VoyUser Login optional ] [ Contact Forum Admin ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: 12345678910 ]
Subject: Re: Response to an archived U Chicago 2021 Football Recruiting Class Message

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]
Date Posted: 12:48:11 07/06/17 Thu
In reply to: Parent 's message, "Response to an archived U Chicago 2021 Football Recruiting Class Message" on 15:51:20 07/04/17 Tue

While I agree with others that University of Chicago (U of C) is an outstanding university from an academic perspective, it is somewhat silly to compare U of C to Yale for recruited football players. This is not an "apples to apples decision"ť, any more than the Ivy League is not competitive when trying to compete with Stanford for a four and five star football recruits.

It is extremely rare that any of the top 20 recruits for any of the Ivy football programs need to worry about competing with a D3 school. Occasionally, we may lose out on a marginally recruited Ivy player or even a preferred walk-on recruit to a D3 football program. The gap in the quality of play between the Ivy League and the U of C's Midwest Conference is as dramatic as the gap between the Ivy League and the Pac 12. The U of C plays in the Midwest Conference with Beloit College, Cornell College, Grinnell, Illinois College, Knox, Lake Forest, Lawrence, Monmouth, Ripon and St. Norbert. Simply put, this Midwest Conference does not have any of the rich traditions of the Ivy League.

Equally important, the league has a much better pipeline for former Ivy football players to elite jobs in the Wall Street, Private Equity, consulting and high tech. To illustrate this point, let's look at how U of C does placing its students in top 10 MBA programs compared to the Ivy League. College Confidential analyzed what were the top feeder colleges to America's top MBA programs. U of C only generated 12 MBA students compared to 192 for Harvard, 183 for U Penn, 113 for Yale, 101 for Princeton, 89 for Columbia, 80 for Dartmouth, 59 for Cornell, and 47 for Brown. The gap is similar when analyzing statistics for feeder colleges for Wall Street, Private Equity, consulting and high tech. Since the majority of football recruits have an strong interest in pursuing a career in business, this gap is very meaningful to them.

Finally, the third major gap area for U of C is not having an engineering program on campus. The lack of engineering classes hurts recruiting for the ever growing percentage of student athletes who have an interest in pursuing a career in high tech or entrepreneurship.

In summary, U of C is highly competitive for bright students overall, but it is not a close comparison between Yale and U of C when recruiting for an elite football player. It is a better comparison for the flute player or classics major.

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

[> Subject: Re: Response to an archived U Chicago 2021 Football Recruiting Class Message

Observer15 (To Parent)
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: 02:06:46 07/10/17 Mon

Thank you, Parent for your respectful and interesting letter.

First, let’s get this out of the way.

Please let us take off the table the quality of Chicago as a school. No one is debating that. It’s a great school! Period. Whether Chicago is “intellectually broader” and is a place where one is exposed to a ”broad range of ideas” more than this or that other school is a fine debate - I would have much to say about it - but it is irrelevant to the discussion about yield which is being discussed here.

Similarly, the issue about playing in the NFL - who imagines he will, what happens to them, etc etc.is irrelevant to this discussion. I accept easily that few students from the Ivies will be playing in the NFL. I still think there is a difference between Division III and 1AA athletes and also would have things to say about that,but again that is not the discussion that was raised.

The discussion raised had to do not with quality or character of school, but with yield, pure and simple. (By the way, it is yield that really matters -not application numbers. A school can have thousands of students who apply as a second choice, and so their yield may be low.)

Comparing yields at schools which have different systems of admissions is not comparing apples to apples but apples to oranges. Chicago, like a number of Ivy schools, has Early Action but it also has two – get that, TWO – Early Decision processes (!) the later one to catch Ivy + applicants who have been deferred. Students know they get a leg up for admission when they apply Early Decision –and while for some students it is an absolute choice, for many others it is a smart gamble, especially after deferral: they know that getting into an Ivy, especially HYP, or Stanford, is super difficult, so they go with a school they like where they make get a kick start as an applicant, even though they are required to attend if admitted. Once again Chicago offers that possibility TWICE, in two separate application periods within the same application year. The school fills a large part of its class with such students, AND of course these programs boost yield because the yield from these programs is 100!

HYP all have EARLY ACTION. When students apply and are admitted they are not hooked in. They can then go and apply to other schools knowing they have an admit to a wonderful school locked up, which a decent number do. When presented with two or three wonderful offers, they then make their decision later after visiting and comparing further.

Obviously, it is senseless to compare a school which has a 100% yield in Early Decision, where people are obliged to attend, with any school that has an Early Action plan, where after being admitted students can apply to other schools. The general public doesn’t focus on this - it does not make an easy sound bite - and ED schools use their “high yield” from admitted students obliged to attend to public relations advantage. But comparing ED and EA yields in this way is crazy.

BTW, this year Chicago, in an unusual move, seems to have determined not to release its admissions application or yield numbers until Fall, although it has done this happily in the past. And I quote: “The University of Chicago does not intend to release admissions numbers this spring for the Class of 2021. This includes the number of applicants and the acceptance rate.“

What is that all about? I have my own ideas.

Where did you get your belief that “Harvard beats Chicago head to head 7-3” on cross admits? I do not believe such information is reported anywhere. Admittedly my 10-1 was a sheer guess, but I would bet the farm I am closer than you. I do not know many students at all, period, who are cross admits and choose Chicago over an Ivy. Very few.

You say: “A football recruit with an offer from Chicago and Yale (Question: Yale in particular?)has the same number of reason to say yes to either school. This is an apples to apples decision from my points of view above.” Any student might prefer Chicago, I agree, but an “apples to apples decision for a football player” - or anyone else? –respectfully, No.

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[> [> Subject: Re: Response to an archived U Chicago 2021 Football Recruiting Class Message

[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: 09:30:34 07/10/17 Mon

Harvard 71% - U of Chicago 29% - Cross-admit data is published by Parchment: http://www.parchment.com/c/college/tools/college-cross-admit-comparison.php?compare=University+of+Chicago&with=harvard

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[> [> [> Subject: Re: Response to an archived U Chicago 2021 Football Recruiting Class Message

Observer15 (to IvyKnowledge)
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: 11:46:11 07/10/17 Mon

Ah, yes, Parchment. Be advised:

Parchment is a transmitter of data and like all data collection it is limited by what it receives and is only as good as what it receives so it must be interpreted. Their data collection is heavily skewed to Midwestern high schools, which are way over represented. The denominator of cross admits for Chicago and Ivies is indubitably way smaller than the national figure. The 95% confidence interval is encouraging but the wide ranges confirm the small denominators and don’t do anything to account for regional differences.

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[> [> [> [> Subject: Parchment ...

[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: 13:52:00 07/11/17 Tue

Their cross-admit stuff used to be far closer to "reality" (based on such glimpses of it as we have had) than it is today. I have asked many people why this is so. I think, as Observer 15 says, it is because their "reporting pool" has become less and less representative of the nation (and world) for a variety of reasons.

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]

VoyUser Login ] Not required to post.
Post a public reply to this message | Go post a new public message
* HTML allowed in marked fields.
* Message subject (required):

Name (required):

  Expression (Optional mood/title along with your name) Examples: (happy, sad, The Joyful, etc.) help)

  E-mail address (optional):

* Type your message here:

Notice: Copies of your message may remain on this and other systems on internet. Please be respectful.

[ Contact Forum Admin ]

Forum timezone: GMT-5
VF Version: 3.00b, ConfDB:
Before posting please read our privacy policy.
VoyForums(tm) is a Free Service from Voyager Info-Systems.
Copyright © 1998-2016 Voyager Info-Systems. All Rights Reserved.