Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

No, early 50s with one already committed to a top school, 2 currently playing at top schools and one has been out 2 years and is killing it on Wall Street. Because I still have one in HS this forum is or interest to me.

You don't need to justify to some anonymous angry and jealous person why you are participating in this discussion.

I know an obvious troll when I see one. He's a 55 y/o father of 5 and his kids are "killing it" while he trolls a college forum? Yeah, sure. Clearly some childless incel troll.

Is there any other country in the world that has athletic recruitment for higher ed? Serious question.

IDK what is wrong with some of you.

So much racism, elitism, hate on this thread.

Allen Iverson and Kyrie Irving are typical examples? Definitely questioning your general intelligence and ability to understand statistics.
Anyway, they are the best of the best. Is your child going to be in their field?

Run your own race. You are doing life wrong. Sad that you are passing this mentality on to your children. The response when another child has achieved something like the OP's description: "Good for them. That is awesome They'll do great. So will you."

Anonymous wrote:This to me is it. It is bizarre -- the elevation of athletics over any other activity connected to the university community (arts, debate, chess, science, what have you). It is uniquely American.

Yes it is. And you know that nearly everything about the American system of higher education is different also, the most desirable in the world. You can't just pick out the one you don't like and demand it be removed. It has been part of our system for about 170 years.

https://education.stateuniversity.com/pages/1846/College-Athletics-HISTORY-ATHLETICS-IN-U-S-COLLEGES-UNIVERSITIES.html

Read the article. You can dislike it, sure. But the colleges feel it is part of their mission and until they decide it no longer is, it is here to stay.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Everyone of these parents complaining about this would happily accept the preferred athletic treatment if their kid was offered it.

Maybe, but I'd at least acknowledge the preferential treatment, which some people seem unable to do here. All I see is protests of sour grapes, they work hard, it's just as stressful for athletes just in other ways, it's just the same as another other EC.....

My kid is a double legacy at a top school which definitely gives special treatment to legacies. Who knows if that will be in place by the time my kid gets to applying, but I freely acknowledge that it is unfair and there is no justification for it at all. Despite the fact that I might benefit, for the system as a whole, I don't think it makes sense.

Can parents of student athletes do the same?

Can you see the difference? Your kid did nothing to achieve double legacy status. It is purely his or her good luck to have been born to parents who attended the school and made donations. An athlete trains for years to achieve a chance at being recruited. That's hard work, not pure luck.

I'm not arguing that the system is fair, but those two admissions preferences aren't comparable.

I went to a worse school to play a sport. I got into much better academic ones and turned it down for a full scholarship. It goes both ways. Also, 95% of the athletes at my college were great students. Competitive athletes are driven and intelligent. Sure, there were some bball players who knew they could coast, but that was a small percentage.

All of you with your panties in a wad about this should take this opportunity to look at your own insecurities. It's pretty obviously projection.

Anonymous wrote:Everyone of these parents complaining about this would happily accept the preferred athletic treatment if their kid was offered it.

Maybe, but I'd at least acknowledge the preferential treatment, which some people seem unable to do here. All I see is protests of sour grapes, they work hard, it's just as stressful for athletes just in other ways, it's just the same as another other EC.....

My kid is a double legacy at a top school which definitely gives special treatment to legacies. Who knows if that will be in place by the time my kid gets to applying, but I freely acknowledge that it is unfair and there is no justification for it at all. Despite the fact that I might benefit, for the system as a whole, I don't think it makes sense.

Can parents of student athletes do the same?

Everyone of these parents complaining about this would happily accept the preferred athletic treatment if their kid was offered it.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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

Sure, Allen Iverson totally would have been admitted to Georgetown had he just been in the regular admissions pile

Yet he brought more money into the university then 95% of the people who have ever attended it.

Sure, just don’t pretend he wasn’t admitted for basketball

nobody is, they knew and he knew and everyone else knew why he was there. He didn't take a coveted spot form some kid who was on the fence in the admissions process. he was brought in to play basketball and make the school money. We could say the school failed him by not preparing him how to mange his money in a finance class.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think it's funny how parents of athletes are twisting themselves into pretzels justifying this completely arbitrary advantage that athletes are given in the college admission process. Yes, your kid puts in long hours -- so do lot of other kids doing music, or theater, or science or dance at a high level. They don't get special admissions processes.

Yeah yeah, sports promotes community and school spirit. So do the performing arts. A tiny percentage of sports bring in money, most do not, yet they still get to recruit. You know that this glaring loophole in college admissions is the reason why the bribery scheme in the "Varsity Blues" case actually worked right? Take a picture of yourself on a rowing machine, call the kid a crew recruit -- voila, admission!

There are other unfairnesses in college admissions of course (legacies), but just because there are others doesn't mean that you can't acknowledge that this one is -- objectively -- unfair.

Totally agree. Parents seem completely oblivious to the water they’re swimming in. It is a bizarrely American thing to value the hard work put into athletics so much more than hard work in other areas. I’d take a kid who looked after his younger siblings after school every day over a kid who went to soccer practice every day because he wanted to win so badly.

This to me is it. It is bizarre -- the elevation of athletics over any other activity connected to the university community (arts, debate, chess, science, what have you). It is uniquely American.

To those saying it's just another thumb on the scale for something the university wants like URM or orchestra and they still have to achieve top grades and test scores, do you see those candidates getting a special recruitment procedure? Does the diversity officer of the school call up a URM candidate and say, "you've got the diversity and background we could really use here. You've got to get a GPA of __ and a SAT of __, but as long as you do, you've got a soft commitment from Larling U!" Does the orchestra director say "we're in need of good trombonist and you caught our eye. If you maintain a GPA of ___ and get SAT of ____ and keep at the trombone, you're in." It's not a plus factor putting them over other candidates with equal stats, it's a whole nother admission procedure.

The only other candidates I can think of that might get an entirely new path set up for them are development, Z-list, your dad donates a building, candidates. But that's all very hush-hush, cloak-and-dagger, rumor which the university wants to hide.

Here, it's all in the open, and everyone looks at it and is like "yeah, seems legit."

Can you not admit it's not just another factor, it's a special fast-track just for athletes? The emperor has no clothes!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

I love the way people (falsely) assume that just because someone is URM means their scores and grades are lower. No...the whole point of the URM hook is that they are qualified by their record to get in and given the choice between a URM and a non-URM, the URM may get the nod. It is so racist to make a presumption that a URM necessarily means "let in because of the color of their skin regardless of academic record" - PP - you may want to check yourself.

Not racist. Just look at the data. URM are admitted at a lower range GPA/SAT/ACT. Of course, there are many URM that have stellar stats but this is the data. I do agree they need to look at the whole picture of the applicant - where they grew up, family situation, income..........however, the blanket view that all URM are the same and that a URM that lives in Bethesda/McLean is some how as disadvantaged as someone living in a bad neighborhood is in itself racist!

But you have a blanket view that an URM in Bethesda has it as good as a non-URM in Bethesda?

Also URM’s are admitted because we are creating leaders in communities. URM’s need leaders not more Wall Street a-holes.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

I love the way people (falsely) assume that just because someone is URM means their scores and grades are lower. No...the whole point of the URM hook is that they are qualified by their record to get in and given the choice between a URM and a non-URM, the URM may get the nod. It is so racist to make a presumption that a URM necessarily means "let in because of the color of their skin regardless of academic record" - PP - you may want to check yourself.

Not racist. Just look at the data. URM are admitted at a lower range GPA/SAT/ACT. Of course, there are many URM that have stellar stats but this is the data. I do agree they need to look at the whole picture of the applicant - where they grew up, family situation, income..........however, the blanket view that all URM are the same and that a URM that lives in Bethesda/McLean is some how as disadvantaged as someone living in a bad neighborhood is in itself racist!

Anonymous wrote:I totally agree with OP. My DS, who is very bright, worked his butt off to study for the SAT/ACT and wrote a ton of essays for his applications. Some girl got into one of his top choices (he did not get in), for hockey, it was early junior year and no grades at that time. Obviously, life isn't fair, but what kind of lesson is this to learn? If you play a sport you can go anywhere, grades don't matter, but if you study and have good grades, good luck to you. I just wonder if these kids are getting into top school b/c of sports, can they handle it academically?

So many good lessons for your son and you to learn here! Just a few:

No one is entitled to admissions at elite private colleges. They accept who they want based on the criteria they develop for building the student community they want on campus. If you aren’t happy with a school’s values and community, apply to one that’s a better fit.

It’s great that you worked so hard in HS and did so well academically! That will give you an excellent foundation for succeeding in life. You need to understand though that there are tens of thousands of HS seniors in the US (and beyond) with perfect or near-perfect stats all applying to the same elite schools. Those schools only have room for a fraction of them. Is there anything in your application that differentiates you from tens of thousands of other qualified applicants? No? You may have a chance of admissions. That chance is probably couple percentage points below the school’s published acceptance rate, so set your expectations accordingly.

Did your parents tell you that if you worked hard and got great grades and test scores and did some ECs that they think sound impressive you’d likely get into an Ivy? Sorry kid. That’s not the way it works. But you can learn from this once you get to the great college that wants you. Away from your parents, you don’t have jump through all the hoops that they and all the other striver parents say you have to (though you may need to do some of this if they condition continued tuition payment on choosing an acceptable major). It’s a good time to start to figure out what you want to do with your life and dig deep into subjects that fascinate you.

Don’t be someone who goes through life envying other people and whining when someone else gets a thing you want. Comparison is the thief of joy. Also, college is a time to meet people from other walks of life and learn from them. Don’t just hang out with kids who seem most like you. Have conversations with everyone in your dorm, participate in intramural activities, maybe go to a women’s hockey game.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I totally agree with OP. My DS, who is very bright, worked his butt off to study for the SAT/ACT and wrote a ton of essays for his applications. Some girl got into one of his top choices (he did not get in), for hockey, it was early junior year and no grades at that time. Obviously, life isn't fair, but what kind of lesson is this to learn? If you play a sport you can go anywhere, grades don't matter, but if you study and have good grades, good luck to you. I just wonder if these kids are getting into top school b/c of sports, can they handle it academically?

Do you think she didn't work her butt off at the rink, and in the classroom?

I don't know what you mean by "no grades at the time" did this girl skip freshman and sophomore year?

People are so jealous that their kids aren't athletic. I hope this hasn't rubbed off on your poor son. I have a son is athletic, but not good enough to get recruited. He could not care less, nor could I, that more athletic kids got into top schools that he had to work twice as hard for. Frankly, the couple of Ivy and other top 10 bound athletes were better students than my son, too. It takes all kinds to make the world go round. How did you get all the way to adulthood and not learn this lesson? And by the way, his younger sister who is a junior will likely commit to top 25 college in the next month for her sport. And he won't be jealous of her, either.

Anonymous wrote: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).

Then you are going to need to show some stats that demonstrate that athletes at NESCAC type schools have lower academic records from their high school. Because that is not my experience.