Why would a school place athletics on an equal or even higher footing than academics?

[Anonymous]

I think Option A is Kevin Plank so I will go with that. The grades seem a little high though.

[Anonymous]

Stupid athletes with "team" skills are not contributing to the world. They don't invent things, they aren't creating businesses, leading corporations, making a difference - they are just louts and followers, drinkers and philanderers. Maybe you like them so you can boss them around - maybe that's the "team" aspect.

Exercise is good, and goals are good. But after 4-5 hours per week, high school athletics are just making kids less educated, less prepared, less well-read. And that's why the world's more focused students are starting to eat our lunch.

If you got C's, I'm not going to hire you. If you got B's, I don't want you either.

And there's a new study, by the way, that says extroverts are not the best sales people. So don't bother with that argument.

Signed,
99+ percentile, 3 Ivy degrees, executive

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Stupid athletes with "team" skills are not contributing to the world. They don't invent things, they aren't creating businesses, leading corporations, making a difference - they are just louts and followers, drinkers and philanderers. Maybe you like them so you can boss them around - maybe that's the "team" aspect.

Exercise is good, and goals are good. But after 4-5 hours per week, high school athletics are just making kids less educated, less prepared, less well-read. And that's why the world's more focused students are starting to eat our lunch.

If you got C's, I'm not going to hire you. If you got B's, I don't want you either.

And there's a new study, by the way, that says extroverts are not the best sales people. So don't bother with that argument.

Signed,
99+ percentile, 3 Ivy degrees, executive

I call BS, Mrs. Sock Puppet. This thread had devolved into the jocks v. the nerds.

[Anonymous]

People act like it's "either - or". It's not. Most Ivy League folks I know are top SATs and excellent athletes. Some people just get an overabundance of talent. I don't think many people on this forum (or maybe it's just one person writing multiple posts) get it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Stupid athletes with "team" skills are not contributing to the world. They don't invent things, they aren't creating businesses, leading corporations, making a difference - they are just louts and followers, drinkers and philanderers. Maybe you like them so you can boss them around - maybe that's the "team" aspect.

Exercise is good, and goals are good. But after 4-5 hours per week, high school athletics are just making kids less educated, less prepared, less well-read. And that's why the world's more focused students are starting to eat our lunch.

If you got C's, I'm not going to hire you. If you got B's, I don't want you either.

And there's a new study, by the way, that says extroverts are not the best sales people. So don't bother with that argument.

Signed,
99+ percentile, 3 Ivy degrees, executive

Dude! You need to go outside and get some Vitamin D. Chill!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Stupid athletes with "team" skills are not contributing to the world. They don't invent things, they aren't creating businesses, leading corporations, making a difference - they are just louts and followers, drinkers and philanderers. Maybe you like them so you can boss them around - maybe that's the "team" aspect.

Exercise is good, and goals are good. But after 4-5 hours per week, high school athletics are just making kids less educated, less prepared, less well-read. And that's why the world's more focused students are starting to eat our lunch.

If you got C's, I'm not going to hire you. If you got B's, I don't want you either.

And there's a new study, by the way, that says extroverts are not the best sales people. So don't bother with that argument.

Signed,
99+ percentile, 3 Ivy degrees, executive

Man! Somebody got too many atomic wedgies in high school.

Too many people seem to think it's a choice between sports or academics. That's a false choice. Just because a kid plays varsity sports doesn't mean he/she will be a B or C student. In fact, moderate physical activity helps kids to focus academically. It doesn't prevent them. And if you think less than one hour a day of exercise is too much for a young developing body, well, that's just pathetic.

This is not to say that some schools don't focus on sports to the detriment of academics. But I wouldn't want my child attending any school where she wasn't required to play at least one team sport per semester. A healthy body and a healthy mind go hand in hand.

Signed,
Somebody who would rather hire a creative, intelligent, and qualified candidate with a broad background than a 2-dimensional caricature from the 99+ percentile with 3 Ivy degrees and obvious emotional issues

[Anonymous]

The problem is that a single-minded focus on sports does not develop a "broad background." How many kids who spend 2-3 hours on sports every day have the energy to read anything other than what is minimally required for school?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Stupid athletes with "team" skills are not contributing to the world. They don't invent things, they aren't creating businesses, leading corporations, making a difference - they are just louts and followers, drinkers and philanderers. Maybe you like them so you can boss them around - maybe that's the "team" aspect.

Exercise is good, and goals are good. But after 4-5 hours per week, high school athletics are just making kids less educated, less prepared, less well-read. And that's why the world's more focused students are starting to eat our lunch.

If you got C's, I'm not going to hire you. If you got B's, I don't want you either.

And there's a new study, by the way, that says extroverts are not the best sales people. So don't bother with that argument.

Signed,
99+ percentile, 3 Ivy degrees, executive

Was that you kissing Bar Refaeli on that GoDaddy commercial?

In law school they saying is that the A students end up working for the C students. The C law students wind up being the rainmakers.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The problem is that a single-minded focus on sports does not develop a "broad background." How many kids who spend 2-3 hours on sports every day have the energy to read anything other than what is minimally required for school?

School 8-3, sports 3-6, homework 6-9

Ummm - yea - they actually do have the time.

[Anonymous]

No horse in this race, but congrats on a pretty decent debate on both sides. Well done!!!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The problem is that a single-minded focus on sports does not develop a "broad background." How many kids who spend 2-3 hours on sports every day have the energy to read anything other than what is minimally required for school?

School 8-3, sports 3-6, homework 6-9

Ummm - yea - they actually do have the time.

This. It's not "either/or" like in some of the hypotheticals above. Although it's more like "homework 8-12" because lots of high school kids get very little sleep. If the only way a kid can get good grades and high SATs is to give up athletics and exercise -- then perhaps that kid is in a school that's too challenging. With good time management skills, your kid gets to run off energy and return to the desk at home to study.

The most selective colleges are not making an either/or decision either. The top colleges can get both in the same kid. We know several recruits to DC's ivy (DC was not a recruit). These kids are NMFs and magnet kids. They are miles away from the straight-C kid that one poster wants us to think is the only option for athletes.

[Anonymous]

When did FDR play football? He went to college around 1900. Besides he was far too handsome and too much of dandy to ever play college football. Maybe you're right but it seems unlikely to me.

Even if he did and even if Ike and Gerry Ford played for West Point and Michigan, the one thing being neglected here is the fact that athletics in those days were single season sports. The players arrived about two weeks before the seasons began and play about 10 football games, 20 basketball games, and about the same number of baseball games. There was no such thing as off-season training in the weight room. After the season was finished the students were off for the next nine months unless they played more than one sport.

Today, college athletes are expected to weight train and condition 12 months a year. Everyone needs to exercise, but from my perspective, unless the kid is so amazing he'll be able to receive a lucrative professional contract off which he'll be able to live comfortably for the rest of his life, well then I think the sacrifice is too great.

Sorry, it seems I have no horse in the race, but I am interested.

[Anonymous]

What sports did FDR engage in?
At Groton School, Franklin D. Roosevelt played football and served as manager of the baseball team and at Harvard College he participated in crew.

I think this thread is about HS sports

Anonymous wrote:When did FDR play football? He went to college around 1900. Besides he was far too handsome and too much of dandy to ever play college football. Maybe you're right but it seems unlikely to me.

Even if he did and even if Ike and Gerry Ford played for West Point and Michigan, the one thing being neglected here is the fact that athletics in those days were single season sports. The players arrived about two weeks before the seasons began and play about 10 football games, 20 basketball games, and about the same number of baseball games. There was no such thing as off-season training in the weight room. After the season was finished the students were off for the next nine months unless they played more than one sport.

Today, college athletes are expected to weight train and condition 12 months a year. Everyone needs to exercise, but from my perspective, unless the kid is so amazing he'll be able to receive a lucrative professional contract off which he'll be able to live comfortably for the rest of his life, well then I think the sacrifice is too great.

Sorry, it seems I have no horse in the race, but I am interested.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Stupid athletes with "team" skills are not contributing to the world. They don't invent things, they aren't creating businesses, leading corporations, making a difference - they are just louts and followers, drinkers and philanderers. Maybe you like them so you can boss them around - maybe that's the "team" aspect.

Exercise is good, and goals are good. But after 4-5 hours per week, high school athletics are just making kids less educated, less prepared, less well-read. And that's why the world's more focused students are starting to eat our lunch.

If you got C's, I'm not going to hire you. If you got B's, I don't want you either.

And there's a new study, by the way, that says extroverts are not the best sales people. So don't bother with that argument.

Signed,
99+ percentile, 3 Ivy degrees, executive [b]and complete fucking wanker

There we go!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:People act like it's "either - or". It's not. Most Ivy League folks I know are top SATs and excellent athletes. Some people just get an overabundance of talent. I don't think many people on this forum (or maybe it's just one person writing multiple posts) get it.

Right.

It actually also responds to OP. If you want to know why private schools emphasize athletics, it's because that's what the best schools are looking for (well rounded kids who excel in a variety of ways), and that's the general recipe for success, however that is defined down the road.