Only at Duke could a football recruiting thread devolve into a discussion of the relative merits of weighted high school grade point averages.
(Yeah, I'm jealous -- we only went to "4" when I was a lad).
Only at Duke are we so obsessed with the purportedly unparalleled eliteness of our own undergrads and of ourselves that we think we're the only ones who are so elite that a FB recruiting thread would devolve into a discussion of the relative merits of weighted high school grade point averages.
Wow, that was so meta I just blew my own mind. I'm more meta than thou, OPK.
A movie is not about what it's about; it's about how it's about it.
---Roger Ebert
Some questions cannot be answered
Who’s gonna bury who
We need a love like Johnny, Johnny and June
---Over the Rhine
Man, this is great. Coach Cut is getting it done big time. I agree with an earlier poster that he is smashing the tired old "can't recruit at Duke" myth. There is absolutely no reason Duke cannot have a solid football program year in and year out. All it takes is committment. I knew this was a good hire, but never dreamed he would make so much progress this fast. (I know, the naysayers will say he has not won a game yet) But if he keeps recruiting like this along with the many other things he is doing, it has to translate to wins sooner than later... Welcome David Harding! and keep rockin Coach C!
Argument for years has been that, in order to attract top quality football recruits at Duke, we must lower admissions requirements, i.e., that there are not enough well-qualified (academically) kids who can also play BCS ball. When we obtain commitments from students like harding who easily qualify for Duke's, Stanford's and the Ivy League's criteria, well this kind of disproves that argument. I think it is more about pointing out the positive (than elitism).
Only if you consider Western syllogisms of logic to be paramount. Step outside the para-dig-em.
(I'm more a "metaphysics of quality" guy. Which fits nicely with being a Duke fan/alum).
And, to the broader point, this does show that the whole "We can't recruit because of admissions requirements" is malarkey. While there may be some liberalization of the standards in certain instances, there is no need for wholesale abrogation of our standards.
Edit to add: fde above stated it better than I. Well said.
Last edited by OldPhiKap; 08-20-2008 at 09:03 AM. Reason: as stated
Just to play the devil's advocate, Dawud Rasheed, Trinity '99, picked Duke over Alabama and was Mr. Alabama in football his senior year in high school. Needless to say, the teams he was a part of won very few games. Big time recruits have to get it done on the field too. I am very cautious with my optimism.
A student can take 7 courses x 6.0 for each A = 42 points. Versus 6 courses x 6.0 for each A giving them 36 points. When this is averaged with the "lower level" courses a student takes when they are freshman and sophomores due to graduation requirements, it will raise their GPA more during their junior and senior years than if they take only 6 courses each semester. My 3 kids just went through this over the last 8 years, so believe me, I have seen it but mainly at 1 particular HS in Raleigh. It is fairly common for the valedictorian to have a GPA of 5.4xxx or 5.5xxx and you can have an intelligent child who has done well with grades, have a 4.8 or 4.9 and not even be in the top 10% of his/her class.
harding has a relatively high gpa, passed the academic screening for Stanford...What do these statements mean, exactly? I can see them being taken at least two ways:When we obtain commitments from students like harding who easily qualify for Duke's, Stanford's and the Ivy League's criteria...
(1) the student qualifies for Duke's [or Stanford's, etc.] football team standards
(2) the student would have gotten into Duke [etc.] even if he played trombone instead of OL
I think we'd all prefer a team full of #2, though I agree #1 is still a nice rebuttal to anyone who wants us to lower the team standards further.
I remember hearing Carl Franks tell members of the Blue Devil Club that football players had to meet a higher academic standard for admission than the one used for basketball players. He didn't ask that the standards be lowered for football, just that the football players not be held to a higher admission standard than the basketball players. He also pointed out that at that time the football team had one academic adviser while the basketball team with around a dozen players had several academic advisers.
I'll just state my opinion one more time, in case anyone missed it on the first page, haha. And throaty, your point has been noted.
Having classes that give you a 5.0 or 6.0 is just ridiculous. It's completely transparent GPA inflation and I'm pretty certain any competent college admissions officer isn't falling for it. It all just seems like a silly and petty way to puff kids up when compared to other schools. Give it another decade and kids will be going to college with an 8.3 GPA.
I disagree. Grade inflation implies giving students something they don't deserve, often in order to bring an indirect benefit back to the professor.Having classes that give you a 5.0 or 6.0 is just ridiculous. It's completely transparent GPA inflation and I'm pretty certain any competent college admissions officer isn't falling for it.
Here there's no deceit. High schools are simply trying to GPAs more comparable within their system -- in other words, assuring that the valedictorian didn't skate thru the system by taking easier courses. Between HS systems, comparison was effectively impossible anyway (just ask, say, Grant Hill and Sean Dockery).
Nevertheless, college admissions are well prepared to deal with variations in grading policy. When I applied a decade ago (eek!), every application asked for GPA in the form of "______ out of ______ possible". At my high school classes were scored from 0-100, with +10 for honors & AP classes...hardly unusual, even then.
Yeah, it is a joke-- Florida has great HS football, but other than that, the other SE states are nothing extraordinary on a per capita or absolute basis-- certainly not NC. Last year, the vaunted best team from NC (Independence, with 7 year unbeaten record and a like number of big school state championships in NC) came up to play a weak Ohio team that finished with a modest 6-4 record-- the OH team beat them, then went on to get stomped several times by other OH teams.
There is no doubt that HS football in VA, MD (Dematha, the top team from that area and allegedly a top 5 national team, got stomped in OH the same weekend as Independence was beaten), NC, SC, and MS are weak by comparison with OH and PA... GA has decent football, as does AL and LA, but certainly none of them are superior to OH/PA (ESPN has done an extensive analysis of this), but only FL has extraordinary talent. Currently, TX and FL are the top-rated states for talent.
I am so excited about Duke FB! (and...let's give them all a break by not expecting the moon right away).
I am 3,000 miles away, so...I PLEAD with all of you within 300 miles to FILL the (...disgusting) Wade Stadium and give our guys the support they are earning.
My dreams of Duke being competitive in football is becoming a reality. YIKES! Such fun!
The note of support is certainly warranted, but I must take exception with calling Wallace Wade Stadium disgusting. It's not the stadium that's disgusting, it's the sorry stewardship of the university. The football stadium is no more disgusting than Indoor Stadium was before the various renovations occurred. Lest anyone reading this think I speak without experiencing what the place is like, I've been attending games there all my life.
As for the renovations, I'm sure there will be many opportunities to donate to the fund needed to carry out the work!