Question for the board

[SUBuddha]

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.

 

[SUBuddha]

As an add on, I am not too proud to admit I got in, in part, due to legacy status. My roommate Fr. year was a DE on the team, he had higher SAT's than me, but a substantially lower GPA.

 

[4down20]

Have you seen how uptight he is? He was probably still just punching the clown.

I'm guessing he was paying and still having to jerk off.

 

[jjc2009]

Please, standards for athletes to be accepted at Notre Dame cannot be that stringent. A freshman only has to maintain a 1.85.

UND.COM :: The Official Site of Notre Dame Athletics

Academic Eligibility


Notre Dame Continuing Eligibility
To remain eligible for intercollegiate athletics, students must meet the Notre Dame standard of academic good standing by earning the minimum semester grade point averages listed below:

First semester of freshman year 1.70
Second semester of freshman year 1.85
Sophomore year until graduation 2.00


Notre Dame NON athletes

Evaluation Criteria // Undergraduate Admissions // University of Notre Dame

Here’s what we’re looking for:
Academic performance in high school
There’s no minimum grade point average or class rank required, but know this: You’re up against the best and the brightest in the world. The more rigorous your course selection, the better your grades, and the higher your class rank, the more competitive your application will be.


At Notre Dame you are on ACADEMIC PROBATION if you GPA is not above a 2.0, Section 2.2.3

https://facultyhandbook.nd.edu/asse...emic_code_effective_7.1.2016_for_posting_.pdf

On page 8, section 3.3.8

A GPA of C Minus = While acceptable, work falls SHORT of meeting basic standards in several areas.

In Conclusion, Notre Dame Athlete Students are expected to be SHORT of basic standards in several areas.

Meanwhile, at my college


Rankings - Colorado School of Mines

Average ACT score incoming freshmen = 31

Mines By the Numbers - Colorado School of Mines

ADMISSIONS
Undergraduate admissions at Mines is highly selective. More than 11,000 students vie each year for about 1,150 spots in the freshman class. Mines applicants’ average scores include 1320 on the SAT, 31 on the ACT and a 3.8 unweighted GPA.

JOB PLACEMENT AND AVERAGE STARTING SALARIES

• 2015-16 graduates (BS) placed at 85% either working in the industry or going onto graduate school
• Average starting salary $67,229 (BS)

You’re conflating eligibility of active students vs. admissions standards.

 

[Across The Field]

I remember having this discussion on here a few months ago in the David Shaw debate. If you think Stanford isn't going to do everything in it's power to try and get 4-5* kids to come to school, you're naive. Simply look at the recruiting rankings. They have active scholarship offers to a boatload of 4-5* kids, as they do most years now, and I highly doubt they all just happen to also be exceptional students.

 

[umichgradfan]

This is what AG can't seem to grasp. The NCAA minimums and what is required to get into Stanford are not the same thing.

Perhaps the athletes have different standards once they get in, but getting in is the hard part. Every year, there are athletes that Stanford's coaches aren't even allowed to recruit because they can't meet Stanford's admission requirements.

What AG fails to understand is that several academically elite institutions have institutional policies that govern who coaches can recruit (Stanford, USC, Notre Dame, Wisconsin, Michigan, for examples). These policies are more stringent than the basic NCAA requirements. For example, one policy at Michigan is that athletes from junior college or community college are not eligible at Michigan. They can transfer into the academic population with the appropriate GPA, but they are not eligible for athletic scholarships at all.

 

[Wamu]

He was getting paid to watch Bob’s ass during this time, so you can’t blame him.

Your avatar is hilarious.

 

[RobToxin]

What AG fails to understand is a whole hell of a lot of shit.

FIFY

 

[umichgradfan]

I cant speak for Stanford but my son had scholarship offers to Cal for Rugby. And he certainly wasnt a 4.0+ at his public HS. He was an All American though and he would have had no chance of getting into the school with his grades. But they would have accepted him for Rugby with his barely 3.0 GPA. They were honest with us though and said if would most likely struggle academically if he didnt dedicate 60 hours a week to study. On top of Rugby. He passed and went with another offer.

I often wonder how some of these kids in football end up graduating at schools like Stanford and Cal. Because some of these guys dont come off very sharp.

Schools like Cal do all they can to choose students they feel will be successful in the end and graduate. The NCAA publishes graduation rates, and schools MUST achieve a minimum graduation rate or risk NCAA sanctions. Even if athletes have no intension of graduating, schools have a vested interest in their academic success.

 

[socaljim242]

I remember having this discussion on here a few months ago in the David Shaw debate. If you think Stanford isn't going to do everything in it's power to try and get 4-5* kids to come to school, you're naive. Simply look at the recruiting rankings. They have active scholarship offers to a boatload of 4-5* kids, as they do most years now, and I highly doubt they all just happen to also be exceptional students.

And you're still wrong. Stanford doesn't recruit or accept "I didn't come here to play school" types. They have a "boat load" of kids who actually want to go to Stanford to play football and can get in because academics matter. while others go where they can just skate . They might not have the grades a regular student does but they value a Stanford education.

 

[Across The Field]

And you're still wrong. Stanford doesn't recruit or accept "I didn't come here to play school" types. They have a "boat load" of kids who actually want to go to Stanford to play football and can get in because academics matter. while others go where they can just skate . They might not have the grades a regular student does but they value a Stanford education.

I actually wasn't wrong at all. Everything I said was true. Your last statement sums it up perfectly.

 

[socaljim242]

I actually wasn't wrong at all. Everything I said was true. Your last statement sums it up perfectly.

Yeah it does. Even with a lower bar for athletes that bar is higher than 98% of any other big boy football schools and you go there knowing you have to play school. The whole Stanford football team could get into the majority of schools on grades alone.

 

[Across The Field]

Yeah it does. Even with a lower bar for athletes that bar is higher than 98% of any other big boy football schools and you go there knowing you have to play school. The whole Stanford football team could get into the majority of schools on grades alone.

But it doesn't preclude them from getting more than enough high-end recruits, obviously. The recruiting rankings echo this sentiment.

 

[socaljim242]

But it doesn't preclude them from getting more than enough high-end recruits, obviously. The recruiting rankings echo this sentiment.

Yes because in all of America there are some kids who go to good schools and get good grades and play football and their parents view a Stanford education as gold for the future. They aren't picking out of the "I didn't come here to play school" pool. Most of their top rated players are O linemen and TEs and QBs who come from Catholic schools in Cali. They have their pick and get the smart ones.

 

[Across The Field]

Yes because in all of America there are some kids who go to good schools and get good grades and play football and their parents view a Stanford education as gold for the future. They aren't picking out of the "I didn't come here to play school" pool.

And evidently much more than enough of them are 4/5* football players, as well. Go out and look at the amount of offers Stanford has made. It's been like this since Harbaugh resurrected them. They've been able to have enough appeal to go after these high end recruits where as before Harbaugh got there, they were usually stuck with the dribs and drabs.

 

[socaljim242]

And evidently much more than enough of them are 4/5* football players, as well. Go out and look at the amount of offers Stanford has made. It's been like this since Harbaugh resurrected them. They've been able to have enough appeal to go after these high end recruits where as before Harbaugh got there, they were usually stuck with the dribs and drabs.

Like I said. They are known for putting out great O linemen and TEs and they have their pick from schools in Cali for these players who usually have good grades. Look at their recruiting list. The top rated players are O linemen almost every year.

 

[Across The Field]

Like I said. They are known for putting out great O linemen and TEs and they have their pick from schools in Cali for these players who usually have good grades. Look at their recruiting list. The top rated players are O linemen almost every year.

That's debatable. They have one great TE and one great OL with a couple other players at the position that are there but not doing anything.

They have their pick from schools in Cali but they have no problem pulling from across the country. In the last five years, they've pulled four 5* kids and countless 4* kids from out of state, several from across the country. My point is (and has been) that they seem to have no issues pulling in high-end recruits on a yearly basis, so listening to the talk about them being at such an enormous disadvantage because of academics is just not accurate.

 

[Deep Creek]

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.

Makes sense to me. Each incoming group is different and trying to apply previous or future criteria to that group is not wise. And, Stanford is anything other than "not wise."

If I understand this right, Stanford applies Skinner’s Constant/Finnegan’s Finagling Factor to each incoming class.

Skinner's Constant/Finnegan's Finagling Factor. That quantity which when multiplied times, divided by, added to, or subtracted from the answer you got – gives you the answer you should have gotten in the first place.

 

[socaljim242]

That's debatable. They have one great TE and one great OL with a couple other players at the position that are there but not doing anything.

They have their pick from schools in Cali but they have no problem pulling from across the country. In the last five years, they've pulled four 5* kids and countless 4* kids from out of state, several from across the country. My point is (and has been) that they seem to have no issues pulling in high-end recruits on a yearly basis, so listening to the talk about them being at such an enormous disadvantage because of academics is just not accurate.

Except many if not most 4-5 star kids couldn't get into Stanford. I live in So Cal and everyone here knows they can't offer many 4-5 star players. Thats why they recruit nation wide to find those who can get accepted. Harvard and Yale have football players. There are smart kids who play football. Just not as many who can play at a high level.For those kids Stanford is something they really like so they have a good shot at them. I didn't come here to play school types are more in abundance and there's plenty of schools who will take them.

 

[Scapegoat]