Josh Garnett Update

Submitted by snakedog on January 16th, 2012 at 9:49 PM

Quoting Tim over at Rivals summarizing Josh's statement:

"The visit to Standford did not move the Cardinal to the top of his list, unlike what many analyst seemed to have think."

A full interview article is on the way for those with rivals insider privileges. This must make us the favorite, or tied at the very worst, which is good to know.

Comments

Bluestreak

January 16th, 2012 at 9:56 PM ^

Michigan's academics and campus aren't too far compared to Stanford's. Can't say the same about Coaches and Opportunities at Stanford.

I'd say overall Michigan has the right balance of academics, football tradition and national recognition compared to Stanford which is predominantly academic.

superstringer

January 16th, 2012 at 10:10 PM ^

I did undergrad at UM and 3 yrs of grad at stanford. campuses dont compare at all. its Club Med versus a midwestern campus. srsly. plus being in northern cali, the weather... when you see stanford coeds tossing the frisbee in bikinis in october, dude, you aint in AA. just the truth.
<br>
<br>i still bleed maize n blue and the ONLY time i rooted for stanford was when a Michigan Man was their HC.

markinmsp

January 17th, 2012 at 5:30 PM ^

Yep, High in the 50's and below 30 lows right now in Santa Cruz.  Just never seems to get wet chill out of the air unless you are down sitting in sun, or east of San Jose, north of Sacramento, or south of Bakerfield.

RedondoWolverine

January 16th, 2012 at 10:48 PM ^

If Garnett is very serious about becoming a doctor as he is AND he honestly doesn't see a career in professional football in his future I would find it difficult to turn down Stanford. But at the same time I find it hard to believe that if he loves football that he could turn down the most storied program in the history of the game. Go blue.

denardogasm

January 16th, 2012 at 10:57 PM ^

This is nonsense.  First, have you seen or heard anything about Michigan's health center? Second, where you go to undergrad has nothing to do with how successful you are as a physician, especially when you're as driven as Garnett seems to be.  You can get into any med school in the country from just about any undergrad, and you can subsequently get into any residency from just about any med school.  It matters even less when you're comparing Michigan to Stanford.  It all depends on how bad you want it.  

RedondoWolverine

January 17th, 2012 at 11:59 AM ^

My point is, if football is merely a means to a free education for Garnett and he is dead set on being a doctor than he should want to get the finest education he can regardless of whether or not it increases his ability to get into a good med school and residency program (it certainly doesnt hurt it) in which case, Stanford is the better choice. Overall, and in the medical field, Michigan is a not quite at the level of academic institution that Stanford is

julesh

January 17th, 2012 at 1:35 PM ^

At the undergrad level, the university's prestige in the medical field is moot. Pre-meds take no medical courses, and you can go to any medical school you get into when you finish undergrad. If this is really Garnett's greatest concern, the only thing that matters is medical school admission stats. I have no idea what the comparison there is for Stanford grads vs. Michigan grads, but I doubt it's too far off for people with similar grades and MCAT scores.

But, if it were the only thing that mattered, why wouldn't Garnett go to Harvard? I'm sure they would be glad to give him a scholarship. So it seems like there's a bit more to the decision than just a free education. 

RedondoWolverine

January 17th, 2012 at 2:58 PM ^

I've heard that a lot if not most Ivy's get recruits in touch with the alum network early and generally hook them up with the cream of the crop post graduation jobs early on including lucrative summer internships which essentially pay for their school and then some. This is, in effect, their scholarship.

BlueCE

January 16th, 2012 at 11:29 PM ^

Dude, I currently live on campus... if you are looking for bikini sights you should go to southern Cal.  Female talent here is horrible.  I swimg at the Stanford acquatic center 3 times a week and it is sad.  

The weather is really nice, better than San Fran, though it is not always perfect as many believe (surprisingly cold summers and rainy winters).

 

Academics are superior, no question about it, but as I said below, UM is pretty close and when you put together the entire Michigan package (football opportunities, student life, etc), I would go to UM over Stanford.  

M-Dog

January 17th, 2012 at 1:25 PM ^

Palo Alto is nice, but it does not feel like a college town at all.  It feels more like a Palm Springs resort for retirees.  No beautiful crisp clear fall football days with leaves falling like Ann Arbor.

You only get one shot at college.  My advice to him is to go to a classic college town.  

When he becomes a pro, he can go to Palm Springs or Scottsdale for vacation in the off-season all he wants. 

 

markinmsp

January 17th, 2012 at 6:01 PM ^

They are all the same over there, Palo Alto, Sunnyvale, Mountainview. No real lawns or grass, just low strip malls with low signage and asphalt butting up to the road. Sure weather is fair, but also a dampness in the air and never really gets warm. Mostly stucco construction, everything is jammed ontop of everything, and yet building codes don't allow them to build up instead of out, so space is at a premium and I seem to find more debris spread along the roadside.

BRCE

January 17th, 2012 at 3:41 AM ^

Even if he really meant Stanford, the number of people on the internet who think major life decisions can be based on the myth of pussy is shocking. There are actually idiots who really think Matt Barkley is staying at USC because of the girls as if they wouldn't be on every corner of whatever NFL city he was drafted to.

Hot chicks are a dime a dozen. You can find them in anywhere in the world, especially if you have a high profile.

 

 

True Blue Grit

January 17th, 2012 at 8:27 AM ^

we're toast.  But, he's a very smart young man who is looking at the big picture and what's best for him in the long run.  The fact that he's come out here to see our campus and is very interested in Michigan is a very good sign.  So, let's hope he makes the right decision for him.

knappianbum

January 16th, 2012 at 10:14 PM ^

Ummm... I don't think you've been to Stanford campus.  I love everything about UM but Stanford campus can't be beat - FAR superior to ours.  Stanford academics is also better than ours.  If you are a serious football player though I don't know why you would choose stanford right now though.  Harbaugh made that program and it isn't going to stay on high.

Wave83

January 16th, 2012 at 10:29 PM ^

Yeah, Stanford's campus is perfect.  I don't think it helps to argue otherwise.  However, Michigan's academics (for the better students) are almost as strong and occasionally as strong as Stanford's.  The football aspects are much stronger at Michigan.  I am obviously biased in favor of Michigan and hope Garnett sees it the same way.

My midwest upbringing does cause me to think that Stanford's campus/weather might be too perfect.   Someone should mention earthquakes to Garnett.

Noleverine

January 16th, 2012 at 10:46 PM ^

I'm in San Francisco right now (which apparently is the only thing you can call it without people getting bent out of shape) and it's probably 10 degrees warmer than Ann Arbor. It is a nice city, but man, it is pretentious. And much colder than I expected. For my college years, give me everything Ann Arbor has to offer. I wouldn't trade my years in Ann Arbor for anything.

San Diego Mick

January 16th, 2012 at 11:14 PM ^

It's so funny you mentioned how people in the Bay Area really do get snippy about what one would call San Francisco, don't say Frisco or San Fran....It's San Francisco or "The City".

I have friends from there and who live there, now the weather where I live is the bomb, trust me, not S.F., it gets and stays pretty nippy there for a good part of the year, the nights can get real cold, it rains a lot. It's on the same latitude as ohio for that matter.

As far as the academics is concerned, yes Stanford is a highly rated school, especially in Law & Business, but part of the reason they're so highly rated across the board I guess is because of people in high places that keep them there and reputation. U-M is right up there w/Stanford in many Fields and surpasses them in some, i.e. Research.

There are a few reasons why U-M alums are the richest accumulatively of any college in the world, great academics is one of them, Stanford is not so superior to U-M, not bad considering they're a private school and we're a public school.

WolvinLA2

January 17th, 2012 at 1:48 AM ^

That's because it sounds awkward and doesn't rhyme. San Fran just sounds cool, it's a bummer the people there don't like it. Frisco does too. It's no wonder everyone thinks people from SF suck - they do!

blueheron

January 17th, 2012 at 6:34 AM ^

That is *very* true, as someone else just noted here. You really have to say "The City" to avoid nasty looks when in certain company.

And, the pretentiousness, where it exists, is of the worst kind. New Yorkers (to take an example) will at least admit (sometimes) to being competitive about every little thing. Some San Franciscans are exactly the same, but it's cloaked in an elaborate "laid back, dude" West Coast pose.

white_pony_rocks

January 16th, 2012 at 11:05 PM ^

according to ARWU, Stanford is the #3 university in the world, U of M is #22.  according to Times-Higher, Stanford is again #3 in the world and U of M is #18, and according to the QS World University Rankings, Stanford is #11 while U of M is close at #14.  But seriously, I don't think there is much difference between schools in the top 20 

EDIT:  for faculty rankings in life sciences and medicine, Stanford is #4 and U of M is #34 for QS.  

for clinical, pre-clinical, and health, Stanford is #6 and U of M is #15 according to Times-Higher.

and for clinical medicine and pharmacy, in 2010 Stanford was #12 and U of M was #8 according to ARWU.

BlueCE

January 16th, 2012 at 11:24 PM ^

Stanford is superior in academics, though Michigan is pretty darn good and will probably open as many doors in the profesional world depending on what he wants to do.  


Campus (I currenyl live on Stanford).  Stanfor campus is probably the pretties I have seen and the weather is insane.  But the campus atmosphere and student life is MUCH better at UM (and don't get me started about female talent here.  IT IS HORRIBLE).

 

If Stanford was to remain a top football program then the decision would be much tougher, but if he is interested in academics I really do believe UM is the best place that mixes the academic, football opportunities, fun campus life, out of any school.

FrankMurphy

January 17th, 2012 at 12:43 AM ^

I live in the Bay, have been to Stanford's campus many times, and I personally think it sucks. Granted, the weather is excellent, but the architecture, the atmosphere, and the campus life (in short, everything that makes up a college experience) sucks. The football atmosphere is also the polar opposite of Michigan. You could drive past Stanford Stadium during a home game and not be able to tell that there's a football game going on.  

They have us beat on weather and academics, but other than that, Michigan is better across the board. 

CleverMichigan…

January 17th, 2012 at 10:03 AM ^

since you keep bringing up the "female talent" yourself. 

I love the attitude that we're all supposed to be grade A students and supermodels at the same time, but if we are pretty, it's assumed we're dumb, got in via affirmative action favoring women or just do favors for grades.

OH and FYI the "male talent" here is nothing great either, especially compared to my East Coast home, and the weather tends to hinder what you apparently think is the natural instinct to participate in bikini-clad frisbee tournaments. Seriously, half the engineers in my major are too awkward to talk to me or any other attractive girl anyway, and I'm not a jersey chaser, so I guess you think I'm wasting my looks. Fuck you if you're the type of interviewer who asks me if I'm getting married soon (because apparently it is a waste of money to hire attractive women who might get married and then obviously have children and take leave or leave for good), or spends the whole interview going on about how you want more women in your work environment. 

tl;dr: We're students too, not just scenery with boobs. Also, fuck you. 

/rant

BlueCE

January 17th, 2012 at 2:02 PM ^

Huh?  Are you really getting insulted that I said that Stanford has few attrative girls?


First of all, you have to admit there are far fewer attrative girls at Stanford than at other schools.  Adn yes, a big reason is the higher academics.  And yes, there are attractive people also styudying at top schools, but the correlation tends to go the other way I am sorry to say.

Second, I was an EECS undergrad, so hard to find a dorkier/less attrative crowd anywhere ;-)

Third, my fiancé is currently an engineering grad student at Stanford (and a big chunk of my friends went to Stanford), so I obviously don't think everyone at Stanford is ugly or that the only pretty people that get in do so because of affirmative action. Nor do I think that women are just boobs or whatever you think I said.

I think you have some mayor unresolved issues. My only advice is that if indeed you have been getting questions about getting married as you recruit for full-time jobs, then that is not a place where you want to work.

BlueCE

January 17th, 2012 at 3:31 PM ^

My entire post was that Stanford had few good looking girls.  If you want to create your own internal women debate go right ahead on your own.  


Wow, you really do enjoy drowning in a glass of water and making up inaccurate conclusions.  

Sorry, you are right, engineers are hot as hell, most engineers are female, Stanford is the party school of the world and has more good looking females than southern Cal schools.  And yes, all men just see women as boobs and we do not think they can do our work... god, sad if that is how you think others view the world and others. But if it makes you feel better I will say over and over again that Stanford and engineering girls (oh, yeah, my two sister's are also engineers) are the hottest group bar none.

And funny how in your first post you insult engineering man and say that the male talent sucks when compared to the east coast.  No idea, probably completely accurate (in fact my female friends here tell me dating life sucks here cause there are no good looking man), but how can you say exactly the same thing I say while you are arguing with me?