40% of Williams' classes are athletic recruits

[Anonymous]

So according to Williams website the number is actually 36% on varsity teams. And not all of these were likely recruited as I know kids who have walked on to teams there. So let's say 30% are recruited (in a D3 kind of way). There are 2188 students so that means over 1500 are not recruited athletes.

[Anonymous]

I just wanted to offer my support that I think it's ridiculous for Williams and similar small colleges to recruit so many athletes and reject more academically talented non-athletes. We are the only country in the world that does this. China is going to eat our lunch someday. I have read Bowen's book, and it frightens me.

[Anonymous]

I completely agree. And to suggest (as some have) that all non-recruited athletes are "nerds" is offensive and untrue. Someone who can row well (for example) gets the early nod into Yale or wherever -- hearing in September or October that he or she has a spot. Meanwhile the Intel Science competition winner has to slug it out with other brilliant kids from China, etc. to obtain one of the remaining places. And this serves our country how????

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I completely agree. And to suggest (as some have) that all non-recruited athletes are "nerds" is offensive and untrue. Someone who can row well (for example) gets the early nod into Yale or wherever -- hearing in September or October that he or she has a spot. Meanwhile the Intel Science competition winner has to slug it out with other brilliant kids from China, etc. to obtain one of the remaining places. And this serves our country how????

Ok, but it is equally as offensive and untrue to suggest (as some have) that recruited athletes at Ivies and top LACS are "dumb jocks" who do not have the academic talent to matriculate at these schools and do not deserve their spots!!!!!

[Anonymous]

As the parent of 2 kids in college – one athlete and one non-athlete – this is the typical paranoid “my kid is at a competitive disadvantage” mumbo jumbo that always arises when the acceptance/rejection letters start getting sent out. Folks use any excuse as to why their kids did not get accepted into where they wanted. “Must be the athletes.” “Must be the minorities.” “Must be the legacies.” Ok, I will give you the last one.

Harvard University has a basketball team in the Division 1 Top 25. I have not heard anyone complain about the overall quality of Harvard graduates. Stanford has one of the top athletic programs across the board in NCAA Division 1. No complaints about overall quality of graduates. Heck, among the NCAA Division 3 schools, Amherst and Williams have athletic and arts programs near the top. Anybody have any complaints about the quality of their grads?

Oh, we are not “losing” to China because of the presence of athletes in college. We are “losing” because our MS and HS math and science programs lag behind and, in Chnia, only the best and brightest receive a high level formal education.

Personally, I just think the whole premise of this thread creates an unfair perception of ahtletes at top academic schools.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:As the parent of 2 kids in college – one athlete and one non-athlete – this is the typical paranoid “my kid is at a competitive disadvantage” mumbo jumbo that always arises when the acceptance/rejection letters start getting sent out. Folks use any excuse as to why their kids did not get accepted into where they wanted. “Must be the athletes.” “Must be the minorities.” “Must be the legacies.” Ok, I will give you the last one.

Harvard University has a basketball team in the Division 1 Top 25. I have not heard anyone complain about the overall quality of Harvard graduates. Stanford has one of the top athletic programs across the board in NCAA Division 1. No complaints about overall quality of graduates. Heck, among the NCAA Division 3 schools, Amherst and Williams have athletic and arts programs near the top. Anybody have any complaints about the quality of their grads?

Oh, we are not “losing” to China because of the presence of athletes in college. We are “losing” because our MS and HS math and science programs lag behind and, in Chnia, only the best and brightest receive a high level formal education.

Personally, I just think the whole premise of this thread creates an unfair perception of ahtletes at top academic schools.

I think some people miss the point about athletes. I supervise/work with a lot of highly talented young people and it's easier than you would expect to identify the ones who played sports. Just like employers, colleges are looking for that drive to succeed, the work ethic that truly sets people apart as they are advancing professionally. Athletes -- more than most other teenagers -- have learned to juggle and prioritize and confront tough competition along with their own limitations. They may not be as brilliant as the stereotypical nerd, but they often possess life skills that help them succeed in college and beyond. I would imagine that college admissions officers at Williams and elsewhere figured this out long ago.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As the parent of 2 kids in college – one athlete and one non-athlete – this is the typical paranoid “my kid is at a competitive disadvantage” mumbo jumbo that always arises when the acceptance/rejection letters start getting sent out. Folks use any excuse as to why their kids did not get accepted into where they wanted. “Must be the athletes.” “Must be the minorities.” “Must be the legacies.” Ok, I will give you the last one.

Harvard University has a basketball team in the Division 1 Top 25. I have not heard anyone complain about the overall quality of Harvard graduates. Stanford has one of the top athletic programs across the board in NCAA Division 1. No complaints about overall quality of graduates. Heck, among the NCAA Division 3 schools, Amherst and Williams have athletic and arts programs near the top. Anybody have any complaints about the quality of their grads?

Oh, we are not “losing” to China because of the presence of athletes in college. We are “losing” because our MS and HS math and science programs lag behind and, in Chnia, only the best and brightest receive a high level formal education.

Personally, I just think the whole premise of this thread creates an unfair perception of ahtletes at top academic schools.

I think some people miss the point about athletes. I supervise/work with a lot of highly talented young people and it's easier than you would expect to identify the ones who played sports. Just like employers, colleges are looking for that drive to succeed, the work ethic that truly sets people apart as they are advancing professionally. Athletes -- more than most other teenagers -- have learned to juggle and prioritize and confront tough competition along with their own limitations. They may not be as brilliant as the stereotypical nerd, but they often possess life skills that help them succeed in college and beyond. I would imagine that college admissions officers at Williams and elsewhere figured this out long ago.

My DD's at the 'herst many of her teammates are premed. I'm sure that both Amherst and Williams have a few athletes who may have entered as academically not as qualified as the majority; however, both schools have the resources to develop any "gaps" that they may have arrived with. Both schools are academically quite rigorous and their athletes are aware that their education comes first. I love that my DD is both an elite athlete and is academically gifted. She loves her well-rounded school experience and doesn't feel the pressure to choose sports over academics.

[Anonymous]

Here's something to consider. Maybe the schools know what they are doing. Maybe through years of forming classes they have learned that a student body with 30% athletes lends something to the school environment that would be missing otherwise. Many of the posts here have cited plausible reasons. I'm willing to give them the benefit of the doubt.

[Anonymous]

I have two recruited athletes who attend top universities, and yes, they had their pick.
They spend about 25-30 hours/week practicing year-round, 6 days a week, rain or shine, plus have competitions on weekends. So far, any interviewers for jobs, internships, and fellowships have been extremely impressed by their ability to maintain a high GPA while having such a demanding schedule. They are the people who will show up at 5 in the operating room, know team work, and persevere.

[Anonymous]

Can anyone shed any light on whether this 40% number is still valid? We're considering applying...has anyone had recent experience with Williams admission process (no need to tell us its competitive...we already know that!) Grades, scores and in particular, are they big on extra curriculars?

[Anonymous]

Can't shed light on Williams' current admissions practices. But I am familiar with four area athletes who have been recruited to top ivies so far this year. I know 3 are NMSSFs, the 4th may or may not be, I just don't have the info, but the 4th comes from a prestigious area magnet and so is no dumb jock.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Does affrimative action refer to such action for those from prep schools with gentleman C averages for decades but no action for those from certain ethnic groups?

So glad you pointed this out. I find it ludicrous and hypocritical that those who have enjoyed privileged status for centuries take umbrage when others are finally given a like leg up.

Agree with other posters that sports at the D3 level is valuable to employers as proof of leadership, team work and work ethic. Also agree that when admission letters come out those parents of students with perfect grades and scores but little else are confronted with the fact that this is just not enough any more. Perfect grades and scores are a dime a dozen.

[Anonymous]

^^^ are valuable not is valuable

[Anonymous]

I went to a similar college. All three of my freshman roommates were athletic recruits. No way would they have gotten in without a sport- they admitted as much (one in particular was waitlisted and the coach got her off the waitlist- she would have gone to a much less prestigous school if she weren't a talented athlete). They were not successful academically.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I went to a similar college. All three of my freshman roommates were athletic recruits. No way would they have gotten in without a sport- they admitted as much (one in particular was waitlisted and the coach got her off the waitlist- she would have gone to a much less prestigous school if she weren't a talented athlete). They were not successful academically.

OK, but when was this? And how prestigious was this college? Things have changed a lot since our day, and it's a really tough admissions world out there. I'm the PP who talked about the 4 ivy athletic recruits, all if whom are DC's friends at various area schools (DC got into one of these colleges but not as an athletic recruit, instead a national-level achievement). These aren't dumb jocks by any stretch.

I'm with the PP who said good grades and SATs aren't enough any more. These are more like a threshold, and then you need something more, which may be Intel or it may be athletics.