Harbaugh

[Chicos' Buzz Scandal Countdown]

College kids are with a coach for the short-term (3-5 years) and, for the most part, have no previous experience with other head coaches at that level. Styles like Harbaugh's can wear thin after too long or may never be fully accepted by players who've played under other regimes (i.e. NFL vets). It's important for them to get players out the door before they turn on them, which is why some coaches are much better suited for college. The Harbaughs, Sabans, etc of the coaching world could never sustain a successful long-term NFL career.

I feel like this is an echo chamber with a lot of innuendo and no real substance. What specific behaviors of Harbaugh's are so grating? Where has he gone over the line?

[Chicos' Buzz Scandal Countdown]

All of those schools that you listed other than Stanford will make exceptions to their admissions standards for student athletes.  Stanford and the Ivy's require that even their student athletes meet the minimum admission requirements for the general student body in order to be accepted into the school.  Those schools may set a minimum requirement of (just using examples) a 29 ACT and 3.4 GPA on a 4.0 scale, but the reality may be that to even be considered a student really needs a 32 and 3.7 GPA plus a bunch of extracurriculars, which is where the student athlete gets their preferential treatment from in that they simply need that 29 ACT and 3.4 GPA.  But they must meet those minimum listed academic requirements to get into Stanford and the Ivy's.  Cal, Michigan, UVA, UCLA, and Notre Dame do not require that.

If you're saying that athletes at Ivies would have been admitted otherwise, I will challenge you on that. Personally know of two examples where that is absolutely false, one being a high school classmate of mine with a 1,000 SAT score who played at Penn.

The other a coworker who played at Harvard with self-admittedly mediocre grades in high school.

[Chicos' Buzz Scandal Countdown]

People always cite this but universities with comparable admissions profiles have proven to be competitive without compromising their academic standards. Michigan, UVA, UCLA, Notre Dame, Stanford, and Cal are in the same class as Northwestern and have fielded more consistently successful programs.

When I was a grad student at U of M there was talk of booting Northwestern out of the Big 10 because they were atrocious - in every sport.

Marquette should not be a national program that can compete with state schools that are 500% larger. But it has made a firm commitment to being so and invests accordingly.

Northwestern has access to significant resources. It chooses not to employ them as have other nationally prominent academic schools.  The "we are academically great so we can't be competitive in athletics" argument is simply wrong.

Keefe, I think we're 100% in agreement on this and I love it.

The University of Chicago is sort of a bizarro-Northwestern in that it had a dominant football program (original B10 member, and only team undefeated against Notre Dame). They chose to scrap it when their president foresaw the runaway spending around football ahead. As a private research institution, they've decided to be great at pretty much everything they do (see The Economist's MBA rankings released yesterday), and shed their involvement in areas where they wouldn't.

Northwestern is a comparable institution academically, but I have to wonder how much of a distraction athletics is for them. It's one of the few areas where Northwestern isn't among the leaders in the field.

[GGGG]

Keefe, I think we're 100% in agreement on this and I love it.

The University of Chicago is sort of a bizarro-Northwestern in that it had a dominant football program (original B10 member, and only team undefeated against Notre Dame). They chose to scrap it when their president foresaw the runaway spending around football ahead. As a private research institution, they've decided to be great at pretty much everything they do (see The Economist's MBA rankings released yesterday), and shed their involvement in areas where they wouldn't.

Northwestern is a comparable institution academically, but I have to wonder how much of a distraction athletics is for them. It's one of the few areas where Northwestern isn't among the leaders in the field.

Just two different paths that lead to the same endpoint.  Hard to call athletics a "distraction" considering how successful Northwestern is as an institution.

[Chicos' Buzz Scandal Countdown]

Just two different paths that lead to the same endpoint.  Hard to call athletics a "distraction" considering how successful Northwestern is as an institution.

Sure... maybe I didn't communicate that well. Not crapping on NW, but just thinking how much better might they be, regardless if they're ahead/behind UofC in any category.

I'm assuming NW's athletics don't pay for themselves. Nor are they really a significant part of the identity of the institution like BBall is at Marquette or Football at Michigan/Texas/ND/etc

[wadesworld]

If you're saying that athletes at Ivies would have been admitted otherwise, I will challenge you on that. Personally know of two examples where that is absolutely false, one being a high school classmate of mine with a 1,000 SAT score who played at Penn.

The other a coworker who played at Harvard with self-admittedly mediocre grades in high school.

I have no idea what the listed requirements are for Penn or Harvard.  I do know that Ivy's require that whatever those listed minimum requirements are are met.  The "listed" requirements might not be all that absurd.  For example, while not one of the Ivy's, I know that, depending on your GPA, you can "get into" Stanford with a 27 ACT.  But in reality, if you aren't an athlete, that 27 won't get you anywhere close to Stanford.

Ivy's also do not offer athletic scholarships.

[Chicos' Buzz Scandal Countdown]

I have no idea what the listed requirements are for Penn or Harvard.  I do know that Ivy's require that whatever those listed minimum requirements are are met.  The "listed" requirements might not be all that absurd.  For example, while not one of the Ivy's, I know that, depending on your GPA, you can "get into" Stanford with a 27 ACT.  But in reality, if you aren't an athlete, that 27 won't get you anywhere close to Stanford.

Ivy's also do not offer athletic scholarships.

Seems a nonzero portion of the admitted class to Stanford had an 18-23 on the ACT.

http://admission.stanford.edu/basics/selection/profile.html

You're claiming there is an official list of minimum requirements of scores, GPAs, etc for these universities?

EDIT: Still looking around for some backup for your claim that there are objective minimum requirements for admissions to colleges. From Harvard's own website:

Q "Do I need certain grades or marks to be considered for admission?"
A "...we do not have rigid grade requirements"

Q "Do I need a minimum required SAT, ACT or Subject Test score?"
A "We do not have minimum scores or cut-offs."

https://college.harvard.edu/frequently-asked-questions

[wadesworld]

Seems a nonzero portion of the admitted class to Stanford had an 18-23 on the ACT.

http://admission.stanford.edu/basics/selection/profile.html

You're claiming there is an official list of minimum requirements of scores, GPAs, etc for these universities?

EDIT: Still looking around for some backup for your claim that there are objective minimum requirements for admissions to colleges. From Harvard's own website:

Q "Do I need certain grades or marks to be considered for admission?"
A "...we do not have rigid grade requirements"

Q "Do I need a minimum required SAT, ACT or Subject Test score?"
A "We do not have minimum scores or cut-offs."

https://college.harvard.edu/frequently-asked-questions

Yes, I'm claiming there is a minimum requirement of scores.  I just finished coaching a kid/going through the recruiting process with a kid who is now starting his freshman season at Stanford and he needed to retake the ACT because he did not reach their minimum grade to allow him into the school the first time around.  They gave him a solid ACT score that he needed to get to be admitted into the school.

[Chicos' Buzz Scandal Countdown]

Yes, I'm claiming there is a minimum requirement of scores.  I just finished coaching a kid/going through the recruiting process with a kid who is now starting his freshman season at Stanford and he needed to retake the ACT because he did not reach their minimum grade to allow him into the school the first time around.  They gave him a solid ACT score that he needed to get to be admitted into the school.

So he must have gotten a 22 or below on the ACT?

[wadesworld]

So he must have gotten a 22 or below on the ACT?

Not even close.

[Chicos' Buzz Scandal Countdown]

Not even close.

lower?

[ChitownSpaceForRent]

Question though Wade. Isn't Stanford a private institution? All your player would need is the NCAA minimum. Stanford has the ability to accept whoever they want. I'm not saying your wrong, it's just kinda weird.

[wadesworld]

Question though Wade. Isn't Stanford a private institution? All your player would need is the NCAA minimum. Stanford has the ability to accept whoever they want. I'm not saying your wrong, it's just kinda weird.

I'm sure they are allowed to take whoever they want, but they only accept student athletes who meet their minimum requirements for the general student body.  So while they may have the option to take someone who had a 2.4 GPA and got a 23 on his ACT, they won't.

This player had a good, but not incredible, ACT score the first time around and had to retake it and wait anxiously to see if he improved his score enough the 2nd time around.  He was all set to accept the very large athletic scholarship from Ball State (the type of scholarship that you only get when you're one of the top players in the entire country, given that men's volleyball only get 3.5 scholarships to distribute among the entire roster - so they made it clear he was their absolute top priority in the entire program, not just that recruiting class) had he not gotten the score he needed to get into Stanford.

Stanford will not bend their admission standards for student athletes.  They will accept a student athlete over a non-student athlete who may be more qualified as just a student, though.

This is compared to some top schools that will only bend their admission standards for X amount of student athletes per athletic team (for example, NYU was offering a pretty good athletic scholarship on another kid I coached a few years back.  He was smart, but not smart enough that he would've otherwise gotten into NYU, but they were allowed 4 "exceptions" on their roster - he ended up going elsewhere).

[wadesworld]

http://thehuskyhaul.com/2012/05/16/comparing-the-acceptance-rates-of-athletes-to-the-general-public/

"Some universities are known for not making any exceptions to their high academic standings. Stanford for instance actually takes advantage of that by only recruiting athletes who would have already made it through the admissions process (or at least would have been competitive) without sports. Perhaps there is a little bit of rule bending, benefit of the doubt, or advantage to being a star recruit, but for the most part, the players who are on the field for Stanford were straight-A high school students with high SAT scores. Stanford is able to recruit nationally in a way few other schools can primarily because they have the advantage of having an Ivy League reputation while still playing in a BCS conference (and they actually offer scholarships). They have turned what could have been a major disadvantage into an asset and have been able to field BCS bowl football teams and make deep runs in the NCAA tournament in basketball. In addition, Stanford has more national championships than any other university in the country (102) except UCLA (108)."

[Chicos' Buzz Scandal Countdown]

Wade - I'm not saying Stanford isn't competitive but your sources are dubious for professing to know the exact workings of Stanford and Ivy Leage institutions.

In fact the published data referenced above BY those institutions contradicts your point.

Oure making a pretty huge leap off of one anecdotal observation.

[wadesworld]

Wade - I'm not saying Stanford isn't competitive but your sources are dubious for professing to know the exact workings of Stanford and Ivy Leage institutions.

In fact the published data referenced above BY those institutions contradicts your point.

Oure making a pretty huge leap off of one anecdotal observation.

You're right.  I'm just making a complete leap of faith despite having just helped a kid go through the recruiting process about 6 months ago.

In fact, when John Kosty told him, "We need you to get a XX on your ACT," he was just scaring the kid into studying harder for the ACT to make Stanford look better.  He was willing to risk losing what he (and other coaches) considered a pretty important recruit just so that the kid would try harder the next time he took the ACT (which was well above the NCAA minimum requirements) just to increase the average ACT scores of his team/school.

Or something like that.

[Chicos' Buzz Scandal Countdown]

You're right.  I'm just making a complete leap of faith despite having just helped a kid go through the recruiting process about 6 months ago.

In fact, when John Kosty told him, "We need you to get a XX on your ACT," he was just scaring the kid into studying harder for the ACT to make Stanford look better.  He was willing to risk losing what he (and other coaches) considered a pretty important recruit just so that the kid would try harder the next time he took the ACT (which was well above the NCAA minimum requirements) just to increase the average ACT scores of his team/school.

Or something like that.

I'm not saying that, nor am I saying you're making up your experience with a student and their interaction with SU. I'm saying that's not basis enough to declare that, "Stanford and the Ivy's require that even their student athletes meet the minimum admission requirements for the general student body in order to be accepted into the school," and that schools like Michigan, ND, UCLA, etc don't do that. In fact, there are no minimum admissions requirements at any of these schools.

There is no evidence Stanford/Harvard does anything different in terms of admissions than Mich/ND/etc. They do have a lot more competition for spots at their school, but this is different than them saying "No matter what, all students must at least have XX ACT and XX GPA."

[wadesworld]

I'm not saying that, nor am I saying you're making up your experience with a student and their interaction with SU. I'm saying that's not basis enough to declare that, "Stanford and the Ivy's require that even their student athletes meet the minimum admission requirements for the general student body in order to be accepted into the school," and that schools like Michigan, ND, UCLA, etc don't do that. In fact, there are no minimum admissions requirements at any of these schools.

There is no evidence Stanford/Harvard does anything different in terms of admissions than Mich/ND/etc. They do have a lot more competition for spots at their school, but this is different than them saying "No matter what, all students must at least have XX ACT and XX GPA."

That's exactly what they say.  They have a sliding scale that a student needs to meet in order to be accepted into these schools, just like Marquette, Wisconsin, etc. have.  Ivy's and Stanford require their student athletes also meet these requirements.  ND, Michigan, UVA, etc. make exceptions for their student athletes.

[keefe]

Stanford and the Ivy's require that even their student athletes meet the minimum admission requirements for the general student body in order to be accepted into the school. 

Wades

Not trying to pick a fight but I know for a fact that this is not true. While the Ivies do not give 'athletic' scholarships they have other mechanisms available. And to your point about admissions, there is latitude given to students recruited for the athletic teams.

[wadesworld]

Wades

Not trying to pick a fight but I know for a fact that this is not true. While the Ivies do not give 'athletic' scholarships they have other mechanisms available. And to your point about admissions, there is latitude given to students recruited for the athletic teams.

Right. It's all about family incomes. Any student who has a household income of under $250K has it very "affordable" (relative to the price of many top colleges). And if the household income is over $250K, well, you can afford to pay a lot for an Ivy League education.

And yes, "latitude" in that they can get a student accepted above someone who has better qualifications because they are an athlete. But they can't take someone with a 24 ACT and 3.0 GPA.

[Chicos' Buzz Scandal Countdown]

That's exactly what they say.  They have a sliding scale that a student needs to meet in order to be accepted into these schools, just like Marquette, Wisconsin, etc. have.  Ivy's and Stanford require their student athletes also meet these requirements.  ND, Michigan, UVA, etc. make exceptions for their student athletes.

I'm just going by the published figures in their site, which shows that folks with very poor test of GPAs have been admitted to the most recent class.

Clearly there is not an objective minimum requirement in these categories. I am not disagreeing that (athlete or not) you're likely not going to get into Stanford with a low GPA or test score.

[wadesworld]

I'm just going by the published figures in their site, which shows that folks with very poor test of GPAs have been admitted to the most recent class.

Clearly there is not an objective minimum requirement in these categories. I am not disagreeing that (athlete or not) you're likely not going to get into Stanford with a low GPA or test score.

You realize that 0% is >1%, right? And that each application they get brings in money to the school, right? So if they publish 0% then kids in those categories don't even bother, whereas if they publish >1% then it's, "so you're saying there's a chance?"

[ChicosBailBonds]

I have a bit of personal experience in this as well.  Both my niece and nephew were water polo players for Stanford in the last 15 years.  Both had to be admitted to the school, first.  Nephew won two NCAA titles in the process.   Meanwhile, at my old gig, had a swimmer from Penn work for me for 7 years (he's now at HBO).  To this day he is a competitive swimmer in the masters circuit with the Rowdy Gaines of the world.  He described the recruiting process for the Ivys in a manner in which he basically needed to have the scores, but also since there was no scholarships, they made financial aid readily available for perspective athletes.

Side note, the swimmers dad was the GM for the Detroit Lions prior to Matt Millen.

[keefe]

I have a bit of personal experience in this as well.  Both my niece and nephew were water polo players for Stanford in the last 15 years.  Both had to be admitted to the school, first.  Nephew won two NCAA titles in the process.   Meanwhile, at my old gig, had a swimmer from Penn work for me for 7 years (he's now at HBO).  To this day he is a competitive swimmer in the masters circuit with the Rowdy Gaines of the world.  He described the recruiting process for the Ivys in a manner in which he basically needed to have the scores, but also since there was no scholarships, they made financial aid readily available for perspective athletes.

Side note, the swimmers dad was the GM for the Detroit Lions prior to Matt Millen.

I don't know about Stanford but I do know that the Ivies admit students who do not meet the standard for the general population. And it isn't just for student athletes.

[GGGG]

Stanford may have different standards for football and basketball players versus the Olympic sports.

BTW Harbaugh clearly is a great coach. But dude's a crazy person.