(05-16-2026, 12:05 PM)Nurdyguy Wrote: Athletes graduating in 3 years is ridiculous...Why is it ridiculous, and why is it ridiculous for athletes but not "regular" students? In order to graduate, one needs a minimum of 180 units. That works out to an average of 15 units for 3 quarters in 4 years. Since athletes are currently expected to spend the summer quarter at Stanford working on their sport they can instead take 15 units a quarter for 4 quarters in 3 years. Very straightforward. They are still taking a "standard load". Add to that that it is possible to receive up to 45 units of credit from AP classes taken in high school. Given that to get admitted at all one must take several AP classes it is highly probable the athletes have at least 9 and probably 12 units they can "test out of". They don't even have to average 15 units a quarter and can still easily graduate in 3 years. They can easily schedule things to have two "light" quarters a year that will allow the athlete plenty of time to put in the "focused" work. On top of that, design it yourself majors such as Science, Technology and Society allow the athlete to structure their curriculum to mesh with their sport schedule.
Indeed, dedicating one quarter per year solely to athletic endeavor and taking four years to graduate may result in a better athlete at the end of four years. I think that restriction would be a very hard sell to the type of athlete that chooses Stanford in the first place. Some people will be fine with it, but most won't. Being at Stanford all summer and not taking classes can be quite fun, but can also be quite boring. There is a limit on how much time one can spend on athletic pursuits. In any case there is no feasible way to prevent an athlete from graduating in 3 years if you allow other students to do so.
Quote:I get it that Stanford is a school first, but athletes need to commit to their sports too, and graduating in 4 years is not a hardship. If potential recruits decide not to commit to Stanford because they won't be able to graduate in three years, it's better to know that upfront and recruit a different athlete who wants to be on the team for four years.Who decides it is not a "hardship"? The student is the one who decides what they want to do with their lives. They may change their minds about their goals as they mature while competing at Stanford. The rest of us, and their coaches, don't get a vote. Some students come in fully intending to be "one and done". Do we refuse to recruit such athletes? What about athletes that have an unexpected breakout season and decide to declare for the draft? How do we stop that? Should we stop that, even if we could? Some students decide to transfer without the degree. Is that somehow "better" than being a grad transfer?
In the (distant) past when freshman couldn't play NCAA sports, when transfer rules were "different" and when pro sports essentially didn't take one and done players you could expect athletes to remain in school for at least 4 years, maybe 5. Those days are gone and are not coming back. It was also very difficult (but not impossible) to graduate from Stanford in 3 years. The course offerings in Summer quarter were almost impossible to apply to any major requirements. You could learn things, but the courses were of little use in "progress towards a degree". The major requirements were also such that it was virtually impossible to schedule the required classes in 3 consecutive years. Add to that prerequisite entanglements and you had a real challenge. This was true even for psychology majors, which had the fewest required number of major units (45). That too is gone and not coming back.