I would argue that athletes are deserving in this framing. They were outstanding enough in a particular way to earn a spot at the most prestigious school in the country.
Just because I'm an excellent coder (I wish!) should not mean I can get into the New York Philharmonic Orchestra.
I totally agree.
What I do not agree is that athletes should have a VIP lane to admission. Either they make it in like everyone else or the rules for everyone need to be changed to reflect the "most successful people".
It turns out that this is not the case and a myth.
"Last month, accountancy firm Ernst & Young, one of the UK’s biggest graduate employers, announced that they were to scrap a requirement of at least a 2:1 from its graduate application process. The company claimed there was no evidence that academic success at university was linked to achievement in professional assessments." Guardian, Sep 2015
https://www.theguardian.com/careers/2015/sep/01/graduate-job...
Others like PwC followed.
The one thing that Harvard is useful for are the connections you make in your time at Harvard, start something with the people you meet there and other people from Harvard you meet that help you with your career.
That is what you pay for.
And Harvard is in the game for the money.