Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Believe it or not, some kids can be athletes, artists, athletes, musicians AND strong students.

Please don't put the athletic admits into a box of being dumb jocks. At places like IVYs and NESCAC, these are generally incredibly multi-talented kids. That is why they are accepted.

They can be but in almost all cases they are not

True that’s why the top 1% end up at great schools with scholarships. (Yes I know Ivy schools don’t have scholarships, at least not ones given by the school.)

They might be the top 1% compared to other athletes but they are in the bottom 10% compared to class of admitted students. They got a massive advantage just admit it. Why is that so hard for you?

But they aren’t in general, their average GPA is > than the overall average.

A few are, that is because somebody has to be at the bottom of the class and Ivy schools found that smart kids in the bottom 10% kill themselves but artists and athletes don’t.

That’s why.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I attended an Ivy (though not Harvard) and counted plenty of athletes among my friends. I assure you that the overwhelming majority of them were phenomenal students in addition to being talented athletes. Outside of luring some top football and basketball recruits, top colleges do not generally have to lower their admission standards much, if at all, to bring in athletes.

I went to an Ivy and wasn’t a jock sniffer and I can say that they do lower admissions standards quite substantially for athletes in all sports.

Jock sniffer, eh? Thanks for proving that even an education cannot instill class in some people.

Oh I’m sorry does “people who irrationally worship and make excuses for athletes” make you feel better?

You're reading an awful lot into the previous post. What happened to you? Were you bullied by a lacrosse player or something?

I’m just providing an honest view of the actual qualifications of athletes at these schools and don’t feel the need to make them or their parents feel better about the fact that they are getting in spite of their academics. people have no problem criticizing URMs for their supposed academic shortcomings but you want desperately to give athletes a pass.

But sure make it about me getting bullied if it lets you keep your fiction intact.

Who thinks it’s okay to criticize URM’s? Not me. Not people I respect.

First time on DCUM is it?

Do you know those posters? Do you think those posts are “okay”?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Believe it or not, some kids can be athletes, artists, athletes, musicians AND strong students.

Please don't put the athletic admits into a box of being dumb jocks. At places like IVYs and NESCAC, these are generally incredibly multi-talented kids. That is why they are accepted.

They can be but in almost all cases they are not

True that’s why the top 1% end up at great schools with scholarships. (Yes I know Ivy schools don’t have scholarships, at least not ones given by the school.)

They might be the top 1% compared to other athletes but they are in the bottom 10% compared to class of admitted students. They got a massive advantage just admit it. Why is that so hard for you?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I attended an Ivy (though not Harvard) and counted plenty of athletes among my friends. I assure you that the overwhelming majority of them were phenomenal students in addition to being talented athletes. Outside of luring some top football and basketball recruits, top colleges do not generally have to lower their admission standards much, if at all, to bring in athletes.

I went to an Ivy and wasn’t a jock sniffer and I can say that they do lower admissions standards quite substantially for athletes in all sports.

Jock sniffer, eh? Thanks for proving that even an education cannot instill class in some people.

Oh I’m sorry does “people who irrationally worship and make excuses for athletes” make you feel better?

You're reading an awful lot into the previous post. What happened to you? Were you bullied by a lacrosse player or something?

I’m just providing an honest view of the actual qualifications of athletes at these schools and don’t feel the need to make them or their parents feel better about the fact that they are getting in spite of their academics. people have no problem criticizing URMs for their supposed academic shortcomings but you want desperately to give athletes a pass.

But sure make it about me getting bullied if it lets you keep your fiction intact.

Who thinks it’s okay to criticize URM’s? Not me. Not people I respect.

First time on DCUM is it?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I attended an Ivy (though not Harvard) and counted plenty of athletes among my friends. I assure you that the overwhelming majority of them were phenomenal students in addition to being talented athletes. Outside of luring some top football and basketball recruits, top colleges do not generally have to lower their admission standards much, if at all, to bring in athletes.

I went to an Ivy and wasn’t a jock sniffer and I can say that they do lower admissions standards quite substantially for athletes in all sports.

Jock sniffer, eh? Thanks for proving that even an education cannot instill class in some people.

Oh I’m sorry does “people who irrationally worship and make excuses for athletes” make you feel better?

You're reading an awful lot into the previous post. What happened to you? Were you bullied by a lacrosse player or something?

His boss must be an Ivy League lax bro

Your posts are the last refuge of someone who knows they’re wrong.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I attended an Ivy (though not Harvard) and counted plenty of athletes among my friends. I assure you that the overwhelming majority of them were phenomenal students in addition to being talented athletes. Outside of luring some top football and basketball recruits, top colleges do not generally have to lower their admission standards much, if at all, to bring in athletes.

I went to an Ivy and wasn’t a jock sniffer and I can say that they do lower admissions standards quite substantially for athletes in all sports.

Jock sniffer, eh? Thanks for proving that even an education cannot instill class in some people.

Oh I’m sorry does “people who irrationally worship and make excuses for athletes” make you feel better?

You're reading an awful lot into the previous post. What happened to you? Were you bullied by a lacrosse player or something?

I’m just providing an honest view of the actual qualifications of athletes at these schools and don’t feel the need to make them or their parents feel better about the fact that they are getting in spite of their academics. people have no problem criticizing URMs for their supposed academic shortcomings but you want desperately to give athletes a pass.

But sure make it about me getting bullied if it lets you keep your fiction intact.

Who thinks it’s okay to criticize URM’s? Not me. Not people I respect.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I attended an Ivy (though not Harvard) and counted plenty of athletes among my friends. I assure you that the overwhelming majority of them were phenomenal students in addition to being talented athletes. Outside of luring some top football and basketball recruits, top colleges do not generally have to lower their admission standards much, if at all, to bring in athletes.

I went to an Ivy and wasn’t a jock sniffer and I can say that they do lower admissions standards quite substantially for athletes in all sports.

Jock sniffer, eh? Thanks for proving that even an education cannot instill class in some people.

Oh I’m sorry does “people who irrationally worship and make excuses for athletes” make you feel better?

You're reading an awful lot into the previous post. What happened to you? Were you bullied by a lacrosse player or something?

Ah the classic response when presented with the truth - some personal attack.

Athletic recruits are admitted in spite of their academics. I feel no need to make parents of athletes feel better about the stories they tell themselves in a desperate attempt to believe that their kid didn’t get some advantage. People have no problem criticizing URMs for their supposed academic shortcomings but athletes (largely rich and white) should get a pass?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I attended an Ivy (though not Harvard) and counted plenty of athletes among my friends. I assure you that the overwhelming majority of them were phenomenal students in addition to being talented athletes. Outside of luring some top football and basketball recruits, top colleges do not generally have to lower their admission standards much, if at all, to bring in athletes.

But why this worship of sports as opposed to other talents? It makes no sense and only is this country is it a thing. But a thing it is so, oh well.

What makes you think that other talents are necessarily ignored? It's not a coincidence that schools like Harvard are able to maintain an orchestra in addition to a baseball team. Musical talent is rewarded as well when it comes to admissions.

You are delusional if you think musicians are recruited like athletes

Some are recruited but yes not like athletes. But it is similar to athletes in the sense they are looking for specific skills to replace graduating seniors.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I attended an Ivy (though not Harvard) and counted plenty of athletes among my friends. I assure you that the overwhelming majority of them were phenomenal students in addition to being talented athletes. Outside of luring some top football and basketball recruits, top colleges do not generally have to lower their admission standards much, if at all, to bring in athletes.

I went to an Ivy and wasn’t a jock sniffer and I can say that they do lower admissions standards quite substantially for athletes in all sports.

Jock sniffer, eh? Thanks for proving that even an education cannot instill class in some people.

Oh I’m sorry does “people who irrationally worship and make excuses for athletes” make you feel better?

You're reading an awful lot into the previous post. What happened to you? Were you bullied by a lacrosse player or something?

I’m just providing an honest view of the actual qualifications of athletes at these schools and don’t feel the need to make them or their parents feel better about the fact that they are getting in spite of their academics. people have no problem criticizing URMs for their supposed academic shortcomings but you want desperately to give athletes a pass.

But sure make it about me getting bullied if it lets you keep your fiction intact.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I attended an Ivy (though not Harvard) and counted plenty of athletes among my friends. I assure you that the overwhelming majority of them were phenomenal students in addition to being talented athletes. Outside of luring some top football and basketball recruits, top colleges do not generally have to lower their admission standards much, if at all, to bring in athletes.

I went to an Ivy and wasn’t a jock sniffer and I can say that they do lower admissions standards quite substantially for athletes in all sports.

Jock sniffer, eh? Thanks for proving that even an education cannot instill class in some people.

Oh I’m sorry does “people who irrationally worship and make excuses for athletes” make you feel better?

You're reading an awful lot into the previous post. What happened to you? Were you bullied by a lacrosse player or something?

His boss must be an Ivy League lax bro

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Believe it or not, some kids can be athletes, artists, athletes, musicians AND strong students.

Please don't put the athletic admits into a box of being dumb jocks. At places like IVYs and NESCAC, these are generally incredibly multi-talented kids. That is why they are accepted.

They can be but in almost all cases they are not

True that’s why the top 1% end up at great schools with scholarships. (Yes I know Ivy schools don’t have scholarships, at least not ones given by the school.)

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I attended an Ivy (though not Harvard) and counted plenty of athletes among my friends. I assure you that the overwhelming majority of them were phenomenal students in addition to being talented athletes. Outside of luring some top football and basketball recruits, top colleges do not generally have to lower their admission standards much, if at all, to bring in athletes.

I went to an Ivy and wasn’t a jock sniffer and I can say that they do lower admissions standards quite substantially for athletes in all sports.

Jock sniffer, eh? Thanks for proving that even an education cannot instill class in some people.

Oh I’m sorry does “people who irrationally worship and make excuses for athletes” make you feel better?

You're reading an awful lot into the previous post. What happened to you? Were you bullied by a lacrosse player or something?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I attended an Ivy (though not Harvard) and counted plenty of athletes among my friends. I assure you that the overwhelming majority of them were phenomenal students in addition to being talented athletes. Outside of luring some top football and basketball recruits, top colleges do not generally have to lower their admission standards much, if at all, to bring in athletes.

I went to an Ivy and wasn’t a jock sniffer and I can say that they do lower admissions standards quite substantially for athletes in all sports.

Jock sniffer, eh? Thanks for proving that even an education cannot instill class in some people.

Oh I’m sorry does “people who irrationally worship and make excuses for athletes” make you feel better?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I attended an Ivy (though not Harvard) and counted plenty of athletes among my friends. I assure you that the overwhelming majority of them were phenomenal students in addition to being talented athletes. Outside of luring some top football and basketball recruits, top colleges do not generally have to lower their admission standards much, if at all, to bring in athletes.

But why this worship of sports as opposed to other talents? It makes no sense and only is this country is it a thing. But a thing it is so, oh well.

What makes you think that other talents are necessarily ignored? It's not a coincidence that schools like Harvard are able to maintain an orchestra in addition to a baseball team. Musical talent is rewarded as well when it comes to admissions.

You are delusional if you think musicians are recruited like athletes

Anonymous wrote:Believe it or not, some kids can be athletes, artists, athletes, musicians AND strong students.

Please don't put the athletic admits into a box of being dumb jocks. At places like IVYs and NESCAC, these are generally incredibly multi-talented kids. That is why they are accepted.

They can be but in almost all cases they are not