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 /

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