The idea that "revenue sports" are net revenue generators for schools is one of those things that everybody knows but not many people look into the details of. Sure, revenue sports bring in lots of money, but costs are HUGE for big programs. The key takeaway from this article on "revenue sports" is this:
https://www.bestcolleges.com/blog/do-college-sports-make-money/ It's WAY past time to totally rethink college sports. |
That why no one wants to go there for undergrad. |
| The book "The Price of Admissions" thoroughly explains the donor/legacy/celebrity/athlete preferences in the Ivy League and other prestigious schools and was published back in 2007. And that's just the non-illegal ways people get in. When you consider the low % admitted and that a majority of those fit one of the hook categories, there are very, very few kids who get in on their own academic merits alone. |
| After watching how easy it was to bribe the coaches, is it unimaginable that admission officers don’t take bribes? Or don’t worry accept kids from families they know? Is it so hard to imagine? Its not for me. |
I think it's pretty clear from posts on this forum that people hop right over the admissions officers with this stuff. |
You have people making not very much money making decisions that people with a lot of money have a lot riding on. If you think about the conditions where you'd expect bribery, this seems like a big one |
It's not unimaginable, but remember adcoms vote, so you'd have to bribe a majority, and since it would not be an athlete, the adcoms would have to have some reasonable defense for admission beyond academics. |
But of course a documentary would build up on that story. That's what makes the documentary marketable and makes people like you watch. You should ask: why is this story being packaged by Netflix with the storyline? Would they have a straight boring documentary about the actual facts of Operation Varsity Blues? No, they have to add zest, which is why you should take anything the media and especially Netflix (which has to come up with new stuff fast) is selling you a product. |
| I haven't seen the show on Netflix yet, but my child's take on the whole issue was how sad to grow up in a family where who you are on your own merit is seen as not good enough by your own family. |
| Yeah, I agree with your child - imagine knowing that your Mom paid someone to correct answers on your SAT without telling you - that has to do some permanent damage to the relationship. That was what I understood Felicity Huffman's case to be - daughter did not know what Mom had done. |
| I have a kid who has LDs and does not score well. It would fundamentally destroy her if we paid someone to increase her scores. It would affirm her self doubt and belief that she is stupid (she’s not—she just has LDs). |
|
I'm not sure why y'all are surprised by this. Most of you practice this on a smaller scale anyways. The private counselor that "didn't write" your kids' essays, the charity work that your DC did because "they were so passionate about that cause", the cool website your DC "built on their own"...
Search your souls people! |
+1,000,000 |
| How can an applicant lie about their race/ethnicity? Isn’t their actual race noted in the high school transcript, or counselor’s recommendation? |
| I read a couple of negative reviews, but I just watched it and I thought it was really excellent. Maybe you have to know a little bit about this world to be interested in it. I really felt for that Stanford coach and I'm glad the school looks like jerks. I am not rich by any means and I think all these actions are gross, but I felt bad for the parents to some extent as well. I agree with the author who said how the universities do bear a lot of responsibility for creating this system. It is annoying how they got off Scott free here.. I liked how they showed the YouTube kids and their hopes and disappointments. And wow, Rick Singer, what a scumbag. In fact, he could have kept the Stanford coach out of it. |