Is the academic perception of Football Powerhouses hurt by their football popularity?

[barrons]

<p>Minnesota has not won anything in decades. After 20 years data becomes meaningless to today.</p>

[JohnAdams12]

<p>bluebayou, sorry but no one has put Tulane in the academic power or football power categories</p>

<p>

John:</p>

<p>Are you associated with the Green Wave? </p>

<p>I don’t know of anyone that would put Tulane under either of your categories: academic power or football power. Sure, Tulane FB was strong in the 30’s, but Tulane has had, what, a handful of winning seasons in the last three decades?

</p>

[JohnAdams12]

<p>USNWR #50 Miami has been added</p>

<p>What big time football fans around the country might perceive</p>

<p>**USNWR Major Research University Rankings (Div. IA Football)</p>

<p>Schools that you always knew were academic**
4. Stanford
10. Duke
12. Northwestern
17. Rice
17. Vanderbilt
21. UC Berkeley
24. Virginia
27. Michigan
28. UNC
47. Texas
50. Tulane</p>

<p>Surprised at this high an academic ranking because of success in sports (the football or basketball factories)
20. Notre Dame
24. UCLA
26. USC
28. Wake Forest
34. Boston College
35. Georgia Tech
39. Illinois
39. Wisconsin
42. Univ. of Washington
47. Penn State
47. Florida
50. Miami</p>

<p>=========================================</p>

[JohnAdams12]

<p>I don’t agree, but you could be correct, it could be different depending on the region…</p>

<p>football fans not knowing about USNWR have always known that Michigan has great academics. Not so for Notre Dame up to the last 10 years or so…</p>

<p>

Also, I think Notre Dame has always been thought of as an academic institution. Someone who is merely a football fan and not familiar with US News would be more surprised with Michigan’s ranking than Notre Dame’s in my opinion. Of course things like that tend to be regional.

</p>

[JohnAdams12]

<p>this is the Notre Dame that many of us thought existed and were surprised to see ranked at #20 in the USNWR rankings of Major Research Universities…</p>

<p><a href=“http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/1064805819-post31.html[/url]”>http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/1064805819-post31.html&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

[k_amp_s]

<p>

Notre Dame does not compromise their admissions or academic standards for athletics. Just look at numerous quotes from coaches across multiple sports at why they have been unsuccessful at Notre Dame in the past years. It almost always contains a quote about not being able to recruit top notch athletes because they couldn’t get admitted to the school.

</p>

<p>Give me a break - the myth about the academic attributes of ND FB recruits is just as much of a myth as that for Duke BB recruits.</p>

<p>The average scores for ND FB recruits is usually a little bit better (but not always) than the B10 schools (aside from NU), but hardly are at the top (in 2008, ND barely made the top 30 w/ respect to avg. scores for recruits).</p>

<p>Sure, ND may miss out on a recruit that would have no problem getting into an SEC school, but to say that they are as limited recruiting-wise as Stanford, NU, the service academies - is just false.</p>

<p>

Do you have statistics to show what you are saying about Stanford and Notre Dame? I don’t think it is accurate. The NCAA releases graduation rates for schools by sports and their latest release was that Notre Dame graduates 96% of it’s football players while Stanford graduates 89%.

</p>

<p>While ND should be commended on its ability to keep FB playersa in school, such a thing doesn’t necessarily correlate w/ the academic requirements for recruits (see PSU).</p>

<p>

The standards at Stanford are higher than Notre Dame because the actual admissions process for all students is MUCH harder at Stanford than Notre Dame.

</p>

<p>Not really true - the average scores for ND students is very similar to that for Stanford students.</p>

<p>

Duke football has improved recently, as a result of dynamic new coach and university resources. The Duke football tradition is rich from the 1920’s -1970’s ( appearances in all of the major Bowl Games.)

</p>

<p>Don’t forget the Duke administration repeatedly lowering the academic standards for FB recruits (tho, still not as low as for BB recruits) - where presently, a third of Duke FB recruits only need to meet the minimum NCAA requirements.</p>

<p>

It’s laughable to compare ND’s athletic admissions standards to Stanford’s. Any ND fan can tell you that Stanford’s recruiting pool is much, much smaller than ND’s. They probably won’t, of course. For Stanford athletes, “official offers” are only contingent upon acceptance to the university. ND athletes do not even need to submit an application. (Stanford is the only BCS school which requires this.)

</p>

<p>The pool of top FB recruits who have the academics to get into schools like Stanford and NU number about 150-170 for each recruiting class.</p>

<p>There has been some grumblings about Harbaugh’s recruiting methods at Stanford, however.</p>

<p>It seems that his recruiting method is to give “unofficial” offers to just about every top recruit that looks to meet the academic threshold.</p>

<p>Over the past 2 years, there have been a no. of recruits (w/ seemingly fine academics) who have accepted the offers (pending admissions) - but were later told that they had trouble passing admissions.</p>

<p>Maybe it’s just coincidence that there were other recruits (more highly ranked for those positions) who subsequently committed to to Stanford, but maybe not.</p>

<p>

1959…we’ve also won most of our bowl games in recent history. When was the last time Northwestern won a bowl game?

</p>

<p>Over the past 50 years, NU has won its conference more often than Cal (and that’s w/ NO academic limitations that NU has for recruits.)</p>

<p>And while NU may have lost its bowl games, it has played in some of the most exciting bowl games of recent years (Alamo Bowl, Outback Bowl) and usually plays a higher level of competition in its bowls than Cal (Emerald, Poinsetta).</p>

<p>

The problem with ranking the current competitiveness of football programs is that such produce very short-sighted that ignore longer-term trends.

</p>

<p>And the problem w/ longer trends is that many of the schools w/ the most esteemed CFB history (Army, Harvard, Yale, UChicago, etc.) are no longer competitive w/ the FBS schools and likely won’t ever be again.</p>

[bluebayou]

<p>

bluebayou, sorry but no one has put Tulane in the academic power or football power categories…

</p>

<p>John, you listed Tulane in your first post, under the bolded heading: </p>

<p>"What big time football fans around the country might perceive…</p>

<p>Schools that you always knew were academic…</p>

<p>…Tulane"</p>

<p>Not sure what other conclusion I’m supposed to draw…</p>

[rjkofnovi]

<p>I’m beginning to think someone here on CC is a ■■■■■.</p>

[ccc999]

<p>

@k&s

Quote:
The standards at Stanford are higher than Notre Dame because the actual admissions process for all students is MUCH harder at Stanford than Notre Dame. </p>

<p>Not really true - the average scores for ND students is very similar to that for Stanford students.

</p>

<p>You cannot narrowly define admissions standards by SAT or ACT scores, especially when there are other equally, if not more important measures of selectivity. For example, Stanford has a yield rate of ~70% and an acceptance rate of ~7%. The figures for Notre Dame are ~50% and ~27%, respectively.</p>

<p>

@k&s

Quote:
It’s laughable to compare ND’s athletic admissions standards to Stanford’s. Any ND fan can tell you that Stanford’s recruiting pool is much, much smaller than ND’s. They probably won’t, of course. For Stanford athletes, “official offers” are only contingent upon acceptance to the university. ND athletes do not even need to submit an application. (Stanford is the only BCS school which requires this.) </p>

<p>The pool of top FB recruits who have the academics to get into schools like Stanford and NU number about 150-170 for each recruiting class.

</p>

<p>It’s possible that the football recruiting pools for Stanford and Northwestern are similar in size. But the admissions process for Stanford football recruits is more rigorous. Northwestern recruits, like other BCS recruits, are not required (or even recommended) to submit an application.</p>

<p>

@k&s

There has been some grumblings about Harbaugh’s recruiting methods at Stanford, however.</p>

<p>It seems that his recruiting method is to give “unofficial” offers to just about every top recruit that looks to meet the academic threshold.

</p>

<p>The Stanford football program has changed its recruiting philosophy since the arrival of Harbaugh. The idea is to cast a wide net as early as possible. The “unofficial” offer is used as an incentive to potential recruits to make sure that their academics are up to par. For example, an offer during the fall of a recruit’s junior year gives him the time to study for the SAT (or ACT), take AP or honors courses, etc.</p>

<p>

@k&s

Over the past 2 years, there have been a no. of recruits (w/ seemingly fine academics) who have accepted the offers (pending admissions) - but were later told that they had trouble passing admissions.</p>

<p>Maybe it’s just coincidence that there were other recruits (more highly ranked for those positions) who subsequently committed to to Stanford, but maybe not.

</p>

<p>Unless you have read the applications (including essays, recommendations, etc.) of these “commits,” you have no idea why some of them were denied admission by Stanford. So skip the innuendos. This is college confidential dot com, not rivals dot com or scout dot com.</p>

[k_amp_s]

<p>

You cannot narrowly define admissions standards by SAT or ACT scores, especially when there are other equally, if not more important measures of selectivity. For example, Stanford has a yield rate of ~70% and an acceptance rate of ~7%. The figures for Notre Dame are ~50% and ~27%, respectively.

</p>

<p>Gee, thanks for telling me stuff I didn’t already know! /s/</p>

<p>The point here is the disparity in scores btwn the general student pop. and that for FB players - all the other stuff, w/ regard to this discussion, does not matter.</p>

<p>

It’s possible that the football recruiting pools for Stanford and Northwestern are similar in size. But the admissions process for Stanford football recruits is more rigorous. Northwestern recruits, like other BCS recruits, are not required (or even recommended) to submit an application.

</p>

<p>Give me a break.</p>

<p>Recruited athletes at NU have to go through admissions like anyone else.</p>

<p>Not only have there been numerous FB recruits who didn’t make it past admissions, the women’s BB team lost out on a top 40 recruit when she failed to get past admissions.</p>

<p>

The Stanford football program has changed its recruiting philosophy since the arrival of Harbaugh. The idea is to cast a wide net as early as possible. The “unofficial” offer is used as an incentive to potential recruits to make sure that their academics are up to par. For example, an offer during the fall of a recruit’s junior year gives him the time to study for the SAT (or ACT), take AP or honors courses, etc.

</p>

<p>And some think that the new recruiting philosophy is starting to smell - there have been a no. of FB recruits who had accepted their offers from Harbaugh, only later to be told that they didn’t past admissions (when they clearly met the academic threshold), when coincidentally, other higher rated recruits at the same position committed.</p>

<p>

Unless you have read the applications (including essays, recommendations, etc.) of these “commits,” you have no idea why some of them were denied admission by Stanford. So skip the innuendos. This is college confidential dot com, not rivals dot com or scout dot com.

</p>

<p>Yeah, it was just the essays/recommendations as to why recruits who happened to have higher scores/GPAs got passed over for recruits (at the SAME position) w/ lower scores/GPAs.</p>

<p>And this thread is about CFB and academics - so it’s totally on point.</p>

[Alexandre]

<p>Notre Dame’s football recruits are at the same academic level as Michigan’s and PSU’s. In fact, those three programs usually recruit the same football players.</p>

[ccc999]

<p>

@k&s

Quote:
You cannot narrowly define admissions standards by SAT or ACT scores, especially when there are other equally, if not more important measures of selectivity. For example, Stanford has a yield rate of ~70% and an acceptance rate of ~7%. The figures for Notre Dame are ~50% and ~27%, respectively. </p>

<p>Gee, thanks for telling me stuff I didn’t already know! /s/</p>

<p>The point here is the disparity in scores btwn the general student pop. and that for FB players - all the other stuff, w/ regard to this discussion, does not matter.

</p>

<p>If it does not matter, then why did you bring it up?</p>

<p>

@k&s

Quote:
It’s possible that the football recruiting pools for Stanford and Northwestern are similar in size. But the admissions process for Stanford football recruits is more rigorous. Northwestern recruits, like other BCS recruits, are not required (or even recommended) to submit an application. </p>

<p>Give me a break.</p>

<p>Recruited athletes at NU have to go through admissions like anyone else.

</p>

<p>Northwestern recruited athletes are not required to submit an application, which means they do not need to write essays, secure recommendations, etc.</p>

<p>

@k&s

Quote:
The Stanford football program has changed its recruiting philosophy since the arrival of Harbaugh. The idea is to cast a wide net as early as possible. The “unofficial” offer is used as an incentive to potential recruits to make sure that their academics are up to par. For example, an offer during the fall of a recruit’s junior year gives him the time to study for the SAT (or ACT), take AP or honors courses, etc. </p>

<p>And some think that the new recruiting philosophy is starting to smell - there have been a no. of FB recruits who had accepted their offers from Harbaugh, only later to be told that they didn’t past admissions (when they clearly met the academic threshold), when coincidentally, other higher rated recruits at the same position committed.

</p>

<p>First of all, there is no academic “threshold.” There is no (theoretical) SAT/ACT and gpa combination that will 100% guarantee a Stanford recruit acceptance. If there were, the official offer would not be conditional. Why would Stanford require recruits to submit an application if it were a mere formality?</p>

<p>Second, higher rated recruits tend to take more time to “commit” than lower rated recruits. So it’s not out of the ordinary that “other higher rated recruits at the same position committed” when previous recruits were denied admission.</p>

<p>Last but not least, Stanford athletic coaches, including Harbaugh, do not have that much admissions clout. Once a recruit submits an application, it’s out of Harbaugh’s hands. That said, and this is only my speculation, higher rated recruits are probably given more consideration than other recruits in the same way that highly talented artists, musicians, chess players, etc. (or anyone else with special skills or circumstances) are given more consideration than other applicants.</p>

[JohnAdams12]

<p>bluebayou, I am sorry but I can’t seem to find a title called “Academic Powers” as you are claiming, at least not in any of my posted messages on this thread</p>

<p>can you please point it out for me?</p>

<p>thanks</p>

<p>

John, you listed Tulane in your first post, under the bolded heading: </p>

<p>"What big time football fans around the country might perceive…</p>

<p>Schools that you always knew were academic…</p>

<p>…Tulane"</p>

<p>Not sure what other conclusion I’m supposed to draw…

</p>

[kvilledeac]

<p>No school’s academic reputation has been more hurt by football than Miami. During their years at the top they had no standards academically or ethically.</p>

<p>I think Michigan and USC have also been somewhat hurt by recent athletic scandals. UCLA somehow got away with the absurd cheating under Wooden because he’s such a legend. The SEC believes in cheating and its academics aren’t good to begin with so they are barely worth mentioning.</p>

<p>My guess is Texas and aTm are the schools most overlooked because of athletics. Schools like Wake and BC are overlooked, not because of athletic success, but because they’re in that 25-40 range where private schools don’t distinguish themselves above the best publics.</p>

[hawkette]

<p>alex,
More exaggerations……:rolleyes: Northwestern has much higher standards than U Michigan in its recruitment standards. Northwestern’s peers are Stanford, Duke, Vanderbilt, Notre Dame and Wake Forest. Not U Michigan. </p>

<p>If you really believe that U Michigan is getting the same quality of football student-athlete as Northwestern, then how do you explain the following comparison of Graduation Success Rates for the major sports?</p>

<p>[2009</a> NCAA Division I Graduation Success Rate (GSR) Data - NCAA.org](<a href=“http://www.ncaa.org/wps/portal/ncaahome?WCM_GLOBAL_CONTEXT=/ncaa/ncaa/academics+and+athletes/education+and+research/academic+reform/gsr/2009/841gfw951_2009_d1_school_gsr_data.html]2009”>http://www.ncaa.org/wps/portal/ncaahome?WCM_GLOBAL_CONTEXT=/ncaa/ncaa/academics+and+athletes/education+and+research/academic+reform/gsr/2009/841gfw951_2009_d1_school_gsr_data.html)</p>

<p>93% Northwestern All Students
88% U Michigan All Students</p>

<p>92% Northwestern Football Players
71% U Michigan Football Players</p>

<p>92% Northwestern Men’s Basketball Players
44% U Michigan Men’s Basketball Players</p>

<p>100% Northwestern Women’s Basketball Players
50% U Michigan Women’s Basketball Players</p>

<p>100% Northwestern Baseball Players
89% U Michigan Baseball Players</p>

<p>It’s pretty clear that the student quality and admissions process are better at Northwestern (and judging from the results on the field, so are the athletes).</p>

[ctyankee]

<p>

Notre Dame’s football recruits are at the same academic level as Michigan’s and PSU’s. In fact, those three programs usually recruit the same football players.

</p>

<p>Nope. Penn State recruiting strength is the Ohio Valley/Western Pennsylvania competing against Ohio State, Pitt and West Virginia for kids. Many kids come from Eastern Pennsylvania, New Jersey with increasing ties down the coast to Virginia. PSU does not have the national recruiting that Michigan or Notre Dame has. They aren’t going to get the choice recruit from Texas, California or Florida to come to Happy Valley very often. </p>

<p>Michigan is mostly Michigan kids but they will get kids from Texas, California and Florida as their current roster indicates. Sure, they will get some Ohio kids too but to suggest much cross-competes with PSU is not the facts. </p>

<p>Notre Dame recruits at the national level and can get their talent from any state and can compete with ANY top program for a top recruit. They have to as Indiana is not a hotbed of high school football.</p>

<p>

No school’s academic reputation has been more hurt by football than Miami. During their years at the top they had no standards academically or ethically.

</p>

<p>Yes, but their years at the top in football also increased their desirability as a choice for students. Was it all positive? Of course not. But, in the Northeast, University of Miami was not as hard to get into as it is now. Sports made much of that happen. Same thing happened with Duke basketball. Always a good school but NOWHERE NEAR the selectivity it had in say 1970. Basketball made the difference. Same thing is happening at UCONN. In the 70’s UCONN was a safety school or not even a viable choice for many of us in-state. Now, very good students are sweating getting in. And if the football program continues to improve it will get on even more kid’s short list.</p>

[hawkette]

<p>I’m not as interested in the geographic comparison of major sport athletes at Notre Dame and U Michigan. Much more stark is how they compare in graduation rates for these students. </p>

<p>96% Notre Dame All Students
88% U Michigan All Students</p>

<p>96% Notre Dame Football Players
71% U Michigan Football Players</p>

<p>100% Notre Dame Men’s Basketball Players
44% U Michigan Men’s Basketball Players</p>

<p>100% Notre Dame Women’s Basketball Players
50% U Michigan Women’s Basketball Players</p>

<p>100% Notre Dame Baseball Players
89% U Michigan Baseball Players</p>

<p>96% Notre Dame Men’s Ice Hockey Players
75% U Michigan Men’s Ice Hockey Players</p>

<p>Would one of the U Michigan fans like to explain these very large differences?</p>

[barrons]

<p>When was the last time ND basketball and hockey players turned pro early? They are not that good. Same for football with maybe a couple over the last years at most. If they start winning you will see more guys leave early. Obviously UM sports has had some issues of late. Coaching turnover usually kills grad rates. Kids leave or get asked to leave.</p>

[rjpfl5]

<p>So you are saying UM has a wealth of players leaving early because of their great athletic programs? Give us a list of players…</p>

[hawkette]

<p>barrons,
First, I think that the GSR data includes kids who transfer or go pro as a positive number if they are at the required academic mileposts at the time of their departure.</p>

<p>Second, I don’t think many women’s basketball players are going pro from either school.</p>

<p>Third, I’d be interested to see the differences in pro departures for all of these sports. Notre Dame has historically been pretty good at this, haven’t they? </p>

<p>IMO, the more accurate interpretation is that one school (Notre Dame) recruits a higher caliber student and puts more resources and effort into helping that student graduate.</p>