Yale athletes discuss their SAT/ACT scores.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So what? The school wants to put together an interesting class with lots of different types of talents. A class filled entirely with people with high standardized test scores may not necessarily be as interesting for the members of said class.

Being with and around young people with many different types of talents leads to a better overall education for everyone in the class. College is about more than just the classroom.

Well yes scores are not everything. But I have a kid with a 26 and 3.5 uw and no AP. And I can assure you they don't belong at Yale or any top 50 school.

True, not every kid has a strong enough talent in one area to be recruited by a school. Schools like Yale know what they’re looking for, and it involves a mix of students who show an impressive talent in many different areas. Leadership is important and the fact is that many athletes are good leaders.

They’re creating a whole class, a community. College is about so much more than the classroom. How is it that so many parents don’t appear to understand this anymore?

Why don't so many parents understand that their students need to come out of school with a job offer? Low GPA athletes don't get very good jobs. Well, maybe they get a job that is good for them.

That's what i used to think but at DS's ivy - many end up with Wall Street jobs.

[Anonymous]

My kids are in highly recruited club sports to get in the shorter admissions line.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:NIL will take care of this soon enough.

Ivy League isn't participating in NIL.

Kids who are great for college but have no prospect for pro, now have a real shot of making 200k a year in college. That can change lives.

For student athletes that want to play soccer and then go to med school, yale is great.

But for the kids who never read a book in HS and are now at Yale because they're good at football, they'll look elsewhere and get some payday - or payback for 18 years of training

UPenn just formed a collective to channel NIL $$$s to athletes...mainly basketball. They just attracted a 5 star basketball recruit...first time in their history.

Ivy League has no restrictions on NIL, though an individual school may or may not. My guess is the others will fall like dominos.

[Anonymous]

I don't get why that's an issue. You have to be so incredibly good at what you do, hardworking and focused to get to that level in sports. Are we begrudging these kids a seat they earned with exceptional efforts?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So what? The school wants to put together an interesting class with lots of different types of talents. A class filled entirely with people with high standardized test scores may not necessarily be as interesting for the members of said class.

Being with and around young people with many different types of talents leads to a better overall education for everyone in the class. College is about more than just the classroom.

Well yes scores are not everything. But I have a kid with a 26 and 3.5 uw and no AP. And I can assure you they don't belong at Yale or any top 50 school.

True, not every kid has a strong enough talent in one area to be recruited by a school. Schools like Yale know what they’re looking for, and it involves a mix of students who show an impressive talent in many different areas. Leadership is important and the fact is that many athletes are good leaders.

They’re creating a whole class, a community. College is about so much more than the classroom. How is it that so many parents don’t appear to understand this anymore?

Why don't so many parents understand that their students need to come out of school with a job offer? Low GPA athletes don't get very good jobs. Well, maybe they get a job that is good for them.

That's what i used to think but at DS's ivy - many end up with Wall Street jobs.

Right -- this is not new info. PP thinks that only people w the best stats should be admitted or hired, but the world doesn't work that way.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I don't get why that's an issue. You have to be so incredibly good at what you do, hardworking and focused to get to that level in sports. Are we begrudging these kids a seat they earned with exceptional efforts?

Apparently some people want to. One heritable characteristic (intelligence) should trump another (athleticism), though hard work may accompany both.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So what? The school wants to put together an interesting class with lots of different types of talents. A class filled entirely with people with high standardized test scores may not necessarily be as interesting for the members of said class.

Being with and around young people with many different types of talents leads to a better overall education for everyone in the class. College is about more than just the classroom.

Well yes scores are not everything. But I have a kid with a 26 and 3.5 uw and no AP. And I can assure you they don't belong at Yale or any top 50 school.

True, not every kid has a strong enough talent in one area to be recruited by a school. Schools like Yale know what they’re looking for, and it involves a mix of students who show an impressive talent in many different areas. Leadership is important and the fact is that many athletes are good leaders.

They’re creating a whole class, a community. College is about so much more than the classroom. How is it that so many parents don’t appear to understand this anymore?

Why don't so many parents understand that their students need to come out of school with a job offer? Low GPA athletes don't get very good jobs. Well, maybe they get a job that is good for them.

That's what i used to think but at DS's ivy - many end up with Wall Street jobs.

Ivy athletes make up to $220k more than non-athletes.

https://www.businessinsider.com/sporty-students-college-jocks-earn-more-than-nerds-study-2023-10

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:NIL will take care of this soon enough.

Ivy League isn't participating in NIL.

Kids who are great for college but have no prospect for pro, now have a real shot of making 200k a year in college. That can change lives.

For student athletes that want to play soccer and then go to med school, yale is great.

But for the kids who never read a book in HS and are now at Yale because they're good at football, they'll look elsewhere and get some payday - or payback for 18 years of training

What college kid is getting 200K a year if they have no shot at going pro?

But as a general premise, yes, I think the Ivy may lose some players to NIL money, but if they're playing at an Ivy, they're generally not the caliber athlete that can be paid that kind of NIL money. I wish the Ivies would offset this with some athletic scholarship money.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:NIL will take care of this soon enough.

Ivy League isn't participating in NIL.

Kids who are great for college but have no prospect for pro, now have a real shot of making 200k a year in college. That can change lives.

For student athletes that want to play soccer and then go to med school, yale is great.

But for the kids who never read a book in HS and are now at Yale because they're good at football, they'll look elsewhere and get some payday - or payback for 18 years of training

What college kid is getting 200K a year if they have no shot at going pro?

But as a general premise, yes, I think the Ivy may lose some players to NIL money, but if they're playing at an Ivy, they're generally not the caliber athlete that can be paid that kind of NIL money. I wish the Ivies would offset this with some athletic scholarship money.

More than you think...the Georgetown basketball player that transferred from Harvard I think will make like $250k and it's highly unlikely he will go pro.

The new UMiami QB is getting paid $6MM and it's debatable if he will even get drafted into the NFL.

[Anonymous]

I understand why some people get mad when they see athletes gain admission to Ivies. They've spent years obsessing over every decimal point on their kid's GPA and while equally obsessing over CS, while little Timmy down the street gets in because he can crack some heads on the football field. Must be infuriating.

My son had no interest in playing for an Ivy, yet now that they are knocking, he is intrigued. Should he reject an Ivy League education because some non-athlete with marginally better stats feels entitled to "his" spot? Please.

It seems utterly ridiculous not to leverage your talents to their fullest potential. The world rewards people who use every advantage they have—academic, athletic, or otherwise. Those clutching their pearls about athletic recruits would happily use their own connections if they had them.

College admissions has never been a pure meritocracy, and anyone pretending otherwise is selling something. If the Ivies value what my son brings to their campus, why on earth would we turn that down?

[Anonymous]

I have a clueless question on how it all works. Not in this world. I know kids really don’t go to anything except Harvard football game at my kids Ivy. Thought I always heard reason they keep up with athletics is to please alumni donors. Does this mean sports used to be popular? What am I missing? I don’t care one way or another, just don’t underhand it all.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I have a clueless question on how it all works. Not in this world. I know kids really don’t go to anything except Harvard football game at my kids Ivy. Thought I always heard reason they keep up with athletics is to please alumni donors. Does this mean sports used to be popular? What am I missing? I don’t care one way or another, just don’t underhand it all.

80 years ago and more, Ivy League schools had some of the most competitive sports teams. Times changed but the traditions haven't.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have a clueless question on how it all works. Not in this world. I know kids really don’t go to anything except Harvard football game at my kids Ivy. Thought I always heard reason they keep up with athletics is to please alumni donors. Does this mean sports used to be popular? What am I missing? I don’t care one way or another, just don’t underhand it all.

80 years ago and more, Ivy League schools had some of the most competitive sports teams. Times changed but the traditions haven't.

That makes sense, thanks!

[Anonymous]

There's a table that applies to the Ivys for football, basketball and hockey. Athletes have to fall into the green boxes, which are a combination of SAT/ACT score and GPA, where both are pegged to your school's averages. So there are cutoff scores, but you have more wiggle room if you have better grades (this parallels the process for non-athletes, obviously). The really low scores were only possible during test optional where there were two different matrixes. Now that Yale is back to test required, you won't see scores that low anymore in any of the Big 3 sports.

[Anonymous]

Everyone justifying the affirmative action for sports by saying the kids have to work so hard and spend so much time at their sport be at that level forget that kids in other activities and and interests spend just as be much time as the athletes but no one is reserving and setting aside spots for the advanced theatre kids, robotics kids, debate travelers, the kids like me that played sports AND worked a job to pay for my sports equipment.

Most kids in the DC area who play sports also have the money and means to play. It’s an industry. Amherst College has roughly the same amount of athletes as the University of Alabama.

Lacrosse costs $$$$ to play. It’s hardly a blue collar sport. Tennis? $$$$. Fencing? $$$$. Gymnastics? $$$$. Hockey used to be more of an accessible sport but that has become part of the affluent club/travel sport culture.

Rowing? $$$$ Sailing $$$$ The list is long and has produced an industry of parents and kids spending time and money hoping it’ll get them into the shorter line to college.

Everyone screams about DEI and affirmative action when the original affirmative action has always been wealth, class, influence, race, gender, and legacy with things like sports allowing some without tremendous wealth to get a leg up. Colleges were originally for white, wealthy or wealthy enough land owning Christian men. There is a reason we had the Ivies and the Seven Sisters. Harvard, Yale, etc. all started hundreds of B years ago to educate certain men. Sometimes they let a Jewish man attend or a Black man. But the seats were reserved for a certain class and type of white man. Just like the country clubs.

Women set up their own colleges or seminaries. Black men and women set up theirs. Jewish people set up theirs too. Eventually the old WASPy mainline schools let in men and women who they had previously kept out but they never really discussed or addressed how their original structure affirmatively helped the groups they served not have to compete with large portions of the population. It created a lot of fragility on the part of the originally favored groups and, rather than admit that their group benefited for 100s of years from not having to compete with smarter but less wealthy men, women, nonwhite, nonWASP/Christian people, they started screaming and pointing at the groups that looked different were why you can’t get in.