The Consulting Firm for Student Athletes and their Families

Running the Numbers: Matriculation of the class of 2006 Boys and Girls Tennis players ranked 100-200 in the nation*

Scholarship for Athletes - Monday, March 09, 2009

Most athletes don’t realize there’s a lot of movement on the teams they sign with, the program they’re part of and the schools they attend.  To make the point, SFA ran the numbers and analyzed the matriculation of the boys and girls junior tennis players ranked 100-200 in the nation in 2006:

How many boys and girls ranked 100-200 in the graduating class of 2006 will start their junior year of tennis on the same division 1 tennis team that they originally signed with in high school? 

Out of those that remain on their starting teams, how many will play top 6 on a top 75 ranked team?

Simple questions with surprising results and shocking implications.

2006 Junior Players Ranked 100- 200 in the Nation

Men

Women

79

Div 1

79%

89

Div 1

89%

2

Div 2

2%

2

Div 2

2%

19

Div 3

19%

9

Div 3

9%

22/79

Quit or Transferred

28%

20/89

Quit or Transferred

22%

26/57

Play top 6

46%

55/69

Play top 6

80%

2 of 26

Top 75 Team

8%

3 of 55

Top 75 Team

5.5%


NOTE: Some of these players will quit or transfer during or after their junior year to pursue their next career after tennis. 

RESULTS:  Boys 2006 recruiting class ranked 100-200

79 out of the 100 boys played division 1 tennis (79%); two out of the 100 played division II tennis (2%); 19 out of the 100 played div III tennis (19%).  22 out of the 79 that went division 1 have already quit or transferred which means that 28 percent of the division 1 men players ranked between 100 and 200 in the 2006 recruiting class didn’t make it to their junior year on the team that they originally signed with. 

Of the 57 boys still on the teams they originally signed with, 26 are playing top 6 for their team.

Two out of those 26 are playing top 6 for a top 75 D1 team: J Walters – Furman (team ranked #70) and R Wardell – William and Mary (team ranked #67)

RESULTS: Girls 2006 recruiting class ranked 100-200

89 out of the 100 girls signed with division 1 schools (89%); two out of the 100 signed with division II schools (2%); 9 out of the 100 signed with division III schools (9%).  20 of the 89 have already quit or transferred which means that 22 percent of the division 1 women players didn’t make it to their junior year on the team that they originally signed with.

55 out of 69 girls are playing top 6 for the Division 1 school that they originally signed with.  3 out of the 55 are playing top 6 for a top 75 ranked D1 team: S Lederhandler – Yale (team ranked #51), H Robinson – LSU (team ranked #23) and E Monson – Utah (team ranked #43)

Analysis:

On the boys side the numbers are scary.  Almost 30 percent of the division 1 players did not make it to their junior year on the team that they signed with.  Of the kids that are still on their original team, almost 50% of them don’t play top 6.   The most frightening stat is that, of the 100 boys we looked at, only two play top 6 for a division 1 team ranked top 75. 

The numbers on the girls’ side were a little better, due in part to the abundance of scholarships for girls.  SFA saw many girls take a full scholarship at a school where they would play top 6 right away.  The boys that fall into these rankings are less likely to get a full scholarship so they tend to seek out schools with a bigger name – where unfortunately they will have a lower chance of playing on the team. 

The girls’ numbers still reflected that over 20 percent of the girls that went division 1 have quit or transferred.  Similar to the boys, the number of girls playing top 6 for a ranked division 1 team is very low.  Only 3 girls out of the 100 girls we looked at are playing top 6 for a ranked team. 

Assessment:

Overall there’s a real problem here.  The data implies that there is a major lack of education for student athletes and their families.  What caused so many athletes to quit or transfer?  There are multiple reasons such as injuries and burn out however a more likely reason is that their expectations were not met in some form or fashion.  They may not have played as much as they expected, the athletic workload may have been more than they expected, or the program simply was not as good of a fit as they expected.  Regardless of the reasons, these are all things that could have been avoided with a thorough analysis of the athlete’s wants and needs along with additional research. 

Proper research is worth the time that it takes and the effort required.  Many students opt for outside help but regardless of who does the research – every athlete should know that it needs to be done.  Period.

*rankings source: wwww.tennisrecruiting.net

Comments
Post has no comments.
Post a Comment




Captcha Image