Not To Jinx Us But

[RockyMTblue2]

For those of you like Charlie who really know this stuff: Who are we going to get (Other than Charli) during the signing period?

Is it really down to Nelson-Ododa, Williams and Scott-Grayson?

17-18 Recruiting thread is broader than this little itty bity question of little consequence.

 

[CocoHusky]

I honestly don't think Honesty is part of UCONN recruiting picture.
Williams has scheduled UCONN for last official visit, I like UCONN's chances.
ONO has down selected to 6 schools including UCONN. Two of ONO's other schools are Duke & Stanford which would indicate in her own words "preference for strong academics".
ONO has not announced any official visits as of yet so I don't expect her to have things sorted out for the early signing period in November.

 

[dogged1]

I honestly don't think Honesty is part of UCONN recruiting picture.
Williams has scheduled UCONN for last official visit, I like UCONN's chances.
ONO has down selected to 6 schools including UCONN. Two of ONO's other schools are Duke & Stanford which would indicate in her own words "preference for strong academics".
ONO has not announced any official visits as of yet so I don't expect her to have things sorted out for the early signing period in November.

UCONN just got a bump in the USNWR rankings. Now at 18 nationally among public universities. While that doesn't make us Stanford or Duke academically, that ain't bad.

 

[bags27]

preference for strong academics....

Not saying that Duke and Stanford aren't great universities and obviously "stronger" academically than (say) UConn. Different missions, different endowments, etc. But who has ever actually evaluated precisely what courses athletes (specifically WCBB players) have taken, how well they've done in them, and what they do with those degrees post-graduate? I haven't either. But my strong sense is that playing top-level D-1 sports significantly limits academic opportunities (for example, no afternoon seminars; lower course loads and therefore make-up credit summer courses that are usually much less challenging and usually not taught by line faculty, etc). Also, elite teams tend to hang by themselves or only with a small circle of friends, so it's not like you profit from the social networking at academically "elite" schools.

You can get a fabulous education at a "less elite" school and a crappy one at a "top" school. It depends on you. But if you're committed to a life in which one thing is prioritized about all other (basketball), everything else is necessarily going to be a compromise. Thinking that you're going to get a "better education" at Duke or Stanford because they're more highly rated academically means that you somehow think you're going to be "smarter" just by going there. Breathing the air, right? Actually, it's drinking the Kool-Aid.... Rebecca Lobo didn't. Too bad she never amounted to anything....

 

[CocoHusky]

preference for strong academics....

Not saying that Duke and Stanford aren't great universities and obviously "stronger" academically than (say) UConn. Different missions, different endowments, etc. But who has ever actually evaluated precisely what courses athletes (specifically WCBB players) have taken, how well they've done in them, and what they do with those degrees post-graduate? I haven't either. But my strong sense is that playing top-level D-1 sports significantly limits academic opportunities (for example, no afternoon seminars; lower course loads and therefore make-up credit summer courses that are usually much less challenging and usually not taught by line faculty, etc). Also, elite teams tend to hang by themselves or only with a small circle of friends, so it's not like you profit from the social networking at academically "elite" schools.
You can get a fabulous education at a "less elite" school and a crappy one at a "top" school. It depends on you. But if you're committed to a life in which one thing is prioritized about all other (basketball), everything else is necessarily going to be a compromise. Thinking that you're going to get a "better education" at Duke or Stanford because they're more highly rated academically means that you somehow think you're going to be "smarter" just by going there. Breathing the air, right? Actually, it's drinking the Kool-Aid.... Rebecca Lobo didn't. Too bad she never amounted to anything....

I actually find it encouraging when these highly talented players prioritize academics so highly. Rebecca and Kara Lawson didn't but Elizabeth Williams, Chiney & Neka Ogwumike , and Asia Durr did (not sure what happened there).

 

[Geew1992]

preference for strong academics....

Not saying that Duke and Stanford aren't great universities and obviously "stronger" academically than (say) UConn. Different missions, different endowments, etc. But who has ever actually evaluated precisely what courses athletes (specifically WCBB players) have taken, how well they've done in them, and what they do with those degrees post-graduate? I haven't either. But my strong sense is that playing top-level D-1 sports significantly limits academic opportunities (for example, no afternoon seminars; lower course loads and therefore make-up credit summer courses that are usually much less challenging and usually not taught by line faculty, etc). Also, elite teams tend to hang by themselves or only with a small circle of friends, so it's not like you profit from the social networking at academically "elite" schools.

You can get a fabulous education at a "less elite" school and a crappy one at a "top" school. It depends on you. But if you're committed to a life in which one thing is prioritized about all other (basketball), everything else is necessarily going to be a compromise. Thinking that you're going to get a "better education" at Duke or Stanford because they're more highly rated academically means that you somehow think you're going to be "smarter" just by going there. Breathing the air, right? Actually, it's drinking the Kool-Aid.... Rebecca Lobo didn't. Too bad she never amounted to anything....

This is why I didn't have a problem with my daughter choosing her school based on the team and playing time. I firmly it's what you, the student, gets out of the education. And in her case, she finished her sophmore year with a 3.80, making the deens list both semesters and the all-academic team.

 

[bags27]

I actually find it encouraging when these highly talented players prioritize academics so highly. Rebecca and Kara Lawson didn't but Elizabeth Williams, Chiney & Neka Ogwumike , and Asia Durr did (not sure what happened there).

Where we differ, Coco. You say they prioritize academics, and I say they prioritize academic reputation. To me, there's a world of difference. You prioritize academics only in how much time you actually devote to your studies. Why can't you devote the same number of hours to your studies at UConn as at Stanford? I just don't get it. We all (and I'm #1 at this) fall for reputation. But it's all smoke and mirrors, and what remains is a kid sitting in a classroom and taking notes and then going back and studying what she's learned. Can do that just as well in Storrs as in Palo Alto....

 

[dogged1]

Where we differ, Coco. You say they prioritize academics, and I say they prioritize academic reputation. To me, there's a world of difference. You prioritize academics only in how much time you actually devote to your studies. Why can't you devote the same number of hours to your studies at UConn as at Stanford? I just don't get it. We all (and I'm #1 at this) fall for reputation. But it's all smoke and mirrors, and what remains is a kid sitting in a classroom and taking notes and then going back and studying what she's learned. Can do that just as well in Storrs as in Palo Alto....

While I agree with your underlying premise that a good education is more about the dedication, ambition, work ethic of the student then it is about the name of the school, there is little doubt in my mind that the same student, bringing that same set of skills can find more academic opportunities and challenges at a Yale, Harvard or Princeton the at Average U.
And wind up with a better "pedigree" that does open doors and impress people.

 

[bags27]

While I agree with your underlying premise that a good education is more about the dedication, ambition, work ethic of the student then it is about the name of the school, there is little doubt in my mind that the same student, bringing that same set of skills can find more academic opportunities and challenges at a Yale, Harvard or Princeton the at Average U.
And wind up with a better "pedigree" that does open doors and impress people.

you make 2 arguments:
1. better academic opportunities; 2. impress people.
I agree with the second, I guess. Depends who is to be impressed. The Ivy League tells students: our degree will get you a first job interview; after that, you're on your own. And not sure how great the impression is if folks think you got into the school because you're a "jock."

As to the better academic opportunities, I don't agree. Playing a D-1 sport pretty much limits your academic opportunities. The honors program at UConn--which is terrific--assures students of every bit as great an opportunity as anything offered elsewhere. Just, how many D-1 athletes have the time or the incredible discipline to take advantage?

Anyway, we've had this discussion so many times. My bad for bringing it up again; just I think it's the wrong way to look at education.

 

[CocoHusky]

Where we differ, Coco. You say they prioritize academics, and I say they prioritize academic reputation. To me, there's a world of difference. You prioritize academics only in how much time you actually devote to your studies. Why can't you devote the same number of hours to your studies at UConn as at Stanford? I just don't get it. We all (and I'm #1 at this) fall for reputation. But it's all smoke and mirrors, and what remains is a kid sitting in a classroom and taking notes and then going back and studying what she's learned. Can do that just as well in Storrs as in Palo Alto....

I think it much more than reputation bags, since 1972 all major the party candidates for president have had 1 thing in common-they were all Ivy league graduates with a few notable exceptions ( Nixon-Duke, McGovern- Northwestern, Regan-Eureka & Carter & McCain-US Naval Academy ). I have seen similar breakdowns of CEO of Fortune 500 companies. I generally agree that any education is what you make of it, but if given an opportunity to attend one of these schools (which is what we are really talking about) then by all means prioritize it above "everything" including basketball or playing time or national championships. BTW didn't want go much further without biggin up the academic rep of ND also.

 

[dogged1]

you make 2 arguments:
1. better academic opportunities; 2. impress people.
I agree with the second, I guess. Depends who is to be impressed. The Ivy League tells students: our degree will get you a first job interview; after that, you're on your own. And not sure how great the impression is if folks think you got into the school because you're a "jock."

As to the better academic opportunities, I don't agree. Playing a D-1 sport pretty much limits your academic opportunities. The honors program at UConn--which is terrific--assures students of every bit as great an opportunity as anything offered elsewhere. Just, how many D-1 athletes have the time or the incredible discipline to take advantage?

Anyway, we've had this discussion so many times. My bad for bringing it up again; just I think it's the wrong way to look at education.

Hey Bags, I'm a newbie here (in terms of posting, anyhow) so I didn't know this was an old topic. Anyhow I absolutely respect your position and opinion. When I posted I wasn't thinking of a D1 student athlete, but more of your standard, intramurals is as good as I get, student. I should have kept in mind that this board is about D1 student athletes.

Anyhow, nothing bad about an a rational discussion on two divergent opinions.

 

[eebmg]

I think it much more than reputation bags, since 1972 all major the party candidates for president have had 1 thing in common-they were all Ivy league graduates with a few notable exceptions ( Nixon-Duke, McGovern- Northwestern, Regan-Eureka & Carter & McCain-US Naval Academy ). I have seen similar breakdowns of CEO of Fortune 500 companies. I generally agree that any education is what you make of it, but if given an opportunity to attend one of these schools (which is what we are really talking about) then by all means prioritize it above "everything" including basketball or playing time or national championships. BTW did want go much further without biggin up the academic rep of ND also.

It is a cycle. The way of the world is that good reputations attract the best students which then fuel good reputations. That does not stop individual students from thriving at schools with less reputation if they are truly motivated.

 

[Golden Husky]

preference for strong academics....

Not saying that Duke and Stanford aren't great universities and obviously "stronger" academically than (say) UConn. Different missions, different endowments, etc. But who has ever actually evaluated precisely what courses athletes (specifically WCBB players) have taken, how well they've done in them, and what they do with those degrees post-graduate? I haven't either. But my strong sense is that playing top-level D-1 sports significantly limits academic opportunities (for example, no afternoon seminars; lower course loads and therefore make-up credit summer courses that are usually much less challenging and usually not taught by line faculty, etc). Also, elite teams tend to hang by themselves or only with a small circle of friends, so it's not like you profit from the social networking at academically "elite" schools.

You can get a fabulous education at a "less elite" school and a crappy one at a "top" school. It depends on you. But if you're committed to a life in which one thing is prioritized about all other (basketball), everything else is necessarily going to be a compromise. Thinking that you're going to get a "better education" at Duke or Stanford because they're more highly rated academically means that you somehow think you're going to be "smarter" just by going there. Breathing the air, right? Actually, it's drinking the Kool-Aid.... Rebecca Lobo didn't. Too bad she never amounted to anything....

What I'm hearing, Bags, is that while a player may get a better academic education at Duke or Stanford, if your major is basketball, which, realistically, is the choice of many of these top-tier recruits, then the UConn faculty, led by Dean Geno, is superbly equipped to help you achieve your goals. Couldn't agree more.

 

[CocoHusky]

Hey Bags, I'm a newbie here (in terms of posting, anyhow) so I didn't know this was an old topic. Anyhow I absolutely respect your position and opinion. When I posted I wasn't thinking of a D1 student athlete, but more of your standard, intramurals is as good as I get, student. I should have kept in mind that this board is about D1 student athletes.
Anyhow, nothing bad about an a rational discussion on two divergent opinions.

The vast majority of D1 student athletes end up at the exact same place as the intramurals players-with a diploma, looking for a job. UCONN graduated ~9000 students last year. UCONN had 140 endowed athletic scholarships among all four under graduate and graduate classes. If you roughly divide 140 endowed athletic scholarships among the 4 classes then 35 of UCONN's 9000 graduates last year graduated debt free due to athletics. UCONN graduated over 175 athletes last year.
Husky Student-Athletes Celebrate Graduation

 

[CocoHusky]

What I'm hearing, Bags, is that while a player may get a better academic education at Duke or Stanford, if your major is basketball, which, realistically, is the choice of many of these top-tier recruits, then the UConn faculty, led by Dean Geno, is superbly equipped to help you achieve your goals. Couldn't agree more.

Geno has the right perspective on education, academics and the reputation of those schools and applies a great sense of humor. There is the famous Duke graduates being waiters in the nicer restaurants and my personal favorite: Geno said after Chinney laid out her reasons for wanting to go to Stanford vs. coming to UCONN he (Geno) wanted to enroll at Stanford.

 

[Charliebball]

I think it really depends on what kind of realistic college and after college experience a top recruit is hoping for.........if her priority is to win national championships then UConn is a logical first choice.................if she is looking to continue playing basketball as a career for say the next ten years then UConn is a logical first choice..........if she wants to play basketball at a high level but also wants to start on the road to a prestigious postgraduate degree then UConn is fine but Stanford, Duke and a few others are clearly superior options.................if she just wants to play basketball at a high level but doesn't want to be pushed to her limits then it's the usual suspects for her................

 

[Nuyoika]

I'm going to assume everyone in this thread is over 40? Times have changed. Millennials know that a Bachelors degree in 2017 & beyond are basically the equivalent of a HS diploma, no matter where you went to school. Almost everyone has one. Also, what millennials expect when it comes to work environments and prior generations is completely different. Unless you studied a very specific field the only thing that sets you apart are your references, internships, and whether you possess what they call in the Human Resources and Organizational Behavior field the "Big 5" personality traits.

It boils down to what you actually plan to do. Do the schools recruiting you have an appropriate option for you? Considering how much these kids transfer (I'm talking top 50 recruits) I would say most of them have no real clue what they want. Furthermore, since 60% of people never work in the field they got their degree in I would say we are all pretty mixed up.

I agree with the perception comments. When a 16 or 17 year old kids says oh I want to go to Stanford or Duke or Harvard or wherever because I care about academics my first question would be why? I guarantee you they couldn't answer that question thoroughly. They have heard its a good school and it is but it may not be the best school for what they wanted to do. As an example, I had a friend who wanted to study biological oceanography and marine biology, specifically sharks. She thought she would go to Duke. She had family in the area and it was theoretically the best school out of the ones she had been accepted to. However, when she compared their program to the one at the University of Miami she realized that for what she wanted to do, the degree from UMiami was going to be better. The research being done at UMiami was far superior and had better backing and she wanted to be a part of that.

Sure she could have gotten that Duke degree but for her the opportunity to possibly get out there and actually tag a few sharks meant a whole lot more.

 

[dogged1]

I'm going to assume everyone in this thread is over 40? Times have changed. Millennials know that a Bachelors degree in 2017 & beyond are basically the equivalent of a HS diploma, no matter where you went to school. Almost everyone has one. Also, what millennials expect when it comes to work environments and prior generations is completely different. Unless you studied a very specific field the only thing that sets you apart are your references, internships, and whether you possess what they call in the Human Resources and Organizational Behavior field the "Big 5" personality traits.

It boils down to what you actually plan to do. Do the schools recruiting you have an appropriate option for you? Considering how much these kids transfer (I'm talking top 50 recruits) I would say most of them have no real clue what they want. Furthermore, since 60% of people never work in the field they got their degree in I would say we are all pretty mixed up.

I agree with the perception comments. When a 16 or 17 year old kids says oh I want to go to Stanford or Duke or Harvard or wherever because I care about academics my first question would be why? I guarantee you they couldn't answer that question thoroughly. They have heard its a good school and it is but it may not be the best school for what they wanted to do. As an example, I had a friend who wanted to study biological oceanography and marine biology, specifically sharks. She thought she would go to Duke. She had family in the area and it was theoretically the best school out of the ones she had been accepted to. However, when she compared their program to the one at the University of Miami she realized that for what she wanted to do, the degree from UMiami was going to be better. The research being done at UMiami was far superior and had better backing and she wanted to be a part of that.

Sure she could have gotten that Duke degree but for her the opportunity to possibly get out there and actually tag a few sharks meant a whole lot more.

Over 40? Guilty as charged, and then some.

 

[chrissaran]

UConn is the greatest platform for WCBB while there and in the future. You're always going to hear about Rebecca, Sue, D, Maya, Tina and the rest years after they've left UConn and retired from basketball.

 

[mudcat]

I'm going to assume everyone in this thread is over 40? Times have changed. Millennials know that a Bachelors degree in 2017 & beyond are basically the equivalent of a HS diploma, no matter where you went to . Almost everyone has one.
Gotta disagree with you 0n this one: the percentage of kids getting college degrees and graduate degrees has inched upwards only slightly. It's not like Korea, where everyone who enrolls graduates (hence leading employers to request transcripts and only considering those in the top third of their class). If only we had reasonable paths to technical training as well as college........

 

[bags27]

To continue my point (wanted to break this up into 2 separate entries), let's say you're a 16 year old cello prodigy. Sure you can go to Harvard (fabulous school, excellent private lessons) or Columbia (ever so slightly less fabulous school, but even better private lessons). OR, you can go to a conservatory like Julliard in NY or Curtis in Philly (generally considered the top 2). But if you go to a conservatory, you won't get the all-around liberal arts education of Harvard or Columbia, etc. What do you do? Most folks go to the conservatory, because they're not interested in the best education, but rather the best musical training because they want to be musicians. (I picked the cello intentionally, for the obvious exception to the rule, but he is the Tiger Wood of cellists and was already gaining world fame at 8.)

Or put another way, my wife had a serious (a bit worrying, actually ) crush on Roger Federer. What pretty much cured her was during an interview someone mentioned Sigmund Freud and Federer's response was: "who is this Freud fellow?" When your whole life is tennis, you don't need to have that education. No one, except fortunately my wife, seems to care about his obvious lack of education.

If you're an elite athlete whose future prospects may well be associated with that sport, and you don't go to the very best place to pursue that sport, well, I don't think you're doing the best for yourself. Which is why Molly Bent, who will not get massive playing time at UConn and could have gone to and starred at (rumor has it) Princeton or Brown, made at the very least a defensible choice.

 

[Husky pride]

I honestly don't think Honesty is part of UCONN recruiting picture.
Williams has scheduled UCONN for last official visit, I like UCONN's chances.
ONO has down selected to 6 schools including UCONN. Two of ONO's other schools are Duke & Stanford which would indicate in her own words "preference for strong academics".
ONO has not announced any official visits as of yet so I don't expect her to have things sorted out for the early signing period in November.

s
We're not exactly "chopped liver". Somebody ought to send ONO the latest U.S. News & World Report's latest rankings!! Not a Duke or Stanford, but certainly not lacking in academics!!

 

[RockyMTblue2]

Anyone know what ONO wants to major in? If it's astrophysics, she should go to MIT an eschew (just love that word) basketball.We recently had a pre-med player who didn't travel with the team at pints because of academic demands. Rebecca's mom and dad really wanted Stanford or ?, and we all know how she feels about her choice of Geno/CD. The Ivy or near Ivy degree has less cachet than ever before. If basketball is not the number 1 career priority should UConn want that player?

 

[CocoHusky]

Anyone know what ONO wants to major in? If it's astrophysics, she should go to MIT an eschew (just love that word) basketball.We recently had a pre-med player who didn't travel with the team at pints because of academic demands. Rebecca's mom and dad really wanted Stanford or ?, and we all know how she feels about her choice of Geno/CD. The Ivy or near Ivy degree has less cachet than ever before. If basketball is not the number 1 career priority should UConn want that player?

I believe ONO want to major in Pre-Medicine

 

[CocoHusky]

s
We're not exactly "chopped liver". Somebody ought to send ONO the latest U.S. News & World Report's latest rankings!! Not a Duke or Stanford, but certainly not lacking in academics!!