Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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

Correct.

The odds of American kids being athletically recruited to Ivies for niche sports such as fencing, squash, field hockey,etc… are slim because of this.

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.

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

The data doesn’t show they are unqualified. Try again.

“The Academic Index (AI) is used by Ivy League schools to ensure that athletes are not admitted with significantly lower academic qualifications than the general student population. The index is based on GPA, SAT/ACT tests scores, and SAT Subject test scores. All athletes must have at least a 176 to play at any of the “Ancient Eight” schools… no team at an Ivy League school may have an average AI of more than one standard deviation below the average AI of all students at the college.“

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.

+1

NP. I think there is one athlete-hater poster on DCUM who is obsessed beyond rationality with athletes. Their posts are exceptionally nasty and also they never listen to reason or evidence. It is rather sad.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

You need serious therapy it’s sad.

Anonymous wrote:

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

Correct.

Anonymous wrote: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.

You can’t look at performance in college. It’s what they looked like when they were admitted. And the data shows that the vast majority of admitted athletes have academic scores that would have seen them rejected otherwise.

Anonymous wrote:

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:

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.

You can’t look at performance in college. It’s what they looked like when they were admitted. And the data shows that the vast majority of admitted athletes have academic scores that would have seen them rejected otherwise.

Anonymous wrote:The data doesn’t show they are unqualified. Try again.

“The Academic Index (AI) is used by Ivy League schools to ensure that athletes are not admitted with significantly lower academic qualifications than the general student population. The index is based on GPA, SAT/ACT tests scores, and SAT Subject test scores. All athletes must have at least a 176 to play at any of the “Ancient Eight” schools… no team at an Ivy League school may have an average AI of more than one standard deviation below the average AI of all students at the college.“

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.

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.

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: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.

Anonymous wrote:

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.