William,
Here are some of your posts
The consensus is that in the end what matters is the person not the source. I whole heartily agree with that in general, but I know my self... I will be a better officer for having spent 4 at USNA.As a doctor, 4 years experience is better than 4 years of extra schooling.However now I'm going for unrestricted officer positions, so being the best trained I can be before I'm in charge of the lives of enlisted men and women is important to me. Even if it slows down my career by 3 years (Ill only be 3 years older than most plebes, not 4).
The best officers can't be taught how to lead. It is in their human nature. An avg officer can be a better officer, through training, but never the best. It is like the real world, personal skills matter and you can't teach that.
I look forward to getting to have a new major, it will make me more well rounded. Matter of fact, I prefer to study something completely new to me.
Don't get me wrong, my highest priority is serving as an officer...not going to the academy. I've looking into all the commissioning sources {INCLUDING GRAD SCHOOL ROTC) and know what they all entail.
This is not meant antagonistically at all, if you want the SA go for it, because nothing stinks more in life than being 50 and looking back with an IF.
However, reading your posts I saw it differently than most; maybe it's that Mom thing. What I see is someone who is not ready to enter the real world. I think you may feel that way due to the fact you started college when you were 16, I am guessing you will graduate at 20, yes, I know you said you are 20, but do the math, 4 yrs and that makes you graduating at 20. Maybe it is nothing more than your fear that your age will be an issue since you are so young regarding leadership. Theoretically, you could be in charge of people and have yet to take your 1st sip of beer legally.
Everything I posted stated you don't want to enter AD right now, but would prefer to wait until you are older, otherwise, Grad school ROTC would have not been even discussed at all and OCS would be your path.
I wish you the best. You are right, you are not taking anything away from anyone else if appointed. You earned it.
Xposted. You just stated what I was inferring. It is not about the academy so much, as it is about your age.
I am rather young for my position (I started college at 16), and am willing to sacrifice a little time to become the most prepared I can be before accepting a commission.
That is not a reason for the SA's to take you and not a reason for you to attend. JMPO, but you'd probably be a better asset to them if you went ROTC grad since you now have that under your belt as a young officer, than paying for you to attend 4 yrs. at an SA so you can be more prepared to accept a commission from an age aspect. If you look at your posts, the most common issue you have in it, not including defending your position, is 1 key statement. AGE. You are concerned about that. Maybe what you should be asking is:
I am 20, and if I go to OCS, graduate at 20, will I be respected as an officer?
The answer is yes. You maybe teased about your age, but nobody is going to "card" you. Nobody under your command is going to disobey you because you are younger than them.
You must also ask if you believe you are mentally mature enough to lead at 21, or do you feel the only reason you really want an SA is to get that time to mature?
I know you wanted this to be about SATs, you have received that answer, and now the thread contorted itself to this.