The advantage of recruiting at a service academy

[Buffnik]

Why does no one ever talk about this? Army, Navy and Air Force are playing under different rules than everyone else. They sign as many guys as they want, stash them at preparatory academies, and then put the best of them on the team.

 

[AeroBuff99]

They don't participate in the NLI program. They have no scholarship limits because everyone that goes to an academy is there on the exact same financial arrangement. They are employed by the DoD, have to buy their own uniforms and have to pay back the cost of their education if the fail to complete school or fulfill their service obligations. Technically those athletes are not committed and can sign with any other school at any time. Plus they have to still be nominated and accepted just like all other cadets.

 

[Not Sure]

An interesting story about service academy students: a CPA friend of mine told me about how a client of his had a child go to the Air Force Academy. Once the child was enrolled, the parents received a letter from the IRS letting them know that they could no longer claim the child as a dependent. Their child was, from that time forward, a Federal Government employee.

 

[MtnBuff]

Have said this all along.
Because of the numbers and because of the prep schools they can sign a whole bunch of guys who are late developers, guys who are excellent players but a couple inches short or 30lbs light. The ones that develop end up playing, those that don't get their free educations.

It has also been stated by those close to the programs that their records on the field are a direct reflection of how tight or loose the school administrations are about admitting athletes who are marginal academically.

 

[The Ogre]

Have said this all along.
Because of the numbers and because of the prep schools they can sign a whole bunch of guys who are late developers, guys who are excellent players but a couple inches short or 30lbs light. The ones that develop end up playing, those that don't get their free educations.

It has also been stated by those close to the programs that their records on the field are a direct reflection of how tight or loose the school administrations are about admitting athletes who are marginal academically.

I assume you know, but those educations aren't free. Same goes for NROTC and the like, they have a payback that lasts years.

As far as admissions go, in my limited understanding (but having know several midshipmen who this applied to), they reach out to underserved communities. It's not just for athletes, but applicants in general. So yes, that helps with athletic numbers, but they still have to meet the standards once they arrive. In large part, the prep is a year of teaching those with promise what their high schools didn't offer, or other gaps. Some high schools, believe it or not, don't offer proper physics, advanced math, and so on - especially at inner city and rural places. My experience is anecdotal, but three of the five kids we sponsored were considered minorities. Two of those three thought they were admitted via waver based on disadvantages they grew up with: one was from a poor family in Orange County, CA who attended Servite's sister school on a similar scholarship, and the other was a rural SE Colorado kid from whose parents never attended college. The third was a rockstar who could have gone just about anywhere she wanted.

Having watched several Navy practices and knowing people associated directly with the team, I promise there weren't 94 x 4 or 5 footballers at practice. The academies recruit athletes because their future professions generally demand that type of person. I had a state champion wrestler friend who went to Air Force and tried to make the football team. He spent a couple years on the scout team, then took up another sport and focused on academics - he became a surgeon. They are all required to participate in some type of sport. Our five participated in: varsity cross country, crew coxswain, flag football/drill, karate, and varsity wrestling.

Don't get me wrong, if it's proven they are somehow cheating the system, it should be corrected. You have to figure most of those kids counted the academies as their best option, few go based solely on patriotism, so they aren't really expecting to make it to the pros. The one thing that changes the dynamic a bit is the recent loosening of rules when it comes to going straight to the NFL, NBA, MLB, or whatever. I'm not certain how the payback component works, whether it's deferred or waived, though I seem to recall it's deferred.

 

[Buffnik]

Not saying with this thread that service academies are cheating the system or have an unfair advantage.

My outlook on this is more that all I ever hear is about the extra special challenges the service academies have with recruiting and managing a D1 football program.

I never hear talk about the fact that the service academies also have advantages within their rules that balance those things out and maybe tilts the wheel in their favor -- at least when we're comparing to other G5 programs where only a few are able to fill their rosters with mid to high 3* prospects. Air Force, for example, is in a good place to end up with more talent on its roster than New Mexico since the volume of recruits and extra screening within feeder preps does a lot to mitigate the high miss rates on low 3*, 2* and unranked recruits.

 

[The Ogre]

Just looked at 247’s ranking of Air Forces class. With 47 commits, they’re 105th in the country (army is 109th and Navy is 106th). The list doesn’t line up with the one provided in the article (21 3*?) and only 7 or 8 are above .80 (rounding down) ranking, with the highest at .85. As we all know, thanks to Duff, there is quite a gap between the lowest and highest 3* talent.

I think a lot of those kids are told they’ll be given a shot to try out, so they get listed as recruits. In reality, they’re cadets first. Maybe Brent Briggeman is either desperate for an article or is grinding an axe.

 

[Buffnik]

Just looked at 247’s ranking of Air Forces class. With 47 commits, they’re 105th in the country (army is 109th and Navy is 106th). The list doesn’t line up with the one provided in the article (21 3*?) and only 7 or 8 are above .80 (rounding down) ranking, with the highest at .85. As we all know, thanks to Duff, there is quite a gap between the lowest and highest 3* talent.

I think a lot of those kids are told they’ll be given a shot to try out, so they get listed as recruits. In reality, they’re cadets first. Maybe Brent Briggeman is either desperate for an article or is grinding an axe.

I've heard Calhoun say in a radio interview that it's an advantage he has that makes all the talk about the disadvantages overblown. Now, some of that may be coachspeak of focusing on what you can do instead of crying about things out of your control that you can't do. But I think the success we've seen by the service academies with their ability to win consistently at a good rate points to them having a solid position within the competitive landscape. Being able to over-sign helps a lot. There is also a silver lining to the types of guys they can and can't recruit -- they end up with rosters filled with smart, hard-working players who don't cause off-the-field problems.