I’m wondering want the typical academic profile of a recruited athlete to Stanford would be. I’m interested in a rough estimate of GPA, test scores, any extracurricular activities outside of their sport, etc.
I understand that every application is unique and there is not a definitive guideline, but I’m looking to see if there are any specific minimums, cut-offs, and anything else Stanford looks for when recruiting athletes (outside of being incredibly talented at his/her sport of course).
Any insight or knowledge is appreciated.
Thank you!
In addition, my school hasn’t had a student accepted to Stanford in years, would this potentially impact my recruitment as an athlete at all?
Here is an interesting article which suggests that athletes definitely have lower academic standards. http://www.stanforddaily.com/2015/02/22/the-price-of-athletics-at-stanford/ You can probably also look at Ivy AI standards – I doubt Stanford’s are higher. I think the issue for Stanford is more whether you are a true D1 athlete at the highest levels.
If you are a recruited athlete, the Stanford coach will have a good feel on your admissions prospects. While recruited athletes clearly receive a boost in admissions, the level of the boast varies with the sport and within the sport with how badly the coach wants you. All admits, athletes as well as non-athletes, must be admitted by the admissions office. This is true at Stanford and all the Ivies, but not at all schools.
I read about a football player who got in with a 28 on the ACT who felt he was “smart” compared to some of the other players. When you look at the 2016-2017 Common Data Set, you see the freshman class has approximately 20 students with an ACT lower than 24.
Stanford athletes score in the bottom quartile in SATS… I saw a common data set analysis somewhere but can’t find it now.
Stanford has the top college sports program and its peers in sports are FBS D1 programs USC, UCLA, Berkeley, Texas, Michigan, Florida etc… while it has relatively high academic standards… I get the feeling Stanford athletics is looking at athletic excellence first and making the academic cut second.
@FutureCollegeAthlete - Your athletic ability will definitely be THE major part of the equation.
Stanford likes to make a big deal out of how “an athlete must be admitted to Stanford first” then join athletics. Don’t believe it. They’ve been good at hiding the admission test scores of elite athletes but they can’t hide from the Wonderlic.
Richard Sherman scored 24, respectable, but not Stanford admission level. His SAT scores have ranged from a reported 1000, only verifiable score, to a 1400, which remarkably, there seems to be no official confirmation, just rumor.
Mike Krzyzewski in the past would not hang championship banners at Duke unless team members were on course to graduate. Now you have the “one and done” athletes and all that changed.
Lou Holtz at Notre Dame told the school they needed to relax their admissions standards for athletes or forget about a top level football team.
I understand that schools do this with the amount of money now involved in NCAA sports, but Stanford’s attempt to act like they’re not also doing it is transparent and hypocritical.
When it comes to athletes Stanford is competing with FBS Div1 programs (HYPM are academic peers but not athletic peers) and yes athlete’s test scores are lower than the Stanford student body… - but probably higher than its athletic peers USC, Berkeley, Texas etc… so it’s relative.
Richard Sherman also graduated second in his high school in Compton CA so he had the grades to get in (URM and Compton were factors too).
Solomon Thomas (5 star recruited athlete) and Christian McCafferty were both first round draft picks last year.
@jcwjnw99 - and Ryan Fitzpatrick scored 48 after finishing the test in a record nine minutes, which might say something about the different approaches of Stanford and Harvard to this issue (although I’ll give Stanford props for Andrew Luck scoring 37).
I’m not sure what everyone expects. Harvard plays Yale and Lafayette while Stanford plays USC,Cal, And UCLA. Hardly the same and it means you need top level players. Overall one can only marvel at the success of Stanford in both academics and sports. No other school comes close.
Stanford has the most dominant college sports program the past 2 decades… . all the more remarkable with a student body less than 1/4 to 1/5 the size of its FBS Div 1 athletic peers UCLA, Berkeley, Texas, Michigan etc.
Stanford athletes won 27 medals in Rio and 14 golds… which is more golds than most countries including Australia. Maya Dirado did have perfect math SATS…along with 2 gold medals draped around her neck at Rio… not bad for an EC
I saw an interview with Richard Sherman’s mother a few years ago (probably before one of the superbowls) and she swore up and down that Richard went to school on an academic scholarship, not a football scholarship. Well we all know that’s not possible, but she is convinced he had a full ride on a merit scholarship.
Not to minimize Stanford’s great performance there, but the top-three medaling schools in the last Summer Olympics (Stanford, Cal and USC - each with over 20 medals) are all located in California - is anyone shocked? Only two of the Pac-12 schools didn’t have someone win a medal in Rio.
In contrast, at the Winter Olympics in Sochi, the second-most-represented US college (after a specialized school in Salt Lake City) was Dartmouth, which, of course, is located in a region congenial to winter sports.
Also dependant on your major for those athletes with low scores. If you want to major in Engineering/CS at Stanford they won’t let you. They know you’ll fail so they will deny you admission. Now if you want to major in communication then you can have a lower score.