Date: November 28, 2005
To: Elite high school baseball playing student-athletes
From: Tom Valcke, President & CEO, Canadian Baseball Hall of Fame & Museum
Re: US college scholarships frequently more sizzle than steak
Wonderful opportunities, but double-check the details and get promises in writing
Dear baseball playing student-athletes:
If a US college baseball scholarship opportunity comes your way, it is a chance to receive an excellent education, generally better coaching, better competition, better facilities, better exposure ... BUT ... when considering these opportunities, you need to understand the whole picture, and be prepared to commit to the ends being worth the means. You will understand better once you've read this through.
My letter below stems from a recent London Free Press article about a very gifted high school student-athlete named Jaleesa Rhoden, who has just signed a letter of intent with the University of Georgia Bulldogs to play for their women's basketball team. Don't skip over anything written about Jaleesa, as it could very much just as easily be you.
I have no desire to be perceived as someone raining on someone else's parade. Nor is this a knock on Jaleesa Rhoden - what an amazing student-athlete and a tremendous accomplishment! It is wonderful to read such good news when the world is so full of bad news!
The info contained here should be made as public as possible. It can be echoed by countless "scholarship" victims, and hopefully may prevent bad experiences in the future. I say this because it this very issue was one of the largest consumers of my time as Canadian Supervisor of the MLB Scouting Bureau as well as one of the biggest misconceptions held by innocent and naive athletes and their parents, no matter how educated or successful in business they were in their other walks of life.
Don't read me wrong here, I am not anti-education whatsoever ... I have a university degree and I'm counting on my kids getting one too. I'm about making educated choices, based on accurate and complete information from all sides.
It really ticks me off when athletes and parents are fed incorrect or at the very least much-embellished information when they are trying to make key decisions that they are, through no fault of their own, inexperienced and unqualified in making (e.g., pro vs. college, or Canadian university vs. USA university, or US college vs. US college, etc.). Some unethical recruiters and/or careless media make an already difficult situation even more unfair with false/misguided information, and ultimately, it is the student-athlete who gets burned and winds up having the regrets.
The London Free Press article about Jaleesa Rhoden is typical of the general public's knowledge (or lack thereof) of scholarships to NCAA schools. Here are three quotes from the same article by Steve Green:
Page A1 > " ... Jaleesa Rhoden has accepted a full scholarship to the University of Georgia, a four-year commitment from the Bulldogs worth $30,000 US a year ..."
Page B1 > "The four-year full ride is worth $30,000 US a year ... "
Page B2 > "( U Georgia assistant coach Brenda) Hill said the scholarship isn't guaranteed, but added Rhoden should have no problems."
Not only inconsistent and vague, but WRONG and WRONG again: (a) Multi-year scholarships are not sanctioned by the NCAA in any sport; and, (b) Does U Georgia cost $30,000 US per year? Says who? See below.
No such thing as a full-ride
Firstly, the bottom-line is that the NCAA does not sanction multi-year scholarships in any sport. Schools can most certainly intend to have athletes on scholarships for four years, and they can express to the athlete and his/her parents this is their desire (and they do, all the time!), but it is a very slippery slope because nobody has the right or the credentials to promise anything beyond the first year.
All scholarships in all NCAA sports are renewable each and every year by the institution on whatever criteria they deem relevant, and they don't have to justify their decision to anybody. If an athlete doesn't cut it on the field, court, or classroom, or if the coach doesn't like him/her, or if the coach gets replaced, or if the school gets put on athletic probation, or if next year's freshman class is loaded with blue chip stud-hammers, or if the student-athlete gets injured, and so on ... the scholarship can be taken away or reduced.
Just as immorally, some athletes in their second or third or fourth year get cut back purposefully because the coach knows that they are comfortable at the school by then, transferring at that point would be a total and impractical inconvenience, credits are not necessarily transferable, and ultimately, if a student-athlete changes schools in mid-stream, they have to sit out of their sport one full year before they can play again ... so out of the blue, mom & dad have virtually no choice but to pony up the difference to keep their son/daughter at that school ... the same school who originally "promised" a four-year full-ride (always verbally, never in writing).
Don't think for a minute that these scenarios are uncommon. In truth, they are actually very common, but very uncommonly made public, because people are embarrassed since their community and Aunt Bess and Uncle Buck and their neighbours and peers were all lead to believe, ultimately by the school, and in turn by the athlete, and by the press, that he/she had a four-year "full-ride." It is so sad because rarely does the athlete have control of his/her fate - the institution has total control, yet it is almost always the athlete who takes the hit at the proverbial water coolers ("he must have gotten into drugs," "she must not have worked hard enough," "he probably fell in love," etc.). Few ever think or realize that the respective college pulled the old bait and switch.
We don't read in the paper about lottery losers, even though they outnumber lottery winners by about ten million to one. If you hang out at a race track or a casino, rarely do you hear anyone walking out the doors broadcasting how much they lost ... but the winners sure like sing from the mountain tops (even though the night before they were nowhere to be heard from!). We therefore fall prey to believing that winning is more common than it realistically is, and this is the same case with scholarships. You would have to search long and hard to find people willing to admit that they got hoodwinked.
Now, all of that negative being said, of course there are success stories, and of course some schools have more honour and integrity than others, and I believe most coaches truly do hope and intend an athlete to have four glorious years and have all four covered in scholarship money. But like the race track, unfortunately, many more get burned than succeed.
Head-count scholarships versus Equivalency scholarships
While Jaleesa is vulnerable to many of the scenarios above, she is luckier than most, since she is in what is referred to as a "head-count" sport. I can't say this with 100% certainty, but my understanding is that there are only three head-count sports in the NCAA, men's football (85 scholarships), women's basketball (15 scholarships), and women's crew/rowing (20 scholarships).
Anyway, a head-count sport has an equivalent number of scholarships available to the number of members on the sport's respective team. Each athlete is given no more or no less than a full scholarship (but still only one year at a time!), including tuition & fees, room & board, and books.
All other sports fall under the "equivalency" policy, whereas they have less scholarships to give out than the number of athletes on their team. Men's baseball, for example, can carry a roster of 30 players, but only has 11.7 scholarships to give out. This odd number came about a few years back, when baseball was entitled to 13 scholarships, but was rolled back ten percent.
So, sticking with the baseball example, a coach could divide his 11.7 and, for example, give out 3 full scholarships, 4 "half" scholarships, and bits and pieces here and there with the aggregate equalling the value of 11.7 full scholarships. You don't think these athletes are going to get burned in their senior years when the coach is recruiting the blue chipper who needs a full-ride to come? The coach can only generate it from one place, and that is by cutting the other slices of the pie a little thinner.
Who says U Georgia is worth $30,000 USD per year?
What guru put a value of $30,000 USD per year on Rhoden's scholarship to U Georgia? The school's website confirms that the value of a full academic year is $23,224 (the breakdown is $16,848 for out-of-state tuition & fees, $3,436 for room, $2,940 for board) + $800 in books for a total of $24,024. Nothing else is covered by the scholarship.
Note that these figures are confirmed in the 2005-06 College Cost Book produced by Limra International Inc., whose book is used across North America by insurance companies who insure scholarships - if anybody would know the exact non-inflated number, they would!
If you want to say her scholarship is worth approximately $30,000 Canadian, no beefs here. But the article specifically says "$30,000 US."
Or, I suppose if you add the $24,000 USD to her travel to and from school perhaps a twice a year (assuming she would come home at Christmas), out of country health insurance, long-distance phone bills, general living and out-of-pocket expenses, you might indeed approach $30,000, but the school isn't going to provide her one penny beyond the $24,000.
In most cases, inflated values enhance the perceived benefit by the student-athlete and it strokes the egos of the parents even moreso. What a violation this is, and just because everyone else does it, that doesn't justify it. In this case, the very first interaction between the school and the student-athlete is predicated on a lie, and there is no excuse. Value it in true dollars - there is nothing to be ashamed about in a $24,000 US scholarship!
I hope my kids get college scholarships someday, be them academic or athletic, but parents are cheating their kids if they don't check, double-check, and triple-check the figures as well as the terms of the scholarship when they are weighing the pros and cons of various choices. Also, if they look deep enough into the fine print of every single scholarship ever given, they will find the words "renewable each and every year by the institution." Due diligence is required, and get everything you can in writing!
A college scholarship should be a time to rejoice, and the ultimate goal should be "no regrets."
Tom
| *** | NCAA DIVISION I | *** |
|---|---|---|
| Sport | Men's | Women's |
| Baseball Softball |
11.7 | 12 |
| Basketball | 13 | 15 |
| Track & Field | 12.6 | 18 |
| Football | 85 | 0 |
| Golf | 4.5 | 6 |
| Gymnastics | 6.3 | 12 |
| Field Hockey | 0 | 12 |
| Ice Hockey | 18 | 18 |
| Lacrosse | 12.6 | 12 |
| Rowing | 0 | 20 |
| S****r | 9.9 | 12 |
| Swimming Diving |
9.9 | 8.1 |
| Tennis | 4.5 | 8 |
| Volleyball | 4.5 | 12 |
| Water Polo | 4.5 | 8 |
| Wrestling | 9.9 | 0 |
| **** | NCAA DIVISION II | **** |
|---|---|---|
| Sport | Men's | Women's |
| Baseball Softball |
9 | 7.2 |
| Badminton | 0 | 10 |
| Basketball | 10 | 10 |
| Bowling | 0 | 5 |
| Track & Field | 12.69 | 12.69 |
| Fencing | 4.5 | 4.5 |
| Football | 36 | 0 |
| Golf | 3.6 | 5.4 |
| Gymnastics | 5.4 | 6 |
| Handball | 0 | 12 |
| Field Hockey | 0 | 6.3 |
| Ice Hockey | 13.5 | 18 |
| Lacrosse | 10.8 | 9.9 |
| Rifle | 3.6 | 7.2 |
| Rowing | 0 | 20 |
| Skiing | 6.3 | 6.3 |
| S****r | 9 | 9.9 |
| Squash | 9 | 7.2 |
| Swimming Diving |
0 | 9 |
| Synchronized | 0 | 5 |
| Swimming | ||
| Tennis | 4.5 | 6 |
| Volleyball | 4.5 | 8 |
| Water Polo | 4.5 | 8 |
| Wrestling | 9 | 0 |
Guys - there is more information all over the internet, but a few sites you may want to check out are:
http://www.sport-scholarships.com/english/faqs.htm
http://www.hsbaseballweb.com/ncaa_enemy.htm
http://www.decatursports.com/college/how_college_scholarships_really_.htm
Tom
