Connect with us

Opinion & Analysis

The numbers you need to get a college golf scholarship

Published

on

One of the most perplexing issues for junior golfers and their families is understanding where to look and how much scholarship (if any) they should expect. In this article, I want to introduce you to the coach’s perspective in recruiting, explain their thought process and then help you understand where to look and approximately how much to expect.

As a college student I was blessed to work a lot of college golf camps with a ton of great coaches. These coaches quickly taught me a lot, including a key rule when recruiting; when you first watch a player, image you can make four more copies. Then imagine with a team of five of them, where would you be ranked? Would you make regionals? Nationals? Match Play? Win it all?

Obviously at each level these numbers are different. So, let’s start by looking at some numbers:

In Division I Men’s Golf, the No. 1 team in Golfstat Cup finished with a scoring average of 69.99. The last team to make regionals (Michigan State) had an average score for their top four of 72.86. The 125th team at the end of the year last year was UC Riverside. The best player on the team averaged 73.93 for the year, while the fourth player averaged 77.51. Dartmouth was the 200th team had three players average better than 75 with the fourth player averaging 76.74.

In Division I Women’s, the No. 1 team in Golfstat Cup was Alabama which boasted an average of 70.93 among their top four. The last team to make regionals on the women’s side was Missouri. For the season, Missouri had a stroke average of 295.4. The 100th best team was Georgetown, with a scoring average of 303.64 (75.91 per player). The 200th best team in women’s golf was Appalachian State women’s golf. They had a team average of 312 (78 per player).

In DII Golf, West Florida Men were the best regular season team with a scoring average among their top four of 70.75. For Women, the best team, as well as eventual National Champions, was Indianapolis with a scoring average of 73.45 among their top four. The 25th team in DII Men’s Golf had an average among their top four of 73.47 and for women the number was 77.03. The 50th ranked team for Men averaged 294.7 as a team (73.675 per player), while the 50th women’s team averaged 322.3 (80.5 per player).

For DIII, the best men’s team was Methodist. Their top four averaged 73, while the top four for the best women’s team averaged 75.32. The 25th best men’s team top four averaged 74.96 and the top four for the 25th ranked women’s team averaged 81.37. The 50th ranked men’s team averaged 302.4 as a team (75.6 per player).

In the NAIA, the best men’s team top four averaged 71.64, while in women’s golf the number was 75.32. The 25th best men’s team averaged 73.13, while the 25th best women’s number was 78.53.

Now, let’s consider where you fit. Many students reading this article will have a ranking on Junior Golf Scoreboard. One aspect of the ranking is your scoring differential. Look that number up. Once you have it, add approximately one shot. Why one? For lots of reasons, including: college golf is likely harder, for many reasons not limited to having to balance school and golf, courses are less familiar, there can be more travel and you are often playing 72 holes in three grueling days.

Based on the competitive nature of college golf, most teams ranked within the top 30 percent of DI, 20 percent of DII and  five percent of DIII and NAIA will likely require a scoring differential of one or better to even become a candidate since the data suggests that they need players who in college can average 73 or better (at worst). When considering allotting their scholarships, coaches are going to strongly consider your ability to contribute “countable rounds”; what is the likelihood and how often will your score count. When coaches think you will count at least 75 percent of the time is when they are most likely to make substantial offers.

Obviously, not everyone reading this article has a scoring differential of one or better. This does not mean that you cannot play college golf, nor does it mean that you cannot get a scholarship. The data suggests that as schools move towards the mean, they become less interested in pure golf results and more interested in the player’s “fit;” that is how they will represent the school and preform academically, as well as shoot scores which can contribute to the team’s ability to finish within the top three at their conference tournament.

Players with higher scoring differentials should certainly be concerned about their golf, but it is likely that the most appealing thing they can do is earn good grades and high test scores. Since approximately 50 percent of programs at every level don’t have full scholarship allotments, they often rely on academic money to package intriguing financial packages to attract prospective student athletes.

For girls, the range is much greater. Likely girls with scoring differentials of four or better are going to get significant attention, but it is likely that anyone with a scoring differential of six or better has a chance to not only get a large scholarship but likely that will come at the Division I level. Again, for female perspective student athletes with scoring differentials above six, don’t worry, there are lots of opportunities, however, like your male counterparts, make sure to get the best grades and test scores possible. They are likely to help and save you thousands of dollars!

B.M. Ryan, an entrepreneur and scientist, is a passionate golfer who loves his local muni. Armed with a keen interest in the game, a large network of friends in the industry, Brendan works to find and produce unique content for GolfWRX.

14 Comments

14 Comments

  1. Walter

    Oct 24, 2018 at 9:31 pm

    I am a 48 year old with eligibility left. (2.0 handicap) LOL. What is the average yardage and course rating these players play?

    • Austin

      Nov 13, 2018 at 1:36 pm

      I play college golf for a high level division II team… I would say the average course we play is about 7,000-7,200 yards and has a course rating of around 74.5. In 4 rounds of qualifying, it typically takes a final score around Even (or roughly 288) to make the starting 5.

  2. Nuno

    Oct 24, 2018 at 2:51 pm

    Do you have any college preparation coaches recommendations in Northern California for a 13 year old with a tournament play 1.3 handicap?

  3. Ryan Michael

    Oct 24, 2018 at 1:17 pm

    So simply break 80 and you’ll have numerous schools knocking at your doorstep. Yawn.

    • Adkskibum

      Oct 24, 2018 at 7:30 pm

      Data analysis is not your strong suit is it?

    • Left Hand Down

      Dec 7, 2018 at 9:42 am

      Did you even read the article?

  4. Jamie

    Oct 24, 2018 at 11:08 am

    2 things:

    1. Makes no mention of the difference in course difficulty between DI and DIII and NAIA. Yes, there is a difference.
    2. Next time make a table and don’t bury the information in useless verbage.

    • Nancy

      Mar 2, 2019 at 12:58 pm

      Not 100% sure on your comment about course difficulty based on D1 vs NAIA.
      My NAIA school played , this Fall, PGA National West Palm, Doral Red Tiger and Blue Monster, Kinderlou plus Innisbrooke.

  5. mel

    Oct 24, 2018 at 10:30 am

    went through this whole scenario with my female junior player.
    i like to think that i was realistic about the possibility of scholarships.
    small D1 schools did not even reply to emails, resumes, phone calls, school
    visit to meet the coach. even though a few D1 schools offered scholarship ,ended up getting a partial scholarship to a small D2 program. she just did not like the campus and went with her gut feeling.
    in the end, i think it’s best for the student-athlete to happy with school and academics first.
    then golf would most likely be easier.

  6. Dan

    Oct 23, 2018 at 7:33 pm

    I was offered scholarships in 1994. I would’ve been laughed at today.

  7. AKaufman

    Oct 23, 2018 at 5:34 pm

    Its tough, I graduated in 2005. Had a -0.5 under par average in high school.
    won some local amateur stuff.
    Was living in CA, best full ride offers I was getting was East coast D1’s not the big time programs. Most big western schools invited me to walk on and try out.

    • Adkskibum

      Oct 24, 2018 at 7:33 pm

      So, what did you do? did you take the East Coast offer? If so, how’d it work out?

Leave a Reply

Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Opinion & Analysis

The 2 primary challenges golf equipment companies face

Published

on

As the editor-in-chief of this website and an observer of the GolfWRX forums and other online golf equipment discourse for over a decade, I’m pretty well attuned to the grunts and grumbles of a significant portion of the golf equipment purchasing spectrum. And before you accuse me of lording above all in some digital ivory tower, I’d like to offer that I worked at golf courses (public and private) for years prior to picking up my pen, so I’m well-versed in the non-degenerate golf equipment consumers out there. I touched (green)grass (retail)!

Complaints about the ills of and related to the OEMs usually follow some version of: Product cycles are too short for real innovation, tour equipment isn’t the same as retail (which is largely not true, by the way), too much is invested in marketing and not enough in R&D, top staffer X hasn’t even put the new driver in play, so it’s obviously not superior to the previous generation, prices are too high, and on and on.

Without digging into the merits of any of these claims, which I believe are mostly red herrings, I’d like to bring into view of our rangefinder what I believe to be the two primary difficulties golf equipment companies face.

One: As Terry Koehler, back when he was the CEO of Ben Hogan, told me at the time of the Ft Worth irons launch, if you can’t regularly hit the golf ball in a coin-sized area in the middle of the face, there’s not a ton that iron technology can do for you. Now, this is less true now with respect to irons than when he said it, and is less and less true by degrees as the clubs get larger (utilities, fairways, hybrids, drivers), but there remains a great deal of golf equipment truth in that statement. Think about it — which is to say, in TL;DR fashion, get lessons from a qualified instructor who will teach you about the fundamentals of repeatable impact and how the golf swing works, not just offer band-aid fixes. If you can’t repeatably deliver the golf club to the golf ball in something resembling the manner it was designed for, how can you expect to be getting the most out of the club — put another way, the maximum value from your investment?

Similarly, game improvement equipment can only improve your game if you game it. In other words, get fit for the clubs you ought to be playing rather than filling the bag with the ones you wish you could hit or used to be able to hit. Of course, don’t do this if you don’t care about performance and just want to hit a forged blade while playing off an 18 handicap. That’s absolutely fine. There were plenty of members in clubs back in the day playing Hogan Apex or Mizuno MP-32 irons who had no business doing so from a ballstriking standpoint, but they enjoyed their look, feel, and complementary qualities to their Gatsby hats and cashmere sweaters. Do what brings you a measure of joy in this maddening game.

Now, the second issue. This is not a plea for non-conforming equipment; rather, it is a statement of fact. USGA/R&A limits on every facet of golf equipment are detrimental to golf equipment manufacturers. Sure, you know this, but do you think about it as it applies to almost every element of equipment? A 500cc driver would be inherently more forgiving than a 460cc, as one with a COR measurement in excess of 0.83. 50-inch shafts. Box grooves. And on and on.

Would fewer regulations be objectively bad for the game? Would this erode its soul? Fortunately, that’s beside the point of this exercise, which is merely to point out the facts. The fact, in this case, is that equipment restrictions and regulations are the slaughterbench of an abundance of innovation in the golf equipment space. Is this for the best? Well, now I’ve asked the question twice and might as well give a partial response, I guess my answer to that would be, “It depends on what type of golf you’re playing and who you’re playing it with.”

For my part, I don’t mind embarrassing myself with vintage blades and persimmons chasing after the quasi-spiritual elevation of a well-struck shot, but that’s just me. Plenty of folks don’t give a damn if their grooves are conforming. Plenty of folks think the folks in Liberty Corner ought to add a prison to the museum for such offences. And those are just a few of the considerations for the amateur game — which doesn’t get inside the gallery ropes of the pro game…

Different strokes in the game of golf, in my humble opinion.

Anyway, I believe equipment company engineers are genuinely trying to build better equipment year over year. The marketing departments are trying to find ways to make this equipment appeal to the broadest segment of the golf market possible. All of this against (1) the backdrop of — at least for now — firm product cycles. And golfers who, with their ~15 average handicap (men), for the most part, are not striping the golf ball like Tiger in his prime and seem to have less and less time year over year to practice and improve. (2) Regulations that massively restrict what they’re able to do…

That’s the landscape as I see it and the real headwinds for golf equipment companies. No doubt, there’s more I haven’t considered, but I think the previous is a better — and better faith — point of departure when formulating any serious commentary on the golf equipment world than some of the more cynical and conspiratorial takes I hear.

Agree? Disagree? Think I’m worthy of an Adam Hadwin-esque security guard tackle? Let me know in the comments.

@golfoncbs The infamous Adam Hadwin tackle ? #golf #fyp #canada #pgatour #adamhadwin ? Ghibli-style nostalgic waltz – MaSssuguMusic

Continue Reading

Podcasts

Fore Love of Golf: Introducing a new club concept

Published

on

Episode #16 brings us Cliff McKinney. Cliff is the founder of Old Charlie Golf Club, a new club, and concept, to be built in the Florida panhandle. The model is quite interesting and aims to make great, private golf more affordable. We hope you enjoy the show!

Continue Reading

Opinion & Analysis

On Scottie Scheffler wondering ‘What’s the point of winning?’

Published

on

Last week, I came across a reel from BBC Sport on Instagram featuring Scottie Scheffler speaking to the media ahead of The Open at Royal Portrush. In it, he shared that he often wonders what the point is of wanting to win tournaments so badly — especially when he knows, deep down, that it doesn’t lead to a truly fulfilling life.

 

View this post on Instagram

 

A post shared by BBC SPORT (@bbcsport)

“Is it great to be able to win tournaments and to accomplish the things I have in the game of golf? Yeah, it brings tears to my eyes just to think about it because I’ve literally worked my entire life to be good at this sport,” Scheffler said. “To have that kind of sense of accomplishment, I think, is a pretty cool feeling. To get to live out your dreams is very special, but at the end of the day, I’m not out here to inspire the next generation of golfers. I’m not out here to inspire someone to be the best player in the world, because what’s the point?”

Ironically — or perhaps perfectly — he went on to win the claret jug.

That question — what’s the point of winning? — cuts straight to the heart of the human journey.

As someone who’s spent over two decades in the trenches of professional golf, and in deep study of the mental, emotional, and spiritual dimensions of the game, I see Scottie’s inner conflict as a sign of soul evolution in motion.

I came to golf late. I wasn’t a junior standout or college All-American. At 27, I left a steady corporate job to see if I could be on the PGA Tour starting as a 14-handicap, average-length hitter. Over the years, my journey has been defined less by trophies and more by the relentless effort to navigate the deeply inequitable and gated system of professional golf — an effort that ultimately turned inward and helped me evolve as both a golfer and a person.

One perspective that helped me make sense of this inner dissonance around competition and our culture’s tendency to overvalue winning is the idea of soul evolution.

The University of Virginia’s Division of Perceptual Studies has done extensive research on reincarnation, and Netflix’s Surviving Death (Episode 6) explores the topic, too. Whether you take it literally or metaphorically, the idea that we’re on a long arc of growth — from beginner to sage elder — offers a profound perspective.

If you accept the premise literally, then terms like “young soul” and “old soul” start to hold meaning. However, even if we set the word “soul” aside, it’s easy to see that different levels of life experience produce different worldviews.

Newer souls — or people in earlier stages of their development — may be curious and kind but still lack discernment or depth. There is a naivety, and they don’t yet question as deeply, tending to see things in black and white, partly because certainty feels safer than confronting the unknown.

As we gain more experience, we begin to experiment. We test limits. We chase extreme external goals — sometimes at the expense of health, relationships, or inner peace — still operating from hunger, ambition, and the fragility of the ego.

It’s a necessary stage, but often a turbulent and unfulfilling one.

David Duval fell off the map after reaching World No. 1. Bubba Watson had his own “Is this it?” moment with his caddie, Ted Scott, after winning the Masters.

In Aaron Rodgers: Enigma, reflecting on his 2011 Super Bowl win, Rodgers said:

“Now I’ve accomplished the only thing that I really, really wanted to do in my life. Now what? I was like, ‘Did I aim at the wrong thing? Did I spend too much time thinking about stuff that ultimately doesn’t give you true happiness?’”

Jim Carrey once said, “I think everybody should get rich and famous and do everything they ever dreamed of so they can see that it’s not the answer.”

Eventually, though, something shifts.

We begin to see in shades of gray. Winning, dominating, accumulating—these pursuits lose their shine. The rewards feel more fleeting. Living in a constant state of fight-or-flight makes us feel alive, yes, but not happy and joyful.

Compassion begins to replace ambition. Love, presence, and gratitude become more fulfilling than status, profits, or trophies. We crave balance over burnout. Collaboration over competition. Meaning over metrics.

Interestingly, if we zoom out, we can apply this same model to nations and cultures. Countries, like people, have a collective “soul stage” made up of the individuals within them.

Take the United States, for example. I’d place it as a mid-level soul: highly competitive and deeply driven, but still learning emotional maturity. Still uncomfortable with nuance. Still believing that more is always better. Despite its global wins, the U.S. currently ranks just 23rd in happiness (as of 2025). You might liken it to a gifted teenager—bold, eager, and ambitious, but angsty and still figuring out how to live well and in balance. As much as a parent wants to protect their child, sometimes the child has to make their own mistakes to truly grow.

So when Scottie Scheffler wonders what the point of winning is, I don’t see someone losing strength.

I see someone evolving.

He’s beginning to look beyond the leaderboard. Beyond metrics of success that carry a lower vibration. And yet, in a poetic twist, Scheffler did go on to win The Open. But that only reinforces the point: even at the pinnacle, the question remains. And if more of us in the golf and sports world — and in U.S. culture at large — started asking similar questions, we might discover that the more meaningful trophy isn’t about accumulating or beating others at all costs.

It’s about awakening and evolving to something more than winning could ever promise.

Continue Reading

WITB

Facebook

Trending