Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Most kids aren’t academic superstars anyway. The two kids I’ve known who really excelled in sports and were recruited by division one colleges focused more on their sport than academics. But they also were not going to be in advanced classes even if they had been encouraged to study more.

The first kid was recruited by Stanford to play soccer. He broke his leg freshman year there. He ended up barely making a few assists on the team while at Stanford. He majored in communications and put in bare minimum while he struggled on the field for 4 years. He has done very well by networking and being a very typical soccer bro.

The second kid was recruited by Nebraska to play volleyball. This kid just wasn’t very bright. It didn’t matter if she focused or not. As it was she was being tutored. She squeaked along in classes at Nebraska while doing well on the volleyball court. She graduated with a degree but no skills other than volleyball so she’s spent the last 10 years playing semi pro volleyball around the world and coaching. She is defiantly fumbling in life and has told me she struggles with her identity.

Point is, for both these kids it would not matter if they had focused more on academics. Most kids who are athletically gifted aren’t going to be able to excel in school. But those who can should because even the most gifted athletes I know aren’t that successful. Play your sport. Love it. But don’t make sacrifices for it if you can actually do well in school.

Only on DCUM can somebody spin going to Stanford to be a negative thing.

Gurl, you cray cray.

So true. The boy graduated from Stanford as a D1 soccer player and was able to play enough to get a few assists while fighting through an injury.

It was an accomplishment to get into Stanford for sure and I said this has helped him tremendously. I did say he’s doing very well. He lives in the Bay Area, done marketing and sales and in a VP somewhere I’ve never heard of that does business development. What I drew from his story was that here was an example of a kid who was the top of the top players in high school. His club team one the national championships. He was all American. Player of the year. And I really doubt he’s touched a soccer ball since college. He broke his leg freshman year and never really recovered I suspect. If it were not for the strong network at Stanford he would have not done so well. But he’s done well. Not an academic kid but no dummy either.

Bolded is why it is worth it to get into schools like Stanford regardless of how "Academic" you are. The world works based on networking not grades. Grades and the school name may help land that first job but after that it is all on the individual. Everyone that graduates has demonstrated on paper their proficiency in their field of study but it will be their work ethic, body of work and who they know after graduation that will go further in determining their success.

Yes. Exactly. He wasn’t going to get into a top school without soccer. He did study hard. He just wasn’t going to be taking the hardest course load. And he wasn’t killing it in the Stanford communications department.

Had he been more academically inclined he may not have been able to be as successful on the field and then not gotten into Stanford. But on the other hand he may have been even more successful as a lawyer or doctor.

If you have a kid who can hang in AP classes that’s a safer bet then thinking your mediocre kid is going to get into a good college with a soccer network.

I love the labeling of mediocre. Kids are kids and college, frankly isn't that hard. Medicare really just means typical. If you think your kid is special because of AP classes you are delusional. Those AP classes will fade away once in college and their only purpose was to presumably get a leg up on admission. Once in college, like life it is a different ball game. If a kid is in college and is also playing a sport and the load is to much, you quit the sport. One should not sacrifice college academics for a sport. I think you have a hard time separating sports in HS and sports in college. Once a kid is accepted into the college they are in the college. Didn't the whole "Varsity Blues" scandal teach you anything? A student/athlete could quit the team on day one in college and they get to stay in the college.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Most kids aren’t academic superstars anyway. The two kids I’ve known who really excelled in sports and were recruited by division one colleges focused more on their sport than academics. But they also were not going to be in advanced classes even if they had been encouraged to study more.

The first kid was recruited by Stanford to play soccer. He broke his leg freshman year there. He ended up barely making a few assists on the team while at Stanford. He majored in communications and put in bare minimum while he struggled on the field for 4 years. He has done very well by networking and being a very typical soccer bro.

The second kid was recruited by Nebraska to play volleyball. This kid just wasn’t very bright. It didn’t matter if she focused or not. As it was she was being tutored. She squeaked along in classes at Nebraska while doing well on the volleyball court. She graduated with a degree but no skills other than volleyball so she’s spent the last 10 years playing semi pro volleyball around the world and coaching. She is defiantly fumbling in life and has told me she struggles with her identity.

Point is, for both these kids it would not matter if they had focused more on academics. Most kids who are athletically gifted aren’t going to be able to excel in school. But those who can should because even the most gifted athletes I know aren’t that successful. Play your sport. Love it. But don’t make sacrifices for it if you can actually do well in school.

Only on DCUM can somebody spin going to Stanford to be a negative thing.

Gurl, you cray cray.

So true. The boy graduated from Stanford as a D1 soccer player and was able to play enough to get a few assists while fighting through an injury.

It was an accomplishment to get into Stanford for sure and I said this has helped him tremendously. I did say he’s doing very well. He lives in the Bay Area, done marketing and sales and in a VP somewhere I’ve never heard of that does business development. What I drew from his story was that here was an example of a kid who was the top of the top players in high school. His club team one the national championships. He was all American. Player of the year. And I really doubt he’s touched a soccer ball since college. He broke his leg freshman year and never really recovered I suspect. If it were not for the strong network at Stanford he would have not done so well. But he’s done well. Not an academic kid but no dummy either.

Bolded is why it is worth it to get into schools like Stanford regardless of how "Academic" you are. The world works based on networking not grades. Grades and the school name may help land that first job but after that it is all on the individual. Everyone that graduates has demonstrated on paper their proficiency in their field of study but it will be their work ethic, body of work and who they know after graduation that will go further in determining their success.

Yes. Exactly. He wasn’t going to get into a top school without soccer. He did study hard. He just wasn’t going to be taking the hardest course load. And he wasn’t killing it in the Stanford communications department.

Had he been more academically inclined he may not have been able to be as successful on the field and then not gotten into Stanford. But on the other hand he may have been even more successful as a lawyer or doctor.

If you have a kid who can hang in AP classes that’s a safer bet then thinking your mediocre kid is going to get into a good college with a soccer network.

I hate the message it sends my player to advise prioritizing soccer over school. And my player is talented like everyone else reading this as who else would even bother to read this. Go ahead but I am not doing that. Have you cut out all the other fat?..ie take away the phone before you take away school.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In my extended group, which includes several families with college athletes, the ones who played D1 had to downgrade their HS education to get recruited. They did get into amazing colleges but post-college really struggled, some living at home into their 30s. By downgrade I don't mean taking less APs, but I mean doing homeschooling or going to a HS just for a sport and barely attending classes.

In contrast the D3 athletes didn't downgrade their education in HS though possibly took less time consuming classes (e.g., less APs). Those athletes have done really well: med school, good jobs, etc.

Data points, that's all.

Anecdotes not data points.

Common sense. But go ahead and skip the academics - your kid is going pro I am sure.

A combination of downgrading HS for soccer still got them into great schools. Many college graduates are struggling post college, between high student loans and job markets. Playing a sport in college does not seem to create a unique post college experience that other students are not also sharing.

At any point, the student could have quit playing the sport and simply attended the school. Once a kid is in school they need to find the balance that allows them to succeed academically. But by ones sophomore year in college that 10th grade AP class is long forgotten and becomes practically irrelevant.

Speak for yourself. Sounds like you are dealing with poor quality instruction and students just going through the motions. With a good teacher there is much to be gained in class and on the field.

It seems a stretch to blame poor post college experience on High School.

One of the pros to playing sports is getting a leg up on admissions to quality schools. Once in the college then the student, who is now an adult must determine the best course of action to achieve success. If taking a few honors classes instead of the equivalent AP classes (especially if the AP classes are outside of the students future interest or major) plus athletics helps them get into a better school, that is the better play.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In my extended group, which includes several families with college athletes, the ones who played D1 had to downgrade their HS education to get recruited. They did get into amazing colleges but post-college really struggled, some living at home into their 30s. By downgrade I don't mean taking less APs, but I mean doing homeschooling or going to a HS just for a sport and barely attending classes.

In contrast the D3 athletes didn't downgrade their education in HS though possibly took less time consuming classes (e.g., less APs). Those athletes have done really well: med school, good jobs, etc.

Data points, that's all.

Anecdotes not data points.

Common sense. But go ahead and skip the academics - your kid is going pro I am sure.

A combination of downgrading HS for soccer still got them into great schools. Many college graduates are struggling post college, between high student loans and job markets. Playing a sport in college does not seem to create a unique post college experience that other students are not also sharing.

At any point, the student could have quit playing the sport and simply attended the school. Once a kid is in school they need to find the balance that allows them to succeed academically. But by ones sophomore year in college that 10th grade AP class is long forgotten and becomes practically irrelevant.

Speak for yourself. Sounds like you are dealing with poor quality instruction and students just going through the motions. With a good teacher there is much to be gained in class and on the field.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Most kids aren’t academic superstars anyway. The two kids I’ve known who really excelled in sports and were recruited by division one colleges focused more on their sport than academics. But they also were not going to be in advanced classes even if they had been encouraged to study more.

The first kid was recruited by Stanford to play soccer. He broke his leg freshman year there. He ended up barely making a few assists on the team while at Stanford. He majored in communications and put in bare minimum while he struggled on the field for 4 years. He has done very well by networking and being a very typical soccer bro.

The second kid was recruited by Nebraska to play volleyball. This kid just wasn’t very bright. It didn’t matter if she focused or not. As it was she was being tutored. She squeaked along in classes at Nebraska while doing well on the volleyball court. She graduated with a degree but no skills other than volleyball so she’s spent the last 10 years playing semi pro volleyball around the world and coaching. She is defiantly fumbling in life and has told me she struggles with her identity.

Point is, for both these kids it would not matter if they had focused more on academics. Most kids who are athletically gifted aren’t going to be able to excel in school. But those who can should because even the most gifted athletes I know aren’t that successful. Play your sport. Love it. But don’t make sacrifices for it if you can actually do well in school.

Only on DCUM can somebody spin going to Stanford to be a negative thing.

Gurl, you cray cray.

So true. The boy graduated from Stanford as a D1 soccer player and was able to play enough to get a few assists while fighting through an injury.

It was an accomplishment to get into Stanford for sure and I said this has helped him tremendously. I did say he’s doing very well. He lives in the Bay Area, done marketing and sales and in a VP somewhere I’ve never heard of that does business development. What I drew from his story was that here was an example of a kid who was the top of the top players in high school. His club team one the national championships. He was all American. Player of the year. And I really doubt he’s touched a soccer ball since college. He broke his leg freshman year and never really recovered I suspect. If it were not for the strong network at Stanford he would have not done so well. But he’s done well. Not an academic kid but no dummy either.

Bolded is why it is worth it to get into schools like Stanford regardless of how "Academic" you are. The world works based on networking not grades. Grades and the school name may help land that first job but after that it is all on the individual. Everyone that graduates has demonstrated on paper their proficiency in their field of study but it will be their work ethic, body of work and who they know after graduation that will go further in determining their success.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Most kids aren’t academic superstars anyway. The two kids I’ve known who really excelled in sports and were recruited by division one colleges focused more on their sport than academics. But they also were not going to be in advanced classes even if they had been encouraged to study more.

The first kid was recruited by Stanford to play soccer. He broke his leg freshman year there. He ended up barely making a few assists on the team while at Stanford. He majored in communications and put in bare minimum while he struggled on the field for 4 years. He has done very well by networking and being a very typical soccer bro.

The second kid was recruited by Nebraska to play volleyball. This kid just wasn’t very bright. It didn’t matter if she focused or not. As it was she was being tutored. She squeaked along in classes at Nebraska while doing well on the volleyball court. She graduated with a degree but no skills other than volleyball so she’s spent the last 10 years playing semi pro volleyball around the world and coaching. She is defiantly fumbling in life and has told me she struggles with her identity.

Point is, for both these kids it would not matter if they had focused more on academics. Most kids who are athletically gifted aren’t going to be able to excel in school. But those who can should because even the most gifted athletes I know aren’t that successful. Play your sport. Love it. But don’t make sacrifices for it if you can actually do well in school.

Only on DCUM can somebody spin going to Stanford to be a negative thing.

Gurl, you cray cray.

So true. The boy graduated from Stanford as a D1 soccer player and was able to play enough to get a few assists while fighting through an injury.

It was an accomplishment to get into Stanford for sure and I said this has helped him tremendously. I did say he’s doing very well. He lives in the Bay Area, done marketing and sales and in a VP somewhere I’ve never heard of that does business development. What I drew from his story was that here was an example of a kid who was the top of the top players in high school. His club team one the national championships. He was all American. Player of the year. And I really doubt he’s touched a soccer ball since college. He broke his leg freshman year and never really recovered I suspect. If it were not for the strong network at Stanford he would have not done so well. But he’s done well. Not an academic kid but no dummy either.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In my extended group, which includes several families with college athletes, the ones who played D1 had to downgrade their HS education to get recruited. They did get into amazing colleges but post-college really struggled, some living at home into their 30s. By downgrade I don't mean taking less APs, but I mean doing homeschooling or going to a HS just for a sport and barely attending classes.

In contrast the D3 athletes didn't downgrade their education in HS though possibly took less time consuming classes (e.g., less APs). Those athletes have done really well: med school, good jobs, etc.

Data points, that's all.

Anecdotes not data points.

Common sense. But go ahead and skip the academics - your kid is going pro I am sure.

A combination of downgrading HS for soccer still got them into great schools. Many college graduates are struggling post college, between high student loans and job markets. Playing a sport in college does not seem to create a unique post college experience that other students are not also sharing.

At any point, the student could have quit playing the sport and simply attended the school. Once a kid is in school they need to find the balance that allows them to succeed academically. But by ones sophomore year in college that 10th grade AP class is long forgotten and becomes practically irrelevant.

One more point: athletic scores help, don't hurt. Kids who are not athletes are not necessarily punished in their overall score, but kids who are athletes can be helped in their overall score if they have a 1 or a 2 level for sports.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In my extended group, which includes several families with college athletes, the ones who played D1 had to downgrade their HS education to get recruited. They did get into amazing colleges but post-college really struggled, some living at home into their 30s. By downgrade I don't mean taking less APs, but I mean doing homeschooling or going to a HS just for a sport and barely attending classes.

In contrast the D3 athletes didn't downgrade their education in HS though possibly took less time consuming classes (e.g., less APs). Those athletes have done really well: med school, good jobs, etc.

Data points, that's all.

Anecdotes not data points.

Common sense. But go ahead and skip the academics - your kid is going pro I am sure.

It’s not common sense. Go away. Pull your kid from sports and lock them in a library.

The Harvard lawsuit has been quite interesting as it relates to this discussion. Now I know “HARVARD” is not exactly representative of all schools, and a kid trying to play soccer at UMD or UVA or Nebraska or whatever isn’t necessarily going to be judged the same, but due to the fact the discovery process has released so much information it’s worth looking over.

From what has been released, the admissions process assigns a score of 1-6 in a variety of fields, such as academics and athletics.

* A “1” is given to athletes with “national or international or Olympic level” recognition or to a player specifically recruited by a coach. Less than 1% of of the kids are given an athletic 1. A look at the Harvard roster will show more than a few kids who have had Youth National Team call ups or even worked out with professional sides overseas. 0.9% of applicants had an athletic -1-, but 88% of kids with an athletic 1 are admitted even if no other -1-s in any other field.

* A “2” is given to an athlete with state or regional recognition or awards or someone with a leadership role in their secondary school team. 9.2% of applicants had an athletic -2-. This a state cup winner with a club side or a captain of a high school team.

* A “3” is given to people who actively participate.

* A “4” is little or no interest in sport.

* A “5” is kind of unique in that it is for kids who have a substantial out of school commitment that precludes them from sports, such as holding down a full time job to support the family or a significant extra curricular activity.

* A “6” is for those who are physically unable to compete.

By way of comparison, an Academic “1” is given to a “Genuine scholar; near-perfect scores and grades (in most cases) combined with unusual creativity and possible evidence of original scholarship.” These are basically kids who are recruited by professors or who have independent academic work that has been reviewed by the faculty. Only a hundred or so kids are given a -1- in academics and it is about the same (100-200) for sports. Academics, by the way, is not just about perfect scores as 8,000 kids had perfect GPA, 3500 had perfect SAT math, and 2700 had perfect SAT verbal

What you can glean from some of this is that:

* Simply playing DA is not going to get you a -1- (i.e. a top billing athletically).

* A -2- is still helpful, but whether the admissions committee differentiates between DA, MLS DA, ECNL or High School team is a debate that would fill this message board but I suspect most admissions personnel wouldn’t care that much about. (i.e. I doubt admissions counselors are uptodate on who is top of the DA, who is not, what ECNL is vs captain of a high school side, etc). I suspect a coach would certainly have an opinion, but from the admissions committee standpoint it seems they are more concerned about things like the time spent playing or leading a team rather than the level of athletic ability within that team.

Now let’s get back to an important point here: this is Harvard. It’s not normal. I imagine a similar rating system does exist for say the top 10 soccer schools in the USA (i.e. national team > regular DA, etc) but for most colleges playing DA will probably carry more weight in the admissions process than it does at the top schools.

My takeaway from this is if you have the capability to get to a -1- in the athletic level (i.e. national team) than a sacrifice of some academics may not hurt you that much (provided it isn't a total blow off of the academics). An athlete with a -1- but with a -4- academics (Adequate preparation. Respectable grades and low-to-mid-600 scores (26 to 29) ACT) is much more likely than a non-athlete with a -4- to get in (as much as 1000 times more likely actually). But we are talking a NATIONAL, INTERNATIONAL, OLYMPICS level of athletic ability, which by and large, isn't your garden variety DA player. Lowering academics just to play on a DA isn't going to open doors to the top schools (either academically or athletically) and playing on a mid-level D1 or a D3 is probably going to be the final years of your kid's soccer career.

A college counselor wrote this after reading this data and it’s pretty appropriate: “If you are truly invested in getting into Harvard (or any other Ivy League), your best bet is probably to find an academic area, extracurricular activity, or sport that you actually have a passion for (not something you are doing just so it "looks good on apps" and try to become elite in that area at a national and/or distinct level -- pull this off and you are more than half-way on the way to acceptance”

Links:
https://www.reddit.com/r/ApplyingToCollege/comments/cfwru7/interesting_statistics_and_info_regarding_harvard/
https://blog.prepscholar.com/harvard-asian-admissions-lawsuit-application-strategy
https://www.thecrimson.com/article/2018/10/29/how-to-get-in-to-harvard/
https://www.thecrimson.com/article/2018/6/30/athlete-admissions/

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In my extended group, which includes several families with college athletes, the ones who played D1 had to downgrade their HS education to get recruited. They did get into amazing colleges but post-college really struggled, some living at home into their 30s. By downgrade I don't mean taking less APs, but I mean doing homeschooling or going to a HS just for a sport and barely attending classes.

In contrast the D3 athletes didn't downgrade their education in HS though possibly took less time consuming classes (e.g., less APs). Those athletes have done really well: med school, good jobs, etc.

Data points, that's all.

Anecdotes not data points.

Common sense. But go ahead and skip the academics - your kid is going pro I am sure.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you want to cut back on academics go ahead. No one should be surprised that that idea is unpopular on this board. I think that the demographic that has the resources to be playing high end youth sports is the same demographic that values education for the most part. These folks are trying to get their kids on track for college and grad school and professional careers with solid incomes that would enable some financial security. Pulling backs on academics is not going to sell in this demographic.

,

It's not selling in this demographic because nobody posting has a kid in the top 1% of the nation in their sport.

Any kid in a DA program is in the top percent of youth players in the US and are the ones who populate Division 1 schools along with their foreign counterparts. No one here is saying to cut Academics. Only that to play DA, it should be possible to not have to be as extreme academically. Also no one is advocating a professional soccer career. We are talking about how playing DA, and DA only, can actually help kids get in better schools as opposed to carrying a heavy academic load and not playing DA, and DA only. We are ONLY talking about DA here and it’s unique demands on its players. And we are ONLY talking about playing for a Division 1 school, not D2, not D3.

Generally speaking, if you are on a reputable DA team in high school, you are Division 3 at the bare minimum and if you get significant playing time/start, you are Division 1. It is a huge advantage for getting into better schools and I agree it is worthwhile to cut back on academics to balance the unique demands on DA players. "Cutting back" can be relative of course as the elite academic schools still require strong stats. I also would suggest that if an elite academic school is the goal, Division 3 (Williams, Amherst etc) can be a great option even for a Division 1 level player.

Anonymous wrote:Listening to a bunch of nerds that never played sports at any level tell people to pull their kids from sports and load them up with AP’s is great. Sports teach their own lessons. Learning to balance academics and athletics will come in handy later in life.

Name-calling. Nice!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Most kids aren’t academic superstars anyway. The two kids I’ve known who really excelled in sports and were recruited by division one colleges focused more on their sport than academics. But they also were not going to be in advanced classes even if they had been encouraged to study more.

The first kid was recruited by Stanford to play soccer. He broke his leg freshman year there. He ended up barely making a few assists on the team while at Stanford. He majored in communications and put in bare minimum while he struggled on the field for 4 years. He has done very well by networking and being a very typical soccer bro.

The second kid was recruited by Nebraska to play volleyball. This kid just wasn’t very bright. It didn’t matter if she focused or not. As it was she was being tutored. She squeaked along in classes at Nebraska while doing well on the volleyball court. She graduated with a degree but no skills other than volleyball so she’s spent the last 10 years playing semi pro volleyball around the world and coaching. She is defiantly fumbling in life and has told me she struggles with her identity.

Point is, for both these kids it would not matter if they had focused more on academics. Most kids who are athletically gifted aren’t going to be able to excel in school. But those who can should because even the most gifted athletes I know aren’t that successful. Play your sport. Love it. But don’t make sacrifices for it if you can actually do well in school.

Only on DCUM can somebody spin going to Stanford to be a negative thing.

Gurl, you cray cray.

So true. The boy graduated from Stanford as a D1 soccer player and was able to play enough to get a few assists while fighting through an injury.