Also, quite a few athletes need an extra bit of time to complete their academics once their athletic eligibility is finished., especially those who commence college in Spring rather than Autumn (as I believe Tiffany did - and Farris in the men). Although tennis players can only represent their colleges for 4 academic years, their scholarships allow them to study for 5 if needed.
The entry level for Div II of 5.2 or 6.1 is REALLY moderate/low (i.e. perfectly good, nice game of tennis but not what you'd think you'd get a tennis scholarship from).
Even 4.1 for Div 1 is not that amazing (although it does say the top 100 colleges will demand 3.1 or 2.2 which is now a very good level).
As Oakland alluded to in his assessment of the men's list, not all Div 1 tennis is equal. There are 4 or 5 conferences (leagues) which are much stronger than the rest (there are around 30 conferences). Other schools do produce strong players, but in general the strongest recruits tend to end up in schools in the strongest conferences. Recruiters tend to look at a total package - LTA rating being a small part. Ability to cope with the academics, junior ITF ranking, WTA/ATP ranking, performance in tournaments, evidence of dubs ability, personality etc. are all taken into account. The very top schools have teams who all had top ITF rankings, or did well in junior grand slams or when trying pro events. The top level is really high but the tail end can be really average.
Digging around a bit more, I think she might still be at Texas but injured. Looked her up on Universal Tennis Rating (a good way to see if a player has been active anywhere esp in the US) and she played 2 matches on 25 Sep but nothing since. Not 100% sure of the rules, but believe if a player has a season-ending injury early enough in the season they can be dropped off the roster to preserve eligibility. She's certainly not shown on the Texas site now. If anyone does know the rules in more detail, I'd be interested to learn them.
And of course there is coping with academics and coping with academics, some institutions being much more academic and much stricter than others. Stanford (Ivy league but not because it's PAC12) require student athletes to meet the same criteria as everyone else ie GPA of 4.0 or better Cal is also strict, Vandy, Duke and Cal Poly are also primarily academic institutions but then support with tutors. I read that there are 30,000 potential student athletes but with the above academic criteria you are down to less than 3k
The various regional championships have taken place over the past few weeks and a couple of our guys did well in doubles. No winners in singles and no winners of any kind for the women:
Southwest Champion - Jordan Angus (+Filip Vittek) - San Diego
Mountain Champion - Alex Gasson (+Henry Craig) - Denver
Sorry the Tunsia ITF thread got hijacked by a college tennis discussion but thought it might be useful to post last comment here also, ie in the right place
A comment on the relative strengths of the different conferences in ladies college tennis.
Looking at the most recent rankings, the top 100 is dominated by four conferences the PAC 12, ACC, SEC and Big 12
In terms of base lining the level of the top 20 players ie the best players you would be tested against at the national championship finals their mean junior combined rank is 370.55 (ie Eliz Maloney (10/8/2000) is playing at the average standard these girls played at at their peak as a junior) range 9-1621
What do good American players think of college tennis? There are 9 foreign players in the top 20. 5 players had junior ranks under 100, only 1 is an American (and only just 99!)
Who would you get to hit with day in day out, one college Stanford has 3 players in the top 20, (4 in 100), Florida 2(5), Virginia 3 (3), Cal 2(5), Miami 2(4), vandy 2(5), UNC 1(2), USC1(4), Texas AM 1(3), Georgia (6). Really these would be the places you would want to be if you had serious aspirations of pursuing a professional singles career after college.
There are 2 Ivy League players in the top 100 ranked 67 and 98, average junior rank 1,534. One from Dartmouth the other at Harvard. So the drop off in talent level outside the top 4 conferences is very steep.
There is one real standout player presently ranked 1 with junior CH of 9 she is Canadian and at Stanford so probably opted to put a Stanford degree in the bank although only 19 if she wants to play pro should quit and go now, McEnroe (J) did just that. There are two other girls who ranked at a similar level to Emily at their peak in world juniors (27) both overseas and from the eastern block
-- Edited by Oakland2002 on Sunday 1st of November 2015 07:46:56 PM
-- Edited by Oakland2002 on Friday 6th of November 2015 10:23:42 PM
-- Edited by Oakland2002 on Friday 6th of November 2015 10:25:08 PM
As Oakland alluded to in his assessment of the men's list, not all Div 1 tennis is equal. There are 4 or 5 conferences (leagues) which are much stronger than the rest (there are around 30 conferences). Other schools do produce strong players, but in general the strongest recruits tend to end up in schools in the strongest conferences. Recruiters tend to look at a total package - LTA rating being a small part. Ability to cope with the academics, junior ITF ranking, WTA/ATP ranking, performance in tournaments, evidence of dubs ability, personality etc. are all taken into account. The very top schools have teams who all had top ITF rankings, or did well in junior grand slams or when trying pro events. The top level is really high but the tail end can be really average.
There are 5 "super conferences" all based mainly on the football teams but they have amazing facilities. Some other colleges are very good too. All div 1 are good though. Some div2/NIAA will take almost anyone though so some quite poor players, even girls who have hardly competed for ages, will get a scholarship. Good news though is div1 is strong and a real aim for all kids serious about tennis and studying to aim for.