Coan arrives
- Thread starter jflores
- Start date
Is he meeting with the local cable company to get his service connected already!
Doesn't have to. Dorms are already wired for cable. They'll go over his options when his RA has the floor orientation.
I heard he's been competing against toddlers. This board has lots of experts.
TA competed in Texas and I THOUGHT the deal was that he only threw 1 pick in HS...not sure how that happened(if true).
I will take the midget competition with fewer picks.
Here are his stats from his HS career in Texas. Looks like he just threw two in his Sr and Jr years each. http://www.huskers.com/ViewArticle.dbml?ATCLID=205371818
Last edited:
I was the one who (first) made the point in a thread a couple weeks ago though I didn't say "toddlers." His competition is quite weak and seeing where he is from is basically my backyard (and where I played sports growing up) I stand by that comment. I also stand by the comment that it doesn't mean a great player can't come out of the area because some have. My point was and still is that you need to consider the competition when looking at his film.I heard he's been competing against toddlers. This board has lots of experts.
BTW...I never jumped into the discussion but remember some of your guys' opinions on those who didn't think that Stanton was a high 4* if not 5*...or should I call it hate for those that said he was a 3* when it was so obvious (to some experts on this board) from watching the kid's film that he was a sure fire star. How did that one work out?
ellobo, this board is like every other board. If we get the kid he is under rated and at the very least a high 4 star, and if we don't get him our coaches cooled on him and he wasn't a big loss, and we all felt he was slightly over rated due to his competition. Same as your board.
What I trying to write...
While I'm not going to claim the Michigan board is the exception to the rule and just a bunch of rational guys chatting sports (it certainly is not the definition of sanity) one thing I give us credit for is trying to understand why a guy is ranked where he is...that way we can at least rip apart "expert" opinions in an "objective" manner...then hold it against that analyst for the 1 out of 3 times or so they end up being wrong...and of course we feel justified because we took the time to figure out why they were only right 2 out of 3 times. That's where I come from on these things....trying to understand the details so I can at least pretend my opinion is informed...
Sounds like its between us and Wisky and they may have a slight advantage based on academics according to his parents... But they loved HCMR and DL! We should know something soon as the family is weighing all pros and cons and will decide.
Not sure if Northwestern is still in the picture, they may have a shot too.
An academic decision should be a great one at Stanford, Northwestern and Cal, not Wisconsin. Otherwise, make a football decision ...
Your statement is just a tad ignorant. Wisky is a very highly regarded university. My nephew in the Milwaukee area has zero chance of getting into there, and most of his friends at his school are in the same boat. It is VERY difficult to get into, even as an in state resident. Just the way it is.
Tied for 11th in public universities
http://colleges.usnews.rankingsandr...ges/rankings/national-universities/top-public
#41 overall
http://colleges.usnews.rankingsandreviews.com/best-colleges/rankings/national-universities/page+4
You don't get out much, do you? Academic-wise Wisconsin is another level up from Nebraska. That is not putting down UNL. It's just the way it is. Coan would have a much tougher time meeting the Badgers academic requirements than the Huskers.
They can say academics all they want, but I'd say Wisconsin may have an advantage because of POB and possibly Gebbia. If Gebbia signs elsewhere or is a strong lean somewhere other than Nebraska I'd put money on him coming to Lincoln.
Its so amusing that one takes publications (bogus ones at that, take a close and critical look at their formula) and/or acceptance rates to validate the education one will receive at X school. I guess you have to be objective somehow right? I mean it couldn't possibly be that you'd receive nearly the same education at Oklahoma as you would at Wisconsin, right?
I'm by far an intellectual snob. I believe that it is up to the individual to get the most out of their education. That being said, there are real differences in the quality of education from school to school. Wisconsin's entrance requirements are tougher than Nebraska's. Are we really arguing this?
The quality of education and entrance requirements are two completely different things, and I'll have to say that many on this board completely over rate how good many Big institutions actually are. Not saying they aren't quality schools, but they aren't near what many on here claim.
Yeah, Wisconsin is a quality school, perhaps just behind other marquee BIG universities such as Michigan.
Ask an employer that question. Two identical candidates with degrees from either school. Who gets the nod?
Perception is reality, whether you believe in the bogus publications or not. The universities sure pay attention to them, and they do what they can to improve their rankings. If you think they don't pay attention to it, you are crazy.
No one is knocking UN-L, but I'm not so foolish to believe that a degree from one place can give you advantages over degrees from other places.
Yep that bogus publication usually lists them #1 (as far as public) in the BIG IIRC.
Here's another. Michigan #7, Wisky # 11 in public universities. But what do the bogus people at Forbes know?
http://www.forbes.com/pictures/gkhh45md/best-public-colleges-201/
You obviously don't have any hiring responsibility or you'd know that what school they went to ranks about 94th on the list of things you actually care about in a candidate.
The lone exception to this is if you can get somebody to like you just by virtue of saying, "Oh cool! I went to school there, too! Go sports team!"
...said somebody who obviously is not a part of hiring decisions. There is no such thing as two identical candidates first off, and let's just say for the sake of sport that their resumes are nearly identical. You would then proceed to INTERVIEW them, which would allow for quick differentiation between them. The interview is far more important than the resume, and really the sole purpose of listing your school is to demonstrate you have the requisite degree listed in the job description. Actual HR professionals and supervisors care about skills and experience, not where your college was. Unless you're dumb enough to say that you got a 2.2 GPA right there at the top, nobody cares about your college.
The lone exception to this is if you can get somebody to like you just by virtue of saying, "Oh cool! I went to school there, too! Go sports team!"
I think the importance of the university name on your degree is inversely proportional to the intellectual capacity of the interviewer.
So if you got a dumb boss, that Stanford name will impress more.
So if you got a dumb boss, that Stanford name will impress more.
I do not disagree with what you are saying but can understand why the rankings can be questioned. Even looking at my own school (Michigan grad) I question the rankings. When pubs put together lists of top research institutions we are generally top 5. When you talk grad schools generally top 10. Overall top 25 in the world. However, when rankings look just at the undergrad we slip a bit.
It is more than fair to say that things like research and graduate programs have little to do (only in select situations does it have a direct effect...indirect is a much longer discussion) with the undergraduate experience. However, if you are going to separate things to get a true ranking of the undergraduate experience you need to do it on a more apples to apples criteria. Michigan is not unique when it comes to this, but as a larger university, what separates it from many of the universities above it or around it (rankings wise) is the breath of programs it offers.
While I think it is great Michigan offers programs like Nursing, (The School of) Natural Resources (aka tree hugging), Kinis, etc. they all have their own admissions and the standards are below (in some cases far below) those of the core schools such as LS&A (Liberal Arts), Engin and Business. And in general many of the smaller universities only offer those core programs and are thus not weighted down (in the rankings). I'm not sure what percentage of the undergrad population is in those "outside" schools but it is enough to effect the rankings but at the same time does not represent the "general" student population (they have zero impact on the majority of undergrad students' experience and education) .
So my point wasn't to just say Michigan should be ranked higher...it is actually that the bigger a school is the more you need to start stripping away layers in order to get the real picture. And at least from a Wall Street recruiting standpoint (I've seen insider lists on priority schools) I think they do. I know Michigan is generally considered higher by them then what they are on the US News list...but here is one that might surprise you...PSU shoots up through the rankings...who would of thunk it (well I guess those who strip things down to the core did)...
If you're going to get industry-specific, then you would expect to see that schools with notoriously good and competitive programs carry a little extra weight in certain arenas. Nebraska's psychology department, for example, has a very solid reputation. I recall K-State being known as a good veterinary program back when I was searching for colleges, etc.
But a smart HR recruiter knows just like a good sports recruiter does that talent is not always found in just one place.
94th really? And you interview people for what type of positions? Can you speak for ALL interviewers? All middle and upper management, CEO's, and Board of Directors? Can you speak for all Governmental Entities local, state, and federal? Can you speak for all Admissions Directors and those who made admission decisions regarding medical, law, and graduate school entrances?
No kidding there is no such thing as two identical candidates, it's hypothetical question, and you are saying with you that what school a person attended is low on your priority list, and that is just you. Don't people have to actually get to an interview or do you interview every single person who sends you a resume? Are you saying that a school attended on a resume will never make a difference in the chances of getting an interview?
You've never in your time had found a tough decision in hiring between 2 candidates? You in the Chicago area, you can tell me that everyone in your position is completely unbiased in their judgment, and wouldn't have an automatic bias towards a Northwestern or U of Chicago Grad vs a UN-L grad? Are you saying that if my son (who wants to go to grad school) applied to grad school at say Northwestern as a 4.0 UN-L grad and his application was competing against a 4.0 Michigan grad for the last spot to get an interview, just to see if he could get admitted, you think the Michigan kid wouldn't get the nod?
Are you saying that the perceived prestige of a University doesn't help in internship placements (which can help in landing a job)? Are you saying that graduates of certain schools don't have a leg up if their school is known to have an (perceived) excellent program in a particular field?
Why did the Con Agra CEO (oh, he went to Vanderbilt # 15 on US News) want to move the headquarters from Omaha to Chicago? Could it be he has more faith in a Northwestern and U of Chicago degree over UNO and UNL, and he thinks he could recruit people who attended those schools easier by moving?
If the college you attended isn't so important, then why are the usual suspects on this list?
http://www.bestcolleges.com/features/colleges-with-highest-number-fortune-500-ceo-graduates/
It only matters how it ranks to the Coan family and if the report is to be believed (who knows?) then in the comparative analysis Wisconsin gets the check next to academics.
Nebraska is perceived to be at the bottom of the BIG academically by its conference breathen and in many nationally rankings that judge things globally. I'm sure this perception (true or false) is brought up by every other BIG program and it is up to our staff - athletic and academic support - to debunk this believe.
Good grief we have the best debate team in the BIG - give them the task of arguing that Nebraska is the academic equivalent of any school in the BIG to give the staff some ammo to counter our academic reputation.
I using Wall Street as an example because I've actually seen the lists and thus not talking out of my buttox. However, I heard others say the same things about pretty much the same schools in other "industries" as well. I put "industries" in quotes because Wall Street is not one industry but a collection of them. In addition, from an undergrad recruiting standpoint, they tend to recruit from a diversity of majors...more so than most "industries." because a lot of jobs require you to be in the business of other types of industries.
People who claim the college you went to has no bearing on getting hired, probably went to Missouri.
My understanding is that he didn't like the commute to Omaha and it was easier for him to uproot the lives of a lot of other people for his own convenience and in spite of the costs being higher in Chicago. So it was purely a selfish move from what I heard.
I can tell you my very first job when I moved here was for a staffing firm and I saw hundreds of resumes a day complete with the detailed notes on how the interview teams scored them, and zero of the notes related to their thoughts on which school the candidate attended.
Northwestern is a reputable school, but you'd be surprised how many people you have to meet around here before you find a Northwestern grad. Most people are from other B1G schools.
Top 2 factors in the ConAgra move:
1) $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ by way of slashed jobs, consolidation of divisions, and incentives given them by IL. He met with Rahm personally, so God only knows what other sort of eye-popping corruption may have played a role. I'd believe anything up to and including them giving him round-the-clock mob security at his home. Get into the potential value of taxes they won't pay in this article. It'll turn your stomach.
They had some seats on their board go to activist investors and they leaned hard to make this happen. If you've watched food companies of late, this is similar to what went on at Heinz and...was it Hostess? One of those snack cake companies.
(indicates wide distance apart with hands)
2) CEO lives in Winnetka.
http://www.chicagotribune.com/business/ct-conagra-headquarters-chicago-1002-biz-20151001-story.html
Last edited:
Totally correct, at least in engineering hiring that I am familiar with. We hire a fair number of graduates from "lesser" schools (e.g. Cal Poly Pomona) because those kids seem to get internships and summer jobs at SoCal engineering firms. I can then call his or her references and get a picture of the candidate's competency and attitude. It seems a lot of kids from the name schools (MIT, Notre Dame) didn't work through school, which makes checking references impossible. In my own case I got hired despite my lowly UNL degree because I had prior military experience.
A lot of it is going to fall what state you live and what job your applying for, in Nebraska I doubt theres going to many HRs that care if your a UNL grad or Wisky grad, point is you got a degree and more times then not, its not going to matter which name your an alumni at, unless Yale, Harvard, Standford or some 5 star type college. Wisky and UNL is more on the same level then compared to said groups above.
The name of the Institution on your degree and resume holds the most value when selecting candidates to interview. The institution may help you get your foot in the door, but your ability to sell yourself and your potential value to an employer is the ultimate deciding factor.
