<p>I’m soooo sick of the accusations that athletes are academically inferior and bring down the level of the class. If that’s true, then Dartmouth is NOT in line with Ivy League athletic admissions standards, which only permit a minor departure from the very high stats required of all Ivy students. And if the school doesn’t like the caliber of athletes they’re getting, they have only themselves to blame. No one is twisting their arm to admit any simpletons. </p>
<p>My D was an Ivy recruit and went on OV’s to Ivy teams. The athletes she met were all very smart. On her HYPS team there are brilliant kids with 4.0’s and 3.95’s in tough subjects like engineering, CS, and math. These kids do exist, and it’s the job of Dartmouth to convince them to choose Dartmouth.</p>
<p>My D went for an OV at a HYP institution and she was completely turned off by the sense by the non athletic students she met that weekend that she must be stupid as she was an athlete. She got out of there as soon as she could and chose a NESCAC school where they believe that student athletes are great–smart and talented. </p>
<p>BTW, there is a reason why this HYP school’s athletics is in the dog house-- they can’t recruit well at all…and as an alum of that school I don’t see their “academic” standards have been increased by their derogatory attitude toward sports.</p>
<p>Only good news for me is that it is saving me lots of money as I wouldn’t give them the time of day from now on.</p>
<p>^Agreed, but one of the other schools in the HYP cluster also couldn’t hide a resentful undercurrent among faculty and students that the athletes are intellectually inferior and could only have been admitted under lower academic admissions standards. That’s why D chose an equally strong school that wholeheartedly embraces their athletes as valued members of the community and intellectual equals.</p>
<p>FWIW, our student at Yale has very high stats academically, It was required that all recruits (non helmet) have the same as the admits in general.
I don’t know why anyone thinks it is different.</p>
<p>Levin’s attitude has got to go. That attitude that someone’s EC means they are subpar in other areas is silly…</p>
<p>That’s like someone saying, the math geek got in even if he has no social skills because he is in lab all day, or the poet got in only because she can write however her math skills are sub par…or the international students got in only for diversity even without all of the AP classes everyone took…etc etc</p>
<p>FWIW Yale used to want to educate (men) to be strong academically, athletically, socially and spiritually…</p>
<p>D is competing at H (3 years) and says you’ll occasionally run across a person who likes to stereotype the ‘jocks’. But she said if you’re dong the work and taking the same difficult classes, working in labs, etc. - most people really respect the fact that she can do it in addition to the athletic time commitment.</p>
<p>Our Ivy recruiting experience was a little frustrating. We originally contacted six schools resulting in two being very interested and maintaining a dialog. My DD’s SATs were well above average at all ivies, and her grades were excellent, but not necessarily enough to get her in. One of the two schools eventually declined, and when the school year started we naturally read the freshman bios on the athletic site. Their freshman class was outstanding, so good for them. </p>
<p>The second school was a different story. The coach told my DD she was just outside of his top 10, then top 5 as senior year approached. His stated requirements seemed unrealistic to us considering the current team ranking, but we kept on talking. My DD eventually signed elsewhere, and when we checked this ivy’s roster in the fall, there were exactly zero freshmen. None. The coach totally dropped the ball.</p>
<p>It’s possible the coach supported the most talented athletes, but those candidates were rejected by admissions due to weak academics. If the coach already had plenty of talented upperclasswomen on his team, he may not have fought that hard for the freshmen recruits.
Each incoming class has different recruiting needs.</p>
<p>^ Another possibility is the freshman aren’t listed on the roster.
I have seen more than once that there are no freshman listed in the fall, and only appear mid spring online.
I am not sure why this is the case, just that I have seen it more than once and at more than one school</p>
<p>fogfog is correct - it appears to not be uncommon for teams to refresh their rosters in the second semester/winter/spring by adding the freshmen then. Perhaps it depends on the main season of the sport, or depends on what each coach/program decides to do, but it is definitely a factor to take into consideration when looking for new recruits on rosters in the fall.</p>
<p>All that may be true for some sports, but for this particular sport, the only possibilities are that none of the coach’s top recruits chose to accept the offer or that they were not accepted academically. Either way, his list should have been longer. It is not feasible that they took a freshman ranked higher than DD and did not put her on the roster, absolutely not. It is also not feasible they could have a walk on who rivals any of the recruits. No, what happened was the coach took a gamble and lost. Perhaps we could have held out until the other five fell by the wayside, but the verbal commitment game is also a gamble.</p>
<p>Never forget that athletic recruiting is a big game of chicken!</p>
<p>The good news is that she’s loving her D1 school, her major is actually more suited to what she wants to do than was offered at the ivy, and she received three scholarships (athletic, merit, and National Merit) totaling about 90% of tuition, room and board.</p>