<p>columbia doesn't care about legacy which is good, but they give more preference to certain athletes which is bad in my opinion (our team is bad anyway so athletes do nothing to help our image while rich alums who's daughters are rejected will never donate again).</p>
<p>buuut anyway. i personally know and am good friends with some of the people mentioned in that article. they're quite smart too and arent what they call "stupid legacies" lol</p>
<p>Well, I agree with Cortana’s point that their legacy status may have helped, but I still find it comforting to know that so few admits were legacies.</p>
<p>Lay off athletes. I’m going to Columbia next year as a recruited athlete with 2330 SAT scores, a 3.9 GPA from a top high school and a raft of extracurriculars </p>
<p>To think that one plays sports at Columbia to “help our image with rich alums” is absurb. Absurd! And to presume that legacies are not highly qualified is arrogant. </p>
<p>You should go back to Columbia and develop your critical thinking skills.</p>
<p>most of the athletes here are totally qualified. there are tons of them playing tons of sports. however, there are some people on some of the teams that are downright morons and some that have ridiculously low SAT scores compared to the rest of the class and are only here because they were recruited. i think the reason people give athletes a hard time here is A. most people don’t give care about sports here B. the teams pretty much all suck (the football team lost every single game this season) and C. the dumb athletes make the rest look bad. </p>
<p>so yeah, your 2330 and your 3.9 are great. so is everybody else’s. but let’s be real here, the reason you’re going to columbia is because you were recruited for your sport. there are plenty of people equally or more qualified than you who will get rejected. but then again that is the same reason why anyone here got in and not rejected - they had something columbia wanted. in athletes’ cases it’s their athletic ability. in others’ cases it’s their talents or bizarre accomplishments</p>
<p>I agree with ergmasterflash,
I hate when students stereotype athletes as being dumb and undeserving of their spots in Ivy league schools. I am attending Columbia next year as a recruit and yes the reason why I am being accepted is because I am a nationally competitive lightweight rower, but thats only half the story. Even without rowing I still have a 2330 SAT (800 CR, 790 Math, 740 Writing). A 760 and 740 SAT II and a 4.35 GPA with all honors and 9 AP classes. I am involved in leadership organizations and a multitude of extra-curriculars activities that make my profile equally if not more competitive than the vast majority of kids who post the profiles to be “chanced.” That being said, when I went to Columbia to meet with the coaches, there were 3 other potential recruits there on the same weekend as me who were all faster rowers than I am, but none of those three are able to be recruited due to their academics. And they weren’t stupid kids either, they had around 2100 SATs and 3.8ish GPA’s, but Columbia’s adcoms wouldn’t accept their profiles because they care a lot less about athletics than people think they due. Out of all the Ivie’s Columbia has one of the tougher academic requirements for their recruited athletes (next to Yale’s that is). So stop stereotyping athletes as being stupid or not deserving their spots at top tier schools because a lot of them have worked extremely hard to get where they are. And to put it in perspective, getting a 2330 on the SAT is a lot easier than winning races at National Championships.</p>
<p>I do know many of their scores. why? because they have told me. There was a post on the private class of 2015 facebook group where people posted their SAT scores. Furthermore my own athlete friends have told me. The ones with comparatively really low scores are few and far between. I should have clarified that it is a small handful of them. Like i said before, most of the athletes are perfectly qualified, with SAT scores and grades right where they should be.</p>
<p>I am not dissing athletes’ intellectual abilities. My post was describing why PEOPLE in GENERAL at Columbia tend to diss athletes. You should read posts more carefully and not make assumptions about who I know and my knowledge of their SAT scores.</p>
<p>and to clarify, the reason why ANYONE is accepted to Columbia is because of what they will bring non-academically to Columbia. Almost everyone applying has really great GPA’s and scores. People are accepted because of their awesome accomplishments outside the classroom - whether that’s being a tremendous athlete, award-winning musician, or they built an orphanage with their bare hands in Africa or some crazy stuff like that.</p>