Reply to Are DII and DIII sports a big scam to get parents to

Forum Index » College and University Discussion

Reply to "Are DII and DIII sports a big scam to get parents to"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]OP's (and some PP's) opinion is rather half-baked in that it seems based on a fair bit of misinformation.

First, there seems to be some misinformation about the benefits of being a D1 athlete. There seems to be an impression that D1 athletes are getting a huge discount on the cost of their education in return for their athletic contributions, but that is true only for a small percentage of athletes. Many D1 athletes are playing without athletic scholarships or with only nominal ones. And only a tiny percentage of D1 athletes go on to play professionally, so it's not like they are making a direct investment in their future careers by playing sports. So if one is going to make an argument about the "big scam" of college athletics, it should be applied across the board, not just to D2 and D3.

Second, OP seems to be entirely unaware of the trade-offs that most college students and their families make between colleges' name recognition, quality, aid offerings, acceptance rate, location, and "fit" and a particular student's stats, interests, and ability to pay. Sure, maybe on the face of it, it makes no sense for a student to turn down an opportunity to play D1 sport at, say, the University of Texas in order to play D3 at, say, Kalamazoo College. But you don't know how much merit aid Kalamazoo offered, how big the athletic scholarship at Texas was, whether the student wants a small school environment, whether the student wants to play at the D1 level (which can take over a kid's entire college life), whether the kid had the grades/stats to get into a more highly ranked D3 school, whether the kid wants to go to school in the south, and what the family can afford to pay. And you don't know what the other options were. Sure, maybe the kid could have played at an in-state university. But maybe Flagship State U isn't recruiting this student, for whatever reason, and so the only real in-state option is Podunk U, which the student doesn't want to go to. Maybe the kid doesn't *want* to play D1 at all, but thinks going to a D3 school offers the best of both worlds--a chance to keep playing but still have a good college life.

These are decisions that many families make, even without sports in the mix. My DS1 is not an athlete, but we faced similar trade-offs. He wanted to go to a small school, not a large one. He had stats that put him in contention for admission to elite SLACs. But most elite SLACs don't offer merit aid, and we don't qualify for much financial aid and can't afford to pay $60k per year. So he focused on SLACs that are a step down from elite, that we knew were likely to offer merit aid to a student like him. In the end, he had offers from 3 SLACs that brought our out-of-pocket cost to $25k-$35k per year. He also was admitted to our large state flagship, which would have cost us $28k per year. He ended up choosing one of the SLACs that costs us $32k. We are willing to spend an extra $4k per year for him to go to the small school that he prefers.

Which leads us to the third issue, which is that OP seems not to know how much in-state college universities cost these days. In-state cost of attendance at UMD-CP is $26k. At UVA, $30k. At W&M, $34k. At VaTech, $25k.

Fourth, most high school athletes aren't good enough to play D1 sports anywhere. So if they want to keep playing, D3 is their only option. And why shouldn't they keep playing if they want to? Someone (OP?) above argues that sports have to end sometime, so it's not worth it to play D3. But then why play in high school either? Sports have to end some time, so why start playing at all? The answer is that for some students sports *are* worth it. They like playing and want to keep doing it. And there are proven benefits--playing college athletics helps some kids stay more focused, but also helps tap many kids into alumni networks that can be very valuable when it comes time to find a job.

IOW, when you see a D3 athlete, you have no idea what her circumstances are. You don't know if she was offered a D1 scholarship. You don't know whether she was good enough to play at the D1 level at all. You don't know how much merit/financial aid the D3 school has given her. You don't know how much it would have cost her to attend her in-state option. You don't know what her grades and test scores were and whether "better" schools would have admitted her. You don't know why she wants to continue playing sports or why she wanted to go to this particular SLAC, or any SLAC. You don't know what her parents can afford to pay. You don't know whether playing that sport gives her or will give her tangible, valuable benefits. IOW, you don't know anything at all. Yet that doesn't seem to keep you from offering your opinion?[/quote]

+1 A voice of reason on many points.  Another thing the OP doesn't seem to know is that some high level D3 teams are actually better than low D1 teams.  Depending on the sport, the quality of play can be very strong, with great competition, and the overall experience for the student athlete can be excellent. Paired with a good/great academic experience at a smaller school, this is seen as win-win for the student.  As this post & other posters make clear, lots of reason student athletes continue to want to compete in college -- love of the sport, camaraderie, good discipline/time management/leadership skills, healthy lifestyle -- whether or not they get any scholarship for sports.  Some students might pick a lower D1 or D3 team where they can play as a freshman or make a contribution sooner, rather than barely making the team, and perhaps where they'll have more balance/less pressure. [/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