What’s the real deal with athletic recruiting?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^ I realize that for the UMC socially striving coastal set on dcum these schools might be the ultimate goal for their dcs, but let’s be honest, they’re just not a huge focus for your average talented high school athlete

+1

I’m struggling to even follow this thread at this point. I honestly didn’t know MIT even had any serious athletic programs, but for serious athletes, who cares?

I have no skin in on the game on MIT, but I would say this. My kid plays Ivy football, but when he was in the recruiting process, received an offer of admission support at MIT. He knew many other players that had also received offers of admission support at MIT. These were very good players, many of whom had offers of admission support at NESCAC schools like Williams, Amherst. Johns Hopkins was frequently in the mix as well. Obviously, none of these schools are playing SEC level football. But the point is if you think that there are no "serious athletes" at MIT, then you should also extend that perspective to D3 more generally (which of course you are entitled to do depending on your own definition).

Bottom line is that there is not small group of talented athletes our there that also bring to bear impressive objective academic performance (for example, 1600 single sitting SAT scores). It might be an inconvenient fact for those that want to believe that the Venn overlap of athleticism and intelligence is a null set. The reality is that they are out there.

I suspect you are getting triggered because you don’t understand the difference between a serious athlete and a good or talented athlete. By “serious athlete” I mean kids who want to make a career out of athletics. Kids who have a realistic dream of playing their sport professionally, for example. “Serious” =/= “talented” necessarily. I’m sure there are many talented athletes that would love to keep playing while studying for their primary goal of being a doctor or an engineer.

And I and many other parents of “serious” athletes are arguing exactly the same as your last statement, but from the other perspective. Our kids who prioritize sports above anything else in life are not dumb, as some other PP insisted. We know athletes can be smart - but a serious athlete prioritizes athletics and a serious student prioritizes academics.

So, this is 1% of all D1 athletes, though baseball is different because there is a more extensive professional system with the minor leagues (where of course they get paid absolute peanuts).

However, I am sorry...the median SAT of professional football, baseball and basketball players (if they even took it) is low. Probably around 1100 (it's 1070 for NFL players). I would wager that less than 0.1% of all professional athletes scored a 1500+.

Now, they were probably smart to go 200% in their sport, because their academic chops weren't going to produce much.

DP. OMG, you sound awful. Seriously.
What is wrong with you??

Nothing wrong with me. It's just weird how folks can't just admit that most professional athletes were never good students. For every John Urschel or Myron Rolle, there are 1000 sports management majors with 2.5 GPAs.

Guess what...most famous musicians and actors also weren't great students, with a large percentage never attending college.

This really isn't news.

I agree with this 100% ...look at the roster websites. Lots of communication and digital media majors.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The real deal is as crazy as you think. If they - any school - any division - wants you - they will get you in. And you will get money.

You clearly have no real idea what you're talking about, because that's simply not how it works. If you're playing football for Alabama, sure. If you're a squash player looking at Princeton, no.

Your example is extreme and not relevant.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^ I realize that for the UMC socially striving coastal set on dcum these schools might be the ultimate goal for their dcs, but let’s be honest, they’re just not a huge focus for your average talented high school athlete

+1

I’m struggling to even follow this thread at this point. I honestly didn’t know MIT even had any serious athletic programs, but for serious athletes, who cares?

I have no skin in on the game on MIT, but I would say this. My kid plays Ivy football, but when he was in the recruiting process, received an offer of admission support at MIT. He knew many other players that had also received offers of admission support at MIT. These were very good players, many of whom had offers of admission support at NESCAC schools like Williams, Amherst. Johns Hopkins was frequently in the mix as well. Obviously, none of these schools are playing SEC level football. But the point is if you think that there are no "serious athletes" at MIT, then you should also extend that perspective to D3 more generally (which of course you are entitled to do depending on your own definition).

Bottom line is that there is not small group of talented athletes our there that also bring to bear impressive objective academic performance (for example, 1600 single sitting SAT scores). It might be an inconvenient fact for those that want to believe that the Venn overlap of athleticism and intelligence is a null set. The reality is that they are out there.

I suspect you are getting triggered because you don’t understand the difference between a serious athlete and a good or talented athlete. By “serious athlete” I mean kids who want to make a career out of athletics. Kids who have a realistic dream of playing their sport professionally, for example. “Serious” =/= “talented” necessarily. I’m sure there are many talented athletes that would love to keep playing while studying for their primary goal of being a doctor or an engineer.

And I and many other parents of “serious” athletes are arguing exactly the same as your last statement, but from the other perspective. Our kids who prioritize sports above anything else in life are not dumb, as some other PP insisted. We know athletes can be smart - but a serious athlete prioritizes athletics and a serious student prioritizes academics.

So, this is 1% of all D1 athletes, though baseball is different because there is a more extensive professional system with the minor leagues (where of course they get paid absolute peanuts).

However, I am sorry...the median SAT of professional football, baseball and basketball players (if they even took it) is low. Probably around 1100 (it's 1070 for NFL players). I would wager that less than 0.1% of all professional athletes scored a 1500+.

Now, they were probably smart to go 200% in their sport, because their academic chops weren't going to produce much.

DP. OMG, you sound awful. Seriously.
What is wrong with you??

Nothing wrong with me. It's just weird how folks can't just admit that most professional athletes were never good students. For every John Urschel or Myron Rolle, there are 1000 sports management majors with 2.5 GPAs.

Guess what...most famous musicians and actors also weren't great students, with a large percentage never attending college.

This really isn't news.

Just admit that for you, and people like you, the focus on HS sports (especially for UMC sports like crew and lacrosse- with private lessons etc) is primarily to get your dc into an ‘elite’ college to be around other elites. It’s not particularly about the sport, and you really can’t imagine a different reality. Some of us can.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^ I realize that for the UMC socially striving coastal set on dcum these schools might be the ultimate goal for their dcs, but let’s be honest, they’re just not a huge focus for your average talented high school athlete

+1

I’m struggling to even follow this thread at this point. I honestly didn’t know MIT even had any serious athletic programs, but for serious athletes, who cares?

I have no skin in on the game on MIT, but I would say this. My kid plays Ivy football, but when he was in the recruiting process, received an offer of admission support at MIT. He knew many other players that had also received offers of admission support at MIT. These were very good players, many of whom had offers of admission support at NESCAC schools like Williams, Amherst. Johns Hopkins was frequently in the mix as well. Obviously, none of these schools are playing SEC level football. But the point is if you think that there are no "serious athletes" at MIT, then you should also extend that perspective to D3 more generally (which of course you are entitled to do depending on your own definition).

Bottom line is that there is not small group of talented athletes our there that also bring to bear impressive objective academic performance (for example, 1600 single sitting SAT scores). It might be an inconvenient fact for those that want to believe that the Venn overlap of athleticism and intelligence is a null set. The reality is that they are out there.

I suspect you are getting triggered because you don’t understand the difference between a serious athlete and a good or talented athlete. By “serious athlete” I mean kids who want to make a career out of athletics. Kids who have a realistic dream of playing their sport professionally, for example. “Serious” =/= “talented” necessarily. I’m sure there are many talented athletes that would love to keep playing while studying for their primary goal of being a doctor or an engineer.

And I and many other parents of “serious” athletes are arguing exactly the same as your last statement, but from the other perspective. Our kids who prioritize sports above anything else in life are not dumb, as some other PP insisted. We know athletes can be smart - but a serious athlete prioritizes athletics and a serious student prioritizes academics.

So, this is 1% of all D1 athletes, though baseball is different because there is a more extensive professional system with the minor leagues (where of course they get paid absolute peanuts).

However, I am sorry...the median SAT of professional football, baseball and basketball players (if they even took it) is low. Probably around 1100 (it's 1070 for NFL players). I would wager that less than 0.1% of all professional athletes scored a 1500+.

Now, they were probably smart to go 200% in their sport, because their academic chops weren't going to produce much.

DP. OMG, you sound awful. Seriously.
What is wrong with you??

Nothing wrong with me. It's just weird how folks can't just admit that most professional athletes were never good students. For every John Urschel or Myron Rolle, there are 1000 sports management majors with 2.5 GPAs.

Guess what...most famous musicians and actors also weren't great students, with a large percentage never attending college.

This really isn't news.

I agree with this 100% ...look at the roster websites. Lots of communication and digital media majors.

Not sure if you realize how much these sorts of comments say about you and your values.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^ I realize that for the UMC socially striving coastal set on dcum these schools might be the ultimate goal for their dcs, but let’s be honest, they’re just not a huge focus for your average talented high school athlete

+1

I’m struggling to even follow this thread at this point. I honestly didn’t know MIT even had any serious athletic programs, but for serious athletes, who cares?

I have no skin in on the game on MIT, but I would say this. My kid plays Ivy football, but when he was in the recruiting process, received an offer of admission support at MIT. He knew many other players that had also received offers of admission support at MIT. These were very good players, many of whom had offers of admission support at NESCAC schools like Williams, Amherst. Johns Hopkins was frequently in the mix as well. Obviously, none of these schools are playing SEC level football. But the point is if you think that there are no "serious athletes" at MIT, then you should also extend that perspective to D3 more generally (which of course you are entitled to do depending on your own definition).

Bottom line is that there is not small group of talented athletes our there that also bring to bear impressive objective academic performance (for example, 1600 single sitting SAT scores). It might be an inconvenient fact for those that want to believe that the Venn overlap of athleticism and intelligence is a null set. The reality is that they are out there.

I suspect you are getting triggered because you don’t understand the difference between a serious athlete and a good or talented athlete. By “serious athlete” I mean kids who want to make a career out of athletics. Kids who have a realistic dream of playing their sport professionally, for example. “Serious” =/= “talented” necessarily. I’m sure there are many talented athletes that would love to keep playing while studying for their primary goal of being a doctor or an engineer.

And I and many other parents of “serious” athletes are arguing exactly the same as your last statement, but from the other perspective. Our kids who prioritize sports above anything else in life are not dumb, as some other PP insisted. We know athletes can be smart - but a serious athlete prioritizes athletics and a serious student prioritizes academics.

So, this is 1% of all D1 athletes, though baseball is different because there is a more extensive professional system with the minor leagues (where of course they get paid absolute peanuts).

However, I am sorry...the median SAT of professional football, baseball and basketball players (if they even took it) is low. Probably around 1100 (it's 1070 for NFL players). I would wager that less than 0.1% of all professional athletes scored a 1500+.

Now, they were probably smart to go 200% in their sport, because their academic chops weren't going to produce much.

DP. OMG, you sound awful. Seriously.
What is wrong with you??

Nothing wrong with me. It's just weird how folks can't just admit that most professional athletes were never good students. For every John Urschel or Myron Rolle, there are 1000 sports management majors with 2.5 GPAs.

Guess what...most famous musicians and actors also weren't great students, with a large percentage never attending college.

This really isn't news.

Just admit that for you, and people like you, the focus on HS sports (especially for UMC sports like crew and lacrosse- with private lessons etc) is primarily to get your dc into an ‘elite’ college to be around other elites. It’s not particularly about the sport, and you really can’t imagine a different reality. Some of us can.

Truth bombs hurt

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^ I realize that for the UMC socially striving coastal set on dcum these schools might be the ultimate goal for their dcs, but let’s be honest, they’re just not a huge focus for your average talented high school athlete

+1

I’m struggling to even follow this thread at this point. I honestly didn’t know MIT even had any serious athletic programs, but for serious athletes, who cares?

I have no skin in on the game on MIT, but I would say this. My kid plays Ivy football, but when he was in the recruiting process, received an offer of admission support at MIT. He knew many other players that had also received offers of admission support at MIT. These were very good players, many of whom had offers of admission support at NESCAC schools like Williams, Amherst. Johns Hopkins was frequently in the mix as well. Obviously, none of these schools are playing SEC level football. But the point is if you think that there are no "serious athletes" at MIT, then you should also extend that perspective to D3 more generally (which of course you are entitled to do depending on your own definition).

Bottom line is that there is not small group of talented athletes our there that also bring to bear impressive objective academic performance (for example, 1600 single sitting SAT scores). It might be an inconvenient fact for those that want to believe that the Venn overlap of athleticism and intelligence is a null set. The reality is that they are out there.

I suspect you are getting triggered because you don’t understand the difference between a serious athlete and a good or talented athlete. By “serious athlete” I mean kids who want to make a career out of athletics. Kids who have a realistic dream of playing their sport professionally, for example. “Serious” =/= “talented” necessarily. I’m sure there are many talented athletes that would love to keep playing while studying for their primary goal of being a doctor or an engineer.

And I and many other parents of “serious” athletes are arguing exactly the same as your last statement, but from the other perspective. Our kids who prioritize sports above anything else in life are not dumb, as some other PP insisted. We know athletes can be smart - but a serious athlete prioritizes athletics and a serious student prioritizes academics.

Got it, "serious athlete" for you means they are going to play professionally? So, by that definition, if a particular sport doesn't have a professional analogue, the participants are all "non serious"? Let me know how the NFL draft goes for your kid, I will eagerly await the results.

Pp. I think most of us can figure out what she means. Eg, a kid who is really driven and focused on their sport, wherever that may lead them. Not just a kid who is pretty good and likes to play, found it was fun socially in high school, and who wouldn’t mind doing it while studying to be an engineer or whatever.

This. Thank you. Some of these posters are being deliberately obtuse, I think.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^ I realize that for the UMC socially striving coastal set on dcum these schools might be the ultimate goal for their dcs, but let’s be honest, they’re just not a huge focus for your average talented high school athlete

+1

I’m struggling to even follow this thread at this point. I honestly didn’t know MIT even had any serious athletic programs, but for serious athletes, who cares?

I have no skin in on the game on MIT, but I would say this. My kid plays Ivy football, but when he was in the recruiting process, received an offer of admission support at MIT. He knew many other players that had also received offers of admission support at MIT. These were very good players, many of whom had offers of admission support at NESCAC schools like Williams, Amherst. Johns Hopkins was frequently in the mix as well. Obviously, none of these schools are playing SEC level football. But the point is if you think that there are no "serious athletes" at MIT, then you should also extend that perspective to D3 more generally (which of course you are entitled to do depending on your own definition).

Bottom line is that there is not small group of talented athletes our there that also bring to bear impressive objective academic performance (for example, 1600 single sitting SAT scores). It might be an inconvenient fact for those that want to believe that the Venn overlap of athleticism and intelligence is a null set. The reality is that they are out there.

I suspect you are getting triggered because you don’t understand the difference between a serious athlete and a good or talented athlete. By “serious athlete” I mean kids who want to make a career out of athletics. Kids who have a realistic dream of playing their sport professionally, for example. “Serious” =/= “talented” necessarily. I’m sure there are many talented athletes that would love to keep playing while studying for their primary goal of being a doctor or an engineer.

And I and many other parents of “serious” athletes are arguing exactly the same as your last statement, but from the other perspective. Our kids who prioritize sports above anything else in life are not dumb, as some other PP insisted. We know athletes can be smart - but a serious athlete prioritizes athletics and a serious student prioritizes academics.

So, this is 1% of all D1 athletes, though baseball is different because there is a more extensive professional system with the minor leagues (where of course they get paid absolute peanuts).

However, I am sorry...the median SAT of professional football, baseball and basketball players (if they even took it) is low. Probably around 1100 (it's 1070 for NFL players). I would wager that less than 0.1% of all professional athletes scored a 1500+.

Now, they were probably smart to go 200% in their sport, because their academic chops weren't going to produce much.

DP. OMG, you sound awful. Seriously.
What is wrong with you??

Nothing wrong with me. It's just weird how folks can't just admit that most professional athletes were never good students. For every John Urschel or Myron Rolle, there are 1000 sports management majors with 2.5 GPAs.

Guess what...most famous musicians and actors also weren't great students, with a large percentage never attending college.

This really isn't news.

What are you talking about? We’re *literally* “admitting” that many athletes are not good students. The disconnect is that not being a good student doesn’t necessarily mean that one is not intelligent.

I suspect you were a “good student” who needed private tutors and multiple tests to achieve your “elite” results, because you can’t seem to grasp this very simple concept even when you are basically being spoon fed…

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^ I realize that for the UMC socially striving coastal set on dcum these schools might be the ultimate goal for their dcs, but let’s be honest, they’re just not a huge focus for your average talented high school athlete

+1

I’m struggling to even follow this thread at this point. I honestly didn’t know MIT even had any serious athletic programs, but for serious athletes, who cares?

I have no skin in on the game on MIT, but I would say this. My kid plays Ivy football, but when he was in the recruiting process, received an offer of admission support at MIT. He knew many other players that had also received offers of admission support at MIT. These were very good players, many of whom had offers of admission support at NESCAC schools like Williams, Amherst. Johns Hopkins was frequently in the mix as well. Obviously, none of these schools are playing SEC level football. But the point is if you think that there are no "serious athletes" at MIT, then you should also extend that perspective to D3 more generally (which of course you are entitled to do depending on your own definition).

Bottom line is that there is not small group of talented athletes our there that also bring to bear impressive objective academic performance (for example, 1600 single sitting SAT scores). It might be an inconvenient fact for those that want to believe that the Venn overlap of athleticism and intelligence is a null set. The reality is that they are out there.

I suspect you are getting triggered because you don’t understand the difference between a serious athlete and a good or talented athlete. By “serious athlete” I mean kids who want to make a career out of athletics. Kids who have a realistic dream of playing their sport professionally, for example. “Serious” =/= “talented” necessarily. I’m sure there are many talented athletes that would love to keep playing while studying for their primary goal of being a doctor or an engineer.

And I and many other parents of “serious” athletes are arguing exactly the same as your last statement, but from the other perspective. Our kids who prioritize sports above anything else in life are not dumb, as some other PP insisted. We know athletes can be smart - but a serious athlete prioritizes athletics and a serious student prioritizes academics.

Got it, "serious athlete" for you means they are going to play professionally? So, by that definition, if a particular sport doesn't have a professional analogue, the participants are all "non serious"? Let me know how the NFL draft goes for your kid, I will eagerly await the results.

Oh, and by the way: Yes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^ I realize that for the UMC socially striving coastal set on dcum these schools might be the ultimate goal for their dcs, but let’s be honest, they’re just not a huge focus for your average talented high school athlete

+1

I’m struggling to even follow this thread at this point. I honestly didn’t know MIT even had any serious athletic programs, but for serious athletes, who cares?

I have no skin in on the game on MIT, but I would say this. My kid plays Ivy football, but when he was in the recruiting process, received an offer of admission support at MIT. He knew many other players that had also received offers of admission support at MIT. These were very good players, many of whom had offers of admission support at NESCAC schools like Williams, Amherst. Johns Hopkins was frequently in the mix as well. Obviously, none of these schools are playing SEC level football. But the point is if you think that there are no "serious athletes" at MIT, then you should also extend that perspective to D3 more generally (which of course you are entitled to do depending on your own definition).

Bottom line is that there is not small group of talented athletes our there that also bring to bear impressive objective academic performance (for example, 1600 single sitting SAT scores). It might be an inconvenient fact for those that want to believe that the Venn overlap of athleticism and intelligence is a null set. The reality is that they are out there.

I suspect you are getting triggered because you don’t understand the difference between a serious athlete and a good or talented athlete. By “serious athlete” I mean kids who want to make a career out of athletics. Kids who have a realistic dream of playing their sport professionally, for example. “Serious” =/= “talented” necessarily. I’m sure there are many talented athletes that would love to keep playing while studying for their primary goal of being a doctor or an engineer.

And I and many other parents of “serious” athletes are arguing exactly the same as your last statement, but from the other perspective. Our kids who prioritize sports above anything else in life are not dumb, as some other PP insisted. We know athletes can be smart - but a serious athlete prioritizes athletics and a serious student prioritizes academics.

So, this is 1% of all D1 athletes, though baseball is different because there is a more extensive professional system with the minor leagues (where of course they get paid absolute peanuts).

However, I am sorry...the median SAT of professional football, baseball and basketball players (if they even took it) is low. Probably around 1100 (it's 1070 for NFL players). I would wager that less than 0.1% of all professional athletes scored a 1500+.

Now, they were probably smart to go 200% in their sport, because their academic chops weren't going to produce much.

DP. OMG, you sound awful. Seriously.
What is wrong with you??

Nothing wrong with me. It's just weird how folks can't just admit that most professional athletes were never good students. For every John Urschel or Myron Rolle, there are 1000 sports management majors with 2.5 GPAs.

Guess what...most famous musicians and actors also weren't great students, with a large percentage never attending college.

This really isn't news.

What are you talking about? We’re *literally* “admitting” that many athletes are not good students. The disconnect is that not being a good student doesn’t necessarily mean that one is not intelligent.

I suspect you were a “good student” who needed private tutors and multiple tests to achieve your “elite” results, because you can’t seem to grasp this very simple concept even when you are basically being spoon fed…

This! But this prior poster is just so caught up in his/her little world that she doesn’t see how myopic she is.