2013-2014 D1 Commitments

[OnMAA]

Re: 2013-2014 D1 Commitments

What is a PITA PLAYER?

Prime example number one....Kenny Linseman.
Prime example number two....Esa Tikanen
Prime Example number three...Claude Lemieux.

Three of the best PITA players.

 

[OnMAA]

Re: 2013-2014 D1 Commitments

Erica Lawler flavored.

Um...no. 1) grad schools are a business and 2) anything that sets you apart from the masses is (usually) a good thing. It doesn't matter what got you into a certain (undergrad) school, it matters more what school it is and what you did during school

I find that most people who share your opinion have 1) never attended Ivy League school and 2) never obtained graduate education (Ivy or otherwise)

Welcome back. You still in same town ?

 

[UCONN FAN]

Re: 2013-2014 D1 Commitments

Prime example number one....Kenny Linseman.
Prime example number two....Esa Tikanen
Prime Example number three...Claude Lemieux.

Three of the best PITA players.

Dale Hunter is #1 in my opinion......

 

[Watson Rink]

Re: 2013-2014 D1 Commitments

Grad schools care about:

- Where you went (provides context for performance and level of achievement)
- What you did there
- How well you did it
- What you did out of school (summers)
- GRE/GMAT/Other Test scores

They do NOT care about how you got in. If you go to an Ivy, are active, and do well there (grade-wise), the fact that you got in against a relaxed admissions standard for athletes is not something grad schools care about. I would also mention that the ABSOLUTE MINIMUM academic index for athletes (which they just raised in the last couple of years) excludes 80% or more of high school students, so relaxed admissions standards is relative.

The bigger issue is if an athlete can perform well academically and do meaningful summer activities given the time commitment of being a Division 1 athlete and this is where the relaxed admission standard may have an impact, because grad schools generally won't care that you are an athlete if you have a C average.

Wish I could remember author's name or title but a professor at the Kennedy School (of Government) at Harvard wrote a book after he was rotated onto the school's admissions committee and began asking friends at other graduate/professional schools about the admissions process and was shocked to find an incredibly wide variation in both process and criteria. Some grad/professional schools evidently rely solely on admissions staff, others heavily on faculty. Some emphasize grades, test scores and other objective criteria, others interviews, recommendations and other subjective criteria. The Med School focuses on "outcomes" and year after year admits a class that four years later not only breaks down exactly the same as all previous classes in terms of specialties selected, but also has the exact same number of researchers, practitioners, people who go back to small states and become leaders in their state medical associations, you name it. Why there was such a wide disparity he didn't know and he believed he was the first faculty member to question whether his school's traditional admissions process could be improved by comparison to other schools' utterly diverse practices.

When I was an undergraduate the senior tutors had a grid showing the admissions results at the Law School for every undergraduate class in the past several years: the x axis was grades and the y axis was law board scores and that, they averred, was all ye know and all ye need to know about your chances of admission. Nothing else had mattered over the years.