Meaning of preferred walk on

I'm pretty sure that a "recruited walk on" is a kid who has been recruited and is being offered a spot on the roster but will not be given scholarship money. Sometimes this happens because the school is out of scholarship.
David Estrada from UCLA was a recruited walk on.

 

My nephew was a preferred walk on. He committed late, after the scholarship money was already used up. He chose to accept it because the school was his dream school. He was seen at Disney senoir year by the coach so it was late in the process.He had regular scholarship offers from two other school but they were small and not schools he would be interested in anyway beyond soccer. He did not sign a letter of intent but was flown up for an official visit.
He was not guaranteed a spot on the roster. He reported to preseason the week before school started, the scholarship and returning players reported the week before. However, once they were all at school, the differences were few. The coach held all the players to the same expectations for preseason. He did not dress one of his scholarship players for several games and dressed my nephew. My nephew also made the travel team. At least for him, other than the money, the playing field was equal.

The coach has said that next year, there will be some $$$.

If it comes down to accepting a walk on spot in order to play at your dream school or taking a slot at another school just for the $$, you might want to think very carefully. Picking your school first is a very wise way to go. You never know how the soccer is going to work out but you want to be at a school you want to graduate from.

 

Some schools use "Recruited Athlete," rather than "Preferred Walk-on."

With only 9.9 scholarships allowed by the NCAA (and sometimes fewer than that funded at many schools), there are frequently numerous small fractional scholarships offered. At times, the grant just covers books and fees.

It's fairly rare for anyone but top, elite players to get the traditional full ride. Many times a "recruited athlete" will make the travel squad and gain playing time and be offered some scholarship money in later years.

Most programs do not differentiate among scholarship and non-scholarship players for training table meals, academic support, off-season training, etc. However, scholarship players may be given an edge in opportunities for playing time to justify the program's investment.

 

The term "recruited athlete" applies to any player that the school has had any type of contact with about playing a sport. You can be a "recruited athlete" and not be given a scholarship. A "walk-on" is technically not a recruited athlete.

So if the coach has told the player he's a "preferred walk-on", it really means that the coach has recruited him to play without any guarantee of a scholarship, provided he can prove himself sufficiently during pre-season training. Bottom line: They think he might be of value as a bench player, but want the opportunity to see what he can do during the pre-season.

(Caveat here also. It could be that the player's academic record is such that the coach is concerned about how long he'll last, and doesn't want to burn a scholarship).

 

The other big difference is in "status" for lack of a better word.

Walk-ons are not only not exepcted to make the team but frankly get next to nothing in terms of scrimmage time, lockers and/or respect. A true walk-on would have to show up and play like Seedorf on crank for someone to even bother askinghis name. Mostlym they're cannon fodder waiting to get cut and everybody knows it.

A "recruited athlete" has been invited to show up and will generally be given roughly the same level of attention, coaching and what have you that the guys on scholarship get. As noted above, a lot of times these are guys who may have something but have something to prove, and often the coach will even come right out and say "Look, I'm not giving you any money but I will gve you a fair shot and if you show you can cut it then I'll give you some money next year"

Walk-ons don't even get to keep the t-shirt.

 

This description of the difference is right on the mark.

The "recruited athlete" gets all the perks of being on the team, including uniform and practice gear, locker, meals, academic support, weightroom and other training access, basically everything except scholarship money. The "walk-on" has to show a lot in a very short time to achieve that status. A "preferred walk-on" is really more like the "recruited athlete" status.

A really good player might be a "recruited athlete" at a top program but scholarship material at a lesser program. That makes for some difficult decisions for the true student-athlete.

The part about not keeping the t-shirt is also true. That's to keep guys from showing up just to get a shirt that says "I tried out." It's probably also based on some obscure NCAA rule.

 

To reiterate. A "recruit" is ANY player with whom the coaching staff has been in contact, whether they even really want him or not. By definition, a "recruited athlete" is the same thing as a "recruit". When they use the term "walk-on", it's the verb and not the noun, as in "We'll let you 'walk on' to the team at the start of training, but we aren't willing to give you a scholarship".

You're either recruited or not recruited. All that being a "recruited athlete" insures is that the coaching staff has been in contact with you beforehand. Whatever happens after that, happens.

A "walk-on" is actually a non-recruited athlete - one with whom the coaching staff has had no prior contact about competing in the sport.

So when the coach tells you to your face that you can be a "preferred walk-on", he's recruiting you to basically try-out and see if you can make the squad, with the assurance they'll give you the accomdation of a good look. Nothing more.

 

Not quite there yet ...

A coach can offer an assured roster spot to a "recruited athlete" (or, perhaps, a "preferred walk-on"), without offering any scholarship. This is different from the off-the-street "walk-on" who gets a chance to try out for a roster spot.

There is no guarantee of playing time. There is also no letter of intent which binds the player. And, it usually means a redshirt Freshman year.

Different schools may use different terminology, but this is the way it works at many big-time programs.

 

Given the diversity of opinion here, I would suggest the boy ask the coach exactly what he means. Does he get invited to camp and have a roster spot? Will he be able to join the team once classes start? The coach should be able to clarify much better than anyone on BS.

 

I think that each coach has their own definition and even that may vary from player to player because i have heard several variations. The main constants as said above, are that they don't sign a NLI and there is no money.

My nephew was flown up for an official visit and shown around like a scholarship recruit. The coach told him and put it in writing that if he came he would be assured a roster spot for that year. Whether he dressed, made the travel team or played would be determined by his performance. There were two players ahead of him that were called "preferred walk ons" the year before and they earned book money their sophmore year. Neither were red shirted and saw playing time. Same for my nephew this year.

My son's team had several walk ons. One was treated the same as my nephew, the others were not. They were invited to preseaon.They were not given an official visit but were listed on the roster sent out over the summer. Once at preseason camp, several more kids showed up that were not on the summer roster. The recruited walk ons (other than the one like my nephew) and the true walk ons were not given the same perks that the rest of the team received such as meals, equipment etc and they werent around long.

I would get the coach to spell out exactly what he has in mind as his definition for that specific player. Find out how preferred walk ons were offered and received the following year if possible.Get it in writing if he will do it although how much that holds depends on the honor of the coach.

Taking a perferred walk on slot worked out for my nephew. Not so much for the ones on my son's team.

 

MTNK1 makes some great points above.

I would also add that the player should do some research into the coach's reputation, especially given his marginal status. Many coaches are great about being straight with their players and giving them a full information set so the player makes a decision that is right for them. Others may not be so straightforward and players can find themselves in a different situation once they matriculate than they were promised during the recruitment process. The coach's integrity in this area can be especially important for more marginal recruits and players.

 

Which is of course exactly what I said. We were actually there before.

 

1) A walk on is someone already on the team who has had to try out or who has been recruited to come and play without a scholarship. That's why schools have "walk on tryouts." You aren't a walk on until you are officially on the team.

2) At most schools walk ons are brought in to either make up numbers or for a good player when there is no money available. In either case the player will get scrimmage time...because that's why they are there.

3) Most schools will recruit kids to come and walk on to their program. It's a way to show a kid that you want him/her even though you currently have no money to give them.

4) Recruited walk ons get everything scholarship players get, with the obvious exception of the scholarship, from day one. Student-athletes who come to a try out get nothing (or just temporary practice gear) until they officially make the team.

 

I often read on this forum that it is quite hard to walk on to D1 teams.
I've always wondered why this is.
Wouldn't it be easier for a kid to walk on to his university team if he is a good enough player?
The program wouldn't lose any scholarship money on the player and it adds a good player to the roster.
Obviously it is more complicated than this because I dont often hear of many players walking on to teams, so what is the downside to accepting a walk on player and why does it seem to be so hard?

 

TIA disclaimer - I'm not a D1 coach so this reply is opinion & speculation...

Why is it so hard? Well, for starters a walk-on realistically has to be better than one or more recruited/rostered players -and not by just a little bit. A coach could understandably opine that someone that good should have already been noticed somewhere.

More thoughts... Many coaches appear to target an overall roster size (think mid-20s). There may typically be 5-7 recruits per year, plus any transfers, and there may be occasional "bonus" years w/ even more recruited players (I've seen 11 announced more than a few times the past couple of years). That right there makes it a numbers game - at many schools you're probably already talking cuts or transfers out just from your announced recruits if you're "only" keeping 20-something rostered. A walk-on also means you're dealing with someone the coaching staff apparently missed, and who likes to be reminded that they blew one (or more..)? And quite frankly, the walk-ons I've known of have often been decent players but just not of the same caliber as most of those recruited - and if it's that close a call most coaches will go with their recruited player, in whom they already have a greater investment.

Just 'cause a walk-on initially gets no scholarship doesn't mean that there is no financial impact. There are typically per diems for road trips, training table charge-backs, etc. that can still figure into overall program budgets, so a walk-on isn't a truly free player. Plus, a somewhat unknown quantity might be perceived as more of a risk to the APR than a more carefully researched or documented recruit.

But after all that hot air, you'd still like to think that a late bloomer or maybe a two-sport participant who winds up being darned good but relatively unknown and unrecruited can still go out and get a fair shake. I just don't know that fairness always carries the day...

 

As Mr. Clint Eastwood said "deserving has nothing to do with it". What college coach is going to cut or even sit one of his prized recruits who he just got finished gushing about in the signee press release in favor of a walk on? As others have said, the walk on faces an uphill battle where he has to be much better than a recruit or current player.

 

Another problem is that if you cut a scholarship player, he still gets his money and he still counts against your roster size so it is not like cutting a scholarship player opens up money or a spot. All it does is give you one less player. Sometimes it has less to with his gushing press release than just the simple fact that you need numbers.

If you are a walk-on that has a guaranteed roster spot, that is a whole different ball game. No coach would play the scholarship player over a walk-on if he thought that walk-on could do a better job helping him win.

 

You'd figure that if a player that has a history of playing at a high level comes to campus and tries to walk on to the team and is obviously better than many of the players, the coach would pick him up.
But, as more and more people post this doesn't seem to be the case.
Matter of pride.. maybe?
I'm not a coach at any level but were I one, I would take any player who I felt would make my team better.
At least, thats what I think now...