Anonymous wrote:I think it's funny how parents of athletes are twisting themselves into pretzels justifying this completely arbitrary advantage that athletes are given in the college admission process. Yes, your kid puts in long hours -- so do lot of other kids doing music, or theater, or science or dance at a high level. They don't get special admissions processes.

Yeah yeah, sports promotes community and school spirit. So do the performing arts. A tiny percentage of sports bring in money, most do not, yet they still get to recruit. You know that this glaring loophole in college admissions is the reason why the bribery scheme in the "Varsity Blues" case actually worked right? Take a picture of yourself on a rowing machine, call the kid a crew recruit -- voila, admission!

There are other unfairnesses in college admissions of course (legacies), but just because there are others doesn't mean that you can't acknowledge that this one is -- objectively -- unfair.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:When was the last time a bunch of people gathered around to watch someone in a lab? In a debate? They don't.

They pack stadiums to watch sports every weekend and it brings the school tons of money. Even small little academic schools in the northeast have nice sized crowds for their sporting events.

Sorry your kid wasn't able to manage getting great grades and participate in a sport. Most schools value that much more than a kid who gets good grades and is also in the science club.

How many people are at Brown girls lacrosse games? A couple dozen, tops? We're talking about UMC patrician sports, not top 25 D1 football and basketball the brutes play.

Anonymous wrote:When was the last time a bunch of people gathered around to watch someone in a lab? In a debate? They don't.

They pack stadiums to watch sports every weekend and it brings the school tons of money. Even small little academic schools in the northeast have nice sized crowds for their sporting events.

Sorry your kid wasn't able to manage getting great grades and participate in a sport. Most schools value that much more than a kid who gets good grades and is also in the science club.

Anonymous wrote:The anti-athlete posts always seem to boil down to “I’m obsessed with College X, and it upsets me that College X prefers students like your kid. I think they should value the same things I value and only seek out students like my kid. It’s so unfair! Let’s try to change College X so it is more like College Y, which quite properly is seeking kids like mine, but is of no interest to my kid.”

I do have some sympathy for OP’s take on the relative ease of the admissions process for recruited athletes. It was, in fact quite easy for us compared to the process for our kid with no hooks. Our athlete had a top choice school, and they wanted him, so one campus visit, one application, and got letter in August saying he was conditionally accepted and would be formally notified of his acceptance at the same time as RD students barring significant downward trend in grades or serious behavioral incident. Unlike a PP who posted their kid’s Ivy experience, I don’t think the admissions committee cared in the slightest that he only had one real EC. Many of our friends with seniors told us that they hated us multiple times during application season, and they were only kind of joking. We understood.

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.

Anonymous wrote:I think it's funny how parents of athletes are twisting themselves into pretzels justifying this completely arbitrary advantage that athletes are given in the college admission process. Yes, your kid puts in long hours -- so do lot of other kids doing music, or theater, or science or dance at a high level. They don't get special admissions processes.

Yeah yeah, sports promotes community and school spirit. So do the performing arts. A tiny percentage of sports bring in money, most do not, yet they still get to recruit. You know that this glaring loophole in college admissions is the reason why the bribery scheme in the "Varsity Blues" case actually worked right? Take a picture of yourself on a rowing machine, call the kid a crew recruit -- voila, admission!

There are other unfairnesses in college admissions of course (legacies), but just because there are others doesn't mean that you can't acknowledge that this one is -- objectively -- unfair.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:When was the last time a bunch of people gathered around to watch someone in a lab? In a debate? They don't.

They pack stadiums to watch sports every weekend and it brings the school tons of money. Even small little academic schools in the northeast have nice sized crowds for their sporting events.

Sorry your kid wasn't able to manage getting great grades and participate in a sport. Most schools value that much more than a kid who gets good grades and is also in the science club.

When was the last time a stadium was packed to watch a college swim meet?

But because the stadium is packed each Saturday in the fall those swimmers get to swim and you clearly have never been to a big 10 swim meet.

Just look at those dozen spectators. That totally makes the cost of the program worthwhile

[img]
https://bigten.org/common/controls/image_handler.aspx?thumb_id=0&image_path=/images/2019/2/14/Central_Page_Graphic.jpg
[/img]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think a lot of people are failing to understand...there are a lot of kids who have stellar grades and standardized test scores WHO ALSO play sports. When given the choice between two kids who have roughly the same academic credentials, the University is going to take the kid who can help staff a team.

There are really not that many circumstances where academics are totally bent to take a kid who would not otherwise gain admission.

+1

Sure, Allen Iverson totally would have been admitted to Georgetown had he just been in the regular admissions pile

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think a lot of people are failing to understand...there are a lot of kids who have stellar grades and standardized test scores WHO ALSO play sports. When given the choice between two kids who have roughly the same academic credentials, the University is going to take the kid who can help staff a team.

There are really not that many circumstances where academics are totally bent to take a kid who would not otherwise gain admission.

+1

Sure, Allen Iverson totally would have been admitted to Georgetown had he just been in the regular admissions pile

Yet he brought more money into the university then 95% of the people who have ever attended it.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

ok. Does the average student care that their school went winless in the Patriot League in golf?

Anonymous wrote:I think it's funny how parents of athletes are twisting themselves into pretzels justifying this completely arbitrary advantage that athletes are given in the college admission process. Yes, your kid puts in long hours -- so do lot of other kids doing music, or theater, or science or dance at a high level. They don't get special admissions processes.

Yeah yeah, sports promotes community and school spirit. So do the performing arts. A tiny percentage of sports bring in money, most do not, yet they still get to recruit. You know that this glaring loophole in college admissions is the reason why the bribery scheme in the "Varsity Blues" case actually worked right? Take a picture of yourself on a rowing machine, call the kid a crew recruit -- voila, admission!

There are other unfairnesses in college admissions of course (legacies), but just because there are others doesn't mean that you can't acknowledge that this one is -- objectively -- unfair.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think a lot of people are failing to understand...there are a lot of kids who have stellar grades and standardized test scores WHO ALSO play sports. When given the choice between two kids who have roughly the same academic credentials, the University is going to take the kid who can help staff a team.

There are really not that many circumstances where academics are totally bent to take a kid who would not otherwise gain admission.

+1

Sure, Allen Iverson totally would have been admitted to Georgetown had he just been in the regular admissions pile

Yet he brought more money into the university then 95% of the people who have ever attended it.

100%. Honestly, this whole 10 page convo is angry privileged white ladies who want their kids to have a bigger hook in the door that they built to keep others out. They're trying to peddle it as being 100% focused on academics but it's really about keeping who they deem to be subpar out of their institutions. The universities have decided that they value sports. They offer a small amount of scholarships and slots for athletes who meet their requirements. If your kids are able to compete in that world, have at it. IF not, go through the college admissions process just like everyone else. This is not hard.