Would the presence of intercollegiate sports affect the desirability of a college for you?

[ucbalumnus]

@lostaccount

I am not sure that admitting athletes with slightly (notice my use of the term slightly) lower grades constitutes “bending” (while markedly lowers grades and scores probably does). Students who have high achievements in nontraditional academic areas (sports, music, art) may spend more time on these activities in order to excel in them. I don’t see any reason for that not to figure into the equation. That does not mean doing away with standards to essentially buy a better team, which some schools have done.

“Bending the admissions standards to treat recruited athletes in a way more favorably than treating their sport as a high level extracurricular” means admitting recruited athletes with academic and other credentials such that admission readers would not otherwise consider that applicant a reasonable candidate for admission if s/he were not recruited for the sport (i.e. treating the sport as a high level extracurricular rather than a special “hook”).

@lostaccount

Privileged/entitled wealthy (usually white) people get into college all the time by essentially buying themselves into it or, even more amazingly, presenting schools with the potential for future donations. It’s called legacy. This happens very often. It isn’t just a token idea. But few people are up in arms about it.

Regarding legacy, it is a completely unearned (by the applicant) credential that is undesirable for college admissions (especially for public universities – though the perceived relationship with alumni donation is probably why schools like Michigan and Virginia use it). But that is not the point of this thread. You may want to start a separate thread on that subject.