<p>How does admissions look at recruits? Do they lower their standards for them? How much does it help?</p>
<p>what sport? and what is the coaches track record for getting athletes who they support admitted?</p>
<p>how much does the coach want them?</p>
<p>I think they treat all the varsity coaches equally. Fencing is as good as football if the coach says he wants you.</p>
<p>the coach told me i'd be on his recruit list, but i thought fencing wouldnt equal football, just cause it's a smaller sport.</p>
<p>ra2000a. it may depend on how high on the list.</p>
<p>The football coach gets to put more people on his "list", but anyone on a coaches "list" will have about the same advantage. (probably like 15 people for football and 2 or 3 for fencing. As long as you know you're on the "list" you should get in if you're in range with everything.</p>
<p>^not true.</p>
<p>My brother was told he was on a lacrosse list for princeton and didn't get in with a 1340 mostly B+'s.</p>
<p>theres different levels by academic index, and each coach is allowed a certain yield in each bracket. Obviously, more recruits are needed for football than fencing, simply based on team size</p>
<p>1340 and mostly B+s is not i nthe range for princeton</p>
<p>I would think it would be.</p>
<p>being on the coaches list doesnt guarantee you will be accepted, although it does help A LOT. they do "lower" their standards for athletes, but then again every other division I school in the nation does the same.</p>
<p>one of the main reasons i applied to brown instead of harvard, yale, princeton....etc was because the coach at harvard (etc.) said when they put a recruit on their list they have about a 90% success rate. that may sound like a lot to some but not good enough in my opinion when the brown coach told me he hadnt had anyone in the past 6-7 years who was on his list and not accepted. like i said before you have really got to consider the coaches past success/failure rate. further i think "mainstream" sports like basketball or football have a bit more pull in the admissions office in comparison to a sport like fencing or volleyball (no offense to those that play). </p>
<p>in the end you have a REALLY good chance if you are on the coaches list and your academic index is about 195-205 and you are one of the top 3 recruits.</p>
<p>bptoast, your brother may not have gotten in because i know for a fact HYP have a bit higher standards in comparison to other ivies. they are not much higher, but your brother sounds like he was borderline about 185-190 AI so that is what may have hurt him.</p>
<p>Many would take 90% chance at Harvard over 99% at Brown. Plus, how do you verify that. I hope you had a better reason for applying to Brwon than the oddsmaker.</p>
<p>I'm #3. I found out today</p>
<p>i thought that your ai had to be within a certain deviation from the average--if you are below that, you just don't get in no matter how much a coach might want you!</p>
<p>"bptoast, your brother may not have gotten in because i know for a fact HYP have a bit higher standards in comparison to other ivies. they are not much higher, but your brother sounds like he was borderline about 185-190 AI so that is what may have hurt him."</p>
<p>Dunno about the AI, but it was good enough for Stanford.</p>
<p>ra200a, are you infact a fencing recruit? (you were the one who brought up fencing earlier in this thread) if so, what weapon and gender?</p>
<p>Female Sabre</p>
<p>"I'm #3. I found out today"</p>
<p>How did you find out?</p>
<p>there is a slight difference in that stanford is a division I school that can offer scholarships. also goes to show athletes getting sccepted has some of the same parody as normal applicants.</p>