home district, rather from the district that had the extra nominations available. But I have never heard of a case in which such a candidate won the slate with that borrowed nomination. I suppose it is possible but if it did occur the candidate would be appointed from the "borrowed district" and it would really piss off any current and future candidates in that district.
 
Back
Top