Friend just announced her junior DD has committed to play lax at a top school

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Disagree. If your friend’s DD is academically qualified and someone who would be a good applicant at that school anyway, the school and student are making a good decision to lock in the relationship. Playing a sport at a level high enough to commit while maintaining grades, etc. deserves to be rewarded just as much as the kid who fiends 20 hours a week in the lab or practicing an instrument. Sports also enhance a school’s community and school spirit, so benefit all students.

Totaply agree! The athlete is providing more "value add" to the university.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:And my senior DD is in the midst of application hell and stress. Athletic recruitment really pisses me off. That’s all.

We knew a girl whose family claimed she was "committed" to an Ivy League college for soccer in 9th or 10th grade. She would wear the sweatshirt, had the Ivy on her instagram profile, and had documented visits on her instagram to the same college a few times. She was one of if not the best players in our orbit — she was also a good student. Her family valued education too but were not overbearing tiger parents.

By fall of 12th grade year she stopped talking about the Ivy and then committed to essentially a public degree mill, especially relative to the Ivy. She went to that diploma mill for a year and then transferred out of there to play at some tiny private non-selective LAC.

I guess the point is recruiting is fluid. It's not anywhere near as glamorous as you think. And most of these kids end up quitting and many transfer out of the college they ONLY chose based on the chance to play a sport.

[Anonymous]

It's funny how parents focus on the 1 or 2 student-athlete kids who make it to a prestige college and ignore the 100s of local student-athletes who pissed away all their teen years to end up getting an "offer" from some podunk tiny college nobody has ever heard of.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It's funny how parents focus on the 1 or 2 student-athlete kids who make it to a prestige college and ignore the 100s of local student-athletes who pissed away all their teen years to end up getting an "offer" from some podunk tiny college nobody has ever heard of.

“Pissed away their teen years” how, exactly? The only thing that my recruited athlete kid missed out on compared to his non-athlete friends or those whose ECs took less time is frequent partying.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:And my senior DD is in the midst of application hell and stress. Athletic recruitment really pisses me off. That’s all.

Too bad your kid isn't coordinated and smart. Some are.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP here. First, I’m happy for them. The girl is very nice and her mom is an old friend.
Second, I don’t think it’s a scholarship, they definitely don’t need the money. I’m just annoyed that her DD is a year behind mine and won’t have to go through most of the college crap and stress mine is currently going through. We are deep in it right now. My DD doesn’t play sports but has other talents, none which get her recruited by colleges.
Third, she has worked hard as an athlete but she wouldn’t be in a position to be recruited if her parents didn’t have the time and money to pay for all teams and tournaments. Let’s face it, for many (I realize there are big exceptions) recruited athletes for sports like lax come from affluent families so the whole system leaves a bad taste in my mouth.
I know this is nothing new. I went to HS with many children of billionaires, most of whom ended up at ivies despite not having the grades. Life is not fair, college admissions is not fair.
I was just venting because, again, I have a very stressed out out senior.

A junior has not received a commitment. Even a senior right now with a verbal commitment from a school could find themselves scrambling last minute. Athletics are effectively part of Early Decision, the deal isn’t settled until about the same time, and athletes are a pool of full pay students for the schools. If they get an aid package, it’s just the regular discounting that particular (lower tier) school offers. Top schools offer nothing. And of course, just like any ED, this limits the athlete to one school, and often not one they would have picked otherwise.

My child is a senior and is a recruited athlete for an Ivy. The likely letter from Admissions was received the first week of October. For Ivies in particular, there are no scholarships for merit or athletics so there's no advantage there.

I can assure you that the process is not any less stressful for recruited athletes than everyone else. In fact, the grades (through the end of sophomore year), SAT scores, and athletic record had to be solidified earlier to receive a verbal commitment at the beginning of junior year, which is technically the earliest for such commitments based on NCAA rules. To be clear, the verbal commitment and coach's support in the admissions process came after a preliminary pre-read by Admissions. My child's full application (essays, recommendation letters, school profile, transcripts, official SAT scores) had to be submitted between September 1-15 of senior year which meant an abbreviated timeline. My child worked all summer on essays to meet this deadline. The fact that essays about your sport are discouraged meant that there had to be other substance there -- other meaningful extracurriculars, experiences, community service -- not just athletics. The admissions criteria for my athlete were the same as for any other student. There was no flexibility with the GPA or SAT score or expectations for being a well-rounded student.

We are not an affluent family by any stretch of the imagination. Definitely working class. My family has made tremendous sacrifices (time and money) to provide the sport as an opportunity for my child. My child has dedicated 25-30 hours a week for years to reach the top of the sport while maintaining exceptional academics. The work has been put in and the admission is well-deserved.

I do not doubt any of this except that the academics are on par with the kids getting in without the athletic recruitment hook. There is a level that they have to achieve but it is not the same. I have two family members that were recruited by multiple Ivys for their sport (sisters and same sport). One went to Harvard, the second decided fall of her senior year that she did not want to do her sport in college because she was an engineering major and wanted to focus on her studies. She had achieved sufficient SAT scores with little effort for when she was a rectruited athlete but she had to study and take them again to get into a comparable level school without the sport hook. She did not get into the same Ivys that were recruiting her but did get into a top 15 school. Yes she was smart and worked hard, but she admitted she needed to turn ither academics up when she walked away from the sport.

Also, they worked hard at their sport but the recruiters came to them, it was not a long term stressful strategy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can someone explain why colleges give lacrosse scholarships? Does lacrosse bring in money for a school?

This is way more info than you probably want.

The only sports that bring in money based on ticket revenue are men's basketball and football. There are probably a handful of women's basketball programs that bring in money (maybe UCONN or Tennesse because of their storied programs.) All the other sports are typically losing money.

Title IX requires an equal number of women and men's sports. So schools with football will typically have more women's teams.

Schools provide college sports for school pride - which does lead to some alumni giving. I have also heard that schools use sports to lure students, the athlete. So if you are a lacrosse player and want to play in college, you try to get into "big name college x." That coach isn't interested in you but the coach from "small college y" is calling you. You decide - they have the program I want to study and I can play lacrosse so now you are a college athlete at "small college y." And "small college y" has your tuition money. You have a positive experience, so you now become a loyal alumni donor.

And the term "scholarship" is mis-leading. A lacrosse player is most likely only getting a small percentage scholarship. And if you're at an Ivy League school (and several of the Patriot League schools), you're getting $0 athletic money - the Ivy League does not give any athletic money.

DP here. Actually is more of a forecasted business decision for universities. University advancement offices are looking for ways to build lifelong financial commitments to their schools; what kind of student will become an alumna/us donor after they graduate, and become one that will consistently give year after year and give big money? You aren't going to like this, but there are theories that the kind of students who play lacrosse come from backgrounds that emphasis team/school pride, will become more active alumnae/I after they graduate and will be more likely to donate money back in the future. Add to that, as lacrosse is an expensive sport to play and somewhat elitist, many lacrosse players come from wealthy backgrounds, meaning they are more likely to be wealthy themselves as adults.

I have been on a few charitable and school boards where these topics are heavily discussed. Lacrosse doesn't bring in money. You can't make a career after college of being a professional lacrosse player. But that student who played lacrosse for your college team may end up working for a hedge fund or Big law down the road and be happy to make large annual donations back to the school.

[Anonymous]

Yup.

Universities should only enroll based on academic merit.
No extra-curriculars.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
Yup.

Universities should only enroll based on academic merit.
No extra-curriculars.

Nope.

Universities should only enroll who they want on their campus. Private ones, at minimum. They get to choose.

You can believe they are choosing poorly, but the idea that you know what is better for them than they do is preposterous.

[Anonymous]

One wonders how much longer this hellish level of neuroticism, credential-envy, and weirdness can continue in suburbs.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP here. First, I’m happy for them. The girl is very nice and her mom is an old friend.
Second, I don’t think it’s a scholarship, they definitely don’t need the money. I’m just annoyed that her DD is a year behind mine and won’t have to go through most of the college crap and stress mine is currently going through. We are deep in it right now. My DD doesn’t play sports but has other talents, none which get her recruited by colleges.
Third, she has worked hard as an athlete but she wouldn’t be in a position to be recruited if her parents didn’t have the time and money to pay for all teams and tournaments. Let’s face it, for many (I realize there are big exceptions) recruited athletes for sports like lax come from affluent families so the whole system leaves a bad taste in my mouth.
I know this is nothing new. I went to HS with many children of billionaires, most of whom ended up at ivies despite not having the grades. Life is not fair, college admissions is not fair.
I was just venting because, again, I have a very stressed out out senior.

A junior has not received a commitment. Even a senior right now with a verbal commitment from a school could find themselves scrambling last minute. Athletics are effectively part of Early Decision, the deal isn’t settled until about the same time, and athletes are a pool of full pay students for the schools. If they get an aid package, it’s just the regular discounting that particular (lower tier) school offers. Top schools offer nothing. And of course, just like any ED, this limits the athlete to one school, and often not one they would have picked otherwise.

My child is a senior and is a recruited athlete for an Ivy. The likely letter from Admissions was received the first week of October. For Ivies in particular, there are no scholarships for merit or athletics so there's no advantage there.

I can assure you that the process is not any less stressful for recruited athletes than everyone else. In fact, the grades (through the end of sophomore year), SAT scores, and athletic record had to be solidified earlier to receive a verbal commitment at the beginning of junior year, which is technically the earliest for such commitments based on NCAA rules. To be clear, the verbal commitment and coach's support in the admissions process came after a preliminary pre-read by Admissions. My child's full application (essays, recommendation letters, school profile, transcripts, official SAT scores) had to be submitted between September 1-15 of senior year which meant an abbreviated timeline. My child worked all summer on essays to meet this deadline. The fact that essays about your sport are discouraged meant that there had to be other substance there -- other meaningful extracurriculars, experiences, community service -- not just athletics. The admissions criteria for my athlete were the same as for any other student. There was no flexibility with the GPA or SAT score or expectations for being a well-rounded student.

We are not an affluent family by any stretch of the imagination. Definitely working class. My family has made tremendous sacrifices (time and money) to provide the sport as an opportunity for my child. My child has dedicated 25-30 hours a week for years to reach the top of the sport while maintaining exceptional academics. The work has been put in and the admission is well-deserved.

I do not doubt any of this except that the academics are on par with the kids getting in without the athletic recruitment hook. There is a level that they have to achieve but it is not the same. I have two family members that were recruited by multiple Ivys for their sport (sisters and same sport). One went to Harvard, the second decided fall of her senior year that she did not want to do her sport in college because she was an engineering major and wanted to focus on her studies. She had achieved sufficient SAT scores with little effort for when she was a rectruited athlete but she had to study and take them again to get into a comparable level school without the sport hook. She did not get into the same Ivys that were recruiting her but did get into a top 15 school. Yes she was smart and worked hard, but she admitted she needed to turn ither academics up when she walked away from the sport.

Also, they worked hard at their sport but the recruiters came to them, it was not a long term stressful strategy.

You doubt that my child's academics were on par with those getting in without the athletic recruitment?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Yup.

Universities should only enroll based on academic merit.
No extra-curriculars.

Nope.

Universities should only enroll who they want on their campus. Private ones, at minimum. They get to choose.

You can believe they are choosing poorly, but the idea that you know what is better for them than they do is preposterous.

Most universities in the world select on academics and don't look AT ALL at extra-curriculars, poor ignorant PP. The US is one of the few to have the incredibly unfair and murky system they have. My kids will go to non-US unis, but I wish, for students like OP's and others, that US universities could stop their completely non-transparent and subjective application process. Just like the supposed "right" to bear arms and the consequences on gun deaths, or gouging corporate middlemen driving life-saving medications sky-high, to name but two other examples, Americans have been brain-washed into thinking these things are set in stone and can never be changed... when actually they're NOT normal and CAN and SHOULD be changed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Disagree. If your friend’s DD is academically qualified and someone who would be a good applicant at that school anyway, the school and student are making a good decision to lock in the relationship. Playing a sport at a level high enough to commit while maintaining grades, etc. deserves to be rewarded just as much as the kid who fiends 20 hours a week in the lab or practicing an instrument. Sports also enhance a school’s community and school spirit, so benefit all students.

Totaply agree! The athlete is providing more "value add" to the university.

Are they? I understand the argument for football and basketball, but once you start going down the list of sports do you even have fans? When you were in college, how many field hockey games did you attend? Did you go to any Tennis matches? Would who have cared at all if your school had a swimmer win an even at a division meet?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP here. First, I’m happy for them. The girl is very nice and her mom is an old friend.
Second, I don’t think it’s a scholarship, they definitely don’t need the money. I’m just annoyed that her DD is a year behind mine and won’t have to go through most of the college crap and stress mine is currently going through. We are deep in it right now. My DD doesn’t play sports but has other talents, none which get her recruited by colleges.
Third, she has worked hard as an athlete but she wouldn’t be in a position to be recruited if her parents didn’t have the time and money to pay for all teams and tournaments. Let’s face it, for many (I realize there are big exceptions) recruited athletes for sports like lax come from affluent families so the whole system leaves a bad taste in my mouth.
I know this is nothing new. I went to HS with many children of billionaires, most of whom ended up at ivies despite not having the grades. Life is not fair, college admissions is not fair.
I was just venting because, again, I have a very stressed out out senior.

A junior has not received a commitment. Even a senior right now with a verbal commitment from a school could find themselves scrambling last minute. Athletics are effectively part of Early Decision, the deal isn’t settled until about the same time, and athletes are a pool of full pay students for the schools. If they get an aid package, it’s just the regular discounting that particular (lower tier) school offers. Top schools offer nothing. And of course, just like any ED, this limits the athlete to one school, and often not one they would have picked otherwise.

My child is a senior and is a recruited athlete for an Ivy. The likely letter from Admissions was received the first week of October. For Ivies in particular, there are no scholarships for merit or athletics so there's no advantage there.

I can assure you that the process is not any less stressful for recruited athletes than everyone else. In fact, the grades (through the end of sophomore year), SAT scores, and athletic record had to be solidified earlier to receive a verbal commitment at the beginning of junior year, which is technically the earliest for such commitments based on NCAA rules. To be clear, the verbal commitment and coach's support in the admissions process came after a preliminary pre-read by Admissions. My child's full application (essays, recommendation letters, school profile, transcripts, official SAT scores) had to be submitted between September 1-15 of senior year which meant an abbreviated timeline. My child worked all summer on essays to meet this deadline. The fact that essays about your sport are discouraged meant that there had to be other substance there -- other meaningful extracurriculars, experiences, community service -- not just athletics. The admissions criteria for my athlete were the same as for any other student. There was no flexibility with the GPA or SAT score or expectations for being a well-rounded student.

We are not an affluent family by any stretch of the imagination. Definitely working class. My family has made tremendous sacrifices (time and money) to provide the sport as an opportunity for my child. My child has dedicated 25-30 hours a week for years to reach the top of the sport while maintaining exceptional academics. The work has been put in and the admission is well-deserved.

I do not doubt any of this except that the academics are on par with the kids getting in without the athletic recruitment hook. There is a level that they have to achieve but it is not the same. I have two family members that were recruited by multiple Ivys for their sport (sisters and same sport). One went to Harvard, the second decided fall of her senior year that she did not want to do her sport in college because she was an engineering major and wanted to focus on her studies. She had achieved sufficient SAT scores with little effort for when she was a rectruited athlete but she had to study and take them again to get into a comparable level school without the sport hook. She did not get into the same Ivys that were recruiting her but did get into a top 15 school. Yes she was smart and worked hard, but she admitted she needed to turn ither academics up when she walked away from the sport.

Also, they worked hard at their sport but the recruiters came to them, it was not a long term stressful strategy.

You doubt that my child's academics were on par with those getting in without the athletic recruitment?

On average, yes. Perhaps your child is an outlier.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Disagree. If your friend’s DD is academically qualified and someone who would be a good applicant at that school anyway, the school and student are making a good decision to lock in the relationship. Playing a sport at a level high enough to commit while maintaining grades, etc. deserves to be rewarded just as much as the kid who fiends 20 hours a week in the lab or practicing an instrument. Sports also enhance a school’s community and school spirit, so benefit all students.

Totaply agree! The athlete is providing more "value add" to the university.

Are they? I understand the argument for football and basketball, but once you start going down the list of sports do you even have fans? When you were in college, how many field hockey games did you attend? Did you go to any Tennis matches? Would who have cared at all if your school had a swimmer win an even at a division meet?

Most schools are in an athletic conference, so they need to field teams in various sports as part of their membership. So yes, the kids are value add.