Stanford's List of Easy Classes for Athletes

THWUGA said:
Off topic, but LOL @ the interest in theonlytechgirl

theonlytechgirl:
Joined 1/25/11 (member for 44 days)
71 profile views (1.61 views per day)
20 posts (3.55 views per post)

THWUGA:
Joined 1/26/03 (2,965 days - 8 yrs earler and 64 times as long)
406 profile views (0.14 views per day)
1,346 posts (0.30 views per post)
Click to expand...

Dude, your jealous of a teenage girl.
 
cyptomcat said:
+1

I didn't think that it's only Stanford among the good academic universities that do some guiding like this.

I still don't understand why our athletes don't study something like HTS or STC? Wouldn't they be easier than Management?

Yeah I know, management can be a lot more useful. Do the athletes themselves think management is more useful or does the GTAA emphasize this?
Click to expand...

I'll take this one:

1. HTS and STaC are boring and include a lot of papers
2. Comfort level. With Management you know you are
going to be around other athletes. If you need help, got a question, or want someone to study with you can call upon someone within your inner circle.
3. Flexibility. This is the reason why athletes, mostly Football, are not Engineering majors. It is almost impossible to make a lab without a time conflict with practice.
4. Simple Lost. Most, if not athletes go to college with aspiration of making it pro. Most have no idea what they want to do if that dream doesn't come true. This is where the appeal of Management comes in to play. With Management being so broad it gives athletes a lot exposure to different fields in the world of business.
 
THWUGA said:
Off topic, but LOL @ the interest in theonlytechgirl

theonlytechgirl:
Joined 1/25/11 (member for 44 days)
71 profile views (1.61 views per day)
20 posts (3.55 views per post)

THWUGA:
Joined 1/26/03 (2,965 days - 8 yrs earler and 64 times as long)
406 profile views (0.14 views per day)
1,346 posts (0.30 views per post)
Click to expand...

:coolugh: :hsdance:
 
ibeeballin said:
I'll take this one:

1. HTS and STaC are boring and include a lot of papers
2. Comfort level. With Management you know you are
going to be around other athletes. If you need help, got a question, or want someone to study with you can call upon someone within your inner circle.
3. Flexibility. This is the reason why athletes, mostly Football, are not Engineering majors. It is almost impossible to make a lab without a time conflict with practice.
4. Simple Lost. Most, if not athletes go to college with aspiration of making it pro. Most have no idea what they want to do if that dream doesn't come true. This is where the appeal of Management comes in to play. With Management being so broad it gives athletes a lot exposure to different fields in the world of business.
Click to expand...
Thanks for the input. I figured that's why, but it's better when a previous Tech athlete confirms it.
 
Jackets '11 said:
Sounds like Course Critique. This is a non-story.

http://www.sga.gatech.edu/critique/Search.php

Certain classes like ID 2202 are really hard to ignore with this info.
Click to expand...

Agreed. I don't know a single person at Tech that didn't try to get the "right" professor for their classes. I was an IE, and you really had to be careful taking the intro course for other engineering majors, because some of those teachers were "weed out" teachers.

I dropped several courses in college where I studied hard and got a D on the first test, only to get an A or B on the same material the following quarter. This is what college students do.
 
turbanicusgt said:
WTF dude, that was the easiest A I ever got. Medina was a snoozer though. How hard is it to memorize like 10 chairs and who made them and what period it was from?!
Click to expand...

WTF????? We have a class called History of Chairs?????? I never want to hear about how hard Tech is again.
 
MTrain said:
http://www.gostanford.com/sports/m-footbl/mtt/stan-m-footbl-mtt.html

http://ramblinwreck.cstv.com/sports/m-footbl/mtt/geot-m-footbl-mtt.html

click around, do a sample, you tell me
Click to expand...

Majors tell you how smart someone is? Really? Wow. So every poli sci major is smarter than a sociology major or english major or exactly how is the ranking of major to intelligence goes, exactly? Because I have never seen a ranking of majors correlating with intelligence. Again, I am calling BS. So far you have shown no proof to the statement that our average football player is dumber than theirs. I might agree to your statement regarding walkons due to the differences in acceptance rates between GT and Stanford, but walkons are not average football players.
 
THWUGA said:
Off topic, but LOL @ the interest in theonlytechgirl

theonlytechgirl:
Joined 1/25/11 (member for 44 days)
71 profile views (1.61 views per day)
20 posts (3.55 views per post)

THWUGA:
Joined 1/26/03 (2,965 days - 8 yrs earler and 64 times as long)
406 profile views (0.14 views per day)
1,346 posts (0.30 views per post)
Click to expand...

I clicked on the profile just to skew the results even more.
 
BuzzMD said:
Majors tell you how smart someone is? Really? Wow. So every poli sci major is smarter than a sociology major or english major or exactly how is the ranking of major to intelligence goes, exactly? Because I have never seen a ranking of majors correlating with intelligence. Again, I am calling BS. So far you have shown no proof to the statement that our average football player is dumber than theirs. I might agree to your statement regarding walkons due to the differences in acceptance rates between GT and Stanford, but walkons are not average football players.
Click to expand...

read the bios, read the accomplishments, hell, look at the pictures.

me thinks you are just very prideful to be a GT grad on this one, and want to believe otherwise
 
MTrain said:
read the bios, read the accomplishments, hell, look at the pictures.

me thinks you are just very prideful to be a GT grad on this one, and want to believe otherwise
Click to expand...

So now intelligence is a visual thing as well -- you can look and see if someone is smarter than someone else? Wow, I am learning so much from you Mtrain. First off, intelligence is correlated with majors, and now it is correlated with profile pictures. Damn. You are one of the last I would have thought would have said that.
 
buzzmd, let me honestly axe you something. take all the scholarship players on stanford and tech. give them a standardized test, or some kind of academic-based trivia. average score wins.

you'd put your money on tech? tell me that with a straight face.
 
BuzzMD said:
So now intelligence is a visual thing as well -- you can look and see if someone is smarter than someone else? Wow, I am learning so much from you Mtrain. First off, intelligence is correlated with majors, and now it is correlated with profile pictures. Damn. You are one of the last I would have thought would have said that.
Click to expand...

I knew you'd overreact to that.

One team is predominantly clean cut, sharp, alert looking people. Another is mostly guys who look like they just got off marta. Nows your chance to claim its all racial.

I'm sure you make judgments on appearance when people walk into your practice.
 
BuzzMD said:
So now intelligence is a visual thing as well -- you can look and see if someone is smarter than someone else? Wow, I am learning so much from you Mtrain. First off, intelligence is correlated with majors, and now it is correlated with profile pictures. Damn. You are one of the last I would have thought would have said that.
Click to expand...

When did I say anything about Major? because I never once thought that. I was pointing at the biographic information.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top