Sorry you misunderstood me, what is bad board manners is when someone calls you names or tells you to go FO in a private message.
I agree with what CoachB says.
Who told you to FO in a PM ?
Yes TPM you are the only other person to publish a PM that I know of in the 5 years I have been here.
Yes TPM you are the only other person to publish a PM that I know of in the 5 years I have been here.
BHD,
You need to get it together man and when you mess up, stop going after others.
You need to get it together man and when you mess up, stop going after others.
Bobblehead,
Please, just stop.
Please, just stop.
Isn't it funny that only you and Infielddad attack my post all the time . Yes my posts can be controversial. Others disagree and state their views. I have been attacked for telling people about athletic admits now everyone seems aware that that practice exists. In fact I got a PM from a parent thanking me because they applied to a prestige school and got accepted.
I have been attacked for what I call the myth of prestige schools and employers have posted that they don't care what school you grad from. It is more important at post grad level in a specific discipline.
It seems that everyone who brings up a controversial point of you, they get attacked.
If you really care about where this started you will see that 06 threw the 1st punch on a question I asked TR. It was partly in jest as I know how TR feels about the world to day. 06 went over the top and got ugly. No one else did until Infielddad when nuts. He accused me of everything except starting the swine flus epidemic. It was clear to me his rant was personal So I tried to take it private and spare everyone this personal vendetta. It is true I have called you names and I did it because you continually attack what I say. You in fact seem to not even read or understand what I say because you are so intent about attacking me.
It doesn't work !
I have been attacked for what I call the myth of prestige schools and employers have posted that they don't care what school you grad from. It is more important at post grad level in a specific discipline.
It seems that everyone who brings up a controversial point of you, they get attacked.
If you really care about where this started you will see that 06 threw the 1st punch on a question I asked TR. It was partly in jest as I know how TR feels about the world to day. 06 went over the top and got ugly. No one else did until Infielddad when nuts. He accused me of everything except starting the swine flus epidemic. It was clear to me his rant was personal So I tried to take it private and spare everyone this personal vendetta. It is true I have called you names and I did it because you continually attack what I say. You in fact seem to not even read or understand what I say because you are so intent about attacking me.
It doesn't work !
TPM-
Sorry you misunderstood me!
I agreed, PM's should not be used to to criticize or tell someone to FO.
But you did not say that PM's should be just that, Private messages, and you fail to say it's bad board manners to publicize a pm that you might have received.
Argue all you want TPM and anyone else who wants to defend it. It's wrong, simple as that.
It really amazes me when some on here refuse to admit they are wrong, simply amazing!!
Sorry you misunderstood me!
I agreed, PM's should not be used to to criticize or tell someone to FO.
But you did not say that PM's should be just that, Private messages, and you fail to say it's bad board manners to publicize a pm that you might have received.
Argue all you want TPM and anyone else who wants to defend it. It's wrong, simple as that.
It really amazes me when some on here refuse to admit they are wrong, simply amazing!!
Just to be clear I never told her to FO. I would never use profanity privately or otherwise.
workinghard,
I understand where you're coming from. I fall on the basic side of PM's should be private...however...
If you were to whisper to me, that you thought I was a jerk, there should be no expectation of privacy on your part. Now, if we were in a dialog, discussing something privately back and forth, then I would expect our conversation to be private.
The difference is, when one party blurts something out, vs. two parties drawing opinions out of each other.
If I pass you a note, unsolicited, I said it, unsolicited, and you can do with it what you want.
I think there's a difference.
And yes, I published part of someones unsolicited PM a month or so ago, to show that he was a liar. He was publicly saying one thing on the board and then privately claimed something else to me trying to curry my favor. So basically, I outed him, but it was his own doing, as I had not engaged him in the PM, he had initiated contact.
I understand where you're coming from. I fall on the basic side of PM's should be private...however...
If you were to whisper to me, that you thought I was a jerk, there should be no expectation of privacy on your part. Now, if we were in a dialog, discussing something privately back and forth, then I would expect our conversation to be private.
The difference is, when one party blurts something out, vs. two parties drawing opinions out of each other.
If I pass you a note, unsolicited, I said it, unsolicited, and you can do with it what you want.
I think there's a difference.
And yes, I published part of someones unsolicited PM a month or so ago, to show that he was a liar. He was publicly saying one thing on the board and then privately claimed something else to me trying to curry my favor. So basically, I outed him, but it was his own doing, as I had not engaged him in the PM, he had initiated contact.
This may sound like a stupid question but why is a PM private if the receiver feels offended and goes public with it---may as well have all the PM's on the board
Solicited or unsolicited PM's should remain just that--- PRIVATE ---if the sender wanted it public he/she would have sent it as a PM--he/she would have posted in a forum---
Solicited or unsolicited PM's should remain just that--- PRIVATE ---if the sender wanted it public he/she would have sent it as a PM--he/she would have posted in a forum---
CPLZ-
I appreciate the tone in which you explained your thoughts. I also understand your rationale.
But, agreeing to disagree I guess, I just think when you say or send something in private, it should be private. Why not just call it "messaging" then.
In my opinion, content doesn't matter (unless of course someones health or life is in jeopardy).
I appreciate the tone in which you explained your thoughts. I also understand your rationale.
But, agreeing to disagree I guess, I just think when you say or send something in private, it should be private. Why not just call it "messaging" then.
In my opinion, content doesn't matter (unless of course someones health or life is in jeopardy).
quote:I just think when you say or send something in private, it should be private
Me too 
Mother and I don't like it when you all ( Miscommunicate )
So What we Have here is a Failure to Communicate.
If it continue's, you will spend the night in the box.
I don't like it anymore then you do.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v...cOIQ&feature=related
EH
So What we Have here is a Failure to Communicate.
If it continue's, you will spend the night in the box.
I don't like it anymore then you do.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v...cOIQ&feature=related
EH
It's rather ironic people are arguing over what "private" means in the thread about the importance of grades in high school. Maybe the thread should be the importance of vocab in English? What is the definition of is? 
Going back to a previous subtopic - is there a point where too high grades/test scores might hurt a bit? I heard something, since Ivy League schools have a limited number of athletic slots, that they might not give one to an athletic recruit who they think is qualified academically to a point where they suspect he will get in without athletic help. This scares me a bit because several non-athletes at my school were turned down at Yale and other top schools this year and all had stellar GPAs and 2300+ SAT scores (2 had perfect scores; I guess admissions has just become THAT competitive). Is this all nonsense because it sounds like a myth to me; I just want to make sure that it is.
Monstor athletic admits or slots as you call it refers to getting in with lower than normal scores. A high GPA won't hurt you and if you have scores that would normally get you in you don't need a slot. They do however look at more than scores.
If it is an Ivy they don't give athletic money but other schools that do may give you less athletic money and rely more on academic money in an attempt to Save athletic money.
If it is an Ivy they don't give athletic money but other schools that do may give you less athletic money and rely more on academic money in an attempt to Save athletic money.
Monstor: Thank you for getting back to the subject.
To get into an Ivy (or Stanford) takes more than stellar GPA's and test scores. Most applying would make it on their scores. What I have been told is that are looking for something that differentiates the candidates, be it community service, or some other non-scholastic reason.
Regardless of what BHD thinks, getting a degree from one of the Ivy's or Stanford will be a life changing experience and will follow the graduate the rest of his life.
To get into an Ivy (or Stanford) takes more than stellar GPA's and test scores. Most applying would make it on their scores. What I have been told is that are looking for something that differentiates the candidates, be it community service, or some other non-scholastic reason.
Regardless of what BHD thinks, getting a degree from one of the Ivy's or Stanford will be a life changing experience and will follow the graduate the rest of his life.
What I say is getting a degree from any college can be a life changing experience. Getting into any Ivy is an honor if that is what you want.
quote:Originally posted by BOF:
Monstor: Thank you for getting back to the subject.
To get into an Ivy (or Stanford) takes more than stellar GPA's and test scores. Most applying would make it on their scores. What I have been told is that are looking for something that differentiates the candidates, be it community service, or some other non-scholastic reason.
Regardless of what BHD thinks, getting a degree from one of the Ivy's or Stanford will be a life changing experience and will follow the graduate the rest of his life.
I agree with your last statement. I remember when son's friend messed up and had to leave Duke to go to another school, Sully told son what a shame, that Duke piece of paper would have opened more doors than one can imagine, that's coming from a college coach, those that don't agree can go argue with him.
If those degrees, from those type of schools don't mean much, why do kids work their tails off in the classroom in HS to try to get admitted, and then pay 50-60K a year for the same thing they could get elsewhere (as some claim).
Here we go again !!
quote:To get into an Ivy (or Stanford) takes more than stellar GPA's and test scores. Most applying would make it on their scores. What I have been told is that are looking for something that differentiates the candidates, be it community service, or some other non-scholastic reason.
One of those perfect SAT scorers who didn't get into his top choice was also a top-10 debater nationally. Even with extra qualifications it seems nobody except recruited athletes with likely letters are sure things at Ivy schools anymore. I'm worried that maybe a coach, who doesn't know how hard it has gotten, will assume that I'll be able to get in without his using an athletic spot on me.
Also, regarding non-Ivies...Is the academic money generally less generously given than the athletic money? Because that would be unfortunate...Also, does Stanford give academic money, it seems unlikely because to get in without academic money you have to be a phenomenal student already but they aren't bounded by Ivy limitations so I'm curious...
Congratulations on even being considered for an Ivy it is an outstanding achievement.
You can be sure that the coach knows how difficult it is to get into his school. The key is - does he want you and how much. (I guess like all schools)
I don't know the answers to all of your questions, but the fact is that there is considerably more academic money available than athletic money. I will know more on Stanford after the first of the year. However to play at Stanford you must be A+ academically and A+ baseball wise. If you are wondering if a Ivy wants you baseball wise, then forget about Stanford. I can’t think of another school that has those kinds of requirements. (there probably is one some one will remind me)
Good luck!
You can be sure that the coach knows how difficult it is to get into his school. The key is - does he want you and how much. (I guess like all schools)
I don't know the answers to all of your questions, but the fact is that there is considerably more academic money available than athletic money. I will know more on Stanford after the first of the year. However to play at Stanford you must be A+ academically and A+ baseball wise. If you are wondering if a Ivy wants you baseball wise, then forget about Stanford. I can’t think of another school that has those kinds of requirements. (there probably is one some one will remind me)
Good luck!
quote:Originally posted by BOF:
Monstor: Thank you for getting back to the subject.
To get into an Ivy (or Stanford) takes more than stellar GPA's and test scores. Most applying would make it on their scores. What I have been told is that are looking for something that differentiates the candidates, be it community service, or some other non-scholastic reason.
For the typical student yes, stellar test scores and gpa are required. For the kid who can throw 95 mph, run like deer on the football field. Academic requirements can be considerably lower for those who can perform in a mainstream sport.
I'm not worried so much that Ivies aren't interested in me as an athlete (and yes, right now Stanford is an outside shot but if I continue my current off-season progression, who knows?); I'm pretty sure that some Ivy coaches will be interested in me. Rather, I'm concerned that an Ivy coach will look at my academic qualifications and think to himself that, even though he wants me as an athlete, he doesn't need to use an "athletic slot" on me because he feels that I will get into the school anyways and that he can save that slot for someone else while I just join the team after I'm admitted. (Wow that was a long, run-on-ish sentence!)
All I'm really asking is if this sort of thing happens to anyone's knowledge. If coaches are truly aware of how hard it is to get into a top academic school and don't take these sort of risks on athletes they truly want, then I'm glad to hear that and this minor concern is resolved
.
All I'm really asking is if this sort of thing happens to anyone's knowledge. If coaches are truly aware of how hard it is to get into a top academic school and don't take these sort of risks on athletes they truly want, then I'm glad to hear that and this minor concern is resolved
.
Gee, popular thread. I take off to go duck hunting for a day and miss 5 pages of posts.
BHD, I probably shouldn't waste my time explaining this, but in case any other folks do have interest I will elaborate on my earlier comments. I've told some of the players and parents that perhaps more than 90% of what goes on with recruiting players for college is stuff that the players never see. Conversations about potential prospects occur regularly between college coaches and lower level coaches, and nobody knows what was said, as those involved realize that the information should stay confidential. Academics are virtually always part of these discussions, but also questions about off-field habits and conduct, character evaluations, family life and also a lot about their baseball skills. Telling a coach that a kid doesn't have the grades to get into a certain university isn't harming a kid, it is saving everyone time. None of those three kids would have survived academically at UCSD even if they could have gotten in. Two of them are going to be at state universities, and those are good fits academically and athletically. BHD, the parents of those players are very grateful for the help their sons were given, not angry that I told the coach they don't have grades for his school. By the way, UC San Diego is probably the 2nd most difficult university to gain acceptance into in the western states, behind only Cal Tech. It has a higher minimum academic threshold than UCLA, Cal, UC Davis, Stanford or any of the other private universities.
Any kid who aspires to play in college should realize that they have to take their academics very seriously and that it will be a subject of initial discussions as much as their baseball ability. I tell all my players that the first question a college coach asks any high school or other coach isn't about a kid's fastball or ability to hit for power; it is 'what are his grades like?' When approached by a college coach asking about a player, I can assure you that this specific question is asked in almost all cases and is one of the very first questions asked. No college coach wants to waste his time recruiting, or even paying attention to, a player he can't recruit. I think you'd find that most lower level coaches who have built relationships with college coaches are very honest with the college guys, and that is the only way to be. If you lie to a college coach, word gets around quickly and every kid following along behind the one you lied for will be harmed by the broken trust that a well intentioned coach brought on himself by not being forthright when discussing a prospect. Having a different opinion or evaluating a kid differently happens all the time, but lying about stuff that can be checked is something no coach should ever do for any player. If there are concerns about a kid, it is simple to say "Coach, be sure you do your homework thoroughly" instead of trashing a kid. They know they've just been given a warning that there is more they need to find out, and they appreciate knowing that. BHD, you should also realize that college coaches do care about what kind of parents a player has, even though college coaches usually won't have much if any interaction with mom and dad beyond exchanging pleasantries. I was once trying to convince a college coach about what a great fit I thought one particular player would be for his program, and the response I got was "I know the kid would make us better, but his dad is a big *ssh*le and I won't have his kid on my team because I don't want to hear from his dad all the time." That kid did end up playing with another program, and is doing well but his dad's bad behavior cost him other opportunities. So, if you think that the only thing that is discussed among coaches is a kid's athletics, you're way, way off.
BHD, I probably shouldn't waste my time explaining this, but in case any other folks do have interest I will elaborate on my earlier comments. I've told some of the players and parents that perhaps more than 90% of what goes on with recruiting players for college is stuff that the players never see. Conversations about potential prospects occur regularly between college coaches and lower level coaches, and nobody knows what was said, as those involved realize that the information should stay confidential. Academics are virtually always part of these discussions, but also questions about off-field habits and conduct, character evaluations, family life and also a lot about their baseball skills. Telling a coach that a kid doesn't have the grades to get into a certain university isn't harming a kid, it is saving everyone time. None of those three kids would have survived academically at UCSD even if they could have gotten in. Two of them are going to be at state universities, and those are good fits academically and athletically. BHD, the parents of those players are very grateful for the help their sons were given, not angry that I told the coach they don't have grades for his school. By the way, UC San Diego is probably the 2nd most difficult university to gain acceptance into in the western states, behind only Cal Tech. It has a higher minimum academic threshold than UCLA, Cal, UC Davis, Stanford or any of the other private universities.
Any kid who aspires to play in college should realize that they have to take their academics very seriously and that it will be a subject of initial discussions as much as their baseball ability. I tell all my players that the first question a college coach asks any high school or other coach isn't about a kid's fastball or ability to hit for power; it is 'what are his grades like?' When approached by a college coach asking about a player, I can assure you that this specific question is asked in almost all cases and is one of the very first questions asked. No college coach wants to waste his time recruiting, or even paying attention to, a player he can't recruit. I think you'd find that most lower level coaches who have built relationships with college coaches are very honest with the college guys, and that is the only way to be. If you lie to a college coach, word gets around quickly and every kid following along behind the one you lied for will be harmed by the broken trust that a well intentioned coach brought on himself by not being forthright when discussing a prospect. Having a different opinion or evaluating a kid differently happens all the time, but lying about stuff that can be checked is something no coach should ever do for any player. If there are concerns about a kid, it is simple to say "Coach, be sure you do your homework thoroughly" instead of trashing a kid. They know they've just been given a warning that there is more they need to find out, and they appreciate knowing that. BHD, you should also realize that college coaches do care about what kind of parents a player has, even though college coaches usually won't have much if any interaction with mom and dad beyond exchanging pleasantries. I was once trying to convince a college coach about what a great fit I thought one particular player would be for his program, and the response I got was "I know the kid would make us better, but his dad is a big *ssh*le and I won't have his kid on my team because I don't want to hear from his dad all the time." That kid did end up playing with another program, and is doing well but his dad's bad behavior cost him other opportunities. So, if you think that the only thing that is discussed among coaches is a kid's athletics, you're way, way off.
Just to get back to the SAT score talk. Son and I went on a visit to Princeton last spring and 1 of the comments the speaker said was that they reject more perfect SAT scores then they admit, there is more to a schools STUDENT BODY then SAT or ACT scores.If that is all they or a baseball coach needs to go by then everything would just stop after testing or coaches could just sign kids based on 60 times,pop times,velocity, ect. why bother watching a kid play the game?I remember Bill Parcells commenting on the NFL combine being the biggest waste of time and effort.
Monster there are as many athletic slots as there are roster positions at the college. Academic Admits can vary from college to college. It is not publicized but it is probably only a few. So if there are 35 roster spots then there would be 35 slot per your terminology. Maybe 3-4 spacial athletic admits.
06 I don't know why I waste my time either.
If you look at what I said and understand it you might not have over reacted.
I was not suggesting your relationship with your team and parents was less than stellar. I didn't say to get a Lawyer nor did I dump on the college.
I did say that you should get releases in todays world to avoid a potential law suit
CoachB25 and May do because their schools have legal advice and understand the possible problems.
As far as your post here I am very aware of the issues. I have also seen poor students become scholars.
Today even web sites have privacy policies at the bottom of the page.
Personally I disagree with coaches making judgment calls on a students academic ability based on marks. GPAs are important but they aren't everything. Yes they determine options to a degree and the amount of scholarship money you will get.
06 I don't know why I waste my time either.
If you look at what I said and understand it you might not have over reacted.
I was not suggesting your relationship with your team and parents was less than stellar. I didn't say to get a Lawyer nor did I dump on the college.
I did say that you should get releases in todays world to avoid a potential law suit
CoachB25 and May do because their schools have legal advice and understand the possible problems.
As far as your post here I am very aware of the issues. I have also seen poor students become scholars.
Today even web sites have privacy policies at the bottom of the page.
Personally I disagree with coaches making judgment calls on a students academic ability based on marks. GPAs are important but they aren't everything. Yes they determine options to a degree and the amount of scholarship money you will get.
06catchersdad - thanks for taking the time to explain things. For starters, I am not sure how anyone back here in the east would know much about the California school system unless they were exposed to it at one point in their lives. I had no idea for example that UCSD was that tough to get into until you and infielddad pointed it out.
BHD - I see where you get yourself in trouble and it seems to me to be a simple error in logic. You seem to extrapolate general principles from your son's specifc circumstances and misapply them over and over again to circumstances that from the outside appear unrelated.
Back to some points raised by 06catcher'sdad... Things are often not black and white. I get how based off of knowledge of UCSD that one could discretely let a coach know that the kid would be unable to qualify. I would hope that if there were some uncertainty however, that coaches would error on the side of the kid. In other words, rather than summarily dismissing some kid with a college coach, one might say something like, "This kid is a pretty good student. He might struggle a bit with your school but he might be someone you want to invesitgate further regarding academics." It seems to me that you could signal the coach there might be some risk there but at the same time leave open the possibility that the risk was worth taking.
This brings me up to my ultimate point and it relates to what intermediaries ought to be saying and/or assuming about what is best for the student and what may or may not be best for the respective recruiter. I believe when it comes to athletics that there is a much bigger grey area than academics. I have heard of coaches in my own experiences and also here on the hsbaseballweb that may decide on their own where a kid might fit athletically at the next level. Some will even go as far as withholding contact information. I know of a case where a coach was approached by a D1 coach and the coach told the recruiter that he did not think that kid was D1 material. Moreover, he never even passed along to the kid or his parents that he was even contacted by said coach. I am not suggesting you would ever do anything like that 06catcherdad but I have heard of that scenario.
IMHO, there is no person on the planet that is 100% knowledgable about the future. That includes pro scouts, college coaches, high school coaches, and high end travel coaches. It seems to me that if a recruiter approaches a coach about a particular player, the player and his parents ought to be notified of the contact for many reasons.
Here is a hypothetical to clarify what I am saying. Recruiter approaches travel coach about player. Recruiter says "We saw player and like his ability. Specifically we like his power potential." Coach response 1: "That kid has never shown power here and frankly I don't see it. I really don't think that kid is a college level prospect." The rationale I have heard for these types of evaluations is that the coach does not want to lose "credibility" with the recruiters. Moreover, he never even passes along the information that some college coach showed some interest.
Now here is another response to the same inquiry Coach response 2: "Player has not shown a lot of present power but you might be right about potential down the road." Coach also lets the recruiter know of other positives about the kid and does everything in his power to present the kid in his best positive light. Coach is confident in the recruiters ability to determine whether or not the kid is a good fit. At no time does the coach misrepresent anything however. If asked why the kid is batting lower in the order for example or is the third starter, the coach gives his honest opinion. After the discussion, coach notifies player and parents of the contact.
BHD - I see where you get yourself in trouble and it seems to me to be a simple error in logic. You seem to extrapolate general principles from your son's specifc circumstances and misapply them over and over again to circumstances that from the outside appear unrelated.
Back to some points raised by 06catcher'sdad... Things are often not black and white. I get how based off of knowledge of UCSD that one could discretely let a coach know that the kid would be unable to qualify. I would hope that if there were some uncertainty however, that coaches would error on the side of the kid. In other words, rather than summarily dismissing some kid with a college coach, one might say something like, "This kid is a pretty good student. He might struggle a bit with your school but he might be someone you want to invesitgate further regarding academics." It seems to me that you could signal the coach there might be some risk there but at the same time leave open the possibility that the risk was worth taking.
This brings me up to my ultimate point and it relates to what intermediaries ought to be saying and/or assuming about what is best for the student and what may or may not be best for the respective recruiter. I believe when it comes to athletics that there is a much bigger grey area than academics. I have heard of coaches in my own experiences and also here on the hsbaseballweb that may decide on their own where a kid might fit athletically at the next level. Some will even go as far as withholding contact information. I know of a case where a coach was approached by a D1 coach and the coach told the recruiter that he did not think that kid was D1 material. Moreover, he never even passed along to the kid or his parents that he was even contacted by said coach. I am not suggesting you would ever do anything like that 06catcherdad but I have heard of that scenario.
IMHO, there is no person on the planet that is 100% knowledgable about the future. That includes pro scouts, college coaches, high school coaches, and high end travel coaches. It seems to me that if a recruiter approaches a coach about a particular player, the player and his parents ought to be notified of the contact for many reasons.
Here is a hypothetical to clarify what I am saying. Recruiter approaches travel coach about player. Recruiter says "We saw player and like his ability. Specifically we like his power potential." Coach response 1: "That kid has never shown power here and frankly I don't see it. I really don't think that kid is a college level prospect." The rationale I have heard for these types of evaluations is that the coach does not want to lose "credibility" with the recruiters. Moreover, he never even passes along the information that some college coach showed some interest.
Now here is another response to the same inquiry Coach response 2: "Player has not shown a lot of present power but you might be right about potential down the road." Coach also lets the recruiter know of other positives about the kid and does everything in his power to present the kid in his best positive light. Coach is confident in the recruiters ability to determine whether or not the kid is a good fit. At no time does the coach misrepresent anything however. If asked why the kid is batting lower in the order for example or is the third starter, the coach gives his honest opinion. After the discussion, coach notifies player and parents of the contact.
Ken I couldn't agree more.
The Dean of Law at my University told me that the best Lawyers weren't the high mark guys. He said they look for well rounded students.
Even getting a job today often means psych test and SAT type exams. They just don't look at GPA and the college you graduate from. One job my son was offered had 5 different interviews, an on line Sat type and psych tests. It also had an 8 month training course after all that. The GPA was part of the package but not a deal maker.
Every kid is different but well rounded seems to be in vogue.
The Dean of Law at my University told me that the best Lawyers weren't the high mark guys. He said they look for well rounded students.
Even getting a job today often means psych test and SAT type exams. They just don't look at GPA and the college you graduate from. One job my son was offered had 5 different interviews, an on line Sat type and psych tests. It also had an 8 month training course after all that. The GPA was part of the package but not a deal maker.
Every kid is different but well rounded seems to be in vogue.
.
I dunno 'bout that CD. Whenever I go in for a session with Madam Matilda...
...she always knows not to accept a check from me. Cash only!
.
- "IMHO, there is no person on the planet that is 100% knowledgable about the future."
I dunno 'bout that CD. Whenever I go in for a session with Madam Matilda...
...she always knows not to accept a check from me. Cash only!
.
CD trouble ? What trouble ? I was quite surprised at 06's response. Yes you said it very well for a Lawyer.
No not about my son's experience. Experience drawn on talks with at least a few hundred college players. I also help pick players on a local college which gets many US college players returning to play here.
I use my son's experience because it is in fact different.
No not about my son's experience. Experience drawn on talks with at least a few hundred college players. I also help pick players on a local college which gets many US college players returning to play here.
I use my son's experience because it is in fact different.
I think it is dangerous to link all the Ivy's into one overall general statement. They are all very different. Each is independent and has different academic & athletic needs and requirements. Fenwaysouth son was recently admitted to an Ivy Early Decision (ED). My observation is that the ED admissions criteria were absolutely incredible. However, the weighting of GPA, class rank, essay, SATs & ACTS, "hooks" such as athletics varied between the Ivy schools that offer Early Decision (a couple don't). Yes, I read on some websites where a few students told of being rejected with perfect SATS. However, I have no idea if their GPA was exceptional or that their essay read well. In my son's case, they were looking for the truly exceptional well-rounded student. My son's hook was baseball, others had some very unique talents that set them apart from what I read on a website. My guess is Stanford would be the same (academically)but even more (athletically) given the demands of their athletic conference.
I have several people I know who attended Harvard. Their hook was a fat wallet. One his Dad was a successful Corporate Lawyer with big BB connections and Mom was a college prof. Many Hall of Fame players stayed at their home when they were here to see Dr John Gleddie.
Also have a friend at Harvard that is paid by them to go there for his PHD. You want to see recruiting ? It was far superior to athletic perks.
Also have friends who attended Cal Berkley and Serra Cosa JC. The guy at SC JC was a much better student than the guy at Cal. Both went on to graduate with no problem.
Also have a friend at Harvard that is paid by them to go there for his PHD. You want to see recruiting ? It was far superior to athletic perks.
Also have friends who attended Cal Berkley and Serra Cosa JC. The guy at SC JC was a much better student than the guy at Cal. Both went on to graduate with no problem.
I know a guy who can suck a strand of spaghetti into his nose and make it come out his mouth. He was a special forces demolition expert that married a girl of Asian descent.
So that must mean, all yellow labs prefer Alpo and the sun shines on Tuesdays. Do you walk to work or carry your lunch?
So that must mean, all yellow labs prefer Alpo and the sun shines on Tuesdays. Do you walk to work or carry your lunch?
.
The spaghetti...cooked or uncooked?
.
- "I know a guy who can suck a strand of spaghetti into his nose and make it come out his mouth."
The spaghetti...cooked or uncooked?
.
I remember that guy.
You cannot make broad based assumptions and apply them to everyone in a given situation.
Real life doesnt work that way.
The best employers look for talent that is appropriate for their needs. A 4.0 Harvard business school grad may be a perfect fit for one job - and a terrible fit for another. Either skillwise - or socially.
The only trait that I believe can be applied across the board for all employers is emotional intelligence.
Unless you will be working in a lab room all by yourself - emotional intelligence is a critical trait that is required for any well functioning business organization.
And you can find potential candidates from every school in the US that either have it - or do not have it.
Just my opinion.
Real life doesnt work that way.
The best employers look for talent that is appropriate for their needs. A 4.0 Harvard business school grad may be a perfect fit for one job - and a terrible fit for another. Either skillwise - or socially.
The only trait that I believe can be applied across the board for all employers is emotional intelligence.
Unless you will be working in a lab room all by yourself - emotional intelligence is a critical trait that is required for any well functioning business organization.
And you can find potential candidates from every school in the US that either have it - or do not have it.
Just my opinion.
Talent comes in all kinds of different packages. Fat Wallet is definitely not a talent for Fenwaysouth, however the spaghetti talent could be an acquired talent. Practice, practice, practice.....
.
Al dente?
.
Al dente?
.
quote:Originally posted by gotwood4sale:
.
Al dente?
.
No, it was only a bruise, he's listed as probable.