MIT loves athletes!

Anonymous wrote:Why do you still want your kid to go to the school if you don't approve of their sports recruiting and spots for athletes?

Colleges love athletes. Even Caltech!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://www.tiktok.com/t/ZTjMrRUM2/

What do yall think?

The football team is not representative of the typical athlete at Yale.

A friend’s son is at Yale right now playing another sport, one that no one at Yale cares much about. He got in with a 1200.

What sport? Do tell

No they didn’t. You are just stirring the pot. But I personally know a girl who lost her commitment to Yale because she couldn’t break 1400 on her SAT. She’s at Northwestern.

I heard it directly from the kid’s mother. She could be lying but why would she lie about that?

Why do you still want your kid to go to the school if you don't approve of their sports recruiting and spots for athletes?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I find it odd how many folks in this thread are talking about kids scoring 1200+ on the SAT like they’re brain-dead troglodytes. 1200 is the 75th percentile- these are still smart kids. Sure, they played sports at an extremely high level rather than spending their weekends at Kumon and taking their standardized tests six times to achieve a top score, but I’m guessing they can hang academically with the average non-athlete Ivy attendee.

Let’s get real: the scholar athletes getting into Yale via preferential athletic admission by and large go to very very good schools. These are the prep school kids or elite private school. Kids where tuition pushes $30-$60,000 a year just for high school. If they’re coming out of that environment with only a 1200 their parents should be pissed

Unless the private schools force the kids to take SAT prep classes your conclusion is a non sequitur.

The SAT is not a final exam. It’s a complete separate, standardized test. And again, “only” a 1200 is a good score.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's the Yale football team.
First guy had a 19, 2nd a 24, 3rd a 1280, and 4th a 27

My thought is “How hard can this school be if these kids can be successful?”

The hardest part is getting in. It’s always been that way at HYP for liberal arts. Athletes are taking easy majors like Government and STEM courses like Rocks 4 Jocks (intro geology).

https://www.thecrimson.com/article/2013/5/30/the-easy-harvard-class/

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://www.tiktok.com/t/ZTjMrRUM2/

What do yall think?

The football team is not representative of the typical athlete at Yale.

A friend’s son is at Yale right now playing another sport, one that no one at Yale cares much about. He got in with a 1200.

What sport? Do tell

No they didn’t. You are just stirring the pot. But I personally know a girl who lost her commitment to Yale because she couldn’t break 1400 on her SAT. She’s at Northwestern.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have a clueless question on how it all works. Not in this world. I know kids really don’t go to anything except Harvard football game at my kids Ivy. Thought I always heard reason they keep up with athletics is to please alumni donors. Does this mean sports used to be popular? What am I missing? I don’t care one way or another, just don’t underhand it all.

80 years ago and more, Ivy League schools had some of the most competitive sports teams. Times changed but the traditions haven't.

Remember, Yale has the highest number of football championships, even greater than Univ of Alabama.

Anonymous wrote:It's the Yale football team.
First guy had a 19, 2nd a 24, 3rd a 1280, and 4th a 27

My thought is “How hard can this school be if these kids can be successful?”

Anonymous wrote:I find it odd how many folks in this thread are talking about kids scoring 1200+ on the SAT like they’re brain-dead troglodytes. 1200 is the 75th percentile- these are still smart kids. Sure, they played sports at an extremely high level rather than spending their weekends at Kumon and taking their standardized tests six times to achieve a top score, but I’m guessing they can hang academically with the average non-athlete Ivy attendee.

Let’s get real: the scholar athletes getting into Yale via preferential athletic admission by and large go to very very good schools. These are the prep school kids or elite private school. Kids where tuition pushes $30-$60,000 a year just for high school. If they’re coming out of that environment with only a 1200 their parents should be pissed

Anonymous wrote:Ok, big deal they will graduate with 3.5s or 3.6s how else do you get an average GPA of 3.8 when everyone else is getting mostly As with an A- or two thrown in.

it's fine for them.

it's if you want to me be in a small seminar class with a kid who got a 19 on the ACT.

Ok, big deal they will graduate with 3.5s or 3.6s how else do you get an average GPA of 3.8 when everyone else is getting mostly As with an A- or two thrown in.

I think colleges would all be better off if we kept a few revenue generating and profile raising sports, those might be the dirty secret admissions like donor class, and moved on.

So many rich kids getting into Princeton for sailing or water polo. It adds nothing. It's dumb. These kids bring nothing special to the table.The campus would be better off w more kids who have worked jobs or been the yearbook editor and gotten a 1550

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OK, if people really want major college sports to operate like the way college club sports work, where you select a student body sports blind and the students self-organize into teams, you could have student bodies that seem to match the major sports teams in terms of admissions.

Since that is not what America wants, it is not what America gets.

So PLEASE think of D1 stadium sports alumni the same way some people think of affirmative action admits, except worse. They didn't earn the degree. They gave the kids bread and circuses and were supported far enough to not fail out. Their degrees should have asterisks and all that.

Why do you care? Elite US colleges are educating young people to be leaders in society in many different areas. They are looking for students who are outstanding in numerous areas, not only pure academics.

Test scores and GPAs don’t necessarily show how “meritorious” an applicant is. Leadership qualities, in particular, are not measured by test scores.

Again, I am puzzled as to why so many people appear to be confused about this.

This doesn't explain why athletes in NCAA sports are given preference over those in non-NCAA sports. The former are an institutional priority, while the latter is not.

Yes, and that is fine. The school has their reasons for wanting to create a class community of a particular composition, and that is their right.

I don’t understand why people have a problem with this.

I don't have a problem with it, I have a problem with people making up false rationalizations for why, such as "leadership".

It’s odd that you think that “leadership” is some sort of rationalization. It is not at all uncommon for athletes, particularly those involved in team sports, to be good leaders- they tend to go on and use those leadership qualities as adults in their jobs and also in giving back to their communities as volunteers. (And, sure, non-athletes can also be leaders, but we’re talking about athletes here. Team sports really bring out and enhance natural leadership qualities.)

Athletes are an addition to the mix of types of students at a school. No one would want a class to consist entirely of musicians or theatre kids or math whizzes or history buffs or . . . athletes. Schools want kids with a mix of interests and talents. And that’s who the admissions people work on bringing together.

Anonymous wrote:Most Ivy athletes have the entire package. Football/basketball have the most leeway, but they still need to meet the academic index.

AT my kid's Ivy (not Yale) less than 3% scored lower than a 31 composite on the ACT--and what is equivalent to ACT. And less than 1% were below the top 1/4 percentile in GPA.

Since it is 'test required' that shows that very few athletes could score that low. Frankly, with test required there are no low 20s--those dudes obviously got in during the test optional period.

A 3.0 and 1110 sat meets the index. And even getting a 33 is extremely easy relative to getting in as a non-athlete given the relative admissions rates of each (33 act applicants vs athletic recruit applicants)