Anonymous wrote:many private D3 schools are just a waste if you aren't getting any money. D3 LACs are basically luxury goods. you don't need to go there, but it feels like an upscale summer camp or boarding school when you do! public schools are bigger and more fun and they get you to the same destination without meeting as many insufferable sheltered teens.
play well enough to get college paid for in D1 or else give up the sport and focus on academics and other parts of your life you've been missing.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:DD is at an Ivy playing her sport. She got zero financial aid. She's now a sophomore and has been a really hard road. She doesn't get much playing time and doesn't get along with her teammates very much. The students at the school are a little weird because they are so so smart and she still working on making friends. The grass is not always greener. In hindsight, I would have encouraged her skip to D1 and just go in-state as a regular applicant.
this is the problem when Ivies and other top schools relax the academic standards too much for athletes. Then if the kid doesn’t continue with the sport then they also don’t really fit in/match the level of the rest of the kids who got in on academic merit. This was my experience at one of the Ivies.
Yes yes yes. Even when they continue it is a problem. The ivy kids who are recruited athletes are more commonly than not weaker students, sometimes signifciantly. They struggle to just be average in difficult "curved to the mean" classes paths such as physics, calc, econ, engineering. Most do not attempt such classes or if they do they switch out. To be fair, for the non-athletes it is nice to have a guaranteed group who cannot compete well, and you can beat. I realize that sounds harsh but with grades on curves it matters and the non-athletes/non-weaker other hooks are happy to have whatever advantage they can.
Easily 50% of all athletes…and more like 75% for sports like fencing or squash…have stats that are at the 50%ile+ for the Ivy school. They have to for the academic indexes to balance out.
I don’t disagree they aren’t recruiting athletes with lower stats…but you are implying a much larger %age than is actual.
As do most rejected applicants.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:DD is at an Ivy playing her sport. She got zero financial aid. She's now a sophomore and has been a really hard road. She doesn't get much playing time and doesn't get along with her teammates very much. The students at the school are a little weird because they are so so smart and she still working on making friends. The grass is not always greener. In hindsight, I would have encouraged her skip to D1 and just go in-state as a regular applicant.
this is the problem when Ivies and other top schools relax the academic standards too much for athletes. Then if the kid doesn’t continue with the sport then they also don’t really fit in/match the level of the rest of the kids who got in on academic merit. This was my experience at one of the Ivies.
Anonymous wrote:DD is at an Ivy playing her sport. She got zero financial aid. She's now a sophomore and has been a really hard road. She doesn't get much playing time and doesn't get along with her teammates very much. The students at the school are a little weird because they are so so smart and she still working on making friends. The grass is not always greener. In hindsight, I would have encouraged her skip to D1 and just go in-state as a regular applicant.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:DD is at an Ivy playing her sport. She got zero financial aid. She's now a sophomore and has been a really hard road. She doesn't get much playing time and doesn't get along with her teammates very much. The students at the school are a little weird because they are so so smart and she still working on making friends. The grass is not always greener. In hindsight, I would have encouraged her skip to D1 and just go in-state as a regular applicant.
this is the problem when Ivies and other top schools relax the academic standards too much for athletes. Then if the kid doesn’t continue with the sport then they also don’t really fit in/match the level of the rest of the kids who got in on academic merit. This was my experience at one of the Ivies.
Yes yes yes. Even when they continue it is a problem. The ivy kids who are recruited athletes are more commonly than not weaker students, sometimes signifciantly. They struggle to just be average in difficult "curved to the mean" classes paths such as physics, calc, econ, engineering. Most do not attempt such classes or if they do they switch out. To be fair, for the non-athletes it is nice to have a guaranteed group who cannot compete well, and you can beat. I realize that sounds harsh but with grades on curves it matters and the non-athletes/non-weaker other hooks are happy to have whatever advantage they can.
Easily 50% of all athletes…and more like 75% for sports like fencing or squash…have stats that are at the 50%ile+ for the Ivy school. They have to for the academic indexes to balance out.
I don’t disagree they aren’t recruiting athletes with lower stats…but you are implying a much larger %age than is actual.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:DD is at an Ivy playing her sport. She got zero financial aid. She's now a sophomore and has been a really hard road. She doesn't get much playing time and doesn't get along with her teammates very much. The students at the school are a little weird because they are so so smart and she still working on making friends. The grass is not always greener. In hindsight, I would have encouraged her skip to D1 and just go in-state as a regular applicant.
this is the problem when Ivies and other top schools relax the academic standards too much for athletes. Then if the kid doesn’t continue with the sport then they also don’t really fit in/match the level of the rest of the kids who got in on academic merit. This was my experience at one of the Ivies.
Yes yes yes. Even when they continue it is a problem. The ivy kids who are recruited athletes are more commonly than not weaker students, sometimes signifciantly. They struggle to just be average in difficult "curved to the mean" classes paths such as physics, calc, econ, engineering. Most do not attempt such classes or if they do they switch out. To be fair, for the non-athletes it is nice to have a guaranteed group who cannot compete well, and you can beat. I realize that sounds harsh but with grades on curves it matters and the non-athletes/non-weaker other hooks are happy to have whatever advantage they can.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:DD is at an Ivy playing her sport. She got zero financial aid. She's now a sophomore and has been a really hard road. She doesn't get much playing time and doesn't get along with her teammates very much. The students at the school are a little weird because they are so so smart and she still working on making friends. The grass is not always greener. In hindsight, I would have encouraged her skip to D1 and just go in-state as a regular applicant.
this is the problem when Ivies and other top schools relax the academic standards too much for athletes. Then if the kid doesn’t continue with the sport then they also don’t really fit in/match the level of the rest of the kids who got in on academic merit. This was my experience at one of the Ivies.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Really hard to feel sorry for people when the athletic hook doesn’t work for them.
It’s not hard if you’re not an ahole because you know how much work the kid put into it.
Our kids who study hard, act in plays, win speech & debate competitions, tutor peers, and write for the paper also are kids who put a lot a lot of work in. they just don't feel as entitled to gain admission with lower academic standards!
why should students whose EC is sports gain admission with lower academic standards to play sports that don't bring any benefit to the school's other students? who watches cross-country, volleyball, squash, etc.?
at least diversity helps everyone by not having people in bubbles.
CMU theatre kids don’t need test scores or grades anywhere approaching the non-theatre students. This is true of other schools with strong arts programs.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Really hard to feel sorry for people when the athletic hook doesn’t work for them.
It’s not hard if you’re not an ahole because you know how much work the kid put into it.
Our kids who study hard, act in plays, win speech & debate competitions, tutor peers, and write for the paper also are kids who put a lot a lot of work in. they just don't feel as entitled to gain admission with lower academic standards!
why should students whose EC is sports gain admission with lower academic standards to play sports that don't bring any benefit to the school's other students? who watches cross-country, volleyball, squash, etc.?
at least diversity helps everyone by not having people in bubbles.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Really hard to feel sorry for people when the athletic hook doesn’t work for them.
It’s not hard if you’re not an ahole because you know how much work the kid put into it.
Anonymous wrote:Colleges shouldn’t be giving athletes special treatment and easy admissions.
Anonymous wrote:OP here, thanks for the replies.
To clarify, we did set financial expectations when DC first started looking at colleges. We ran the NPC and didn't qualify for aid. Told DC we couldn't afford it. Several D3 coaches told DC don't worry about it because they hear that all the time from students who end up getting aid and the NPC isn't necessarily accurate. Well, it turns out that the NPC is very accurate.
DC did get athletic scholarship offers from D1 schools, but DC wanted an SLAC.
DC has good grades, which honestly seems to complicate things even more. If DC had lower grades, then some of these other D1 schools with a very generous athletic scholarship but lower admission standards would have made more sense.
We're talking offers from the top NESCACS, which would be a great fit both academically and athletically. Technically we could pay for it, but it would tank our retirement if we did that for both kids. Hence the donut hole dilemma.
This recruiting process is a lot of work (not even counting the athletic training!) and isn't transparent. It sounds like my story is helping at least a couple posters think more clearly about their own kid's situation. I feel like a really sh*tty parent right now and my kid is hurting. If sharing saves a few other families from this, then that's a good thing.
I hope everyone's kid finds a good fit that works for their family's budget.