<p>“the problem is that these schools preach that athletes are held to the same standards as ordinary students, which is clearly not true.”</p>
<p>Do they preach that? That’s not my perception. They say that everyone admitted meets a minimum academic standard, which is not the same thing as saying that athletes are “held to the* same *standards as ordinary students.” They openly acknowledge use of an AI for athletes only. I don’t always agree with the decisions schools make in this area, but I do not think they are dishonest about it.</p>
<p>As a senior still going through the application process, actually the waiting process, I’d like to express my experience with Ivy recruiting:</p>
<p>I believe I’m a solid student, but not at the same caliber as many of the students accepted to top schools without recruiting. Through hard work and good communication, I was able to get into a good position with one of the Ivy League schools. I started talking to them right when I could, emailing them since Junior year and calling over the summer. After I took my official, I was convinced that it was the school for me. But then we got to cost…</p>
<p>I was ready to commit to the school and told myself I’ll deal with the 30K a year my parents said I’d have to cover. As I talked to more people who went to expensive colleges, a clear picture emerged: don’t do it. I’m not trying to degrade these schools- the lectures I sat in on were very interesting, and even as a prospect, was able to participate through my knowledge. But since I aspire to continue with dentistry after undergrad, it seemed a little hard to stomach. After doing a little math, it comes down to something like this: 120K undergrad + 280K dental school + 300K (starting a new practice in a rented space) adds up to 700K. Some will argue that the value of an Ivy League experience is worth it, but if you’re going into health sciences, is it really so much? 120K is a lot of money to most of us, so I think I’d rather save money. Also, anything I can do to save money in undergrad will be put towards my graduate education. For those reasons, I applied to accelerated programs and considered cheaper schools where I can still get a great education.</p>
<p>Back to the athlete part. The allure of competing as an Ivy League athlete is great. I can’t imagine coming home with a Dartmouth or Princeton Rowing sweatshirt. But even thinking about that, are those programs really much better than state schools? UW, one of the schools I am currently talking to, has a fantastic rowing program and the academic help student athletes need when they are putting so much time into practice. I know that to many it’s frustrating to know that an athlete will have a much better chance of being admitted, but for many of them it is hard to consider a better school without sports. While I myself do not fall into my category, many of my friends have been rewarded for their hard work in sports, and I support their way. Ivy Leagues do not offer athletic scholarships. For athletes like me, they become impossible. They also do not take athletic status into account for financial aid, so in that sense it is an even playing field. I believe part of the idea is that if athletes had the 18-30 hours extra a week to put into grades, they would be able to perform much better academically. While I also do think some people with very low GPAs should not have it much easier, I think for athletes who are near the acceptance lines for the schools really do deserve the extra boost.</p>
<p>I am the parent of 2 Ivy League students, one current and one graduated in ‘03. 2 different schools. To speak in generalities re athletes and admission is not an accurate assessment of the situation. One of our children was flagged as a recruited athlete, the other who happens to be an athlete, did not even meet or talk with the coach until an admitted students’ weekend. His teammate, who was recruited, was a National Merit finalist and AP Honor student. For the most part, the Ivy League scrutinizes all of their athletes at a very high level. Admission is not easy, regardless of athlete or non-athlete category. There are , of course, some exceptions with super stars who happen along every so often. This also happens with children of very large donors. There are also a large number of students on financial aid and loans. Only the student and family can decide if these sacrifices are worth the education and experience. As an aside, there are some Ivy Sports who compete at a high level, but the majority are not known for their DI prowess! These are student-athletes in the truest sense. Finally, both of my Ivy children were top of their classes, with all honors, all-state, and all-american designation and they certainly were turned down by some Ivy schools!! Best of luck to all, it is about the proper fit and what is right for you. There is no be all end all.</p>
<p>As you know Wiso is a member of the EARC and won the IRA in 2008. Chris Clark is a respected coach. You better check however to confirm whether Wisco offers $ for men’s rowing. </p>
<p>You may also wish to check out BU and Northeastern each of which I am told offer 20 ships per year. Schools that have solid rowing programs but race below the EARC level that also offer $ include Drexel, St.Joe’s, FIT. LaSalle, Fairfield and others.</p>
<p>If you are eligible for financial aid then checkout the schools in the New England Small College Athletic Conference (the NESCAC) which contains many strong academic programs with fine rowing programs. </p>
<p>Unless you have a great great erg score known to coaches through Junior Nationals or the like you must aggressively market yourself or else,you will never be found by the college coaches.</p>
<p>school admit whoever they want and just having good score/grades is no guarantee that the student is going to succeed. Just as every athletic admission isn’t lower than any other student. I never hear or see this with the "hundreds of legacy admissions that Ivies or Eastern Schools take. I never hear this from the Eastern Prep school bias that Ivies exhibit every class. I never hear this when we talk about “developmental admits” big dollar contributors,my d friend father just told her she was admitted to Vanderbilt last thursday after her father talked with a university official–funny thing she didn’t apply and I guess her ED to Wellesley means nothing. It’s just the athletes that get special treatment.</p>
<p>and yes the schools do preach that athletes are held to the same standard as everyone else, but let’s face it who is the most visible representation of the school the athlete on television in university advertisments or the student just going to school and no one knows? There are some case studies in business that show the impact of adding one player to a program(Georgetown when Pat Ewing signed his NLI and it affect on sports revenue, merchandise sales etc…) that is an interesting study.</p>
<p>^You can’t negate the bump athletes get by throwing other groups into the discussion. I looked at the naviance for the school my child attends. The two admits to Harvard scored an average of 1780(single sitting) and an 1820 SAT(superscored). Both of these admits were recruited athletes. What other groups would get into Harvard with these numbers?</p>
<p>Not schools like Northwestern and Stanford.</p>
<p>For non-revenue sports, the diff. is slim; for men’s FB and BB, there is more of a diff. but recruits for schools like SU and NU are closer to the Ivy level than say they are to schools like UMich. </p>
<p>Duke is a bit of an anomaly when it comes to BB recruits (much more leeway) and they have repeatedly lessened the academic requirements for FB recruits in an attempt to get competitive (1/3 of recruits now only have to meet the minimum NCAA standard).</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Not higher than schools like the aforementioned, as well as places like ND.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Other Ivy League coaches have accused Amaker of recruiting players that have been traditionally lower than what Harvard had sought in the past.</p>
<p>Amaker also dumped half the team to make room for his incoming recruits.</p>
<p>Sports, even at the Ivies, is becoming more cut-throat.</p>
<p>Now, while Stanford has stuck to its academic requirements for recruits when it comes to revenue sports, it seems that the practice initiated by Harbaugh has continued under Shaw.</p>
<p>Basically, lesser rated recruits who have already verballed to Stanford are later told that they didn’t get past admissions (one who recently got rejected had a 5.1 GPA); and coincidentally, higher rated recruits ended up committing to Stanford (often w/ lower grades/scores).</p>
<p>This kind of practice stinks of the over-signing that many SEC schools do (Saban recently told a RB commit who is still recuperating from an injury that his scholarship will be for the next year, even tho the recruit had been one of the 1st to verbal to 'Bama).</p>
<p>Frankly, I expected better from Stanford (and Harvard for that matter), but as we can see - winning makes people and institutions do not so ethical things.</p>
Interesting. A poster at a recent thread was trying to tell me that the elites are, with a few exceptions, meritocracies. The thread was closed before I had a chance to respond. Too bad.
If I want to know more about ones social-economic background, I ask about the college; if I want to know about ones ability, I ask about the major. There are outliers, of course, but not as many as some would like to believe.</p>
<p>single anecdote (for fun). One of Cal-Berkeley’s b’ball recruits had a 2350/4.8. I guess Amaker must’ve thought that he was too slow for a ranked team. :)</p>