<p>I asked a similar question at the 'what are my chances' forum, but my post is probably buried by now and i wanted to ask here. For a track and field athlete, how much lower are the athletic standards for Ivy league schools, especially for Upenn and Princeton? For example, the average GPA to get into princeton, in my school, is 4.8. would athletic recruits be as low as 4.4?</p>
<p>How good are you in track and field?! Seriously, the admission standards for recruited athletes vary from school to school and from athlete to athlete. In my experience, it would not be unusual for an athlete to get accepted with the (very) slight difference you are talking about. Usually coaches get a certain number of athletic admits per year. That means kids who do not come too close to the average stats of admitted students but still meet the minmum standards for athletes as set forth by the school. Then the coaches get a few other spots where they can tell the admissions people they want this athlete and if the athlete's stats are within range, as yours are, then the application is flagged for approval. Lastly, there are athletes the coaches would like to have but are unwilling to use an exception or flag for. These are athletes who have to make it on their own and then the coach will let them be on the team. I know of several recruited athletes who were turned down for schools like Harvard and MIT. All were non-revenue sports and the athletes weren't ranked in their state or nationally. If the coach wants you and you are within the range or just below that of regular admits, then you should get in as a recruited athlete. Even in the revenue sports, some schools (Stanford is one) will not automatically admit an athlete just because the coach wants the athlete on his team. The coach should be up front with you about this. If he gives you positive feedback or puts you in touch with an academic advisor or an admissions counselor, then youknow he is probably serious about having you on his team. Good luck.</p>
<p>Not that much. Especially for track and field. If you played football or basketball, you'd have lots of leeway, but not for track and field.</p>
<p>And, even if you're recruited, the coach probably as 5-10 spots tops, including walk-ons for their team. But they'll try to get 20 kids to apply, because they know they won't be able to get all of them through admissions.</p>
<p>Have you already been contacted by a coach? If not, it's too late to be recruited.</p>
<p>I think you meant academic standards. I have no idea; it's as the other posters said...dependent on sport and skill. If you're a really good basketball player and you want to go to Duke you won't need more than 1100 M/V. However if we're talking softball...don't expect much leeway.</p>
<p>i know swimmers who have gotten into yale with a 1100 old SAT, one into princeton with 1200 old SAT</p>
<p>make sure to contact the coach nevertheless if you do plan to do a respective sport in college. it would help</p>
<p>If a coach wants you and has pull, your stts can be in the bottom 25% for the school.</p>
<p>Any idea what the practice is for athletes at UNC, UVA and Wake for OOS students? Sports are Cross Country and track.</p>
<p>you have to be damn good at track and field to get in an ivy league school with a 4.4 gpa</p>
<p>So a decent football player with ~2150 and a 3.6 in a "most challenging" curriculum would have a shot?!?</p>
<p>Just slightly higher than the wealthy/famous/politically connected applicant.</p>
<p>The only way to find out if a coach can help you with admissions is to find out if the coach wants you. Call as early as possible. Or have yor high school or club coach call. They have recruiting lists for the athletes they want and they start planning on certain kids. The more they want you, the more they can help. No coach can get you past the minimum standards that the university sets for recruited athletes so it helps to discuss your transcrit with the coach right off the bat.</p>
<p>Depends on how good you are.</p>
<p>Supremely good football player ---> 1900 SAT's @ Princeton this year.</p>
<p>Depends on the sport (revenue vs. non-revenue), an athlete's skill level (a good player as opposed to a super blue-chip) and the school.</p>
<ol>
<li> Schools (particularly the top schools) generally have a different criteria for recruits in revenue sports vs. non-revenue sports.</li>
</ol>
<p>For instance, lax players at academically inclined schools generally score in the mid to high 1300s on the SATs (m/v), while it is not uncommon to find football and bb players who score in the 1100s-1200s.</p>
<ol>
<li><p>A super blue-chip recruit will get more leeway than a good, but not exceptional recruit. Most schools have a few slots at the lower end of the academic spectrum which are usually reserved for top prospect with less than ideal academic record (it's usually a common practice for coaches to push these prospects with the admissions board).</p></li>
<li><p>The academic standards also differ from school to school. While there isnt much difference btwn the Ivies and schools like Stanford, Northwestern and Duke with regard to academic qualifications for recruits in non-revenue sports, there is more of a spread with regard to the big revenue sports of FB and BB.</p></li>
</ol>
<p>Among academic schools in big sports conferences, Stanford has the highest standard, followed by Northwestern. Otoh, other schools have really cut their corners with regard to their recruits in revenue sports (for instance, during 1994-1997, the average SAT score for incoming freshman on Duke BB schollies was 968 which was middle of the pack for ACC schools).</p>