College Retention Rates

[Unregistered]

With all the posts about D1/D2/D3 I thought I would take a look at the percentages of players who start as freshmen and finish up as seniors at the same school.

I looked at the ACC and NESCAC as sample conferences although they are not really what I would consider to be the "norm" for D1 and D3, but I would consider both to be competitive athletically and academically for their respective divisions.

I looked at the current 2014 rosters and compared them to the school's 2011-12 rosters. I tried to take into account redshirting so a redshirt junior would be counted as a "senior". In the NESCAC there were two schools that did not have (or I could not find) 2011 information.

In summary -- of the 99 freshmen listed on ACC rosters for the 2011-12, 57 were still around for their senior (or redshirt junior) year. 58%

For NESCAC of the 70 freshmen in 2011 58 of them were still around for their senior season. 83%

Athletes may quit playing at a school for a number of reasons -- injuries, need to concentrate on academics, jobs/internships, and a number may transfer and keep playing. But, a fair number likely quit because of lack of playing time/lack of fun.

[Unregistered]

Were you looking at men or women?

My daughter has played all 4 years of D1. The seniors started as 7 freshman. One transferred after freshman year, but as she was California, that's not surprising. Of the remaining 6, 5 lived together 3 of the 4 years and 4 lived together all 4 years. One of them was a walk on who earned her way to a starting position as a senior after almost giving up as a sophomore. I think that is testament to her perseverance and perhaps to them all. And btw I just came across this that I thought should be shared with this forum.


https://fbcdn-sphotos-b-a.akamaihd.n...26ac0c7a370259

[Unregistered]

The figures are for women's teams.

To me -- one of the key takeaways is the importance of researching the college choice, particularly at the Div 1 level as more than 4 in 10 girls will stop playing before their senior year.

[Unregistered]

There's tons of good stuff on this thread...

http://www.talking-soccer.com/TS4/sh...63345&page=135

check post 1342. Granted this is one class but according to the poster doing the grunt work it's pretty consistent. I've seen other stats that between 30-40% of D1 athletes aren't playing by junior year. Some get cut, others quite/transfer because they don't get any playing time, some burn out, others want to focus on school, etc.

[Unregistered]

There's tons of good stuff on this thread...

http://www.talking-soccer.com/TS4/sh...63345&page=135

check post 1342. Granted this is one class but according to the poster doing the grunt work it's pretty consistent. I've seen other stats that between 30-40% of D1 athletes aren't playing by junior year. Some get cut, others quite/transfer because they don't get any playing time, some burn out, others want to focus on school, etc.

When you some of you finally get it that being a D1 athlete is a JOB and a 30% retention rate isn't all that out of whack when you realize that it is an average which means that there are lots of D1 programs that have very little turnover. Just like in the business world high turnover is a symptom of dysfunction.

[Unregistered]

The figures are for women's teams.

To me -- one of the key takeaways is the importance of researching the college choice, particularly at the Div 1 level as more than 4 in 10 girls will stop playing before their senior year.

My son had a couple of D1 offers and a host of D3 offers (one D2). The D1 offers were good, but not great academic schools (of course it is what you make of it). The D3 schools were excellent academic schools (NESCAC and non-NESCAC). Although some of the latter were ranked higher, they were all in the same academic league. He considered the options, the schools, the facilities, the team's success and trends, and the coach. He went with an excellent academic D3 school that he was confident that he would play at.
.......no D1 money, but a happy, productive student-athlete......

[Unregistered]

My son had a couple of D1 offers and a host of D3 offers (one D2). The D1 offers were good, but not great academic schools (of course it is what you make of it). The D3 schools were excellent academic schools (NESCAC and non-NESCAC). Although some of the latter were ranked higher, they were all in the same academic league. He considered the options, the schools, the facilities, the team's success and trends, and the coach. He went with an excellent academic D3 school that he was confident that he would play at.
.......no D1 money, but a happy, productive student-athlete......

Basically he was the runt of the litter when it comes to soccer players. But hey, dad can still come here to lament the evils of D1 soccer and champion the ideals of the scholar athlete.

[Unregistered]

Basically he was the runt of the litter when it comes to soccer players. But hey, dad can still come here to lament the evils of D1 soccer and champion the ideals of the scholar athlete.

Thanks, BTDT. Not you, right?

[Unregistered]

Thanks, BTDT. Not you, right?

"Working class white people don't like President Obama much. According to the latest*Gallup poll,*only 27% approve of him. That's 21 percentage points down since he took office in 2009.

A standard talking-point is that these voters don't like Obama because they're racist. But that assumes that the key word in "white working class" is "white." In fact, the key word is "working." After all, Obama isn't any blacker than he was in 2009.

A few Democratic pundits seem to get this. Writing in*Mother Jones,*Kevin Drumobserves: "So who does the WWC take out its anger on? Largely, the answer is the poor. In particular, the*undeserving*poor. Liberals may hate this distinction, but it doesn't matter if we hate it. Lots of ordinary people make this distinction as a matter of simple common sense, and the WWC makes it more than any. That's because they're closer to it. For them, the poor aren't merely a set of statistics or a cause to be championed. They're the folks next door who don't do a lick of work but somehow keep getting government checks paid for by their tax dollars."

http://www.usatoday.com/story/opinio...lumn/19700747/

[Unregistered]

Basically he was the runt of the litter when it comes to soccer players. But hey, dad can still come here to lament the evils of D1 soccer and champion the ideals of the scholar athlete.

D1 on the girls side is in front of friends and family. Nobody else gives rats ass. Congrats!

[Unregistered]

D1 on the girls side is in front of friends and family. Nobody else gives rats ass. Congrats!

Don't forget that there's scholarship money involved with D1 athletics so while the fan base might be small (but larger than on the men's side) at least the participants are getting paid to be there. At the D3 level even the schools don't give a rats ass and the parents are paying big bucks to sit there and pretend their kids are important soccer players. Congrats.

[Unregistered]

Don't forget that there's scholarship money involved with D1 athletics so while the fan base might be small (but larger than on the men's side) at least the participants are getting paid to be there. At the D3 level even the schools don't give a rats ass and the parents are paying big bucks to sit there and pretend their kids are important soccer players. Congrats.

Athletic money in many cases isn't all that much, especially on the men's side, and can be revoked the next year. Sure every bit helps but it's a black cloud hanging over you much of the time. A smart player can get more academic dollars that, in most cases, can't be revoked. Like with all else there are extremes - not all D1 schools are inexpensive and not all D3 schools cost a fortune. Nor are all D1 schools crap academically or D3 schools nirvana.

[Unregistered]

D1 on the girls side is in front of friends and family. Nobody else gives rats ass. Congrats!

Unless you are playing a headcount sport, in either gender, no one gives a rats ass.

Even then, the attendance is usually awful unless you are a top 25 program. I think Mens soccer is in trouble as football has been given the green light to make their own rules. Paying players, etc. Next move is to increase scholarships. Title 9 issues will come up and they will need to decrease elsewhere.

[Unregistered]

Don't forget that there's scholarship money involved with D1 athletics so while the fan base might be small (but larger than on the men's side) at least the participants are getting paid to be there. At the D3 level even the schools don't give a rats ass and the parents are paying big bucks to sit there and pretend their kids are important soccer players. Congrats.

I'm poster #2 of this thread and that is quite unkind of you. Not to mention arrogant. My daughter had several friends who chose D3 that could have played D1, in fact one of them was recruited by the same D1 as my daughter. Another was selected to the Region 1 ODP team when ODP still had some relevance. These young women chose their schools for academic reasons. Two of them went on to win a D3 Nat́onal Championship as starters for the team. What has your kid done that makes you think they are "important" soccer players?

[Unregistered]

Do not feed the trolls --

As there was a comment to the effect that better teams would have lower turn over I took a look at the current top 10 ranked teams. Overall 55 seniors are still around out of the 89 freshmen who started out in the 11/12 season. That is about a 62 percent retention rate.