The Cal Aquatics Fund has been raising $ since the 1980s. I believe there is a considerable corpus at this point, and no doubt an active pool of donors to protect the 4 aquatics programs. That's where my donations have been going.
Polodad said:
The Cal Aquatics Fund has been raising $ since the 1980s. I believe there is a considerable corpus at this point, and no doubt an active pool of donors to protect the 4 aquatics programs. That's where my donations have been going.
Schroeder71 said:
Pablo Morales would be perfect for the women's swim program, depending upon the outcome of the McKeever
investigation. GO BEARS!
SoCalie said:
Pablo was pro-Stanford ever since he was little. He grew up on that side of the Bay, his club coaches had very close ties to Stanford swimming, and his parents (who worked their butts off, but were from very humble beginnings) were thrilled with him being able to go to Stanford on a full ride..
As much as I love our alma mater, Cal just wasn't truly in the equation. However, I will say that I believe it WOULD have been, if his parents had known more about the university when he was in high school.
Whatever. I just want him to come to Cal NOW!! That'll mean even more!
I'm sure Tara has a great mix of kids with super high academics and those with much lower scores and GPAs. This reminds me of when Russell White was recruited to Cal. I don't recall who the Cal faculty advisor was at the time, but his position was they were going to hold the line on recruits' academic profiles, but would find a spot for a superior talent like White. I'm sure the same applies for Tara...and let's face it, when somebody accumulates a record like hers I'm sure she's given all the leeway in the world. The perverse irony about Furd v Cal is that once you're in at Furd, you'd have to really try hard to flunk out. My brother started his academic career at Northwestern and transferred to Furd after his sophomore year. NW was super tough and he absolutely couldn't believe how easy Furd was by comparison. The point of all of this is that, as someone else stated, being an elite athlete with decent grades and SATs will get you into Stanford. The difference I think is that they only bend on admissions for super highly ranked recruits. Don't forget, that if they have something like 750 D1 athletes enrolled at any given time, that's something like 15% of the student body - a very high percentage....coachdeke said:
Stanford places more emphasis on the verbal portion of the SAT/ACT than math. It's up to each coaching staff to sell admissions on prospective student athletes. They don't take "prop 48l" level test scores but have taken kids with sub 3.0 students with decent test scores. The relationship of the coaching staff to admissions is really important, I've been told Tara Vandeveer is the master of getting kids through admissions.
Furd has 7645 undergrads and Cal had a lot of latitude with athletes until Tedford brought in the lowest graduation rate of Power 5 schools. There really was no "holding the line."juarezbear said:I'm sure Tara has a great mix of kids with super high academics and those with much lower scores and GPAs. This reminds me of when Russell White was recruited to Cal. I don't recall who the Cal faculty advisor was at the time, but his position was they were going to hold the line on recruits' academic profiles, but would find a spot for a superior talent like White. I'm sure the same applies for Tara...and let's face it, when somebody accumulates a record like hers I'm sure she's given all the leeway in the world. The perverse irony about Furd v Cal is that once you're in at Furd, you'd have to really try hard to flunk out. My brother started his academic career at Northwestern and transferred to Furd after his sophomore year. NW was super tough and he absolutely couldn't believe how easy Furd was by comparison. The point of all of this is that, as someone else stated, being an elite athlete with decent grades and SATs will get you into Stanford. The difference I think is that they only bend on admissions for super highly ranked recruits. Don't forget, that if they have something like 750 D1 athletes enrolled at any given time, that's something like 15% of the student body - a very high percentage....coachdeke said:
Stanford places more emphasis on the verbal portion of the SAT/ACT than math. It's up to each coaching staff to sell admissions on prospective student athletes. They don't take "prop 48l" level test scores but have taken kids with sub 3.0 students with decent test scores. The relationship of the coaching staff to admissions is really important, I've been told Tara Vandeveer is the master of getting kids through admissions.