Michigan Rules,
If we can stay on the topic of FOOTBALL players here is an interesting article from the Chicago Tribune:
__________________
CHICAGO--It was amusing to hear Paul Hornung speak of Notre Dame's "excessively demanding admissions standards" for football players (Tribune, April 1). Here's some truth for Mr. Hornung and those Irish alums who believe the school's winning percentage has dropped in inverse proportion to supposed "rising standards:"
Recent data released by the NCAA lists Stanford and Northwestern No. 1 and No. 2 in average SAT scores for football players, which is why each plays in a Rose Bowl every 30-odd years. Rice, Duke and Vanderbilt come in at Nos. 3, 4 and 5. The Fighting Irish ranked No. 51 out of 115 Division I football programs with an average SAT score of 925, below Big Ten schools Purdue (No. 6), Indiana (No. 10), Ohio State (No. 12), Penn State (No. 21), Iowa (No. 27) and Michigan (No. 46). They are also ranked well below a Colorado team (No. 35) that has been making headlines for things other than academic achievement.
Unlike the famed Four Horsemen, Irish supporters sit on mythical high horses, oblivious to the facts and unwilling to accept reality: Notre Dame has very relaxed academic standards for its football players, yet fields a team that had drifted into mediocrity.
________________________
Academic standards for the general student body and their entrance test scores are not the issue here. The question is about scholar athletes. I find it interesting that the OSU football team is comprised of athletes with the 12th highest SAT scores, while UM is drifting toward 50th. Yet, somehow, UM is the superior choice for 'smart' athletes. Please explain.
If we want to debate entrance scores: Ohio State and Miami of Florida both have entrance requirements for athletes that exceed the NCAA requirements. The majority of major universities use the NCAA rules to determine who gets in. I don't know what UoM does, but it would appear they are like virtually everyone else: If the NCAA clearinghouse says you are good to go, welcome to M*ch*gan.
UM didn't have less AAA becuase the course work is so much harder or the school is 'so much better', they had less because the players at UM didn't do as well in the classroom. Period.
Turns out that should not be a surprise since OSU football players scored higher on their entrance exams and cleared higher admission requirements.
Academic achievement at any major university should not be discounted due to the name on the diploma. The course work at the majority of the major institutions is very similar, often employing the same texts and curriculums. Yes, that even in includes the likes of Stanford and Northwestern.
The real differentiation occurs at the undergrad entrance requirements (where OSU is superior to UM for athletes) and then again at the graduate and doctrate levels.
OSU had a greater number of athlets who actually fit the scholar athlete mold, for at least the third year in a row. I would be interested to hear your spin as to why you believe UM would be a better academic choice for Mr. Rolle. To date it would appear the 'smarter athletes' on average are selecting OSU before UM.
What do you know that they don't?