<p>
[quote]
Stanford only recruits athletes under a special admission process which even bypass the Early Admission and you get a confirmation in September itself and solely on the basis of your athletic performances.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>POIH, your ignorance is showing here. These are the NCAA rules, not Stanford's special admission process. And its not solely on the basis of athletic performance. High school academics is indeed a factor.</p>
<p>I am... Why should top schools accept kids who are just merely good at kicking balls and nothing else over extremely smart and well rounded kids?</p>
<p>Because "extremely smart and well rounded kids" are a dime a dozen. Div. 1 athletes are rare.</p>
<p>Being excellent at a sport is no less valuable then being excellent at anything else. As long as you are indeed excellent.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Div. 1 athletes are rare.
[/quote]
I beg to differ... Plus, they aren't all good students and are more prone to vandalism and crime than the really smart people who get in due to their intelligence.</p>
<p>not everyone is really smart, why should they be denied the opportunity</p>
<p>bob,</p>
<p>Look at your own hs. How many "extremely smart and well-rounded" students are in the Senior class? How many Div 1 recruited athletes? If your school is like most, the answers will be "many" and "a few or none," respectively.</p>
<p>These athletes work twice as hard than any student with a perfect GPA has.</p>
<p>No blindfold here, It just amazes me you think these schools don't know exactly what they are doing.</p>
<p>My daughter's high school had a young man who was recruited by many schools for baseball. His father is a former professional football player. The young man had over a 4.0 weighted GPA. He will be playing baseball for Stanford.</p>
<p>I see a ton of ludicrous examples of recruiting athletes to top schools. For example, OJ Mayo has told USC he wants to play there for a year, until he's eligible for the NBA. He picked USC because he'll get good exposure there, being in LA and all. I don't think there is a interview out there where he mentions looking forward to taking classes at USC. </p>
<p>However, to hold up Stanford or the Ivies as examples of this is silly. Those schools have shown time and time again they will not recruit athletes that would not do well at their school. Qualified students may be losing places to qualified students that are also stellar athletes, but they are not losing places to unqualified students.</p>
<p>"I see a ton of ludicrous examples of recruiting athletes to top schools. For example, OJ Mayo has told USC he wants to play there for a year, until he's eligible for the NBA."</p>
<p>Is there something wrong with that? Most athletes don't yell out "YES!!! I get to do Calculus right after basketball practice!!!!" But that doesn't mean they won't do well there. </p>
<p>But honestly, if the NBA was in your future, would you really care about Calculus, Chemistry, and all that stuff?</p>
<p>And that kid still deserves to be there even more than the student's place he'd be taking. He's a great athlete. Being a great athlete is just as good as being a great student, probably even better if you can go pro.</p>
<p>Bay "Sheesh! You don't have to insult me POIH"</p>
<p>There is no intention to insult you in anyway. When something is refuted with proof, people try to circumvent it. I came back to the discussion after seeing "Karl's" comment that Football or similar sports brings million to the Stanford university so the payment of $5 mil bonus is justified. I just put forward the truth. Most of us when living in society have stoppers on the side of eyes which prevent us to see the whole thing. These stoppers are our up bringing or the society so we can’t see it or understand it. But when someone else comes from outside the picture is different.</p>
<p>Since I was not grown up here so I don't have these stoppers, I see the reality and so can’t appreciate what is going on in the name of sports admissions.</p>
<p>If I've to be blunt then it is like robbing deserving students their admission in the name of sports.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Look at your own hs. How many "extremely smart and well-rounded" students are in the Senior class? How many Div 1 recruited athletes? If your school is like most, the answers will be "many" and "a few or none," respectively.
[/quote]
Actually, it's just the opposite at my school.</p>
<p>Armando :"But honestly, if the NBA was in your future, would you really care about Calculus, Chemistry, and all that stuff?"</p>
<p>Then why these people need Stanford degrees. They don't need it, or respect it or care about academics anyway, then why they deserve it.</p>
<p>They don't. With this attitude these should not even be consider for the spot.
For an ordinary student we recommend showing passion in the field of study, do research, find cure for cancer to get into Stanford or Ivies, but then give admissions to students who don't even care to study about calculus or chemistry.</p>
<p>I love how you essentially call collegiate sports 'professional' lmao.</p>
<p>Athletes deserve admissions spots too. They worked hard, they excelled, the deserve the payoff just as much as anyone else who applies.</p>
<p>POIV,</p>
<p>The NCAA allows 12 basketball scholarships for Div 1 schools. That's total, across all 4 years. So Stanford will likely be awarding approximately 3 basketball scholarships to the entering class next fall. Wow, what a travesty!</p>
<p>And btw, if an athletic scholarship makes a student a "professional athlete," does a scholarship awarded for achievement in science make a student a "professional scientist?"</p>
<p>
[quote]
Actually, it's just the opposite at my school.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Bob,</p>
<p>So how many D1 athletes are/were in your senior class? What sports are they playing and where are they going to school? Please elaborate.</p>
<p>Bay:"And btw, if an athletic scholarship makes a student a "professional athlete," does a scholarship awarded for achievement in science make a student a "professional scientist?""</p>
<p>That is true; a merit scholarship will make a student pseudo professional scientist. But that is what Stanford needs to do as it is in the business to create professional scientist. I'll be all for more such scholarships as provided by "Olin College" to all the students because that is what universities are for.</p>
<p>If you go thru the threat that is the main purpose to point that create sports academies and give all athletes money to join and attend. But keep universities to create professional scientists and not pro football players.</p>
<p>You're way off base POIH. Stanford is in the business of creating leaders of all kinds. People who play college sports do well in life on the whole. The motivation and discipline it takes to succeed in sports serves the well in all sorts of goals.</p>
<p>All of these threads are a bit of a waste of time considering the colleges have been recruiting athletes as part of business forever and will continue to. When Dartmouth's then head of admissions suggested Dartmouth recruit fewer athletes the alum called for his head. He quickly resigned after twenty some years and Dartmouth has a new Dean of Admissions who knows his mandate.</p>