<p>are some schools said to have more well-rounded student bodies than others?</p>
<p>I assume what you mean is best athletics-to-academics ratio? I'm not an expert on the topic, but I'll make a quick list, because it's 1:50 in the morning and I've nothing better to do.
Here's how my rankings would go for best athletics with best academics:</p>
<p>1 - Stanford (baseball, basketball, cross country, track and field, football's not bad. . .we all know about their academics)</p>
<p>2 - Wake Forest (excellent basketball/football, field hockey is perennial nat'l title contenders; great academics)</p>
<p>3 - Duke (only for basketball; horrible football/track team, laughing stock of the ACC; academics++)</p>
<p>4 - UNC-Chapel Hill (basketball, football, track; maybe the best public university?)</p>
<p>5 - UCLA (should probably be higher than Duke because they're better in more sports, but Duke's academics are better than UCLA's)</p>
<p>6 - USC (basketball was unstoppable a few years ago, baseball is great, they have two collegiate record holders on the track team, and their football team might never lose again; academics keep this from being higher on my list)</p>
<p>I should do more, but I can't think of any off the top of my head. Maybe Illinois (basketball), Tulane (baseball/football), and Baylor (track and field) deserve a nod.</p>
<p>Elip,</p>
<p>I couldn't help noticing where you are from. Where are you now? Are you ok?</p>
<p>bulldog- Ecliptica is "The Man" for info on track recruiting (emphasis on sprints/field). He is planning to take classes at Brown this semester. He's back home in the northeast. He shared that he had one of those "recruited strongly but denied admission" experiences at Davidson but it all worked out since Tulane was a better fit (and, hopefully, will be in the future).</p>
<p>Oooh, yeah, I should change that back; it was New Orleans for a couple of weeks. . .but then Hurricane Katrina ruined everything.
As MoWC said, I'm back in Massachusetts right now and taking classes at Brown for the semester. I'll be going back to Tulane in the spring unless by some miracle I happen to be academically qualified enough to permanently stay at Brown (very doubtful. . .and I still loooooove Tulane, I don't think I could leave.)</p>
<p>All I pretty much do on here is help people with recruiting questions and athlete inquiries :)</p>
<p>I also liked matt360's post. Get pretty good grades, study for a bit to do really well on your sat's, get really good at your sport, party hard on the weekends and go to a good school.</p>
<p>jocks represent the old guard in our society - discrimination and a somewhat disturbing connection to an aryan/super human fit genetic combo which a man early 20th century germany chamioned.</p>
<p>tell me why they deserve to go to places of serious study when weekends are spent around a keg? and i'm not talking about you guys on CC who have 2390 SATs and 4.0 UW gpas and work your butts off. i'm talking about the average jock joe who gets lousy grades but is admitted to the same schools as someone who has to sacrifice their free time because they aren't built like a tank.</p>
<p>Didn't this attitude drive away a really great poster last year?</p>
<p>Your post is purely anecdotal. Let's hear some real stories. Grades/test scores/sport. Did they graduate? </p>
<p>The Germany thing is a little out there considering you are probably most angry about football players and they come in all flavors.</p>
<p>\
Well Division I schools in football & basketball feel that it is the best publicity they can buy. In addition, at many schools the revenue earned from these 2 sports funds other nonrevenue sports. I agree, in general the difference between basketball & football players compared to the average student at the most competetive schools (athletically) is enormous. That doesn't mean that they don't work as hard, but it does mean that you have some players with SAT's that are 500 points below the average student at their school. I don't see how they can compete in the same classrooms.</p>
<p>Nearly every football player I know that's gone to a good school has had the grades to get them in. In fact, I've been wondering where that stereotype of the dumb football player at a good school taking basket-weaving has gone; I honestly can't name a single football player that I know or have played with or anything that had a horrible SAT score or GPA. </p>
<p>Basketball. . .ehhhhhh. . .</p>
<p>500 points below = D1 revenue sport hero. </p>
<p>Remember there are also many non-revenue athletes-- my D is one. Though her GPA & rank were a bit low for her reach school, her SATS were right at the median. Did athletic recruitment help? Certainly. In fact, probably a lot. Does she stand out, as being below par, at her school? Not at all.</p>
<p>One thing she has on many college freshman is incredible time management. Remember some of these 3.6, 3.7 kids would probably be 3.9, 4.0s if they did not spend 20 hours a week on sports for 4 years of high school.</p>
<p>"Nearly every football player I know that's gone to a good school has had the grades to get them in. In fact, I've been wondering where that stereotype of the dumb football player at a good school taking basket-weaving has gone; I honestly can't name a single football player that I know or have played with or anything that had a horrible SAT score or GPA."</p>
<p>....any school that plays in one of the major conferences...including such good academic schools as : Wake Forest, UNC, U of Mich., Syracuse, U of Florida, NC State, to name a few, has players who barely quailify as scholarship players. I would be 99% certain you they have a number of players with 800 or less SAT's asnd some around 700.</p>
<p>ninjagold --</p>
<p>if you are interested in being recruited for any sport at any level do not wait for coaches to contact you. and if a coach does contact you that does not necessarily mean you will be recruited. you have to do the legwork. research schools that would be a good fit for you academically, athletically, geographically and contact the coach yourself.</p>