Athletes have such an edge

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:All of these post make sense and I am with you in your complaint but the bottom line is that schools have sports teams and, by their nature, sports teams need to be competitive, and to be competitive, you need athletes with unique talents. Get rid of sports teams and problem solved.

That would affect $$$ and tuition would go up.

Even non revenue sports bring in more money from donations than non sports connected families.

So let’s keep the sports (they are fun to watch) and people need to stop complaining.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m OP and it isn’t a fake story….at least on my end. Someone said that it’s possible the kid’s mom lied to me. That is possible but I didn’t think likely. We’ve been friends a long time and she shares good and bad stuff about her kids.

OP there is a difference between the coach offering their support to a player and admissions. There is a whole NCAA process that needs to be followed by schools. Giving your friend the benefit of the doubt, she sounds like she is either uneducated about the process or didn't convey it well to you.

That said your jealousy is not a good look. I guarantee you her DC put in 3-5 hours a day in season and 2+ hours a day in the off season and also got their homework done. It's not news that schools want kids who excel in another area in addition to academics.

This. So many parents don’t understand that non-academic activities are more valuable in the college application process because they show that a student can excel in both: it shows that the student can do well in academics while spending a large amount of time doing something completely different.

Academic activities are not quite as valuable in the process because they usually involve doing some of the same things the student is doing in school. So, the student excels in academics while doing more academics outside of school. Nice, and impressive, but not nearly as impressive as the student who excels in academics while doing something completely different for hours every day.

I just don’t understand why it is so difficult for parents to understand why this is so.

There are plenty of kids who spent hours a day doing non-academic activities -- think student musicians who play at a high level or dancers. My DD trains in ballet for hours a day and is very good. It's even an activity that promotes fitness and discipline -- just like sports! And she gets her homework done. But of course that's going to count for sh** compared to athletics for admissions.

I guess you'll just say I'm jealous and I should have just put her athletics if I wanted the admissions boost. I could have, but I let her choose what she enjoyed, and we'll let the chips fall where they may come admissions time.

We all understand that this is the admission landscape; I'm just pointing out that your argument as to why the admissions preference for athletes has merit doesn't fly.

[Anonymous]

I'm just hoping for my high school junior's sake there is some truth to it. DC works incrediby hard at a very intense private school. Gets okay grades, but definintely in the lower middle of the pack in the school. Beloved by most for being an all-around great kid and is a strong athlete. Not quite strong enough for the top D1 programs, but lower D1 and very competitive DIII are coming after them fairly hard. But is now just waiting for the other shoe to drop when they see their mid-year grades--they're fine, but below admissions standards for the high academic schools that want him. We're hoping just one of them has one of those "coveted" spots that can land them admission!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I highly doubt student athletes are being offered college admission without applying.

My DC is nationally ranked in their sport and attends a test-in magnet program with a 4.0 unweighted GPA. DC spends 99% of the day working on schoolwork or getting better at the sport they compete in. There are many athletes in a similar position. Frankly, schools like athletes-it shows their level of commitment and perseverance.

What sport? I played on a high school with a guy who ended up playing basketball at UNC. Coaches recruiting him asked what his GPA and SAT were and then offered him a spot. No admissions officer at those schools was going to tell a mens basketball coach no for a kid who met the minimum requirements.

DP. For the 100th time there is a massive difference between DI and DIII recruitment, between different sports, between specific schools, and between numerous other factors, too many to list. The problem with these "the athletes have it easy" threads and with responses like the one just above about the UNC basketball player is that it presents generalizations as gospel. Stop with the generalizations.

PP said they doubted there were athletes who didn't apply. If you think that a five star wide receiver going to Alabama is actually bothering to write essays or even fill out 90% of the application, then I have a bridge to sell you.

Clearly the people saying this sort of thing in this thread are talking about athletic recruiting at "elite" academic schools. You can't compare SEC football recruiting to Ivy League non-revenue sports recruiting, they're completely difference worlds and processes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I highly doubt student athletes are being offered college admission without applying.

My DC is nationally ranked in their sport and attends a test-in magnet program with a 4.0 unweighted GPA. DC spends 99% of the day working on schoolwork or getting better at the sport they compete in. There are many athletes in a similar position. Frankly, schools like athletes-it shows their level of commitment and perseverance.

What sport? I played on a high school with a guy who ended up playing basketball at UNC. Coaches recruiting him asked what his GPA and SAT were and then offered him a spot. No admissions officer at those schools was going to tell a mens basketball coach no for a kid who met the minimum requirements.

DP. For the 100th time there is a massive difference between DI and DIII recruitment, between different sports, between specific schools, and between numerous other factors, too many to list. The problem with these "the athletes have it easy" threads and with responses like the one just above about the UNC basketball player is that it presents generalizations as gospel. Stop with the generalizations.

PP said they doubted there were athletes who didn't apply. If you think that a five star wide receiver going to Alabama is actually bothering to write essays or even fill out 90% of the application, then I have a bridge to sell you.

Clearly the people saying this sort of thing in this thread are talking about athletic recruiting at "elite" academic schools. You can't compare SEC football recruiting to Ivy League non-revenue sports recruiting, they're completely difference worlds and processes.

How are they different? The basic strategy remains the same. How is the athlete recruiting at public schools?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m OP and it isn’t a fake story….at least on my end. Someone said that it’s possible the kid’s mom lied to me. That is possible but I didn’t think likely. We’ve been friends a long time and she shares good and bad stuff about her kids.

OP there is a difference between the coach offering their support to a player and admissions. There is a whole NCAA process that needs to be followed by schools. Giving your friend the benefit of the doubt, she sounds like she is either uneducated about the process or didn't convey it well to you.

That said your jealousy is not a good look. I guarantee you her DC put in 3-5 hours a day in season and 2+ hours a day in the off season and also got their homework done. It's not news that schools want kids who excel in another area in addition to academics.

This. So many parents don’t understand that non-academic activities are more valuable in the college application process because they show that a student can excel in both: it shows that the student can do well in academics while spending a large amount of time doing something completely different.

Academic activities are not quite as valuable in the process because they usually involve doing some of the same things the student is doing in school. So, the student excels in academics while doing more academics outside of school. Nice, and impressive, but not nearly as impressive as the student who excels in academics while doing something completely different for hours every day.

I just don’t understand why it is so difficult for parents to understand why this is so.

There are plenty of kids who spent hours a day doing non-academic activities -- think student musicians who play at a high level or dancers. My DD trains in ballet for hours a day and is very good. It's even an activity that promotes fitness and discipline -- just like sports! And she gets her homework done. But of course that's going to count for sh** compared to athletics for admissions.

I guess you'll just say I'm jealous and I should have just put her athletics if I wanted the admissions boost. I could have, but I let her choose what she enjoyed, and we'll let the chips fall where they may come admissions time.

We all understand that this is the admission landscape; I'm just pointing out that your argument as to why the admissions preference for athletes has merit doesn't fly.

If your daughter is at a level where she has an excellent portfolio to share with the chair of the department then she would absolutely be supported with admissions by that department chair. There are lots of very good athletes who put in a lot of time and are not recruited college athletes. The point is schools are looking for excellence in an area besides academics whether it be athletics or the arts etc. I’m specifically talking about too academic schools here which seems to be the root of OPs accusations and hurt feelings.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m OP and it isn’t a fake story….at least on my end. Someone said that it’s possible the kid’s mom lied to me. That is possible but I didn’t think likely. We’ve been friends a long time and she shares good and bad stuff about her kids.

OP there is a difference between the coach offering their support to a player and admissions. There is a whole NCAA process that needs to be followed by schools. Giving your friend the benefit of the doubt, she sounds like she is either uneducated about the process or didn't convey it well to you.

That said your jealousy is not a good look. I guarantee you her DC put in 3-5 hours a day in season and 2+ hours a day in the off season and also got their homework done. It's not news that schools want kids who excel in another area in addition to academics.

This. So many parents don’t understand that non-academic activities are more valuable in the college application process because they show that a student can excel in both: it shows that the student can do well in academics while spending a large amount of time doing something completely different.

Academic activities are not quite as valuable in the process because they usually involve doing some of the same things the student is doing in school. So, the student excels in academics while doing more academics outside of school. Nice, and impressive, but not nearly as impressive as the student who excels in academics while doing something completely different for hours every day.

I just don’t understand why it is so difficult for parents to understand why this is so.

There are plenty of kids who spent hours a day doing non-academic activities -- think student musicians who play at a high level or dancers. My DD trains in ballet for hours a day and is very good. It's even an activity that promotes fitness and discipline -- just like sports! And she gets her homework done. But of course that's going to count for sh** compared to athletics for admissions.

I guess you'll just say I'm jealous and I should have just put her athletics if I wanted the admissions boost. I could have, but I let her choose what she enjoyed, and we'll let the chips fall where they may come admissions time.

We all understand that this is the admission landscape; I'm just pointing out that your argument as to why the admissions preference for athletes has merit doesn't fly.

I would disagree that ballet training counts for nothing. I have a neighbor whose daughter was very qualified academically and was also intensively training in ballet during high school. Video of her dancing was included in her application and she was accepted at a number of schools, including UVa. After college, she went on to dance with a professional company. Other dancers at her training school here were accepted at a number of Ivies.

So, I would say that colleges love kids who spend a lot of time training in music and the arts.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:All of these post make sense and I am with you in your complaint but the bottom line is that schools have sports teams and, by their nature, sports teams need to be competitive, and to be competitive, you need athletes with unique talents. Get rid of sports teams and problem solved.

That would affect $$$ and tuition would go up.

Even non revenue sports bring in more money from donations than non sports connected families.

contributions to colleges from non sports connected families dwarf those of sports connected families. It’s not even close.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If a circus is trying out jugglers, and one drops no balls but the other drops one, which one should they take?

The answer depends on how many balls each managed to juggle and what else they can do while juggling. If you dropped one of 10 while riding a unicycle on a high wire, you are a more impressive act than the juggler who dropped zero of three while standing on two feet.

Not really. Because, in reality then, the kid with excellent grades, extra curriculars, some mediocre sports, amazing test scores, outstanding recommenations, etc. would always pass the kid who is a good athlete and below the other kid in all other factors. No one is saying the kid with good grades is a one trick pony. He has lots of tricks...being a good athlete, is not one of them.

I think that's the thing parents of admitted athletes don't understand, lots of kids spend lots of time on non-athletic pursuits. They are just as dedicated and learn a lot of the same life skills - but it doesn't translate into needing lower stats to get into a top college or get a scholarship.

I've taught at a handful of universities from D1 to almost no sports, there are lots of perks. For instance, athletes get excused absences when even active military students do not. At the most highly ranked schools, generally, I have found that athlete students are more likely to be one dimensional, their only interest is their sport. They haven't had that mix of activities and experiences that other students have had.

it's worse than that. Parents of admitted athletes think that athletic pursuits are inherently better than other non-athletic, non-academic pursuits and that athletics are the only way to learn certain life skills like time management, determination and team work.

Then they all love to claim that their kid was equally qualified academically and didn't get any sort of boost from being a recruited athlete.

When their next non-athlete kid applies, then they complain about all the other kids who 'don't have the test scores or grades' that get in.

What a slow thinker you are.

What an appropriate response - this is level of intellect an athlete needs to demonstrate to get into a t10 school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:All of these post make sense and I am with you in your complaint but the bottom line is that schools have sports teams and, by their nature, sports teams need to be competitive, and to be competitive, you need athletes with unique talents. Get rid of sports teams and problem solved.

That would affect $$$ and tuition would go up.

Even non revenue sports bring in more money from donations than non sports connected families.

contributions to colleges from non sports connected families dwarf those of sports connected families. It’s not even close.

And those families also get in

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:All of these post make sense and I am with you in your complaint but the bottom line is that schools have sports teams and, by their nature, sports teams need to be competitive, and to be competitive, you need athletes with unique talents. Get rid of sports teams and problem solved.

That would affect $$$ and tuition would go up.

Even non revenue sports bring in more money from donations than non sports connected families.

contributions to colleges from non sports connected families dwarf those of sports connected families. It’s not even close.

And those families also get in

Exactly. So you could eliminate sports, admit academically qualified students instead of lowering your standards, and get more in donations. Nothing wrong with that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:All of these post make sense and I am with you in your complaint but the bottom line is that schools have sports teams and, by their nature, sports teams need to be competitive, and to be competitive, you need athletes with unique talents. Get rid of sports teams and problem solved.

That would affect $$$ and tuition would go up.

Even non revenue sports bring in more money from donations than non sports connected families.

contributions to colleges from non sports connected families dwarf those of sports connected families. It’s not even close.

Nope

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

The point is - if there weren't athletes their academic grades and scores would not get them in.

The point is, this is generally wrong. At Ivies, all teams have Academic Index requirements. Research it. There may be a couple kids on the low end of the general student distribution, but then those are balanced by kids at the extreme high end. Way too many people commenting on this thread who have no actual knowledge of the rules and what actually happens.

It is not wrong. A kid I know was offered a spot at Columbia, Vanderbilt and Wesleyan without applying. NO application has been filled out. He’s taken the SAT three times and his super score is not even over 1000. He’s at a small public school with As, Bs and Cs. He hasn’t filled out a single college application yet. Zero. No common app. Nothing. He has taken a sprinkling of honors classes, zero AP classes. He’s played football all four years. Zero other activities.

Sorry guy, but this definitely didn't happen.

Well, it did. He took the spot at Wesleyan and filled the application out. He was promptly accepted. He chose that school bc his gf is a junior and he wants to stay relatively close to her.

Ahh, the "kid I know" story. Unless it's your son, it's not true - NP here with a H who played baseball at Ivy. The coach's offer was conditional on a minimum SAT score and GPA. BTW, the lowest scores are not coming from athletes and legacies, but from the children of celebrities, royals, and mega wealthy (like billions). Some of them have such low scores that they are allowed to "shadow" the first year and then officially enroll the next year, so they won't spoil the scores. One of the celebrities' kids wrote a very honest opinion about the process in the student newspaper and she candidly admitted that she got in because of her mom. It caused a lot of drama.

[Anonymous]

4 kids, all DI athletes at top academic schools, including an Ivy. They all earned it on the field and in the classroom. And the 2 who have graduated are killing it professionally—the fact that they played a team sport and learned how to sublimate the personal and instead focus on the team goals/results has only accelerated their professional success.

[Anonymous]

And both will be in a position to provide donations to their respective alma maters. Schools know what they are doing when looking at athletes in the admission process.