scholarship dilemna

Tell them what's up. The sooner, the better.

Be nice.

a clarification: you mention that you ran well your senior year. have you done anything so far in college that would merit an increase?

assuming you've done something so far in college, the best (and easiest) time to bring it up is in a "preseason" meeting with your coach where you discuss goals. a question like "what sort of times would you need to see me run to get an increase of x?" is probably a way to go. try not to mention what you did in high school in this meeting.

The big question is have you been running above expectations in your freshmen year so far? Most coaches give scholarship money based on what they think you will be able to do in college. Just because you had a breakthrough at the end of your senior year of high school, that alone wouldn't merit a scholarship increase. If however, you have continued that breakthrough in your freshmen year of college and are running better than expected, then you would deserve an increase. If that is the case, you should let the coach know as soon as possible that you are hoping for an increase. Some coaches just automatically increase someone if they are running well, but many coaches won't give any kind of increase unless asked, and even then they might not do so. Either way, it doesn't hurt to ask.

Sorry chuck d, I was responding at the same time as you and basically said the same thing that you did.

I understand where this athlete is coming from-- however lets look at the other side. If an athlete performs below what is expected would you expect to have your money cut. This kind of reminds me of a part of the movie MR DEEDS (where the quaterback wants a raise, due to performance, but said "hell no" when asked if he would expect a cut if he did not perform well). As a matter of fact I did receive an increase after a good performance. I was happy for this, however it was not expected. Many schools will not increase scholarships even when the tuition does goes up. This could make it easier for schools to bounce scholarship money from individuals for a subpar performance.

It's the coach's job to get you to improve. When you do, he shouldn't in effect, be penalized for doing his job.

Every time he gives you more money, someone else doesn't get some money.

to the above two posters,

if you don't give an increase to athletes who perform well, you're an ass. additionally, you're an ass who doesn't know how to effectively run a program.

and it's not just the coach's job to get you to improve - it's a partnership with the athlete. coaches get rewarded for good performances; athletes must be rewarded as well.

any athlete who is at a program which does not reward good performances will have athletes who don't care as much and will be looking to jump to another school.

I agree that athletes should have the opportunity to get a scholarship increase if they improve dramatically. I do not believe every athlete that improves should get an increase however. When you offer an athlete a scholarship, you are going to expect that if you coach them well and they work hard, that there will be some improvement. If you are a good coach, most of your athletes are going to improve and you would not be able to give increases to every single one of them or you would never be able to recruit new kids. However, when a kid makes a bigger than expected jump in performance on a consistent basis, you had better reward him or her or your program will go down hill. The worst situation is the coach who will not reward his walk-on's for developing into scholarship level athletes. If you get the reputation as someone who does not reward big improvements, then walk-on's and low level scholarship athletes are going to think twice about going to your school.

we're probably pretty much saying the same thing here but, while i agree that there is a certain expectation for an athlete when they enter your program and not every "improvement" should result in an increase, if you have an athlete who has a virtually indistinguishable scholarship from when they signed their letter as their senior year of college, that's a problem. it's either a problem because you have someone on your roster who has not improved or it's a problem because you haven't rewarded their improvement. i rather doubt anyone with a job would expect to receive no raises for four or five years if they're performing well.

distance running tends to be a sport where full rides (or even 3/4) are rarely given out to anyone less than a very select few high school athletes. this is in contrast to other sports (for a variety of reasons, most of which should be obvious). this brings with it, however, the expectation that if you become a stud in college, you get paid like one.

I think we are pretty much agreeing. I think one factor is what the coach actually tells the kids when he recruits them. If a coach admits that he rarely gives increases unless someone dramatically improves, then at least he was upfront about it. However, most coaches are not going to admit that to their recruits. Coaches also need to be consistent and not give increases to some athletes and not to others that are improving the same. The big thing is honesty and consistency so the athletes know what to expect.

Many exceptions to these statements.

Not giving increases for good performances does not make you an ass. There has to be money available to start with, plus, giving too much money for increases preempts you from signing other athletes to provide more depth. It also says alot about the character of the athlete if they have to transfer schools because they all of sudden think they are "worth" more money.

Also, most coaches don't get jack shit for good performances. What a stupid comment to make. This is college track and cross country. Some of the athletes make more than the coaches with their scholarships. Typically, coaches sign one-year contracts, and get a 3-4% increase every year.

And you are saying it is likely that a dedicated athlete who improves should expect more cash, or else be disinterested?

Your post adds to the greed of college athletes and their parents, who are always looking for more money.

i don't know a single coach - any sport - that has ever signed a contract that doesn't include bonuses for conference championships, etc. that's standard boilerplate. this "stupid comment" makes me think that it's best to disregard the rest of the post you obviously made using your extensive insight and experience.

I'm a division I track and cross country coach. There are no performance incentives in my contract or those of many of my peers/friends. Sure I read about how the FSU staff got great bonuses for winning the outdoor NCAA title, but that does not mean that all of us get the same.

I try to increase athletes on my team as much as possible each year. However, with scholarship money at a premium, it is sometimes not possible to do so even with increases in performance. There are times when I have to choose between increasing current athletes or getting recruits. If I don't get a certain number of recruits each year, then I'm not going to have a very good program. The kids on my team understand this and want the best for the program. Sure they would all love more scholarship money (who wouldn't), but they would also love to be part of a great team. Most DI schools are not fully funded and those that are often split that money amongst numerous event groups. Ideals and theories are great, but reality is a whole other beast.

Chuck D - I am a DI coach of 12 years, so I do have extensive experience on the matter. I have never gotten a bonus for good performances, and have very little scholarship money to throw increases at every one of my athletes who improves.

Hence, you made a "stupid comment" because you obviously don't know many college track and xc coaches because they will tell you the same thing I am. If your feelings are hurt, I am sorry, but you don't know what you're talking about!

I can show you my contract if you want? Or, you can talk to my AD for me when contract time rolls around.

chuck d...i'm at a school that sponsors 21 teams. i can tell you for a fact that coaches of 9 of our teams don't get a bonus for winning a conference championship, and i suspect the coaches of the other 12 teams do not have any bonus provision. and i know for a fact that our one team that won a national championship in the past 10 years did not earn the coaches, head or assistant, a bonus.

when you talk about "extensive insight and experience" you might want to check the mirror. i'm sure there are many programs whose coaches contracts include performance bonuses however the percentage may be far fewer than you think.

to the original poster, there are a lot of factors that are going to influence whether or not your coach can bump up your aid package, some of which you can effect and others that are out of your control. good luck to you.

I can only speak for the three colleges that I have coached at in the past 22 years. My contract stated that I received an increase for every National Champion. I have only had one. I am also very upfront with my recruits and tell them that if they improve they will be submitted for an increase in scholarship money, I also tell them that it has only happened once at my current school. At most schools we (coaches) do not have total control over our scholarship money. I have to keep a mix of 60% to females and 40% to males. In addition I cannot have any year group receive any more than 30% of the total. As I stated "should we be able to cut for lack of performance?" I think that the success or failure of any athlete depends upon both the coach and the athlete. However, I agree with an early post and the athlete should talk to the coach. Once again I can only speak for myself, I hold biweekly meetings in season with my each member of my team as well as the typical preseason and post season meetings. In addition they are more than welcome to stop by my office and discuss anything that they want to talk about.