Like Gunner said, as a MI you aren't really catching the ball anyway most of the time so stiffness of the glove really isn't a huge deal. For balls right at you or DP, it really should be more of a deflection off the index finger. You may not have thought of it this way but go and field a ground ball now with this thought in mind ...As a MI I used the same Rawlings glove from 9th grade through college..it certainly wasn't stiff.So this may make me sound a little naive...and I probably am to an extent yet also well experienced...so here it goes.
Why does a glove need to be so rigid? I've searched Shoeless Jane on the forums and see alot of complaints about it being "floppy" and the fingers not rigid enough. I may not be using the exact words but you get the point. I've also heard coaches complain when the kids gloves look like pancakes. I'm not saying any of this is wrong, I'm trying to understand it as its not my experience. I was a D1 shortstop in the late 90s. I used the same floppy super soft glove through HS and college. It felt like an extension of my fingers. I felt like I could control every movement it made. If the ball didn't hit right in the pocket, I had the control to hang on to it anyway, especially on those what were ALMOST just out of reach. But I put on some of the more rigid gloves at my kids practices and I don't have that feeling. I seems like I need to make sure the ball hits pocket every time. I seems like the ones that are ALMOST just out of reach end up bouncing off because they hit off the rigid part of the glove.
But I realize that I am in the minority here...so it probably comes down to my lack of playing time with one of these other gloves. Can anyone explain what would be better if I got to go back and play a season with a different glove? LOL...oh how I wish I could play one more!