Acceptance History for Hooked vs Non-Hooked at top private school

[Anonymous]

I’m involved in soccer recruiting and I’ll be the first to say getting a bump in admissions at a top school for being a good footballer is ridiculous.

None of the players have the ability to go to the next level. IMO a bump/hook shouldn’t be given unless you can take the ability to the next level. There are female ivy players that can play at the next level but that doesn’t exist in the men’s game.

Not just soccer - it should be like that for all sports at elite schools.

Katie ledecky? Yes, give her every hook in the world. But not for the others. It’s not pro sports - fill your teams with walkons except for those that show the ability to play post college. Those with that kind of ability have earned their hook IMO.

Ivy League men’s soccer I’m sorry to say is full of kids that have the first touch of a rapist and will never kick a ball at the next level.

[Anonymous]

If you're in the bottom 1/2 as a non athlete, you have the time to take full advantage of the education and ECs. An athlete's time whether that be D1 or even D3 is controlled by sports demands. They have morning and afternoon practices taking up to 6 hours of the day everyday plus weekend travel. Even for the brightest there's limited time to do more than academics and be with your team. Non varsity athletes can cut back on ECs if needed for study, see tutors, see professors, be with classmates to work in groups, or stretch themselves with challenging courses because they have time. I think the luxury of time and ability to choose your day is the difference.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I’m involved in soccer recruiting and I’ll be the first to say getting a bump in admissions at a top school for being a good footballer is ridiculous.

None of the players have the ability to go to the next level. IMO a bump/hook shouldn’t be given unless you can take the ability to the next level. There are female ivy players that can play at the next level but that doesn’t exist in the men’s game.

Not just soccer - it should be like that for all sports at elite schools.

Katie ledecky? Yes, give her every hook in the world. But not for the others. It’s not pro sports - fill your teams with walkons except for those that show the ability to play post college. Those with that kind of ability have earned their hook IMO.

Ivy League men’s soccer I’m sorry to say is full of kids that have the first touch of a rapist and will never kick a ball at the next level.

It would be great to have walk on teams. Kids who have the time and interest to play. And are no longer required to prioritize the sport over their books.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:^^I certainly agree that the treatment of basketball and football players by many D1 programs is shameful, and I think the NCAA is outrageously corrupt for many of its practices. I also agree that an athlete is not going to get much out of the academic side of college if they are incapable of doing the work. But I don't at all think that's true of most recruits in most sports at most top colleges and universities. Also? Half of every school population is going to be in the bottom 50% of the class. Not sure why that should be a deterrent.

Athletes get special treatment - they have tutors and are steered to the easy classes. The coaches tell the athletes that they have to tell the profs that they are athletes. I know of several recruits to HYP - summer before freshman year, a tutor was assigned to these kids because their scores on math portion of the SAT were in the low 600s.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:GPA is meaningless. 50% of high school seniors in the USA have an A average. Give me this chart with SAT scores.

Dear God, you live in a bubble. I assure you 50% of seniors in the U.S. do NOT have an A average.

+1

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I’m involved in soccer recruiting and I’ll be the first to say getting a bump in admissions at a top school for being a good footballer is ridiculous.

None of the players have the ability to go to the next level. IMO a bump/hook shouldn’t be given unless you can take the ability to the next level. There are female ivy players that can play at the next level but that doesn’t exist in the men’s game.

Not just soccer - it should be like that for all sports at elite schools.

Katie ledecky? Yes, give her every hook in the world. But not for the others. It’s not pro sports - fill your teams with walkons except for those that show the ability to play post college. Those with that kind of ability have earned their hook IMO.

Ivy League men’s soccer I’m sorry to say is full of kids that have the first touch of a rapist and will never kick a ball at the next level.

Isn’t the point to field winning teams so the alumni will be happy and bust out their checkbooks? In other words, it’s to bring money into the college. I don’t think the colleges care whether the kids want to play after graduating.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m involved in soccer recruiting and I’ll be the first to say getting a bump in admissions at a top school for being a good footballer is ridiculous.

None of the players have the ability to go to the next level. IMO a bump/hook shouldn’t be given unless you can take the ability to the next level. There are female ivy players that can play at the next level but that doesn’t exist in the men’s game.

Not just soccer - it should be like that for all sports at elite schools.

Katie ledecky? Yes, give her every hook in the world. But not for the others. It’s not pro sports - fill your teams with walkons except for those that show the ability to play post college. Those with that kind of ability have earned their hook IMO.

Ivy League men’s soccer I’m sorry to say is full of kids that have the first touch of a rapist and will never kick a ball at the next level.

Isn’t the point to field winning teams so the alumni will be happy and bust out their checkbooks? In other words, it’s to bring money into the college. I don’t think the colleges care whether the kids want to play after graduating.

I don’t think Michael Bloomberg or zuck care how the teams are doing when they decide to drop 9 digits in donations

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Also, to the person mentioning 1s and 2s on APs, the 4/5 rate was 68% and the 3/4/5 rate was 88%. Few students fail the exam.

Do a little more research. Scores vary by exam. The goal is to have half of test-takers pass. But the score cut offs are set before test administration, so doesn't always pan out exactly.

https://www.totalregistration.net/AP-Exam-Registration-Service/2016-AP-Exam-Score-Distributions.php

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m involved in soccer recruiting and I’ll be the first to say getting a bump in admissions at a top school for being a good footballer is ridiculous.

None of the players have the ability to go to the next level. IMO a bump/hook shouldn’t be given unless you can take the ability to the next level. There are female ivy players that can play at the next level but that doesn’t exist in the men’s game.

Not just soccer - it should be like that for all sports at elite schools.

Katie ledecky? Yes, give her every hook in the world. But not for the others. It’s not pro sports - fill your teams with walkons except for those that show the ability to play post college. Those with that kind of ability have earned their hook IMO.

Ivy League men’s soccer I’m sorry to say is full of kids that have the first touch of a rapist and will never kick a ball at the next level.

Isn’t the point to field winning teams so the alumni will be happy and bust out their checkbooks? In other words, it’s to bring money into the college. I don’t think the colleges care whether the kids want to play after graduating.

I don’t think Michael Bloomberg or zuck care how the teams are doing when they decide to drop 9 digits in donations [/q

Right. But the point is, nobody cares, including Bloomberg or Zuck, about pp’s point that none of these recruited kids is ever going professional. Maybe they should, and I’d be open to hearing arguments why.

And don’t discount the sums contributed by alumni, because they can be substantial.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m involved in soccer recruiting and I’ll be the first to say getting a bump in admissions at a top school for being a good footballer is ridiculous.

None of the players have the ability to go to the next level. IMO a bump/hook shouldn’t be given unless you can take the ability to the next level. There are female ivy players that can play at the next level but that doesn’t exist in the men’s game.

Not just soccer - it should be like that for all sports at elite schools.

Katie ledecky? Yes, give her every hook in the world. But not for the others. It’s not pro sports - fill your teams with walkons except for those that show the ability to play post college. Those with that kind of ability have earned their hook IMO.

Ivy League men’s soccer I’m sorry to say is full of kids that have the first touch of a rapist and will never kick a ball at the next level.

Isn’t the point to field winning teams so the alumni will be happy and bust out their checkbooks? In other words, it’s to bring money into the college. I don’t think the colleges care whether the kids want to play after graduating.

Agree, plus the athletes contribute to the on-campus entertainment options and social life. It's really fun to go see games with your friends, especially at good soccer schools like Wake, Maryland, Georgetown, etc. Incidentally, those schools plus several other academically strong ones (including Stanford and Notre Dame), do produce pro players.