Does this make sense?

[JAD]

A friend from high schools parents told him that he had to pay for his first year of college, and they would pay for the next 3. At the time it seemed a little harsh, but it makes perfect sense now that I am on the other side of the equation. If someone is not going to make it in college, there is a good chance it will happen in their freshman year. Some kids went crazy with their first taste of freedom, and paying for it yourself may help develop good study habits early.

 

[JAD]

Why would they redshirt a freshman who is not a transfer student? Also, why isn't there any money? Not even academic? That's odd isn't it?

Redshirting is common in football because they have 85 scholarships and a freshman has to be pretty special to see the field their first year. In softball it is not as common, but it does happen. Most football players need a year or two in the gym before they are ready to play. Softball players can be "game ready" if they work hard before they get there. If a coach really wants a player, but does not think she will significant playing time as a freshman a redshirt may be a good option, especially if the parents are willing to foot the bill for the redshirt year ( great deal for the coach, not so much for the player or her parents). The other choice is going to a JUCO for a year or two and transferring.

 

[JAD]

Also, why isn't there any money? Not even academic? That's odd isn't it?

Academic money is completely separate from athletic money and can be stacked, so a 50% athletic and 25% academic scholarship would fund 75%. Softball coaches LOVE kids who qualify for academic money because it helps them spread the athletic money further, so stress grades and SAT/ACT scores to your DD early and often!

Another option could be needs based financial aid, especially at private schools with large endowments. Needs based financial aid cannot be stacked with athletic money, but if a player is academic only or no scholarship money they may qualify.

 

[Me_and_my_big_mouth]

A friend from high schools parents told him that he had to pay for his first year of college, and they would pay for the next 3. At the time it seemed a little harsh, but it makes perfect sense now that I am on the other side of the equation. If someone is not going to make it in college, there is a good chance it will happen in their freshman year. Some kids went crazy with their first taste of freedom, and paying for it yourself may help develop good study habits early.

That's a good point - and a scary one.

DS is going through this right now. First apartment, first car, has $3.06 until Monday because he is young and makes poor choices. DH said that if I give DS money, he'll trip me when I walk by and he won't even feel bad about it. So, I listen sympathetically and advise DS to eat in the galley for the weekend.

The difference is, I'm not paying for his poor choices. I'd be paying for hers if she messes up. I also wonder if that message of, "We like you, but we're not 100% sold on you," would affect her mentally. I think it would mess with my brain, if I were treated that way by a new employer. She needs to be somewhere that likes her and values her education. Who knows, like it's been said before, DD might not even play softball in college. Her choice.

We've always gone at this like we'd rather have her choose a school that allows her to graduate with the least amount of debt, instead of pursuing the biggest and best school, no matter the cost. In real life, we are practical people who don't generally overspend (unless it's for softball. Gotta have your priorities right). We would love for her to go Ivy - but dude, wrong family. I went to a JUCO and got a decent education. I lived to tell about it. Of course I would like better for her - but there is a reality here. The message should be that you buy what you can afford, and you go where you're wanted and needed. If a scholarship at an Ivy still results in more tuition than full price at a different school, then practical choices must be made.

I've told her that finding a school is like finding a boy. Go after the one who has the most to offer, who likes you back. Don't be desperate. And don't pick one just because everybody else thinks he's cool.

If she went off on my nickel and screwed up her freshman year, I'd be surprised because she's worked so hard to get there.

 

[CoogansBluff]

Redshirting is common in football because they have 85 scholarships and a freshman has to be pretty special to see the field their first year.

There's also something informally called a 'gray shirt' in college football where, similar to the OP, they ask a player to walk on the first year with the promise of a scholly the next. Let's say Alabama has 20 schollies to offer and has those committed but still wants a guy. They talk him into being part of next year's class, basically. But be on the team for one year and pay your way. It's something you would do if you really want to go to that school. Of course, in football, you either get a full ride or you don't, so you're more secure in that promise. They can't come back and say, 'Here's 20 percent.' So short of them pulling the scholly offer altogether, you're more sure of what you're getting.

 

[JAD]

The difference is, I'm not paying for his poor choices. I'd be paying for hers if she messes up. I also wonder if that message of, "We like you, but we're not 100% sold on you," would affect her mentally. I think it would mess with my brain, if I were treated that way by a new employer. She needs to be somewhere that likes her and values her education. Who knows, like it's been said before, DD might not even play softball in college. Her choice.

I would caution against thinking that a coach is not sold on a player just because they want them to redshirt. It usually has more to do with perceived playing time. Say your DD is a pitcher and is a freshman at Alabama when Jackie Traina is a senior. Do you really think your DD is going to see meaningful circle time while Jackie Traina sits in the dugout? Redshirting in softball just gets a little squirrely because of the partial scholarships and limited budgets.

 

[JAD]

There's also something informally called a 'gray shirt' in college football where, similar to the OP, they ask a player to walk on the first year with the promise of a scholly the next. Let's say Alabama has 20 schollies to offer and has those committed but still wants a guy. They talk him into being part of next year's class, basically. But be on the team for one year and pay your way. It's something you would do if you really want to go to that school. Of course, in football, you either get a full ride or you don't, so you're more secure in that promise. They can't come back and say, 'Here's 20 percent.' So short of them pulling the scholly offer altogether, you're more sure of what you're getting.

You are correct, but other than the money, an important difference is a gray shirt still counts as one year of eligibility, while a redshirt does not. When an athlete graduates from high school they have 5 years to play 4, unless they receive a medical hardship for a 6th year of eligibility. While we are at it, there is also a black shirt which is a player that has been removed from an athletic scholarship usually due to a career ending injury, but the school still honors their financial commitment to the student athlete.

 

[Me_and_my_big_mouth]

I would caution against thinking that a coach is not sold on a player just because they want them to redshirt. It usually has more to do with perceived playing time. Say your DD is a pitcher and is a freshman at Alabama when Jackie Traina is a senior. Do you really think your DD is going to see meaningful circle time while Jackie Traina sits in the dugout? Redshirting in softball just gets a little squirrely because of the partial scholarships and limited budgets.

Thank you for clarifying how it works. It's confusing.

 

[girliesmom]

Is it the academic situation their DD really wants? Is it out of state, if so if they can waive residency requirement that's not terrible. I would look for some sort of commitment, maybe if she pitches they have two senior starters that share the duties but only a junior and sophomore backing them up and they did not get innings last year. If she is just a position/utility player I would be hard press to jump at the offer and certainly would not sign anything although since you are not getting anything, would there be anything to sign? This could go sideways quick and even cost her a year of eligibility if things get crazy definitely keep looking, is she a senior?

She's a pitcher and a junior. Can the offer change between now and her senior year? I think her family was hoping for a full-ride but have said that they will bridge the difference in the past. Getting absolutely no money the first year (coach made no mention of speaking with admissions about academic money whatsoever) is a huge bridge.

 

[girliesmom]

Apparently, there are 2 competing offers for dd's teammate. One is from the mid-major d1 - no money first year, money in the next 4 and red-shirt first year. Then there's also a D3 offer (although I don't think it's really an offer because D3 can't offer anything... not that I know of) where the coach has told the same player that she has a roster spot on her team should she decide to go there. There's no mention of redshirtting. D3 is financial aid only. Parents are leaning towards the D1 offer because it's D1.

Questions: How do you make sense of the D3 offer (or statement)? If you were the parent, what would you do? Go the D1 route? Go the D3 route?

This is a tough one!