| hmm, I seem to agree with dontno on this one. Although I realize that there are indeed academically qualified recruited athletes, on average, they should not have gotten in compared to other normal applicants had they not been recruited. I went to a huge high school, one of the best public high schools in the country of having over 1000 kids in hs. Each year, about 70 people apply to HYP, and about 7 kids get in to each. Since I was an athlete(not recruited, but just high school varsity) I had many friends who were exceptional atheletes. I played football, bball, and track. I know a kid from my track team, who was ranked top 15 in the state for 1 mile run, got recruited from HYPS with top 25% class rank, mediocre course selection, and 26ACT. He ended up at Harvard. One of my closest childhood friends got recruited from Yale as a swimmer, and his stats were plain mediocre as well. In addition, I know 2 football, 1 golfer, and 3 more track and field athletes who got into HYPS. These recruited athletes, after talking to coaches, were almost guaranteed admission regardless of their mediocre academic records while others with almost perfect scores were getting rejected.
My point is that all these students 'qualify' to be admitted. But, that is FAR from being AS Qualified as other accepted students or many other rejected candidates with far better academic, extracurricular, and intellectual credentials at the ivies. After all, HYPS and rest of ivies are premiere academic, not athletic, institutions, and I fail to observe any benefits that come with these exceptional schools giving up so many spots for these athletes, while having to reject so many exceptional, intelligent, hard-working students due to lack of space available. |