<p>Like @PurpleTitan said: if you don’t like it, go to a college that doesn’t set aside spots for athelte recruits. And your anger is misplaced and you’re holding onto a fallacy. NO ATHLETE TAKES THE SPOT AWAY from a scholar. Those allocations were made by the administration – long before you entered high school. Do you know whose spot a top athlete takes away? The spot of a lesser athlete. That spot WAS NEVER AVAILABLE to the scholar/dancer/artist/musician/international/nursing student to begin with. Stop hating when you only have maybe 25% of the story. Get your facts straight before you light the torches and reach for the pitchforks.</p>
<p>Same thing with the URM. She takes the spot of a lesser talented URM – not the football player or field hockey star or acting genius’ spot. These soft quotas are set long in advance.</p>
<p>But why don’t you share the outrage for the disproportionately MOST oppressed category? Academically superior international applicants. Without a hint of shame, the unis clearly lock them in a quota. Yet their avg SATs continue to rise, their applicant #s continue to rise – but their presence on many campuses stays the same. Why no outrage on behalf of them? Can’t identify with the Korean Prep school applicants or super Pakistani or Indian science geniuses? Having a problem being sympathetic for that Austrian math whiz? Or Chinese violin virtuoso? </p>