<p>Bay,
By being looked at earlier and within a tiny pool of athletes in organized settings, it is “easier” (and simpler) for athletes to get in. Slots are specifically allocated to athletes, as well, which constitutes a kind of priority. As does the early timing (ahead of the others) of their notification, subject to AdComm reviews, but still…
Artists, debaters, etc. are in the big pool. No set number of slots is pre-allocated to these types. And these applications can easily get lost on the swamp. They may get another piece of paper in the file from a professor who liked their supplement, but they are swimming in a big pool.</p>
<p>Xiggi - obviously you have nt been following Miami or ignoring them altogether?</p>
<p>I wonder how many of those Miami FB recruits are actually under 21??!</p>
<p>Ivies probably are not “wining”, just dining!</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>EXACTLY. Athletes are the only ones who have specific set-aside slots and recruitment and coaches “pulling” them in so they know where they’re going by September of senior year. Yet it’s always the URM who took Deserving 2400 Johnny’s spot. Say what you will about URM admissions, there aren’t specific set-asides, specific recruitment, or faculty members or administrative members “pulling” them in in September. It puzzles me, therefore, why URM’s are resented more than athletes and accused of “stealing the spots.” I don’t resent athletes, to be clear – more power to them, if they have a skill the college wants – I wouldn’t run Pizzagirl U that way, but that’s neither here nor there.</p>
<p>sparkling wine with 0% alcohol of course.</p>
<p>This kid was in top 2%, 35 ACT, IB diploma candidate etc and not an academic slouch by any means. However, the outcome was predetermined since the academic part was found acceptable by adcoms before the coach could make an offer.</p>
<p>I knew this would turn into another hating-on-the-athletes thread.</p>
<p>texaspg,
If this athlete applicant was such a shoo-in with regard to her stats, why do you consternate about the whether her admission was justified?</p>
<p>performersmom,
I totally get what you are saying, but your argument holds only if you want HYPS to eliminate NCAA Div 1 sports altogether. If they eliminate it, then there is no argument.</p>
<p>Also, you and PG argue as though a scholar-athlete competing at a Div 1 level is “no big deal.” Most people, including elite u’s, would disagree with you.</p>
<p>“Including with regard to Stanford, the adcom makes the final decision and does in fact, sometimes reject athletes who are supported by the coaches.”
The recruits that are rejected by Stanford are the ones whose stats are far below the standards that Stanford has set for athletes and for whom the adcoms wont make an exception. Recruited Athletes who ARE qualified academically often do get the “nod” from the admissions office / and coaches after their qualifications [transcripts, SAT’s, Subject tests, ]are submitted by the coach at the end of their Jr year. Submitting their official application is just a formality. It is NOT reviewed AGAIN by adcoms.<br>
The admissions offices KNOW how many athletic spots will be open on teams, due to graduating seniors, LONG before applications start to come in. They get those spots filled as soon as possible with academically qualified recruits, and that allows coaches to not have to use “tips” for those who would probably be accepted anyway.</p>
<p>Well PG, athletes may have priority or advantages over URM’s for the reasons above, but URM’s do have a system that advantages them for better looks and possibly lower thresholds, by design, over non-URM’s with no other hooks. The EA process is actually recommended for those who have the institutionalized hooks (required for athletic recruits, I believe- another sign of how much more “in” they are).
Any applicant who is in the EA pool has a smaller number of competitors and can be flagged more easily as having a hook. Yes, the competition (stats, maturity, achievements ) of the EA candidates is no joke, and many of the hooked are very much up to par, if not over.
But URM’s and low SES are definitely sought after (Questbridge has its own application process, right? early, right?) The colleges tell us so. They try to flag these applications to get to know the applicants. It is an institutional priority.</p>
<p>Texaspg- I know several Ivy recruits who were told by coaches that they were “in” and then it didn’t happen. Many Ivy schools don’t offer likely letters in the non-revenue sports, so there IS some suspense. Yale is notorious for leaving recruits on the sideline.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Absolutely not true in every case.</p>
<p>Bay,
I am not hating on athletes!
I am just analyzing the process and trying to understand what the effects and implications are. hey- I married a recruited scholar-athlete. My first D went through the athletic recruiting process. It is what it is.
Athletes work hard! And need lots of talent, no question! And much of what they do is very helpful in later life in their work/ off the field- no disagreement there at all!
(I do feel that a lot of the others, like artists and newspaper editors, are SIMILARLY special, though!)
just being human and trying to figure what it means…
Thanks for listening to my take, too!</p>
<p>The reason^^for coaches telling athletes they are in, who aren’t, is because coaches don’t know which athletes are accepting. Same reason Stanford doesn’t accept athletes in junior year. </p>
<p>HYPS is not division 1</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Stanford is “not division 1”? How can you go to a BCS bowl or be ranked #7 in the AP poll and NOT be division 1? On what planet is your Stanford. By the way, all the other HYP schools are division 1, but in the lower division of division 1.</p>
<p>HYPSM is Div 1A - not Div 1.</p>
<p>Athletic recruiting is an added layer of stress to an already stressful admissions landscape. Frankly, I was glad both my kids backed out of the process. Had just enough taste of it with both kids to realize it is not for the faint of heart. The kids that continue on that path are usually very dedicated and in most cases, the schools are lucky to have them. The Ivy and Dlll kids put in lots of time and effort to represent their schools with no scholarship money involved.The arts,music,debate kids,etc.do too. The reality is that it is usually the athletics that the students and alumni are more likely to rally around. It is what it is.</p>
<p>HYPBCCDP ARE in a special section of D1- the Ivy League is an athletic league with its own rules, different from the regular D1 schools. Kind of between D1 and D3 in nature.</p>
<p>Stanford is a regular D1 school. Not in the Ivy League. Competes with “real” programs and can award athletic scholarships to recruits, just as their competitors do. Stanford is quite amazing- to be able to have such competitive sports and Ivy-calibre students academically, I am not sure how low their AI is compared to Ivies, though. Overall, the athletes at Stanford do not seem to lower the academic standards.</p>
<p>sevmom, Arts applications are ALSO huge added stress in the admissions process. Auditions and supplements and trial lessons and so forth are very time consuming, expensive, involve lots of extra work and travel, and are not very structured. Yet, these applications are not tipped early for pre-allocated, possibly lower threshold slots.
Also, at many colleges it is very hard to walk on as an athlete if an admit is not recruited, so in order to be able to play, being recruited is preferred.</p>
<p>Bay - I did nt question whether it was justified or not. We started this discussion because I corrected one poster about the adcoms actually deciding whether to admit after the coach has made an offer and you disagreed with my position.</p>
<p>My position is that the coach ensures someone is admittable by processing the pre paperwork using whatever the school has allowed the coaches to do (adcoms talk to them about the recruits, review paperwork, determine an AI and ensure they are admissible first?). Once they have determined admissibility, coach makes athletic admission offer (for non-ivies we would call it athletic scholarship offer but since Ivies don’t have one not sure what they call them although the local papers still called it a athletic scholarship from Harvard). At the point when the admission offer is made and is accepted, the admission is considered predetermined since they are competing with other D1 schools for the same athlete as well as other Ivies. If for some reason they backout of giving that admission, then no athlete will trust them in future and other coaches at other schools will use that as leverage. So an offer wont be made lightly.</p>
<p>I have no problem with anyone getting into any school under any preference mechanism. The fact that I have a viewpoint does nt necessarily make it biased against a certain group being admitted and it is one that can change as I learn more information from others here like you. I just think somethings could be done differently to arrive at the same end result in some areas. </p>
<p>Btw - I also know how much suffering. pain and sacrifices the parents and kid had to go through to get her to the elite level in her sport and I believe she deserved all offers she received.</p>
<p>I understand ,performersmom, that anything performance related will require extra effort and evaluation. The whole process is stressful. I surely don’t know what the answer is. I would imagine that as long as students and alumni continue to bond around athletics, the tip for athletics will not be going away.</p>
<p>Yes, and I feel that the non-scholarhip awarding coaches at Ivies are competing with coaches who can give scholarships, so that may be a very real reason for all this. For some reason, there is not this system of competing for oboe-players among Music Depts by awarding scholarships!!
The reason for THAT may be what you describe, that colleges seek winning sports teams for alumni, community-building, donations, overall school spirit, and branding…
However, my sense of the Ivies, per se, is that alums are not attending that many games (usu only the big one vs the big rival), and that ticket sales are not covering the costs of the athletic program???( correct me if I am wrong- someone must know…) Yes, alumni loyalty, school pride, and reunions do bring in donations, but doubt the tix sales are enough to justify all this at Ivies. So that is another reason for my puzzlement, as it were.</p>