• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Is Admitting Students to College based on Sports Beneficial?

Should we allow students to be recruited?


  • Total voters
    28
still waiting for that answer as to your college. being a good athlete is hardly anti-intellectual

Again with the reading problems there Turtle. One would think that maybe you were the stereotypical jock the way you're going. I didn't say being a good athlete is anti-intellectual. I was making fun of a certain segment of the athletics community, namely the dumb ass jocks who get all the privilege because they happen to be great at football or basketball and thus are allowed to coast through the academic portion of University. As a result of said critique, someone called me anti-athlete. In response, once the other made fun of a certain segment of the intellectual/academic community; I returned the favor.

It's really not that tough man, you just gotta give it a moment and think.
 
Again with the reading problems there Turtle. One would think that maybe you were the stereotypical jock the way you're going. I didn't say being a good athlete is anti-intellectual. I was making fun of a certain segment of the athletics community, namely the dumb ass jocks who get all the privilege because they happen to be great at football or basketball and thus are allowed to coast through the academic portion of University. As a result of said critique, someone called me anti-athlete. In response, once the other made fun of a certain segment of the intellectual/academic community; I returned the favor.

It's really not that tough man, you just gotta give it a moment and think.


we do note you seem to have a hard on for athletes that goes well beyond any valid arguments


still waiting to hear how letting a talented athlete in rather than someone on the margin hurts the school
 
we do note you seem to have a hard on for athletes that goes well beyond any valid arguments


still waiting to hear how letting a talented athlete in rather than someone on the margin hurts the school

I am not hard on all athletes. If you could read, you would have noted THAT by now. I have continually said that it is the ones who can't hack the academic work but because of their position in some sport, they can continue. And I've answered your question several times. Please, please, please for the love of all that is holy learn to read. I didn't say it "hurts" the school. I said admitting students to University based on sports is not beneficial on whole to the University, which is the topic of this thread. Wow, you're really a lawyer? Damn.
 
Last edited:
I am not hard on all athletes. If you could read, you would have noted THAT by now. I have continually said that it is the ones who can't hack the academic work but because of their position in some sport, they can continue. And I've answered your question several times. Please, please, please for the love of all that is holy learn to read. I didn't say it "hurts" the school. I said admitting students to University based on sports is not beneficial on whole to the University, which is the topic of this thread. Wow, you're really a lawyer? Damn.

If could read-shall we compare educational backgrounds?
 
If could read-shall we compare educational backgrounds?

It doesn't matter where you went, it matters what you actually know. Its entirely possible for someone from UCLA to be more knowledgable about, say, economics than someone from Harvard, Yale or University of Chicago.
 
If could read-shall we compare educational backgrounds?

We can. All hyperbole and whatever else aside, I do think you're a bright person who has worked hard for what you have. But I also believe I have credible criticism of the current incarnation of commercialized college football and basketball and some of the activities which go down. Not only is it academically questionable, but it gives other athletes a bad name because they can be grouped in with football and basketball which has grown corrupt and treated as nothing more than a business.
 
It doesn't matter where you went, it matters what you actually know. Its entirely possible for someone from UCLA to be more knowledgable about, say, economics than someone from Harvard, Yale or University of Chicago.

true, especially if the Harard guy majored in molecular biophysics or East Asian literature. and its somewhat possible that the average UCLA econ student knows as much about that subject as an Econ major at Wharton just like its theoretically possible for a high school kid to know more about real life than someone who has worked for almost thirty years etc but the odds are against it

but when some guy suggests another cannot read comparing educational backgrounds seems rather appropriate
 
but when some guy suggests another cannot read comparing educational backgrounds seems rather appropriate

Seriously though, that's because I've been rather clear on my position and you're trying to generalize it to an attitude against all student athletes that I do not hold. I've seen both sides of the spectrum. The athlete that goes above and beyond to perform both academically and in their athletics, and the ones who can't do crap academically but are given a pass because they play a particular sport and are good at it, lending to academically corrupt behavior which is nothing more than down right cheating.
 
Last edited:
We can. All hyperbole and whatever else aside, I do think you're a bright person who has worked hard for what you have. But I also believe I have credible criticism of the current incarnation of commercialized college football and basketball and some of the activities which go down. Not only is it academically questionable, but it gives other athletes a bad name because they can be grouped in with football and basketball which has grown corrupt and treated as nothing more than a business.

well I can agree with that but the OP was about giving people with strong sports backgrounds breaks in admissions and I thought they should
 
well I can agree with that but the OP was about giving people with strong sports backgrounds breaks in admissions and I thought they should

I have no problem with any athlete who can honestly uphold their academic responsibilities. That is the foremost thing in University, education. I have said that overall sports does not have a huge benefit to University. It is very beneficial for those who participate, there's lots to learn and great opportunity for personal growth. I'm not looking to divorce sports from school. But I would like honest academic standards applied equally to everyone. Be it some dork who likes physics, some rich kid who's daddy got them into college, or the athlete there on scholarship. I cannot stand academic dishonesty and certain folk getting passes not because of their academic achievements, but rather because of their performance in extra curricular activities.

But you know, seriously for all the poking fun and trying to push your buttons, sorry.
 
Last edited:
You were making fun of intellectuals. When I made fun of certain jocks, I got called anti-athlete or something like that.

By the way, you may want to go back and get a degree in English. I have said many times that there are smart athletes and that my problem was not with them. But rather my problem is with the athletes who cannot maintain on their own the academic standards of the University but are none the less allowed to persist and graduate from University.

How was I making fun of intellectuals? I was pointing out that many professors don't understand the pressures that student-athletes have and sometimes actually make life more difficult for them. Hardly the same as what YOU are doing...
 
A portion of our research grants does go to athletics. The point aside. The question was is it beneficial. To which people said yes because it brings in money to the University. I was merely clarifying that while it can bring in money (depending on the size of the program), that money doesn't go to the University at large; but rather is funneled back into the athletics department. So just because it brings in money does not mean that it is providing a benefit to the University as a whole.

It's a funny thing about that crying football program because our football program does cry a lot. And we give in. They need new facilities, they need an indoor practice arena because outside is cold, they need this, they need that. They don't go out and have a bake sale, they cry to us. And we give in. And student fees go up, and general funds goes down. We all pay more, give them what they want; and the still suck. I think we should get a little something something for our money.

Well in reality, I think that CSU football should be a club sport and our hockey club and or baseball club should be promoted up.

Sounds like a problem in your state laws. None of that happened at my university due to state laws. Athletic funds stayed with the athletic department; research/academic funds stayed in the academic arena,... and this is they way it SHOULD be...
 
We can. All hyperbole and whatever else aside, I do think you're a bright person who has worked hard for what you have. But I also believe I have credible criticism of the current incarnation of commercialized college football and basketball and some of the activities which go down. Not only is it academically questionable, but it gives other athletes a bad name because they can be grouped in with football and basketball which has grown corrupt and treated as nothing more than a business.

Can we at least agree on a couple core points...

1. Academic/research funds and athletic funds should be divorced from one another. That would also mean, however, that Athletic Department facilities (like the running track for example) would only be available for athletes, and not the general student population.
2. Athletes should have to meet academic requirements and be required to hand in their own assignments -- with extensions granted for when student-athletes are on road trips.

You have to understand, that your anti-athlete innuendo notwithstanding, this WAS my experience at university and living in the athletic dorms, I saw this was also the case with athletes from other sports, including hockey (the biggest sport at my school).
 
How was I making fun of intellectuals? I was pointing out that many professors don't understand the pressures that student-athletes have and sometimes actually make life more difficult for them. Hardly the same as what YOU are doing...

i saw more than a few nerdy professors resent athletes-especially the ones who made top grades.

one of my favorite memories of college involved a history professor who was considered the toughest grader in the dept. He taught a course on Roman History. the grade was based on a midterm, a final and four 6 page papers

I did well on the MT and made As on the first three papers. So the last Paper I write on my way back from the 1980 qualifying event for the1980 Olympic team. I know the paper wasnt great. I ace the final but the day after the final as I am walking to the gym out comes Professor McMullin. He calls my name and asks me why my last paper sucked and noted I might not get an A in the course.

So I tell him why-no excuses. He asked me if making the Olympic team was more important than an A-I said yes but I thought I could do both He asked me if I made the team-I said I made the finals but I didnt think I was shooting well enough to win one of two slots (later that summer I did not). So he asked me why I didn't ask for an excuse to write the paper later-I told him I thought I could make the deadline and it was a choice I made.

so he smiled-pulled out my paper and threw it in the trash can and said something like honesty was a waning value

not only did he give me an A-he was the guy who nominated me for a Rhodes next year.

sadly, he was a rare bird but he had been a varsity captain 30 years before I ever met him
 
People always say yes because it brings in money, but almost every college loses money due to sports according to an ESPN article recently.
 
Is it a good idea to keep admitting students to colleges based on their athletic skills rather than their academic skills?

While I'm not against considering sports as a benefit to a student's resume, I'm talking about recruiting people specifically because of their sports skills.

It depends on the school... I think it's beneficial to OSU because they spend most of the money on the sports programs
 
People always say yes because it brings in money, but almost every college loses money due to sports according to an ESPN article recently.

that might be true-women's sports-due to Title IX I believe-requires a school to have equal varsity sports for women if there are as many women in the student body. women's sports lose money big time

when I was in college,the women's BB team was rather good-the men's team sucked. yet the men's team would draw several thousand fans-even against teams with no real draw-when we played a really good team like Syracuse, the place would almost sell out. I went to a womens game because one of my friends was a starter-other than boyfriends (or a couple girlfriends) of the players and maybe 100 other people, the place was empty. yet the college spent the same on each team
 
that might be true-women's sports-due to Title IX I believe-requires a school to have equal varsity sports for women if there are as many women in the student body. women's sports lose money big time

when I was in college,the women's BB team was rather good-the men's team sucked. yet the men's team would draw several thousand fans-even against teams with no real draw-when we played a really good team like Syracuse, the place would almost sell out. I went to a womens game because one of my friends was a starter-other than boyfriends (or a couple girlfriends) of the players and maybe 100 other people, the place was empty. yet the college spent the same on each team

It's not just due to Title IX, most football programs alone lose money.
 
that might be true-women's sports-due to Title IX I believe-requires a school to have equal varsity sports for women if there are as many women in the student body. women's sports lose money big time

when I was in college,the women's BB team was rather good-the men's team sucked. yet the men's team would draw several thousand fans-even against teams with no real draw-when we played a really good team like Syracuse, the place would almost sell out. I went to a womens game because one of my friends was a starter-other than boyfriends (or a couple girlfriends) of the players and maybe 100 other people, the place was empty. yet the college spent the same on each team

Pretty much the same from my exeperence except for the women's gymnastics team when I was a grad student at Georgia. They were only outdrawn by the football team and were a revenue generating sport that usually outdrew the men's basketball team except during the short-lived Tubby Smith era.
 
People always say yes because it brings in money, but almost every college loses money due to sports according to an ESPN article recently.

Id be interested to see if that report re losing money meant strictly ticket sales. What has to be remembered is that most of the 'cost' of a program is intangible and most of the financial gain comes from university backer dollars and public relations.
 
Id be interested to see if that report re losing money meant strictly ticket sales. What has to be remembered is that most of the 'cost' of a program is intangible and most of the financial gain comes from university backer dollars and public relations.

Good question, I'll try to dig it up.
 
It's hard to put how much a team makes into dollars and cents.

If a school has a very vibrant sports team for whatever sport that attracts a lot of people and leaves them with positive impressions, the alumni might be more likely to donate later in their lives.
My school was made of very smart people, but more than that, they were all interesting and brought some unique aspect to the school.

@Turtledude
I actually know a guy who's just 19 years old who's starting Yale next year - he's a GM in chess and played in the world chess olympiad last year for the US :)
 
Back
Top Bottom