Parents College recruiting process...part of the problem?

[gasrgoose]

THIS. The very young top talents can wait to commit- it is the schools that are competing for them. There is a top 6 school this year that just offerred TWO scholarships within the past year to 2018 commits....that is a trend that would be nice to see continue.

This ^^^^^^ is correct. And I know a few also from the past 2 years. But the irony is the best gymnasts who DON"T have to commit early are the ones who are committing early. And then everyone talks about how horrible it is. Parents keep letting their kids email coaches and talk to coaches so it must not be that bad. Or the reward is worth the risk.

 

[josie55]

How do the ivies and Stanford handle recruiting? I understand ivies don’t do athletic scholarships and also that they don’t recruit early, but is this true? Do kids who want to go there just take a big risk in holding out until junior year? Or are they having the same early conversations as everyone else, but just don’t make early verbals?

 

[skschlag]

#3, unless it's a D2 school, then partials are not possible. They can fund a year at a time, so only 2 of 4 years for example, but it has to be a full scholarship for that year.
.

Is this true for men too? I know they do lots of partials.....

 

[flippin out]

#3, unless it's a D2 school, then partials are not possible. They can fund a year at a time, so only 2 of 4 years for example, but it has to be a full scholarship for that year.

I know of at least 2 D1 schools that have offered partials. Temple has (it was a few years ago....3-4 maybe) and Towson offered Leah Smith a partial for 2018. Not sure how it all works, my daughter's school does not offer partials, but obviously some D1 schools can

 

[MeetDirector]

How do the ivies and Stanford handle recruiting? I understand ivies don’t do athletic scholarships and also that they don’t recruit early, but is this true? Do kids who want to go there just take a big risk in holding out until junior year? Or are they having the same early conversations as everyone else, but just don’t make early verbals?

For athletic purposes, don’t compare Stanford to the rest of the Ivies. Stanford does recruit early and the rest of the Ivies do not. The rest of the Ivies will show interest in an athlete, but they can’t do anything until the athlete has actually applied for admission. The rest of the Ivies can “help” with admission if there is a boderline case. The rest of the Ivies do not offer any sort of merit financial aid and merit includes athletic ability. The only financial aid for the rest of the Ivies is need-based. Good luck as it is very challenging to get into any of the Ivies. On top of everything else, the academic expectations are sky-high.

 

[josie55]

For athletic purposes, don’t compare Stanford to the rest of the Ivies. Stanford does recruit early and the rest of the Ivies do not. The rest of the Ivies will show interest in an athlete, but they can’t do anything until the athlete has actually applied for admission. The rest of the Ivies can “help” with admission if there is a boderline case. The rest of the Ivies do not offer any sort of merit financial aid and merit includes athletic ability. The only financial aid for the rest of the Ivies is need-based. Good luck as it is very challenging to get into any of the Ivies. On top of everything else, the academic expectations are sky-high.

Thank you for the info! I have wondered about those things. As far as my kid goes, she is a long ways off from any of this and I know that it's ALL a long shot, especially the ivies.

 

[duyetanh]

For athletic purposes, don’t compare Stanford to the rest of the Ivies. Stanford does recruit early and the rest of the Ivies do not. The rest of the Ivies will show interest in an athlete, but they can’t do anything until the athlete has actually applied for admission. The rest of the Ivies can “help” with admission if there is a boderline case. The rest of the Ivies do not offer any sort of merit financial aid and merit includes athletic ability. The only financial aid for the rest of the Ivies is need-based. Good luck as it is very challenging to get into any of the Ivies. On top of everything else, the academic expectations are sky-high.

I actually thought Stanford did not recruit early. I am confused on this one.

 

[MeetDirector]

I actually thought Stanford did not recruit early. I am confused on this one.

From our experience in the recruiting process, Stanford does what it wants and when it wants separate and apart from the East coast Ivies.

The bottom-line with any of the Ivies, including Stanford, is the athlete has to be able to get in academically first and that, in and of itself, might be harder that gymnastics.

 

[duyetanh]

From our experience in the recruiting process, Stanford does what it wants and when it wants separate and apart from the East coast Ivies.

The bottom-line with any of the Ivies, including Stanford, is the athlete has to be able to get in academically first and that, in and of itself, might be harder that gymnastics.

I have to say I wonder if that holds true for sports like football that bring the university those much needed dollars. Not being snarky at all here...just wondering aloud.

 

[raenndrops]

I think it's crazy that 12 year olds even know what college is and what it's for. When I was 12 I had no clue, and I'm pretty sure that neither did my class mates. I think we had just discovered what high school means, and we learned that from teen movies and books.

It's even more crazy that 12 year olds are supposed to be in contact with adults they have never met and talk to them about their future plans. Their future plans should include things like what they are going to wear for school on Monday, who they want to ask to a dance in the school disco and where they want to go for a summer camp.

Somebody should put an end to that kind of crazyness! Kids should be kids and not worry about something that is not going to happen in 6 years.

Actually, I knew what college was when I was 7 (and nobody in my family had ever gone to college). I knew what I wanted to major in (which didn't change until I was 19 and a very nice mentor "put a bug in my ear" about a different major), and what school I wanted to attend. I was certain about it. When I took my SATs in 7th and 8th grade, it was the ONLY school I sent my scores to. When I took my ACT in college, it was the only school I sent my scores to. It was the only college I even applied to attend.

Some kids DO know early, BUT I agree that it is crazy for them to be in contact with college coaches on their own that young.

 

[Seeker]

I do understand that, but surely these coaches are regulated by someone - a governing body of some kind? And surely that governing body would not recommend shutting a parent of a 12/13 year old out of discussions about their future? I find that amazing...

They’re regulated by the NCAA.

 

[raenndrops]

Actually, I knew what college was when I was 7 (and nobody in my family had ever gone to college). I knew what I wanted to major in (which didn't change until I was 19 and a very nice mentor "put a bug in my ear" about a different major), and what school I wanted to attend. I was certain about it. When I took my SATs in 7th and 8th grade, it was the ONLY school I sent my scores to. When I took my ACT in HIGH SCHOOL, it was the only school I sent my scores to. It was the only college I even applied to attend.

Some kids DO know early, BUT I agree that it is crazy for them to be in contact with college coaches on their own that young.

edited my previous post... took ACT in high school, not college, lol.

 

[Deedee]

I personally think it’s a great idea for the gymnast to begin learning how to communicate to recruiters etc at an early age. With parents supervision one hundred percent however. It builds great skills for when they are older and also allows the gymnast to really begin to think about their future. It is important for the gymnasts views and ideas to come from them. And I am sure that recruiters are aware of the gymnasts age and don’t expect high communication skills and i am sure recruiters are also aware that their goals now may not be their goals in the future. I think it shows great courage to be able to speak to adults at that age. I think parents should be encouraging their gymnasts to create the emails and then be supervised by the parents. Same with calls. Communications with three way calls so the parents are involved but the gymnast is the one speaking. Gymnasts in general at a young age begin to learn time management with their school friends and gymnastics and this already gives them an advantage and increased awareness that other students at school may not have. In my opionion gymnasts who are training to be at a college level are already very mature for their age when compared to students at school their age (the majority) as they have learnt discipline. Time management. Team work and social skills. I wouldn’t look at recruiters wanting to hear from the child (even as young as 12) and not the parents as a bad thing. It is important for them to have a relationship with the child and then also independently with the parents. And then all together as one. I think the scandals that have been happening in USAG have made parents more cautious and have created a backlash. With this post. I agree parents should monitor and be cautious and supervise the recruitment process. But if everything that has happened with USAG recently hadn’t of happened would this post even be here ?

 

[Deedee]

We have to stop bubble wrapping our kids. It is important to be aware of what is going on and it is important to monitor and be an informed parent. But at the end of the day even us adults don’t learn from our mistakes unless we actually make mistakes. We can tell our kids not to say certain things or do something because of a certain outcome. But they won’t really understand and learn from the experience unless they go through it themselves. Let them say what they feel and say what they think even if you think it is not the right thing. Don’t change their words. Let them go through this experience. Because whether it is a good outcome or a bad outcome they have learned and it will be an experience they will remember through life which they will remember when another similar situation comes up.

 

[John]

We have to stop bubble wrapping our kids. It is important to be aware of what is going on and it is important to monitor and be an informed parent. But at the end of the day even us adults don’t learn from our mistakes unless we actually make mistakes. We can tell our kids not to say certain things or do something because of a certain outcome. But they won’t really understand and learn from the experience unless they go through it themselves. Let them say what they feel and say what they think even if you think it is not the right thing. Don’t change their words. Let them go through this experience. Because whether it is a good outcome or a bad outcome they have learned and it will be an experience they will remember through life which they will remember when another similar situation comes up.

I agree with this advice but I would add that we must remember that college recruiters and coaches are looking out for themselves and their careers, to think otherwise would be naive.

 

[Madden3]

I personally think it’s a great idea for the gymnast to begin learning how to communicate to recruiters etc at an early age. With parents supervision one hundred percent however. It builds great skills for when they are older and also allows the gymnast to really begin to think about their future. It is important for the gymnasts views and ideas to come from them. And I am sure that recruiters are aware of the gymnasts age and don’t expect high communication skills and i am sure recruiters are also aware that their goals now may not be their goals in the future. I think it shows great courage to be able to speak to adults at that age. I think parents should be encouraging their gymnasts to create the emails and then be supervised by the parents. Same with calls. Communications with three way calls so the parents are involved but the gymnast is the one speaking. Gymnasts in general at a young age begin to learn time management with their school friends and gymnastics and this already gives them an advantage and increased awareness that other students at school may not have. In my opionion gymnasts who are training to be at a college level are already very mature for their age when compared to students at school their age (the majority) as they have learnt discipline. Time management. Team work and social skills. I wouldn’t look at recruiters wanting to hear from the child (even as young as 12) and not the parents as a bad thing. It is important for them to have a relationship with the child and then also independently with the parents. And then all together as one. I think the scandals that have been happening in USAG have made parents more cautious and have created a backlash. With this post. I agree parents should monitor and be cautious and supervise the recruitment process. But if everything that has happened with USAG recently hadn’t of happened would this post even be here ?

I am certainly not suggesting bubble wrapping kids or controlling every move they make. Obviously HS students can and should be thinking about and actively participating in planning their future lives, and yes of course learning to communicate in a clear manner is an important skill to be instilling (in an age appropriate manner) from babyhood. My point is that gymnastics in particular and perhaps college sports in general appear to have a culture where the athlete's parents are actively discouraged from close oversight. With terrible results.

Also, as far as why this post now...I am not sure what you are saying. Why does it matter if I only posted due to the USAG scandal? If we cannot learn from that horror show, what can we learn from? If only more parents had learned from previous abuse scandals!

But in fact, I am someone who was made well aware during my own teen years that adults pushing parents out of teen's lives as a general rule is very destructive and the people who do it are all too often not looking out for the best interest of the teens they are seeking to influence. Later I had a front row seat at the Catholic priest scandal and these situations motivated me to study the issue of systemic child (usually adolescent) abuse in general and the cult like atmospheres that allow it to happen. Aside that kind of abuse, anyone who reads about sports in the US (and I have, for most of my life- I love to read about sports, not participate in them) knows that there has long been a problem of some college athletes being exploited by the schools that recruit them. And as I mentioned above, my creep meter as the parent of gymnasts first went off when I read that article on recruiting in USAG magazine and that was before I personally had any knowledge of the abuse issues in USAG, aside maybe reading something here- I definitely had no earthly idea of the extent of the carnage at that time. I was motivated to write my OP after getting an email this week about recruitment in other sports that echoed a similar POV as that article and I could not believe that no one was making the connection that this attitude is problematic- and that is what finally pushed me to post about my concerns here.

 

[gasrgoose]

I am certainly not suggesting bubble wrapping kids or controlling every move they make. Obviously HS students can and should be thinking about and actively participating in planning their future lives, and yes of course learning to communicate in a clear manner is an important skill to be instilling (in an age appropriate manner) from babyhood. My point is that gymnastics in particular and perhaps college sports in general appear to have a culture where the athlete's parents are actively discouraged from close oversight. With terrible results.

Also, as far as why this post now...I am not sure what you are saying. Why does it matter if I only posted due to the USAG scandal? If we cannot learn from that horror show, what can we learn from? If only more parents had learned from previous abuse scandals!

But in fact, I am someone who was made well aware during my own teen years that adults pushing parents out of teen's lives as a general rule is very destructive and the people who do it are all too often not looking out for the best interest of the teens they are seeking to influence. Later I had a front row seat at the Catholic priest scandal and these situations motivated me to study the issue of systemic child (usually adolescent) abuse in general and the cult like atmospheres that allow it to happen. Aside that kind of abuse, anyone who reads about sports in the US (and I have, for most of my life- I love to read about sports, not participate in them) knows that there has long been a problem of some college athletes being exploited by the schools that recruit them. And as I mentioned above, my creep meter as the parent of gymnasts first went off when I read that article on recruiting in USAG magazine and that was before I personally had any knowledge of the abuse issues in USAG, aside maybe reading something here- I definitely had no earthly idea of the extent of the carnage at that time. I was motivated to write my OP after getting an email this week about recruitment in other sports that echoed a similar POV as that article and I could not believe that no one was making the connection that this attitude is problematic- and that is what finally pushed me to post about my concerns here.

Please explain the terrible results you are referencing, in regards to college recruiting and how early recruiting contributed, I don't see it. Your posts references the USAG/Nassar abuse, which is unrelated to early recruiting in the NCAA. I personally know college athletes, current and former, and all regard their experience as extremely positive. Where is the exploitation of athletes by schools? Most college athletic departments operate in the red because they offer so much to the student athletes.

 

[gasrgoose]

I agree with this advice but I would add that we must remember that college recruiters and coaches are looking out for themselves and their careers, to think otherwise would be naive.

Exactly. The coach/recruiter isn't doing this as a hobby it is their livelihood.

 

[FlippinLilysMom]

Exactly. The coach/recruiter isn't doing this as a hobby it is their livelihood.

Exactly and if the colleges and coaches become known for pulling out of verbal offers it doesn't look good for them, just as it doesn't look good for a gymnast or club to have a lot of girls pull out of verbal offers or change schools, etc...From what I've heard most verbal offers are seen through to the end and the process has been a smooth and enjoyable one for all involved.

 

[Madden3]

Please explain the terrible results you are referencing, in regards to college recruiting and how early recruiting contributed, I don't see it. Your posts references the USAG/Nassar abuse, which is unrelated to early recruiting in the NCAA. I personally know college athletes, current and former, and all regard their experience as extremely positive. Where is the exploitation of athletes by schools? Most college athletic departments operate in the red because they offer so much to the student athletes.

First, I think you are imputing things I did not say, such as suggesting all or most college athletes are exploited or abused which I did not say nor do I think that is the case. And the Nassar abuse is only one part of the USAG scandal or am I missing something about UofM and also a couple of former Penn coaches? As far as a history of exploitation...why is there an NCAA and why does it have strict participation and recruiting rules and academic standards? Just cause? It is to try to protect athletes from exploitation.

Overall, I am questioning a cultural aspect in very competitive sports that pushes parents to the sidelines that IMO is epidemic in the sport of gymnastics and in this thread I wondered if college recruitment traditions are also part of the issue. I not here to convince everyone there is reason for alarm. If you disagree there are any problems, no worries.