Reply to Why do elite SLACs and Small R1s value athletic recruits

Forum Index » College and University Discussion

Reply to "Why do elite SLACs and Small R1s value athletic recruits"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]If all this reform talk wasn’t focused on the maybe 40 or so most “elite” schools it might be interesting but it just comes off as more striver prestige whore BS. Sorry your nerd son might have to settle for, dare I say, Emory![/quote]
I think the point is that nerd sons are wisely foregoing ED at Williams or Amherst since well over 80% of the slots go to athletes or first gen. They are “settling” for lower Ivies. [/quote]
Who cares? Sorry but I don’t feel any despair that upper middle class kids in Fairfax are choosing to apply to Dartmouth instead of Williams.[/quote]

Williams should care. The smartest kids a generation or so ago would sometimes go to Williams. Now, the smartest kids do not even apply: these kids are smart enough to know applying ED to Williams is a waste and that they better use their ED card where it might actually help them. Maybe they won’t get into a lower Ivy ED, but the ED application there at least gives a boost. If they are not admitted, they have Chicago, Hopkins, and a host of ED2 options…[/quote]

Very curious if it really was different a generation ago.  I have a senior applying to LACs this year, mostly NESCACs and few others a notch down.  Not an athlete, just a typical high stats kid with leadership ECs.  It will be interesting to see what happens.  Test scores etc are at or above the median at all these schools, but realize they are all still a crapshoot.

Haven’t these schools always had the same size rosters as today and so presumably athletics have always been prioritized?  [/quote]
The numbers are there; this was different even 10 years ago. ED being a disadvantage is a recent phenomenon — maybe 5 years ago — because a threshold was reached due to the heightened competitiveness of admissions generally (while the number of athletes stayed the same). It’s a feedback loop that is only beginning. (It does not apply to schools like Midd, where ED is still an advantage because 70% of the class is filled ED.)[/quote]

When you think about it then, there are couple constants: class size and roster size.  Those have not changed.  The variable is the volume of applications.  Suddenly when no one is getting in, it feels like only the athletes are getting in.

The reality maybe is that the schools are driving this via the common app, no supplements, and not even caring about demonstrated interest a lot of times.  I’m the PP who has a senior looking at NESCACs. He is applying to 17 colleges, some require zero extra effort so, considering low acceptance rates, what not.  That seems to be the root of the problem: the games these schools are playing to create the illusion of selectivity.  Even the test optional thing is part of it.  I think Dartmouth is doing it right: hard supplements and test required.  Rankings and the chase
for selectivity etc are like a cancer within these schools.

As for the athletes, I’m thinking don’t hate the player, hate the game.  
[/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics