This is not an advantage to any institution. Smart students are an advantage. The SAT is by far the best way to identify them.
On the other hand, if you're trying to pull in students who will use up lots of administrative hours trying to keep these kids from failing, and you yearn to spend money on adjunct faculty who will teach "[Fill in the identity] Studies" courses you invent just for the dumber kids who can't handle the regular curriculum, then forget that SAT and go for it, baby.
You'll just have to get a lot of grant money from guilty corporations and tax money from Uncle Sam or your state to pay tuition for these kids who don't belong in college anyway—since besides not being that bright, most of them come from broken homes and therefore have no work habits or money either.
Just because this will result in a divided campus where some students work and succeed, while those incapable of college work hate them for it and do drugs, fight, and trash the buildings instead, shouldn't concern you at all. Is that clear?
the SAT has turned into a politically correct mess.
Accuplacer, much better.
My understanding of the research on predictors of academic success in college is that grades earned in challenging high-school courses (e.g., AP Calculus, science, etc.) are the best predictors, followed by SAT/ACT scores. Nothing else (reference letters, extracurricular activities, ...) matters.
My daughter told me that at Ohio State, athletes took geology courses to fulfill a science course requirement. No mathematics. The courses were referred to as "rocks for jocks."
What "SAT optional" really means:
If you are white/Asian and do not submit high SAT scores, and are not "connected", then you will not be considered.
If you are black and submit a recommendation from somebody "connected" in the Democrat Party, then you are in.