Why do elite SLACs and Small R1s value athletic recruits

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I was watching another thread where moms were arguing back and forth over athletic recruiting and it seemed like both neither side was talking about what I think is the real question. Why do they place so much value on them? It's not just the top SLACs, (they are very heavy on recruits) but it is the smaller R1s as well. MIT, Chicago, JHU, WashU, Rochester, etc. all recruit a large number of athletes. NYU as well. These[b] schools obviously see great value in athletic recruiting, what are we missing?

Schools don’t want to be overpopulated with quirky, awkward nerds.

It would be a fun experiment to remove athletics from a NESCAC. My bet is the heaven of a pure meritocracy optimized for academic achievement would fail to materialize as students gradually lose interest in the school without athletics. Surely alumni giving would dry up as the team-based bonds that drive donor loyalty disappear. Students would become even more neurotic with the entire student body just focused on grades and clubs, with those becoming the only currencies of status and identity. And the brighter kids with interest beyond academics would ultimately choose to go elsewhere because the school would become a hellscape of misery of those focused on PhD programs.

Did you see the picture of the “big rivalry game” of Williams vs Amherst. I think this idea of sports as community builders is from a different time.

Well, my kid goes to a Big Ten school, and I can assure sports as a community builder is as strong as ever. It's possible Amherst and Williams are already too far gone to be saved.

Yeah, but your Big Ten school has 1) real athletes and 2) fewer athletes than either Williams or Amherst despite having — I don’t know — 15X as many students.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If all this reform talk wasn’t focused on the maybe 40 or so most “elite” schools it might be interesting but it just comes off as more striver prestige whore BS. Sorry your nerd son might have to settle for, dare I say, Emory!

I think the point is that nerd sons are wisely foregoing ED at Williams or Amherst since well over 80% of the slots go to athletes or first gen. They are “settling” for lower Ivies.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If all this reform talk wasn’t focused on the maybe 40 or so most “elite” schools it might be interesting but it just comes off as more striver prestige whore BS. Sorry your nerd son might have to settle for, dare I say, Emory!

I think the point is that nerd sons are wisely foregoing ED at Williams or Amherst since well over 80% of the slots go to athletes or first gen. They are “settling” for lower Ivies.

Ha. Yeah. Ok. All the Ivies are much more competitive admit than either.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If all this reform talk wasn’t focused on the maybe 40 or so most “elite” schools it might be interesting but it just comes off as more striver prestige whore BS. Sorry your nerd son might have to settle for, dare I say, Emory!

I think the point is that nerd sons are wisely foregoing ED at Williams or Amherst since well over 80% of the slots go to athletes or first gen. They are “settling” for lower Ivies.

Who cares? Sorry but I don’t feel any despair that upper middle class kids in Fairfax are choosing to apply to Dartmouth instead of Williams.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If all this reform talk wasn’t focused on the maybe 40 or so most “elite” schools it might be interesting but it just comes off as more striver prestige whore BS. Sorry your nerd son might have to settle for, dare I say, Emory!

I think the point is that nerd sons are wisely foregoing ED at Williams or Amherst since well over 80% of the slots go to athletes or first gen. They are “settling” for lower Ivies.

Who cares? Sorry but I don’t feel any despair that upper middle class kids in Fairfax are choosing to apply to Dartmouth instead of Williams.

Williams should care. The smartest kids a generation or so ago would sometimes go to Williams. Now, the smartest kids do not even apply: these kids are smart enough to know applying ED to Williams is a waste and that they better use their ED card where it might actually help them. Maybe they won’t get into a lower Ivy ED, but the ED application there at least gives a boost. If they are not admitted, they have Chicago, Hopkins, and a host of ED2 options…

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If all this reform talk wasn’t focused on the maybe 40 or so most “elite” schools it might be interesting but it just comes off as more striver prestige whore BS. Sorry your nerd son might have to settle for, dare I say, Emory!

I think the point is that nerd sons are wisely foregoing ED at Williams or Amherst since well over 80% of the slots go to athletes or first gen. They are “settling” for lower Ivies.

Ha. Yeah. Ok. All the Ivies are much more competitive admit than either.

Not in the ED round for an unhooked kid; not even close.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If all this reform talk wasn’t focused on the maybe 40 or so most “elite” schools it might be interesting but it just comes off as more striver prestige whore BS. Sorry your nerd son might have to settle for, dare I say, Emory!

I think the point is that nerd sons are wisely foregoing ED at Williams or Amherst since well over 80% of the slots go to athletes or first gen. They are “settling” for lower Ivies.

Who cares? Sorry but I don’t feel any despair that upper middle class kids in Fairfax are choosing to apply to Dartmouth instead of Williams.

Williams should care. The smartest kids a generation or so ago would sometimes go to Williams. Now, the smartest kids do not even apply: these kids are smart enough to know applying ED to Williams is a waste and that they better use their ED card where it might actually help them. Maybe they won’t get into a lower Ivy ED, but the ED application there at least gives a boost. If they are not admitted, they have Chicago, Hopkins, and a host of ED2 options…

How to say that I am clueless without saying that I am clueless.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If all this reform talk wasn’t focused on the maybe 40 or so most “elite” schools it might be interesting but it just comes off as more striver prestige whore BS. Sorry your nerd son might have to settle for, dare I say, Emory!

I think the point is that nerd sons are wisely foregoing ED at Williams or Amherst since well over 80% of the slots go to athletes or first gen. They are “settling” for lower Ivies.

Who cares? Sorry but I don’t feel any despair that upper middle class kids in Fairfax are choosing to apply to Dartmouth instead of Williams.

Williams should care. The smartest kids a generation or so ago would sometimes go to Williams. Now, the smartest kids do not even apply: these kids are smart enough to know applying ED to Williams is a waste and that they better use their ED card where it might actually help them. Maybe they won’t get into a lower Ivy ED, but the ED application there at least gives a boost. If they are not admitted, they have Chicago, Hopkins, and a host of ED2 options…

How to say that I am clueless without saying that I am clueless.

You did not just say what you think you said. Priceless.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If all this reform talk wasn’t focused on the maybe 40 or so most “elite” schools it might be interesting but it just comes off as more striver prestige whore BS. Sorry your nerd son might have to settle for, dare I say, Emory!

I think the point is that nerd sons are wisely foregoing ED at Williams or Amherst since well over 80% of the slots go to athletes or first gen. They are “settling” for lower Ivies.

Who cares? Sorry but I don’t feel any despair that upper middle class kids in Fairfax are choosing to apply to Dartmouth instead of Williams.

Williams should care. The smartest kids a generation or so ago would sometimes go to Williams. Now, the smartest kids do not even apply: these kids are smart enough to know applying ED to Williams is a waste and that they better use their ED card where it might actually help them. Maybe they won’t get into a lower Ivy ED, but the ED application there at least gives a boost. If they are not admitted, they have Chicago, Hopkins, and a host of ED2 options…

I think you might need help. The concern over athletes and first gen is unhealthy. We know the game for you is prestige, but your kids is going be fine without Williams or Amherst. My bet is your kid is thinking about distance from you more than college ranking.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If all this reform talk wasn’t focused on the maybe 40 or so most “elite” schools it might be interesting but it just comes off as more striver prestige whore BS. Sorry your nerd son might have to settle for, dare I say, Emory!

I think the point is that nerd sons are wisely foregoing ED at Williams or Amherst since well over 80% of the slots go to athletes or first gen. They are “settling” for lower Ivies.

Who cares? Sorry but I don’t feel any despair that upper middle class kids in Fairfax are choosing to apply to Dartmouth instead of Williams.

Williams should care. The smartest kids a generation or so ago would sometimes go to Williams. Now, the smartest kids do not even apply: these kids are smart enough to know applying ED to Williams is a waste and that they better use their ED card where it might actually help them. Maybe they won’t get into a lower Ivy ED, but the ED application there at least gives a boost. If they are not admitted, they have Chicago, Hopkins, and a host of ED2 options…

I think you might need help. The concern over athletes and first gen is unhealthy. We know the game for you is prestige, but your kids is going be fine without Williams or Amherst. My bet is your kid is thinking about distance from you more than college ranking.

This is about college admissions. It is unhealthy for applicants to apply to schools where ED is a disadvantage. Glad that you so value getting this crucial information for applicants out there.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If all this reform talk wasn’t focused on the maybe 40 or so most “elite” schools it might be interesting but it just comes off as more striver prestige whore BS. Sorry your nerd son might have to settle for, dare I say, Emory!

I think the point is that nerd sons are wisely foregoing ED at Williams or Amherst since well over 80% of the slots go to athletes or first gen. They are “settling” for lower Ivies.

Who cares? Sorry but I don’t feel any despair that upper middle class kids in Fairfax are choosing to apply to Dartmouth instead of Williams.

Williams should care. The smartest kids a generation or so ago would sometimes go to Williams. Now, the smartest kids do not even apply: these kids are smart enough to know applying ED to Williams is a waste and that they better use their ED card where it might actually help them. Maybe they won’t get into a lower Ivy ED, but the ED application there at least gives a boost. If they are not admitted, they have Chicago, Hopkins, and a host of ED2 options…

Very curious if it really was different a generation ago. I have a senior applying to LACs this year, mostly NESCACs and few others a notch down. Not an athlete, just a typical high stats kid with leadership ECs. It will be interesting to see what happens. Test scores etc are at or above the median at all these schools, but realize they are all still a crapshoot.

Haven’t these schools always had the same size rosters as today and so presumably athletics have always been prioritized?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If all this reform talk wasn’t focused on the maybe 40 or so most “elite” schools it might be interesting but it just comes off as more striver prestige whore BS. Sorry your nerd son might have to settle for, dare I say, Emory!

I think the point is that nerd sons are wisely foregoing ED at Williams or Amherst since well over 80% of the slots go to athletes or first gen. They are “settling” for lower Ivies.

Ha. Yeah. Ok. All the Ivies are much more competitive admit than either.

There are far more not really competitive striver applications at all of the Ivies. Once those are backed out you will find that you are wrong. Very wrong.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If all this reform talk wasn’t focused on the maybe 40 or so most “elite” schools it might be interesting but it just comes off as more striver prestige whore BS. Sorry your nerd son might have to settle for, dare I say, Emory!

I think the point is that nerd sons are wisely foregoing ED at Williams or Amherst since well over 80% of the slots go to athletes or first gen. They are “settling” for lower Ivies.

Who cares? Sorry but I don’t feel any despair that upper middle class kids in Fairfax are choosing to apply to Dartmouth instead of Williams.

Williams should care. The smartest kids a generation or so ago would sometimes go to Williams. Now, the smartest kids do not even apply: these kids are smart enough to know applying ED to Williams is a waste and that they better use their ED card where it might actually help them. Maybe they won’t get into a lower Ivy ED, but the ED application there at least gives a boost. If they are not admitted, they have Chicago, Hopkins, and a host of ED2 options…

Very curious if it really was different a generation ago. I have a senior applying to LACs this year, mostly NESCACs and few others a notch down. Not an athlete, just a typical high stats kid with leadership ECs. It will be interesting to see what happens. Test scores etc are at or above the median at all these schools, but realize they are all still a crapshoot.

Haven’t these schools always had the same size rosters as today and so presumably athletics have always been prioritized?

The numbers are there; this was different even 10 years ago. ED being a disadvantage is a recent phenomenon — maybe 5 years ago — because a threshold was reached due to the heightened competitiveness of admissions generally (while the number of athletes stayed the same). It’s a feedback loop that is only beginning. (It does not apply to schools like Midd, where ED is still an advantage because 70% of the class is filled ED.)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If all this reform talk wasn’t focused on the maybe 40 or so most “elite” schools it might be interesting but it just comes off as more striver prestige whore BS. Sorry your nerd son might have to settle for, dare I say, Emory!

I think the point is that nerd sons are wisely foregoing ED at Williams or Amherst since well over 80% of the slots go to athletes or first gen. They are “settling” for lower Ivies.

Who cares? Sorry but I don’t feel any despair that upper middle class kids in Fairfax are choosing to apply to Dartmouth instead of Williams.

Williams should care. The smartest kids a generation or so ago would sometimes go to Williams. Now, the smartest kids do not even apply: these kids are smart enough to know applying ED to Williams is a waste and that they better use their ED card where it might actually help them. Maybe they won’t get into a lower Ivy ED, but the ED application there at least gives a boost. If they are not admitted, they have Chicago, Hopkins, and a host of ED2 options…

Very curious if it really was different a generation ago. I have a senior applying to LACs this year, mostly NESCACs and few others a notch down. Not an athlete, just a typical high stats kid with leadership ECs. It will be interesting to see what happens. Test scores etc are at or above the median at all these schools, but realize they are all still a crapshoot.

Haven’t these schools always had the same size rosters as today and so presumably athletics have always been prioritized?

Yes, athletics have long been prioritized. Some of the rosters are a bit larger today and some are a bit smaller because of fewer walk on players. Overall you are right it is about the same as it has always been.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If all this reform talk wasn’t focused on the maybe 40 or so most “elite” schools it might be interesting but it just comes off as more striver prestige whore BS. Sorry your nerd son might have to settle for, dare I say, Emory!

I think the point is that nerd sons are wisely foregoing ED at Williams or Amherst since well over 80% of the slots go to athletes or first gen. They are “settling” for lower Ivies.

Who cares? Sorry but I don’t feel any despair that upper middle class kids in Fairfax are choosing to apply to Dartmouth instead of Williams.

Williams should care. The smartest kids a generation or so ago would sometimes go to Williams. Now, the smartest kids do not even apply: these kids are smart enough to know applying ED to Williams is a waste and that they better use their ED card where it might actually help them. Maybe they won’t get into a lower Ivy ED, but the ED application there at least gives a boost. If they are not admitted, they have Chicago, Hopkins, and a host of ED2 options…

Seems like their kids are plenty smart with top fellowships and top grad school outcomes.