Allister Departing Minnesota for Stanford

[schwabach]

Just need to find where you fit in and make the most of the experience.

It really is that simple.

 

[Rocketech1]

I had a conversation similar to this with my 12 year old DD last night on the way to her catching lesson. I asked her if in the unlikely event you got offered softball scholarships to Auburn, Oregon(her two favorite college teams) and Harvard, which would she choose. Without hesitation she said Harvard. Made me proud.

And it sounds like you raised her right. Harvard (and Stanford) are world-class colleges that are always in the top 3 in the world. If you are bright enough to get into these schools and can have your tuition and expenses paid for in either athletic, academic, and/or financial need money, it's an easy choice.

 

[MNDad]

I said as much. If you have a highly motivated kid who is able to put blinders on it really doesn't matter what school they go to. However if you have a kid who may not be able to separate themselves from the average
environment of a University then being in an environment with a bunch of overachievers is helpful.

I agree completely with this.

It probably wasn’t meant to, but your first OU post came off a little elitist to me. I know on average you’re going to have far better students at an Ivy caliber school. I took the OU post as similar to an inner city HS. I’m looking at it more from an opportunity standpoint and from that aspect OU and any major university are among the best in the country. I’m not talking top 1%, but looking at all the colleges in the country they’re still in the top 10%.

You didn’t say this, but it reminded me of all the times I hear “My kid could have gone D1, but chose DIII for the better education”. The meaning being that kids who go D1 don’t care about academics, which is total BS. I know there’s plenty of athletes at DII and DIII schools that really did have a chance to play D1. It’s kind of like how many D1 parents say their kid got a “full ride”. In both cases it’s nowhere near as high as what parents claim. Rant over. Again, I know you didn’t say it. Just hit a nerve.

 

[_MIA_]

And it sounds like you raised her right. Harvard (and Stanford) are world-class colleges that are always in the top 3 in the world. If you are bright enough to get into these schools and can have your tuition and expenses paid for in either athletic, academic, and/or financial need money, it's an easy choice.

At Stanford if your family makes less than 125K tuition is pretty much covered. This might actually help Allister bring in some top kids without having to give out scholarships...

 

[MNDad]

Several knew on the 11th the job was open. It's a pretty close timeline here. Not trying to "counter", just laying some timeline out there. Not sure of the exact time of departure from Stanford and LSU respectively, but I bet pretty darn close. Regardless of when I was notified, I still suspect Allister was under contract w/Minnesota and doing everything above board as a Gopher. I also think she (Sydney) is going where she wants to go, Minnesota.

Smith committed in June. It was announced well after she signed for some reason.

 

[_MIA_]

I agree completely with this.

It probably wasn’t meant to, but your first OU post came off a little elitist to me. I know on average you’re going to have far better students at an Ivy caliber school. I took the OU post as similar to an inner city HS. I’m looking at it more from an opportunity standpoint and from that aspect OU and any major university are among the best in the country. I’m not talking top 1%, but looking at all the colleges in the country they’re still in the top 10%.

You didn’t say this, but it reminded me of all the times I hear “My kid could have gone D1, but chose DIII for the better education”. The meaning being that kids who go D1 don’t care about academics, which is total BS. I know there’s plenty of athletes at DII and DIII schools that really did have a chance to play D1. It’s kind of like how many D1 parents say their kid got a “full ride”. In both cases it’s nowhere near as high as what parents claim. Rant over. Again, I know you didn’t say it. Just hit a nerve.

Wasn't meant to be elitist but I can see how you would take it that way. Again I teach at OU so I am privy to the environment. I have some really bright kids in my courses who could be excelling but because their friends are doing the bare minimum they are not going above and beyond. One thing I hate is seeing talent wasted. These kids are able to do well GPA wise because of their intellect alone, but as others have said GPA in this age of grade inflation is not the best indicator of success. Let me give you an example of what I mean regarding from a personal standpoint. I got into Duke for grad school but didn't have a PhD advisor to start off. The advisor I ended up working with told me he chose to work with me because of the courses I took my senior year of undegrad. I could have taken basket weaving, etc but instead took grad level courses because a) I was interested in them and b) my friends were doing the same thing and it was just natural to do so. My GPA suffered a bit but my advisor said it showed that was I was interested in learning/knowledge.

 

[CoogansBluff]

If you have a highly motivated kid who is able to put blinders on it really doesn't matter what school they go to. However if you have a kid who may not be able to separate themselves from the average environment of a University then being in an environment with a bunch of overachievers is helpful.

There's some research that has been used to suggest that high achievers at schools like Oklahoma do better professionally than low achievers at places like Stanford. The lack of blinders leads those low-end Stanford students to feel inferior and sometimes give up.

I agree with what you see as some real advantages to Stanford, but I also believe that OK is not chopped liver and that if you love that school and fit in there and also have a chance to be on a great softball team, you'll probably never regret it. Also, OK has twice as many students as Stanford. I would imagine that there are programs for the best and brightest 5,000 at OK that would be pretty rigorous for any student-athlete who chose to pursue it.

 

[DmystifieD]

Smith committed in June. It was announced well after she signed for some reason.

Ahhhhh, Way ahead of me on that front.

 

[_MIA_]

There's some research that has been used to suggest that high achievers at schools like Oklahoma do better professionally than low achievers at places like Stanford. The lack of blinders leads those low-end Stanford students to feel inferior and sometimes give up.

This is one of the reasons why MIT is pass/fail freshmen year. Some high achievers in HS who suddenly feel average have a hard time coping with it at first. Again, a parent has to know what type of kid their son or daughter is and factor
that into their college choice.

I agree with what you see as some real advantages to Stanford, but I also believe that OK is not chopped liver and that if you love that school and fit in there and also have a chance to be on a great softball team, you'll probably never regret it. Also, OK has twice as many students as Stanford. I would imagine that there are programs for the best and brightest 5,000 at OK that would be pretty rigorous for any student-athlete who chose to pursue it.

Agreed. I said previously that there are good programs at OU and some not so good programs at OU.

 

[riseball]

And it sounds like you raised her right. Harvard (and Stanford) are world-class colleges that are always in the top 3 in the world. If you are bright enough to get into these schools and can have your tuition and expenses paid for in either athletic, academic, and/or financial need money, it's an easy choice.

That certainly does not speak well for the decision by Barnhill.