Anonymous wrote:
It’s well known that academic standards are lower for athletes. I can’t believe someone is trying to argue this isn’t the case, might as well argue the earth isn’t round. Of course, some athletic admits might meet normal admission standards.

My kids have gone to a "big3" in DC. Between their two grades and various team mates of various sports, I can pretty much attest that to an applicant, every one these kids are as academically qualified as any "regular" academic student, the only difference being they are bringing a sport to the table as an applicant. Obviously there is the rare Allen Iverson, but you are kidding yourself if you think all of the athletes admitted, particularly to D3 and IVY schools are dumb jock not worthy of the academic slot.

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.

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.

The brutes? The elitism is just dripping from this PP. don’t feel for your or your kid one bit.

+1. That caught my eye as quite the tell.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: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.

I think some of people's frustration with the process is that athletes are rewarded more than scientists and musicians. (Know any juniors who are biochemists or pianists who have been recruited?)

The scientists and musicians are absolutely desired by top schools but the process is later than for athletes. College athletics is what it is. Just focus on the best path for your student.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

A junior has not received a commitment. Even a senior right now with a verbal commitment from a school could find themselves scrambling last minute. Athletics are effectively part of Early Decision, the deal isn’t settled until about the same time, and athletes are a pool of full pay students for the schools. If they get an aid package, it’s just the regular discounting that particular (lower tier) school offers. Top schools offer nothing. And of course, just like any ED, this limits the athlete to one school, and often not one they would have picked otherwise.

My child is a senior and is a recruited athlete for an Ivy. The likely letter from Admissions was received the first week of October. For Ivies in particular, there are no scholarships for merit or athletics so there's no advantage there.

I can assure you that the process is not any less stressful for recruited athletes than everyone else. In fact, the grades (through the end of sophomore year), SAT scores, and athletic record had to be solidified earlier to receive a verbal commitment at the beginning of junior year, which is technically the earliest for such commitments based on NCAA rules. To be clear, the verbal commitment and coach's support in the admissions process came after a preliminary pre-read by Admissions. My child's full application (essays, recommendation letters, school profile, transcripts, official SAT scores) had to be submitted between September 1-15 of senior year which meant an abbreviated timeline. My child worked all summer on essays to meet this deadline. The fact that essays about your sport are discouraged meant that there had to be other substance there -- other meaningful extracurriculars, experiences, community service -- not just athletics. The admissions criteria for my athlete were the same as for any other student. There was no flexibility with the GPA or SAT score or expectations for being a well-rounded student.

We are not an affluent family by any stretch of the imagination. Definitely working class. My family has made tremendous sacrifices (time and money) to provide the sport as an opportunity for my child. My child has dedicated 25-30 hours a week for years to reach the top of the sport while maintaining exceptional academics. The work has been put in and the admission is well-deserved.

I do not doubt any of this except that the academics are on par with the kids getting in without the athletic recruitment hook. There is a level that they have to achieve but it is not the same. I have two family members that were recruited by multiple Ivys for their sport (sisters and same sport). One went to Harvard, the second decided fall of her senior year that she did not want to do her sport in college because she was an engineering major and wanted to focus on her studies. She had achieved sufficient SAT scores with little effort for when she was a rectruited athlete but she had to study and take them again to get into a comparable level school without the sport hook. She did not get into the same Ivys that were recruiting her but did get into a top 15 school. Yes she was smart and worked hard, but she admitted she needed to turn ither academics up when she walked away from the sport.

Also, they worked hard at their sport but the recruiters came to them, it was not a long term stressful strategy.

You doubt that my child's academics were on par with those getting in without the athletic recruitment?

On average, yes. Perhaps your child is an outlier.

Perhaps your sample size of 2 contains 2 outliers. You really shouldn't make generalizations which only serve to diminish the qualifications and accomplishments of others. You could not possibly have knowledge to support your "on average" comment applied across the thousands of athletes recruited at roughly 1100 colleges that offer a combination of 24 NCAA sports.

Read. "Who Gets and Why", in 2018 157 of Amherst's 490 Freshmen were recruited athletes. That is over 25% of the student body at a top SLAC. The athlete profiled in that book had strong grades but had to pull his SAT up to 1300 to get in. Not exactly the same bar as unhooked applicants. So perhaps the PP's student was an athlete and had a 1500 SAT and 4.6 GPA, but that is not the average. When looking at common data sets it is my understanding to ignore the SAT range of the bottom 25% because that is for athletes and other hooks.

I am sure there are very smart kids that are recruited athletes. There are thousands of smart kids. This is an advantage and they are not competing on the same playing field as kids that rely on academics and other accomplishments. It is what it is.

It’s well known that academic standards are lower for athletes. I can’t believe someone is trying to argue this isn’t the case, might as well argue the earth isn’t round. Of course, some athletic admits might meet normal admission standards.

Anonymous wrote:Sports crazy parents need to add up all the roster spaces at the top private colleges. Far less than lottery odds your kid is one of them. And all of teams give the nod to filthy rich families over random joe blow striver from the DMV. Talent is a secondary consideration.

I bet you all laugh and make fun of “dumb” poor people for wasting money on scratch off lottery tickets.

If your good not great athlete plays at “the next level” it’s prob going to be some podunk crap college nobody has ever heard of. And they’ll most likely quit the team after a year and transfer to the state university all their friends are at. I’ve seen this play out hundreds of times.

You think there are a lot of posters (any posters?) on the DCUM College and University forum who show up to post at all if their kid ends up at a “podunk crap college” for whatever reason? Is this your first time on DCUM?

Anonymous wrote:I have 4 kids who all got into great schools because they were recruited athletes. It was worth it. And the ones that have graduated are killing it because their employers recognize the value they bring as a “team” player and the ability to deal with adversity.

So you’re in your 60s with 4 adult children posting on a college admissions forum? Okay troll.

Sports crazy parents need to add up all the roster spaces at the top private colleges. Far less than lottery odds your kid is one of them. And all of teams give the nod to filthy rich families over random joe blow striver from the DMV. Talent is a secondary consideration.

I bet you all laugh and make fun of “dumb” poor people for wasting money on scratch off lottery tickets.

If your good not great athlete plays at “the next level” it’s prob going to be some podunk crap college nobody has ever heard of. And they’ll most likely quit the team after a year and transfer to the state university all their friends are at. I’ve seen this play out hundreds of times.

I have 4 kids who all got into great schools because they were recruited athletes. It was worth it. And the ones that have graduated are killing it because their employers recognize the value they bring as a “team” player and the ability to deal with adversity.

IMHO, the issue in this post is not the star basketball and football players at major D1 universities (those are a whole other set of issues). It is the large percentage of admits to smaller top academic schools that go to athletes.

I do not resent it, but I also recognize that they are getting in for their athletic abilities, not their academic caliber. I call BS that the parents of these students think their kids are getting in on their academic merit the same as the non athletes (and the legacy and other hooks are no better).

Plus the entire SEC — no academic standards for athletes.

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.

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.

The brutes? The elitism is just dripping from this PP. don’t feel for your or your kid one bit.

You're right, Kyrie Irving who thinks the Earth is flat at Duke... all the other athletes caught cheating, who talk and tweet like they have the education of a 4th grader... UNC caught faking entire departments for student-athletes... means they all earned their way in and totally take real university-level courses...

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

B.S. Student-athlete + URM.

Reading the long post a few above this from an athlete parent makes me think we need a D1 sports commiseration/inspiration thread in the General Sports forum. I too now understand why a lot of businesses prioritize college athletes. If you demonstrate that you can perform well on the field, get decent grades, and accept as normal a situation where your teammates are trying to steal your spot, your coaches feel free to yell at and humiliate you and work you until you collapse (sometimes literally, and in your own vomit), and you are willing to play through illness and injury? Why wouldn't that be attractive for a company looking for a hard worker (corporate cog)?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

A junior has not received a commitment. Even a senior right now with a verbal commitment from a school could find themselves scrambling last minute. Athletics are effectively part of Early Decision, the deal isn’t settled until about the same time, and athletes are a pool of full pay students for the schools. If they get an aid package, it’s just the regular discounting that particular (lower tier) school offers. Top schools offer nothing. And of course, just like any ED, this limits the athlete to one school, and often not one they would have picked otherwise.

My child is a senior and is a recruited athlete for an Ivy. The likely letter from Admissions was received the first week of October. For Ivies in particular, there are no scholarships for merit or athletics so there's no advantage there.

I can assure you that the process is not any less stressful for recruited athletes than everyone else. In fact, the grades (through the end of sophomore year), SAT scores, and athletic record had to be solidified earlier to receive a verbal commitment at the beginning of junior year, which is technically the earliest for such commitments based on NCAA rules. To be clear, the verbal commitment and coach's support in the admissions process came after a preliminary pre-read by Admissions. My child's full application (essays, recommendation letters, school profile, transcripts, official SAT scores) had to be submitted between September 1-15 of senior year which meant an abbreviated timeline. My child worked all summer on essays to meet this deadline. The fact that essays about your sport are discouraged meant that there had to be other substance there -- other meaningful extracurriculars, experiences, community service -- not just athletics. The admissions criteria for my athlete were the same as for any other student. There was no flexibility with the GPA or SAT score or expectations for being a well-rounded student.

We are not an affluent family by any stretch of the imagination. Definitely working class. My family has made tremendous sacrifices (time and money) to provide the sport as an opportunity for my child. My child has dedicated 25-30 hours a week for years to reach the top of the sport while maintaining exceptional academics. The work has been put in and the admission is well-deserved.

I do not doubt any of this except that the academics are on par with the kids getting in without the athletic recruitment hook. There is a level that they have to achieve but it is not the same. I have two family members that were recruited by multiple Ivys for their sport (sisters and same sport). One went to Harvard, the second decided fall of her senior year that she did not want to do her sport in college because she was an engineering major and wanted to focus on her studies. She had achieved sufficient SAT scores with little effort for when she was a rectruited athlete but she had to study and take them again to get into a comparable level school without the sport hook. She did not get into the same Ivys that were recruiting her but did get into a top 15 school. Yes she was smart and worked hard, but she admitted she needed to turn ither academics up when she walked away from the sport.

Also, they worked hard at their sport but the recruiters came to them, it was not a long term stressful strategy.

You doubt that my child's academics were on par with those getting in without the athletic recruitment?

On average, yes. Perhaps your child is an outlier.

Perhaps your sample size of 2 contains 2 outliers. You really shouldn't make generalizations which only serve to diminish the qualifications and accomplishments of others. You could not possibly have knowledge to support your "on average" comment applied across the thousands of athletes recruited at roughly 1100 colleges that offer a combination of 24 NCAA sports.

Read. "Who Gets and Why", in 2018 157 of Amherst's 490 Freshmen were recruited athletes. That is over 25% of the student body at a top SLAC. The athlete profiled in that book had strong grades but had to pull his SAT up to 1300 to get in. Not exactly the same bar as unhooked applicants. So perhaps the PP's student was an athlete and had a 1500 SAT and 4.6 GPA, but that is not the average. When looking at common data sets it is my understanding to ignore the SAT range of the bottom 25% because that is for athletes and other hooks.

I am sure there are very smart kids that are recruited athletes. There are thousands of smart kids. This is an advantage and they are not competing on the same playing field as kids that rely on academics and other accomplishments. It is what it is.

The initial post discussed a high school junior who had decided on a college and the poster’s child who was dealing with college apps and admittance in her Senior year. I did the post pointing out that kids playing non-revenue college sports (not football or basketball at Power5 conference schools), had as much, and frankly it is a lot more stress with their own “application” process, but that it took place when they were Sophomores and Juniors.

I dropped in to note that the next step of actually playing a college sport is an entirely different animal than what any kid does before college. The sport is who you are and what you do at college. You are a lacrosse player, swimmer, soccer player, or whatever. You will be spending all your free time on your sport before and during the college season, and most of your free time when the season is over. That makes for a very different college experience.

Now, NCAA rules limit college athletes’ involvement in their sport to 20 hours a week during the defined season and 7 hours a week out of the defined season. But - the 20 hours does not include travel time nor does it include “volunteered” time. So - not surprisingly, you volunteer to do weightroom, physical therapy, and film review. The time limits also do not apply to the time it takes for you to transport yourself to and from practice, as well as change and get ready for practices and games. Got a 15 minute walk to practice, plus change into practice gear and stretch, get taped up, and get to the field - say another hour - none of that counts in that time limit. Got to ice down anything after practice, then shower and change and walk back to your dorm. Not part of the time limit hours.

The reality is that during the season - kids eat, sleep, go to class, go to required study hours (needed), go to practice and go to games. There is not much time to do anything else. Out of season the kids do have more free time, but they still will have a steady practice and team commitment. So - what all that means is if a kid is not playing, or likely to play a lot next year, they will quit and maybe transfer. I tell parents of athletes all the time to go to the team website for any school their kid is considering and look at the number of seniors on the team. Then go back 4 years and look at the number of freshmen on the team. Typically at least half and often two-thirds of those freshmen will be gone by their senior year.

Why? It is a very different atmosphere than prior to college. The coach is not your friend. Your parents are not paying the coach. The coach wants you to stay out of trouble, follow the rules, be ready to play - and always be improving. And, if you do not do those things - the coach wants you gone so that your scholarship money can be given to someone else.

Your teammates are mostly not your friends either. Everyone wants the team to do well, but everyone also wants to play. If you play that means someone else is sitting out, and they want to play. If you get hurt or do poorly, they will play. They absolutely want the team to do well, but there will be teammates who are not very sad if you get injured and cannot play, or if you don’t do great and lose playing time. There are no “I”s in “team”, but there are two in “playing time”. Being on a college team takes way too much time and effort to not also play.

Additionally, because of the time commitments required, it is very important for non-revenue sport athletes to make sure they can do the academic side of things. Yes there are general supports - study hours and tutors - but you still have to do the work and get the grades. The football stars may be able to skate through but not the girls lacrosse team players. If you can’t do the work to get good grades it is a very bad idea to go to that school. Being the dumb kid in the class is never fun.

Finally - being a college athlete does limit your choice of majors. It is nearly impossible to be in an art, music or lab science major. Majors where you cannot do the required work (carve a piece of marble, practice as a quartet, attend mandatory labs) because you are on the road traveling x days out of the term really means you cannot have one of those types of majors. “But I could take the class in the off season term or over the summer.” Yes, you could, but look how classes are sequenced as you hit Junior and Senior year. You can’t take required Organic 402 until you have had Lab 210 and Lab 340 and while you could do 210 over the summer, 340 is only offered during the season. Rinse, wash, repeat with other similar types of courses.

It is not all bad news though. My daughter did play soccer all 4 years in college - though sophomore year was a mess and she did get her starting position because a player was injured. She was warmed up ready to enter for another player and instead went in for the injured player. She ended up keeping the position for 2 years. In her 4 years she figures that she actual spoke one on one with the head coach maybe a total of about 2 hours - in 4 years. And she won the coach’s award for team leadership 2 years. But, after her senior season was over the coach has been absolutely great. He has written letters of recommendation, talked to grad school and job recruiters and really done everything you could want.

And - now having seen the whole process through - I can see why being a college athlete is a common attribute for leadership positions of all types - particularly for women. My kid went to O/P grad school, and is now in her second year of post grad doing the prosthesis internship segment. The company she is working for was only going to take 1 in to this segment, but decided to take two so they could have her as several of the principals in the group liked her ability to work under stressful conditions and pursue collaborative approaches with little to no direction. She credits a lot of those types of skills to her experience of being on the college soccer team.





B