Do you have to be a top athlete to be recruited at SLACs, MIT (D3) and the Ivies?

[Anonymous]

It will also depend on the sport. I can only comment on track/xc but the ivies wanted the whole enchilada - top ranking in sport and top sat/gpa; Duke only wanted the top ranking runners; and Stanford only wanted future olympians.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Or is a very strong student at a top high school plus a good but not tippity top club/varsity player enough? Are there many top athletes out there who also have the academic chops to hack it at these colleges? I am sure it depends on the sport, but how about for sports outside of football and basketball? If your SAT is in the 1550-1580 range, high rigor at a strong, nationally recognized HS, and let's say you are an ok lacrosse/volleyball/soccer/track athlete, what are the odds that you'd get recruited by a top academic institution? Obviously no chance at Duke, Stanford and the likes.

I am new to this site and process and curious how it all works.

I’d say no chance. Why would they recruit an “ok” athlete?

DC is a top student at one of the most rigorous and widely recognized high schools in the country. And an ok athlete (not an impact player) at a good club. None of their teammates are even remotely as academically qualified. I have no idea how athletic recruiting works at the top colleges. I was under the impression that you have to be an excellent student too, and ime there aren’t many kids who are both. The few who are both are going to the Stanfords and Dukes type of colleges, not MIT/Brown/Amherst.

If your student is an "OK athlete", then he/she is NOT a recruited athlete. period.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Or is a very strong student at a top high school plus a good but not tippity top club/varsity player enough? Are there many top athletes out there who also have the academic chops to hack it at these colleges? I am sure it depends on the sport, but how about for sports outside of football and basketball? If your SAT is in the 1550-1580 range, high rigor at a strong, nationally recognized HS, and let's say you are an ok lacrosse/volleyball/soccer/track athlete, what are the odds that you'd get recruited by a top academic institution? Obviously no chance at Duke, Stanford and the likes.

I am new to this site and process and curious how it all works.

I’d say no chance. Why would they recruit an “ok” athlete?

DC is a top student at one of the most rigorous and widely recognized high schools in the country. And an ok athlete (not an impact player) at a good club. None of their teammates are even remotely as academically qualified. I have no idea how athletic recruiting works at the top colleges. I was under the impression that you have to be an excellent student too, and ime there aren’t many kids who are both. The few who are both are going to the Stanfords and Dukes type of colleges, not MIT/Brown/Amherst.

If your student is an "OK athlete", then he/she is NOT a recruited athlete. period.

Not exactly true. Her DC might be able to get recruited to some of the NESCACs and other schools (though I assume her DC wouldn't be interested in lower ranked academic schools just to go D1). No athletic scholarships at D3 though.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Or is a very strong student at a top high school plus a good but not tippity top club/varsity player enough? Are there many top athletes out there who also have the academic chops to hack it at these colleges? I am sure it depends on the sport, but how about for sports outside of football and basketball? If your SAT is in the 1550-1580 range, high rigor at a strong, nationally recognized HS, and let's say you are an ok lacrosse/volleyball/soccer/track athlete, what are the odds that you'd get recruited by a top academic institution? Obviously no chance at Duke, Stanford and the likes.

I am new to this site and process and curious how it all works.

I’d say no chance. Why would they recruit an “ok” athlete?

DC is a top student at one of the most rigorous and widely recognized high schools in the country. And an ok athlete (not an impact player) at a good club. None of their teammates are even remotely as academically qualified. I have no idea how athletic recruiting works at the top colleges. I was under the impression that you have to be an excellent student too, and ime there aren’t many kids who are both. The few who are both are going to the Stanfords and Dukes type of colleges, not MIT/Brown/Amherst.

If your student is an "OK athlete", then he/she is NOT a recruited athlete. period.

Not exactly true. Her DC might be able to get recruited to some of the NESCACs and other schools (though I assume her DC wouldn't be interested in lower ranked academic schools just to go D1). No athletic scholarships at D3 though.

Outside of Basketball and football there is considerable overlap between the NESCAC, Patriot, and Ivy League teams. There could be some opportunities but it would be very sport/school dependent.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You don't have to be any kind of athlete to go to any of those colleges. I've had friends who can barely roll a ball along the ground at Columbia, Harvard, MIT etc

It’s always kind of funny when people reference Ivy schools as not having good athletes and completely ignore that these schools are often top 20 ranked in most sports other than football, basketball and baseball.

Lax, hockey, soccer, field hockey, water polo, fencing et al.

I get you may not care about those sports…which is a different story.

I was not "referencing these colleges" as having "not good athletes" I was referring to actual, specific, known students who were not athletes in any way, shape or form - its a reality, some students do not play ANY sport.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You don't have to be any kind of athlete to go to any of those colleges. I've had friends who can barely roll a ball along the ground at Columbia, Harvard, MIT etc

It’s always kind of funny when people reference Ivy schools as not having good athletes and completely ignore that these schools are often top 20 ranked in most sports other than football, basketball and baseball.

Lax, hockey, soccer, field hockey, water polo, fencing et al.

I get you may not care about those sports…which is a different story.

I was not "referencing these colleges" as having "not good athletes" I was referring to actual, specific, known students who were not athletes in any way, shape or form - its a reality, some students do not play ANY sport.

Yes. We get it. Every school has NARPs. The question here was can you be an ATHLETIC recruit without being a top ATHLETE. The answer, of course, depends on the school and the sport. For the most part, being an athletic recruit requires being very good to excellent at your sport.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote: Duke only wanted the top ranking runners; and Stanford only wanted future olympians.

Aren't these the same? Olympians were top ranking in his, no?

[Anonymous]

To everyone saying that Duke/Stanford are more academically selective with their athletes, I'll just leave this here: https://blogs.mercurynews.com/collegesports/2008/11/05/stanford-vs-duke-basketball-the-difference-in-admissions-standards/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:To everyone saying that Duke/Stanford are more academically selective with their athletes, I'll just leave this here: https://blogs.mercurynews.com/collegesports/2008/11/05/stanford-vs-duke-basketball-the-difference-in-admissions-standards/

It’s dated…but yes, for some bizarre reason people think that Power 4 sports recruits in revenue sports at Duke and Stanford are close to the average student when in fact they are closer to just NCAA minimum requirements (which are very low) vs the average student at those schools.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Or is a very strong student at a top high school plus a good but not tippity top club/varsity player enough? Are there many top athletes out there who also have the academic chops to hack it at these colleges? I am sure it depends on the sport, but how about for sports outside of football and basketball? If your SAT is in the 1550-1580 range, high rigor at a strong, nationally recognized HS, and let's say you are an ok lacrosse/volleyball/soccer/track athlete, what are the odds that you'd get recruited by a top academic institution? Obviously no chance at Duke, Stanford and the likes.

I am new to this site and process and curious how it all works.

Yes, your mid athlete definitely deserves to be recruited to the top colleges in America because the great athletes are all morons.

Those top jocks can achieve what your DC has more easily than the other way around. Let that sink in.

Not really. Top athletes are good at doing mundane tasks repetitively until they perfect them. I say this as the parent of athletic kids, and an athletic person myself. In contrast, brilliance of the mind cannot be trained by hard work and perseverance alone. You either have the IQ and natural curiosity, or you don't. Put it that way: would it be easier to train a monkey to score goals/shoot hoops or to write poetry/perform surgery/analyze balance sheets?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Or is a very strong student at a top high school plus a good but not tippity top club/varsity player enough? Are there many top athletes out there who also have the academic chops to hack it at these colleges? I am sure it depends on the sport, but how about for sports outside of football and basketball? If your SAT is in the 1550-1580 range, high rigor at a strong, nationally recognized HS, and let's say you are an ok lacrosse/volleyball/soccer/track athlete, what are the odds that you'd get recruited by a top academic institution? Obviously no chance at Duke, Stanford and the likes.

I am new to this site and process and curious how it all works.

I’d say no chance. Why would they recruit an “ok” athlete?

DC is a top student at one of the most rigorous and widely recognized high schools in the country. And an ok athlete (not an impact player) at a good club. None of their teammates are even remotely as academically qualified. I have no idea how athletic recruiting works at the top colleges. I was under the impression that you have to be an excellent student too, and ime there aren’t many kids who are both. The few who are both are going to the Stanfords and Dukes type of colleges, not MIT/Brown/Amherst.

If your student is an "OK athlete", then he/she is NOT a recruited athlete. period.

The term recruited athlete is complicated at the D3 level.

If you are an excellent student and a decent athlete the coach may talk to you. They may tell you that if you get accepted you may be able to try to walk on to the team. Depending on their level of interest they may be able to get your application preread by admissions to give you some idea of how likely you are to get in or they may look at your gpa test scores and give you a gestalt of your chances. It most cases the coach won’t significantly improve your admission chances unless they really want you on their team.

Some lesser D3 schools use academic scholarships to recruit athletes as well but those offers are generally based more on athletic ability than academic ability.

Does dear child really want to participate in college athletics or are you just trying to use athletics to help admission?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Or is a very strong student at a top high school plus a good but not tippity top club/varsity player enough? Are there many top athletes out there who also have the academic chops to hack it at these colleges? I am sure it depends on the sport, but how about for sports outside of football and basketball? If your SAT is in the 1550-1580 range, high rigor at a strong, nationally recognized HS, and let's say you are an ok lacrosse/volleyball/soccer/track athlete, what are the odds that you'd get recruited by a top academic institution? Obviously no chance at Duke, Stanford and the likes.

I am new to this site and process and curious how it all works.

There have been a lot of changes in NCAA athletic scholarships that took effect this year. In practice, it has meant that many D1 schools have had to cut rosters in non-revenue sports like track and swimming. It is tougher today to land a spot and/or a scholarship on a D1 team than it was last year.

Generally, being an ok athlete is not going to be a hook that moves the needle at the top academic D1 schools - Ivy league, Stanford, Vanderbilt, Duke, Northwestern, Berkeley, Michigan, etc. All roster spots at such schools are going to go to extremely strong recruited athletes. No one casually joins Stanford swimming or Duke lacrosse or Yale hockey or Michigan track. It wasn't happening last year, and it's definitely not happening this year.

Strong academic students who are good but not great in their respective sports will have better luck reaching out to coaches at the D3 level. Most schools will have practical info somewhere on their websites - student athlete bios, recruitment/walk on times, etc. It's useful to take a look there for general guidance.

[Anonymous]

The top schools in my kid’s individual Olympic sport requires excellent grades and test scores plus high national ranking. The #1 recruit a few years ago who went to an Ivy had a 1590 SAT and perfect GPA from a highly regarded private school and was a 2024 Olympian.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The top schools in my kid’s individual Olympic sport requires excellent grades and test scores plus high national ranking. The #1 recruit a few years ago who went to an Ivy had a 1590 SAT and perfect GPA from a highly regarded private school and was a 2024 Olympian.

Is it an NCAA sport?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Or is a very strong student at a top high school plus a good but not tippity top club/varsity player enough? Are there many top athletes out there who also have the academic chops to hack it at these colleges? I am sure it depends on the sport, but how about for sports outside of football and basketball? If your SAT is in the 1550-1580 range, high rigor at a strong, nationally recognized HS, and let's say you are an ok lacrosse/volleyball/soccer/track athlete, what are the odds that you'd get recruited by a top academic institution? Obviously no chance at Duke, Stanford and the likes.

I am new to this site and process and curious how it all works.

There have been a lot of changes in NCAA athletic scholarships that took effect this year. In practice, it has meant that many D1 schools have had to cut rosters in non-revenue sports like track and swimming. It is tougher today to land a spot and/or a scholarship on a D1 team than it was last year.

Generally, being an ok athlete is not going to be a hook that moves the needle at the top academic D1 schools - Ivy league, Stanford, Vanderbilt, Duke, Northwestern, Berkeley, Michigan, etc. All roster spots at such schools are going to go to extremely strong recruited athletes. No one casually joins Stanford swimming or Duke lacrosse or Yale hockey or Michigan track. It wasn't happening last year, and it's definitely not happening this year.

Strong academic students who are good but not great in their respective sports will have better luck reaching out to coaches at the D3 level. Most schools will have practical info somewhere on their websites - student athlete bios, recruitment/walk on times, etc. It's useful to take a look there for general guidance.

I'll add that almost any competent high school athlete can find a D3 program that will allow them to continue their athletic career. As others have said D3s can run the gamut of athletic talent from D1 or near D1 talent to a reserve high school player.