<p>At our school, not an athletic powerhouse, I think there were 25 recognized as continuing in sports in college. I don’t think there is a single one who would not have been admitted to the school on merit alone. The majority are going to schools in the south east, Div-3, junior college, not-so-competitive D-1. I think their sports formed them into the type of students they are - on time, able to juggle priorities, leaders, drug and alcohol free, healthy- rather than getting them into schools where they aren’t qualified. The student going to MIT has a 4.55/36ACT. Should MIT have taken the 4.6/36ACT over the volleyball player? Why shouldn’t athletic ability be the deciding factor between two equally academically qualified students?</p>