You are incorrect. They will admit athletes a bit below the average, not way below. This seems like a hard concept to understand. Top academic schools are way more concerned about maintaining their academic elitism than they are at winning athletic events. Most of the women on the NC State cross country team would not be admitted to Stanford through the coach. If you think that they are willing to push a runner through who is not close to the standard, you are way off.
Excuses are like buttholes, everyone’s got one buddy!👌
Actually, I don't have one. I know this is a common misconception, but not everyone has a butthole. Please be a little more thoughtful before spewing hateful ignorant asspersions next time.
Yes Tuohy is on the Dean's list and was a top high school student but most were not. She likely could have gotten into better schools than NC State. But schools also recruit top athletes who may get rejected by admissions also.
Chmiel, Touhy, Starliper and Rauber all could have been admitted to any school. They were all top 3 national recruits, top 10% of class, and 32+ act (or eqvt) Moreno as well, who actually was admitted to and attended Stanford.
Chmiel recently won the award for #1scholar athlete for all women in all sports in the NCAA. She would be a strong candidate for a Rhodes Scholarship.
Bush, Chmiel, Holt, Howlett, Shaw, Tuohy and Tyynismaa are all regulars on all-academic teams.
Chmiel, Holt, Moreno and Shaw all graduated early and are now completing graduate degrees to get more academic bang for their buck with their scholarship.
All these ladies CHOSE to be at NC State over higher ranked alternatives due:
east coast, warm but not Florida, teammates, coaching, academic/sports balance
Their choice of NC State will not limit them academically or in their careers after running.
You are incorrect. They will admit athletes a bit below the average, not way below. This seems like a hard concept to understand. Top academic schools are way more concerned about maintaining their academic elitism than they are at winning athletic events. Most of the women on the NC State cross country team would not be admitted to Stanford through the coach. If you think that they are willing to push a runner through who is not close to the standard, you are way off.
And we’re to believe that Michigan or Florida would “never” accept a football player with an ACT or academics out of high school that are “way below” the average?? Give us a break. Maybe Stanford is some special case. But that ain’t flying at Florida or Michigan and most of these other schools.
No way that Michigan, Florida, and Notre Dame are turning away top cross country runners over academics. This isn’t a factor.
Of course it will limit them or nobody would pay for a Duke education over NC State. Facts back it up. Your one opinion is just that.
For example when Chmiel eventually finishes vet school along with 2 or 3 classmates with Duke undergrad degrees, what disadvantage as a veterinarian will she have vs the Dukies?
2y - you are correct. I talked to the parents at NC State at the ACC meet. (What wonderful people). The women you mention are excellent students. They could have obtained admission almost anywhere. I am an alum of one of the best schools that gives D1 scholarships (at least by the rankings) and contrary to save it now's statements - am well aware of the kind of credentials that national class athletes need for top schools. I interview local students, and quite often get the track people, well, for obvious reasons. And all of the women mentioned above at State were indeed national class athletes in high school. I myself was in the same shoes years and years ago - about at the midpoint in terms of stats at the Ivies and Duke and Stanford. Midpoint may have been stretching it - but still viable. I got in everywhere I applied. I do agree that something like Cal Tech or MIT would have been difficult, but not everywhere else. U of Chicago accepted me - surprising too but track didn't hurt. Times are different but no one can make the argument that 32 ACT people cannot do very good work at all of these schools - of course they can.
NC State is an excellent school, especially when you look at outcomes. My quibble with the ACC is not with NC State (or Florida State or what have you), but rather with Louisville, which simply doesn't fit in the conference academically. Throw in their recent penchant for scandal (very ugly ones) and it really sets Louisville in its own category in the ACC. Having said this, they have made strides recently in academics (a professor friend of mine who taught there in the 80's said he never would have sent his kids there, a condition he says he no longer holds to). Given the increasingly lousy values behind higher education, this is no time for snobbery and a look at utility is essential.
Rare? Just the opposite. Stanford will recruit from the top 100 athletes in each event but only about 10% of those athletes will qualify.
And so schools like Florida and Michigan would have to reject 9 out of the top 10 quarterback prospects each year because 90% of them don’t meet their academic standards? lmao. No, all 10 could be accepted.
And cross country has much better academics out of high school than football. So it’s going to be much much less of an issue where schools like Florida or Michigan would have to deny acceptance to a XC athlete over academics.
Rare? Just the opposite. Stanford will recruit from the top 100 athletes in each event but only about 10% of those athletes will qualify.
And so schools like Florida and Michigan would have to reject 9 out of the top 10 quarterback prospects each year because 90% of them don’t meet their academic standards? lmao. No, all 10 could be accepted.
And cross country has much better academics out of high school than football. So it’s going to be much much less of an issue where schools like Florida or Michigan would have to deny acceptance to a XC athlete over academics.
You can see how low a top school will go academically to admit athletes by googling their common data set and looking at questions c9-c12. The athletes are the bottom 5%, with most egregious in the bottom 1% - usually football and basketball.
Stanford and Michigan both regularly admit below 1200 sat, 23 act, 2,9 gpa, and top 25% class rank. Proud Michigan even dips below 800 sat and 17 act!
Nice post. Loooville used to be a commuter school, at least they are using the acc money to attempt to raise the academic profile of the whole school.
Before Paterno, Penn State was an ag and tech school in the middle of nowhere. On the back of football, it grew to become a solid research university in the big10. It can be done.
Rare? Just the opposite. Stanford will recruit from the top 100 athletes in each event but only about 10% of those athletes will qualify.
And so schools like Florida and Michigan would have to reject 9 out of the top 10 quarterback prospects each year because 90% of them don’t meet their academic standards? lmao. No, all 10 could be accepted.
And cross country has much better academics out of high school than football. So it’s going to be much much less of an issue where schools like Florida or Michigan would have to deny acceptance to a XC athlete over academics.
Much of this has been previously quantified in the book “The game of life” by a former President of Princeton. An average recruit for a non-revenue sport like cross country gets the equivalent of a 150 point boost on their SAT. So at an elite college, you would still need a ~1350-1400 to get accepted. For revenue sports like football or basketball, an average recruit may get a 300+ point boost equivalent (and the SAT only has a range of 800 points!).
Help us build the best running shoe review site for a chance to win a LetsRun t-shirt.Help us build the best running shoe review site for a chance to win one of 10 LetsRun t-shirts.