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?

In fact it is the hatred of college athletes and constant efforts to represent them as academically unqualified that is irrational.

Lots of students with other talents are also academically qualified but a big chunk of spots go to these students that can also run fast or throw a ball. It is not logical. There is no basketball major at Harvard

It is perfectly logical from the school’s’ perspective. Lots of athletes leads to a healthier, happier student body with more wealthy, connected alums who donate more to the school and help build or maintain its brand. You only find it illogical because you are thinking either that Harvard, etc., should follow the admissions practices of universities in some other country or because to you, “logical” means ought to favor kids exactly like yours. This schools’ have sound reasons for liking athletics even if you are not objective enough to understand this.

Wow I didn’t realize the mere presence of an athlete made the rest of the student body healthier! A truly magical cohort.

And you say the PP isn’t being logical. At least she isn’t attributing all that is good in the world to athletes.

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?

In fact it is the hatred of college athletes and constant efforts to represent them as academically unqualified that is irrational.

Lots of students with other talents are also academically qualified but a big chunk of spots go to these students that can also run fast or throw a ball. It is not logical. There is no basketball major at Harvard

It is perfectly logical from the school’s’ perspective. Lots of athletes leads to a healthier, happier student body with more wealthy, connected alums who donate more to the school and help build or maintain its brand. You only find it illogical because you are thinking either that Harvard, etc., should follow the admissions practices of universities in some other country or because to you, “logical” means ought to favor kids exactly like yours. This schools’ have sound reasons for liking athletics even if you are not objective enough to understand this.

What do you mean like mine? I have one of these which is why I understand this silly game. Athletic recruiting largely favors a wealthy white demographic. I can't control that or change it and I would be stupid to ignore it or not play the game. But I can look at it say I think it is misguided.

You said it’s not logical. It’s perfectly logical from the school’s perspective for the reasons mentioned by many of us. What’s “misguided” about it? You seem to be saying that the schools should have a different emphasis and admit students other than the ones they do now. I’m sure each of us would have a different idea of how we would structure admissions if we got to design our perfect university, but that’s not the same as saying the schools’ current policies make no sense or are misguided.

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?

In fact it is the hatred of college athletes and constant efforts to represent them as academically unqualified that is irrational.

Lots of students with other talents are also academically qualified but a big chunk of spots go to these students that can also run fast or throw a ball. It is not logical. There is no basketball major at Harvard

It is perfectly logical from the school’s’ perspective. Lots of athletes leads to a healthier, happier student body with more wealthy, connected alums who donate more to the school and help build or maintain its brand. You only find it illogical because you are thinking either that Harvard, etc., should follow the admissions practices of universities in some other country or because to you, “logical” means ought to favor kids exactly like yours. This schools’ have sound reasons for liking athletics even if you are not objective enough to understand this.

What do you mean like mine? I have one of these which is why I understand this silly game. Athletic recruiting largely favors a wealthy white demographic. I can't control that or change it and I would be stupid to ignore it or not play the game. But I can look at it say I think it is misguided.

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?

In fact it is the hatred of college athletes and constant efforts to represent them as academically unqualified that is irrational.

Lots of students with other talents are also academically qualified but a big chunk of spots go to these students that can also run fast or throw a ball. It is not logical. There is no basketball major at Harvard

It is perfectly logical from the school’s’ perspective. Lots of athletes leads to a healthier, happier student body with more wealthy, connected alums who donate more to the school and help build or maintain its brand. You only find it illogical because you are thinking either that Harvard, etc., should follow the admissions practices of universities in some other country or because to you, “logical” means ought to favor kids exactly like yours. This schools’ have sound reasons for liking athletics even if you are not objective enough to understand this.

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?

His boss must be an Ivy League lax bro

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

No it empathy for someone who is mental and obviously hurt at some point in your life but still not over it.

The more you make this about me, the more you admit I’m right.

Anonymous wrote:"Among white students admitted to Harvard, 54% are athletes+legacy+dean's list+faculty/staff children (column 2). Just 10% is regular admission

Big athletic school, Harvard..."

Just read this and feeling injustice is real. How bad is it at other T20?

You are being deceptive. Athletes make up about 15% of the class. Legacy and large donations make up the majority of admissions.

And Ivy league schools need athletes: Harvard sponsors 40 teams, Princeton sponsors 36 and Yale sponsors 32. Athletes constitute a significant percentage of the student body at Ivy League schools:

School Admission Rate Undergrad Enrollment TotalAthletes Athlete%
Brown 9% 6,556 892 14%
Columbia 7% 7,552 753 10%
Cornell 14% 14,461 1,120 8%
Dartmouth 11% 4,230 903 21%
Harvard 5% 6,931 1,070 15%
Penn 9% 10,231 891 9%
Princeton 7% 5,236 1,067 20%
Yale 6% 5,468 849 16%

https://scholarshipstats.com/ivies

Legacy admissions is 25-35% add in large donors, famous and powerful people and this number goes a lot higher.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Also, athletes tend to be more loyal to the university they attend and contribute more to the school as alums. They are good for branding.

They also cure diseases at a higher rate. And feed more stray cats. They have a lower carbon footprint.

If you’re just going to make stuff up why aim so low?

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?

In fact it is the hatred of college athletes and constant efforts to represent them as academically unqualified that is irrational.

The data doesn’t lie. Look it up sometime. But I know you won’t because you like living in your fantasy world.

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?

In fact it is the hatred of college athletes and constant efforts to represent them as academically unqualified that is irrational.

Lots of students with other talents are also academically qualified but a big chunk of spots go to these students that can also run fast or throw a ball. It is not logical. There is no basketball major at Harvard

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?

In fact it is the hatred of college athletes and constant efforts to represent them as academically unqualified that is irrational.

In some sports at harvard the athletes are dominated by international students. So its not even American athletes getting the boost.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Also, athletes tend to be more loyal to the university they attend and contribute more to the school as alums. They are good for branding.

They raise a lot of money.

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Also, athletes tend to be more loyal to the university they attend and contribute more to the school as alums. They are good for branding.

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?

His boss must be an Ivy League lax bro

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

No it empathy for someone who is mental and obviously hurt at some point in your life but still not over it.

So does OP or anyone else have a statistic for the actual percentage of white athletes admitted to Harvard? Because the 54% cited is a large category that includes many subcategories other than athletes. According to OP, the figure includes “athletes+legacy+dean's list+faculty/staff children (column 2)”. No clue what “dean’s list” is, but legacy is going to be a huge subcategory by itself.

This discussion is also pretty useless unless we know what percentage of the athletes were recruited by the University and offered an admissions slot. Each coach has a limited number of slots/tips to use on recruits, so a significant percentage of athletes on teams at any university were not recruited and made it in just like any other student without an athletic hook.