I don't blame her for wanting to win now. Any athlete approaching the apex of their skill development wants to be in the best spot to be noticed. That is how you move to the next level.
I sound like a broken record, but it is the truth: UMN has faculty, administration and a board of regents that varies from resisting athletic success to undermining athletic success. That opposition to athletic success is also an opposition to developing new methods of revenue, income and donations to the school.
The faculty's "students first, athletes second" creed is a venomous and ignorant attack on 25% of their own schools. Schools that focus on the function of the human body and the variety of elements that comprise it. The faculty doesn't understand, or care, that they are driving away students who enjoy athletics and basic physical activity. They are not only driving them towards other schools, but, thanks to technological innovation, other methods of accessing knowledge.
The administration, thanks to the demands of faculty, staff and associated interests, have placed disproportionately narrower behavior standards on student-athletes than they do on non-athletic students. It is all done under the guise of "meeting education standards" and "fulfilling federal funding mandates". UMN has intentionally designed tighter standards than required under state and federal Instruction. This is an actual disincentive especially when compared to how other land grant schools established their standards under the same parameters.
The Board of Regents is a power bottleneck which especially in terms of funding for UMN. A successful athletic department with winning teams and boosters who want to provide funds through that department is a threat to the Regents power and their financial trust.
Each of these entities is surrounded by a community of advocates and allies who work to keep this antiquated, authoritarian power structure and its ideology in place.
Compare the ascension of four new hockey programs in Minnesota to the vascilating results in the established hockey programs at both UMN and UMD. Everyone is bewildered by Wisconsin's rise in athletic stature when the formula is really simple: get unnecessary faculty, administration and Board of Regent-imposed obstacles to having successful sports teams out of the way and innovate educational access for all students.
Any athlete who wants to be successful and take their skills to the next level is no different than any student, undergraduate or graduate, who wants to get to the next level with their educational skills. They will go to the place that gives them the best opportunity to do so.
The difference is what return on investment do either provide their school or department within the university? The cash cow of medical innovation is drying up. Technological innovation is so spread out and in such demand that it works on thinner margins for the university. Business schools are in competition with rapid fire innovation start ups not associated with any particular university and half of successful business are started by college dropouts. Schools of public policy and political science are not, by nature, generators of disproportionately high income alumni. I think you get the idea that if you need funding infusions then you need to follow the money, which has been found, for the last forty years, in athletics, in competitive sports.