Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:1) people need to get off the idea that the athletes are lesser students

2) people need to understand the sports, and particularly football, foster broader community spirit than any other activity

3) colleges need to fill slots, that includes staffing teams. if they have the choice between the A student with 1500+ and a lineman and the same student who isn't a lineman, guess which one they are going to take?

they are lesser students more often than not so why do we need to get off that idea?

colleges do need to fill spots and in your example, it's more likely that they would take the lineman with a B+ average and 1300 SATs over the A student with 1500+ who did non-athletic activities.

Depends on the school. The ivies and similar get plenty of linesman with A avg and 1500+ SATs. Unless you are Olympic caliber or nationally ranked in the top 200, sports prowess isnogoing to help much + top grades and SATs.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Does it matter if the child plays for the HS or if they are on a club team not affiliated with the HS?

you kinda want kids playing for the schools

I wish the US would adopt a European approach to scholastic sports. Schools should have nada to do with it, it just detracts from their missions. Leave the sports to clubs.

What is the European approach? I agree it needs to change.

What I just described. The schools don’t sponsor athletics. Kids can, should and do play sports, but all the leagues are run independently of schools.

Anonymous wrote:The top privates can’t get kids in otherwise to Ivy schools.

Another top school in LA posted stats on number of its students getting into top 20 schools, with and without hooks of legacy, recruited athletes, or URM. Only about 10% of its students could get into top schools without the hook. Exceptions were UChicago and the tech schools.


So if DC privates want to have a top school pipeline, they must have seniors with one of the three hooks….like top athletes in niche sports like lacrosse, squash, crew.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You'd think their sports teams would be stronger in that case.

Right! They don’t value athletes the most, however they try to get them to be competitive.

Reading comprehension is key. This applies to the smart kids who are also strong athletes.

Exactly. My athlete is a 4.0 student while still working out 30-40 hours a week.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Does it matter if the child plays for the HS or if they are on a club team not affiliated with the HS?

you kinda want kids playing for the schools

I wish the US would adopt a European approach to scholastic sports. Schools should have nada to do with it, it just detracts from their missions. Leave the sports to clubs.

What is the European approach? I agree it needs to change.

What I just described. The schools don’t sponsor athletics. Kids can, should and do play sports, but all the leagues are run independently of schools.

The problem with this is its the selective colleges that go after athletes too. The privates are just trying to recruit the kids who can get accepted into them. Have to change sports at the college level and that ain't happening.

For good reason.
Study: College Athletes Have Better Academic, Life Outcomes

https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2020/06/24/gallup-study-shows-positive-life-outcomes-college-athletes

I’m not saying don’t play sports. On the contrary, actually. It just shouldn’t be the schools sponsoring the teams. It’s the athletic kids and their parents who favor HS and colleges continuing to sponsor sports because it gives them a hook.

Do you understand how ingrained Friday night lights is in American culture? Didn't you ever pack a gym to cheer for your high school basketball team?

Maybe for large public schools. Most elite privates certainly at the middle school level (since you are talking about admissions) do not have enough students to field the teams at that level - sports are for fun, not particularly to help with admissions to high schools and our school sends kids to the top NE boarding schools. Our school discourages playing on travel teams and wants kids to play on the schools teams.

My kid goes to an all boys’ private middle school (not DMV) where sports is everyday and mandatory and the main sport they recruit for is ice hockey and even that takes second place after academics. The teachers at the school also coach sports and many of them played sports in college like football at Amherst, squash at Yale, etc not exactly Friday night lights.

Which is precisely why high schools have to be selective and recruit in order to field teams

Lol! The sports teams are mandatory and for fun. If they can play, they are in. The level of selectivity is not high at all. Also, it’s middle school and many kids get introduced to sports they have never tried before and their skill level is beginner. Athletics is not high on the admissions criteria except for hockey.

My kid is one of the top players in the area in a valued sport and got waitlisted at a big 3z

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:1) people need to get off the idea that the athletes are lesser students

2) people need to understand the sports, and particularly football, foster broader community spirit than any other activity

3) colleges need to fill slots, that includes staffing teams. if they have the choice between the A student with 1500+ and a lineman and the same student who isn't a lineman, guess which one they are going to take?

they are lesser students more often than not so why do we need to get off that idea?

colleges do need to fill spots and in your example, it's more likely that they would take the lineman with a B+ average and 1300 SATs over the A student with 1500+ who did non-athletic activities.

Depends on the school. The ivies and similar get plenty of linesman with A avg and 1500+ SATs. Unless you are Olympic caliber or nationally ranked in the top 200, sports prowess isnogoing to help much + top grades and SATs.

My dd has two friends verbally committed to a top Ivy from her academically rigorous private. One has top grades in honors classes. The other is on the bottom third of her class.

Really? That’s amazing. The top privates in the DMV sends their top 10% to the ivies and similar. A bottom third getting in? Did they donate $$$$$?

Verbally committed means both girls are athletes. No other hooks.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Does it matter if the child plays for the HS or if they are on a club team not affiliated with the HS?

you kinda want kids playing for the schools

I wish the US would adopt a European approach to scholastic sports. Schools should have nada to do with it, it just detracts from their missions. Leave the sports to clubs.

What is the European approach? I agree it needs to change.

What I just described. The schools don’t sponsor athletics. Kids can, should and do play sports, but all the leagues are run independently of schools.

The problem with this is its the selective colleges that go after athletes too. The privates are just trying to recruit the kids who can get accepted into them. Have to change sports at the college level and that ain't happening.

For good reason.
Study: College Athletes Have Better Academic, Life Outcomes

https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2020/06/24/gallup-study-shows-positive-life-outcomes-college-athletes

I’m not saying don’t play sports. On the contrary, actually. It just shouldn’t be the schools sponsoring the teams. It’s the athletic kids and their parents who favor HS and colleges continuing to sponsor sports because it gives them a hook.

Do you understand how ingrained Friday night lights is in American culture? Didn't you ever pack a gym to cheer for your high school basketball team?

Maybe for large public schools. Most elite privates certainly at the middle school level (since you are talking about admissions) do not have enough students to field the teams at that level - sports are for fun, not particularly to help with admissions to high schools and our school sends kids to the top NE boarding schools. Our school discourages playing on travel teams and wants kids to play on the schools teams.

My kid goes to an all boys’ private middle school (not DMV) where sports is everyday and mandatory and the main sport they recruit for is ice hockey and even that takes second place after academics. The teachers at the school also coach sports and many of them played sports in college like football at Amherst, squash at Yale, etc not exactly Friday night lights.

Which is precisely why high schools have to be selective and recruit in order to field teams

Lol! The sports teams are mandatory and for fun. If they can play, they are in. The level of selectivity is not high at all. Also, it’s middle school and many kids get introduced to sports they have never tried before and their skill level is beginner. Athletics is not high on the admissions criteria except for hockey.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:1) people need to get off the idea that the athletes are lesser students

2) people need to understand the sports, and particularly football, foster broader community spirit than any other activity

3) colleges need to fill slots, that includes staffing teams. if they have the choice between the A student with 1500+ and a lineman and the same student who isn't a lineman, guess which one they are going to take?

they are lesser students more often than not so why do we need to get off that idea?

colleges do need to fill spots and in your example, it's more likely that they would take the lineman with a B+ average and 1300 SATs over the A student with 1500+ who did non-athletic activities.

Depends on the school. The ivies and similar get plenty of linesman with A avg and 1500+ SATs. Unless you are Olympic caliber or nationally ranked in the top 200, sports prowess isnogoing to help much + top grades and SATs.

My dd has two friends verbally committed to a top Ivy from her academically rigorous private. One has top grades in honors classes. The other is on the bottom third of her class.

Really? That’s amazing. The top privates in the DMV sends their top 10% to the ivies and similar. A bottom third getting in? Did they donate $$$$$?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Does it matter if the child plays for the HS or if they are on a club team not affiliated with the HS?

you kinda want kids playing for the schools

I wish the US would adopt a European approach to scholastic sports. Schools should have nada to do with it, it just detracts from their missions. Leave the sports to clubs.

What is the European approach? I agree it needs to change.

What I just described. The schools don’t sponsor athletics. Kids can, should and do play sports, but all the leagues are run independently of schools.

Hockey is one of the sports our school could care less about, they play a conference down and most kids on the team never played before high school. Definitely no one being admitted at this school for hockey ability.

Outside of the Catholic schools, most private schools only care about two to three sports and they differ among schools. Lacrosse and soccer are big at many private schools but they don’t admit a ton of recruits because they tend to have a good amount of kids playing those sports. Basketball and football kids tend to dominate 9th grade recruits.

For good reason.
Study: College Athletes Have Better Academic, Life Outcomes

https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2020/06/24/gallup-study-shows-positive-life-outcomes-college-athletes

I’m not saying don’t play sports. On the contrary, actually. It just shouldn’t be the schools sponsoring the teams. It’s the athletic kids and their parents who favor HS and colleges continuing to sponsor sports because it gives them a hook.

Do you understand how ingrained Friday night lights is in American culture? Didn't you ever pack a gym to cheer for your high school basketball team?

Maybe for large public schools. Most elite privates certainly at the middle school level (since you are talking about admissions) do not have enough students to field the teams at that level - sports are for fun, not particularly to help with admissions to high schools and our school sends kids to the top NE boarding schools. Our school discourages playing on travel teams and wants kids to play on the schools teams.

My kid goes to an all boys’ private middle school (not DMV) where sports is everyday and mandatory and the main sport they recruit for is ice hockey and even that takes second place after academics. The teachers at the school also coach sports and many of them played sports in college like football at Amherst, squash at Yale, etc not exactly Friday night lights.

Which is precisely why high schools have to be selective and recruit in order to field teams

Lol! The sports teams are mandatory and for fun. If they can play, they are in. The level of selectivity is not high at all. Also, it’s middle school and many kids get introduced to sports they have never tried before and their skill level is beginner. Athletics is not high on the admissions criteria except for hockey.