Does being in the center of Mpls hurt the U of M? (Minneapolis: chapel, neighborhood)

[marmac]

Cuz at that time the Dome was looked as " the greatest thing on earth"

I recall writing letters to papers expressing the stupidity of moving Gopher football to the Dome, but I can assure you my view was in the minority.

They thought night college football at the Dome would pack the stands.

I'm a "traditionalist" and believe college football should be played outside,on campus, on Saturday afternoon.

[Kid Cann]

Originally Posted by marmac

Cuz at that time the Dome was looked as " the greatest thing on earth"

I recall writing letters to papers expressing the stupidity of moving Gopher football to the Dome, but I can assure you my view was in the minority.

They thought night college football at the Dome would pack the stands.

I'm a "traditionalist" and believe college football should be played outside,on campus, on Saturday afternoon.

That's what I'm saying....

The Movie RUDY shows how college football atmosphere should be like!

[MN55]

Originally Posted by Kid Cann

Maybe if they stop recruting football players from the Twin Cities metro and looked south where the real talent is.

Football - Roster - Gophersports.com - Official Web Site of University of Minnesota Athletics (http://www.gophersports.com/SportSelect.dbml?DB_OEM_ID=8400&SPID=3280&SPSID=38 606 - broken link)

^I count about 25 players from Lousiana, California, Texas, Florida, etc. About the same number as from Minnesota so I don't think that's the problem.

Compare this with the badgers who have 17 players from the south (none from Cali) and 41 from WI or MN.

UWBadgers.com - The Official Web Site of the Wisconsin Badgers - Football

Coaching and managing is the Gophers problems, not the players.

[Kid Cann]

Originally Posted by MN55

Football - Roster - Gophersports.com - Official Web Site of University of Minnesota Athletics (http://www.gophersports.com/SportSelect.dbml?DB_OEM_ID=8400&SPID=3280&SPSID=38 606 - broken link)

^I count about 25 players from Lousiana, California, Texas, Florida, etc. About the same number as from Minnesota so I don't think that's the problem.

Compare this with the badgers who have 17 players from the south (none from Cali) and 41 from WI or MN.

UWBadgers.com - The Official Web Site of the Wisconsin Badgers - Football

Coaching and managing is the Gophers problems, not the players.

I wonder what the magnitude of those players' talent are... and those numbers has only been high since Brewster. With Mason the majority of the team was from MN, OH and the midwest.

After watchign the Gophers the last few years I keep asking "How is it that Eric Decker and Adam Weber are the best WR and QB you could find?", geeze, venture out of the Twin Cities-MSA.

I'm not much of a Gopher football fan, or a College Football Fan in general, is Brewster not a good coach?

[pepe1]

Originally Posted by K-Luv

Iowa attracts a good amount of students from Illinois, including those from Chicago, because of a reciprocal agreement between those two states.

Iowa does not have a reciprocal agreement with Illinois (or with any other state for that matter).

[Cruz Azul Guy]

Originally Posted by golfgal

I would have to disagree with this. Yes, there are SOME students that have no social skills and only go to college to study but your better students are the ones that are involved in things on campus-just like you see in high school. They will also be your better employees and will be involved in things in the workforce and community as they get out of school.

This is a generalization I don't at all agree with. I would say it could go either way but in my experiences I don't think you could make a very strong correlation either way, it all comes down to the individual.

[golfgal]

Originally Posted by Slig

This is a generalization I don't at all agree with. I would say it could go either way but in my experiences I don't think you could make a very strong correlation either way, it all comes down to the individual.

No, I won't do the research for you but look it up yourself, people that are involved are more successful. Look at your Johnnie classmates and who were the top students in the class-the kids that ran track/cross country most likely, not the kids that sat in the library all the time studying.

[uptown_urbanist]

I went to school first and foremost to study, but certainly didn't leave out the fun part, too (or internships, volunteering, or other activities outside of class) -- I don't think that choosing a school based on academics first and foremost means that the student ISN'T involved in other things, too, which is what seems to have been suggested. I'm admittedly more traditional academia-focused than most people (and am planning on going back to complete a PhD in the next several years), but none of my fellow grad students (who spend as much time as anyone in the library) have been studious at the expense of blowing off steam in other ways, both in formal "extracurricular" ways and in just having a good time in more traditional college ways.

All that said, I don't think a student has to be involved in formal campus activities to be successful in life, if that's also what is being suggested. There's certainly life beyond campus-sanctioned events.

[golfgal]

Originally Posted by uptown_urbanist

I went to school first and foremost to study, but certainly didn't leave out the fun part, too (or internships, volunteering, or other activities outside of class) -- I don't think that choosing a school based on academics first and foremost means that the student ISN'T involved in other things, too, which is what seems to have been suggested. I'm admittedly more traditional academia-focused than most people (and am planning on going back to complete a PhD in the next several years), but none of my fellow grad students (who spend as much time as anyone in the library) have been studious at the expense of blowing off steam in other ways, both in formal "extracurricular" ways and in just having a good time in more traditional college ways.

All that said, I don't think a student has to be involved in formal campus activities to be successful in life, if that's also what is being suggested. There's certainly life beyond campus-sanctioned events.

Involved is involved be it on campus or in the community. Most people I know picked a school for academics and were in school to learn, not party, however, the most successful students were the involved students, not the ones with no social life and studied every free minute. They are also not the ones that were getting jobs out of school due to lack of involvement in college-same goes for high school kids getting into college, colleges don't look very favorably on kids that had no outside activities.

[uptown_urbanist]

I agree that involved kids do the best in life, but didn't read the earlier comments to imply that those who chose a school based on academics were necessarily only doing that. (I skimmed the conversation, though, so may have missed something.) I can't remember encountering any students who only studied and lacked any life beyond classes, but I'm sure they do exist. More typical these days, though, seem to be the over-scheduled students who are trying to cram their resumes full of everything possible to impress a future employer; they do it throughout high school to get into college, then do it in college to get a job. In any case, I enjoyed my time at the U, and most of my classmates seemed to have a good balance between academics and outside activities. Those who wanted only a party school probably prefer to go elsewhere, and those who only study and have no outside life beyond classes presumably have a tougher time getting into college to begin with, assuming that their lives were equally restricted during high school.