[FarmBoy]

Why bother picking favorites amongst the players who have signed. Let the best man win and trust the coaches are making the right decisions.

[FarmBoy]

Why bother picking favorites amongst the players who have signed. Let the best man win and trust the coaches are making the right decisions.

[socalstanfan1]

http://www.ncsasports.org/football-recru...1/rex-manu

"My vision as a student-athlete is to attend a major university which will inspire and challenge me as I obtain my Bachelors degree in the field of chemical engineering. While it's a football player's dream to play and excel in the NFL, I believe that the objective at this point in my life is to STUDY, work hard on and off the field, help others in the community and represent my family, coaches, teachers and mentors in a positive light. The gridiron breaks a player down and with great coaching, rebuilds that player into something even greater...a part of something bigger.  This is why I have a strong desire to play and pursue football at the next level!  Being an out of district student/athlete has meant less sleep, better time management and has taught me the meaning of perseverance, but has been well worth the effort and sacrifice.  Coaches, thank you for taking the time to view my profile!"

Sounds like a Stanford guy to me.

Kudos for finding this, Publius. He is way off the radar, as I can't find him in the databases for any of the major recruiting boards (Rivals, Scout, 24/7, ESPN) Do you have any idea if we are recruiting him? His statement reads like he's trying to sell himself to us.

[socalstanfan1]

http://www.ncsasports.org/football-recru...1/rex-manu

"My vision as a student-athlete is to attend a major university which will inspire and challenge me as I obtain my Bachelors degree in the field of chemical engineering. While it's a football player's dream to play and excel in the NFL, I believe that the objective at this point in my life is to STUDY, work hard on and off the field, help others in the community and represent my family, coaches, teachers and mentors in a positive light. The gridiron breaks a player down and with great coaching, rebuilds that player into something even greater...a part of something bigger.  This is why I have a strong desire to play and pursue football at the next level!  Being an out of district student/athlete has meant less sleep, better time management and has taught me the meaning of perseverance, but has been well worth the effort and sacrifice.  Coaches, thank you for taking the time to view my profile!"

Sounds like a Stanford guy to me.

Kudos for finding this, Publius. He is way off the radar, as I can't find him in the databases for any of the major recruiting boards (Rivals, Scout, 24/7, ESPN) Do you have any idea if we are recruiting him? His statement reads like he's trying to sell himself to us.

[OutsiderFan]

Do you have any idea if we are recruiting him? His statement reads like he's trying to sell himself to us.

https://twitter.com/SLKalani/status/441351073563803648

[OutsiderFan]

Do you have any idea if we are recruiting him? His statement reads like he's trying to sell himself to us.

https://twitter.com/SLKalani/status/441351073563803648

[Bruce Wang]

Kudos for finding this, Publius. He is way off the radar, as I can't find him in the databases for any of the major recruiting boards (Rivals, Scout, 24/7, ESPN) Do you have any idea if we are recruiting him? His statement reads like he's trying to sell himself to us.

WIM deserves the credit for finding this kid, or rather finding out that Shaw & Company found this kid.  I just google searched the name.  He was off the radar.  Now that he has a Stanford offer, he'll get at least 3 or 4 stars.

[Bruce Wang]

Kudos for finding this, Publius. He is way off the radar, as I can't find him in the databases for any of the major recruiting boards (Rivals, Scout, 24/7, ESPN) Do you have any idea if we are recruiting him? His statement reads like he's trying to sell himself to us.

WIM deserves the credit for finding this kid, or rather finding out that Shaw & Company found this kid.  I just google searched the name.  He was off the radar.  Now that he has a Stanford offer, he'll get at least 3 or 4 stars.

[washingtonismoney]

WIM deserves the credit for finding this kid, or rather finding out that Shaw & Company found this kid.  I just google searched the name.  He was off the radar.  Now that he has a Stanford offer, he'll get at least 3 or 4 stars.

I actually deserve 0 credit for finding him. The unofficial Stanford football account is run by some sort of internet demon and/or the Matrix computer. (https://twitter.com/StanfordFB)

[washingtonismoney]

WIM deserves the credit for finding this kid, or rather finding out that Shaw & Company found this kid.  I just google searched the name.  He was off the radar.  Now that he has a Stanford offer, he'll get at least 3 or 4 stars.

I actually deserve 0 credit for finding him. The unofficial Stanford football account is run by some sort of internet demon and/or the Matrix computer. (https://twitter.com/StanfordFB)

[PrinceLightfoot]

Drukarev tweeted Georgia OG Nick Wilson has moved Stanford to his #1 school after his Junior Day visit. Without revealing anything behind the paywall, we are beating out some very popular football programs in the south who have also offered him.

https://twitter.com/StanfordRivals/statu...5881445376

Junior year tape: http://www.hudl.com/athlete/1426160/high.../127427382

[PrinceLightfoot]

Drukarev tweeted Georgia OG Nick Wilson has moved Stanford to his #1 school after his Junior Day visit. Without revealing anything behind the paywall, we are beating out some very popular football programs in the south who have also offered him.

https://twitter.com/StanfordRivals/statu...5881445376

Junior year tape: http://www.hudl.com/athlete/1426160/high.../127427382

[rudruff]

His glasses are a little too fashionable, but the staff will fix that.

http://nickwilsonfootball.com/university...d-cardinal

[rudruff]

His glasses are a little too fashionable, but the staff will fix that.

http://nickwilsonfootball.com/university...d-cardinal

[Bruce Wang]

His glasses are a little too fashionable, but the staff will fix that.

http://nickwilsonfootball.com/university...d-cardinal

Nerd chic.

That's a pretty slick blog.  Kid has taste and tech saavy.  He's ours.

[Bruce Wang]

His glasses are a little too fashionable, but the staff will fix that.

http://nickwilsonfootball.com/university...d-cardinal

Nerd chic.

That's a pretty slick blog.  Kid has taste and tech saavy.  He's ours.

[Bruce Wang]

http://www.orlandosentinel.com/sports/bl...50172.post

No surprise here.  Claims a 4.9 GPA on a 5 point scale and 4.35 GPA on a 4 point scale.  I'm not sure how that's possible if they count A+s as 4.3 like they did at my high school.

[Bruce Wang]

http://www.orlandosentinel.com/sports/bl...50172.post

No surprise here.  Claims a 4.9 GPA on a 5 point scale and 4.35 GPA on a 4 point scale.  I'm not sure how that's possible if they count A+s as 4.3 like they did at my high school.

[Roberton3]

http://www.orlandosentinel.com/sports/bl...50172.post

No surprise here.  Claims a 4.9 GPA on a 5 point scale and 4.35 GPA on a 4 point scale.  I'm not sure how that's possible if they count A+s as 4.3 like they did at my high school.

Not only have grades been inflated, the grading scale has been inflated, too.  When I was in high school, an AP class got a half-point bonus, and honors classes counted the same as any other class.  Now a lot of schools give a 1-point bonus for AP classes, and a half-point for honors classes.  With a scale like that, it's pretty easy to get a GPA well above 4.0.

[Roberton3]

http://www.orlandosentinel.com/sports/bl...50172.post

No surprise here.  Claims a 4.9 GPA on a 5 point scale and 4.35 GPA on a 4 point scale.  I'm not sure how that's possible if they count A+s as 4.3 like they did at my high school.

Not only have grades been inflated, the grading scale has been inflated, too.  When I was in high school, an AP class got a half-point bonus, and honors classes counted the same as any other class.  Now a lot of schools give a 1-point bonus for AP classes, and a half-point for honors classes.  With a scale like that, it's pretty easy to get a GPA well above 4.0.

[washingtonismoney]

Is it really inflated or just a different scale? The problem with grade inflation is that it erases distinctions between top performers and merely good (or average) ones. But if you give everyone in AP or honors classes a flat boost, it's not clear that that achieves the same thing. Perhaps it's more difficult to compare a given student with someone ten or twenty years before, but this seems like a really minor concern.

[washingtonismoney]

Is it really inflated or just a different scale? The problem with grade inflation is that it erases distinctions between top performers and merely good (or average) ones. But if you give everyone in AP or honors classes a flat boost, it's not clear that that achieves the same thing. Perhaps it's more difficult to compare a given student with someone ten or twenty years before, but this seems like a really minor concern.

[BostonCard]

Remember that Stanford recalculates GPA anyways to its own scale, and recalibrates it based on the prior history of the school.

BC

[BostonCard]

Remember that Stanford recalculates GPA anyways to its own scale, and recalibrates it based on the prior history of the school.

BC

[rastaman85]

Oh, come on. Y'all are smart enough to know that different school districts have different policies--as do different counties and states, Illinois has long given 5 points for  A's in honors classes, and 6 in AP's. Trust the trained professionals in Montag to be able to figure this out.

[rastaman85]

Oh, come on. Y'all are smart enough to know that different school districts have different policies--as do different counties and states, Illinois has long given 5 points for  A's in honors classes, and 6 in AP's. Trust the trained professionals in Montag to be able to figure this out.

[rudruff]

I'm just disappointed that my school didn't get anyone into Stanford for three years after I got accepted.

[rudruff]

I'm just disappointed that my school didn't get anyone into Stanford for three years after I got accepted.

[FarmBoy]

Trust the trained professionals in Montag to be able to figure this out.

It would be nice to believe in the omnipotence on of the Stanford admissions, but I'm a skeptic on that front. I attended a very well regarded public school on the east coast. We regularly sent ~10% of the class to Ivy League quality schools. Until my brother matriculated, the school policy was that 93-100% was an A, 86-92% was a B, and so on. Noone had been admitted to Stanford for several years despite multiple kids from each class going to Harvard, Yale, MIT, etc. My brother's class was the first one to move to the more standard 90/80/70... cut off for grades and they had 5-6 kids accepted to Stanford and 4 attended. My class also had 5-6 accepted.

Did the students suddenly become smarter over night? Of course not. Based on this anecdote, I don't think it's a stretch to see that Stanford was not properly adjusting our GPAs relative to other applicants, while schools in our "backyard" did recognize the value of a student from the school with a not perfect GPA.

[FarmBoy]

Trust the trained professionals in Montag to be able to figure this out.

It would be nice to believe in the omnipotence on of the Stanford admissions, but I'm a skeptic on that front. I attended a very well regarded public school on the east coast. We regularly sent ~10% of the class to Ivy League quality schools. Until my brother matriculated, the school policy was that 93-100% was an A, 86-92% was a B, and so on. Noone had been admitted to Stanford for several years despite multiple kids from each class going to Harvard, Yale, MIT, etc. My brother's class was the first one to move to the more standard 90/80/70... cut off for grades and they had 5-6 kids accepted to Stanford and 4 attended. My class also had 5-6 accepted.

Did the students suddenly become smarter over night? Of course not. Based on this anecdote, I don't think it's a stretch to see that Stanford was not properly adjusting our GPAs relative to other applicants, while schools in our "backyard" did recognize the value of a student from the school with a not perfect GPA.

[larkinforever]

I'm just disappointed that my school didn't get anyone into Stanford for three years after I got accepted.

When things like this occur in my life, I generally ask the following question - "Was it me?" :D

[larkinforever]

I'm just disappointed that my school didn't get anyone into Stanford for three years after I got accepted.

When things like this occur in my life, I generally ask the following question - "Was it me?" :D

[CTcard]

There has been some speculation that Montag favors certain high schools over others.  One could interpret that as certain high schools tend to have the students that Stanford wants. 

I am actually a little confused as to just what your point was, but I think it was basically this second sentence.

I would rephrase it a little. It seems likely that some high schools stress things that Stanford admissions cares about more than others. My impression is that Stanford wants to see students that excel in academics (grades) and something else - i.e. they care less amount the number of extra-curriculars than that you have done something at an extremely high level with notable dedication. Once your grades/scores are above 96-97th percentile or so, the "second-excellence" matters more than another few points on tests. Some schools, families, communities push this sort of thing more than others.

On the detailed number-to-letter-grade issue, that will generally vary all over the place. I had always heard (but don't really know) that for just this reason Stanford was far more interested in class rank over absolute GPA number. [For that matter, since for most courses percentages are just as fungible as letters, I expect that at most schools if a new number to letter algorithm is announced, most teachers would tend to subtly adjust their tests/grading to end up with near the same results. At least I have seen just that result happen in related cases.]

At any rate, Rastaman ought to know of what he speaks on this topic.

[CTcard]

There has been some speculation that Montag favors certain high schools over others.  One could interpret that as certain high schools tend to have the students that Stanford wants. 

I am actually a little confused as to just what your point was, but I think it was basically this second sentence.

I would rephrase it a little. It seems likely that some high schools stress things that Stanford admissions cares about more than others. My impression is that Stanford wants to see students that excel in academics (grades) and something else - i.e. they care less amount the number of extra-curriculars than that you have done something at an extremely high level with notable dedication. Once your grades/scores are above 96-97th percentile or so, the "second-excellence" matters more than another few points on tests. Some schools, families, communities push this sort of thing more than others.

On the detailed number-to-letter-grade issue, that will generally vary all over the place. I had always heard (but don't really know) that for just this reason Stanford was far more interested in class rank over absolute GPA number. [For that matter, since for most courses percentages are just as fungible as letters, I expect that at most schools if a new number to letter algorithm is announced, most teachers would tend to subtly adjust their tests/grading to end up with near the same results. At least I have seen just that result happen in related cases.]

At any rate, Rastaman ought to know of what he speaks on this topic.

[Mick]

As a baseline measuring system, the Ivies use the "Academic Index" to gauge prospective athletes.  It is a 240 point scale with three factors, each counting for eighty points.  A full third of the scale goes to class rank -- if your high school actually ranks students, and an increasing number of them refuse to do so.  The other two are grades and test scores, naturally.

To your other point, I would generally agree that the most select colleges want to see achievement in scholastics and one other category, but I'd like to offer a caveat to that concept.  When my oldest was applying to college in 2009, I spoke to an associate athletic director whose primary function at a top Ivy was to get student-athletes admitted.  She dealt regularly with admissions, and she said that for years prior to 2003, her University sought chiefly "well-lopsided" students over "well-rounded."  They actively preferred students who had great academics and were all-world in one other thing.  They noted, however, that there was a tendency for these individuals to overfocus on their passion to the exclusion of all else, and that the campus atmosphere was the lesser for it.  So in her terms, she said "(our school) has to have a place not just for the best pianist in the world, but the 4.0/student body president/tennis captain; the student who has mastered every category but isn't necessarily the very best in any one category."

That description fits both of my sons, who attend/will attend an Ivy (not hers).  So I think there's room for both student profiles.

[Mick]

As a baseline measuring system, the Ivies use the "Academic Index" to gauge prospective athletes.  It is a 240 point scale with three factors, each counting for eighty points.  A full third of the scale goes to class rank -- if your high school actually ranks students, and an increasing number of them refuse to do so.  The other two are grades and test scores, naturally.

To your other point, I would generally agree that the most select colleges want to see achievement in scholastics and one other category, but I'd like to offer a caveat to that concept.  When my oldest was applying to college in 2009, I spoke to an associate athletic director whose primary function at a top Ivy was to get student-athletes admitted.  She dealt regularly with admissions, and she said that for years prior to 2003, her University sought chiefly "well-lopsided" students over "well-rounded."  They actively preferred students who had great academics and were all-world in one other thing.  They noted, however, that there was a tendency for these individuals to overfocus on their passion to the exclusion of all else, and that the campus atmosphere was the lesser for it.  So in her terms, she said "(our school) has to have a place not just for the best pianist in the world, but the 4.0/student body president/tennis captain; the student who has mastered every category but isn't necessarily the very best in any one category."

That description fits both of my sons, who attend/will attend an Ivy (not hers).  So I think there's room for both student profiles.

[CTcard]

As a baseline measuring system, the Ivies use the "Academic Index" to gauge prospective athletes.  It is a 240 point scale with three factors, each counting for eighty points.  A full third of the scale goes to class rank -- if your high school actually ranks students, and an increasing number of them refuse to do so.  The other two are grades and test scores, naturally.

Well, since a properly normalized GPA is class rank (at least I assume that is what they mean by "rank"), that of course gives 2/3rds weighting to GPA and 1/3 tests - which in a very general sense seems about right for an "academic index".

I was primarily thinking about non-recruited athlete admissions. I would assume that a recruited athlete has the "other thing" category covered by definition.

By the way, does the fact that your sons are/will be attending different Ivies than the one from whom you quote the admissions officer indicate that that particular school still has the unmet need to take an interest in more well rounded students?

[CTcard]

As a baseline measuring system, the Ivies use the "Academic Index" to gauge prospective athletes.  It is a 240 point scale with three factors, each counting for eighty points.  A full third of the scale goes to class rank -- if your high school actually ranks students, and an increasing number of them refuse to do so.  The other two are grades and test scores, naturally.

Well, since a properly normalized GPA is class rank (at least I assume that is what they mean by "rank"), that of course gives 2/3rds weighting to GPA and 1/3 tests - which in a very general sense seems about right for an "academic index".

I was primarily thinking about non-recruited athlete admissions. I would assume that a recruited athlete has the "other thing" category covered by definition.

By the way, does the fact that your sons are/will be attending different Ivies than the one from whom you quote the admissions officer indicate that that particular school still has the unmet need to take an interest in more well rounded students?

[Mick]

[quote author=Mick link=topic=7902.msg85420#msg85420 date=1394646105]
As a baseline measuring system, the Ivies use the "Academic Index" to gauge prospective athletes.  It is a 240 point scale with three factors, each counting for eighty points.  A full third of the scale goes to class rank -- if your high school actually ranks students, and an increasing number of them refuse to do so.  The other two are grades and test scores, naturally.

Well, since a properly normalized GPA is class rank (at least I assume that is what they mean by "rank"), that of course gives 2/3rds weighting to GPA and 1/3 tests - which in a very general sense seems about right for an "academic index".

I was primarily thinking about non-recruited athlete admissions. I would assume that a recruited athlete has the "other thing" category covered by definition.

By the way, does the fact that your sons are/will be attending different Ivies than the one from whom you quote the admissions officer indicate that that particular school still has the unmet need to take an interest in more well rounded students?
[/quote]

You're right, class rank was intended to circumvent the whole weighted/unweighted gpa thing while at the same time giving credit to students who had achieved highest marks without the most challenging courseload (as I read it).  A top school might get 20 applications from a feeder high school with unweighted 4.0s.  It leaves the school to calculate academic rank based upon not just grades but difficulty of courses; e.g., some schools weight AP classes a full additional point, some schools weight honors classes either a full point, a half point or no extra points at all depending upon the class (incidentally, the University of California system lists honors classes by high school and which are allowed to claim extra credit.  For example, at my sons' high school, honors chemistry counts for an extra grade point by the UC, whereas honors bio does not.  Many of the students who take honors chem (there's a separate AP chem class) will actually take the Chem AP test.  I know one boy (not a science stud) who took honors chem, read three chapters in the AP prep book and passed the exam with a 4 (out of 5).

Actually, according to that particular AAD, that university made the conscious decision to seek a roughly equal blend of well-lopsided and well-rounded students around 2003.  By your definition, my elder son fit the well-lopsided category and my younger son fit the well-rounded category, although each had virtually identical athletic/academic/social/political/charitable profiles.  One son had slightly better athletics, one son had slightly better grades/test scores.  That particular school made somewhat clear to both of my sons that each was of interest to the school's admissions officers (although definitely not guaranteed; each was accepted in early decision by their school of choice, and took themselves out of the running at the other Universities to which they'd applied).  If you'd like broader detail, I'm happy to discuss it offline.

[Mick]

[quote author=Mick link=topic=7902.msg85420#msg85420 date=1394646105]
As a baseline measuring system, the Ivies use the "Academic Index" to gauge prospective athletes.  It is a 240 point scale with three factors, each counting for eighty points.  A full third of the scale goes to class rank -- if your high school actually ranks students, and an increasing number of them refuse to do so.  The other two are grades and test scores, naturally.

Well, since a properly normalized GPA is class rank (at least I assume that is what they mean by "rank"), that of course gives 2/3rds weighting to GPA and 1/3 tests - which in a very general sense seems about right for an "academic index".

I was primarily thinking about non-recruited athlete admissions. I would assume that a recruited athlete has the "other thing" category covered by definition.

By the way, does the fact that your sons are/will be attending different Ivies than the one from whom you quote the admissions officer indicate that that particular school still has the unmet need to take an interest in more well rounded students?
[/quote]

You're right, class rank was intended to circumvent the whole weighted/unweighted gpa thing while at the same time giving credit to students who had achieved highest marks without the most challenging courseload (as I read it).  A top school might get 20 applications from a feeder high school with unweighted 4.0s.  It leaves the school to calculate academic rank based upon not just grades but difficulty of courses; e.g., some schools weight AP classes a full additional point, some schools weight honors classes either a full point, a half point or no extra points at all depending upon the class (incidentally, the University of California system lists honors classes by high school and which are allowed to claim extra credit.  For example, at my sons' high school, honors chemistry counts for an extra grade point by the UC, whereas honors bio does not.  Many of the students who take honors chem (there's a separate AP chem class) will actually take the Chem AP test.  I know one boy (not a science stud) who took honors chem, read three chapters in the AP prep book and passed the exam with a 4 (out of 5).

Actually, according to that particular AAD, that university made the conscious decision to seek a roughly equal blend of well-lopsided and well-rounded students around 2003.  By your definition, my elder son fit the well-lopsided category and my younger son fit the well-rounded category, although each had virtually identical athletic/academic/social/political/charitable profiles.  One son had slightly better athletics, one son had slightly better grades/test scores.  That particular school made somewhat clear to both of my sons that each was of interest to the school's admissions officers (although definitely not guaranteed; each was accepted in early decision by their school of choice, and took themselves out of the running at the other Universities to which they'd applied).  If you'd like broader detail, I'm happy to discuss it offline.