HS class of ‘24 started committing last summer. Now Class of 25 is getting recruited. Know several. Some sports start a LOT earlier.

I went to an HYP years ago.
I was surprised to see all the athletic recruits. I saw surprised to see the lower standards - although to be fair in many cases they were much lower.
Then I saw how they had to work in college to perform athletically and academically.
Now 25 years later I see that they are some of the most successful alums in my class.
The discipline, the team work, the ability to balance paid off in the real world.
My kids are good athletes but not that good and not that disciplined.
I don’t know their efforts are any less impressive than training up for an extra 100 points on the SAT.
These schools aren’t looking for an arms race on stats. They are looking for future leaders - broadly defined - and in that regard the athletes have as good a chance as any of their classmates

My kid goes to an Ivy. It became clear that many athletes have a chip on their shoulder because they think other students look down on them and think they only got admitted because of their sport. Parents of athletes raised it on the Parents Facebook page.

I don’t love the whole college sports thing, but maybe that’s because my kids didn’t have that talent. I am sure if they did, I would have supported using it to gain admission. I know it can be a meaningful part of a student’s college experience.

I know some committed kids who ultimately were not accepted. It’s not hundred percent until they receive their acceptance, typically through early decision in December.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Athletic preference can't die soon enough. It takes more seats from academically qualified applicants than legacy and development cases combined.

Sorry, you are jealous, but recruited Athletes don’t “take seats” from non- athletes.

+1
College recruited athletes often go through a separate admissions process, and some argue that this can sometimes lead to a perception that they take seats away from other non-recruited students. However, colleges typically have a certain number of spots allocated for athletes, and these spots are separate from the general admissions pool. So, while there might be debate around this topic, recruited athletes usually don't directly take seats from other non-recruited students.

That makes no sense. If a college wants a college class of X number of students, accepting athletes through a separate process necessarily means fewer seats for non-athletes.

I believe athletes can commit beginning junior year so someone from class of 2029 can commit this year.

I know twins who’ve committed to Northwestern and they are college class of 2029

Anonymous wrote:
Athletic preference can't die soon enough. It takes more seats from academically qualified applicants than legacy and development cases combined.

Yeah, I really don’t get this especially when so many of these sports are net money-losers. Try to explain athletic recruitment to someone from anywhere besides the US and you will get plenty of laughs.