What's new
USCHO Fan Forum

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.

Bill Beaney

Re: Bill Beaney

He's saying the administration isn't putting a penny more than they need to into Athletics, but if an alumn wants to pay for new stuff, they won't say "no"...

That's a terrible shame if it's true. Such a long tradition of winning. It's more exciting for all students to go to a school where they have some winning teams in the athletics department. It's something to be proud of, something the student body can have a good time supporting. Once the shift goes in the other direction the student body figures out that the school doesn't care about their athletic programs and support and pride dwindle quickly.
 
Re: Bill Beaney

That is why I was asking....the D3 powers all are the same year in and year out...it is no accident...they all have
administrative commitment, Finacial aid commitment and admissions commitment...Beaney at one time had that...not sure it will ever come back? Norbet, Norwich, Adrian, Oswego, St. Thomas...all have it.
 
That is why I was asking....the D3 powers all are the same year in and year out...it is no accident...they all have
administrative commitment, Finacial aid commitment and admissions commitment...Beaney at one time had that...not sure it will ever come back? Norbet, Norwich, Adrian, Oswego, St. Thomas...all have it.

Trust me. It costs $$$ to attend Norwich nowadays. You would crap yourself if you saw the graph of how much tuition has increased the last 10 years.
 
Re: Bill Beaney

Trust me. It costs $$$ to attend Norwich nowadays. You would crap yourself if you saw the graph of how much tuition has increased the last 10 years.

I'm afraid that's a national trend. Tuition is skyrocketing everywhere. However, there was an interview done either last semester or last year where President Schneider talked about the growth of the school and how there was a conscious commitment to invest more in athletics, hockey specifically, to win. That's seen with both men's and women's hockey teams winning national titles, but we're also seeing conference titles in everything from football, to lacrosse, to softball. So, long way around I'm agreeing with you. Winning takes investment, and the benefits of pride and increased exposure are hard to quantify.
 
Re: Bill Beaney

In the case of Middlebury, if there is a lack of institutional commitment to hockey, it is likely primarily a matter of an unforgiving admissions process. Kenyon is one of finest facilities in D3 hockey and financial aid at Middlebury is need based, meaning that if a hockey player can gain admittance, he will get financial aid if he meets standardized criteria for measuring "need." So if Middlebury has decided to lower the profile of its hockey program, it would be doing so through the admissions process and not through the allocation of financial resources to hockey. As to the admissions criteria, the real question is whether Middlebury has decided to go further than other NESCACs in limiting the number of hockey players that have slightly subpar high school GPAs and test scores . .
 
Re: Bill Beaney

I think the NESCACs may operate on a system similar to the one that the Ivies had when I was a student at Dartmouth. Schools were permitted a certain number of "tips" in the admissions processes. A "tip" was granting admission to a student who had a "special talent" but otherwise did not qualify for admission. There were specific limits on how many tips can be granted for various reasons. At one time Dartmouth had a dominant football program and because of that, the number of tips they were allowed for football was reduced by the Ivy League, and other schools that had struggled in football were allocated more tips. As a consequence, the football program fell from good to mediocre and all the way to bad over the course of several years. There may be a similar mechanism among the NESCACs, since the NESCACs sometimes seem to have Ivy envy and try to emulate or exceed the restrictive practices of the Ivies.
 
Last edited:
Re: Bill Beaney

I think the NESCACs may operate on a system similar to the one that the Ivies had when I was a student at Dartmouth. Schools were permitted a certain number of "tips" in the admissions processes. A "tip" was granting admission to a student who had a "special talent" but otherwise did not qualify for admission. There were specific limits on how many tips can be granted for various reasons. At one time Dartmouth had a dominant football program and because of that, the number of tips they were allowed for football was reduced by the Ivy League, and other schools that had struggled in football were allocated more tips. As a consequence, the football program fell from good to mediocre and all the way to bad over the course of several years. There may be a similar mechanism among the NESCACs, since the NESCACs sometimes seem to have Ivy envy and try to emulate or exceed the restrictive practices of the Ivies.

They could also do something where they bring in players who have excellent grades who can balance out a player that may not be so academically smart which is another practice that the Ivies utilize quite a bit as it keeps the team average GPA/SAT high (I know of particular cases in hockey and lacrosse).
 
Re: Bill Beaney

I think the NESCACs may operate on a system similar to the one that the Ivies had when I was a student at Dartmouth. Schools were permitted a certain number of "tips" in the admissions processes. A "tip" was granting admission to a student who had a "special talent" but otherwise did not qualify for admission. There were specific limits on how many tips can be granted for various reasons. At one time Dartmouth had a dominant football program and because of that, the number of tips they were allowed for football was reduced by the Ivy League, and other schools that had struggled in football were allocated more tips. As a consequence, the football program fell from good to mediocre and all the way to bad over the course of several years. There may be a similar mechanism among the NESCACs, since the NESCACs sometimes seem to have Ivy envy and try to emulate or exceed the restrictive practices of the Ivies.

Don't think it has much to do with "Ivy envy" but, yes, the NESCAC has a complicated system of slots and tips, with some deviation allowed for athletes with subpar GPAs and scores. But Middlebury is subject to the same set of rules that apply to all other NESCAC school, including several with similar admissions standards like Bowdoin, Williams, Amherst, etc., that have assembled better records than Middlebury for several years. So the possibility is that Middlebury has imposed stricter standards on itself than it is required to do by NESCAC rules.
 
Re: Bill Beaney

They could also do something where they bring in players who have excellent grades who can balance out a player that may not be so academically smart which is another practice that the Ivies utilize quite a bit as it keeps the team average GPA/SAT high (I know of particular cases in hockey and lacrosse).

The NESCAC system of tips is different from the Ivies' Academic Index so there are no hard minimum numbers or hard average numbers as there is in the Ivies.
 
In the case of Middlebury, if there is a lack of institutional commitment to hockey, it is likely primarily a matter of an unforgiving admissions process. Kenyon is one of finest facilities in D3 hockey and financial aid at Middlebury is need based, meaning that if a hockey player can gain admittance, he will get financial aid if he meets standardized criteria for measuring "need." So if Middlebury has decided to lower the profile of its hockey program, it would be doing so through the admissions process and not through the allocation of financial resources to hockey. As to the admissions criteria, the real question is whether Middlebury has decided to go further than other NESCACs in limiting the number of hockey players that have slightly subpar high school GPAs and test scores . .

Let's be honest, though. One of the gravest predictors of Academic success is socioeconomic status, because those with more money tend to have more academic support at home (computers with Internet, books, parents with college degrees, tutors, etc), and tend to have to worry a bit less about non-academic issues (it's hard for a 15 year old to do their homework when their working maximum hours just to help feed their family, for example). So, the average student who meet Middlebury's incredibly high admissions standards probably won't qualify for a considerable amount of need-based aid (although they may get a small amount of help, like around $1,000, just so the school can keep advertising a really high number for "percent of students receiving need-based aid")
 
Re: Bill Beaney

From the 2013 USNews&World Report Best Colleges rankings (the newest one laying around my house ;) ): Percentage of students determined to have financial need: Amhurst College 62%; Williams College 53%; Bowdoin College 46 %; Hamilton College 45%; Middlebury College, 42% Colgate University 36% (!). If you consider those values to be x then 100-x = %Daddy wrote a check for full tuition and room & board.

If you are wondering.......Norwich University is 79%.
 
Last edited:
Re: Bill Beaney

In the case of Middlebury, if there is a lack of institutional commitment to hockey, it is likely primarily a matter of an unforgiving admissions process. Kenyon is one of finest facilities in D3 hockey and financial aid at Middlebury is need based, meaning that if a hockey player can gain admittance, he will get financial aid if he meets standardized criteria for measuring "need." So if Middlebury has decided to lower the profile of its hockey program, it would be doing so through the admissions process and not through the allocation of financial resources to hockey. As to the admissions criteria, the real question is whether Middlebury has decided to go further than other NESCACs in limiting the number of hockey players that have slightly subpar high school GPAs and test scores . .

That's exactly right. The admissions process at the NESCACs is different at each school. Yes, they must follow certain guidelines set forth by the NESCAC but the difference is in how willing the admissions office is to help. Each school has different guidelines...it's based on the student body as a whole. So Williams, Amherst, Middlebury, Bowdoin all have higher guidelines to meet than Conn. College, Trinity, Hamilton, etc. Some of these schools are SAT optional which is a huge advantage (Bowdoin, Conn). At Trinity, I've heard that they do not have to use one of their "tips" on a player, if that player is a full-pay student. So if Trinity is given one spot for a hockey player who needs a lot of support with admissions, they can bring in 4 players that are all at that academic level, as long as three of them are full pay. I'm not 100% sure on this but have heard it from multiple sources so believe it to be accurate.

The other difference is how much support you have from the admission directors and athletic directors. If you do have it, you're able to get some players in that are borderline. If you look at the list of players that was presented earlier in this thread...Brewer, Cole, Hawkrigg, Murden, etc., they are mostly players that I know for a fact were told "No" by the Middlebury admissions. There are also a handful of players on the Williams team this year, that were told no. Some schools have admissions directors and athletics directors that will support some players that are lower than the guidelines state they should, and some don't.

Learning about this process over the past 10 years really has helped shed some light on the trends in the NESCAC. It is not surprising that Trinity is doing what they are doing. They have a young coach who seems to be a good recruiter, an admissions that supports them, and a school policy that allows them to bring in multiple low (relative to the NESCAC) academic players every year. Bowdoin is an SAT optional school...they can find players that have good grades, but not great SAT scores, and be able to get them in. Amherst has done a great job. I believe that they have done some great recruiting and that Jack Arena must be a good coach. Williams has a great team on paper and their admissions has been willing to help them. Will Kangas ever be able to get the team to come together and actually win? Conn College recently went SAT optional and are starting to have some success. Hamilton is a lower tier NESCAC school that can accept players that are academically lower than other NESCACs. They also seems to be taking advantage of their location to Ontario. I wouldn't be surprised to see them in the top-half of the NESCAC more consistently. Middlebury has a great history and tradition but does not have the support of the administration. Look at their history across the entire athletic department...dozens of National Championships and they never went more than 1 year between National Championships from 1995-2010. They have now gone 5 years without one. Sad time to be a Panther fan.
 
Re: Bill Beaney

I have posted these articles before in the context of NESCAC admissions discussions---it's a three part series but worth the read for anyone interested in the point. Written by a Bowdoin student reporter but he clearly did some digging. It goes into a lot of detail about agreements between the schools on athletic admissions---it also goes a long way to explaining the parity within the conference.

http://bowdoinorient.com/article/9151

http://bowdoinorient.com/article/9211

http://bowdoinorient.com/article/9252

FWIW there is another element to the question of why one applicant may be admitted to one school and not another----there's always the subjective element of feel and fit. Back in my day I was admitted to Midd and Bowdoin but wait-listed at Trinity. Always a head scratcher for me as it was my "back-up" anyway. 1980 is the time frame so the essay portion of the applications had yet to become so homogenized--you still had to write individual essays for each college, so maybe my reader at Trinity just wasn't impressed. I interviewed at Bowdoin and Midd, but did not at Trinity maybe that made the difference?

So the implication in one of the posts in this thread that Trinity will take folks passed over by Midd on a routine basis is probably not fair (unless Trinity runs off 5 in a row)
 
Re: Bill Beaney

That's exactly right. The admissions process at the NESCACs is different at each school. Yes, they must follow certain guidelines set forth by the NESCAC but the difference is in how willing the admissions office is to help. Each school has different guidelines...it's based on the student body as a whole. So Williams, Amherst, Middlebury, Bowdoin all have higher guidelines to meet than Conn. College, Trinity, Hamilton, etc. Some of these schools are SAT optional which is a huge advantage (Bowdoin, Conn). At Trinity, I've heard that they do not have to use one of their "tips" on a player, if that player is a full-pay student. So if Trinity is given one spot for a hockey player who needs a lot of support with admissions, they can bring in 4 players that are all at that academic level, as long as three of them are full pay. I'm not 100% sure on this but have heard it from multiple sources so believe it to be accurate.

The other difference is how much support you have from the admission directors and athletic directors. If you do have it, you're able to get some players in that are borderline. If you look at the list of players that was presented earlier in this thread...Brewer, Cole, Hawkrigg, Murden, etc., they are mostly players that I know for a fact were told "No" by the Middlebury admissions. There are also a handful of players on the Williams team this year, that were told no. Some schools have admissions directors and athletics directors that will support some players that are lower than the guidelines state they should, and some don't.

Learning about this process over the past 10 years really has helped shed some light on the trends in the NESCAC. It is not surprising that Trinity is doing what they are doing. They have a young coach who seems to be a good recruiter, an admissions that supports them, and a school policy that allows them to bring in multiple low (relative to the NESCAC) academic players every year. Bowdoin is an SAT optional school...they can find players that have good grades, but not great SAT scores, and be able to get them in. Amherst has done a great job. I believe that they have done some great recruiting and that Jack Arena must be a good coach. Williams has a great team on paper and their admissions has been willing to help them. Will Kangas ever be able to get the team to come together and actually win? Conn College recently went SAT optional and are starting to have some success. Hamilton is a lower tier NESCAC school that can accept players that are academically lower than other NESCACs. They also seems to be taking advantage of their location to Ontario. I wouldn't be surprised to see them in the top-half of the NESCAC more consistently. Middlebury has a great history and tradition but does not have the support of the administration. Look at their history across the entire athletic department...dozens of National Championships and they never went more than 1 year between National Championships from 1995-2010. They have now gone 5 years without one. Sad time to be a Panther fan.

There are plenty of good (very good) hockey players who are academically eligible by Middlebury admissions that could attend Middlebury if they chose to. Middlebury is losing a lot of talent (a) that could attend but chose to go elsewhere, (b) commit to Middlebury but change their minds before setting foot on campus, and (c) commit to Middlebury, play at Middlebury, but end their careers early by their own choice. With the steady decline of a once-proud program, and a talented group that chooses to endure, it's clear that Middlebury hockey is becoming a sad memory. This current team and ones of this decade are quickly and reliably becoming the bottom feeders of NESCAC and D3 hockey.
 
Re: Bill Beaney

This current team and ones of this decade are quickly and reliably becoming the bottom feeders of NESCAC and D3 hockey.

I think that is a huge over-reach. There is no way that Middlebury is reaching those depths, or will reach them any time soon. When you talk about "bottom feeders" of DIII hockey you have to fall to unbelievable depths. They are not Finlandia, Fredonia, or even USM
 
Re: Bill Beaney

. . . So, the average student who meet Middlebury's incredibly high admissions standards probably won't qualify for a considerable amount of need-based aid (although they may get a small amount of help, like around $1,000, just so the school can keep advertising a really high number for "percent of students receiving need-based aid")

Actually the average annual financial aid package at most NESCACs is in the $38,000/year range.
 
Let's be honest, though. One of the gravest predictors of Academic success is socioeconomic status, because those with more money tend to have more academic support at home (computers with Internet, books, parents with college degrees, tutors, etc), and tend to have to worry a bit less about non-academic issues (it's hard for a 15 year old to do their homework when their working maximum hours just to help feed their family, for example). So, the average student who meet Middlebury's incredibly high admissions standards probably won't qualify for a considerable amount of need-based aid (although they may get a small amount of help, like around $1,000, just so the school can keep advertising a really high number for "percent of students receiving need-based aid")

While I understand you're usually compelled to comment on absolutely everything, regardless of whether you know what you're talking about or not...

Tell me, for real. I know you're a legitimate Marxist and all, but have you ever considered the fact that your little bald, closeted life doesn't have much to do with, or much knowledge about, what's going on at Middlebury?

Keep up the great work.
 
I think the NESCACs may operate on a system similar to the one that the Ivies had when I was a student at Dartmouth. Schools were permitted a certain number of "tips" in the admissions processes. A "tip" was granting admission to a student who had a "special talent" but otherwise did not qualify for admission. There were specific limits on how many tips can be granted for various reasons. At one time Dartmouth had a dominant football program and because of that, the number of tips they were allowed for football was reduced by the Ivy League, and other schools that had struggled in football were allocated more tips. As a consequence, the football program fell from good to mediocre and all the way to bad over the course of several years. There may be a similar mechanism among the NESCACs, since the NESCACs sometimes seem to have Ivy envy and try to emulate or exceed the restrictive practices of the Ivies.

You are correct, sir.
 
Back
Top