Started By
Message
re: Satellite camps, if any other coach tweets this, it's major headlines
Posted on 4/11/16 at 11:24 am to fibonaccisquared
Posted on 4/11/16 at 11:24 am to fibonaccisquared
quote:
Looking at the Stanford recruitment class of 2009 (this year was quite typical in terms of test scores), the median football player who reported scores got an 1800 out of 2400 on the SAT and 26 on the ACT.
That is pretty solid. It may be lower than the general student population at Stanford, but it is like that everywhere.
1
Posted on 4/11/16 at 12:28 pm to Waffle House
ETA (because this post got long fast): TL;DR - It's not as hard to get student athletes into Stanford as many would like to make it out to be. It's selective to be certain, but the idea that they don't lower their standards compared to their non-athlete counterparts is ridiculous.
I'm not saying it's not. I'm simply providing a counterpoint to the idea that they don't lower their standards for their athletics. There is a difference between not lowering them, and not lowering them as far as other programs. And even in that scenario, I'm not sure you could say in a relative context that they're not lowering them just as much.
Those numbers are only the ones that are publicly reported. Obviously those who got lower scores are going to be less likely to publicly report. Additionally, it's the median. It says nothing about the range of their scores, simply that if you laid the scores all out, this is the one in the middle. For example, lets say a group of 5 took the SAT and the results were:
1000, 1100,1800, 1820, 1850
1800 is the median but the mean/average would be 1514. (Admittedly silly example, but just to illustrate that numbers can be used to tell whatever story you'd like.)
Generally speaking, while it's impressive for an athlete, 1800/2400 ~ 1200/1600 in the old test scoring model... aka, the score that the majority of students now need to get into state schools.
Compare that to their 25th percentile student, which is 690, 700, 690 across the different SAT sections, or 2080/2400 OR their 75th percentile student, which is 780, 800, 780 across the different SAT sections, or 2360/2400... pretty significant difference between the athlete and the rest of the student body, even not being able to account for those that don't report.
In 2015, Stanford accepted approximately 5% or a little less in each category of SAT where scores fell in the range of 400-599 per category (or 1200-1797/2400). 5% of ~2000 gets us 100 students, which a reasonable individual can likely guess would have a high probability of aligning with athletes as opposed to their typical student (though some minority candidates may be included in that number or statistical outliers who do great at one subject but are just dreadful in others - a small number to be certain).
To put that in context...
This puts the 25% student at a 1810 SAT/27 ACT and further still, if you look at scholarship student admission:
The admitted scholarship student average falls well within that range as well. So while I'm certain that we take more low end student athlete scores in our bottom quartile of scholarship students, our average criteria are quite high there as well. I'd imagine that if you looked at the numbers for UF, Texas A&M, and several other SEC schools, what you would see would largely mirror this. The biggest difference is Stanford has to pass on some of the top 25/50 players in the country (particularly at the running back, defensive line, and linebacker spots based on what I've seen in past years on where the biggest struggles for admission seem to be), but it's not as though there is an absolute dearth of athletes that fall into their acceptance criteria. It's simply a fallacy that has continued to get perpetuated and then accepted into the collective mindset of sports fans.
I'm not saying it's not. I'm simply providing a counterpoint to the idea that they don't lower their standards for their athletics. There is a difference between not lowering them, and not lowering them as far as other programs. And even in that scenario, I'm not sure you could say in a relative context that they're not lowering them just as much.
Those numbers are only the ones that are publicly reported. Obviously those who got lower scores are going to be less likely to publicly report. Additionally, it's the median. It says nothing about the range of their scores, simply that if you laid the scores all out, this is the one in the middle. For example, lets say a group of 5 took the SAT and the results were:
1000, 1100,1800, 1820, 1850
1800 is the median but the mean/average would be 1514. (Admittedly silly example, but just to illustrate that numbers can be used to tell whatever story you'd like.)
Generally speaking, while it's impressive for an athlete, 1800/2400 ~ 1200/1600 in the old test scoring model... aka, the score that the majority of students now need to get into state schools.
Compare that to their 25th percentile student, which is 690, 700, 690 across the different SAT sections, or 2080/2400 OR their 75th percentile student, which is 780, 800, 780 across the different SAT sections, or 2360/2400... pretty significant difference between the athlete and the rest of the student body, even not being able to account for those that don't report.
In 2015, Stanford accepted approximately 5% or a little less in each category of SAT where scores fell in the range of 400-599 per category (or 1200-1797/2400). 5% of ~2000 gets us 100 students, which a reasonable individual can likely guess would have a high probability of aligning with athletes as opposed to their typical student (though some minority candidates may be included in that number or statistical outliers who do great at one subject but are just dreadful in others - a small number to be certain).
To put that in context...
quote:
UGA Standardized Test Scores - 2015
SAT-I Middle 50% of Admitted First-Year Students: 1810 - 2060
ACT Middle 50% of Admitted First-Year Students: 27 -31
This puts the 25% student at a 1810 SAT/27 ACT and further still, if you look at scholarship student admission:
quote:
SAT Middle 50% of Admitted Scholarship Students (CR&M): 1290 - 1480
ACT Middle 50% of Admitted Scholarship Students: 30 - 33
The admitted scholarship student average falls well within that range as well. So while I'm certain that we take more low end student athlete scores in our bottom quartile of scholarship students, our average criteria are quite high there as well. I'd imagine that if you looked at the numbers for UF, Texas A&M, and several other SEC schools, what you would see would largely mirror this. The biggest difference is Stanford has to pass on some of the top 25/50 players in the country (particularly at the running back, defensive line, and linebacker spots based on what I've seen in past years on where the biggest struggles for admission seem to be), but it's not as though there is an absolute dearth of athletes that fall into their acceptance criteria. It's simply a fallacy that has continued to get perpetuated and then accepted into the collective mindset of sports fans.
This post was edited on 4/11/16 at 12:45 pm
Page 1 of 1
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News