[quote]rojo wrote:
When the kid is highly intelligent and super fast, he's almost always going to go Stanford./quote]
News flash, Christina Aragon is a girl. Though to be fair, she runs times most guys would be happy with, perhaps explaining your confusion.
rojo wrote:
Why Stanford wrote:Why are all of these elite high school girls going to Stanford?
Miltenberg has proven that he is a mediocre female and male coach. Elise Cranny pulled out the win this week, but is a far cry from the girl who beat Efraimson at the World Junior Championships. Don't point out one person or give the excuse of tough academics (plenty of schools are challenging).
Stanford has a who's who in high school middle distance running. I would love to see someone do a progression of improvement for Stanford, Oregon, Washington, Oklahoma State, Mississippi State, Georgetown, Virginia, Colorado, and all others that are worthy of analysis.
She might be the greatest of all time.
Is this a serious question? The answer is easy.
When the kid is highly intelligent and super fast, he's almost always going to go Stanford unless his parents don't have money. Why? Because it's a great school and he can go for free. The other option is Ivies but they are expensive (unless the parents are poor).
No offense, but you are going to college to get educated. Few people would choose Miss State over Stanford if the cost is equal. In terms of coaching, Milternberg won an NCAA title at Gtown. He's certainly capable and the horse makes the jockey.
It amazes me that people think coaching makes or ruins these runners. So Milt has ruined Cranny and Salazar ruined Cain, but Salaar made Rupp? No. The horse makes the jockey.
Another thing to consider.
1) Think abou tthe type of athlete that goes to Stanford. I always say an 8:55 2 miler that goes to Stanford or an Ivy probabaly isn't as talented as a guy who ran *;55 and goes to a state school. Not always. But probably. The kid is a high achiever. Had a 3.75 GPA or higher. He works hard in school and likely trained harder - again on average- to run that 855 than the kid who has a 2.8 GPA and was a slacker in both academics and track work ethic in HS.
2) Academics are indeed harder.
3) I think being at Stanford is a big distraction. You've got some genius in your dorm curing cancer. Sports seem trivial to that. It's hard to stay committed.
Stanford would be cheaper than almost any other option because of their extensive financial aid, especially for recruited athletes.
TrackCoach wrote:
To the best of knowledge, Rowbury, Huddle, Agostino, Uhl, Barringer, Hall, Goucher, Coburn, Frerichs, O’Connor, Houlihan, Conley Willard, Martinez, Moser, Infeld and Bizzarri never won a H.S. national title.
Rowbury won the Adidas Outdoor Championship (now NBON) 800 in 2001.
rojo wrote:
Why Stanford wrote:Why are all of these elite high school girls going to Stanford?
Miltenberg has proven that he is a mediocre female and male coach. Elise Cranny pulled out the win this week, but is a far cry from the girl who beat Efraimson at the World Junior Championships. Don't point out one person or give the excuse of tough academics (plenty of schools are challenging).
Stanford has a who's who in high school middle distance running. I would love to see someone do a progression of improvement for Stanford, Oregon, Washington, Oklahoma State, Mississippi State, Georgetown, Virginia, Colorado, and all others that are worthy of analysis.
She might be the greatest of all time.
Is this a serious question? The answer is easy.
When the kid is highly intelligent and super fast, he's almost always going to go Stanford unless his parents don't have money. Why? Because it's a great school and he can go for free. The other option is Ivies but they are expensive (unless the parents are poor).
No offense, but you are going to college to get educated. Few people would choose Miss State over Stanford if the cost is equal. In terms of coaching, Milternberg won an NCAA title at Gtown. He's certainly capable and the horse makes the jockey.
It amazes me that people think coaching makes or ruins these runners. So Milt has ruined Cranny and Salazar ruined Cain, but Salaar made Rupp? No. The horse makes the jockey.
Another thing to consider.
1) Think abou tthe type of athlete that goes to Stanford. I always say an 8:55 2 miler that goes to Stanford or an Ivy probabaly isn't as talented as a guy who ran *;55 and goes to a state school. Not always. But probably. The kid is a high achiever. Had a 3.75 GPA or higher. He works hard in school and likely trained harder - again on average- to run that 855 than the kid who has a 2.8 GPA and was a slacker in both academics and track work ethic in HS.
2) Academics are indeed harder.
3) I think being at Stanford is a big distraction. You've got some genius in your dorm curing cancer. Sports seem trivial to that. It's hard to stay committed.
Stanford tuition is free if you make under $125,000 a year.
But how many kids get in with families that make under $125k?
Kate Murphy will go to Oregon. Calling it now