but what would you replace it with? the old system based on blood lines and birth? or an entirely subjective process in which admissions offices just pick their favorites? when you're dealing with tens of thousands of applications and are able to admit a small number, it means you have to rely on some blunt instruments like tests and grades. many criticize the reliance on these kinds of objective indices but few have been able to propose a workable alternative to them. that means universities should live up to their ideals rather than admitting athletes and legacies that are unqualified they should focus on finding bright children from poor backgrounds who have great potential but don't score as well on these testing measures. many elite colleges today take in more students from the top 1% of the income distribution than from the bottom 60%. it cannot be that those millions of students have no talent.