<p>University is a place of higher learning and should remain a place for higher learning and not sports franchise. NCAA should create Unversity Level Sports Clubs where the requirement should be that a student of any University in that geographical region can participate. </p>
<p>That way Ivy League will only become a Sports League and the Institutes of Higher learning will remain as that and hence the people will go to Yale/Brown only because these are good institutes of higher learning and not becuase of a sports franchise.</p>
<p>I think that there are some great benefits to being a student athlete and that those benefits (to both the student and the university at large) are most prevalent in the Ivy League.</p>
<p>First of all I don't believe anyone goes to Brown because of the sports program.</p>
<p>That being said, the sports programs of schools do a lot of things for those with success. It broadcasts the school name so that more hear about it, look into it, and apply. But perhaps more importantly, athletics are a major source of income (at least the Big Ten, ACC, PAC Ten, etc. schools) that provides the university with additional funds that oftentimes go to the academic portion of the school.</p>
<p>Depends on the school. Most need it to please the alumni.
However, I really feel the tech schools should drop them.
I think Caltech has stopped recruiting, but MIT still does...a lot.</p>
<p>See, you're talking about Yale/Brown because that's where you want your daughter to go. I remember you had a thread that stated schools increase enrollment and someone stated that you don't care really as long as that it's 1 extra slot for your daughter.</p>
<p>"I think that there are some great benefits to being a student athlete and that those benefits (to both the student and the university at large) are most prevalent in the Ivy League."</p>
<p>That is why I said there should be University Level Sports Franchise, where the eligibility should be students who are enrolled at the University in that area. That will provide all benefits of Sports at University to the students/University that are tied to it.</p>
<p>"That being said, the sports programs of schools do a lot of things for those with success. It broadcasts the school name so that more hear about it, look into it, and apply. "</p>
<p>But then there might be students who know a school just becuase of its NCAA ranking.</p>
<p>My daughter used to know a lot about UConn/Duke during her middle school just becuase of their ranking in sports.</p>
<p>"See, you're talking about Yale/Brown because that's where you want your daughter to go. I remember you had a thread that stated schools increase enrollment and someone stated that you don't care really as long as that it's 1 extra slot for your daughter.
"</p>
<p>I certainly won't care once my D's in college. I may not hover on this board after 2009 but what does that have to do with the question?</p>
<p>i get annoyed that kids who are not as deserving get into a school because they are good at sports. there is a girl at my school who is being recruited for sking at some very good schools, but she does not have the best grades and i think she will probably take the place of more deserving kids. i think it can be very unfair.</p>
<p>It is not only the kids but think about the situation where a university shell out $5 Millions as bonus to hire a Football coach but pay a $200K to a Nobel Laurate.</p>
<p>I think Ivy league schools, like Yale and Brown, have spent decades building their schools and their reputations, and with that their Alumni networks and endowments. I think they would be foolish to consider tweaking anything that has such a huge impact on their Alumni networks and endowments as athletics.</p>
<p>"But then there might be students who know a school just becuase of its NCAA ranking."</p>
<p>Exactly. That is the benefit to the college, the kids who learn about the school and apply to it after hearing about it because of sports.</p>
<p>As quick as some are to denounce student athletes because their grades are not as good, consider the amount of time student athletes devote to sports. While you have the whole night to do homework and study for tomorrow's test, these kids exhaust themselves during four hours of nightly practice and barely have half an hour to finish all school-related responsibilities. It's not as cut and dry as you think.</p>
<p>I think talk of eliminating sports programs/recruiting entirely does a disservice to some students.</p>
<p>A good friend of mine was recruited for a sport in Div III (and thus scholarships are not an issue). Throughout her high school career, she has spent about three hours every school day practicing, and also has practice Saturdays, not to mention the entire weekends she has given up to compete. She has also managed to keep a 4.0 UW GPA in a program of rigorous academics involving both AP classes and being an IB Diploma candidate, as well as scoring 2200+ on her SAT.
She will be attending one of her top choice schools next year, one of the most elite LACs. She was obviously qualified for this school in Stats, and had several additional, smaller, ECs.
Was her sport the tipping factor in getting her in to a college so selective all admissions are a crapshoot? Maybe, who knows. But might she have gotten in anyway? Certainly. Thus, I have no problem with the fact that she was rewarded for the many hours she's dedicated to her sport (if, in fact, she even was rewarded for it any more than she would've been by another EC).</p>
<p>You and your crazy ideas POIH. Have you no respect for individualized school pride?</p>
<p>If I was against athletic admits, I'd be against all the other "bad" things out there too - development cases, legacies, PRIVATE SCHOOL preferences, yada yada.</p>
<p>What's fair is fair. You seemingly like to contradict yourself a lot though.</p>
<p>dbentley_511: If there was a piano virtuoso at your school who has adequate but not the best grades, is a school wrong to admit him/her over a "typical" student who has better grades/scores?</p>
<p>How about schools choosing these "types" of students?</p>
<p>child of foreign diplomat, child of refugee
science whiz but has terrible personality
rural or urban HS background
lower socio-economic group
under-represented minority
female athletes or male atheletes
child of alumni
child of extremely big donor (multimillions)
male who intends to study nursing
community activist</p>
<p>All these are "legitmate" in some schools' eyes.</p>