DP. I’d add that the admissions boost is not something spread evenly among athletes around the country. The kids who get the admissions boost are mostly the kids who have had their eye (or the kids whose parents have had their eyes) on the academic prize since the kids were in kindergarten. Of those who are talented athletes by HS age, many in this subset will have a decent chance of playing at a top 30 university or top SLAC. |
Again depends on the sport and depends on the school |
Well, the students are not paying tuition either way, and there are a lot of additional requirements and obligations at these schools that don't apply to "civilian" schools, so I can see how attrition could be an issue. I wonder if it is a challenge to replace the athletes who quit the teams or some incentive offered for them to remain on the teams. I think at West Point, everyone is required to participate in some sport, whether it be at the rec / club level or at the D1 level. Obviously the D1 level requires a lot more travel and time away from school. |
It’s simple math. There are what, 20, elite colleges you think you need this hook to get into? Add up the roster spots for the sport your snowflake plays x 20. Then subtract all the URMs, legacies and trust funders and you have the ACTUAL roster spots available for random recruited student-athletes. Then take that number and divide it by all the kids in the same graduating class who play said sport. <1% was being generous. And as for D1, if you’re good enough to play D1 (highly, highly unlikely), there are a lot of mediocre D1 universities and they certainly do not give scholarships to all student-athletes. So, what’s even the point? |
| Check out scholarship stats for sports like soccer and tennis |
|
my daughters were D1 swimmers - books paid for, tuition paid for about 50%, built in friends when they arrived, extra tutoring when needed, preferential scheduling of classes, trips to the south to train over Christmas.
Plus, if you make it all four years it looks really good on a resume. |
Field hockey is very competitive. And, part of that is that, yes, the really competitive programs (and even some of the not, now) are pulling international players. Yes, you CAN get a boost for admissions. But it's becoming more difficult. And the scholarship money isn't really there like it is for other sports. Our Club Director had a recruiting session (She was a D1 player at a big program) and I think the number she gave for D1 recruitment (and thus $$$) was 1-3% ranges. D3 offers not athletic money. |
And you need that “resume boost” when you go to some random podunk d1 where you have no friends for no other reason than to play a sport. |
not when you stay in podunk state. Everyone impressed. but you do you with your jealousy. |
Looks like 10 percent of high school field hockey players compete in colleges |
Those aren't niche. You need to look at squash, fencing, equestrian, sailing, maybe water polo... |
| I work with many colleagues with HS and college aged kids (some URMs) who are athletes of varied sports. My colleagues’ athletic kids are most definitely getting preferential admission over their classmates with “better” GPAs and higher test scores, at least to top state schools like UVA, UCLA and UNC (including the kids who are not recruited athletes or chose not to play). |
Duh! |
To brag to friends and on Facebook that their good not great kid is going to play "at the next level." Of course you won't hear or see anymore sporty bragging when the kid rides the bench all of their freshman year, then quits the sport, and likely transfers out of the college they went to solely for said sport. |
PP, the structure of a varsity (non-club) sport in college helps kids stay fit, learn teamwork, learn the ins-and-outs of a particular college and make friends starting in the August when freshman year starts. |