Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:If you are talking about all sport like lacrosse or crew or field hockey, these recruits statistically will presumptively be successful in their chosen careers.
What a flimsy statement. I am sure kids who play lacrosse or crew are disproportionately from wealthy families and have grown up with lots of opportunities. They aren’t successful because of their sport. (Not even getting to what is the definition of success and what stats are you using).
Yes, OP, I find colleges favoritism to atheists to be so bizarre and frustrating. College is not an athletic endeavor.
Athletics help fund most of the fancy buildings your studious kids study in.
NP
Source for this claim?
Eh, usually it's actually the other way around. Regular students are paying special "facilities fees" to subsidize fancy new stadiums, locker rooms and even massage parlors for the foopball buffs.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:If you are talking about all sport like lacrosse or crew or field hockey, these recruits statistically will presumptively be successful in their chosen careers.
What a flimsy statement. I am sure kids who play lacrosse or crew are disproportionately from wealthy families and have grown up with lots of opportunities. They aren’t successful because of their sport. (Not even getting to what is the definition of success and what stats are you using).
Yes, OP, I find colleges favoritism to atheists to be so bizarre and frustrating. College is not an athletic endeavor.
Athletics help fund most of the fancy buildings your studious kids study in.
NP
Source for this claim?
Anonymous wrote:What annoys me is the special treatment and perks the athletes get once in the school.
Athletes at my Ivy League school got free one-on-one tutoring and were allowed to skip classes and were given special notes and videos of the classes they missed. I had to work many hours at my exhausting work study job to make money. I would have liked a tutor to help make up for the time I also was too “busy” to study.
This is so far off base you must be a troll. I have three kids who were athletes at different Ivy schools. They practiced/played 20 hours per week and traveled on weekends on top of being science/math majors, with zero tutoring available to them (other than what was available to non-athletes). They also had to practice all summer in addition to their internships. They, and many of their teammates, definitely had high school academic profiles that were similar (often better) than the average student admitted to their schools. Some of their teammates also had work-study jobs on top of their already-packed schedules. So sorry -if you were too busy to study because you had 10-15 hours a week of class and a work-study job, you need better time management skills (which you would have learned growing up if you had played a club sport outside of your high school, like all the recruited athletes).
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:The fundamental question is should schools have sports teams? If you answer Yes, then admissions has to show preference to athletes because of unique skill sets required and limited number of candidates.
No. No reason it can't function like public HS sports where the team is composed of students at the school...not recruited athletes. The point is healthy and learning how to play a sport and be part of a team. Not trying to win meaningless games and championships by giving valuable academic spots to athletes that are not even focused on the their academic educations
This.
How would this work? Schools are on their honor system to not look at athletic achievement? Sports by its nature is competitive and this would turn into under the table recruitment.
New poster: I have no issue with looking at athletics the same way an eagle scout is looked at or an artist. What I do object to is the recruiting where athletes are offered spots at schools where they normally wouldn't get in based on every single other factor (tests, grades, essay, etc.) but for the athletics AND are offered spots without even applying. No other accomplished kid gets that handed to him, no one. Not perfect SAT kids, not #1 in class kids, no one. That is my problem with it.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:4 kids, all recruited athletes, all got into much better schools than scores would predict including Ivies. They spent just as much time and effort on their craft as a concert pianist or robotic designer. No apologies.
Well you and many others place this huge value on sports. I just do not get want us so inherently valuable about sports even though I have a recruited athlete. IMO there was way too much emphasis on sports in HS years. to the detriment of academics in many students that I observed although that was not going to fly in my house.
I pointed out before..my public district voted to spend millions on a deluxe new turf facility for sports and practically zero on upgrading the computer education offerings. Stupid!!!!! To what end?
I think anybody that follows a passion shows value.
Our world needs athletes and artist.
Computing has revelutionized the world and fundamentally altered so many industries. Football is the basically same darn sport as it was when we went to HS ( except it much more clear how dangerous it is). Yet we need new turf and no computers. Ok..that makes sense. Not!
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:The fundamental question is should schools have sports teams? If you answer Yes, then admissions has to show preference to athletes because of unique skill sets required and limited number of candidates.
No. No reason it can't function like public HS sports where the team is composed of students at the school...not recruited athletes. The point is healthy and learning how to play a sport and be part of a team. Not trying to win meaningless games and championships by giving valuable academic spots to athletes that are not even focused on the their academic educations
This.
How would this work? Schools are on their honor system to not look at athletic achievement? Sports by its nature is competitive and this would turn into under the table recruitment.
New poster: I have no issue with looking at athletics the same way an eagle scout is looked at or an artist. What I do object to is the recruiting where athletes are offered spots at schools where they normally wouldn't get in based on every single other factor (tests, grades, essay, etc.) but for the athletics AND are offered spots without even applying. No other accomplished kid gets that handed to him, no one. Not perfect SAT kids, not #1 in class kids, no one. That is my problem with it.[/quote
Say it with me: Alumni money!! These athletes are WAY more likely to donate after grad than an artist with the perfect SAT score. Sports bring in REVENUE. Your study bug son doesn't.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:The fundamental question is should schools have sports teams? If you answer Yes, then admissions has to show preference to athletes because of unique skill sets required and limited number of candidates.
No. No reason it can't function like public HS sports where the team is composed of students at the school...not recruited athletes. The point is healthy and learning how to play a sport and be part of a team. Not trying to win meaningless games and championships by giving valuable academic spots to athletes that are not even focused on the their academic educations
This.
How would this work? Schools are on their honor system to not look at athletic achievement? Sports by its nature is competitive and this would turn into under the table recruitment.
New poster: I have no issue with looking at athletics the same way an eagle scout is looked at or an artist. What I do object to is the recruiting where athletes are offered spots at schools where they normally wouldn't get in based on every single other factor (tests, grades, essay, etc.) but for the athletics AND are offered spots without even applying. No other accomplished kid gets that handed to him, no one. Not perfect SAT kids, not #1 in class kids, no one. That is my problem with it.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:4 kids, all recruited athletes, all got into much better schools than scores would predict including Ivies. They spent just as much time and effort on their craft as a concert pianist or robotic designer. No apologies.
Well you and many others place this huge value on sports. I just do not get want us so inherently valuable about sports even though I have a recruited athlete. IMO there was way too much emphasis on sports in HS years. to the detriment of academics in many students that I observed although that was not going to fly in my house.
I pointed out before..my public district voted to spend millions on a deluxe new turf facility for sports and practically zero on upgrading the computer education offerings. Stupid!!!!! To what end?
I think anybody that follows a passion shows value.
Our world needs athletes and artist.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:4 kids, all recruited athletes, all got into much better schools than scores would predict including Ivies. They spent just as much time and effort on their craft as a concert pianist or robotic designer. No apologies.
Well you and many others place this huge value on sports. I just do not get want us so inherently valuable about sports even though I have a recruited athlete. IMO there was way too much emphasis on sports in HS years. to the detriment of academics in many students that I observed although that was not going to fly in my house.
I pointed out before..my public district voted to spend millions on a deluxe new turf facility for sports and practically zero on upgrading the computer education offerings. Stupid!!!!! To what end?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:The fundamental question is should schools have sports teams? If you answer Yes, then admissions has to show preference to athletes because of unique skill sets required and limited number of candidates.
No. No reason it can't function like public HS sports where the team is composed of students at the school...not recruited athletes. The point is healthy and learning how to play a sport and be part of a team. Not trying to win meaningless games and championships by giving valuable academic spots to athletes that are not even focused on the their academic educations
This.
How would this work? Schools are on their honor system to not look at athletic achievement? Sports by its nature is competitive and this would turn into under the table recruitment.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:4 kids, all recruited athletes, all got into much better schools than scores would predict including Ivies. They spent just as much time and effort on their craft as a concert pianist or robotic designer. No apologies.
Well you and many others place this huge value on sports. I just do not get want us so inherently valuable about sports even though I have a recruited athlete. IMO there was way too much emphasis on sports in HS years. to the detriment of academics in many students that I observed although that was not going to fly in my house.
I pointed out before..my public district voted to spend millions on a deluxe new turf facility for sports and practically zero on upgrading the computer education offerings. Stupid!!!!! To what end?
I think anybody that follows a passion shows value.
Our world needs athletes and artist.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:4 kids, all recruited athletes, all got into much better schools than scores would predict including Ivies. They spent just as much time and effort on their craft as a concert pianist or robotic designer. No apologies.
Well you and many others place this huge value on sports. I just do not get want us so inherently valuable about sports even though I have a recruited athlete. IMO there was way too much emphasis on sports in HS years. to the detriment of academics in many students that I observed although that was not going to fly in my house.
I pointed out before..my public district voted to spend millions on a deluxe new turf facility for sports and practically zero on upgrading the computer education offerings. Stupid!!!!! To what end?
I think anybody that follows a passion shows value.
Our world needs athletes and artist.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:4 kids, all recruited athletes, all got into much better schools than scores would predict including Ivies. They spent just as much time and effort on their craft as a concert pianist or robotic designer. No apologies.
Well you and many others place this huge value on sports. I just do not get want us so inherently valuable about sports even though I have a recruited athlete. IMO there was way too much emphasis on sports in HS years. to the detriment of academics in many students that I observed although that was not going to fly in my house.
I pointed out before..my public district voted to spend millions on a deluxe new turf facility for sports and practically zero on upgrading the computer education offerings. Stupid!!!!! To what end?
Anonymous wrote:4 kids, all recruited athletes, all got into much better schools than scores would predict including Ivies. They spent just as much time and effort on their craft as a concert pianist or robotic designer. No apologies.