Athletes have such an edge

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you are talking about all sport like lacrosse or crew or field hockey, these recruits statistically will presumptively be successful in their chosen careers.

They are tiny fraction of the people who are successful in their chosen careers. Tiny. Far more people in this world are successful and did not play those sports. In other words, playing lacrosse is not what makes a person successful.

Not presidents and CEOs.

The only scholar-athlete president tht comes to mind is Gerald Ford. Are there others? Don’t know much about CEOs. I don’t think Musk, Zuckerberg, or @jack played sportball. Please help me out with some household names.

Ford
Reagan
Nixon
Eisenhower
Kennedy
Bush
Carter
Wilson


CEOs

GE Immelt
IBM Palmisano
HP Whitman
Wholefoods Robb
Sunoco Elsenhans
Bank of america Noynihan
Mondelez International Rosenfeld
Comcast Roberts (gold medal)
GM Akerson

(many are women)

There are many articles about this here is one... https://www.cnbc.com/2017/01/11/want-to-be-a-ceo-later-play-sports-now.html

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:They absolutely do. The only kids I know personally who go to Ivys are recruited athletes. (Not in DMV area.)

My boyfriend’s ds is a standout soccer player and going to a school he would never get in otherwise.

I don’t have any judgment about it and probably see it as an overall fine thing because I don’t really believe in entitlement to spots in college.

But there is stigma associated with that on campus. The athletes are viewed as weaker students because they got in because of sports. It worth it to take the admit but just be aware of that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Bunch of stupid idiots. It's all about $$$. Revenue sports bring to the school via sponsors, TV, ads...etc. Schools with good sports teams will get more apps (and up the ranking). Athletics can be dumb as doorknobs but they still bring $.

That's only true for a small minority of programs. Even with revenue sports, most DI football teams lose money. NESAC schools probably have the highest concentration of student athletes (aside from service academies), and I challenge you to find any source of revenue associated with Bowdoin field hockey.

And guess which sports gets the ax when school runs out of money? Answer --> the ones that bring in no revenue. Remember about 10-15 years ago, UMD canceled its swiming team for the same reason?

No NESAC sports bring in any revenue. MD cut sports because their athletic department thought there were Ohio State and spent like it.

Revenue vs alumni donations

Renenue - I don't think so
Alumni donations - very much so

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They absolutely do. The only kids I know personally who go to Ivys are recruited athletes. (Not in DMV area.)

My boyfriend’s ds is a standout soccer player and going to a school he would never get in otherwise.

I don’t have any judgment about it and probably see it as an overall fine thing because I don’t really believe in entitlement to spots in college.

But there is stigma associated with that on campus. The athletes are viewed as weaker students because they got in because of sports. It worth it to take the admit but just be aware of that.

There was a study done and found that all Ivy students in the bottom 50% of the class were struggling to fit in on campus except a few... athletes and artists. So Ivy's specifically started recruiting athletes and artist because somebody has to be in the bottom 50%.

[Anonymous]

Don't know why you are talking about. I just heard this from students I know attending these types of schools...both academic superstars and sports superstars said this.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Bunch of stupid idiots. It's all about $$$. Revenue sports bring to the school via sponsors, TV, ads...etc. Schools with good sports teams will get more apps (and up the ranking). Athletics can be dumb as doorknobs but they still bring $.

That's only true for a small minority of programs. Even with revenue sports, most DI football teams lose money. NESAC schools probably have the highest concentration of student athletes (aside from service academies), and I challenge you to find any source of revenue associated with Bowdoin field hockey.

And guess which sports gets the ax when school runs out of money? Answer --> the ones that bring in no revenue. Remember about 10-15 years ago, UMD canceled its swiming team for the same reason?

No NESAC sports bring in any revenue. MD cut sports because their athletic department thought there were Ohio State and spent like it.

Revenue vs alumni donations

Renenue - I don't think so
Alumni donations - very much so

So your theory is these dumb jocks who have no business being at Williams in the first place will turn into wealthy professionals who will then donate because of their fondness for Williams cross country? Or do you think that wealthy benefactors will be so impressed by Colby's crew team that they will suddenly decide to build a new dorm?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Bunch of stupid idiots. It's all about $$$. Revenue sports bring to the school via sponsors, TV, ads...etc. Schools with good sports teams will get more apps (and up the ranking). Athletics can be dumb as doorknobs but they still bring $.

That's only true for a small minority of programs. Even with revenue sports, most DI football teams lose money. NESAC schools probably have the highest concentration of student athletes (aside from service academies), and I challenge you to find any source of revenue associated with Bowdoin field hockey.

And guess which sports gets the ax when school runs out of money? Answer --> the ones that bring in no revenue. Remember about 10-15 years ago, UMD canceled its swiming team for the same reason?

No NESAC sports bring in any revenue. MD cut sports because their athletic department thought there were Ohio State and spent like it.

Revenue vs alumni donations

Renenue - I don't think so
Alumni donations - very much so

So your theory is these dumb jocks who have no business being at Williams in the first place will turn into wealthy professionals who will then donate because of their fondness for Williams cross country? Or do you think that wealthy benefactors will be so impressed by Colby's crew team that they will suddenly decide to build a new dorm?

NASCAC athletes are not dumb jocks. There are multiple studies posted on this thread that they give more money to the school in the long run.

Their family/friends/alum also give more internships.

Sorry you are on the outside of this social construct but it exists and it is working for colleges.

Besides sports have replaced frats in those colleges so it's their healthy social group.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:To be honest, I would be embarrassed if my kid had to take this route to get into a good college.

Plus, I would worry that he would have time and/or the capability to do well there (i.e., that he might eek through, but fail to actually gain a strong education).

No you wouldn't. You'd be bragging to anyone and everyone. Green eyed monster.

You so don't get people like me, and my circle.

Well thank God for that, who has time for people like your circle of losers?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you are talking about all sport like lacrosse or crew or field hockey, these recruits statistically will presumptively be successful in their chosen careers.

They are tiny fraction of the people who are successful in their chosen careers. Tiny. Far more people in this world are successful and did not play those sports. In other words, playing lacrosse is not what makes a person successful.

Not presidents and CEOs.

The only scholar-athlete president tht comes to mind is Gerald Ford. Are there others? Don’t know much about CEOs. I don’t think Musk, Zuckerberg, or @jack played sportball. Please help me out with some household names.

Ford
Reagan
Nixon
Eisenhower
Kennedy
Bush
Carter
Wilson

Many didn’t start, were on club teams or also did cheerleading like Reagan. I still only count Ford.

CEOs

GE Immelt
IBM Palmisano
HP Whitman
Wholefoods Robb
Sunoco Elsenhans
Bank of america Noynihan
Mondelez International Rosenfeld
Comcast Roberts (gold medal)
GM Akerson

That’s great, but they’re not HH names except for Whitman.


(many are women)

There are many articles about this here is one... https://www.cnbc.com/2017/01/11/want-to-be-a-ceo-later-play-sports-now.html

[Anonymous]

College isn’t just about the life of the mind. We’ve all heard the expression “sound mind, sound body.” Wouldn’t you want your kid to have both in spades? And wouldn’t the soundest bodies correlate to athletic excellence? Even better would be someone who was also a great visual or performing artist. College advisors may talk about the importance of being “pointy,” but at the top schools almost no one is admitted who doesn’t have more than one strength. The only places where athletes are overly advantaged are the ones that make a mockery of the term student-athlete.

[Anonymous]

Fantastic. All you kids aspiring to be president...hit the track and your on your way!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You haven’t figured out that our society values sports over education?

But you can get into a good school with amazing academics and zero athletics, but if you have amazing athletics you still need academics that are far above average.

It's higher EDUCATION...not higher athletics.

Then you don't understand EDUCATION.

I don't give a rats ass if my lawyer or my investment advisor or my doctor can catch a ball. I need their brains...period.

College athlete is still a great proxy for work ethic. There's a reason that they also have an edge when applying to jobs.

This. They can take feedback, work hard, be a teammate, and persevere through adversity. And they have great time management skills, because to get recruited to the best schools they need a strong academic transcript on top of the elite sports skill.

I think it's the time management. Its much easier to have a perfect academic transcript if you have a couple of clubs that take an hour or two a week, but you generally get home before 5:00 and have the entire evening to study and work vs. an athlete who can easily have practice four days a week ranging from an hour to several hours that may be a long drive from home and weekends packed with games and have the expectation of doing strength training, cardio, and skills training outside of practice.

I get that the athlete likes the sport and is good at it and has to manage their time to do it. I have one on that track.

But the kid that wants to use their free time in the pursuit of knowledge and learn to manage time doing that is the one I want for my employee, or advisor or surgeon, etc. But you do you.

One person's pursuit of knowledge is another's gaming. I have yet to see a kid was up at 4:00 am to pursue knowledge every weekday morning before school. I'll take the kid used to priritizing and producing under tight time constraints

If you want a worker bee that can get up and work and do it again everyday then hire the athlete I guess.

But if I need an engineer to make sure the plane won't crash..sorry...i am going with the robotics super nerd every time.

Oh, wow. Such unnecessary, obnoxious, toxic stereotypes. Do you also choose your doctor based on race?

My kid is a Straight-A student enrolled in Project Lead the Way and interested in engineering. He is also a phenomenal basketball player. Not sure where he’ll end up, but I am pretty sure he will make an amazing engineer if he so chooses, despite his interest in sports.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You haven’t figured out that our society values sports over education?

But you can get into a good school with amazing academics and zero athletics, but if you have amazing athletics you still need academics that are far above average.

It's higher EDUCATION...not higher athletics.

Then you don't understand EDUCATION.

I don't give a rats ass if my lawyer or my investment advisor or my doctor can catch a ball. I need their brains...period.

College athlete is still a great proxy for work ethic. There's a reason that they also have an edge when applying to jobs.

This. They can take feedback, work hard, be a teammate, and persevere through adversity. And they have great time management skills, because to get recruited to the best schools they need a strong academic transcript on top of the elite sports skill.

I think it's the time management. Its much easier to have a perfect academic transcript if you have a couple of clubs that take an hour or two a week, but you generally get home before 5:00 and have the entire evening to study and work vs. an athlete who can easily have practice four days a week ranging from an hour to several hours that may be a long drive from home and weekends packed with games and have the expectation of doing strength training, cardio, and skills training outside of practice.

I get that the athlete likes the sport and is good at it and has to manage their time to do it. I have one on that track.

But the kid that wants to use their free time in the pursuit of knowledge and learn to manage time doing that is the one I want for my employee, or advisor or surgeon, etc. But you do you.

One person's pursuit of knowledge is another's gaming. I have yet to see a kid was up at 4:00 am to pursue knowledge every weekday morning before school. I'll take the kid used to priritizing and producing under tight time constraints

If you want a worker bee that can get up and work and do it again everyday then hire the athlete I guess.

But if I need an engineer to make sure the plane won't crash..sorry...i am going with the robotics super nerd every time.

Oh, wow. Such unnecessary, obnoxious, toxic stereotypes. Do you also choose your doctor based on race?

My kid is a Straight-A student enrolled in Project Lead the Way and interested in engineering. He is also a phenomenal basketball player. Not sure where he’ll end up, but I am pretty sure he will make an amazing engineer if he so chooses, despite his interest in sports.

What does race have to do with nerdyness? I don't care about race...I just want a brainiac.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:To be honest, I would be embarrassed if my kid had to take this route to get into a good college.

Plus, I would worry that he would have time and/or the capability to do well there (i.e., that he might eek through, but fail to actually gain a strong education).

No you wouldn't. You'd be bragging to anyone and everyone. Green eyed monster.

You so don't get people like me, and my circle.

Well thank God for that, who has time for people like your circle of losers?

+1. That PP is an utter imbecile. Only children with hyper aggressive and conniving parents consciously take up a sport at age 7 with the explicit goal of advantaging themselves in college admissions. The vast majority have a love for the sport just like musicians have a love for their instrument. If it can help is some small way with college admissions more power to them. By that point in their lives they've clearly demonstrated that they have the requisite tenacity, discipline and focus to achieve success in at least one thing in their lives.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This is our culture. I agree it makes no sense. Really what do sports have to do with pursuit of higher education? I don't think.any other countries play collegiate sports like we do. But you have to accept it as it is just the way it is here.

You must not have played sports yourself. I think maybe you don't realize how much character it builds to play a sport competitively. It builds emotional and physical stamina, teamwork skills, requires incredible commitment, and teaches young people the value of hard work. As a woman, it also helped me develop a deep respect for myself and my body, beyond what it looked like or could do for men. I met people from all over the world and was exposed to dozens of cultures through my sport.

Also, it's not like athletes are 50% of the student body and none deserve to be there. They are a small percentage and they've all worked very hard to get where they are. I'm sorry it wasn't your pathway, but maybe you should realize that being born rich is a much, MUCH greater "edge" than playing a sport.