Friend just announced her junior DD has committed to play lax at a top school

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Everyone of these parents complaining about this would happily accept the preferred athletic treatment if their kid was offered it.

Maybe, but I'd at least acknowledge the preferential treatment, which some people seem unable to do here. All I see is protests of sour grapes, they work hard, it's just as stressful for athletes just in other ways, it's just the same as another other EC.....

My kid is a double legacy at a top school which definitely gives special treatment to legacies. Who knows if that will be in place by the time my kid gets to applying, but I freely acknowledge that it is unfair and there is no justification for it at all. Despite the fact that I might benefit, for the system as a whole, I don't think it makes sense.

Can parents of student athletes do the same?

we do and you don't like it. but you don't see the work they do, 4 am swim practice, soccer games in 30 degree weather, crew practice in freezing windy dark mornings. working through the mental aspects of it, the physical injuries,. you all think this stuff happens by itself but it doesn't. then add the academics, many of them have just as good or better academic credentials than your kids and that just eats away at you.

A former soccer player at a W school got offered a full ride for both academics and athletics to Stanford, she took the academic one so another team member could use the athletics scholarship. Talk about someone many of you on here thinks didn't deserve what she got.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Everyone of these parents complaining about this would happily accept the preferred athletic treatment if their kid was offered it.

Maybe, but I'd at least acknowledge the preferential treatment, which some people seem unable to do here. All I see is protests of sour grapes, they work hard, it's just as stressful for athletes just in other ways, it's just the same as another other EC.....

My kid is a double legacy at a top school which definitely gives special treatment to legacies. Who knows if that will be in place by the time my kid gets to applying, but I freely acknowledge that it is unfair and there is no justification for it at all. Despite the fact that I might benefit, for the system as a whole, I don't think it makes sense.

Can parents of student athletes do the same?

Actually, unless you and your partner have given in the seven figures, don't count on that double-legacy. Legacy matters when there is signigicant benefit to the school, i.e. long-term financial contributions. Schools benefit by admitting students for any number of reasons beyond just grades: diversity is probably number 1, then those who contribute to the long-term financial health of the institution in a significant way, then athletes, who tend to be top performers after graduation and, in the case of the big sports, money makers for the school. You can begrudge these factors all you want, but it's students like these who keep many of these insitutions thriving. The one in 50,000 A student has a much less predictable long-term contribution to the school.

Please provide a statistic to support that athletes are top performers after graduation, I went to a school with a top d1 lacrosse program, and that was definitely not the case.

Most modern day presidents were student athletes.
Most CEO's were student athletes
NCAA athletes have a higher average GPA than non-athletes (its an NCAA requirement that each school track this and the GPA not go below the college average)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I personally find it funny that the “sour grapes” posters are trying to claim academic standards are the same for athletes. What a joke! Many schools limit the majors available to athletes and require tutors. I’m sure junior is a genius but that is just not the case for the vast majority of athletic recruits.

So i assume this story about these 3 basketball players at Maryland had to major in communications? I will save you the trouble of actually reading the article and post the headline

Three Maryland women’s basketball players set sights on attending medical school

now you will say well they are the exception etc etc when it is clear you have no idea what you are talking about most college athletes use college to get amazing degrees. You look at the few who make it to the professional rank and use that as the majority when it simply isn't accurate.

Just to follow up on where they are now, 1 is at Wake Forest Med School, 1 is at Maryland Med school and the third will be going to med school when they complete their WNBA career

https://dbknews.com/0999/12/31/arc-rzlbjo22bvbbjggb45o63nhvvm/

People are so jealous of athletes and just want them to be stupid. The fact is, for many sports, you really need to be sharp to be successful. You just don't come across many "dumb" athletes, especially at top universities. Great athletes are often standouts in other ways, just accept it. It's okay.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Everyone of these parents complaining about this would happily accept the preferred athletic treatment if their kid was offered it.

Maybe, but I'd at least acknowledge the preferential treatment, which some people seem unable to do here. All I see is protests of sour grapes, they work hard, it's just as stressful for athletes just in other ways, it's just the same as another other EC.....

My kid is a double legacy at a top school which definitely gives special treatment to legacies. Who knows if that will be in place by the time my kid gets to applying, but I freely acknowledge that it is unfair and there is no justification for it at all. Despite the fact that I might benefit, for the system as a whole, I don't think it makes sense.

Can parents of student athletes do the same?

Can you see the difference? Your kid did nothing to achieve double legacy status. It is purely his or her good luck to have been born to parents who attended the school and made donations. An athlete trains for years to achieve a chance at being recruited. That's hard work, not pure luck.

I'm not arguing that the system is fair, but those two admissions preferences aren't comparable.

She can't. The fact that PP can't understand the hard work, sacrifice, discipline, and value of athletics is very scary. To think that's an unfair advantage and being an athlete is an unfair advantage is truly insane.

The fact that you think athletics has some sort of monopoly over hard work, sacrifice and discipline that other ECs (which don't get the same admissions preference) don't is insane.

I was comparing the advantage of being an athlete vs being a legacy. Quite accurately. A recruited athlete has more value and is more deserving than a legacy. All day long.

Other ECs require those qualities and that's great. My point wasn't that other ECs don't require them. It was that being a legacy does not.

Colleges are allowed to have priorities, just like you are. They also invest more to recruit professors in comp sci compared to classics. So what?

-Mom of legacy kids with no athletic ability

Your job is to provide connections! Step up babe! 😂

What does this mean?

Legacies get preferential treatment because going to a top school is important for connections. Legacies are the connections. That is how it works.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I personally find it funny that the “sour grapes” posters are trying to claim academic standards are the same for athletes. What a joke! Many schools limit the majors available to athletes and require tutors. I’m sure junior is a genius but that is just not the case for the vast majority of athletic recruits.

As a PP with the long post a page back noted, there are majors that are simply not realistic to the time constraints of the sport. That is a choice the student-athlete makes as part of the deal. If they really want a lab based major, then they likely need to give up the sport. Not everyone has that option if scholarship money is involved. So...they get a degree, play the sport and then go to grad school for their academic passion. So what?

IDK, my niece is pre-med and a D1 sport in a top 10 (in her sport) and T30 school.

Also, my son (who follows your way of thinking) gets an enormous amount of support in the form of preferred registration and tutors, who come to the athletic department during his required study time. He is getting an extra year of eligibility and auto accepted to a graduate school program in the degree he preferred instead of the one he did since he was 17/18/19 when he chose his major

My son has a few co-players that are engineering and biology so I think it just depends.

A few examples here and there are not the norm. It is like saying Steve Jobs didn't graduate from college but went on to become successful means that others will be successful as well.

Take a look at University of North Carolina men tennis roster: https://goheels.com/sports/mens-tennis/roster

It is either Exercise and Sport Science or Business Administration. You are not going to find pre-med or Engineering. You just don't have time for those majors.

The tennis roster... 60% are Business Majors, that is very good.

I think the % of people that major in pre-med and biology and engineering for the school as a whole is low so it's going to be low for students in sports but it's not much lower than the school as a whole.

My nephew is one of the tennis players on that roster majors in Business Administration. His reasons: I can make much more money than both physicians and engineers with a job in IT or software sales. Athletes get these high paying sales jobs via school alumni or boosters.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I personally find it funny that the “sour grapes” posters are trying to claim academic standards are the same for athletes. What a joke! Many schools limit the majors available to athletes and require tutors. I’m sure junior is a genius but that is just not the case for the vast majority of athletic recruits.

So i assume this story about these 3 basketball players at Maryland had to major in communications? I will save you the trouble of actually reading the article and post the headline

Three Maryland women’s basketball players set sights on attending medical school

now you will say well they are the exception etc etc when it is clear you have no idea what you are talking about most college athletes use college to get amazing degrees. You look at the few who make it to the professional rank and use that as the majority when it simply isn't accurate.

Just to follow up on where they are now, 1 is at Wake Forest Med School, 1 is at Maryland Med school and the third will be going to med school when they complete their WNBA career

https://dbknews.com/0999/12/31/arc-rzlbjo22bvbbjggb45o63nhvvm/

People are so jealous of athletes and just want them to be stupid. The fact is, for many sports, you really need to be sharp to be successful. You just don't come across many "dumb" athletes, especially at top universities. Great athletes are often standouts in other ways, just accept it. It's okay.

Anther great story is the story of Dikembe Mutombo, he wanted to be a doctor so his town would have one. John Thompson convinced him to be a BB player because he could build a hospital and hire many doctors if he went to the NBA... so he did.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dikembe_Mutombo

Mutombo attended Georgetown University on a USAID scholarship. He originally intended to become a doctor, but the Georgetown Hoyas basketball coach John Thompson recruited him to play basketball.

And that is just what he did...

https://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/nba/2018/05/22/dikembe-mutombo-wins-sager-strong-award-humanitarian-work-congo/632359002/

Dikembe Mutombo built a hospital, named after his mother, Biamba Marie, in his native Democratic Republic of Congo. He brought a team of doctors to Congo to conduct knee replacement surgery and cataract surgery for people in Congo. He has arranged for thousands of free cervical and breast cancer screenings for women in his home country.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I personally find it funny that the “sour grapes” posters are trying to claim academic standards are the same for athletes. What a joke! Many schools limit the majors available to athletes and require tutors. I’m sure junior is a genius but that is just not the case for the vast majority of athletic recruits.

So i assume this story about these 3 basketball players at Maryland had to major in communications? I will save you the trouble of actually reading the article and post the headline

Three Maryland women’s basketball players set sights on attending medical school

now you will say well they are the exception etc etc when it is clear you have no idea what you are talking about most college athletes use college to get amazing degrees. You look at the few who make it to the professional rank and use that as the majority when it simply isn't accurate.

Just to follow up on where they are now, 1 is at Wake Forest Med School, 1 is at Maryland Med school and the third will be going to med school when they complete their WNBA career

https://dbknews.com/0999/12/31/arc-rzlbjo22bvbbjggb45o63nhvvm/

People are so jealous of athletes and just want them to be stupid. The fact is, for many sports, you really need to be sharp to be successful. You just don't come across many "dumb" athletes, especially at top universities. Great athletes are often standouts in other ways, just accept it. It's okay.

Beg to differ. . .

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think it's funny how parents of athletes are twisting themselves into pretzels justifying this completely arbitrary advantage that athletes are given in the college admission process. Yes, your kid puts in long hours -- so do lot of other kids doing music, or theater, or science or dance at a high level. They don't get special admissions processes.

Yeah yeah, sports promotes community and school spirit. So do the performing arts. A tiny percentage of sports bring in money, most do not, yet they still get to recruit. You know that this glaring loophole in college admissions is the reason why the bribery scheme in the "Varsity Blues" case actually worked right? Take a picture of yourself on a rowing machine, call the kid a crew recruit -- voila, admission!

There are other unfairnesses in college admissions of course (legacies), but just because there are others doesn't mean that you can't acknowledge that this one is -- objectively -- unfair.

Totally agree. Parents seem completely oblivious to the water they’re swimming in. It is a bizarrely American thing to value the hard work put into athletics so much more than hard work in other areas. I’d take a kid who looked after his younger siblings after school every day over a kid who went to soccer practice every day because he wanted to win so badly.

This to me is it. It is bizarre -- the elevation of athletics over any other activity connected to the university community (arts, debate, chess, science, what have you). It is uniquely American.

To those saying it's just another thumb on the scale for something the university wants like URM or orchestra and they still have to achieve top grades and test scores, do you see those candidates getting a special recruitment procedure? Does the diversity officer of the school call up a URM candidate and say, "you've got the diversity and background we could really use here. You've got to get a GPA of __ and a SAT of __, but as long as you do, you've got a soft commitment from Larling U!" Does the orchestra director say "we're in need of good trombonist and you caught our eye. If you maintain a GPA of ___ and get SAT of ____ and keep at the trombone, you're in." It's not a plus factor putting them over other candidates with equal stats, it's a whole nother admission procedure.

The only other candidates I can think of that might get an entirely new path set up for them are development, Z-list, your dad donates a building, candidates. But that's all very hush-hush, cloak-and-dagger, rumor which the university wants to hide.

Here, it's all in the open, and everyone looks at it and is like "yeah, seems legit."

Can you not admit it's not just another factor, it's a special fast-track just for athletes? The emperor has no clothes!

This. I don't care that athletes get a bump for being in a time-intensive EC, just like any other EC that requires talent and dedication. It's the completely separate application track where admissions bows to the coaches that smells bad. It's also what made the whole "Varsity Blues" con work. And, even though they busted that one counselor, you know there are others pulling the same thing given the lack of checks and balances.

Exactly!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think it's funny how parents of athletes are twisting themselves into pretzels justifying this completely arbitrary advantage that athletes are given in the college admission process. Yes, your kid puts in long hours -- so do lot of other kids doing music, or theater, or science or dance at a high level. They don't get special admissions processes.

Yeah yeah, sports promotes community and school spirit. So do the performing arts. A tiny percentage of sports bring in money, most do not, yet they still get to recruit. You know that this glaring loophole in college admissions is the reason why the bribery scheme in the "Varsity Blues" case actually worked right? Take a picture of yourself on a rowing machine, call the kid a crew recruit -- voila, admission!

There are other unfairnesses in college admissions of course (legacies), but just because there are others doesn't mean that you can't acknowledge that this one is -- objectively -- unfair.

Totally agree. Parents seem completely oblivious to the water they’re swimming in. It is a bizarrely American thing to value the hard work put into athletics so much more than hard work in other areas. I’d take a kid who looked after his younger siblings after school every day over a kid who went to soccer practice every day because he wanted to win so badly.

This to me is it. It is bizarre -- the elevation of athletics over any other activity connected to the university community (arts, debate, chess, science, what have you). It is uniquely American.

To those saying it's just another thumb on the scale for something the university wants like URM or orchestra and they still have to achieve top grades and test scores, do you see those candidates getting a special recruitment procedure? Does the diversity officer of the school call up a URM candidate and say, "you've got the diversity and background we could really use here. You've got to get a GPA of __ and a SAT of __, but as long as you do, you've got a soft commitment from Larling U!" Does the orchestra director say "we're in need of good trombonist and you caught our eye. If you maintain a GPA of ___ and get SAT of ____ and keep at the trombone, you're in." It's not a plus factor putting them over other candidates with equal stats, it's a whole nother admission procedure.

The only other candidates I can think of that might get an entirely new path set up for them are development, Z-list, your dad donates a building, candidates. But that's all very hush-hush, cloak-and-dagger, rumor which the university wants to hide.

Here, it's all in the open, and everyone looks at it and is like "yeah, seems legit."

Can you not admit it's not just another factor, it's a special fast-track just for athletes? The emperor has no clothes!

This. I don't care that athletes get a bump for being in a time-intensive EC, just like any other EC that requires talent and dedication. It's the completely separate application track where admissions bows to the coaches that smells bad. It's also what made the whole "Varsity Blues" con work. And, even though they busted that one counselor, you know there are others pulling the same thing given the lack of checks and balances.

Exactly!

really? Can you explain the track to me?

[Anonymous]

Society value certain unique skill sets.

Only a small subset of the population is athletic and to work to develop that skill set for particular sport makes that candidate very rare & desirable to colleges.

It is much more common to find kids with 1500+ SAT, 4.0+GPA than it is to find someone who can perform at a very high level in their particular sport.

For other activities, such as music & science/math, if you are the top tier (ie. won an award at Carnegie Hall or won the countries top math/science award), you WILL BE recruited.

Most of our kids, with a combination of privilege of growing up in the DMV & hard work, are all great candidates. Many of them can get merit scholarships at T50-100 schools but we chose to fight over the T20.

Remember, school are filling their needs.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

This. I don't care that athletes get a bump for being in a time-intensive EC, just like any other EC that requires talent and dedication. It's the completely separate application track where admissions bows to the coaches that smells bad. It's also what made the whole "Varsity Blues" con work. And, even though they busted that one counselor, you know there are others pulling the same thing given the lack of checks and balances.

This is because of the nature of rosters, balancing positions in a fixed number environment, particularly in light of the transfer portal rules. If you don't like it, take it up with the NCAA. But holding 17 year olds in disdain is a loser proposition.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think it's funny how parents of athletes are twisting themselves into pretzels justifying this completely arbitrary advantage that athletes are given in the college admission process. Yes, your kid puts in long hours -- so do lot of other kids doing music, or theater, or science or dance at a high level. They don't get special admissions processes.

Yeah yeah, sports promotes community and school spirit. So do the performing arts. A tiny percentage of sports bring in money, most do not, yet they still get to recruit. You know that this glaring loophole in college admissions is the reason why the bribery scheme in the "Varsity Blues" case actually worked right? Take a picture of yourself on a rowing machine, call the kid a crew recruit -- voila, admission!

There are other unfairnesses in college admissions of course (legacies), but just because there are others doesn't mean that you can't acknowledge that this one is -- objectively -- unfair.

Totally agree. Parents seem completely oblivious to the water they’re swimming in. It is a bizarrely American thing to value the hard work put into athletics so much more than hard work in other areas. I’d take a kid who looked after his younger siblings after school every day over a kid who went to soccer practice every day because he wanted to win so badly.

This to me is it. It is bizarre -- the elevation of athletics over any other activity connected to the university community (arts, debate, chess, science, what have you). It is uniquely American.

To those saying it's just another thumb on the scale for something the university wants like URM or orchestra and they still have to achieve top grades and test scores, do you see those candidates getting a special recruitment procedure? Does the diversity officer of the school call up a URM candidate and say, "you've got the diversity and background we could really use here. You've got to get a GPA of __ and a SAT of __, but as long as you do, you've got a soft commitment from Larling U!" Does the orchestra director say "we're in need of good trombonist and you caught our eye. If you maintain a GPA of ___ and get SAT of ____ and keep at the trombone, you're in." It's not a plus factor putting them over other candidates with equal stats, it's a whole nother admission procedure.

The only other candidates I can think of that might get an entirely new path set up for them are development, Z-list, your dad donates a building, candidates. But that's all very hush-hush, cloak-and-dagger, rumor which the university wants to hide.

Here, it's all in the open, and everyone looks at it and is like "yeah, seems legit."

Can you not admit it's not just another factor, it's a special fast-track just for athletes? The emperor has no clothes!

This. I don't care that athletes get a bump for being in a time-intensive EC, just like any other EC that requires talent and dedication. It's the completely separate application track where admissions bows to the coaches that smells bad. It's also what made the whole "Varsity Blues" con work. And, even though they busted that one counselor, you know there are others pulling the same thing given the lack of checks and balances.

Exactly!

really? Can you explain the track to me?

Ummm, the one where a student athlete gets approached by a college athletic official and if the student commits to the college, then as long as student achieves above a certain floor in GPA and test scores, the college promises to admit that student? And then that happens, because the athletic department shepherds the application through?

Is that not what we've been talking about this whole time?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think it's funny how parents of athletes are twisting themselves into pretzels justifying this completely arbitrary advantage that athletes are given in the college admission process. Yes, your kid puts in long hours -- so do lot of other kids doing music, or theater, or science or dance at a high level. They don't get special admissions processes.

Yeah yeah, sports promotes community and school spirit. So do the performing arts. A tiny percentage of sports bring in money, most do not, yet they still get to recruit. You know that this glaring loophole in college admissions is the reason why the bribery scheme in the "Varsity Blues" case actually worked right? Take a picture of yourself on a rowing machine, call the kid a crew recruit -- voila, admission!

There are other unfairnesses in college admissions of course (legacies), but just because there are others doesn't mean that you can't acknowledge that this one is -- objectively -- unfair.

Totally agree. Parents seem completely oblivious to the water they’re swimming in. It is a bizarrely American thing to value the hard work put into athletics so much more than hard work in other areas. I’d take a kid who looked after his younger siblings after school every day over a kid who went to soccer practice every day because he wanted to win so badly.

This to me is it. It is bizarre -- the elevation of athletics over any other activity connected to the university community (arts, debate, chess, science, what have you). It is uniquely American.

To those saying it's just another thumb on the scale for something the university wants like URM or orchestra and they still have to achieve top grades and test scores, do you see those candidates getting a special recruitment procedure? Does the diversity officer of the school call up a URM candidate and say, "you've got the diversity and background we could really use here. You've got to get a GPA of __ and a SAT of __, but as long as you do, you've got a soft commitment from Larling U!" Does the orchestra director say "we're in need of good trombonist and you caught our eye. If you maintain a GPA of ___ and get SAT of ____ and keep at the trombone, you're in." It's not a plus factor putting them over other candidates with equal stats, it's a whole nother admission procedure.

The only other candidates I can think of that might get an entirely new path set up for them are development, Z-list, your dad donates a building, candidates. But that's all very hush-hush, cloak-and-dagger, rumor which the university wants to hide.

Here, it's all in the open, and everyone looks at it and is like "yeah, seems legit."

Can you not admit it's not just another factor, it's a special fast-track just for athletes? The emperor has no clothes!

This. I don't care that athletes get a bump for being in a time-intensive EC, just like any other EC that requires talent and dedication. It's the completely separate application track where admissions bows to the coaches that smells bad. It's also what made the whole "Varsity Blues" con work. And, even though they busted that one counselor, you know there are others pulling the same thing given the lack of checks and balances.

Exactly!

really? Can you explain the track to me?

Ummm, the one where a student athlete gets approached by a college athletic official and if the student commits to the college, then as long as student achieves above a certain floor in GPA and test scores, the college promises to admit that student? And then that happens, because the athletic department shepherds the application through?

Is that not what we've been talking about this whole time?

Gosh no Pollyanna, that is not the process.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think it's funny how parents of athletes are twisting themselves into pretzels justifying this completely arbitrary advantage that athletes are given in the college admission process. Yes, your kid puts in long hours -- so do lot of other kids doing music, or theater, or science or dance at a high level. They don't get special admissions processes.

Yeah yeah, sports promotes community and school spirit. So do the performing arts. A tiny percentage of sports bring in money, most do not, yet they still get to recruit. You know that this glaring loophole in college admissions is the reason why the bribery scheme in the "Varsity Blues" case actually worked right? Take a picture of yourself on a rowing machine, call the kid a crew recruit -- voila, admission!

There are other unfairnesses in college admissions of course (legacies), but just because there are others doesn't mean that you can't acknowledge that this one is -- objectively -- unfair.

Totally agree. Parents seem completely oblivious to the water they’re swimming in. It is a bizarrely American thing to value the hard work put into athletics so much more than hard work in other areas. I’d take a kid who looked after his younger siblings after school every day over a kid who went to soccer practice every day because he wanted to win so badly.

This to me is it. It is bizarre -- the elevation of athletics over any other activity connected to the university community (arts, debate, chess, science, what have you). It is uniquely American.

To those saying it's just another thumb on the scale for something the university wants like URM or orchestra and they still have to achieve top grades and test scores, do you see those candidates getting a special recruitment procedure? Does the diversity officer of the school call up a URM candidate and say, "you've got the diversity and background we could really use here. You've got to get a GPA of __ and a SAT of __, but as long as you do, you've got a soft commitment from Larling U!" Does the orchestra director say "we're in need of good trombonist and you caught our eye. If you maintain a GPA of ___ and get SAT of ____ and keep at the trombone, you're in." It's not a plus factor putting them over other candidates with equal stats, it's a whole nother admission procedure.

The only other candidates I can think of that might get an entirely new path set up for them are development, Z-list, your dad donates a building, candidates. But that's all very hush-hush, cloak-and-dagger, rumor which the university wants to hide.

Here, it's all in the open, and everyone looks at it and is like "yeah, seems legit."

Can you not admit it's not just another factor, it's a special fast-track just for athletes? The emperor has no clothes!

This. I don't care that athletes get a bump for being in a time-intensive EC, just like any other EC that requires talent and dedication. It's the completely separate application track where admissions bows to the coaches that smells bad. It's also what made the whole "Varsity Blues" con work. And, even though they busted that one counselor, you know there are others pulling the same thing given the lack of checks and balances.

Exactly!

really? Can you explain the track to me?

Ummm, the one where a student athlete gets approached by a college athletic official and if the student commits to the college, then as long as student achieves above a certain floor in GPA and test scores, the college promises to admit that student? And then that happens, because the athletic department shepherds the application through?

Is that not what we've been talking about this whole time?

Gosh no Pollyanna, that is not the process.

Depending on the sport and the school, that is absolutely the process. It isn't the process for the types of sports (like women's lax) that are popular around here, but it is the process for football and basketball (with much more convincing required on the college's part)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Everyone of these parents complaining about this would happily accept the preferred athletic treatment if their kid was offered it.

Maybe, but I'd at least acknowledge the preferential treatment, which some people seem unable to do here. All I see is protests of sour grapes, they work hard, it's just as stressful for athletes just in other ways, it's just the same as another other EC.....

My kid is a double legacy at a top school which definitely gives special treatment to legacies. Who knows if that will be in place by the time my kid gets to applying, but I freely acknowledge that it is unfair and there is no justification for it at all. Despite the fact that I might benefit, for the system as a whole, I don't think it makes sense.

Can parents of student athletes do the same?

we do and you don't like it. but you don't see the work they do, 4 am swim practice, soccer games in 30 degree weather, crew practice in freezing windy dark mornings. working through the mental aspects of it, the physical injuries,. you all think this stuff happens by itself but it doesn't. then add the academics, many of them have just as good or better academic credentials than your kids and that just eats away at you.

A former soccer player at a W school got offered a full ride for both academics and athletics to Stanford, she took the academic one so another team member could use the athletics scholarship. Talk about someone many of you on here thinks didn't deserve what she got.

Sorry, but this didn’t happen. Stanford gives no academic scholarships. They give generous financial aid for lower income families, and they provide athletic scholarships up to the NCAA max, but zero merit awards. So you either misunderstood what you heard or whoever told you this story was very confused or not being truthful.