Started By
Message
re: Stanford head coach David Shaw just disrespects the entire SEC
Posted on 4/11/16 at 8:05 pm to weedGOKU666
Posted on 4/11/16 at 8:05 pm to weedGOKU666
The next SEC expansion should include Rhode Island. They must be our kind of folks. And Shaw is an idiot.
LINK
LINK
quote:
The campus will come alive Tuesday morning as 1,768 freshmen and 31 transfer students move into their dorm rooms, ably assisted by hundreds of volunteers – students, staff and alumni – wearing red T-shirts that say: Like the Way I Move? The new students come from 49 U.S states – Rhode Island not included – and 56 countries.
quote:
Class of 2016 by the numbers The largest group of incoming students – 38.1 percent – graduated from California high schools. The next top five regions represented in the class are the South (15.1 percent); international students and U.S. students who completed high school studying abroad (9.7 percent); the Mid-Atlantic (9.2 percent); Far West – Oregon, Washington, Alaska and Hawaii (8 percent); and the Mid-West (7.8 percent). The other regions are Mountain States (6.3 percent); New England (3.7 percent); and the Great Plains (1.8 percent).
1
Posted on 4/11/16 at 8:07 pm to oman
Hey, sorry I am belaboring, but just defending my team's coach and his efforts to try to recruit where he has some natural disadvantages.
I don't think anyone, including Shaw, doesn't pretend that football players (like most extraordinary students) don't get special consideration at Stanford, but in general, those players are pretty impressive, academically.
I don't think anyone, including Shaw, doesn't pretend that football players (like most extraordinary students) don't get special consideration at Stanford, but in general, those players are pretty impressive, academically.
Posted on 4/11/16 at 8:10 pm to DingLeeBerry
Damn, I've got an echo in this bitch.
Posted on 4/11/16 at 8:11 pm to roadGator
quote:
Wow. Imagine if he was white and he had said that.
Take this shite back to the poli board. Has nothing to do with race. He is right, get over it.
Posted on 4/11/16 at 8:14 pm to CaptainBrannigan
Based on Stanford's enrollment data, he isn't right.
Posted on 4/11/16 at 8:16 pm to oman
quote:
but in general, those players are pretty impressive, academically
I wouldn't call a 930/1600 on the SAT "impressive academically", and yet that's essentially what DRob was told he'd need to get in. It's all relative.
The bar is higher for athletes at Stanford than many schools, but it's nowhere in the same vicinity as what is required for the rest of the student body. On *average* at Stanford, being a football player is approximately worth about 200-300 points on a kid's SAT and a +(.5 to 1.0) GPA boost...
While it means there are definitely some kids that flat out aren't even in consideration, these days there are a large number of available candidates to select from from high school athletes that actually can make it into Stanford.
As far as the camps go, I'm not sure they are valuable for any SEC programs either, simply due to our proximity to the majority of the talent in the country to begin with. California's not hurting for talent either. There is a reason the B1G was the only P5 conference onboard with these things.
Posted on 4/11/16 at 8:17 pm to weedGOKU666
That's why the rose bowl is their championship. They could even win the national championship with Andrew Luck. People talk about Mississippi, sure they are dead last in education. Who is 45 -49? Bordering states.
Posted on 4/11/16 at 8:17 pm to CaptainBrannigan
quote:
He is right, get over it.
Actually, he's the opposite of right, as demonstrated by actual enrollment data.
Not surprising, I suppose, that an Auburn fan can't grasp simple math.
Posted on 4/11/16 at 8:23 pm to oman
quote:
Other than guys like you who would rather be butt hurt and desperate to play the race card
We rarely get to play that card. I don't blame him for trying it to see how it feels.
I understand what Shaw was saying, but he was clumsy with the way he presented it.
Posted on 4/11/16 at 8:24 pm to fibonaccisquared
I'm willing to bet those green dots to the left side of the graph are heavily weighted toward the student-athlete special admission side of the student body.
Piling on a bit and acknowledging the report is a bit dated (2008), but Georgia Tech had the nation's best average SAT score for football players, 1028 of a possible 1600, and best average high school GPA, 3.39 of a possible 4.0."
I wonder where GT was getting all those smart football players, must be a national recruiting powerhouse.
Interestingly enough, even with only one year of increased special admits included under the Harbaugh regime, Stanford wasn't a top 10 school or even the highest rated Pac 12, CA-based school in the report for football player test scores.
Athletes lag in admissions test scores
Stanford class of 2019 admissions stats
Piling on a bit and acknowledging the report is a bit dated (2008), but Georgia Tech had the nation's best average SAT score for football players, 1028 of a possible 1600, and best average high school GPA, 3.39 of a possible 4.0."
I wonder where GT was getting all those smart football players, must be a national recruiting powerhouse.
Interestingly enough, even with only one year of increased special admits included under the Harbaugh regime, Stanford wasn't a top 10 school or even the highest rated Pac 12, CA-based school in the report for football player test scores.
Athletes lag in admissions test scores
Stanford class of 2019 admissions stats
This post was edited on 4/11/16 at 8:29 pm
Posted on 4/11/16 at 8:25 pm to fibonaccisquared
quote:
The bar is higher for athletes at Stanford than many schools, but it's nowhere in the same vicinity as what is required for the rest of the student body.
So you guys are arguing with the Make Believe David Shaw who claims athletes are given no special consideration.
I like your odds of prevailing.
Posted on 4/11/16 at 8:34 pm to oman
You mean this make believe David Shaw?
ETA: Since you chose not to respond to the SAT requirement comment for DRob, am I to assume that you believe a 930/1600 SAT is impressive academically?
quote:
"We have the same academic standards."
ETA: Since you chose not to respond to the SAT requirement comment for DRob, am I to assume that you believe a 930/1600 SAT is impressive academically?
This post was edited on 4/11/16 at 8:37 pm
Posted on 4/11/16 at 8:47 pm to fibonaccisquared
quote:
You mean this make believe David Shaw?
quote:
"We have the same academic standards."
ETA: Since you chose not to respond to the SAT requirement comment for DRob, am I to assume that you believe a 930/1600 SAT is impressive academically?
Well, I noticed that you didn't actually quote it, because Shaw certainly didn't say what you said he said. In the article he says that Stanford has not lowered it's academic standards to have a better football team. Which is of course completely different from saying that football players have to make the same grades or scores as anyone else.
With Stanford’s rise in football prominence, many have wondered if the program has become more lax in its admissions standards. Shaw adamantly denies this. “We have the same academic standards. What we’re doing, though, is a really good job of finding those kids who fit here academically and are going to graduate.
I'd hope that you would understand the difference between a school having academic standards and a school requiring the same scores of everyone. That article is nothing more than Shaw saying that Stanford hasn't lowered the floor for incoming athletes.
Finally, not sure what your point was with DRob. No Stanford official has stated what his SAT needed to be and he apparently hasn't been admitted. Not sure that stands for the proposition that all athletes only have to make a certain score.
This post was edited on 4/11/16 at 8:50 pm
Posted on 4/11/16 at 8:53 pm to oman
Oh, and I don't have any reason to believe that a person who makes a 930 can't ultimately be impressive academically, which was what I said.
Stanford is going to be more flexible than some schools regarding the SAT. I know Rice has always or often had higher SAT scores than Stanford.
Stanford is going to be more flexible than some schools regarding the SAT. I know Rice has always or often had higher SAT scores than Stanford.
Posted on 4/11/16 at 9:05 pm to oman
That was not a good public relations move by Coach Shaw. Some southern high school coaches are make him pay for that remark.
About 1/4 of the team's roster is from the south.
Dumb move!
About 1/4 of the team's roster is from the south.
Dumb move!
Posted on 4/11/16 at 9:11 pm to oman
Yes. I'm fully aware that I cherry picked that quote. It was a hook, which you bit. Ultimately, Stanford as an institution points to cherry picked examples of academic excellence to paint the picture of the student athlete that meets their stringent academic requirements... such as this article: LINK /
The truth, however, is that a little bit of those academic principles are indeed sacrificed, since otherwise they would be hard pressed to field a complete team, let alone one that could compete in the PAC12.
I've never stated that David Shaw explicitly indicated that football players aren't given preferential treatment. What Stanford as a university *does* do, is hang their hat on "high academic requirements", while as shown in the scatterplot and the study by the Journal-Constitution, that their threshold for admission is nowhere near as high as they would like everyone to believe. It is an open invitation for criticism, when you paint the picture of the valedictorian, 4.0+ GPA, 1600/1600 SAT as the type of athlete that you recruit, and yet you're actually pulling athletes that would be average students at most top State schools.
Demetris Robertson shared in an interview that he was essentially told that a 1400 score on the SAT would be sufficient to get him into Stanford. 1400/2400 is approximately a 930 on the old 1600 point scale. I'm just asking if you believe that is "academically impressive". I've already done plenty in the other thread to show that while it's "relatively impressive" considering they're athletes, they are still in the bottom 5-10% of Stanford students from an academic perspective.
quote:
As Stanford moves deeper into a football "golden age," the program has become proof that academic principles do not have to be sacrificed in pursuit of victories.
quote:
HOW IS STANFORD FOOTBALL different? Among the reasons are these:
The program has close ties with faculty. At other schools, the application process may be modified and standards adjusted to attract top players. At Stanford, football players go through the same application process as any other student and are held to the same standards.
The truth, however, is that a little bit of those academic principles are indeed sacrificed, since otherwise they would be hard pressed to field a complete team, let alone one that could compete in the PAC12.
I've never stated that David Shaw explicitly indicated that football players aren't given preferential treatment. What Stanford as a university *does* do, is hang their hat on "high academic requirements", while as shown in the scatterplot and the study by the Journal-Constitution, that their threshold for admission is nowhere near as high as they would like everyone to believe. It is an open invitation for criticism, when you paint the picture of the valedictorian, 4.0+ GPA, 1600/1600 SAT as the type of athlete that you recruit, and yet you're actually pulling athletes that would be average students at most top State schools.
quote:
Finally, not sure what your point was with DRob. No Stanford official has stated what his SAT needed to be and he apparently hasn't been admitted. Not sure that stands for the proposition that all athletes only have to make a certain score.
Demetris Robertson shared in an interview that he was essentially told that a 1400 score on the SAT would be sufficient to get him into Stanford. 1400/2400 is approximately a 930 on the old 1600 point scale. I'm just asking if you believe that is "academically impressive". I've already done plenty in the other thread to show that while it's "relatively impressive" considering they're athletes, they are still in the bottom 5-10% of Stanford students from an academic perspective.
This post was edited on 4/11/16 at 9:41 pm
Posted on 4/11/16 at 10:13 pm to Korin
Stanford has Four from Georgia, three from Louisiana, two from Texas, two from Florida and two from North Carolina. South Carolina and Tennessee also are on the list. Plenty of those players are being counted on to contribute in 2016 and aren't just on the roster to boost the APR. Senior linebacker Peter Kalambayi (from Charlotte, N.C.) was fifth on the team in tackles last season and is the team's top player from the South.
Posted on 4/11/16 at 11:12 pm to fibonaccisquared
quote:
Yes. I'm fully aware that I cherry picked that quote. It was a hook, which you bit.
Well, then you are a disingenuous. You could have proven a point, but you misattributed a quote. It wasn't a hook. You just sound dumb.
Posted on 4/11/16 at 11:17 pm to oman
You've spent a lot of time and energy justifying a completely asinine statement by Shaw.
Posted on 4/11/16 at 11:36 pm to TigerNSac
quote:
That was not a good public relations move by Coach Shaw. Some southern high school coaches are make him pay for that remark.
About 1/4 of the team's roster is from the south.
Dumb move!
They win, they get recruits. This is a throwaway comment about a dead issue. If there was any negative publicity would be outweighed by the SEC schools looking scared of recruiting competition from the Big10.
Page 6 of 9
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News