<p>I know at a lot of the Ivy League, there are no "reserved spots" each coach for a particular sport is given to fill. How much do you think being an athlete in whom the coach is interested aids your app? Is it significant, especially at HYPS?</p>
<p>yes it is.</p>
<p>Ivy League schools recruit athletes just like other schools, and coaches are keen to enroll the best athletes they can get - just like other coaches. However, there are no athletic scholarships. </p>
<p>Being a recruited athlete can be a significant boost to your admission chances at an Ivy, but you still have to be pretty good as a scholar as well. Your grades and test scores may not need to be quite as high as non-athletes to get you in, but they've still got to be pretty decent.</p>
<p>They give scholarships to athletes they just dont call them athletic scholarships.
A student from my school, one of the best divers in the country had a 2.9 (weighted) and a 950 SAT and was admitted to Princeton.</p>
<p>i know someone who was borderline mentally functional (tutor, mentor in class while taking tests in HS, barely able to read--) but incredible athlete. admitted to Ivy league school. school not identified deliberately.</p>
<p>My friend's brother is basically the perfect applicant. He's one of the best soccer players in the country, has about a 2000 SAT, and is an URM. He's been recruited to Brown, Upenn, and Dartmouth and he's very high on each of the coaches lists. The Brown coach basically said if he applies to Brown, he's in.</p>
<p>My theory is that as long as you're not stupid, the country's best athletes are in. </p>
<p>ex: girl at my school is one of the top ranked hardcourt tennis players for her age group...i'm talking top three in the nation. She has just been accepted to both Princeton and USC (with a full ride) without either school seeing an official application. Because she travels so much for tournaments and misses a lot of school, she gets crappy grades and can't have a GPA higher than a 3.0. Her SAT is in the 1700 range. I'm sure that without this distraction, she would have better grades and scores, but not good enough for either of these offers
.
However, this doesn't really bother me at all. The way I see it, being that kind of top rated athlete shows that the person has qualities of determination and dedication, rather like great grades and accomplishments in other areas would indicate. If you don't agree, read this excerpt from a Malcolm Gladwell article: </p>
<p>"Male athletes, despite their lower S.A.T. scores and grades, and despite the fact that many of them are members of minorities and come from lower socioeconomic backgrounds than other students, turn out to earn a lot more than their peers. Apparently, athletes are far more likely to go into the high-paying financial-services sector, where they succeed because of their personality and psychological makeup. In what can only be described as a textbook example of burying the lead, Bowen and Shulman write:</p>
<p>One of these characteristics can be thought of as drive—a strong desire to succeed and unswerving determination to reach a goal, whether it be winning the next game or closing a sale. Similarly, athletes tend to be more energetic than the average person, which translates into an ability to work hard over long periods of time—to meet, for example, the workload demands placed on young people by an investment bank in the throes of analyzing a transaction. In addition, athletes are more likely than others to be highly competitive, gregarious and confident of their ability to work well in groups (on teams). </p>
<p>Shulman and Bowen would like to argue that the attitudes of selective colleges toward athletes are a perversion of the ideals of American élite education, but that’s because they misrepresent the actual ideals of American élite education. The Ivy League is perfectly happy to accept, among others, the kind of student who makes a lot of money after graduation. As the old saying goes, the definition of a well-rounded Yale graduate is someone who can roll all the way from New Haven to Wall Street."</p>
<p>If anyone’s interested, here’s the full article.
<a href="http://www.newyorker.com/critics/atlarge/articles/051010crat_atlarge%5B/url%5D">www.newyorker.com/critics/atlarge/articles/051010crat_atlarge</a></p>
<p>Anyway, a college’s goal is to attract people that will be successful in life. This article shows evidence that athletes (or at least male athletes) have greater success later in life. So how can anyone deny that a handful of high performance athletes are not a good addition to any freshman class?</p>
<p>
[quote]
They give scholarships to athletes they just dont call them athletic scholarships.
A student from my school, one of the best divers in the country had a 2.9 (weighted) and a 950 SAT and was admitted to Princeton.
[/quote]
This has nothing to do with scholarships, only with admission. Scholarships are based on your ability to pay only. There are no 'free rides' in the Ivies unless you make less than $60K, and then athletic ability is not a factor either.</p>
<p>Preferential financial aid packing happens all the time with athletes recruited to the Ivies and Top LACs--more grants, no loans, no work study= close to free ride</p>
<p>Show me......</p>