Minnesota Prep Commits to Stanford . . .

[DL65]

according to Rivals. Anhony Hayes, 6-3, 290, DT, at St. Thomas Academy committed to Cardinals recently.

Anyone know anything about Hayes? Seen him play? Jim Harbaugh and crew have had some good recruiting classes and appear to be good at evaluating prep talent.

Go Gophers!!

 

[btowngopher]

Brewster was looking at him, but held off on offering him this early. here is a review i found about him, "As a DT prospect, Hayes has some potential but is not there yet. He has a tendency to come out of stance too high and not play with leverage. He's a big kid with a decent first step which allows him to get into the backfield and blow up running lanes, but he needs to gain some lower body strength and play more consistently."

 

[streetfighter]

according to Rivals. Anhony Hayes, 6-3, 290, DT, at St. Thomas Academy committed to the Cardinal recently.

FYP

 

[Son of a Badger]

I love the Gophs but if I were a prep athlete and had a chance to go to Stanford, it would be hard to turn that down.

 

[EG#9]

Then you don't "love the gophs". If you "love the gophs" they would be your first choice.

 

[Son of a Badger]

Then you don't "love the gophs". If you "love the gophs" they would be your first choice.

Whatever you say

 

[goldygo4]

Loving the Gophs or not, it would be a tough decision to turn down the chance to get a free education to such a prestigious academic school like Stanford.

 

[Sumtimegophs]

Loving the Gophs or not, it would be a tough decision to turn down the chance to get a free education to such a prestigious academic school like Stanford.

In the ranking of 8000 institutions worldwide, Stanford ranks as #3, the University of Minnesota ranks #7, not much of a difference. It is arguable just how much more prestigious Stanford is than Minnesota and quite frankly it would depend on the student's academic interests. There are several academic programs where it would be much better to stay home.

http://www.webometrics.info/top8000.asp

 

[mplsbadger]

In the ranking of 8000 institutions worldwide, Stanford ranks as #3, the University of Minnesota ranks #7, not much of a difference. It is arguable just how much more prestigious Stanford is than Minnesota and quite frankly it would depend on the student's academic interests. There are several academic programs where it would be much better to stay home.

http://www.webometrics.info/top8000.asp

That's amazing given that Stanford only admits 12% of it's applicants while the U admits 50%. Those students applying to Stanford must not have heard about web-o-metrics!

 

[eker0016]

Loving the Gophs or not, it would be a tough decision to turn down the chance to get a free education to such a prestigious academic school like Stanford.

I went to the U and I totally agree. I would have a very difficult time turning down a Stanford or a Cal-Berkeley, as you get the double whammy of big conference athletics along with fantastic academics.

 

[RedPoo]

I went to the U and I totally agree. I would have a very difficult time turning down a Stanford or a Cal-Berkeley, as you get the double whammy of big conference athletics along with fantastic academics.

Wow...gotta side with EG here, and I'm a bit surprised at all of that. This is probably the first time I've really believed that other schools in the area (like, say, Wisconsin) just care more than we do. I know Stanford's a better school (and probably by a good deal more than that out-of-nowhere #7 ranking would suggest). I don't fault this kid for his choice one bit, but I'd expect someone on a Gopher site to pick Minnesota if they had their choice of schools. I know I would (and did...though I probably wouldn't have gotten in at Stanford).

Also, Stanford lets in a lot less people than the U because they're a lot smaller than the U (~15,000 vs. ~ 50,000). If Minnesota only let in 12% of their applicants, they'd be smaller, too. And probably more 'prestigious.'
Your point, badgergopher, is absolutely without merit.

 

[GopherGod]

Wow...gotta side with EG here, and I'm a bit surprised at all of that. This is probably the first time I've really believed that other schools in the area (like, say, Wisconsin) just care more than we do. I know Stanford's a better school (and probably by a good deal more than that out-of-nowhere #7 ranking would suggest). I don't fault this kid for his choice one bit, but I'd expect someone on a Gopher site to pick Minnesota if they had their choice of schools. I know I would (and did...though I probably wouldn't have gotten in at Stanford).

Also, Stanford lets in a lot less people than the U because they're a lot smaller than the U (~15,000 vs. ~ 50,000). If Minnesota only let in 12% of their applicants, they'd be smaller, too. And probably more 'prestigious.'
Your point, badgergopher, is absolutely without merit.

Ah the classic chicken and the egg argument. Is Stanford more prestigious because they let in fewer students than Minnesota or more prestigious than Minnesota and therefore have fewer students. Either way nearly every respected publication would put Stanford as a superior school to Minnesota and I could not fault a kid who wants to go there. The name Stanford is recognized worldwide as a top university, while nationally and internationally Minnesota just does not have that level of recognition.

 

[eker0016]

Wow...gotta side with EG here, and I'm a bit surprised at all of that. This is probably the first time I've really believed that other schools in the area (like, say, Wisconsin) just care more than we do. I know Stanford's a better school (and probably by a good deal more than that out-of-nowhere #7 ranking would suggest). I don't fault this kid for his choice one bit, but I'd expect someone on a Gopher site to pick Minnesota if they had their choice of schools. I know I would (and did...though I probably wouldn't have gotten in at Stanford).

Also, Stanford lets in a lot less people than the U because they're a lot smaller than the U (~15,000 vs. ~ 50,000). If Minnesota only let in 12% of their applicants, they'd be smaller, too. And probably more 'prestigious.'
Your point, badgergopher, is absolutely without merit.

It all depends on the individual and their values. I highly value academics, I like the ocean, I like being close to mountains, I like the Gophers. Going to Stanford is not mutually exclusive with liking the Gophers (if I was either a player or a fan). The U of M is an excellent institution from a research standpoint, thus the ranking, but its large size somewhat lessens its academic value from somebody who enjoys the classroom experience. I actually went to one of the smaller U of M campuses (Morris) for my undergrad and I really enjoyed the liberal arts atmosphere. When I went to the TC campus for grad school, I didn't like the massive classes. All of that to say, your choice depends on your values...so don't be surprised when someone values things differently than you do.

 

[mplsbadger]

Also, Stanford lets in a lot less people than the U because they're a lot smaller than the U (~15,000 vs. ~ 50,000). If Minnesota only let in 12% of their applicants, they'd be smaller, too. And probably more 'prestigious.'
Your point, badgergopher, is absolutely without merit.

O.k.

I'll make a different point. I guess all the employers that pay Stanford MBA grads $165,000 / year vs. the U of M average of $103,000 / year haven't heard about web-o-metrics.

p.s. - Stanford has a class size of 360, Minnesota's is less than 150.

 

[GopherHomer]

I'm sure all the incomes in Southern California are larger than that of the Midwest...plus all you've decided to prove is that the MBA program is smaller. There's much more to a school than the MBA program. I'm not even saying I disagree with Badger, but he's not doing a very good job with his debate rhetoric.

 

[ConferenceChamp]

I'm sure all the incomes in Southern California are larger than that of the Midwest...

Are you suggesting Stanford is located in southern California?

Last I checked, it was 350 miles north/northwest of L.A.

 

[EG#9]

The original post by son of a badger said this:
I love the Gophs but if I were a prep athlete and had a chance to go to Stanford, it would be hard to turn that down.

I think the "prep athlete" thing is a huge distinction. I would hope that everyone who "loves the gophs" would choose to play their sport at Minnesota if offered a scholarship. I could see someone "loving the Gophs" not getting an athletic scholarship, still supporting the Gophers, but attending school elsewhere. I don't understand how someone could claim to love the Gophers, but would choose another school if they had a chance to play college athletics.

 

[GopherGod]

The original post by son of a badger said this:
I love the Gophs but if I were a prep athlete and had a chance to go to Stanford, it would be hard to turn that down.

I think the "prep athlete" thing is a huge distinction. I would hope that everyone who "loves the gophs" would choose to play their sport at Minnesota if offered a scholarship. I could see someone "loving the Gophs" not getting an athletic scholarship, still supporting the Gophers, but attending school elsewhere. I don't understand how someone could claim to love the Gophers, but would choose another school if they had a chance to play college athletics.

How about because the kid is smart enough to realize he is unlikely to go pro so better to pick the school that opens the most doors after sports are done, all things being equal.

 

[mplsbadger]

I'm sure all the incomes in Southern California are larger than that of the Midwest...plus all you've decided to prove is that the MBA program is smaller. There's much more to a school than the MBA program. I'm not even saying I disagree with Badger, but he's not doing a very good job with his debate rhetoric.

How about a simple appeal to common sense.

I think the linked survey is very interesting, but does anyone here really believe that Stanford and the U are in the same class for undergraduate education? Wisconsin was ranked #9 in the same survey but even I will admit that it should be 20 spots away from Stanford for undergraduate education.

What the linked survey points to, which I'll happily concede, is that if you are a PhD candidate in engineering or economics, or if you are an MD candidate, Stanford and the U are roughly the same. It is based primarily on the web activity surrounding research publications.

For undergrads however the Stanford grad can expect to:
- Be surrounded by smarter kids than at the U
- Be educated by more highly regarded professors than at the U (on average)
- Receive a higher salary upon graduation than U grads
- Receive greater preference in job and post-graduate opportunities than a U grad

Anyway, it's just one man's opinion. I wouldn't blame a kid for going to Stanford if that's his dream. My problem is with the kids going to Ohio State, Notre Dame, etc.

 

[coolhandgopher]

A few thoughts. . .
* Using the Web-o-Metric for legitimate rankings of a university is laughable; take a look at how they devise their rankings-it has everything to do with how many papers/documents/citations are found on search engines and nothing to do with anything else. When Cal Tech is ranked below the "U", when Yale checks in at #30, Princeton at #40, and U of Chicago at #46, you really really need to question the data.
* I'm not a big fan of the US News & World Report's annual college ranking, but if you want to refer to rankings of universities from the most popular source for these things, you'll find Stanford tied for #4 and the "U" tied for #61 in top national universities.
* Stanford's admittance rate for 2010 is slightly over 7%, trailing only Harvard in most difficult universities to gain admission.
* Stanford's total undergrad population is roughly 6,500, while the "U" is approximately 32,500. The ratio of student to faculty at Stanford is 6:1, at the "U" it's 19:1.
* The retention rate of Stanford students from freshman to sophomore year is 98%; at the "U" it is 88%. Graduation rates for students who began Stanford in Fall 2002 is 79% within 4 years and 94% within 6 years; at the "U" those numbers are 44% and 61%.


I'm not stating all these numbers to disparage the "U", but rather to point out that Stanford exists on a different plane in the academic universe than the "U" (and most every other university in the world). Stanford's the west coast Ivy, with better athletics obviously. Stanford carries a world-wide reputation/name recognition that is probably only matched by the top of Ivy League for academic excellence. I would hope any student-athlete would seriously consider an offer to Stanford and any student who chooses Stanford cannot be blamed nor should be questioned. It stands head and shoulders above any major conference D-1 university in academic reputation.

One last point, the demographics of Stanford's student body is 36% California, 54% other states, and 10% international. At the "U", the student body is 71% Minnesota, 25% other states, and 4% international. So, to the argument of average wages being higher in California than Minnesota accounting for the disparity, I agree that you're looking at Minnesota grads likely staying in Minnesota or the upper midwest, but I don't know that you can make the same claim towards Stanford grads.
Sources:
http://colleges.usnews.rankingsandreviews.com/best-colleges/national-universities-rankings

http://nces.ed.gov/COLLEGENAVIGATOR/

http://www.ucan-network.org/

http://thechoice.blogs.nytimes.com/2010-admissions-tally/

 

[Jackson5]

That NY Times link has Iowa's admit rate at almost 78%!! Wisconsin checks in at almost 55% with Stanford at 7%.

 

[Son of a Badger]

Look, I didn't say I wouldn't attend Minnesota if I had the chance to attend Stanford, I just said it would be a hard decision. Plus, this kid never got an offer from Minnesota so it made his decision easy.

 

[coolhandgopher]

Personally, I think admitted rate is an overrated stat; you'll see many very good colleges with admit rates at 50% or above. However, it cannot be denied that admittance to the Stanford/Harvard class is quite an accomplishment in its own way.

 

[Unregistered User]

Personally, I think admitted rate is an overrated stat; you'll see many very good colleges with admit rates at 50% or above. However, it cannot be denied that admittance to the Stanford/Harvard class is quite an accomplishment in its own way.

I'm not trying to take anything away from anyone's point of view on this discussion, but it reminded me of a conversation with a girl who attended Yale. She was walking around campus with her new roommate (freshman year) and the girl says "Oh...so that's where it is". My friend responds "that's where what is?". Her roommate answers "Oh, my daddy donated this building, and this is the first time I've seen it."

Sometimes it's easier for some to get into the Ivy league than the rest, although this can hardly be considered the norm. Just an interesting memory of mine.

 

[bankonit]

How about because the kid is smart enough to realize he is unlikely to go pro so better to pick the school that opens the most doors after sports are done, all things being equal.

If the athlete is unlikely to go pro then we don't want him anyway so who gives a rip. I want guys who know they are going pro (even if they are not going to) They need to have that kind of swagger to them.

 

[GopherGod]

If the athlete is unlikely to go pro then we don't want him anyway so who gives a rip. I want guys who know they are going pro (even if they are not going to) They need to have that kind of swagger to them.

Good luck on fielding a complete roster. God forbid a player uses football as a means to an end to get his education and has aspirations beyond football while people such as yourself try to live vicariously through them.

 

[jovs]

Then you don't "love the gophs". If you "love the gophs" they would be your first choice.

Depends on the kids priorities. If professional Football is not his goal, but education is, it is hard argue with his choice. There might be a specific degree where the U is better but as a whole it does not compare to Stanford.

 

[RodentRampage]

If someone would pick a scholarship offer from the Gophers over all other scholarship offers, then they love the Gophers. But just because someone might take an offer from a prestigious school like Stanford doesn't mean they don't love the Gophers. Perhaps they love them less than someone who would take a Gopher offer over all other offers, but that doesn't mean they don't love the Gophers.

Someone who would walk on here rather than take scholarship offers from other schools probably loves the Gophers even more than someone who would take a Gopher scholarship offer over another scholarship offer, does that then mean that someone who would take a scholarship offer elsewhere if they can't get a scholarship here doesn't love the Gophers?

Stanford MBAs may make more money than Minnesota MBAs, but it's also a whole lot more expensive out there.

 

[maxwellsmart]

Then you don't "love the gophs". If you "love the gophs" they would be your first choice.

Right. Pay no attention to what a Stanford degree can do for you in the job market. First choice? Yes. Only consideration? No, unless you suffer from severe tunnel vision.

 

[bankonit]

Good luck on fielding a complete roster. God forbid a player uses football as a means to an end to get his education and has aspirations beyond football while people such as yourself try to live vicariously through them.

I did not say every player goes pro, but if even the athlete himself going into college ball figures he will probably not go pro then he has a problem. I want kids who think they are head and shoulders more talented than the guy lined up across from them. It may not always end up that way and some players don't reach their potential and others suffer injuries that hamper their careers, but I would like players and coaches to figure that every player they recruit has pro potential or why recruit them?