Vander Clue-lessness

[mu-rara]

I had a conversation with a couple of Badger fans Thanksgiving weekend.  Vander came up and they started in with:

"Well, you know he would never have been accepted into UW @ Madison". 

I responded that Ron Dayne managed to get accepted.....

I never thought of these guys as BadgerNation types, but I guess you need to drink the KoolAid to be in the club.

[Nukem2]

Its their mantra. If you really want bad on that score, the dookies and Tarheels are even far worse.

[The Lens]

I had a conversation with a couple of Badger fans Thanksgiving weekend.  Vander came up and they started in with:

"Well, you know he would never have been accepted into UW @ Madison". 

I responded that Ron Dayne managed to get accepted.....

I never thought of these guys as BadgerNation types, but I guess you need to drink the KoolAid to be in the club.

A better reply would have been: "then why did Bo offer him a scholarship?"

[mu-rara]

A better reply would have been: "then why did Bo offer him a scholarship?"

Yeah, that would have been good.....They were also blabbing about what a great coach St. Bo was (my highlight)

[Ellenson Guerrero]

Its obvious Badger fans knew Vander couldn't get accepted. Thats why they didn't care when he chose MU. It really was just expected all along. Obviously not any kind of revisionist thinking

[rocky_warrior]

Maybe I'm just too sensitive to recruits, but I initially thought (from the title of the thread) that you were calling  VB clueless.  I get the play on words, I really do, but perhaps "Badger Blue-lessness" would be better

[Pakuni]

There are just three reasons any highly recruited Wisconsin player does not end up at UW:

1. They aren't smart enough to get into/survive the Harvard of the Midwest.

2. Bo cooled on him.

3. His parents are overbearing troublemakers.

[GOO]

It's funny.  They blast the poor kid for not going there and wanting to explore his options, but then they say he couldn't get accepted anyway.  Just like Maymon.  First it was he won't qualify.  Maymon worked his butt off and got qualified, so they change their tune to he can't get accepted at UW-Madison.  
Was Bo planning on pulling the scholarship offer to Vander since he couldn't get accepted?  When was Bo going to do this?  Bo could have saved Vander a lot of grief by pulling the offer, if he knew he couldn't get accepted.  Obviously, we all know he would have and could have gotten into UW -Mad, but he choose not to go there.  It really is a bad spin job by the UW fan base and maybe Bo.  But, I guess some of them can't deal with the truth, that a lot of players don't want to play for Bo and don't want to attend UW-Mad.

[HoopsMalone]

The admission standards at MU and UW have no more than a 1 or 2 point difference on the ACT.  MU and UW put you in the same exact places when you graduate.  

UW is not one of the best schools in the country, it is not one of the best schools in the Midwest, it does not come to mind when you think of the best public schools in the country, and it is not even one of the elite academic schools in the Big Ten.  People in Wisconsin have a very inflated view of how good it is academically.    

It is a great school, but nothing to brag about in comparison to MU academically, and certainly not one of the top schools in the country.  

[Canned Goods n Ammo]

I had a conversation with a couple of Badger fans Thanksgiving weekend.  Vander came up and they started in with:

"Well, you know he would never have been accepted into UW @ Madison". 

I responded that Ron Dayne managed to get accepted.....

I never thought of these guys as BadgerNation types, but I guess you need to drink the KoolAid to be in the club.

Fans that make comments like that are just looking for a debate.

A guy in my office said something like that.

I just laughed and said "So what? I won't care when he lights the Badgers up."

He didn't have much of a response to that.

[VegasWarrior77]

Maybe I'm just too sensitive to recruits, but I initially thought (from the title of the thread) that you were calling  VB clueless.  I get the play on words, I really do, but perhaps "Badger Blue-lessness" would be better

+1

When I saw the title, I thought "okay what's on facebook or youtube!".

[mu-rara]

Maybe I'm just too sensitive to recruits, but I initially thought (from the title of the thread) that you were calling  VB clueless.  I get the play on words, I really do, but perhaps "Badger Blue-lessness" would be better

That's why you have to read the thread (play the game).

[Litehouse]

I love their logic and think we should use it against them every chance we get.
"ATTENTION ALL HIGHLY-TALENTED, ATHLETIC RECRUITS...  BADGER FANS THINK YOU ARE DUMB!"

[KipsBayEagle]

The admission standards at MU and UW have no more than a 1 or 2 point difference on the ACT.  MU and UW put you in the same exact places when you graduate.  

UW is not one of the best schools in the country, it is not one of the best schools in the Midwest, it does not come to mind when you think of the best public schools in the country, and it is not even one of the elite academic schools in the Big Ten.  People in Wisconsin have a very inflated view of how good it is academically.    

It is a great school, but nothing to brag about in comparison to MU academically, and certainly not one of the top schools in the country.  

In all fairness, UW is one of the best schools in the country.  It is one of the best public schools in the country, and is a great school anyway you cut it.

[copious1218]

In all fairness, UW is one of the best schools in the country.  It is one of the best public schools in the country, and is a great school anyway you cut it.

Well this is a completely subjective post.  What qualifies it as "one of the best"?  Is it a top-10, 20, 50, 100?  In what areas?  Research?

No doubt, it is a great school, but when I think "best in the country", not one of the first 20 to come to mind.

[MUinCO]

In all fairness, UW is one of the best schools in the country.  It is one of the best public schools in the country, and is a great school anyway you cut it.

Then someone needs to tell the rest of the country because I can guarantee you that if I were to walk around my office here in CO and our offices in VA (that happen to be full of college grads with advanced degrees from across the country)...not one single person would bring up UW.

Further, if I invited them to pick between Marquette and UW...MU would win 99% of the time.  I'm not saying UW is not a good school, it is a great school and I think most of the MU grads on this board would agree with that.  However, this inflated sense that UW has this national reputation as a top academic institution is pure fantasy.

Also, it's totally irrelevant in this context because most scholarship athletes at UW (and likely at MU) are "special admits."  Bottom line, UW's academic reputation is only visible in the upper mid-west and likely has little impact on the athletes recruited (particularly for basketball and football).  Go ahead and take a step outside of Wisconsin, you'll see what I'm talking about.

[Hards Alumni]

Then someone needs to tell the rest of the country because I can guarantee you that if I were to walk around my office here in CO and our offices in VA (that happen to be full of college grads with advanced degrees from across the country)...not one single person would bring up UW.

Further, if I invited them to pick between Marquette and UW...MU would win 99% of the time.  I'm not saying UW is not a good school, it is a great school and I think most of the MU grads on this board would agree with that.  However, this inflated sense that UW has this national reputation as a top academic institution is pure fantasy.

Also, it's totally irrelevant in this context because most scholarship athletes at UW (and likely at MU) are "special admits."  Bottom line, UW's academic reputation is only visible in the upper mid-west and likely has little impact on the athletes recruited (particularly for basketball and football).  Go ahead and take a step outside of Wisconsin, you'll see what I'm talking about.

This is mostly wrong.  UW is a great school, and is consistantly ranked as one of the top public schools in the nation.  Simply because the people you talk to don't agree does not make it so.  MU on the other hand... when I would travel and people would ask me where I go/went to college many of them think that Marquette is in Michigan or something and is a state school.

UW has a lot of great kids that attend.  Their admission standards are higher than MU's whether you wish to believe it or not.  I understand they get a lot of applicants and that is why their rejection rate is higher.  BUT that doesn't change their standards.

But one point I will agree with you on is that it is no harder for athletes to get into UW than it is for them to get in to MU.

[bma725]

However, this inflated sense that UW has this national reputation as a top academic institution is pure fantasy.

No, the notion that it doesn't have that reputation is a fantasy cooked up mostly by MU grads who get upset when people from UW try to downplay their education.

The reality is that UW is one of the top schools in the country, public or private and nearly every objective measure reflects that.  There's a reason they continually get ranked among the best schools in the country and in some programs the world....because they are.  To argue otherwise is foolish at best.

[mu-rara]

This is mostly wrong.  UW is a great school, and is consistantly ranked as one of the top public schools in the nation.  Simply because the people you talk to don't agree does not make it so.  MU on the other hand... when I would travel and people would ask me where I go/went to college many of them think that Marquette is in Michigan or something and is a state school.

UW has a lot of great kids that attend.  Their admission standards are higher than MU's whether you wish to believe it or not.  I understand they get a lot of applicants and that is why their rejection rate is higher.  BUT that doesn't change their standards.

But one point I will agree with you on is that it is no harder for athletes to get into UW than it is for them to get in to MU.

The admission standards are higher for Wisconsin residents.  Out of state applicants have an easier time.  High taxpayer subsidy means UW@ Madison needs out of state $$ to balance their budget.

UW is a fine school.  To say that VB could'nt get into UW but could get into MU is ridiculous.

[Chili]

Then someone needs to tell the rest of the country because I can guarantee you that if I were to walk around my office here in CO and our offices in VA (that happen to be full of college grads with advanced degrees from across the country)...not one single person would bring up UW.

Further, if I invited them to pick between Marquette and UW...MU would win 99% of the time.  I'm not saying UW is not a good school, it is a great school and I think most of the MU grads on this board would agree with that.  However, this inflated sense that UW has this national reputation as a top academic institution is pure fantasy.

Also, it's totally irrelevant in this context because most scholarship athletes at UW (and likely at MU) are "special admits."  Bottom line, UW's academic reputation is only visible in the upper mid-west and likely has little impact on the athletes recruited (particularly for basketball and football).  Go ahead and take a step outside of Wisconsin, you'll see what I'm talking about.

I hate UW a lot, but they do have more CEO's of Fortune 500 companies than any other university. They also are tops in a lot of their programs. All schools have their strong points, but to bash their academics is plain silly. It is a pretty darn good school, just like Marquette.

[Hards Alumni]

The admission standards are higher for Wisconsin residents.  Out of state applicants have an easier time.  High taxpayer subsidy means UW@ Madison needs out of state $$ to balance their budget.

UW is a fine school.  To say that VB could'nt get into UW but could get into MU is ridiculous.

This is completely correct.

[mu-rara]

No, the notion that it doesn't have that reputation is a fantasy cooked up mostly by MU grads who get upset when people from UW try to downplay their education.

The reality is that UW is one of the top schools in the country, public or private and nearly every objective measure reflects that.  There's a reason they continually get ranked among the best schools in the country and in some programs the world....because they are.  To argue otherwise is foolish at best.

Much of UW's high ranking is due to research and the number of graduate programs they offer.  In many ways, comparing UW to MU is apples and oranges.  MU is a small, Jesuit, Liberal Arts university with a lot of emphasis on undergraduate work.  UW puts much more emphasis on grad programs.

[lurch91]

UW has a lot of great kids that attend.  Their admission standards are higher than MU's whether you wish to believe it or not.  I understand they get a lot of applicants and that is why their rejection rate is higher.  BUT that doesn't change their standards.

That's interesting.  I think one reason UW has higher admission standards then an OSU or MSU is UW uses it to exclude in-state admits - as out of state students cost just as much to educate, but pay 2-3 x more in tuition then an in-state admission. (Doh!  mu-rara beat me to it!)

And yes, MU and UW are both excellent institutions filling different needs of the education process.

[Pakuni]

No, the notion that it doesn't have that reputation is a fantasy cooked up mostly by MU grads who get upset when people from UW try to downplay their education.

The reality is that UW is one of the top schools in the country, public or private and nearly every objective measure reflects that.  There's a reason they continually get ranked among the best schools in the country and in some programs the world....because they are.  To argue otherwise is foolish at best.

UW is an excellent university. No argument there.
But before deeming them "one of the top schools in the country" I guess we better establish what it means to be "one of the top." Top 20? Top 50? Top 100?
Just using the US News rankings as a measure, UW was in a very respectable 39th place tie this year, including tied for 3rd best among the Big Televen schools and 9th among large state schools. That's terrific.

That said, if UW hoops finishes the year with enough AP poll votes to rank 39th, nobody would be calling them "one of the top teams in the country" and the "North Carolina of the Midwest" when it comes to basketball. At least not with a straight face.

I think that's what gets in people's craw. Not that UW isn't an excellent school. Nobody denies that. But rather than a) it's some kind of elite university that ranks right up there with Harvard, Princeton, MIT and Stanford and b) it's academic standards are so rigorous that only the brightest athletes can hope for admittance.

[Kramerica]

UW is an excellent university. No argument there.
But before deeming them "one of the top schools in the country" I guess we better establish what it means to be "one of the top." Top 20? Top 50? Top 100?
Just using the US News rankings as a measure, UW was in a very respectable 39th place tie this year, including tied for 3rd best among the Big Televen schools and 9th among large state schools. That's terrific.

That said, if UW hoops finishes the year with enough AP poll votes to rank 39th, nobody would be calling them "one of the top teams in the country" and the "North Carolina of the Midwest" when it comes to basketball. At least not with a straight face.

I think that's what gets in people's craw. Not that UW isn't an excellent school. Nobody denies that. But rather than a) it's some kind of elite university that ranks right up there with Harvard, Princeton, MIT and Stanford and b) it's academic standards are so rigorous that only the brightest athletes can hope for admittance.

+1,0000
That is what drives me crazy as well.  As someone who lives out of state, I had no idea that Wisconisn was considered the Havard of the Midwest until I started reading this board really.