• 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
Cephus said:
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.
Click to expand...

Thank you. I would never have been able to afford to go to university were it not for my athletic scholarship...
 
Ikari said:
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.
Click to expand...

At the University I attended, state law prohibited general university funds to be used in the athletic program.
 
Ikari said:
Those jerks go to schools without football teams. But in general, what I said stands. Admission should be based on academic performance and ability; nothing else.
Click to expand...

You sound like someone who is bitter at athletes. Do you understand how difficult it is to balance athletics and academics???
 
Ikari said:
First off, it's about dispelling the myth that somehow football generates significant revenue for academia. Secondly, it's that because of the business of college football and basketball in particularly; some "students" are not achieving anything scholastically and are cheating to make sure good players get the grades they need to continue to play. If Timmy "brainiac" doesn't perform up to the academic standards, he's out of there. If a star football player doesn't perform up to academic standards, it's well more likely in that case that certain administrators make sure that they still get a passing grade.
Click to expand...

I have not argued that it contributes to academia, because in my experience it doesn't. Again, I was in a state where BY LAW, the two funds are separated. However, student athletes do make a contribution to the life on campus. Sports foster school spirit and loyalty that typically extends beyond ones university years. Also, student-athletes bring experiences to the academic community that others don't have. Also, the team skills learned in sports serves to build the whole person rather than simply the book smarts. As an athlete, it was possible for me to bring experiences into the classroom that others did not have. It is beneficial to the university community, but I am not going to pretend that it brings money into academics with the possible exception that the school loyalty that sports help to develop do lead some alumni to donate money to academic programs after graduation.
 
repeter said:
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.
Click to expand...

Sure they should.

Athletes bring in revenue for colleges, and helps keep them funded. Also, higher education is just as much about physical excellence as it is about intellectual excellence.

I have two things to say about this:

1) Student athletes should get paid for their performance. It is unnatural to expect college athletes to make good grades, go to practice, and hold down a job to pay for their housing, food, entertainment, and other extras. So I think that all athletes should be paid for their work for the school.

2) Colleges should better market their academic institutions. By this, I mean that every college should use their English and Creative Writing students to write for the school's magazines and fiction anthologies, or use their History students to write up historical programs for the school to produce, or hold concerts for their music department.

There's a lot more ways that colleges can benefit from academics if they actually put some thought into it.
 
I'm not sure how other universities do it, but at my institution, athletes cannot have a significantly lower Academic Index than other students (I think its one Standard Deviation).

Also, I voted yes, if its a private institution they should be able to admit any students they want.
 
Last edited:
samsmart said:
Sure they should.

Athletes bring in revenue for colleges, and helps keep them funded. Also, higher education is just as much about physical excellence as it is about intellectual excellence.

I have two things to say about this:

1) Student athletes should get paid for their performance. It is unnatural to expect college athletes to make good grades, go to practice, and hold down a job to pay for their housing, food, entertainment, and other extras. So I think that all athletes should be paid for their work for the school.
Click to expand...

We are paid, with an education. Athletic budgets can't sustain paying athletes. If they did that, the non-revenue generating sports would have to be cut. And BTW, scholarships include housing and food. And unless the rules have changed, NCAA scholarship athletes are not permitted to have jobs outside the university.
 
Ikari said:
Those jerks go to schools without football teams. But in general, what I said stands. Admission should be based on academic performance and ability; nothing else.
Click to expand...

but universities are far more than mere academics. there are many way to learn outside of classrooms. I had never met a Hasidic Jew or someone of the Bahai faith or an Intertnational master in chess before going to college. having all as suitemates taught me as much as I learned in a classroom stocked with the best students and professors in the USA
 
Dutch said:
Like what?
Click to expand...

I learned alot from different people-one of my classmates in law school was a consensus all american football player who was on the superbowl winning Oakland As another guy was on the pro tennis tour. one made law review, the other is a top sports agent in Nebraska. People who have been world class achievers are interesting people to be around. I also had one of the guys who tested the F-16.. they sure added alot more to my education than a couple more nerds who had done nothing but study in college.
 
American said:
It gets alumni bucks for stadiums and sports scholarships. Come on turtle, you know better.
Click to expand...

bs-its far more than that. of course I went to a college that was not known as an NBA or NFL factory. In my experience athletes enhanced my college experience.
 
American said:
UVA is probably the only big sports school with an academic standard, that's not dumbed down (maybe).
Click to expand...

stanford does OK in both-its a far better school academically than UVA and has better sports though in all fairness, UVA turned me down for law school (out of state quotas were slim that year) and Stanford accepted me
 
Ikari said:
They're all part of the same group of privileged ****tards. The academic side of University (you know, the entire point of University) doesn't get a whole lot from athletics. The big schools can pull of a bit, but other places not so much.

And I wasn't "singling" them out. This thread was about student athletes, not kids from rich families. I don't have to mention every caveat when the subject has been specified.
Click to expand...

I disagree with your claims-a university is about learning and that has several different areas where that can take place
 
TurtleDude said:
I learned alot from different people-one of my classmates in law school was a consensus all american football player who was on the superbowl winning Oakland As another guy was on the pro tennis tour. one made law review, the other is a top sports agent in Nebraska. People who have been world class achievers are interesting people to be around. I also had one of the guys who tested the F-16.. they sure added alot more to my education than a couple more nerds who had done nothing but study in college.
Click to expand...

Huh?!?!? Baseball team winning football's Super Bowl?
 
I voted no in the poll. Since we are behind other countries in education, academic achievement should be the priority.
 
Catawba said:
I voted no in the poll. Since we are behind other countries in education, academic achievement should be the priority.
Click to expand...

did it ever occur to you that staying eligible for sports has done a fair amount of increasing education in some minority communities

quoting Buffett gives me the LOLs btw.
 
repeter said:
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.
Click to expand...

This sounds recycled somehow...but...here goes...

I think they should by all means continue college sports teams. They just ought to ensure the student athletes can pass entrance exams and meet academic standards like all other students.

I would be all for the major sports creating a farm system where athletes that cant hack academically can get scholarships, participate in the sport, get paid, and be taught basics like business math, money management, contract language, english, etc.
 
ludahai said:
This has never been the case nor should it. Admissions officers consider the entire person, not just grades and SAT scores. If only grades and SAT scores were looked at, then the US system will come to resemble systems in Asia that only stress academics and test scores and not other things that lead to the development of a person. Universities want a diverse community with many interests and skill sets, not only bookworms...
Click to expand...

People can get in, but when I say it should be based on academic achievment and ability alone, I mean that when at University you must perform well academically. There should be no consideration of whether or not you play a sport or how good of a player you are. You go to class, you get grades, those grades must meet a standard. No cheating because you're the star football player, no grade changes because you're the best basketball player of all time. Everything is judged on academic ability alone.
 
ludahai said:
You sound like someone who is bitter at athletes. Do you understand how difficult it is to balance athletics and academics???
Click to expand...

I do, and I've seen first hand athletes fail at it and get bailed out by the coaches and administrators.
 
Ikari said:
People can get in, but when I say it should be based on academic achievment and ability alone, I mean that when at University you must perform well academically. There should be no consideration of whether or not you play a sport or how good of a player you are. You go to class, you get grades, those grades must meet a standard. No cheating because you're the star football player, no grade changes because you're the best basketball player of all time. Everything is judged on academic ability alone.
Click to expand...

so when Yale let in chess masters who might have had lower grades that was bad? what bout Jodie Foster, David Hyde Pierce?
 
TurtleDude said:
but universities are far more than mere academics. there are many way to learn outside of classrooms. I had never met a Hasidic Jew or someone of the Bahai faith or an Intertnational master in chess before going to college. having all as suitemates taught me as much as I learned in a classroom stocked with the best students and professors in the USA
Click to expand...

University is for the most academically rigorous, challenging, and diverse education. Universities are not "far more" than mere academics. It's dominated by academics with some other **** thrown in so normal people don't lose their minds.
 
Ikari said:
I do, and I've seen first hand athletes fail at it and get bailed out by the coaches and administrators.
Click to expand...

and my roommate freshman year at Yale had perfect boards and was valedictorian from one of the finest prep schools in the USA and he snorted his way out of college.

You really seem to have a hard on for athletes
 
Ikari said:
University is for the most academically rigorous, challenging, and diverse education. Universities are not "far more" than mere academics. It's dominated by academics with some other **** thrown in so normal people don't lose their minds.
Click to expand...

bs-for lots of kids its a social networking facility. I remember my senior year going to a big state university (U Mass Amherst) to play in a national collegiate table tennis tournament. I was amazed at the lack of intellectual rigor there-I remember a girl from Brockport state hanging out with my team the whole weekend-she was #1 in her class and she said she needed to hang with people who actually were students
 
TurtleDude said:
I disagree with your claims-a university is about learning and that has several different areas where that can take place
Click to expand...

You can disagree with my claims all you want. I'm an academic, it's what I do. I see what goes on, I've interacted with those "student" athletes, tutored them as best they could be. I've seen them get their passes merely because they were in the right sport. You can play sports in University but the first part of student athlete is STUDENT. You have to study, you have to perform. No special treatment, no passes. Do the work or go home.
 
Ikari said:
You can disagree with my claims all you want. I'm an academic, it's what I do. I see what goes on, I've interacted with those "student" athletes, tutored them as best they could be. I've seen them get their passes merely because they were in the right sport. You can play sports in University but the first part of student athlete is STUDENT. You have to study, you have to perform. No special treatment, no passes. Do the work or go home.
Click to expand...

and I was a varsity letter winner in one sport, a jv letter winner in another and got four "club" letters in yet a third and graduated with a 3.75 I then coached a top ten varsity program while going to law and grad school at another Ivy. I think you have a rather biased anti athletic view. I am glad I played sports in college and I would suggest not enough athletics is causing more problems than not enough studying for many Americans
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom