This does not apply to distance runners. Distance runners almost always out perform the rest of the student body by a large margin. On the flip side, probably 10% of football and basketball players would be able to gain entry to their current school based on academics alone.
I’m sure John Urschel needed the bump to get into Penn State. I mean after the NFL he only went on to get his Math PhD at MIT. Whereas I’m sure all the Stanford distance runners got in on academic merit.
Exactly. He’s part of the ten percent. Football and Basketball players are typically 200-300 SAT points below the general student body.
Well if JohnR has never met anyone, then it has to be bogus.
I worked in fencing for a bit. The attitude of fencing to get into a good school was rampant. I also saw what it did to a lot of kids. Parental pressure (paying thousands of dollars on lessons and competitions) was being felt by the kids. Could be pretty toxic at times. (Also lots of good folks to be fair).
A fencing coach from a top private school told me that (and the numbers are just illustrative) that if the admissions in general required (whether by rule or not) a 1400 SAT, if someone was offered an athletic grant it would be lowered to 1250. (Still solid). So the fencing partial scholarship increased a person's chances significantly. Even in that case, the cost was going to be high since that school gave few full fencing scholarships.
sorry, this is bull. same mistake as my colleague. you even kind of admit the truth implicitly when you say, "if they are offered a scholarship." the special help is usually reserved for the top prospects. not for the kid who is both subpar academically for the profile, and also barely walkon worthy.
example. teammate of mine had a lower SAT. occasionally flashed some skills but would disappear a lot, and then didn't like playing defense. he needs more admissions help. he doesn't get it. he gets admitted on his own. i have a higher SAT but also am scouted that i will start soccer as a freshman and be on the relays for track. i am top half of the profile. i pretty much know i am getting in. i am told if anything goes haywire with admissions, i will be helped. i get admitted within days of sending in my application. no need for help. start as a frosh and 3rd leg relays.
we're both select players. his being select and needing help didn't get him in. he had to sweat it. i got the push offer because i could make an immediate impact.
what you're confused about, is the AD is trusting his coach to do this process honestly and with a clue about the sport. they likely are not sitting over the HC's shoulder saying, wait, kid x is better than kid y you want help with, or kid z is not worthy of our team. and the team doesn't necessarily know who got help or scholarships, unless someone involved says it. this creates limited room for corruption.
Sorry to your sorry, but this was directly from a coach. Your example has nothing to do with the situation of admissions standards for an athlete being lower than those of a "regular" student.
There’s definitely some truth to that, particularly in expensive travel teams, private coaches, and tournaments, which have become the norm in so many sports. It can give those families a tremendous advantage.
The thing is, though, that most kids in youth sports aren’t even doing it for college. They’re doing it because they love the sport. The issue is that, in so many cases, youth sports have become so expensive that not all kids even get the opportunity to participate at that level.
I wish the college scholarship wasn't tossed about so freely as the big goal for HS athletes. A kid can be very very very good, and still not be good enough for college athletics. It makes it appear that if you dont get a scholarship, you somehow failed and your time in HS was wasted.