I find it slightly ironic that you're disputing posters like me and saying we are simply talking about "street smarts".. because you are actually using your street smarts to make your argument.
But it's all good. I'll admit I made some points but I wasn't overly specific. Look at the graphic below:
There are multiple kinds of intelligence. MIT heavily favors those who have strong spatial and logical-mathematical skills. Maybe strong in one or the other, maybe a bit of both.
The other kinds of intelligence I am talking about that would make one more "well-rounded" would be interpersonal, intrapersonal, and linguistic in addition to the 2 previously stated.
IMO a student (whether it's a Harvard or Penn State graduate) that is well above average in those 5 categories (but not necessarily an expert in any of them) is more intelligent overall and more likely to succeed than a student that is an expert at the logical-mathematical or spatial intelligences. Sure the logical mathematical genius who went to MIT may outclass the Penn State Business school grad in building machine learning algorithms.. but that MIT genius won't be running a multi-billion dollar corporation like Nike anytime soon.