Are you missing out by going to a college with no football team or good athletics?

Son attended SEC football powerhouse for a year and did all the normal stuff there. He enjoyed the football games. Now he’s at a very small school with no sports, only intramurals. This is the place he wanted to be at, and he doesn’t miss the big school sports at all. It all depends on what you want.

I took the question to be ‘do I need to go to a big football school, or at the very least a school with some good sports teams (like hockey or basketball)? Will it be a ‘college experience’ if the school doesn’t have sports?’

I think it is a different experience. Many schools have sports, good sports, without football teams. U of Denver won the NCAA hockey championship this year and the lacrosse championship a few years ago. Even without a football team, there are a lot of sports opportunities for students and the games are a big student activity.

Even at schools with no football, the school may have a tradition of associating with another school that does have football/sports. The women of Smith and Mt Holyoke attended many games over the years.

My kid would say no way, the less sports the better. My youngest has already said he would like a decent football team. No one can answer this question but you.

Often, if sports are a very large part of student life, you might find yourself struggling to find things to do if you don’t care for them. I know that I, personally, would rather go to a school where they matter less because I’ve got better/more interesting things to do with my time than drink crappy beer and get tinnitus.

@moscott I never said their wasn’t a big difference between D1 and D3 basketball. The school I mentioned in my post, Gonzaga, has D1 basketball but if you care about college basketball or March Madness at all you probably knew that. I think you’re being unnecessarily hostile on this thread.

@snowfairy137 Seriously? Maybe change to snowflake. You never said there wasn’t a big difference between D1 and D3 basketball…no you only pointed that out for football. Hence the balance. Hostile? Lol, how exactly?

You guys arguing pointlessly about things that don’t matter really just illustrates the point that less sports focus is better lol.

@moscott

You’re making this a binary decision - it’s not. Stanford is hardly a “big football school” - the games are not a huge cultural event on campus to the point that not going is missing out. Just having a football team is not why people eliminate schools. People who don’t like sports want to go to schools where it isn’t a big component in the social scene. That doesn’t really eliminate many top schools. No one said they were going to remove all schools with football.

You’re also being very literal and lacking any understanding for the posters you’re discussing with. Really, because they didn’t specifically say basketball, it was needed to nitpick that? In general, your tone has been pretty hostile to just about everyone here. Adding in a “not judging” before a very judgemental comment doesn’t nullify it.

Eh. I’m going to a BIG sports school. I mean HUGE. I mean lots of people applied just because they liked the teams. Not kidding. But, I have absolutely no idea what sports even are. But, I will be going to sports events. Personally, I like the “hype” it brings to my school.

BUT, it can be overwhelming. Without sports (and the scandals that come with them), students typically have to try harder to get distracted which is not bad at all. Plus, colleges usually cluster together. I know two small colleges where I applied where the schools aren’t big on sports are actually near to the schools who are big on sports. So, that experience, in many cases is only a bus or car trip away.

It’s worth mentioning though that students might write off Vanderbilt because it has a large emphasis on greek life AND sports. So I wouldn’t really equate Vanderbilt with Stanford, Duke, etc.

Most people that I know argue about various sports teams and players, including my D and I. Here on CC we argue about whether sports are relevant in the college experience. That just tells us there’s many “flavors of ice cream” for everyone. Choose wisely.

Stanford is hardly a big football school?? Power 5 conference…Rose Bowl appearances…Heisman contenders… 50,000 per game, top 20 recruiting. I could care less if they enjoy football or want to go where a school has football or not. Sorry but if you are going to eliminate “big football schools” even by your standards then say goodbye to USC, UCLA, Michigan, Texas etc…

You’re not getting what is important to the students who don’t care for sports. It’s not how many accolades the team has or bowl appearances or the money the school administration spends on the program, but about the weight of sports in the social environment of the school. Stanford has such academic prowess that despite its strength in football, it’s not a social pillar like it is at some other schools. That’s the case for many of the schools you listed. Of course, it depends on the student as to how much is too much. Either way, you frame it like it’s ridiculous to eliminate a few top schools - there are so many good schools out there that most can easily afford to do that. We talk about fit all the time here - this is exactly what is meant by it.

I realize your point but the OP leaves the definition of “big football school” open to interpretation. So a student in Texas or Michigan or Florida has to look OOS instead of a top academic in state school because they have a big football culture? Seems rather silly but their choice. I think the social environment of the schools such as Duke, Stanford, Berkeley, Notre Dame and on and on is very heavily weighted.

So to answer the OP’s question…I would say yes unless we are talking Cal Tech since every top college I can think of at least has a football program. I don’t think for those that don’t care for football or any sports you would be “missing out” other than ruling out a top college because they have a sports or more specifically football culture. See schools such as Oklahoma, UF and Alabama that have among the most NMF.

I don’t think that’s what OP is asking: they are asking if you do select a school without football, will you miss out on something? That answer is “It depends on you”, which has been addressed here already. There is no mention of OP eliminating any colleges based on if they have a football team.

^^^You are correct, it wasn’t the OP it was raclut that I was responding to. To the OP I would agree that if you don’t enjoy football or sports than I see no reason to feel like you are missing out. I still contend that regardless of the sports enthusiasm of the school you may be missing out on a top school if you choose not to go because they have a big football program(raclut).

@moscott some people don’t want to or can’t afford to go to the top schools even if they can get in. Some people don’t need to go to a top school for their chosen career. It’s up to everyone to find the best school for them. That may mean sports are a big focus or not. It’s all about pros and cons and what matters most to you.

@snowfairy137 Agreed. My main point was to raclut who said their D chose a school based on their LACK of a big football program. Now they may mean they paid more, passed on a better school or whatever. That just seems silly to me. However that’s their choice.

MODERATOR’S NOTE: Have you noticed how far off track this thread has gotten? Please stay on track.

And any more discourteous posts will receive warnings. You’ve made your points - please don’t debate them further.