Recruitment QUESTION

Sorry your daughter had a frustrating recruiting experience. Glad it worked out for her in the end.

That just hasn’t been my experience with similar athletes over the last few years. In my experience, when appropriate schools are contacted the response rate is about what it was before Covid. That doesn’t mean 100%, but more than half depending on the specifics.

Hard to know why you had that experience. Maybe there are regional differences (none of my kids had interest in schools in the south). But my advice to an athlete getting a 10% response rate usually is to cast a wider net and make sure to include schools that actually recruit in their range. Unless there’s something in the approach email tone, etc.) that is causing issues. I have no idea if that was an issue with your daughter.

I will say that there are HS coaches who have no idea how the portal and the extra Covid years have affected the recruiting pool. There are schools that 3-4 years ago were bringing in mostly first years who now can use recruiting energy and funds on proven college runners. So yes, their attention has shifted. All that means is that the pool of schools where HS juniors will get interest has shifted. Duke, NC state, Virginia, Washington, etc. can get conference scorers from the transfer portal as grad transfers. That’s where some schools will focus all their energy and scholarship money now. Recruits (and their coaches) need to understand this.

Georgia Tech concentrates on in state kids as they get a break on in state tuition. What is your home state? can you reach out to the on state schools? could be a good option for you.

This is an informed answer. And correct. I am currently bring an athlete in for a official visit from out of state who has similar times to the person with the 5:01 daughter. Many HS coaches do not understand the entire picture that a college coach has to deal with.

You may be doing a decent job but many of your peers are missing some great runners. Coaches have fallen asleep the past few years. We have pointed out that a 1:47 runnet got overlooked by many programs. That is as extreme as it gets. I have some girls who ran 4:55 junior year and are getting little interest. What school are you at? I know of a handful of girls faster than the one you mentioned and they are willing to walkon.

unfortunately its against NCAA rules for coaches recruit this way. i only post to help provide information. all I'll say is on the west coast I can name several schools (with solid coaching staffs) who would be interested in any 4:55 PSA. My advice is to branch out some.

Pretty much hit the entire B10 and ACC.

And I am amazed at how nobody wants to address a 1:47 guy with a 36 ACT getting ovetlooked.

Because it didn’t happen.

It did. We live nearby. If you don't know who it is, you obvioulsy aren't a fan of the sport. Some of us essentially told you who it is by naming the schools. You have all of about 3 choices.

What rule are you referring to? I have seen coaches tweet that they have scholarships available and they list time requirements.

I found a few candidates (1:47. high) and, quite frankly, that mark was hit during the post-season cavalcade of "national championships" and was a substantial drop from their high school season performances (in the 1:50-1:55 range). Two possible reasons that Mr. 1:47 didn't get athletic financial support:

1. The mark was achieved very late in his senior year. Schools are essentially out-of-money by then and have committed all of their allocated athletic aid for the following year. If he didn't apply early enough, all of the big academic awards may also have been gone as the majority of those funds go to high achieving Early Action/Early Decision applicants at most institutions.

2. Coaches are going to be leery of a sudden fast performance at a post-season meet if the athlete was not demonstrating consistency or a clear trend towards that mark. Personally, I'm not going to commit money if I think that performance was likely a one-off mark caused by the excitement of getting invited to an elite meet, grey area stuff like being caffeinated to the gills on race day, or benefitting from a long taper that collegiate athletes don't enjoy. I am also fearful that the kid just had the race of his life and will never duplicate that mark again.

You are making the point that coaches are morons if you wouldn't commit any money for a 1:47. The kid ran 47 in the 400 multiple times junior year finishing 2nd at a national meet and winning a national meet in the hurdles.

These are 4:55 juniors?

I’m not clear if you’re saying they were totally ghosted or just didn’t get enthusiastic responses. I’ve had kids in that range get responses from coaches in those conferences. Recently. So if there were no replies at all I’d suspect something about the approach or timing could be an issue. Are they filling out the online forms, following up with a concise email, then following up a few more times if no reply? At good times of day/season? In my experience that would get replies (not 100% but more than zero). Could be the content has issues.

However, I don’t think those are high priority recruits for the conferences you list. It’s fine to reach out but I wouldn’t assume a 4:55 athlete will end up with a spot in the ACC. Some will, some won’t. I encourage kids in that range to think more widely. Big East, Patriot, Ivy, Mountain West, WCC, etc. They’d be priority recruits at selective D3s like Williams, which is a great option for academically inclined kids.

as for the 1:47 kid, I don’t know the details but it sounds like he was a 1:51ish athlete during the recruiting cycle? I’d expect a kid like that to get some interest but I wouldn’t expect it to be universal. There are a number of 1:48/1:49 guys on the portal these days, a lot of them with range up to a mile. 36 act doesn’t matter a whole lot except it clears the threshold at Ivy schools. But there are enough kids clearing the threshold that it comes down to the athletic and fit piece anyway. Sounds like that kid ended up with OVs and committed so I’m not clear what the complaint is.

So he was a sprinter/hurdler? Was he trying to be recruited as a mid-d athlete or a hurdler?

Look, I don’t think anyone would disagree that college coaches make mistakes and that they also can’t predict the future. That’s different than not going after a kid who might one day run a 1:47.

If he had that kind of promise in the 8, what did his HS coach do to show that to the rest of the world before he started contacting college coaches?

Not much a coach can do if the money is gone. This is especially true of programs that are still carrying 5th and 6th years thanks to COVID. You had better be good enough your junior year or light the boards on fire during the winter of your senior year if you want money. Outdoors during your senior year is simply too late.

I'm not trying to fight with you. It's a harsh environment out there and the recruiting game is more complicated than ever. There are schools that would love to have a 47/1:47 talent on their squad but, the top fully funded P5 programs are full (plus they also recruit from overseas). The majority of D1 programs are operating on the thinnest of budgets. Athletes, high school coaches, and parents need to stop perpetuating a fantasy world where a state championship or a single performance automatically equals a free college education.

He needs to set his initial sites lower, have a solid freshman campaign demonstrating that his 1:47 is not a fluke, and then utilize the portal.

The process started junior year. Coaches make huge mistakes.

This topic comes up at least once per week. It is clear that many coaches are missing the boat by not responding to athleteswho are faster than the majority of athletes on their teams. Many parents and athletes and Hs coaches have told stories about it. It seems that many college coaches don't check their email or recruiting questionnaires. I have a kid who is on scholarship at NAU but didn't get responses from the majority of other coaches who he contacted. He was willing to walk-on at many of them.

If I’m looking at the right athlete it looks like he took five visits, clicked with Milt, and committed to a good school in a high level conference.

He had not run 1:47 at the time. What’s your complaint?

OP, two things:

1) Follow up with Penn and Cornell. I have family in Philadelphia (and actually on the faculty at Penn) and have spent considerable time in Ithaca. Good coaching and good training at both; if I personally had to make a choice--all else being equally academically--I'd probably go with Cornell, if only because of the variety of training environments available. But hard to go wrong with either!
[And all is rarely equal academically. If you have a strong sense of a particular field of study you're aiming at, that could tip the balance: Penn for business or Cornell for engineering, say.]

2) Though coaches should always respond timely to every contact, late July/early August is that rare time of the year when many college coaches feel they can "safely" go on a vacation with their families--or just take some time away. So yes, it's possible that your emails got buried in folks' inboxes. I like the earlier suggestion about re-emailing and using a catchy subject line, one that includes your stats.

Good luck, OP. I think you'll be fine, with many good options for college.