<p>Is duke a school that compromises its academic standards for athletic recruits? (especially in regards to admissions)
many schools make certain exceptions for their athletes, and I was just wondering if it is the same for duke, considering how rigorous it seems to be academically</p>
<p>a lot of schools do this</p>
<p>yes, but at top tier schools that have DI programs (Duke, Northwestern, Vandy, Rice, Notre Dame) and Ivies, you have to be somewhat smart to be a recruited athlete there. Could the Duke basketball players make it into Duke if they weren't recruited? most likely not, but they would be competitive in admissions. duke and other similar schools wouldnt recruit an athlete with a 800 on the SAT (out of 1600) even if they were amazing. yes they make exceptions, but they dont lower the bar very far. the average duke athlete is smarter than the average OU or LSU athlete (or student for that matter :))</p>
<p>Well I hear that Duke's coaches can recruit a kid without the admission committee's approval. On the other hand, the reason Stanford coaches have a hard time recruiting is because it has to go through the admissions comittee and the recruiting is just a "hook" that is added to their app.</p>
<p>duke's admission standards are significantly lowered probably for the major sports--$ generating. not even able to compare to ivy league standards. i mean, have you heard sheldon williams speak--probly not b/c i've only heard him be interviewed once. but anyways, the guy sounds like a completee moron. and btw, duke must be hard or s/t b/c duke's qb lewis or w/e got caught in a plagerism scandal a year or two ago
besides, do u really think the admissions committee would reject s/o that coach k wants on his team?
plus depending on the skill level and sport, like sheldon williams in this case, exceptions are definitely made</p>
<p>Student athletes at Duke are some of the smartest athletes in the nation overall. This is necessary since an entire TEN PERCENT of the student body participates in a varsity sport. Having said this, recruited athletes most definitely do not have to have as an impressive academic record as their non-athlete counterparts. It varies by *greatly *by sport, though. Football and basketball will make more of an exception than swimming and golf. </p>
<p>Most NCAA football programs from BCS conferences will accept anybody with the minimum NCAA SAT/ACT, which is 820 and 17, if they are a fantastic recruit. Duke's standards for the absolute best football players (e.g. those recruited by the Oklahomas of the college football world as in DT Vince Oghobaase who had a 1020 SAT with 3.6 GPA) is 1000 and a 3.0+ GPA. The vast majority of the team, however, is 1100+ and a sizeable portion is 1200+. This is still much much lower than the rest of the student body, but much higher than typical football programs. Basketball, likewise, is pretty flexible if you are an elite recruit. The rest of the sports, though, are not so nice and require significant academic standards unless you are like the best person in the nation at a particular sport. Coaches do have significant power to persuade the admissions committee though if they really want you. </p>
<p>Duke has had a ton of academic All-Americans and the athletes represent the university very well on and off the field/court. But obviously they are given some leeway in regards to their academic record since they have exhibited such excellence in a sport in order to be recruited by Duke, a perennial sports power.</p>
<p>RE: TarHeel2007; if you're going to insult SheldEn Williams, at least spell his name right! Doesn't show much about your academic abilities ;) Also, it wasn't Lewis that got suspended for plagiarism, it was Asack. Obviously basketball and football are the exceptions. There are only 3 b-ball recruits a year, so this isn't a sizeable number. Football has perhaps slightly higher standards than basketball just because there are so many more of them and they aren't as sought after in their respective sport. Also, current Duke center Brian Zoubek is super smart and got like a 1400 on his SATs. His final choices were Stanford, Princeton, and Duke. Battier also is really smart. Trajan Langdon was a math major, I believe. Nick Horvath was a physics major. Reggie Love (a football and basketball player) was econ major (or took a bunch of econ courses) and turned down working for Goldman Sachs to be Barack Obama's "body man." So there are some smart b-ball players around.</p>
<p>Obviously TarHeel3007 has a more biased opinion. Bluedog more or less has it right. The majority of Duke's student athletes have just as high academic standards. </p>
<p>If you're a highly recruited athlete, there are exceptions. But even then, they don't talk like Neanderthals, as was implied by TarHeel3007.</p>
<p>"This is still much much lower than the rest of the student body"</p>
<p>True, but what if "the rest'" was also guaranteed admission under the same relaxed standard? If you're a recruited athlete, you don't have the incentive to kill the SATS the way regular applicants do. Why study, buy Kaplan, pay for Princeton Review, retake, retake, etc when good colleges are already courting you as early as eighth, ninth grade? It may not be fair to judge athletes smarts based on SATS when most applicants would likely also have lower "I only need to pass" scores given similar circumstances.</p>
<p>
Well I hear that Duke's coaches can recruit a kid without the admission committee's approval.
Well, <em>anyone</em> can go out and recruit <em>anyone</em>. But students cannot be admitted without the approval of admissions, and offers of admision can therefore not be made without the approval of admissions, either.</p>
<p>[Scout.com:</a> The Bootleg's Graduation Rate Analysis<a href="basketball:%20thumbs%20down">/url</a>
[url=<a href="http://stanford.scout.com/3/1997_SAT_Analysis.html%5DScout.com%5B/url">http://stanford.scout.com/3/1997_SAT_Analysis.html]Scout.com[/url</a>] (football: thumbs up)
[url=<a href="http://www.slate.com/id/101920/%5DThe">http://www.slate.com/id/101920/]The</a> Blue Devils Aren't Angels - By Jason Zengerle - Slate Magazine<a href="basketball:%20thumbs%20down">/url</a></p>
<p>[url=<a href="http://www.dukechronicle.com/home/index.cfm?event=displayArticle&ustory_id=1fcb182b-4405-45f6-96df-bb1e86da7a76%5DThe">http://www.dukechronicle.com/home/index.cfm?event=displayArticle&ustory_id=1fcb182b-4405-45f6-96df-bb1e86da7a76]The</a> Chronicle](<a href="http://stanford.scout.com/2/520523.html%5DScout.com:">http://stanford.scout.com/2/520523.html)
[quote]
the eight men's baseball team recruits averaged 1,206 that year, while 22 football players averaged 1,063 and the five men's basketball players came in last at 997. All 14 other recruited male athletes averaged 1,258.</p>
<p>Considering the national average for the 2002 SAT was 1,026, it's a safe bet that few (if any) non-athletes could even get their foot in the door with stats like the ones above.</p>
<p>Yet the most elite recruits (read: prospective basketball players) can be tentatively admitted before they've finished their junior year of high school; all that's needed is a PSAT score and freshman and sophomore grades.</p>
<p>This must have been how our beloved Sean Dockery got admitted with a 2.3 GPA and an ACT score of 15; at the time, his credentials didn't even meet NCAA minimums of a 2.5 GPA and 17 on the ACT
[/quote]
</p>
<p>;)</p>
<p>Of course Sam Lee would be lurking here.</p>
<p>^i was just searching for "northwestern" and this is one of the threads that came up. ;) i think it's pretty clear that duke athletes are comparable to stanford/rice/northwestern athletes; the only exception is the basketball team.</p>
<p>I'd assume Stanford and Duke would set their academic standards a little higher when it comes to recruiting because their athletics programs are so big (it seems like 1/2 of the students are athletes). If they could recruit any average joe then their academic reputation would go down the toilet. The exception with Duke would be basketball. I'd be willing to bet that Coach K gets his way no matter what.</p>
<p>And I'm pretty sure Stanford's standards are much higher than Duke's. Nonetheless, I'm sure Duke's standards are above national average.</p>
<p>"and I'm pretty sure Stanford's standards are much higher than Duke's."</p>
<p>Hmm...maybe, if you take out the "much". Stanford is more of a jock school than Duke. The athletic budget is three times larger than Duke's (it's the largest in the country). They have more sports and more athletic scholarships and thus arguably more potential for "compromise".</p>