<p>^What makes you think that the offensive linemen at MIT weigh 300 lbs.</p>
<p>^^ Because I looked at the roster.</p>
<p>Every school has their own mosaic for the kind of incoming class they’re looking for. MIT is no different. Marilee Jones once said they could easily fill the incoming class with qualified applicants from the state of Massachusetts alone. And they don’t because they have their own vision for the kind of class they want to create.</p>
<p>Is admissions interested in “qualified applicants” who are experienced football players? Sure. But probably as much as they want qualified applicants who stayed in their basement all through high school playing with rockets (Marilee’s words), or Oboe players, or those with a demonstrated passion for math, or dancing, or whatever - You get the point. </p>
<p>A friend of mine at MIT did competitive sports there as an undergrad, and although still connected to MIT’s teams, is coaching at the school down the river. She once explained to me that after they’ve recruited and identified their list of top athletes whom they would love to see get accepted, they give that list to admissions and can only say “please do what you can”. After years of doing it, she said if all else is equal, they’ll take the athlete, but they won’t use athletics to influence or bump a person’s qualifications.</p>
<p>MIT does recruit. That is a demonstrable fact. Coaches are present at high school age events, wearing the colors.</p>
<p>I agree that coaches submit a list of candidates who they believe…informally…would pass minimum academic muster. If they would like X number of athletes for the team this year, they might submit a list with 2X or 3X number of names. Following ATPmolecule’s insight, this would lead to athlete acceptance rates of anywhere from 33%–50%.</p>
<p>These rates are high, but if the coach has done his/her job, the pool is pre-screened. By comparison, what proportion of the entire applicant pool is cut in the first triage? 50%? In other words, is it correct to say that in the first review, about 50% of the applicants are easily identified as not having the requisite qualifications? All the people on the coaches’ lists (presumably) are qualified.</p>
<p>This would bring the overall acceptance rate of minimally qualified applicants and the athletic acceptance rate a little closer in line.</p>
<p>MIT Chris said 20% of recruited athletes get accepted, however in other posts I have seen that number as 30 or even 40%. In fact one coach told me 50% of the applicants he supported got in. It makes sense to me. Does anyone know however if two sports would raise these numbers much more or if it would just slightly increase the chances.</p>
<p>Please note that my 3.9 gpa is unweighted, and my weighted gpa is a 4.3</p>
<p>Have you interviewed with the coaches of the sports you’re interested in? Because I believe they do rank their recruits when they send in that list, and you might get a better idea of how much they want you. If they have two academically eligible student athletes and one does his sport in his local area and another has won a highly competitive national junior championship, you know the latter will be at the top of their list. </p>
<p>I was told, for example, that 50 kids a year try to present themselves as recruits in my son’s sport. They usually find about 30 as qualified by their academic and sport stats. Looking at MIT’s roster in my son’s sport, I can see maybe 2 kids getting in a year who really have an outstanding athletic record, and guess what, they have excellent academic and science bios as well. </p>
<p>If you are a junior and the coaches like you, they will ask you to do an overnight at MIT in the fall of your senior year. Through out the season, the coaches will contact you about your sporting stats, and they will ask to look over your application and advise you on it. Then it’s all up to Admissions, like they say. </p>
<p>The OP in “Cruel Process” makes it clear that like everyone else, you are taking a chance at getting into MIT, and any recommendations from MIT faculty or coaches just ups that chance by an unknowable degree or two. The coaches we spoke with at MIT never led us to believe otherwise.</p>
<p>I bet there’s a lot of selection bias with athletes. You probably don’t bother with recruiting unless you’re both academically competent and good at your sport, and coaches probably won’t rank you unless they think the same.</p>
<p>What Piper said.</p>