View Poll Results: Should we allow students to be recruited?

Voters
37. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes

    17 45.95%
  • No

    18 48.65%
  • No opinion

    2 5.41%
Page 3 of 18 FirstFirst 1234513 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 172

Thread: Is Admitting Students to College based on Sports Beneficial?

  1. #21
    Guru
    repeter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    California
    Last Seen
    07-15-14 @ 12:06 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    3,445

    Re: Is Admitting Students to College based on Sports Beneficial?

    Quote Originally Posted by Bodhisattva View Post
    As long as students who can academically qualify are not left out in the cold, sure.
    That's what I'm talking about. When athletes apply to a college, and are chosen over a more qualified student because of their athletic involvement, I feel it is not only unfair, setting a bad precedent but also putting those students who deserve those spots at a disadvantage in life.
    Veni. Vidi. Vici.
    -Gaius Julius Caesar
    The Only Thing to Fear is Fear Itself.
    -Franklin Delano Roosevelt

  2. #22
    Guru
    repeter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    California
    Last Seen
    07-15-14 @ 12:06 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    3,445

    Re: Is Admitting Students to College based on Sports Beneficial?

    Quote Originally Posted by TurtleDude View Post
    that makes no sense to me either-and its not the case at top universities. People who learn to compete successfully in college athletics tend to compete successfully after college. its a character builder. looking good tends to work the best in leftwing dominated professions-acting, tv shows, etc.
    ...can you say something without making a remark about left-wing whatevers???

    It gets real old real fast.
    Veni. Vidi. Vici.
    -Gaius Julius Caesar
    The Only Thing to Fear is Fear Itself.
    -Franklin Delano Roosevelt

  3. #23
    Defender of the Faith
    ludahai's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Taichung, Taiwan - 2017 East Asian Games Candidate City
    Last Seen
    07-03-13 @ 02:22 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    10,320

    Re: Is Admitting Students to College based on Sports Beneficial?

    Quote Originally Posted by soccerboy22 View Post
    That is how it is here at BU too. Even though our sport kids might not be the brightest, the have to attend a certain percentage of classes or they will get kicked off their team and lose their scholarship. At least that is how it is with Track and Field, Swimming, Hockey, and I believe Soccer. So I imagine that it would be similar for all our other sports as well. And most of the athletes that I know are C=/B- range, unless they are in one of our harder majors.
    I played against BU in both soccer and track and field... great kids and a credit to the school... good ambassadors and always tough competitors with good sportsmanship in both victory and defeat...
    Semper Paratus
    Boston = City of Champions: Bruins 2011; Celtics 2008; Red Sox 2004, 2007; Patriots 2002, 2004, 2005
    Jon Huntsman for President

  4. #24
    Sage
    Ikari's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Colorado
    Last Seen
    12-08-17 @ 01:05 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    54,124

    Re: Is Admitting Students to College based on Sports Beneficial?

    Quote Originally Posted by TurtleDude View Post
    sure beats admitting people based on their race. athletes at least have achieved something. and while you hear cases of dumb jocks who take BS classes and can hardly read that is not the case-at the most prestigious schools. The Ivy league has strict rules that prevent a team from having more than one deviation below the student body. The ivies use the following formula

    240 points is a perfect student-since First in your class gives you 80 points, perfect SATs 80 points and a 4.0 or 4.3 average is 80 points. In 2006 Yale's student body was about 222 points. Teams could not be less than one deviation below that which would mean about 210. In other words 1400 averages rather than 1475, 3.85 rather than 3.95 HS GPA and top 10% of their classes rather than top 5%.

    When I was there, some of the very best students had been recruited for sports-a HS All American Football player in my class earned a Rhodes and a 3.97, the captain of the squash team was a rhodes scholar the captain of the tennis team was a Marshall Scholar, an olympic Skeet Shooter was cum laude, and one of my suitemates-recruited for gymnastics is now a surgeon rebuilding ballerinas' knees.

    for every dumb hockey jock or football guy there were a dozen very good athletes earning top grades in everything from theoretical mathmatics to italian poetry.
    Prestigious does not have to mean Ivy League. And I don't buy it. My adviser had a good friend who was a professor at one of these very nice Universities. He had to teach a class to the basketball team. The class was about the rules and regulations of basketball. Not all of them passed...but they all ended up passing.

    For every one really smart athlete who actually studies and understands theoretical mathematics or Italian poetry, there are a dozen more who have their grades changed, are papered and made sure they don't take anything too difficult, or otherwise academically cheat. This is particularly true in football and falls off sharply when you get past basketball (i.e. womens volleyball probably doesn't have a large number of cheaters in it).

    University should be based on academic achievement and ability alone.
    You know the time is right to take control, we gotta take offense against the status quo

    Quote Originally Posted by A. de Tocqueville
    "I should have loved freedom, I believe, at all times, but in the time in which we live I am ready to worship it."

  5. #25
    Global Moderator
    Moderator

    Zyphlin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    NoMoAuchie
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    47,941

    Re: Is Admitting Students to College based on Sports Beneficial?

    First off, let me say I’m going to be speaking about public universities because it’s of none of our concern honestly if Private schools want to look at this imho.

    Now, personally I have no issue with it in a general sense. I believe there are a number of benefits. First and foremost is the revenue that enters into the college. It is not by chance that the “most prestigious” public universities in this country, the biggest named and the best equipped, also often happen to be the ones that are most likely to have successful sports programs as well. Sports generate some of the largest revenue for many of these various colleges. That BCS bowl game your team got in just allowed your new science lab to be built. That Sweet 16 appearance just allowed you to retain a department you were thinking of possible axing. If college sports were not either as exciting, as skilled, or as likely to transition into the professional game the revenue that is generated by them would not be anywhere near what it is now.

    Additionally, the notion that one who excels at sports might be able to get aid with college is something I believe that pushes physical fitness and health in this country. It provides an incentive not just to make your mind, but your body healthy as well when growing up. In a society that is continually getting more lethargic, more over weight, and more unhealthy, I believe such an incentive is definitely a benefit.

    Now to some points, I absolutely agree. I think there should be some sort of minimum requirement academically to be able to enter into any public college, and a scholarship athlete would need to meet that. Truly illiterate, uneducated individuals who then never actually do anything in college should not be taking up a spot. However, I believe that is far and away the minority of the scholarship athletes in this country. While they all may not be the “best and brightest” I do not think they all are the most ignorant amongst us.

    Is it “wrong” that someone “smarter” may not get in because someone was a better athlete? I don’t think so. Perhaps you may think it’s not “fair”, but is college supposed to be designed as a step into the real world or a bubble of adolescence? Life isn’t fair. Is it “wrong” or “fair” that someone who had more life experience and wrote a better essay gets in instead of someone “smarter” than them? Is it “wrong” or “fair” that someone who was “dumber” than someone else but had better extra-curricular gets in instead? Is it “wrong” or “fair” that because someone is a minority, came from a school district with easier grading scales, tests very well despite having good practical intelligence, or a number of other things gets in rather than someone “Smarter” than them? Why is it that you deem athletic prowess as some black mark amongst a dozen of entry fields that far exceed simply whose IQ is the highest or who did best in school. Even if you think it is superficial, are we suggesting honestly that such is truly so different than real life? History shows the taller President with better hair usually wins out. Studies show overweight people are less likely to get a job compared to an equally or less qualified attractive person. Who you know is often far more important than what you know. LIFE can be somewhat superficial, because the reality is society as a whole values far more than simply who has the biggest brain.

    I think there’s way to improve the academic entry process, and I think…if its not already there…that there should be an equal amount of money spent by the school for educational scholarships as there is for academic scholarships along with the minimum entry requirements I suggested before. But I see nothing wrong inherently with the admission of individuals due to their athletic ability, and I think there are a number of benefits to doing such.

  6. #26
    Sage
    Ikari's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Colorado
    Last Seen
    12-08-17 @ 01:05 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    54,124

    Re: Is Admitting Students to College based on Sports Beneficial?

    As a life long member of academia, I've seen this issue many many times. I've seen the type of money that can be drawn into the University through programs. Some of the huge, very good schools generate a lot of capital. But where do you think that money goes? You think it goes into a general fund for things to improve the University? Hire more academic professors? Expand research facilities? It doesn't, not on the whole. The vast majority of it is spent on advertising the school and back into the athletics department. Yay...thanks a lot. You know how much money a research lab generates for a University? A good research facility can be on par or even greater than athletics. Maybe not the top tier football/basketball programs; but when 1 professor has over a million dollars in grants and the department has 16 or so research faculty, and there are a hand full of research departments, and the University gets a nice cut; it all adds up. Where does our money go? Well I think bureaucracy eats a bunch. But we expand research facilities, we hire more professors, we offer a more classes in more subjects. The money brought into the physics department doesn't stay just in physics. We help fund other departments like psychology or history or political science; departments which don't really have research means of their own.

    The point is, the money comes into academia and is spent on academia. That's not the way with the athletics department, and only the really large schools with already established large programs really reap the benefit of having a football team or basketball team. The rest of the Universities are left with football programs which hemorrhage money. Because for some reason we got it into our heads that every University has to have a football program. Colorado State University football is ****. It's been **** for some time. Yet they keep raising student fees, taking more from the students (hahah...I'm a post doc, so they can't have anymore of my money!) to build indoor practice facilities and brand new weight rooms and this and that, and what we get is a losing team no one cares about, more money owed to the University, and alumni who still don't give a crap about our ****ty football team. And I've tutored a lot of those guys over the years. There were some fairly smart ones, but for many of them I don't know how they got out of high school. Why should some dumbass who can barely read get a degree from the same University as me? A PhD in physics from the same University where Bradlee Van Pelt went to. That guy was in my 121 lab and was absolutely retarded.

    University is the highest form of secondary education. It is supposed to be the most academically rigorous, challenging, and diverse education out there. It's primary purpose is education, not sports entertainment. Is it wrong that someone smarter may not get in because someone was a better athlete? Absolutely. This isn't hold your hand while you spread your wings time. University is supposed to be stressful and hard and competitive. I know some people have the perception that it's about stretching out and learning who you are and blah blah blah other hippie garbage, but those people are either psychology or business majors. But we have to water down our education, throw billions of dollars collectively at athletics and making sure top tier athletes sail through? Really? That's LIFE, huh? **** that ****. If you can't do calculus, get out of University. University should be academically challenging, it should represent scholastically the pinnacle of achievement. And entrance into University should be based on academic achievement alone. You can have College, Community College, and Tech College for everything else.
    Last edited by Ikari; 01-26-11 at 11:48 AM.
    You know the time is right to take control, we gotta take offense against the status quo

    Quote Originally Posted by A. de Tocqueville
    "I should have loved freedom, I believe, at all times, but in the time in which we live I am ready to worship it."

  7. #27
    Sage
    Cephus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    CA
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:13 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Conservative
    Posts
    29,755

    Re: Is Admitting Students to College based on Sports Beneficial?

    I've got no problem with it, it gets kids who may not otherwise have the ability to go to college through the doors. So long as their educational requirements are the same as everyone else's, sports scholarships are fine. It's when all they have to do is throw around a ball that I object. College exists to teach, not to play.
    There is nothing demonstrably true that religion can provide the world that cannot be achieved more rationally through entirely secular means.

    Blog me! YouTube me! VidMe me!

  8. #28
    Farts in Elevators
    OscarB63's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Alabama
    Last Seen
    09-06-14 @ 07:26 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    26,526

    Re: Is Admitting Students to College based on Sports Beneficial?

    sports is the only way some of those kids would ever be able to go to college. would you rather have them hanging out on the street corners sell drugs and running from the police or running with a ball bringing in $$$ for the university?
    The best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter.

    An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile, hoping it will eat him last.

  9. #29
    Farts in Elevators
    OscarB63's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Alabama
    Last Seen
    09-06-14 @ 07:26 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    26,526

    Re: Is Admitting Students to College based on Sports Beneficial?

    Quote Originally Posted by repeter View Post
    That's what I'm talking about. When athletes apply to a college, and are chosen over a more qualified student because of their athletic involvement, I feel it is not only unfair, setting a bad precedent but also putting those students who deserve those spots at a disadvantage in life.
    I don't know of many, if any, colleges that actually turn away qualified students. this is a bogus arguement. it's not like that for every athlete they admit, they turn away a brainiac.
    The best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter.

    An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile, hoping it will eat him last.

  10. #30
    Sage
    Ikari's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Colorado
    Last Seen
    12-08-17 @ 01:05 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    54,124

    Re: Is Admitting Students to College based on Sports Beneficial?

    Quote Originally Posted by OscarB63 View Post
    sports is the only way some of those kids would ever be able to go to college. would you rather have them hanging out on the street corners sell drugs and running from the police or running with a ball bringing in $$$ for the university?
    So what? We're supposed to treat University like some form of minimum security prison? I'd rather academia be taken seriously, the focus should never be on a football team or a basketball team. And they don't really bring money into the university as a whole; they bring money into the administration and athletics departments.
    You know the time is right to take control, we gotta take offense against the status quo

    Quote Originally Posted by A. de Tocqueville
    "I should have loved freedom, I believe, at all times, but in the time in which we live I am ready to worship it."

Page 3 of 18 FirstFirst 1234513 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •