FCV kid receives FULL ride to UVA

[Anonymous]

Join a service academy you have to play a sport. Why? Teaches leadership AND followership, stay fit, keep out of trouble, make lasting friendships...

Scholarships are only needed because colleges pay professors a crap ton of money to barely teach anything, but bring notoriety to colleges. No one wants to see a chart, but look up costs of college... ffs. Zero reach Stanford needs to charge $50k a year

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Join a service academy you have to play a sport. Why? Teaches leadership AND followership, stay fit, keep out of trouble, make lasting friendships...

Scholarships are only needed because colleges pay professors a crap ton of money to barely teach anything, but bring notoriety to colleges. No one wants to see a chart, but look up costs of college... ffs. Zero reach Stanford needs to charge $50k a year

"Zero reach Stanford?" WTH are you smoking?

[Anonymous]

zero "reason" stanford needs to charge $50k other than paying for overpaid professors. Stanford used to offer world class education at affordable prices, what happened?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Let me try to explain. I don’t think universities and colleges should give out scholarships for athletics. Period. I think an institute of higher learning should focus on academics and research and not sports. I think colleges can have volunteer sports activities where they are self funding (revenue pays for expenses, including facilities, equipment, coaching and travel) and any revenue left over is shared with players. Similar to high school. They can get sponsors and do fund raisers too and even have alumni donations, but no school based revenue (tuition, fees, grants, etc.) goes into those programs and no scholarships. While I get that sports creates a nice brand for universities, that’s not what universities should be competing on. They are supposed to be there to teach young adults and get them ready for the real world. That’s not what they’ve become and this over emphasis on college athletics, sports, etc. is not helping.

If your kid is that good they get picked up by a pro or semi pro team, or they play club or college ball for free, or they play for fun. No more free rides because a kid can kick, shoot, hit, dunk, catch, tackle, swim, run fast, etc.

Why is it that you think colleges should be exclusively for academics? I think they should be much more than that, they should be about producing good members of society. Athletics is a part of that.

Academic and athletic skills are, for the most part, god given, and further developed from there. Why do you think that one is more important than the other? Why should we not have both academic and athletic scholarships?

My opinions is that college is for academics and sports clubs are for sports. That's my opinion. No need to agree with me.

As far as you're other statement, you think academic and athletic skills are God given? You're an elitist. So at birth we should just hand out scholarships to the "lucky" kids with good breeding? Wow. The eugenics poster has arrived. Hate to break it to you, but hard work accounts for 80% of success. Yes, natural ability has a role, but far less than you think.

[Anonymous]

What about Rudy from Norte dame?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Let me try to explain. I don’t think universities and colleges should give out scholarships for athletics. Period. I think an institute of higher learning should focus on academics and research and not sports. I think colleges can have volunteer sports activities where they are self funding (revenue pays for expenses, including facilities, equipment, coaching and travel) and any revenue left over is shared with players. Similar to high school. They can get sponsors and do fund raisers too and even have alumni donations, but no school based revenue (tuition, fees, grants, etc.) goes into those programs and no scholarships. While I get that sports creates a nice brand for universities, that’s not what universities should be competing on. They are supposed to be there to teach young adults and get them ready for the real world. That’s not what they’ve become and this over emphasis on college athletics, sports, etc. is not helping.

If your kid is that good they get picked up by a pro or semi pro team, or they play club or college ball for free, or they play for fun. No more free rides because a kid can kick, shoot, hit, dunk, catch, tackle, swim, run fast, etc.

Why is it that you think colleges should be exclusively for academics? I think they should be much more than that, they should be about producing good members of society. Athletics is a part of that.

Academic and athletic skills are, for the most part, god given, and further developed from there. Why do you think that one is more important than the other? Why should we not have both academic and athletic scholarships?

My opinions is that college is for academics and sports clubs are for sports. That's my opinion. No need to agree with me.

As far as you're other statement, you think academic and athletic skills are God given? You're an elitist. So at birth we should just hand out scholarships to the "lucky" kids with good breeding? Wow. The eugenics poster has arrived. Hate to break it to you, but hard work accounts for 80% of success. Yes, natural ability has a role, but far less than you think.

oof. Did you fail out of the debate club? Your reading comprehension and bullish manner completely obscures any value in your post.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Let me try to explain. I don’t think universities and colleges should give out scholarships for athletics. Period. I think an institute of higher learning should focus on academics and research and not sports. I think colleges can have volunteer sports activities where they are self funding (revenue pays for expenses, including facilities, equipment, coaching and travel) and any revenue left over is shared with players. Similar to high school. They can get sponsors and do fund raisers too and even have alumni donations, but no school based revenue (tuition, fees, grants, etc.) goes into those programs and no scholarships. While I get that sports creates a nice brand for universities, that’s not what universities should be competing on. They are supposed to be there to teach young adults and get them ready for the real world. That’s not what they’ve become and this over emphasis on college athletics, sports, etc. is not helping.

If your kid is that good they get picked up by a pro or semi pro team, or they play club or college ball for free, or they play for fun. No more free rides because a kid can kick, shoot, hit, dunk, catch, tackle, swim, run fast, etc.

Why is it that you think colleges should be exclusively for academics? I think they should be much more than that, they should be about producing good members of society. Athletics is a part of that.

Academic and athletic skills are, for the most part, god given, and further developed from there. Why do you think that one is more important than the other? Why should we not have both academic and athletic scholarships?

My opinions is that college is for academics and sports clubs are for sports. That's my opinion. No need to agree with me.

As far as you're other statement, you think academic and athletic skills are God given? You're an elitist. So at birth we should just hand out scholarships to the "lucky" kids with good breeding? Wow. The eugenics poster has arrived. Hate to break it to you, but hard work accounts for 80% of success. Yes, natural ability has a role, but far less than you think.

oof. Did you fail out of the debate club? Your reading comprehension and bullish manner completely obscures any value in your post.

Re-read what you wrote. "for the most part". You know what you meant. Don't try to deflect, eugenics person. Who'd you discriminate against today?