For those that actually care, and we know OP does not, Stanford has a sliding scale for students based on excellence in a given field. If you go to their admissions site they actually have a place for students in the arts to submit an arts portfolio that demonstrates their excellence in their field. I will never claim that an elite athlete has the same admissions hurdles as a general student, however, the scale applies to all students who show excellence in a particular area.
A buddy of mine went into admissions at LSJU after graduation (gap year). He explained it like this, picture 3 areas with a potential score of 10 for a total of 30. You can earn 10 for GPA, 10 for test scores and 10 for excellence in a particular area. Each year based on the pool of applicants they set the bar at a score some where between 20 and 30. So if you are a 5 star recruit, of course your test scores and GPA can be lower that someone who does not have that third area. However, the same applies to people who show excellence in the arts, programming or start their own company.
That said nice to see that the OP has admitted he was wrong, and also that we all know he will go straight to ad hominem attacks when that happens.
A buddy of mine went into admissions at LSJU after graduation (gap year). He explained it like this, picture 3 areas with a potential score of 10 for a total of 30. You can earn 10 for GPA, 10 for test scores and 10 for excellence in a particular area. Each year based on the pool of applicants they set the bar at a score some where between 20 and 30. So if you are a 5 star recruit, of course your test scores and GPA can be lower that someone who does not have that third area. However, the same applies to people who show excellence in the arts, programming or start their own company.
That said nice to see that the OP has admitted he was wrong, and also that we all know he will go straight to ad hominem attacks when that happens.