Are too many making a mistake to play college softball?

[Cannonball]

How are going to measure whether it was a mistake or not?

 

[Rocketech1]

Some people are highly intelligent underachievers though. My dad (who played college football until he blew out his knee) did the bare minimum to get the minimum grades he had to get. Still got into first an MBA program then later, law school. When he finished law school he figured he'd sit for the bar exam without studying, so he could get a good feel for it and make sure he didn't over study. For real, he only does the least amount he had to do to get by. So he went to take it with no studying after a night of heavy drinking, and passed it.

I'm trying to understand your point...teach your kids to do the bare minimum because they may still achieve their end goals with mediocrity?

Maybe I'm nuts but I value my kids doing the best they can including challenging themselves in rigorous coursework so they can get into a good school and have options when they graduate from college (job or graduate school). I can only imagine that getting a good paying job is going to get tougher and tougher each decade.

 

[grcsftbll]

I'm trying to understand your point...teach your kids to do the bare minimum because they may still achieve their end goals with mediocrity?

Maybe I'm nuts but I value my kids doing the best they can including challenging themselves in rigorous coursework so they can get into a good school and have options when they graduate from college (job or graduate school). I can only imagine that getting a good paying job is going to get tougher and tougher each decade.

No, no. lol. You said the C student couldn't pass the medical boards. I was just pointing out that grades and intelligence aren't always linked. I in NO WAY consider my dad a role model, trust me. But it is possible a med student with a C average could pass the boards; maybe it's someone like my dad who just doesn't care about being anything other than "good enough to get by."

 

[riseball]

This topic transcends softball and is applicable to all sports. Where would you want your kid? Spending 4 years at Yale as student where nitwits recently signed a petition to ban the 1st amendment, or playing a sport for the likes of a John Wooden, Sue Enquist, Mike Candrea, or a Lou Holz? People like to make the Captain Obvious comment that there is no softball after college. What they fail to realize that playing softball or any other sport in college is not about the sport, it is about the experience. You can go to school and learn in the classroom, or you can go to school and learn in the classroom AND the athletic field. But if you take the latter route you need to be ready to go all in and sacrifice what many consider the typical college experience. It is not for everyone, which is why so many in all sports wash out the first year. A 4 year degree shows that you have what it takes to jump through some hoops and realize and end goal. The same 4 year degree while playing a sport shows a bit more.

 

[FP26]

I agree with what riseball is saying, but I don't think sports is the only option here. When I was in college, I had numerous friends that were in ROTC programs. Much of the training that they received was superior to the "normal" student in areas of leadership, discipline, etc. Personally, I worked my way through college. I had a job that averaged 25 hours per week on top of my course load and spent some time tutoring. Again, other activities on top of the education itself. When the student actually graduates and enters the workforce, all of these items will be reviewed by the potential employer. And those potential employers will have as many varying opinions as we have in this forum. There is no singular right answer.

As a supervisor, I am involved in the hiring process myself. There are numerous factors that I review including, but not limited to experience, education, previous jobs (including length of stay and reason for leaving), other activities, etc. When we have job openings, we typically receive a fair number of applicants. All of these items can be used as tie breakers to differentiate between candidates.

 

[BobInMadison]

Someone once did an interesting study of two colleges. I remember the names, because I attended one of the colleges.

The study was done in Pennsylvania. It compared students with the same SAT and HS GPA. One group attended a large state university in the middle of Pennsylvania. The other group attended a small, elite liberal arts college in the Philly suburbs (NOT the main line). I attended the latter school.

On the average, the students who went to Small Elite Liberal Arts College did better financially in their post-college years than did the students who attended State U. So far it appears the college made the difference, right? Wrong.

They also looked at students who were accepted at Small Elite College but who attended State U. There was no statistically significant difference between students who were accepted at the elite college and DID attend vs. the students who were accepted at the elite college who did NOT attend.

The conclusion? The researchers figured the admissions office at the Small Elite College did a good job screening which students were more likely to be successful in later life.

This is important. If your kid has what it takes to do well in life, your kid will do well in life.

A HUGE caveat: Since that time, a number of very high paying Wall Street financial firms have pretty much limited their recruiting to students who graduated from Ivy League or similar level schools, and who graduated in the top half of their class. The financial firms are, in effect, outsourcing their HR screening to the Ivy admissions offices. So, if your kid really wants to go into finance, and has a chance to attend an Ivy, then she should do so.

If your kid decides to be a doctor or a lawyer or a PhD, people will remember the law school or med school or grad school, NOT the undergraduate college.

 

[BobInMadison]

As far as sports and some other activities go, as I mentioned on the other thread, this really depends a lot on the individual.

My DS rows for a D-3 school. I think the exercise, time spent doing what he loves, and friendships he develops on the team are far more beneficial to him than the time lost to practices and regattas. Besides, the guys he meets on the team might be really great contacts later in life.

 

[Elk Grove Hurricane]

The answer is going to vary for everyone, but the underlying question is how important is softball to your DD? If it is everything, then attending Laverne and playing is better than attending UCLA and trying to walk on, or giving up the sport. My oldest DD has wanted to got to Dartmouth for a while now, we're years away of course, but that trumps softball to her. I'd love to see her play, but if the choice is playing softball for Domincan University in the Bay Area or attending Dartmouth I know her answer. The DD of one of my friends is attending South Dakota State to play softball in 2 years. She would rather go there and play than attend a CSU or UC school, and that works for them.

 

[Elk Grove Hurricane]

Someone once did an interesting study of two colleges. I remember the names, because I attended one of the colleges.

The study was done in Pennsylvania. It compared students with the same SAT and HS GPA. One group attended a large state university in the middle of Pennsylvania. The other group attended a small, elite liberal arts college in the Philly suburbs (NOT the main line). I attended the latter school.

On the average, the students who went to Small Elite Liberal Arts College did better financially in their post-college years than did the students who attended State U. So far it appears the college made the difference, right? Wrong.

They also looked at students who were accepted at Small Elite College but who attended State U. There was no statistically significant difference between students who were accepted at the elite college and DID attend vs. the students who were accepted at the elite college who did NOT attend.

The conclusion? The researchers figured the admissions office at the Small Elite College did a good job screening which students were more likely to be successful in later life.

This is important. If your kid has what it takes to do well in life, your kid will do well in life.

A HUGE caveat: Since that time, a number of very high paying Wall Street financial firms have pretty much limited their recruiting to students who graduated from Ivy League or similar level schools, and who graduated in the top half of their class. The financial firms are, in effect, outsourcing their HR screening to the Ivy admissions offices. So, if your kid really wants to go into finance, and has a chance to attend an Ivy, then she should do so.

If your kid decides to be a doctor or a lawyer or a PhD, people will remember the law school or med school or grad school, NOT the undergraduate college.

And if you want to be a litigator, it really doesn't matter where you went to law school.

 

[PA SB Dad]

Some people are highly intelligent underachievers though. My dad (who played college football until he blew out his knee) did the bare minimum to get the minimum grades he had to get. Still got into first an MBA program then later, law school. When he finished law school he figured he'd sit for the bar exam without studying, so he could get a good feel for it and make sure he didn't over study. For real, he only does the least amount he had to do to get by. So he went to take it with no studying after a night of heavy drinking, and passed it.

Great, exactly what I am looking for if I need a lawyer - a slacker who does the bare minimum to get by when my life is on the line. Not a ringing endorsement of your father.