It wins its share of banners every year, sometimes tennis, soccer or basketball, other times, track, or wrestling or yes, football.

It isn't an either/or proposition. Somehow, other schools are able to retain strong academics while also fielding strong sports teams. Why should Sidwell be any different?

Colleges want well rounded kids, kids who can excel in different venues and who show grit. I see no issue whatsoever with how the athletics have been at Sidwell over the past 10+ years. In that time, there are scores of banner from different sports including a DCSAA championship in both football and basketball. Why does anyone think it is different now just because a girls team is nationally ranked? I mean, boys and girls Tennis have also been nationally ranks.

I just don't get where this is bad or hypocritical.

Anonymous wrote:It’s too small of grade sizes to be good at sports. Sure it can stack a team around some stars once in awhile, that doesn’t bother us. But they can’t support more than 1-2 teams at a time for that when each grade is 120-140, half males, half females roughly. They don’t even have a swimming pool.

So isn't it smart to focus on sports with biggest impact per recruit (basketball, tennis), especially when you can find those kids and have them be good students that would fit into your community anyway?

And, for those speaking of music, I am certain playing a needed instrument in orchestra/jazz band would help in admissions, even if they aren't recruiting.

It’s too small of grade sizes to be good at sports. Sure it can stack a team around some stars once in awhile, that doesn’t bother us. But they can’t support more than 1-2 teams at a time for that when each grade is 120-140, half males, half females roughly. They don’t even have a swimming pool.

Anonymous wrote:As an alum and as a parent of 2 recent grads, I’m surprised by how much Sidwell has ramped up its focus on sports. I remember when, in the name of equity, there was an intentional focus to support and celebrate the arts as much as sports, and that seems to have gone by the wayside. Admittedly, I’m now on the outside looking in, but curious if this new focus will hurt the school in the long run.

as an alum and a current parent i think it is

sidwell is trying to be prep or st johns but with better academics. but they dont have the resources to do both, and athletics are increasingly winning out.

As an alum and as a parent of 2 recent grads, I’m surprised by how much Sidwell has ramped up its focus on sports. I remember when, in the name of equity, there was an intentional focus to support and celebrate the arts as much as sports, and that seems to have gone by the wayside. Admittedly, I’m now on the outside looking in, but curious if this new focus will hurt the school in the long run.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You know, many of the so-called athletes ALSO are good students, play in Orchestra and Jazz Band, lead clubs act in plays etc.

It isn't a zero sum game.

Of course they are. But what’s with the recruiting? Do they recruit for jazz band?

Are you saying there shouldn't be any athletic recruiting? Are you saying that schools like Sidwell should just do away with sports all together?

I’m a DP but yes, I’m saying there shouldn’t be any athletic recruiting. Somehow, public schools and other private schools exist without it. Obviously that has nothing to do with “doing away with sports altogether.”

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You know, many of the so-called athletes ALSO are good students, play in Orchestra and Jazz Band, lead clubs act in plays etc.

It isn't a zero sum game.

Of course they are. But what’s with the recruiting? Do they recruit for jazz band?

Are you saying there shouldn't be any athletic recruiting? Are you saying that schools like Sidwell should just do away with sports all together?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You know, many of the so-called athletes ALSO are good students, play in Orchestra and Jazz Band, lead clubs act in plays etc.

It isn't a zero sum game.

Of course they are. But what’s with the recruiting? Do they recruit for jazz band?

If kids apply and they play certain instruments which are needed, then they are more highly valued than a kid who doesn't play an instrument.

Does any local school recruit for music? Do tell! I am not familiar with such.

Anonymous wrote:You know, many of the so-called athletes ALSO are good students, play in Orchestra and Jazz Band, lead clubs act in plays etc.

It isn't a zero sum game.

Of course they are. But what’s with the recruiting? Do they recruit for jazz band?

You know, many of the so-called athletes ALSO are good students, play in Orchestra and Jazz Band, lead clubs act in plays etc.

It isn't a zero sum game.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:❤️❤️❤️ the AD! From a mom of two SFS students, one highly athletic and the other not so much (but thanks largely to the terrific athletics program has found a very happy niche and friend group in a sport he now loves and is excelling in). And, really, the AD set the stss as board in priactvity and caring for our kids through the pandemic.

He’s absolutely horrific. Only cares about athletes who can represent the school. Everyone else just sits on the sidelines

That is really not true and unfair to post behind the cloak of anonimity. I have found him to be pro-active, effective and kind.

Are we talking about the athletic director or the admissions director?

It should be clear, shouldn’t it? But when the job descriptions of the two overlap so much, it’s hard to tell where one stops and the other begins. The interests of the athletic department are too much involved in admissions. But it reflects the athlete hero worship in the general culture so I suppose they are just buying into that.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:❤️❤️❤️ the AD! From a mom of two SFS students, one highly athletic and the other not so much (but thanks largely to the terrific athletics program has found a very happy niche and friend group in a sport he now loves and is excelling in). And, really, the AD set the stss as board in priactvity and caring for our kids through the pandemic.

He’s absolutely horrific. Only cares about athletes who can represent the school. Everyone else just sits on the sidelines

That is really not true and unfair to post behind the cloak of anonimity. I have found him to be pro-active, effective and kind.

Are we talking about the athletic director or the admissions director?

People like this AD tangent as a distraction from the Covid rule exceptions they keep making. For the greater good of course.

Anonymous wrote:OP et all — get help. Compulsive hate is so 2016.

You are posting in two threads on an anonymous message board at 4:53 and 4:54 in the morning, telling other people to get help and calling them off their rockers.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:❤️❤️❤️ the AD! From a mom of two SFS students, one highly athletic and the other not so much (but thanks largely to the terrific athletics program has found a very happy niche and friend group in a sport he now loves and is excelling in). And, really, the AD set the stss as board in priactvity and caring for our kids through the pandemic.

He’s absolutely horrific. Only cares about athletes who can represent the school. Everyone else just sits on the sidelines

They are competing and winning so he’s doing his job well.

I don’t agree with the post to which you’re responding. But your response is also wrong, and not how Keith or the school talks about athletics. He is very clear that character, integrity and leadership come first and are more important. Which is great in my view. Winning is not the goal or how Keith wants the athletic program to be measured, though of course it is a welcome byproduct of a strong culture.

A$$ kissing? Now this is next level stuff. Rimming.