OU still in play for Trae Young as he explodes nationally

[bocabull]

For an intelligent, ambitious person who does well at Stanford, yes. For an athlete focusing on football, making a 2.5 in sociology, no.

If Stanford is on your resume its just assumed you're elite. Period. You go to the top of the stack. The Stanford grad with the worst GPA in their class will be a Stanford grad for the rest of their life and benefit immensely.

 

[bgrch1350]

Exactly. Plus, in hindsight, Richardson is probably the only one I think would have been a true difference maker. Of course, that's on Capel (Richardson was in the 2011 class).

We don't need difference makers. We need a bench. We have offered juco players and Booker. You can't tell me that pursuing the previous kids mentioned wouldn't be better then recruiting these guys.

And I disagree with that statement. Harris, Parker, Milton, and Jolly are 4 year players. Nothing wrong with having them on your team whether they become all stars or not.

 

[campbest]

For an intelligent, ambitious person who does well at Stanford, yes. For an athlete focusing on football, making a 2.5 in sociology, no.

Actually, yes it does.

No different than your point about an OU football player reaping the benefits of staying in-state after their playing days are done. Their diploma says Stanford...they will reap the benefits of that for a lifetime.

 

[sperry]

If Stanford is on your resume its just assumed you're elite. Period. You go to the top of the stack. The Stanford grad with the worst GPA in their class will be a Stanford grad for the rest of their life and benefit immensely.

Sorry, but this isn't accurate. The employers that care about things like that (big banking, consulting, tech, etc.) also care a LOT about your major and your gpa, as well as how you interview and whether you can do the job.

Most Stanford grads are brilliant, becuase they had to be to get into the school. The name doesn't do you any good if you don't actually match up to the standards.

 

[sperry]

Actually, yes it does.

No different than your point about an OU football player reaping the benefits of staying in-state post after their playing days are done. Their diploma says Stanford...they will reap the benefits of that for a lifetime.

You think all the Duke basketball players, every single one of whom majors in Sociology because it's the only thing they can pass at the school, are just tearing up the corporate world? Give me a break.

 

[skyvue]

If I had a free pass to go live, learn, and play basketball for free somewhere it wouldn't be in Oklahoma. I am from Oklahoma, and currently live here, but it would be a tough sell for me to stay in state as a 17 or 18 year old.

I would probably be heading to UC Santa Barbara, Pepperdine, USC, Stanford, Hawaii, or a Florida school.

So, you like the beach, do you? Fair enough.

I left Oklahoma right out of college and haven't returned (except to visit friends and family). I'll likely never reside there again.

But your preference and mine aren't the point. boca said any kid who gets an offer from one of the elite programs has to take it. That's nonsense. There are any number of reasons why a young athlete might choose to stay close to home and play basketball for a quality program like OU, and do himself no harm in the process. Just ask Blake (and Wayman would have agreed, I'm sure).

 

[bocabull]

Sorry, but this isn't accurate. The employers that care about things like that (big banking, consulting, tech, etc.) also care a LOT about your major and your gpa, as well as how you interview and whether you can do the job.

Most Stanford grads are brilliant, becuase they had to be to get into the school. The name doesn't do you any good if you don't actually match up to the standards.

You live in a fantasy world. Any company wants to be associated with the prestige of Stanford. A Stanford grad has an undeniable advantage for life. The advantage gets larger with age.

And football is football no player is going to be better prepared for the NFL by attending OU over Stanford. Actually the current OU coaching staff is very mediocre. Regardless football careers are short. A Stanford degree is for life.

 

[bocabull]

So, you like the beach, do you? Fair enough.

I left Oklahoma right out of college and haven't returned (except to visit friends and family). I'll likely never reside there again.

But your preference and mine aren't the point. boca said any kid who gets an offer from one of the elite programs has to take it. That's nonsense. There are any number of reasons why a young athlete might choose to stay close to home and play basketball for a quality program like OU, and do himself no harm in the process. Just ask Blake (and Wayman would have agreed, I'm sure).

Blake was an underrated as a recruit and Capel got him committed early. He didn't have offers from Duke or UCLA. But if he was rated the #1 recruit and had those offers its very likely his own father would have told him he had to take it. It would be parental malpractice not to.

 

[sperry]

You live in a fantasy world. Any company wants to be associated with the prestige of Stanford. A Stanford grad has an undeniable advantage for life. The advantage gets larger with age.

And football is football no player is going to be better prepared for the NFL by attending OU over Stanford. Actually the current OU coaching staff is very mediocre. Regardless football careers are short. A Stanford degree is for life.

You're putting too much emphasis on the mythical status of the degree, and ignoring that the employers love stanford grads because they're extremely intelligent, ambitious, and talented.

 

[bgrch1350]

You live in a fantasy world. Any company wants to be associated with the prestige of Stanford. A Stanford grad has an undeniable advantage for life. The advantage gets larger with age.

And football is football no player is going to be better prepared for the NFL by attending OU over Stanford. Actually the current OU coaching staff is very mediocre. Regardless football careers are short. A Stanford degree is for life.

The OU coaching staff is very mediocre? Thats funny.

 

[DFWHoopster]

I was at the EYBL in Houston and watched Mokan Elite play the NY Lightning. Trae Young played well (scored a lot of points- especially at the free throw line) and his team won which of course is the most important thing...

But I felt the NY Lightning PG outplayed him- Shamorie Ponds. Ponds shows an OU offer. Ponds ripped him at least 4 times- maybe more.

Trae is a year younger though. From what I saw, I would rather have Ponds- toughness and all around game.

I was sitting with some guys for various 247 sites and although the Kansas guy thinks he's a KU lock, when one of the guys interviewed him after the game his face lit up when he talked about Duke. I would say if Duke offers, he would likely go there based on his reaction.

 

[BigTime]

I was at the EYBL in Houston and watched Mokan Elite play the NY Lightning. Trae Young played well (scored a lot of points- especially at the free throw line) and his team won which of course is the most important thing...

But I felt the NY Lightning PG outplayed him- Shamorie Ponds. Ponds shows an OU offer. Ponds ripped him at least 4 times- maybe more.

Trae is a year younger though. From what I saw, I would rather have Ponds- toughness and all around game.

I was sitting with some guys for various 247 sites and although the Kansas guy thinks he's a KU lock, when one of the guys interviewed him after the game his face lit up when he talked about Duke. I would say if Duke offers, he would likely go there based on his reaction.

DFW,

I think Duke did offer recently.

 

[SoonerInJersey]

Sorry, but this isn't accurate. The employers that care about things like that (big banking, consulting, tech, etc.) also care a LOT about your major and your gpa, as well as how you interview and whether you can do the job.

Most Stanford grads are brilliant, becuase they had to be to get into the school. The name doesn't do you any good if you don't actually match up to the standards.

Almost dead on. I work in investment risk. We definitely look at fields of study first. We take into account grades. School can, and to my mind unfortunately too often, make a difference as to which applicants get an interview when 'all things are otherwise equal'. But who is continued to the second round or hired is based more on the interview, what they can or have done, intelligence, and similar. Frankly, I have met and interviewed far too many entitled and ignorant Ivy and Stanford and MIT people to be very impressed with the actual under graduate education at such schools. i have also met and interviewed some (and approved for hiring) some brilliant ones. But the school is in no way the primary or even major consideration. At least where I work cannot speak for everywhere.

Graduate programs are a bit different. But then again, it can be other schools than Ivy, Stanford, or UCLA/Duke, etc. that have excellent graduate programs for financial economics, quantitative MBA, stochastic modelling, and on and on.

 

[DenverSooner]

You're putting too much emphasis on the mythical status of the degree, and ignoring that the employers love stanford grads because they're extremely intelligent, ambitious, and talented.

A degree from Stanford or an Ivy League school opens doors. It is a fact. It doesn't mean you cannot be extremely successful with a degree from another school or even no degree but it is silly to discount the value of a degree from Stanford. It is probably the best school in the country and certainly one of them.

 

[DFWHoopster]

DFW,

I think Duke did offer recently.

ok- he said Duke was tracking him/showing interest on Friday night. But if they did offer, I will be surprised if he doesn't take that based on his reaction to their interest.

 

[bocabull]

Almost dead on. I work in investment risk. We definitely look at fields of study first. We take into account grades. School can, and to my mind unfortunately too often, make a difference as to which applicants get an interview when 'all things are otherwise equal'. But who is continued to the second round or hired is based more on the interview, what they can or have done, intelligence, and similar. Frankly, I have met and interviewed far too many entitled and ignorant Ivy and Stanford and MIT people to be very impressed with the actual under graduate education at such schools. i have also met and interviewed some (and approved for hiring) some brilliant ones. But the school is in no way the primary or even major consideration. At least where I work cannot speak for everywhere.

Graduate programs are a bit different. But then again, it can be other schools than Ivy, Stanford, or UCLA/Duke, etc. that have excellent graduate programs for financial economics, quantitative MBA, stochastic modelling, and on and on.

Understand where you're coming from. I'm managing member and chief investment officer of a quantitative investment management firm. Obviously you want the most qualified people in decision making positions. But you also need a few trophies on the company profile even if you have them picking up donuts!!

 

[chuckb]

You think all the Duke basketball players, every single one of whom majors in Sociology because it's the only thing they can pass at the school, are just tearing up the corporate world? Give me a break.

I would doubt there's a very high percentage of Sociology majors working in the corporate world. The two don't go together all that well.

 

[SoonerInJersey]

Understand where you're coming from. I'm managing member and chief investment officer of a quantitative investment management firm. Obviously you want the most qualified people in decision making positions. But you also need a few trophies on the company profile even if you have them picking up donuts!!

Fair enough.

 

[sperry]

A degree from Stanford or an Ivy League school opens doors. It is a fact. It doesn't mean you cannot be extremely successful with a degree from another school or even no degree but it is silly to discount the value of a degree from Stanford. It is probably the best school in the country and certainly one of them.

It absolutely does open doors. Doors which will promptly get shut in your face if you aren't an impressive candidate on your own merits.


If you are a smart and talented individual who can take advantage of the Stanford degree, you should definitely go there over Random State U. I'm saying the calculus isn't all the same for an elite athlete of average intelligence.


Again, I'm not a hater of the elite schools. They are definitely worth the price of admission. I have degrees from OU and an Ivy league school, so I've experienced both, and recognize the strengths and benefits of each.

 

[WTSooner]

You're putting too much emphasis on the mythical status of the degree, and ignoring that the employers love stanford grads because they're extremely intelligent, ambitious, and talented.

I gotta agree with this. I've been in the "business world" for 15+ years now, and for the most part, nobody gives a crap where anybody went to school, other than as a basis for discussing sports.

A smart kid with a great resume from TU, OU, or OSU is going to have every bit the same shot at a job anywhere around here (midwest) as a Stanford grad with a similar resume. From my experiences anyways.