Hating donut hole life: athletic recruiting version

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:OP here, thanks for the replies.

To clarify, we did set financial expectations when DC first started looking at colleges. We ran the NPC and didn't qualify for aid. Told DC we couldn't afford it. Several D3 coaches told DC don't worry about it because they hear that all the time from students who end up getting aid and the NPC isn't necessarily accurate. Well, it turns out that the NPC is very accurate.

DC did get athletic scholarship offers from D1 schools, but DC wanted an SLAC.

DC has good grades, which honestly seems to complicate things even more. If DC had lower grades, then some of these other D1 schools with a very generous athletic scholarship but lower admission standards would have made more sense.

We're talking offers from the top NESCACS, which would be a great fit both academically and athletically. Technically we could pay for it, but it would tank our retirement if we did that for both kids. Hence the donut hole dilemma.

This recruiting process is a lot of work (not even counting the athletic training!) and isn't transparent. It sounds like my story is helping at least a couple posters think more clearly about their own kid's situation. I feel like a really sh*tty parent right now and my kid is hurting. If sharing saves a few other families from this, then that's a good thing.

I hope everyone's kid finds a good fit that works for their family's budget.

Look, I get it. But Amherst or Williams are probably worth it. Other NESCACs, probably not.

Is other kid going to be an athletic recruit? Maybe second kid won’t be as expensive…

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Colleges shouldn’t be giving athletes special treatment and easy admissions.

Sports should be treated as a valued extra-curricular that factors into the admissions equation, but in recent years this has become dramatically over-weighted. Coaches should have little to no say in the process. However, they have increased their involvement dramatically, which is understandable from their perspective because their livelihood depends on it. As much as some of these schools are playing at a seemingly very low level, if a coach has an awful record for several years in a row, they are likely to lose their job - if Bates volleyball or Skidmore softball win one game a year for 3-4 straight years, those coaches are likely done. So it is in their best interest to influence who gets in so they can have the best team possible.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Really hard to feel sorry for people when the athletic hook doesn’t work for them.

It’s not hard if you’re not an ahole because you know how much work the kid put into it.

Our kids who study hard, act in plays, win speech & debate competitions, tutor peers, and write for the paper also are kids who put a lot a lot of work in. they just don't feel as entitled to gain admission with lower academic standards!

why should students whose EC is sports gain admission with lower academic standards to play sports that don't bring any benefit to the school's other students? who watches cross-country, volleyball, squash, etc.?

at least diversity helps everyone by not having people in bubbles.

[Anonymous]

If your kid can get D1 offers, are schools like Lafayette, HC, Davidson or Richmond not good enough? They provide athletic scholarships.

[Anonymous]

OP, will kids overlap in college ever? You could run the NPC as if 2 kids are in college and that would be true for the (year? two?) that they will overlap in the future.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Really hard to feel sorry for people when the athletic hook doesn’t work for them.

It’s not hard if you’re not an ahole because you know how much work the kid put into it.

Our kids who study hard, act in plays, win speech & debate competitions, tutor peers, and write for the paper also are kids who put a lot a lot of work in. they just don't feel as entitled to gain admission with lower academic standards!

why should students whose EC is sports gain admission with lower academic standards to play sports that don't bring any benefit to the school's other students? who watches cross-country, volleyball, squash, etc.?

at least diversity helps everyone by not having people in bubbles.

CMU theatre kids don’t need test scores or grades anywhere approaching the non-theatre students. This is true of other schools with strong arts programs.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Really hard to feel sorry for people when the athletic hook doesn’t work for them.

It’s not hard if you’re not an ahole because you know how much work the kid put into it.

Our kids who study hard, act in plays, win speech & debate competitions, tutor peers, and write for the paper also are kids who put a lot a lot of work in. they just don't feel as entitled to gain admission with lower academic standards!

why should students whose EC is sports gain admission with lower academic standards to play sports that don't bring any benefit to the school's other students? who watches cross-country, volleyball, squash, etc.?

at least diversity helps everyone by not having people in bubbles.

CMU theatre kids don’t need test scores or grades anywhere approaching the non-theatre students. This is true of other schools with strong arts programs.

Do they get pre reads? I didn’t think so.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:DD is at an Ivy playing her sport. She got zero financial aid. She's now a sophomore and has been a really hard road. She doesn't get much playing time and doesn't get along with her teammates very much. The students at the school are a little weird because they are so so smart and she still working on making friends. The grass is not always greener. In hindsight, I would have encouraged her skip to D1 and just go in-state as a regular applicant.

this is the problem when Ivies and other top schools relax the academic standards too much for athletes. Then if the kid doesn’t continue with the sport then they also don’t really fit in/match the level of the rest of the kids who got in on academic merit. This was my experience at one of the Ivies.

Yes yes yes. Even when they continue it is a problem. The ivy kids who are recruited athletes are more commonly than not weaker students, sometimes signifciantly. They struggle to just be average in difficult "curved to the mean" classes paths such as physics, calc, econ, engineering. Most do not attempt such classes or if they do they switch out. To be fair, for the non-athletes it is nice to have a guaranteed group who cannot compete well, and you can beat. I realize that sounds harsh but with grades on curves it matters and the non-athletes/non-weaker other hooks are happy to have whatever advantage they can.

[Anonymous]

It was irresponsible for the coach to say that. Some coaches seem much more focused on the financial piece than others.

Being a recruited athlete is mostly an admissions boost for qualified, full-pay students. Contrary to what people say on this board, it doesn't help totally unqualified students get into top schools in most cases (there may be an exception here or there for tippy-top athletes), and it only helps w/ finances for the very best athletes.

OP -- maybe tell us what sport this is for. Sometimes there are really solid schools good at certain sports with merit aid (Kenyon and Denison for swimming, for example).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:DD is at an Ivy playing her sport. She got zero financial aid. She's now a sophomore and has been a really hard road. She doesn't get much playing time and doesn't get along with her teammates very much. The students at the school are a little weird because they are so so smart and she still working on making friends. The grass is not always greener. In hindsight, I would have encouraged her skip to D1 and just go in-state as a regular applicant.

this is the problem when Ivies and other top schools relax the academic standards too much for athletes. Then if the kid doesn’t continue with the sport then they also don’t really fit in/match the level of the rest of the kids who got in on academic merit. This was my experience at one of the Ivies.

Yes yes yes. Even when they continue it is a problem. The ivy kids who are recruited athletes are more commonly than not weaker students, sometimes signifciantly. They struggle to just be average in difficult "curved to the mean" classes paths such as physics, calc, econ, engineering. Most do not attempt such classes or if they do they switch out. To be fair, for the non-athletes it is nice to have a guaranteed group who cannot compete well, and you can beat. I realize that sounds harsh but with grades on curves it matters and the non-athletes/non-weaker other hooks are happy to have whatever advantage they can.

Easily 50% of all athletes…and more like 75% for sports like fencing or squash…have stats that are at the 50%ile+ for the Ivy school. They have to for the academic indexes to balance out.

I don’t disagree they aren’t recruiting athletes with lower stats…but you are implying a much larger %age than is actual.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:DD is at an Ivy playing her sport. She got zero financial aid. She's now a sophomore and has been a really hard road. She doesn't get much playing time and doesn't get along with her teammates very much. The students at the school are a little weird because they are so so smart and she still working on making friends. The grass is not always greener. In hindsight, I would have encouraged her skip to D1 and just go in-state as a regular applicant.

this is the problem when Ivies and other top schools relax the academic standards too much for athletes. Then if the kid doesn’t continue with the sport then they also don’t really fit in/match the level of the rest of the kids who got in on academic merit. This was my experience at one of the Ivies.

Yes yes yes. Even when they continue it is a problem. The ivy kids who are recruited athletes are more commonly than not weaker students, sometimes signifciantly. They struggle to just be average in difficult "curved to the mean" classes paths such as physics, calc, econ, engineering. Most do not attempt such classes or if they do they switch out. To be fair, for the non-athletes it is nice to have a guaranteed group who cannot compete well, and you can beat. I realize that sounds harsh but with grades on curves it matters and the non-athletes/non-weaker other hooks are happy to have whatever advantage they can.

Easily 50% of all athletes…and more like 75% for sports like fencing or squash…have stats that are at the 50%ile+ for the Ivy school. They have to for the academic indexes to balance out.

I don’t disagree they aren’t recruiting athletes with lower stats…but you are implying a much larger %age than is actual.

As do most rejected applicants.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:DD is at an Ivy playing her sport. She got zero financial aid. She's now a sophomore and has been a really hard road. She doesn't get much playing time and doesn't get along with her teammates very much. The students at the school are a little weird because they are so so smart and she still working on making friends. The grass is not always greener. In hindsight, I would have encouraged her skip to D1 and just go in-state as a regular applicant.

It can be very hard. Mine was in a similar situation with Patriot League and NESCAC offers while still in process at a couple of Ivies. After a conversation with a former teammate who was at Dartmouth she took a NESCAC offer rather than continue on the D1 path. Last fall there was a bit of FOMO but now we can all see that it was the best decision for her, great schools. athletic discipline but also a semester each year where they can have a typical student life. D1 is not always the answer.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:DD is at an Ivy playing her sport. She got zero financial aid. She's now a sophomore and has been a really hard road. She doesn't get much playing time and doesn't get along with her teammates very much. The students at the school are a little weird because they are so so smart and she still working on making friends. The grass is not always greener. In hindsight, I would have encouraged her skip to D1 and just go in-state as a regular applicant.

this is the problem when Ivies and other top schools relax the academic standards too much for athletes. Then if the kid doesn’t continue with the sport then they also don’t really fit in/match the level of the rest of the kids who got in on academic merit. This was my experience at one of the Ivies.

You weren't smart enough but somehow got in?

Academic standards at the Ivies are relaxed somewhat but still plenty high enough. I have to call Bull.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:DD is at an Ivy playing her sport. She got zero financial aid. She's now a sophomore and has been a really hard road. She doesn't get much playing time and doesn't get along with her teammates very much. The students at the school are a little weird because they are so so smart and she still working on making friends. The grass is not always greener. In hindsight, I would have encouraged her skip to D1 and just go in-state as a regular applicant.

this is the problem when Ivies and other top schools relax the academic standards too much for athletes. Then if the kid doesn’t continue with the sport then they also don’t really fit in/match the level of the rest of the kids who got in on academic merit. This was my experience at one of the Ivies.

Yes yes yes. Even when they continue it is a problem. The ivy kids who are recruited athletes are more commonly than not weaker students, sometimes signifciantly. They struggle to just be average in difficult "curved to the mean" classes paths such as physics, calc, econ, engineering. Most do not attempt such classes or if they do they switch out. To be fair, for the non-athletes it is nice to have a guaranteed group who cannot compete well, and you can beat. I realize that sounds harsh but with grades on curves it matters and the non-athletes/non-weaker other hooks are happy to have whatever advantage they can.

Easily 50% of all athletes…and more like 75% for sports like fencing or squash…have stats that are at the 50%ile+ for the Ivy school. They have to for the academic indexes to balance out.

I don’t disagree they aren’t recruiting athletes with lower stats…but you are implying a much larger %age than is actual.

As do most rejected applicants.

We get that…but PP implied most athletes are weaker students which isn’t true.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:many private D3 schools are just a waste if you aren't getting any money. D3 LACs are basically luxury goods. you don't need to go there, but it feels like an upscale summer camp or boarding school when you do! public schools are bigger and more fun and they get you to the same destination without meeting as many insufferable sheltered teens.

play well enough to get college paid for in D1 or else give up the sport and focus on academics and other parts of your life you've been missing.

There is an awful lot of "just plain dumb" in this post.