I am totally convinced

[heet75]

That all of our problems have to do with admissions, the history , the fan base , and what we have to offer. We have had really good coaches over the years and not one could build a program. I talked when to Tex Winter a few months after he was hired and I asked him how things were going. He seemed frustrated. He went on to say that he could have 100 recruits he really wanted and of those only 14 could pass admissions and that it was a hard sell against other academic schools ...Duke, Stanford etc. IMO CCC has done well and he has not lost the players. The team never quits and the effort is always there. I don't for one minute want to settle for what is going on now but unless other things change I don't feel John Wooden or any other great coach could change things. I understand coach K has a special admissions for his players. Not saying we should do that but it would help to an extent. As for me ...cat fan forever and win or lose...it's just a game.

 

[Purple Pile Driver]

That all of our problems have to do with admissions, the history , the fan base , and what we have to offer. We have had really good coaches over the years and not one could build a program. I talked when to Tex Winter a few months after he was hired and I asked him how things were going. He seemed frustrated. He went on to say that he could have 100 recruits he really wanted and of those only 14 could pass admissions and that it was a hard sell against other academic schools ...Duke, Stanford etc. IMO CCC has done well and he has not lost the players. The team never quits and the effort is always there. I don't for one minute want to settle for what is going on now but unless other things change I don't feel John Wooden or any other great coach could change things. I understand coach K has a special admissions for his players. Not saying we should do that but it would help to an extent. As for me ...cat fan forever and win or lose...it's just a game.

Why shouldn’t admissions be the same as Duke or Vandy? Is NU’s academic reputation taking a big hit with the ONE admission chance a year they take on a B Ballplayer?

 

[TheC]

That all of our problems have to do with admissions, the history , the fan base , and what we have to offer. We have had really good coaches over the years and not one could build a program. I talked when to Tex Winter a few months after he was hired and I asked him how things were going. He seemed frustrated. He went on to say that he could have 100 recruits he really wanted and of those only 14 could pass admissions and that it was a hard sell against other academic schools ...Duke, Stanford etc. IMO CCC has done well and he has not lost the players. The team never quits and the effort is always there. I don't for one minute want to settle for what is going on now but unless other things change I don't feel John Wooden or any other great coach could change things. I understand coach K has a special admissions for his players. Not saying we should do that but it would help to an extent. As for me ...cat fan forever and win or lose...it's just a game.

You would think that if a school like NU wants to be the best, then they should strive to be the best at everything they do. You want a good math department, you recruit the best mathematicians you can get. You want a good drama department, you recruit the best performers you can get. You want a good basketball team, you recruit the best basketball players you can get. I don't need my basketball players to be among the best mathematicians. Certain standards make sense, but if you are coming to play music or play sports or some other specialty, then you should get a lot of leeway if you happen to be one of the best in the country at that specialty.

 

[willycat]

Why shouldn’t admissions be the same as Duke or Vandy? Is NU’s academic reputation taking a big hit with the ONE admission chance a year they take on a B Ballplayer?

Exactly! If they don't go the way of Duke and Vanderbilt regarding admissions, they will never got out of the bottom half of the conference. Also when Collins gets as fed up as Winter and others, getting a top flight coach in Evanston will be close to impossible.

 

[Purple Pile Driver]

Exactly! If they don't go the way of Duke and Vanderbilt regarding admissions, they will never got out of the bottom half of the conference. Also when Collins gets as fed up as Winter and others, getting a top flight coach in Evanston will be close to impossible.

We aren’t going to suddenly get the superstars even if they let in players that can’t name the 12 months. However, Admissions seems to have more power than JP or even Morty. It’s amazing the players that CCC and Fitz get considering the low percentage they can go after. Players graduate, so it’s complete BS that they won’t be successful at NU. In fact, take your mission statement and expand it give opportunities to students that are from disadvantaged backgrounds that make something out of themselves due to that degree.

 

[GatoLouco]

NU: the liberal institution that refuses to give upward mobility chances to basketball players.

 

[Medill90]

Why shouldn’t admissions be the same as Duke or Vandy? Is NU’s academic reputation taking a big hit with the ONE admission chance a year they take on a B Ballplayer?

It doesn't have to be the same as Duke.

It just needs to be adjusted a bit.

There are less than 4 schollies/year on average. A slight, slight adjustment opens NU to dozens and dozens of student athletes that NU cannot today recruit.

 

[Hungry Jack]

Why shouldn’t admissions be the same as Duke or Vandy? Is NU’s academic reputation taking a big hit with the ONE admission chance a year they take on a B Ballplayer?

You really cannot effectively implement a policy of one "lottery" admission per year. It just opens up a can of worms about access, fairness, etc. Frankly, I would not want to be the one "charity case" on a program like NU. Tough spot to be in.

I think, above all, admissions policies need to be consistent (especially in this day and age). I have little doubt that admissions are a constraint, but didn't we just have a Tournament team a few years ago? The wheels came off quickly because of recruiting misfires at guard, and perhaps some bad injury luck. Admissions weren't the cause of this.

I don't want to see us stoop to Duke levels of admission standards (they aren't really "standards"). Maybe there needs to be more leeway.

 

[GatoLouco]

It just opens up a can of worms about access, fairness, etc.

Like today's policies don't? Those, who no one really knows what they are? That are on a case by case basis? No transparency there.

 

[Fitz51]

Lower the admissions standards when you pay the players. If they’re really just coming in to play revenue sports, make it work on both ends.

 

[CatJones]

“...I’m not here to play school.”

 

[willycat]

You really cannot effectively implement a policy of one "lottery" admission per year. It just opens up a can of worms about access, fairness, etc. Frankly, I would not want to be the one "charity case" on a program like NU. Tough spot to be in.

I think, above all, admissions policies need to be consistent (especially in this day and age). I have little doubt that admissions are a constraint, but didn't we just have a Tournament team a few years ago? The wheels came off quickly because of recruiting misfires at guard, and perhaps some bad injury luck. Admissions weren't the cause of this.

I don't want to see us stoop to Duke levels of admission standards (they aren't really "standards"). Maybe there needs to be more leeway.

Yet Duke and others are always mentioned , along with NU when top academic schools are discussed.

 

[Hungry Jack]

Yet Duke and others are always mentioned , along with NU when top academic schools are discussed.

That's their institutional brand.Duke is an outstanding research institution, much like NU. Its admission standards are high for the general undergraduate population. It is a very selective school for these types of applicants.

But it has a different set of rules for athletes in basketball and football. These athletic program admission standards and academic programs are tantamount to running a separate college under the Duke umbrella.

 

[Fitz51]

“...I’m not here to play school.”

Precisely. I guess that's what some of us prefer, since, you know, our happiness as sports fans is a primary concern.

 

[willycat]

That's their institutional brand.Duke is an outstanding research institution, much like NU. Its admission standards are high for the general undergraduate population. It is a very selective school for these types of applicants.

But it has a different set of rules for athletes in basketball and football. These athletic program admission standards and academic programs are tantamount to running a separate college under the Duke umbrella.

Hey maybe NU needs to also have a separate set of rules for athletes, just like their equals Duke, Vanderbilt, ND, and Stanford seem to have.

 

[TheC]

“...I’m not here to play school.”

There is some room in between.

 

[TheC]

That's their institutional brand.Duke is an outstanding research institution, much like NU. Its admission standards are high for the general undergraduate population. It is a very selective school for these types of applicants.

But it has a different set of rules for athletes in basketball and football. These athletic program admission standards and academic programs are tantamount to running a separate college under the Duke umbrella.

And I guarantee you, the excellence associated with Duke the basketball brand definitely helps maintain the excellence associated with Duke the academic brand. Everyone likes to be associated with winners, even indirectly.

 

[Hungry Jack]

And I guarantee you, the excellence associated with Duke the basketball brand definitely helps maintain the excellence associated with Duke the academic brand. Everyone likes to be associated with winners, even indirectly.

No doubt. Alumni affiliation increases greatly with sports program and success. This generates giving and other forms of support.

Some people bemoan the $350 million spent on our athletic facility upgrades, but that money never would have been generated for the general fund. Sports can generate massive amounts of support that scholarships and academic buildings generally cannot. Love it or hate it, that's the way it is.

 

[TheC]

No doubt. Alumni affiliation increases greatly with sports program and success. This generates giving and other forms of support.

Some people bemoan the $350 million spent on our athletic facility upgrades, but that money never would have been generated for the general fund. Sports can generate massive amounts of support that scholarships and academic buildings generally cannot. Love it or hate it, that's the way it is.

I also remember stories about how application numbers spike for schools after winning a championship or having an unusually successful year in a major sport. It would be good for the entire Northwestern brand to relax admission standards a little bit for individuals who are really really good at what they do.

 

[Fitz51]

It would be good for the entire Northwestern brand to relax admission standards a little bit for individuals who are really really good at what they do.

I was a champion masturbator in my teens, which is what got me in.

 

[Medill90]

I also remember stories about how application numbers spike for schools after winning a championship or having an unusually successful year in a major sport. It would be good for the entire Northwestern brand to relax admission standards a little bit for individuals who are really really good at what they do.

To me it's just disingenuous to stay in the conference, take the money and then not provide the coaching staffs the necessary latitude to build a competitive team.

I'm not suggesting that NU let in any student athlete incapable of graduating. I don't think anyone suggests that. But the NU admissions criteria for student athletes in the revenue sports ignores reality and the performance results these last 50-60 years are the expected outcome of that ignorance.

Provide more latitude for student athletes who have proven they can take and pass classes at NU.

 

[torque-cat]

You are citing a coach from 40 years ago.

Hey maybe NU needs to also have a separate set of rules for athletes, just like their equals Duke, Vanderbilt, ND, and Stanford seem to have.

There is a huge gap between admissions standards for revenue sport athletes and general student body.

 

[hoosboot]

Sports can generate massive amounts of support that scholarships and academic buildings generally cannot. Love it or hate it, that's the way it is.

Well...I hear you, but I'm not totally convinced about that. 5 of the top ten schools in endowments are Ivys along with MIT and Stanford. And Northwestern is ahead of Duke. So, while I understand the value that athletics can bring to a university, it's sometimes hard to remember that the goal here seems to remain scholar-athletes. That's not an argument against giving more kids who have shown broad excellence in their young lives an opportunity to show they can handle what Northwestern offers. It's an argument against thinking it's a good idea to relax admissions standards for applicants whose only outstanding skill displayed is athletic or that it is beneficial to anything other than athletics.

 

[ricko654321]

Well...I hear you, but I'm not totally convinced about that. 5 of the top ten schools in endowments are Ivys along with MIT and Stanford. And Northwestern is ahead of Duke. So, while I understand the value that athletics can bring to a university, it's sometimes hard to remember that the goal here seems to remain scholar-athletes. That's not an argument against giving more kids who have shown broad excellence in their young lives an opportunity to show they can handle what Northwestern offers. It's an argument against thinking it's a good idea to relax admissions standards for applicants whose only outstanding skill displayed is athletic or that it is beneficial to anything other than athletics.

Well said. Best post of this thread IMO.

 

[Purple Pile Driver]

You are citing a coach from 40 years ago.


There is a huge gap between admissions standards for revenue sport athletes and general student body.

What’s wrong with that? If the admission standards were the same as regular students you would literally not be able to field teams or at best field last place finishers that are not the least bit competitive. Get out if the arena if you want to be on some elitist moral ground of higher education. I am fine with that if that is what you see you mission is. However, I am not the least embarrassed to say I want a competitive team to support.

Again, no one is saying let in people that are academically doomed before they set foot in class. It might actually benefit the existing student body to have a few people with more diverse upbringings. Something other than the finest prep schools in the country.

 

[hoosboot]

What’s wrong with that? If the admission standards were the same as regular students you would literally not be able to field teams or at best field last place finishers that are not the least bit competitive. Get out if the arena if you want to be on some elitist moral ground of higher education. I am fine with that if that is what you see you mission is. However, I am not the least embarrassed to say I want a competitive team to support.

Again, no one is saying let in people that are academically doomed before they set foot in class. It might actually benefit the existing student body to have a few people with more diverse upbringings. Something other than the finest prep schools in the country.

A little touchy, huh, Driver? All he said was that there's already a big gap between regular admissions and athletic admissions, particularly revenue sports athletes. How's that some elitist moral high ground?

 

[Purple Pile Driver]

Well...I hear you, but I'm not totally convinced about that. 5 of the top ten schools in endowments are Ivys along with MIT and Stanford. And Northwestern is ahead of Duke. So, while I understand the value that athletics can bring to a university, it's sometimes hard to remember that the goal here seems to remain scholar-athletes. That's not an argument against giving more kids who have shown broad excellence in their young lives an opportunity to show they can handle what Northwestern offers. It's an argument against thinking it's a good idea to relax admissions standards for applicants whose only outstanding skill displayed is athletic or that it is beneficial to anything other than athletics.

I can’t disagree with the financial facts you tout, but I entirely disagree with the premise. You are neglecting the facts the NU has historically graduated their athletes. Don’t us fans take pride in that? These are students that lives are forever changed because they have a NU degree with the NU network. Isn’t this at least a component of the University’s mission?

As something that likely would have went on to a career as a electrician or some other trade, but was afforded the benefit of an athletic grant, I can tell you it is life changing. I wasn’t worried about HS grades and had no real foresight into what a college degree means. Once I got there, I understood.

 

[haywood jahblowme]

No doubt. Alumni affiliation increases greatly with sports program and success. This generates giving and other forms of support.

Some people bemoan the $350 million spent on our athletic facility upgrades, but that money never would have been generated for the general fund. Sports can generate massive amounts of support that scholarships and academic buildings generally cannot. Love it or hate it, that's the way it is.

also pretty sure it was all private donations ear marked for athletics

 

[Purple Pile Driver]

A little touchy, huh, Driver? All he said was that there's already a big gap between regular admissions and athletic admissions, particularly revenue sports athletes. How's that some elitist moral high ground?

Sorry, wasn’t meant as a shot at you.

Yes, I am passionate about this topic. I just continue to see a lot of chatter around not lowering admission standards that leap to a conclusion that these lower admitted students won’t succeed. That has not been supported by anything and really can’t be until lower admitted students are actually admitted. In fact, the opposite is true with that wide gap that you cited. There doesn’t appear to be a materially different graduation rate.

 

[hoosboot]

I can’t disagree with the financial facts you tout, but I entirely disagree with the premise. You are neglecting the facts the NU has historically graduated their athletes. Don’t us fans take pride in that? These are students that lives are forever changed because they have a NU degree with the NU network. Isn’t this at least a component of the University’s mission?

As something that likely would have went on to a career as a electrician or some other trade, but was afforded the benefit of an athletic grant, I can tell you it is life changing. I wasn’t worried about HS grades and had no real foresight into what a college degree means. Once I got there, I understood.

Totally understand that and appreciate your frankness on the matter. I think your example is what one wants to aim for. But, do you know any high school athletes who were like you and didn't care about HS grades and wouldn't have understood when they got there? The challenge for the admissions department is distinguishing between the two. There are lots of great athletes who struggle with testing or don't have incredible grades, but display tremendous character and ability in things outside of their sport. It seems like you're asking for the admissions department to make their decisions based on faith that it worked in your case (and since you were admitted, actually more extreme cases than your case). I guess what I'm saying is that there's nothing wrong with admissions wanting to see evidence that the applicant would contribute to more than just the basketball or football team.

 

[hoosboot]

Sorry, wasn’t meant as a shot at you.

Yes, I am passionate about this topic. I just continue to see a lot of chatter around not lowering admission standards that leap to a conclusion that these lower admitted students won’t succeed. That has not been supported by anything and really can’t be until lower admitted students are actually admitted. In fact, the opposite is true with that wide gap that you cited. There doesn’t appear to be a materially different graduation rate.

I didn't take that as a shot and don't think we are far apart on this. It's a credit to Northwestern that athletes thrive once they get here. I suspect that is by design, so I'm cautious about altering that design without a ton of firsthand knowledge into how the choices are made. I wouldn't be opposed to changes being made in the regular admissions process either because I saw a lot of students at NU who probably didn't need to be there, but were there by virtue of their parents. As long as the the choices made are in keeping with the broader aspirations of the institution and not solely to enhance the basketball and football team, it seems like a good choice.

 

[haywood jahblowme]

Totally understand that and appreciate your frankness on the matter. I think your example is what one wants to aim for. But, do you know any high school athletes who were like you and didn't care about HS grades and wouldn't have understood when they got there? The challenge for the admissions department is distinguishing between the two. There are lots of great athletes who struggle with testing or don't have incredible grades, but display tremendous character and ability in things outside of their sport. It seems like you're asking for the admissions department to make their decisions based on faith that it worked in your case (and since you were admitted, actually more extreme cases than your case). I guess what I'm saying is that there's nothing wrong with admissions wanting to see evidence that the applicant would contribute to more than just the basketball or football team.

i just said this on another post. you almost never hear of NU athletes failing out of school. its very rare. the academic support is great. the problem is not kids succeeding. its getting kids into school.

 

[Purple Pile Driver]

Totally understand that and appreciate your frankness on the matter. I think your example is what one wants to aim for. But, do you know any high school athletes who were like you and didn't care about HS grades and wouldn't have understood when they got there? The challenge for the admissions department is distinguishing between the two. There are lots of great athletes who struggle with testing or don't have incredible grades, but display tremendous character and ability in things outside of their sport. It seems like you're asking for the admissions department to make their decisions based on faith that it worked in your case (and since you were admitted, actually more extreme cases than your case). I guess what I'm saying is that there's nothing wrong with admissions wanting to see evidence that the applicant would contribute to more than just the basketball or football team.

I don’t believe it should be blind faith. A very important component is that character evaluation. No one wants knuckleheads. Fitz and team are known to go to great lengths in evaluating character. I don’t think it is unreasonable to do this in the Men’s basketball program that averages 3 recruits a year. Of course this is hardly fool proof. We can miss the mark in character evaluations with the standards as they are today. Lathon and Atkinson are the two prominent examples. However, I don’t think we can pin those on a lack of due diligence. At least not in the Lathon case.

 

[Medill90]

Totally understand that and appreciate your frankness on the matter. I think your example is what one wants to aim for. But, do you know any high school athletes who were like you and didn't care about HS grades and wouldn't have understood when they got there? The challenge for the admissions department is distinguishing between the two. There are lots of great athletes who struggle with testing or don't have incredible grades, but display tremendous character and ability in things outside of their sport. It seems like you're asking for the admissions department to make their decisions based on faith that it worked in your case (and since you were admitted, actually more extreme cases than your case). I guess what I'm saying is that there's nothing wrong with admissions wanting to see evidence that the applicant would contribute to more than just the basketball or football team.

I just want to note that we're having this discussion at a point in time when major universities are dropping standardized test scores as a component to admissions. University of Chicago which ranks ahead of NU (US News and other rankings) has figured out how to maintain its academic integrity without standardized tests.

I doubt that U of C is doing it on faith. More likely they are weighing things like written recommendations and essays more heavily.

Again, in the case of bball it's on average less than four spots per year. Why can't admissions dig deeper into the candidates and determine if they'll be successful at NU?

My answer, because bias exists. First, the decision-makers are loathe to abandon a template they navigated. And, race. Because they come from a similar background to the general NU population they have no concept of what it means to come from a challenged background. They think a high school freshman year C average is the same in Winnetka as it is in East Orange, or Lawndale. And, because all those accepted to NU have perfect transcripts through all four years of high school, a kid that takes two years to get his bearings before getting decent grades doesn't deserve the pass.

I have close friends who are academics at NU. I'm sorry, I love them dearly and they are decent good people. But they have no clue.

Frankly, the school and the learning environment would be a lot better if it had more diversity forced upon it.

 

[IdahoAlum]

"I am convinced...that all of our problems have to do with admissions, the history, the fan base , and what we have to offer. " And somehow all of that got reduced down to just "admissions" in this thread. We continue to ignore NU's horrible athletic history, lack of players in the league, the (until recently) lousy facilities, the (still) lousy fan base, and the fact that even if we let marginal student/athletes in, many would be much less inclined to come to NU because who wants to work that hard to succeed academically if you don't have to? Yes, there are MANY different factors that contribute to NU's lack of success in basketball. (Not to mention coaching, but that's an argument for another thread).

 

[Fitz51]

Remember in 2017 when no one had a problem with the admissions standards?

Or any number of years in football?

Jesus Christ, people.

 

[Medill90]

even if we let marginal student/athletes in, many would be much less inclined to come to NU because who wants to work that hard to succeed academically if you don't have to?

A childhood friend of mine is a reading specialist and the whistleblower for North Carolina's cheating scandal.

The heartbreaking part of that story is that they young men who she worked with genuinely wanted to earn their degrees. They wanted to take all the classes, all the tests, etc., etc.

They did not know they had barely a middle school reading ability and were unprepared/incapable of succeeding in a college class.

If a kid doesn't want to do the work he shouldn't be recruited. Can't do the work, same story.

But if a kid can do the work and wants to do the work why not have the discussion?

 

[Medill90]

Remember in 2017 when no one had a problem with the admissions standards?

Or any number of years in football?

Jesus Christ, people.

Not true

 

[hdhntr1]

That all of our problems have to do with admissions, the history , the fan base , and what we have to offer. We have had really good coaches over the years and not one could build a program. I talked when to Tex Winter a few months after he was hired and I asked him how things were going. He seemed frustrated. He went on to say that he could have 100 recruits he really wanted and of those only 14 could pass admissions and that it was a hard sell against other academic schools ...Duke, Stanford etc. IMO CCC has done well and he has not lost the players. The team never quits and the effort is always there. I don't for one minute want to settle for what is going on now but unless other things change I don't feel John Wooden or any other great coach could change things. I understand coach K has a special admissions for his players. Not saying we should do that but it would help to an extent. As for me ...cat fan forever and win or lose...it's just a game.

A lot of our problems do but saying all of them do is probably going too far. Goes too far into saying there is nothing we can do about it.

 

[Hungry Jack]

Well...I hear you, but I'm not totally convinced about that. 5 of the top ten schools in endowments are Ivys along with MIT and Stanford. And Northwestern is ahead of Duke. So, while I understand the value that athletics can bring to a university, it's sometimes hard to remember that the goal here seems to remain scholar-athletes. That's not an argument against giving more kids who have shown broad excellence in their young lives an opportunity to show they can handle what Northwestern offers. It's an argument against thinking it's a good idea to relax admissions standards for applicants whose only outstanding skill displayed is athletic or that it is beneficial to anything other than athletics.

I’m not advocating for relaxed standards, at least not strongly. I like NU’s approach.

But, as noted, success in high profile athletics does as much to spur alumni engagement and support as anything. The Ivies are consistent in their approach, and frankly don’t need sports to spruce up their endowments. They are fairly unique in higher ed.