SLAC with strong ED numbers that aren't 35% athletes

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So, if you really want to game this out, figure out how many varsity athletes are at each school (there’s a government website that has this info, but many schools have it on their websites), divide by four, and then subtract that number from the number of ED admissions.

OK, found the site: https://ope.ed.gov/athletics/#/institution/detail

I looked up Williams, which has 745 varsity athletes total, meaning ~180 freshman. Not all will be admitted ED1, but the vast majority will. Williams admits ~250 ED. So, the math there is bad! Bowdoin has about 165 freshman varsity athletes and about 280 ED admissions. Slightly better! Wesleyan (which is bigger than most other LACs) has ~185 freshman athletes but about 450 ED admissions.

It’s really not quite that bad bc at William’s quite a few kids play 2 sports (track and track or winter & spring track or all 3, or field hockey & lacrosse, etc)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So, if you really want to game this out, figure out how many varsity athletes are at each school (there’s a government website that has this info, but many schools have it on their websites), divide by four, and then subtract that number from the number of ED admissions.

OK, found the site: https://ope.ed.gov/athletics/#/institution/detail

I looked up Williams, which has 745 varsity athletes total, meaning ~180 freshman. Not all will be admitted ED1, but the vast majority will. Williams admits ~250 ED. So, the math there is bad! Bowdoin has about 165 freshman varsity athletes and about 280 ED admissions. Slightly better! Wesleyan (which is bigger than most other LACs) has ~185 freshman athletes but about 450 ED admissions.

It’s really not quite that bad bc at William’s quite a few kids play 2 sports (track and track or winter & spring track or all 3, or field hockey & lacrosse, etc)

as you can see on the OPE.ed site, this is accounted for. duplicated and unduplicated.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So, if you really want to game this out, figure out how many varsity athletes are at each school (there’s a government website that has this info, but many schools have it on their websites), divide by four, and then subtract that number from the number of ED admissions.

OK, found the site: https://ope.ed.gov/athletics/#/institution/detail

I looked up Williams, which has 745 varsity athletes total, meaning ~180 freshman. Not all will be admitted ED1, but the vast majority will. Williams admits ~250 ED. So, the math there is bad! Bowdoin has about 165 freshman varsity athletes and about 280 ED admissions. Slightly better! Wesleyan (which is bigger than most other LACs) has ~185 freshman athletes but about 450 ED admissions.

It’s really not quite that bad bc at William’s quite a few kids play 2 sports (track and track or winter & spring track or all 3, or field hockey & lacrosse, etc)

745 is the unduplicated count. (904 total participants on teams)

[Anonymous]

For no athletes, unhinged antifa protestors, and lots of drug use, hard and soft, go to Reed! Great professors, super-woke and often crazy students, all in a city (Portland, OR) that has the highest drug overdose rate in the nation. What could be better?!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think all the lacs are pretty similar. About 30 pct of the class is gonna be athletes but not all recruited. Yes, a lot of athletes in ED round but still it confers an edge.

With non-stellar transcript, assuming unhooked, Bowdoins of the world will be very difficult. My DC was quite similar. Maybe aim high ED1 if you want but aim lower ED2. We did exactly that and DC is very happy at ED2 school. In retrospect we are very happy DC didn’t land at ED1 school even though it ranks higher, for various reasons.

OP, PP has good advice. Know too many kids who basically pivoted from one peer school to another rather than aiming at a "lower" ED2. It didn't work out for any of them.

[Anonymous]

I know it’s changed (I think harder to get in) but I’m a non-legacy non-recruited athlete who went to Williams. I was admitted ED. Same story for my closest friend from college. We met playing JV field hockey freshman year but otherwise didn’t do organized sports and definitely weren’t recruited. I forget who among my closest friends (a group of about 14 of us - guys and girls) got in early, but most didn’t do a sport (beyond the required PE credits) and I think only 1-2 of the few who played a sport were good enough to have potentially been recruited for their sport. I also married a non-athlete classmate, but he did not apply early.


When I was accepted years ago my guidance counselor did say “what?!?! But you’re not even a legacy or an athlete?” But she also tried to change something on my admission essay because she was convinced it couldn’t be true when it was true, so I didn’t place too much weight in her opinions anyway. It’s possible to do!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So, if you really want to game this out, figure out how many varsity athletes are at each school (there’s a government website that has this info, but many schools have it on their websites), divide by four, and then subtract that number from the number of ED admissions.

Not all varsity athletes at SLACs are recruited. As many as half may be walk-ons.

Yes - I went to Williams. Not only are there many walk ons, there are quite a few kids who are multi-sport athletes.

Is this still true, though? Recruitment today seems like a much, much bigger deal — and the walk-on experience far less common — than it was a generation ago.

[Anonymous]

Sooo many athletes at Williams now

Comparing anything to “our day” is nuts