Athletes have such an edge

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It sounds like many of you haven’t even walked onto a live-in college campus. It is not all about high achieving academics. There is a mind body soul aspect to it as well. There are sports, clubs, singing groups, a newspaper, a radio station, theatrical performances, gyms, climbing walls, chapels, gardens, farms, you name it. It’s about educating the well rounded kid and introducing them to life beyond high school and the world and different perspectives. No one wants a whole school of singleminded academically focused students who do nothing but study. That’s not what it’s about. If that’s the only qualification the school wanted they would get rid of all of their amazing facilities and save a lot of money.

I agree with you completely, but threads like these show that there are plenty of DCUM posters who would be thrilled if elite schools were populated only by the students described in your bolded sentence, aka known the students who most resemble those posters’ kids. It has always struck me as shortsighted. You don’t care about sports in general and certainly not the sports predominantly played by rich, mostly white kids? Well lots of rich power brokers out in the real world do. I am very happy for my kids to be making friends with kids with all kinds of interests and backgrounds in college, including the many nice kids who had a more privileged upbringing, and have many more connections, than mine.

It’s not black and white. No one is arguing for all students to be the same. We are saying that athletes shouldn’t have offers for admittance without applying (initially). Athletes shouldn’t have an easier time getting a spot because a coach makes a call and puts their application under a different priority and consideration lens as other kids.

Athletics should be judged like all other EC activities. You played a club sport well for more than a decade? Put that with Eagle Scout kids. You are highly state ranked in track? Put that with someone who has won state or National contests or similar recognition, like robotics, research, etc. An athlete has a below average test score, put their application down a notch - as would happen to router students like that who apply. So the sports is a plus, but not largely determinative.

A couple points in response to this. First, are you aware that academic standouts also have offers for admission before they apply to top schools? They receive likely letters that are the same ones the most sought-after athletes receive, with the same massage that the kid will be in after they apply if they don’t F up. I first learned about this on College Confidential years ago. The process is described here and elsewhere: https://www.crimsoneducation.org/us/blog/campus-life-more/likely-letters/?slv_rt=v1%7E1fn2pgogc%7E9d58b74f-a7a5-49fa-9643-71bcdf87d66e%7E6424cf03-2955-4168-8126-883d4f975e53%7E-b8hqds

Second, I understand that you are describing the way it would work in your perfect world if you designed your perfect university, and you are doing a more thoughtful job of it than many. But that isn’t the way it works at any elite university in the US, nor has it ever. If, as it seems, you recognize that an elite athlete can add value to a school, why exactly do you care if they enter through a streamlined process? Is it just because you think it’s unfair if some kids have less stress in the applications process? Seems kind of petty. Do you feel that way about the kids who get matched through Questbridge or who receive the academic likely letters? Schools fill their designated University priority slots first (and for athletics at D1 Universities it’s never entire teams worth of athletes who get slotted in, only the coaches “must haves”) then they move on to filling up the remainder. It makes perfect sense from the school’s perspective, and theirs is the only one that matters for applicants.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Thirty five pages of ranting by nerdy parents of nerdy children. Cut me a break.

Ummm. Lots of posts here defending "top" athletes in the so called "top" leagues that are top dollar but who knows if the athletes are so amazing since the low income athletes simply are not even there to compete

[Anonymous]

Meant to add to the above that outstanding athletes who want to attend elite schools do get their prospects moved down a notch or out of the pile based on lower test scores, no matter what you hear on here from the many posters who have no clue how athletic recruitment works. It’s just that the coach is the first arbiter. A large percentage of the best athletes in the country have no chance of playing for an elite school, because the schools all have either indexes or minimum thresholds that are fairly to very high for no revenue sports. The index schools like the ivies have a sliding scale. If you are one of the top athletes in the country for your sport, the type Power 5s are recruiting? Good grades and a 1250 does it for the one kid per year who may consider an Ivy in their sport instead of a more competitive school. Next tier down? Good grades and 1350-1400 does it for the 1-2 kids who may be in that grouping for the sport. Next tier down, which are still excellent athletes and the types most of the athletes DCUMers know at ivies? 1450 and up to start and most won’t get nods from the coaches.

Kids drop off coaches’ lists all the time prior to NLIs based on their failure to get the needed scores and grades, or for failing to maintain their athletic performance, or for injury, and then they have no admissions edge. Also, as others have posted, the top athletic prospects will be checking in with coaches quite frequently to ensure that they are meeting the targets coaches deem safe for grades, APs, and course rigor even after they meet score thresholds.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Meant to add to the above that outstanding athletes who want to attend elite schools do get their prospects moved down a notch or out of the pile based on lower test scores, no matter what you hear on here from the many posters who have no clue how athletic recruitment works. It’s just that the coach is the first arbiter. A large percentage of the best athletes in the country have no chance of playing for an elite school, because the schools all have either indexes or minimum thresholds that are fairly to very high for no revenue sports. The index schools like the ivies have a sliding scale. If you are one of the top athletes in the country for your sport, the type Power 5s are recruiting? Good grades and a 1250 does it for the one kid per year who may consider an Ivy in their sport instead of a more competitive school. Next tier down? Good grades and 1350-1400 does it for the 1-2 kids who may be in that grouping for the sport. Next tier down, which are still excellent athletes and the types most of the athletes DCUMers know at ivies? 1450 and up to start and most won’t get nods from the coaches.

Kids drop off coaches’ lists all the time prior to NLIs based on their failure to get the needed scores and grades, or for failing to maintain their athletic performance, or for injury, and then they have no admissions edge. Also, as others have posted, the top athletic prospects will be checking in with coaches quite frequently to ensure that they are meeting the targets coaches deem safe for grades, APs, and course rigor even after they meet score thresholds.

Well put! Being a recruited athlete at top D1 school is no joke.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It sounds like many of you haven’t even walked onto a live-in college campus. It is not all about high achieving academics. There is a mind body soul aspect to it as well. There are sports, clubs, singing groups, a newspaper, a radio station, theatrical performances, gyms, climbing walls, chapels, gardens, farms, you name it. It’s about educating the well rounded kid and introducing them to life beyond high school and the world and different perspectives. No one wants a whole school of singleminded academically focused students who do nothing but study. That’s not what it’s about. If that’s the only qualification the school wanted they would get rid of all of their amazing facilities and save a lot of money.

I agree with you completely, but threads like these show that there are plenty of DCUM posters who would be thrilled if elite schools were populated only by the students described in your bolded sentence, aka known the students who most resemble those posters’ kids. It has always struck me as shortsighted. You don’t care about sports in general and certainly not the sports predominantly played by rich, mostly white kids? Well lots of rich power brokers out in the real world do. I am very happy for my kids to be making friends with kids with all kinds of interests and backgrounds in college, including the many nice kids who had a more privileged upbringing, and have many more connections, than mine.

It’s not black and white. No one is arguing for all students to be the same. We are saying that athletes shouldn’t have offers for admittance without applying (initially). Athletes shouldn’t have an easier time getting a spot because a coach makes a call and puts their application under a different priority and consideration lens as other kids.

Athletics should be judged like all other EC activities. You played a club sport well for more than a decade? Put that with Eagle Scout kids. You are highly state ranked in track? Put that with someone who has won state or National contests or similar recognition, like robotics, research, etc. An athlete has a below average test score, put their application down a notch - as would happen to router students like that who apply. So the sports is a plus, but not largely determinative.

A couple points in response to this. First, are you aware that academic standouts also have offers for admission before they apply to top schools? They receive likely letters that are the same ones the most sought-after athletes receive, with the same massage that the kid will be in after they apply if they don’t F up. I first learned about this on College Confidential years ago. The process is described here and elsewhere: https://www.crimsoneducation.org/us/blog/campus-life-more/likely-letters/?slv_rt=v1%7E1fn2pgogc%7E9d58b74f-a7a5-49fa-9643-71bcdf87d66e%7E6424cf03-2955-4168-8126-883d4f975e53%7E-b8hqds

Second, I understand that you are describing the way it would work in your perfect world if you designed your perfect university, and you are doing a more thoughtful job of it than many. But that isn’t the way it works at any elite university in the US, nor has it ever. If, as it seems, you recognize that an elite athlete can add value to a school, why exactly do you care if they enter through a streamlined process? Is it just because you think it’s unfair if some kids have less stress in the applications process? Seems kind of petty. Do you feel that way about the kids who get matched through Questbridge or who receive the academic likely letters? Schools fill their designated University priority slots first (and for athletics at D1 Universities it’s never entire teams worth of athletes who get slotted in, only the coaches “must haves”) then they move on to filling up the remainder. It makes perfect sense from the school’s perspective, and theirs is the only one that matters for applicants.

+1, except that the process is definitely not more streamlined or less stressful (although it may seem that way to the non-athletes). All the work and stress is just moved earlier, starting Freshman year (or earlier) with 100s-1000s of emails, making and sending out recruiting videos, studying for and taking the SAT starting Sophomore year, attending many many showcases and college camps, having to perform when it matters and hope a coach is there and watching, and dealing with rejection after rejection - or just being ignored by coaches. It's definitely not a streamlined or easier process until senior year, if you are lucky enough to find a good fit and be recruited. And the process is certainly not less stressful.

[Anonymous]

I get this for D1 but I was really surprised while touring places like artsy/cerebral Wesleyan and they spent significant time talking up sports and luring high school athletes.

[Anonymous]

^ Wesleyan is a NESCAC school, probably the strongest athletic conference among DIIIs. The NESCAC schools have an extremely strong athletic tradition and culture, and because most of them are relatively small in size, about 40% of students are also athletes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Thirty five pages of ranting by nerdy parents of nerdy children. Cut me a break.

I think some of this is actually sour grapes from kids who just got deferred. Some of the lack of perspective seems like it comes.from teenagers. OPs story is for sure false, and I think some of the rest of this sounds like teens.

I’m OP. My story is not false unless my friend misstated something. She posted on social media about the acceptances, so I can’t believe she’d do that with her son in the pictures and being tagged.

Either you are lying or you are extremely gullible. But your facts as described just aren't possible.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Why should not an athlete have an edge? They add to the school in a way that most cannot.

Barf.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:To be honest, I would be embarrassed if my kid had to take this route to get into a good college.

Plus, I would worry that he would have time and/or the capability to do well there (i.e., that he might eek through, but fail to actually gain a strong education).

No you wouldn't. You'd be bragging to anyone and everyone. Green eyed monster.

You so don't get people like me, and my circle.

DP. You and your circle sound like insufferable and judgmental jerks.

Carry on with your bad selves.

NP. Not nearly as insufferable as obnoxious, obsessive, pseudosuperior sports parents.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You haven’t figured out that our society values sports over education?

But you can get into a good school with amazing academics and zero athletics, but if you have amazing athletics you still need academics that are far above average.

It's higher EDUCATION...not higher athletics.

Then you don't understand EDUCATION.

I don't give a rats ass if my lawyer or my investment advisor or my doctor can catch a ball. I need their brains...period.

And you get that, as med and law schools don't look at sports for admission.

They do consider it in an applicant though. If you ace the LSAT, and had top grades, plus played a varsity sport in college, and maybe also were the captain, that added time commitment and leadership on top of academic success does stand out to a law school as law requires excellent time management and leadership.

Thanks anyway but I want one that honed their time management skills with academic work and internships , not time on the field or in the pool or whatever.

That’s great the world need worker bees too.

Aww, you're cute. In the real world, our kids will employ your jocks.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you are talking about all sport like lacrosse or crew or field hockey, these recruits statistically will presumptively be successful in their chosen careers.

They are tiny fraction of the people who are successful in their chosen careers. Tiny. Far more people in this world are successful and did not play those sports. In other words, playing lacrosse is not what makes a person successful.

Not presidents and CEOs.

The only scholar-athlete president tht comes to mind is Gerald Ford. Are there others? Don’t know much about CEOs. I don’t think Musk, Zuckerberg, or @jack played sportball. Please help me out with some household names.

Ford
Reagan
Nixon
Eisenhower
Kennedy
Bush
Carter
Wilson


CEOs

GE Immelt
IBM Palmisano
HP Whitman
Wholefoods Robb
Sunoco Elsenhans
Bank of america Noynihan
Mondelez International Rosenfeld
Comcast Roberts (gold medal)
GM Akerson

(many are women)

Oof, you really had to reach for companies to find those CEOs.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They absolutely do. The only kids I know personally who go to Ivys are recruited athletes. (Not in DMV area.)

My boyfriend’s ds is a standout soccer player and going to a school he would never get in otherwise.

I don’t have any judgment about it and probably see it as an overall fine thing because I don’t really believe in entitlement to spots in college.

But there is stigma associated with that on campus. The athletes are viewed as weaker students because they got in because of sports. It worth it to take the admit but just be aware of that.

I don't think they care what the nerds think anyway.

That's OK. The smart kids who got in on their own intellectual merits don't care what the sportball players think anyway.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They absolutely do. The only kids I know personally who go to Ivys are recruited athletes. (Not in DMV area.)

My boyfriend’s ds is a standout soccer player and going to a school he would never get in otherwise.

I don’t have any judgment about it and probably see it as an overall fine thing because I don’t really believe in entitlement to spots in college.

But there is stigma associated with that on campus. The athletes are viewed as weaker students because they got in because of sports. It worth it to take the admit but just be aware of that.

I don't think they care what the nerds think anyway.

The " I don't care" defense mechanism. It does exist.

This is a silly tangent. The only people who stigmatize athletes as weak students are younger versions of people like OP who are jealous and bitter about athletes being more sought after by colleges. Most people are not like this, and the ones who are are disappointed to find that the majority of athletes do well academically in college. Hopefully this helps them learn the dangers of stereotyping, though I don’t hold out a lot of hope given how many full-grown athlete haters there are on this forum.

Not one poster expressed hatred for athletes.

I personally expressed DIFFERENT aspirations for my child.

That is all. Why is that opinion any less valid than yours?

People have called them dumb, jocks, don’t fit in… so yes since these are all negative judgements, it shows a “hate”.

And near-immedately, a nasty sports parent retorted with HARR HARR THEY DON'T CARE WHAT THE NERDZ THINK OF THEM ANYWAY and another even dumber one "LOL"ed their post.

So you were saying?

[Anonymous]

"My kid wakes up at 4:00AM!"
"My kid wakes up at 5:00AM!!"

Cool. Well, the world needs baristas.