<p>With so many outstanding students rejected or waitlisted by Harvard-- I know of an Intel Science Finalist who didn't make it-- I'm reassured to see their admission priorities remain sound, and to know that they managed to find room for six probable National Hockey League draftees in the class of 2013. (Y'know, the NHL only drafts 210 players every year, and a sizable number of those are from Eastern Europe and don't speak English.) Academic standards, faugh. What could possibly be more important than a winning hockey team?</p>
<p>Because the names of the Intel Science Finalists are public, and so are the names of the hockey players, and one can quickly check the intersection?</p>
<p>You can’t afford to bet me all my money, and as a longtime hockey fan who has watched many young players come to the NHL, I assure you that the Russian, Ukranian and Kazahkstani players who come here generally do not speak much English when they arrive.</p>
<p>So you managed to find 6 people who you thought were not up to Harvard’s standards who “kicked out” other qualified applicants. I think that even if you somehow mananged to show that they were somehow inferior to the other applicants, 6 people is far below the standard deviation in Harvard’s acceptance amount anyway, so it’s hard to argue that they really ‘kicked out’ anyone.</p>
<p>God, I’m not even an athlete and I’m getting sick of this athlete-hate.
A college is more than a glorified schoolhouse. Just being at the smartest kid in the class doesn’t mean you are entitled to attend Harvard. Harvard is a community, and a good, diverse community is made up of people with varying talents. Would you begrudge the world-class pianist whose SAT scores are a little low her spot at Harvard? Come on.</p>
<p>Plus, I’m sure your Intel Science Finalist was accepted to a ton of other fantastic schools. Just because (s)he didn’t get into Harvard doesn’t mean (s)he is being deprived of the paragon of academic bliss.</p>
<p>Reading that blog, I was impressed by the number of hockey players at top prep schools. Presumably, they got a pretty good education at Exeter, Andover, etc… besides playing hockey.</p>
<p>Well, Stanford had their Tiger Woods and John McEnroe and Mike Mussina, so I guess we shouldn’t criticize Harvard too much–except, of course, that those three individuals could at least speak English (and Mike Mussina actually finished his college degree)–something that is fairly unlikely for the 6 hockey players heading to Harvard.</p>
<p>It’s called diminishing marginal utility: At some point, Harvard decides that its students won’t derive any benefit from the company of yet another nationally-recognized student-scientist, or another East Asian with perfect test scores, or another “well-rounded” upper-middle class student, etc.</p>
<p>Who woulda thunk economic reasoning would be useful for something?</p>
<p>“t took a @$%#load of work to be that good at hockey. And I’m sure they’re pretty sharp too.”</p>
<p>^^ indeed to the post above. And if they’re not pretty sharp…then they’re going to fail classes anyway, while you amazing Intel Finalist will surely prove yourself worthy at another college and end up being better off anyway.
TONS of the rejected applicants were qualified enough to go to Harvard…now we only have to prove it by actually working as hard somewhere else.
Aka shut up & do what you gotta do to be better than them, if that’s what you desire. Your spiteful whining won’t help you.</p>