<p>Jay Fielder graduated from Dartmouth and went on to be quarter back for the Dophins.</p>
<p>Even Jay Fiedler wouldn't brag about that. :)</p>
<p>As for the Columbia players, I don't know where they get five from - only one is active on an NFL roster, and that's Marcellus Wiley. I believe Steve Cargile (Columbia safety) is the only other Columbia player "in the NFL", but he's only on the Broncos practice squad.
EDIT: And NONE of them were drafted. In addition, only one Princeton player was drafted - Dennis Norman in the 7th round to the Seahawks in 2001.</p>
<p>I didn't want to change the topic of the thread, but I see that I did. I also don't want to start a ****ing match between D-IA and Ivy league football, but I see I've done that, too.</p>
<p>Let's pretend I never posted.</p>
<p>Glad you posted. My advice to everyone else- don't argue sports with Ecliptica. He is an encyclopedia! :)</p>
<p>Xiggi, not sure what part of bs's story you find incredible but I can corroborate the first part: a track star from dd's high school was recruited to a top Ivy with a 3.2 ish gpa and ~1900 SAT. There are rumors floating about another Ivy having to adjust its expectations to accomodate a different athlete from the same high school. I can't vouch for that one though.</p>
<p>I have to echo sticker shock and soozievt: I have a lot of respect for athletics and the dedication of talented, athletic kids, I simply can't accept that this talent should be treated so very differently from students who show equivalent dedication and accomplishment in other fields. And there are other ventures that also attract $$$ to campus and heighten the school's attractiveness to the outside world. Dance, journalism, music, art all leap to mind.</p>
<p>"Xiggi, not sure what part of bs's story you find incredible but I can corroborate the first part: a track star from dd's high school was recruited to a top Ivy with a 3.2 ish gpa and ~1900 SAT."</p>
<p>I can believe it, and I understand it. It is far easier to find outstanding journalists, musicians, actors, dancers, etc. with more remarkable grades than it is to find stellar athletes with Ivy caliber grades and scores who also would prefer to be on an Ivy team than to be, for instance, on a renowned state college team that gets lots of national attention.</p>
<p>Someone in my Harvard class who was recruited because of his prodigious athletic abilities is still angry at Harvard. Why? Because he blames Harvard (where he still holds records) for the fact that he was not able to go pro. This is despite the fact that the man has a highly successful, lucrative, visible career that would be a dream for most people.</p>
<p>I know someone who had a 3.1 gpa, 750 m (I don't know what his verbal score was, but I'm sure it was over 600) and was a very rare URM, who was a recruited athlete by Ivies, applied to 2, was accepted by one, but rejected by Harvard. It's not as if the Ivies accept any recruited athlete. (Incidentally, he chose to go to state U, which is a powerhouse in his sport. Unfortunately, he didn't make that team.)</p>
<p>According to Harvard's admissions officers, no one gets in unless they have the stats to indicate that that they have the ability to eventually graduate from Harvard. Pushed to give the lowest stats that indicate someone could do this, my regional admissions officer said a 3.0 gpa and 600 score on all parts of the SAT I.</p>
<p>I knew all sorts of athletes at Harvard, and while it was true that many didn't seem to be as bright as the average Harvard student, all of the athletes that I know graduated from Harvard (as is the case for about 97% of Harvard students), and some whom I thought weren't that bright (this is by Harvard standards) ended up doing things like becoming lawyers. It's not as if the Ivies are scraping the bottom of the barrel to get athletes.</p>
<p>I have read one of Princeton alum and U.S. Senator Bill Bradley's books, and his SATs were in the 500s. He was an amazing basketball player who eventually did well in the pros. He also did very well in the real world, including becoming a senator known for his intellectualism and thoughtfulness, so don't write off those Ivy athletes!</p>
<p>Underlying most of these discussions is the unstated and undefended assumption that elite colleges exist primarily to educate the most academically talented students and that any departure from this concept is an aberration. This assumption is clearly not true in the real world; moreover, it is far from clear that elite colleges should take that view. For example, one might take the position that our "best" colleges should be in the business of training those who are most likely to be leaders in the future. In that case, unusual success in athletics is a quite plausible criterion in the admissions process.</p>
<p>"It is far easier to find outstanding journalists, musicians, actors, dancers, etc. with more remarkable grades than it is to find stellar athletes with Ivy caliber grades and scores who also would prefer to be on an Ivy team than to be, for instance, on a renowned state college team that gets lots of national attention."</p>
<p>Really? I suppose I'm overly influenced by the narrow vision of life around me, but I see bright, talented athletic kids by the dozen, all training specifically for Ivy League admissions. Sheesh, these kids start travel soccer by the time they're 8 and there's already no place for the more casual, less talented athlete at that point. I know kids who take up squash or fencing or skiing only because they think it will make them more competitive in college admissions. The NY Times recently ran a piece about (crazy--sorry, I can't help myself) parents sending their kids to ski schools for the winter season purely to boost their chances in college admissions. In this large pool, there's a lack of kids with high grades? Hard to believe.</p>
<p>In any event, I find it difficult to accept the premise that these athletes deserve the extra value assigned to them. They work no harder than the musicians who practice for hours each day or than the dancers, who are actually engaged in a demanding sport. </p>
<p>As to scraping the bottom of the barrel, I don't accept the premise that it takes superstar credentials to thrive at Harvard or Yale or any other such school. It takes determination and the type of ability that most bright kids possess. So while I don't think the athlete applicants are "subpar," I simply think they're enjoying an unfair advantage that is misplaced in today's insanely competitive college admissions environment.</p>
<p>EMM1, well sure, except that the schools themselves put out demands and expectations that perpetuate the belief that only the most academically talented (and driven) students belong at their schools. If the schools are truly looking for leadership or some other quality not defined by academics, one would expect that the stats for admission would be a heck of a lot more variable. The only real variability I see is explained by legacy, development, and athletic admissions.</p>
<p>"In this large pool, there's a lack of kids with high grades? Hard to believe."</p>
<p>Well, I'm sure that it varies from sport to sport. I can only speak for basketball. My S was at a second-level showcase camp--700 players. I spoke to a coach at a top LAC that was looking at him. He said that, at this camp, only 20 kids had grades that were good enough for him to even consider (without any knowledge of whether these kids could play or not).</p>
<p>College varsity athletes are sought after by businesses and law firms. I don't believe the same consideration is given to talented musicians, etc. Perhaps it should be, but I don't think it is. I know I have worked for several CEOs that really valued the skills and discipline required to be successful in a sport.<br>
My son's interest in and dedication to his (non-revenue) sport had nothing to do with where he was going to go to college. It started way before a thought was even GIVEN to college! I suspect this is the case with most talented and driven athletes. Yes, there are the exceptions noted here who do it to gain an admissions advantage.
He also had excellent academics, but not the perfect stats we see on this forum. He had some things that might have been perceived as negatives- a suspension/expulsion from a school, several schools on his transcript, even a (oh my God) C in a course soph year! We learned that he was viewed as an interesting and intriguing candidate who had learned from some mistakes. He was recruited by many highly selective schools for his sport, but ALL these schools made it clear that Admissions had the final say.<br>
I had a horse in the other race, too, with a musician daughter (high academic stats but, again, not perfect). She was somewhat recruited as well- with financial offers from several schools after her auditions. Maybe that is the answer to this issue- the artistic kids get preference at schools that focus on this area as a strong major or conservatory level program. There are a lot of artistic kids at top music programs that have below-par academic stats.</p>
<p>Mom of Wild Child, there are many ways to demonstrate skills and discipline. I worked for a law firm that valued the skill and discipline required to excel in law school while holding a full time job. I know a professional musician currently attending Yale as an undergrad who is widely admired for her ability to excel academically while practising her instrument 4-5 hours each day. My own kid runs her school newspaper and several other publications and has won awards for these endeavors. She's widely admired by the faculty of her school for being able to manage this while also being a standout student who has won prestigious academic awards. She's an interesting and intriguing imperfect candidate but it's pretty clear that she's not about to be recruited by a highly selective school. Sure, Admissions has the final say with regard to student athletes but it's my understanding that the coach has a certain number of slots that are his to fill. I accept that there are unfairnesses in the admissions process--legacies enjoy a certain advantage, those who have endowed chairs confer advantage to their children and grandchildren, celebrity applicants are admitted without the same scrutiny to which the bulk of the applicant pool is subjected, coming from a particular background hurts or helps...and athletes are given an extra advantage that seems to me unfair.</p>
<p>"Really? I suppose I'm overly influenced by the narrow vision of life around me, but I see bright, talented athletic kids by the dozen, all training specifically for Ivy League admissions"</p>
<p>Are they nationally or state ranked athletes? </p>
<p>Sure, they may be training for Ivy League admissions, but are they athletically good enough to be recruited by colleges that are stellar in their sports and send lots of players to the pros? Those colleges tend to be public universities that are known for excellence in sports.</p>
<p>With the exception of perhaps things like ice hockey and perhaps crew -- rare sports that Ivy teams actually have recently been nationally ranked in-- that's probably not the case. </p>
<p>Ivies actually get plenty of applicants who are, for instance, All State musicians. Indeed, Ivies get so many such applicants that it's not a big deal for them. To truly stand out in the musician pool, one probably needs to be the kind of prodigy that a Yoyo Ma was -- who applied to Harvard after a career as a child prodigy, and turned down Julliard for Harvard.</p>
<p>At Harvard, something like 60% of the freshman class had music as an EC, often at a high level locally such as being concertmaster of a school orchestra or in All State. While many students may have been high school athletes, I am sure that most were not state-recognized athletes.</p>
<p>The same is true for students who are writers, journalists, and artists. Ivies get plenty of applicantions from students who are excellent in those fields and who also have sky high scores and grades. It's not that hard to fill out those aspects that are needed to create well rounded classes.</p>
<p>It's far harder to make sure that Ivies have the students with the intelligence and academic backgrounds who have the interest to do varsity sports at Ivies and to be talented enough to help create reasonably strong teams.</p>
<p>Where I live and have lived, I've seen plenty of Harvard applicants with strong skills in writing, art, music, competitive academic activities, but can think of only one student who was being recruited for sports. At best, applicants did sports on weak school teams, and were not the standouts even on those teams.</p>
<p>The one recruited athlete whom I knew, however, had only a 3.1 gpa, and didn't get in despite being a very rare URM.</p>
<p>A local student who got in with an unusually strong athletic background (for my area) -- had been since middle school teaching roller blading and ice skating including to adults-- also was val or sal at a strong high school, National Merit, had a sky high gpa and scores was a legacy and had other strong ECs.</p>
<p>I agree with Northstarmom. </p>
<p>Shoshi, look at your own local high school. How many athletes were good enough to be recruited by Div. I colleges? Very few, I would venture to guess.</p>
<p>Athletes with Div. I-level talent plus academic credentials are relatively rare and are therefore highly sought after.</p>
<p>"As to scraping the bottom of the barrel, I don't accept the premise that it takes superstar credentials to thrive at Harvard or Yale or any other such school. It takes determination and the type of ability that most bright kids possess. So while I don't think the athlete applicants are "subpar," I simply think they're enjoying an unfair advantage that is misplaced in today's insanely competitive college admissions environment."</p>
<p>I don't think that most bright kids would thrive at a place like Harvard or Yale. Most bright kids are motivated by grades, and don't have the passion to pursue independently and creatively academics or ECs. Most of them (as is the case with most people) do what's required for the grades.</p>
<p>Those aren't the type of people that HPY are looking for. THey are looking for students who'll not only survive at their colleges, but also will thrive by taking advantage of the free reign they will get there to connect with some of the world's most brilliant academicians and to start organizations, create projects, do research, etc. simply because they are interested in those things.</p>
<p>I remember considering taking a history class at Harvard that required only one paper (length was up to the student), no exams. The prof described a previous student who had chosen to do a 100 page paper and had traveled around the country to gather info for it. I decided not to take that class because I lacked that kind of passion for that particular subject. However, for students who were interested in that subject, it was a skys the limit opportunity to dive into something they cared about.</p>
<p>When it came to ECs, students did things like start major community service projects; fund out of town trips to write investigative articles for the student newspaper; wrote plays, created film series and festivals etc. -- all things that they did purely for fun and got no credit in class for.</p>
<p>The Ivies aren't places for students who did activities in h.s. to decorate their resume. They are places for students who really want the chance to passionately pursue their EC and academic interests. Most people -- no matter how smart -- aren't wired like this, and, indeed, would prefer less intense college environments.</p>
<p>If these talented athletes are as rare as you say, why have so many of them been given likely letters and acceptances? I can think of two soccer players, a swimmer, a runner, an equestrian, and a fencer from a single high school in a single year during this past early round and that's just off the top of my head. Sorry, I just don't buy it that athletic talent is something more rare and precious than any other ability. If 60% of all kids entering Harvard have music as an EC, than I'd venture to guess that 90% have a sport of some kind, often varsity.</p>
<p>BTW, those who stand out in the musical field, as you say, are indeed fewer and further between than the recruited athlete. So why wouldn't Ivies want to recruit them?</p>
<p>talented athletes who can qualify academically are indeed highly sought after. not only are these kids recruited by the ivies, many are recruited by other division 1 schools who can offer athletic scholarships. if money is an issue--and it is for most--it is very hard for ivies to retain the recruits who are offered full rides to division 1 schools. </p>
<p>the likely letters help entice a student to make a commitment to an ivy league school--which isn't always an easy sale--full ride somewhere else or ivy league education?</p>
<p>shoshi,</p>
<p>The reason that athletes get likely letters and early acceptances is because the NCAA provides for a "National Letter of Intent" signing week in November for all the scholarship schools. Any athletes with offers from scholarship schools need to know whether they got into the Ivies before they sign a contract with another school. I suppose the Ivies do not have to do the likely letters, but they will be at a tremendous disadvantage with recruiting if they do not.</p>
<p>Northstarmom, I couldn't disagree more. Granted, my perspective is limited by life in a competitive northeast suburb but what I see is that the kids accepted by HYPS from my kid's private prep school as well as from our local public school are the kids CONSUMED by grades. The ones who fret constantly over their gpa's and what they must do to stand out. The ones who go to great lengths to pepper their resumes with ECs. The ones who sign up to take Greek before school so that they can add that to their resumes. </p>
<p>In my experience, the quirky, brilliant kids who don't present that perfect picture are almost never accepted. I fervently wish this were not the case, but that's the way it looks from here.</p>
<p>Bill Bradley isn' a good indication of the type of student that the Ivys are taking now because there are strict academic requirements in the league that didn't exist when he was in school. Be that as it may, to get into a place like Harvard etc on EC's requires tremendous talent and dedication. My daughter probably got into Harvard last year not because of her great grades, 4 years of varsity sports etc. but for music. All state level is usually insufficient - she was a National Foundation for the Advancement of Arts award winner. Harvard etc want to see national level accomplishments and real passion.</p>
<p>"If these talented athletes are as rare as you say, why have so many of them been given likely letters and acceptances? I can think of two soccer players, a swimmer, a runner, an equestrian, and a fencer from a single high school in a single year during this past early round and that's just off the top of my head. "</p>
<p>Maybe the athletes where you live are exceptionally good. Since you live in a place where there's an equestrian team, I'm guessing that your area is affluent has lots of very smart kids who also have had excellent coaching. IF they are talented, they probably have the opportunities to be excellent at their sports. Assuming that your area has an excellent school district -- typical for affluent areas -- studetns whose gpas are relatively low for Ivies still probably are much stronger academically than are students with higher gpas who come from weaker schools.</p>
<p>Most areas are not like yours As I mentioned, I know of only one student in my area (where I have lived for more than a decade)who was being recruited by an Ivy. I have headed my local interviewing committee for Harvard and never have encountered an athlete from my very large area that Harvard has been recruiting.</p>
<p>"Sorry, I just don't buy it that athletic talent is something more rare and precious than any other ability. If 60% of all kids entering Harvard have music as an EC, than I'd venture to guess that 90% have a sport of some kind, often varsity."</p>
<p>Nope. According to admissions, the most prevalent high school EC of their students was music. As I mentioned before, there certainly are many students who also have done h.s. athletics, but it is rare to find students who did it at such a high level as to be recruitable athetes. Many did athletics simply as stress relievers, and also were on weak teams. </p>
<p>"BTW, those who stand out in the musical field, as you say, are indeed fewer and further between than the recruited athlete. So why wouldn't Ivies want to recruit them?"</p>
<p>Places like Harvard have no problem filling their orchestras, bands, choral groups, etc. and having excellence in those things.</p>
<p>Indeed, Harvard has so many musicians that on their annual Arts First weekend, each hour there are as many as 6 student performances going on around the campus.</p>
<p>If a world class musician applies to an Ivy and has the academic background to graduate from an Ivy, I'm sure that Ivies would be glad to accept them. However, Ivies have no reason to beat the bushes looking for them. Even without any such students, Ivies will have no problem having plenty of decent musical groups on their campus. </p>
<p>That's not the same as will occur with sports. Without recruited athletes, it could be very difficult to have, for instance, a football team (which needs lots of players) or at least have a football team that wouldn't be an embarassment even in the relatively weak Ivy League.</p>