Anonymous wrote:Hockey looks pretty amazing from the draft yesterday. I think I read the lowest salary is $750,000 in the NHL?
Offensive lineman is actually one of the safest football positions in terms of CTE risk.Anonymous wrote:If a kid is 6’5 or taller, yes, this can happen. Have to be ok with your kid playing on the offense or defensive line.
This does not focus on highly selective schools nor does it account for parental income or other socioeconomic factors.Anonymous wrote:Much better odds for ice hockey and lacrosse players: https://www.ncaa.org/sports/2015/3/2/estimated-probability-of-competing-in-college-athletics.aspx
And men's softball?Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:It's such a gross system. 3.5 is frankly terrible for the ivies, but, because some kid spent more time tackling and catching a ball, they will surpass all the kids hard working academic students who might add much more to the campus community. Recruitment makes me sick. Does any other nation allow some of its brightest students to be surpassed by athletes? Last I checked, Oxford doesn't need sports recruits to keep its global prestige, why do top colleges?
What does the average good student add to the campus community? Meanwhile 51,000 people attended the Game last year to watch those 3.5 kids tackle each other
Why does this at all determine your admission to Harvard? It's not like any sizeable amount go on to professional leagues that justifies the massive rah rah schools. It's a backdoor for wealthy kids. Take away the football example, explain to me what softball or rugby are adding that needs to have recruiting.
Softball is needed to balance football for title ix. Rugby is a club sport with no admission bump
6.4 million people tuned in to the League of Legends world tournament - how much preference should their players get?Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:It's such a gross system. 3.5 is frankly terrible for the ivies, but, because some kid spent more time tackling and catching a ball, they will surpass all the kids hard working academic students who might add much more to the campus community. Recruitment makes me sick. Does any other nation allow some of its brightest students to be surpassed by athletes? Last I checked, Oxford doesn't need sports recruits to keep its global prestige, why do top colleges?
What does the average good student add to the campus community? Meanwhile 51,000 people attended the Game last year to watch those 3.5 kids tackle each other
Anonymous wrote:If a kid is 6’5 or taller, yes, this can happen. Have to be ok with your kid playing on the offense or defensive line.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Either your kid goes to a football academy or that didn't happen. If your kid does go to a school where the whole team gets recruited, the odds are very good that the high school coach also recruited
OP here. No, he does not. It's a independent prep school.
Not making this up.
In several cases, these kids have not even played a lot of football. One is not even a starter. One is primarily a track and field athlete. What they are is super athletic and tall/big. In one case that I know well, the coach has basically said: "i know you can do the work at this university and pay the bill and we we can teach you the football piece."
It makes you realize how hard it is to fill the football rosters at some schools (Ivy and similar) both with kids who can do the academic work. It's been wild to see. These kids are completely middle-of-the-pack academically at this tough high school.
Anonymous wrote:No one here has given a reason why recruited athletes should be RECRUITED rather than treated like other extracurriculars for admission to an academically challenging institution.