- Feb 7, 2013
- 3,188
- 48
I would hope that most here would understand that competing in college with some of the best and brightest kids in the nation has a lot of value to a students's undergraduate education.
Are too many making a mistake to play college softball?
- Thread starter CoogansBluff
- Start date
Welcome to Discuss Fastpitch
Your FREE Account is waiting to the Best Softball Community on the Web.
- Mar 22, 2010
- 129
- 28
I recommend "Where You Go Is Not Who You'll Be" by Frank Bruni. It's a great read for all college bound students. A short description:
Over the last few decades, Americans have turned college admissions into a terrifying and occasionally devastating process, preceded by test prep, tutors, all sorts of stratagems, all kinds of rankings, and a conviction among too many young people that their futures will be determined and their worth established by which schools say yes and which say no.
That belief is wrong. It's cruel. And in WHERE YOU GO IS NOT WHO YOU'LL BE, Frank Bruni explains why, giving students and their parents a new perspective on this brutal, deeply flawed competition and a path out of the anxiety that it provokes.
Bruni, a bestselling author and a columnist for the New York Times, shows that the Ivy League has no monopoly on corner offices, governors' mansions, or the most prestigious academic and scientific grants. Through statistics, surveys, and the stories of hugely successful people who didn't attend the most exclusive schools, he demonstrates that many kinds of colleges-large public universities, tiny hideaways in the hinterlands-serve as ideal springboards. And he illuminates how to make the most of them. What matters in the end are a student's efforts in and out of the classroom, not the gleam of his or her diploma.
Where you go isn't who you'll be. Americans need to hear that-and this indispensable manifesto says it with eloquence and respect for the real promise of higher education. - See more at: Where You Go Is Not Who You'll Be - Hachette Book Group
Over the last few decades, Americans have turned college admissions into a terrifying and occasionally devastating process, preceded by test prep, tutors, all sorts of stratagems, all kinds of rankings, and a conviction among too many young people that their futures will be determined and their worth established by which schools say yes and which say no.
That belief is wrong. It's cruel. And in WHERE YOU GO IS NOT WHO YOU'LL BE, Frank Bruni explains why, giving students and their parents a new perspective on this brutal, deeply flawed competition and a path out of the anxiety that it provokes.
Bruni, a bestselling author and a columnist for the New York Times, shows that the Ivy League has no monopoly on corner offices, governors' mansions, or the most prestigious academic and scientific grants. Through statistics, surveys, and the stories of hugely successful people who didn't attend the most exclusive schools, he demonstrates that many kinds of colleges-large public universities, tiny hideaways in the hinterlands-serve as ideal springboards. And he illuminates how to make the most of them. What matters in the end are a student's efforts in and out of the classroom, not the gleam of his or her diploma.
Where you go isn't who you'll be. Americans need to hear that-and this indispensable manifesto says it with eloquence and respect for the real promise of higher education. - See more at: Where You Go Is Not Who You'll Be - Hachette Book Group
Getting into a top college is no guarantee of anything.
Yes, Bill Gates got into a top college, but he dropped out. His success was due to his brains, his coding abilities, his business sense, and most importantly, the connections his father had with IBM.
I did go to an elite liberal arts college. Three of the guys I knew there are successful enough in their fields they have their own Wikipedia pages: CC, the second smartest student in my freshman math and physics classes, was once picked by Gore to be White House science adviser. He has had a really great career. Maybe going to an elite college helped him. He got to study Physics with some really smart professors and students who challenged him. He was also very interested in the philosophical aspects of science, and it was great for him to be in a college with a really good philosophy department. Had he gone elsewhere, he probably still would've been a great scientist. His science reputation was made by studying at Cornell under Carl Sagan. Maybe he did more because he went to a top college, maybe not.
The smartest kid in the class? That is another story. There was a young lady who was miles ahead of anyone else in the class. Not just that class. One time I ran across her when she had just gotten a paper returned in a class, and the professor wrote that it was the best paper he had ever seen. What happened to her? She dropped out of college and decided to devote her considerable intellect to furthering the cause of the Unification Church.
I knew another brilliant would-be physicist who was kicked out of the Unification Church because of his drug use. That took him down from being a top physics student to an average student. Not sure which of them ended up worse.
I don't know if going to an elite college hurt or helped the last two I mentioned, or if it made no difference at all.
I think one reason I was happy my DS is doing sports in college is so he will hopefully have the social support to avoid making truly bad decisions in his life.
Yes, Bill Gates got into a top college, but he dropped out. His success was due to his brains, his coding abilities, his business sense, and most importantly, the connections his father had with IBM.
I did go to an elite liberal arts college. Three of the guys I knew there are successful enough in their fields they have their own Wikipedia pages: CC, the second smartest student in my freshman math and physics classes, was once picked by Gore to be White House science adviser. He has had a really great career. Maybe going to an elite college helped him. He got to study Physics with some really smart professors and students who challenged him. He was also very interested in the philosophical aspects of science, and it was great for him to be in a college with a really good philosophy department. Had he gone elsewhere, he probably still would've been a great scientist. His science reputation was made by studying at Cornell under Carl Sagan. Maybe he did more because he went to a top college, maybe not.
The smartest kid in the class? That is another story. There was a young lady who was miles ahead of anyone else in the class. Not just that class. One time I ran across her when she had just gotten a paper returned in a class, and the professor wrote that it was the best paper he had ever seen. What happened to her? She dropped out of college and decided to devote her considerable intellect to furthering the cause of the Unification Church.
I knew another brilliant would-be physicist who was kicked out of the Unification Church because of his drug use. That took him down from being a top physics student to an average student. Not sure which of them ended up worse.
I don't know if going to an elite college hurt or helped the last two I mentioned, or if it made no difference at all.
I think one reason I was happy my DS is doing sports in college is so he will hopefully have the social support to avoid making truly bad decisions in his life.
- Feb 3, 2011
- 1,880
- 48
It's possible that the "most accurate" conclusions are all anecdotal...that our varied personalities and freedoms and ability to pursue opportunities make it nigh impossible to give the social scientists any real data to evaluate or to give such evaluations any real merit at all.
Greenmonsters
Wannabe Duck Boat Owner
Probably not far from the truth. IMO, the only irrefutable fact is that selecting a school solely on the merits of its softball program is unwise.
- Jun 29, 2013
- 589
- 18
The one thing sports do for all kids is instill a sense of confidence, we see it at every level of play. College athletes, particularly female college athletes simply because they aren't getting into a lot of schools with a 2.3 like a football player at any D1A school, are necessarily going to have that trait, and it is going to get them a lot of good jobs that require a real interview. It won't help at a Silk Stocking law firm, as they are all into resumes and they will only hire from Tier 1 law schools (yes, there are a few exceptions, but it's a precious few.) But it can help at any job involving litigation, where competitive instinct matters most. Back to the original question: the answer depends on the value of softball in your daughter's life. If it is her passion, she is going to want to play and she will get a degree, probably doing what she loves. If it is just something she enjoys but really is more intellectual than athletic, she will pick the school that challenges her intellectually. My oldest is easy to figure out, she is all about school. The younger one is a hell of a competitor, only 9 but you can see the fire already. She is a lot more difficult to figure out.
Parents underestimate their kids...they have a good idea of who they are, what they want and what is best for them. Parents also over-estimate their own knowledge about the future.
Parents need to let go and have confidence their child can make the right decision.
Have someone lay out the pluses and minuses of playing softball in college and going to MacU, and then let the child decide what she wants to do. Letting them make the decision gives them ownership of their future.
Parents need to let go and have confidence their child can make the right decision.
Have someone lay out the pluses and minuses of playing softball in college and going to MacU, and then let the child decide what she wants to do. Letting them make the decision gives them ownership of their future.
Last edited:
- Feb 3, 2011
- 1,880
- 48
And then there's this guy:
Cleveland Browns hire New York Mets' Paul DePodesta as chief strategy officer
After earning his Bachelor's in economics in 1995, he went to work as a scout for the Cleveland Indians and has enjoyed a meteoric rise since that time. He got the General Manager position with the Dodgers when he was only 31 years old.
Now he's going to work in the front office of the Cleveland Browns. I can't name many people who've jumped from the front office of a team in one major sport to the front office of a team in another major sport. Experience wise, he did play both baseball and football in college.
We can label DePodesta an outlier, but the fact of the matter is that he went to Harvard. I looked up his high school, Episcopal, located in Alexandria. The tuition is over $50,000 a year. I think it's safe to say that was probably a pretty solid investment for their family.
Cleveland Browns hire New York Mets' Paul DePodesta as chief strategy officer
After earning his Bachelor's in economics in 1995, he went to work as a scout for the Cleveland Indians and has enjoyed a meteoric rise since that time. He got the General Manager position with the Dodgers when he was only 31 years old.
Now he's going to work in the front office of the Cleveland Browns. I can't name many people who've jumped from the front office of a team in one major sport to the front office of a team in another major sport. Experience wise, he did play both baseball and football in college.
We can label DePodesta an outlier, but the fact of the matter is that he went to Harvard. I looked up his high school, Episcopal, located in Alexandria. The tuition is over $50,000 a year. I think it's safe to say that was probably a pretty solid investment for their family.
- Apr 8, 2013
- 192
- 0
And then there's this guy:
Cleveland Browns hire New York Mets' Paul DePodesta as chief strategy officer
After earning his Bachelor's in economics in 1995, he went to work as a scout for the Cleveland Indians and has enjoyed a meteoric rise since that time. He got the General Manager position with the Dodgers when he was only 31 years old.
Now he's going to work in the front office of the Cleveland Browns. I can't name many people who've jumped from the front office of a team in one major sport to the front office of a team in another major sport. Experience wise, he did play both baseball and football in college.
We can label DePodesta an outlier, but the fact of the matter is that he went to Harvard. I looked up his high school, Episcopal, located in Alexandria. The tuition is over $50,000 a year. I think it's safe to say that was probably a pretty solid investment for their family.
There was a panel discussion on the radio last night asking if in the next three years the Browns owner will look like a genius for his "outside of the box thinking," or if everyone will say "and that's why the Browns are the Browns." It was unanimous and I don't think I have to say which way everyone on the panel went.
There was a panel discussion on the radio last night asking if in the next three years the Browns owner will look like a genius for his "outside of the box thinking," or if everyone will say "and that's why the Browns are the Browns." It was unanimous and I don't think I have to say which way everyone on the panel went.
OTOH, sports reporters can be idiots, and that has been the case for a very long time.
Sometimes we like to think that there was a golden age in the past when sports reporters were brilliant, but one may have to go all the way back to Daymon Runyan and Bat Masterson for that. Although the former was better known for his fiction, and the latter for his previous career as a gunslinger.
They were always bad.
When the Phillies won the World Series in 1980, there were several big name players who refused to talk to reports, most notably Steve Carlton. During the victory parade, Tug McGraw got the biggest applause for his scathing comments about NY sports reporters.
Back in the 1950s, my father ran across one of the legends in NYC sports reporting at a party or bar or something, and was amazed by what an idiot the guy was. The reporter told my father that devout Roman Catholics could never make it in the Majors because they spent too much time going to Mass (as opposed to staying up all night drinking, I suppose). I forget which player in particular they were discussing, but the guy did much better than the sports writer could possibly imagine.
Greg Easterbrook, who writes the Tuesday Morning Quarterback column, is of the opinion that many NFL coaches get overly conservative in their play calling, especially on fourth downs, because if they take reasonable risks, the sports reporters will flay them, and there will be a lot of pressure on the owners to fire the coaches. Only a few rare birds like Belichick can safely ignore the nattering nabobs of negativism. [5 brownie points if you know who used that epithet against reporters, and an additional 10 if you can identify the speech writer]
Similar threads
