lumberpack4
Banned
Posts: 4,336
Joined: Jun 2013
I Root For: ACC
Location:
|
RE: Cincinnati v. The Power 5
(09-08-2013 12:08 AM)nzmorange Wrote: (09-07-2013 11:49 PM)lumberpack4 Wrote: (09-07-2013 11:20 PM)nzmorange Wrote: 1. I will freely stipulate that UC fields good teams. I actually like Cincinnati, and if there's anyone on the planet Earth that respects their athletic department's ability to consistently achieve satisfactory results, it's me. However, I do not think that UC fits the ACC's culture. I have outlined some reasons why I have that belief. You clearly disagree, so tell me why. Why do you think that UC would be a good cultural fit?
The ACC's culture is southern and eastern. Cincinnati is in the culturally "southern" part of Ohio. Cincy is also heavily influenced by German culture, as is VT, Pitt, UVa, WF. I see and know nothing that indicates that Cincy is outside the ACC's cultural range. Cincy is not a "Yankee" school, nor is it exclusively "Midwestern". They have a historic basketball tradition, going back to the days of Oscar Robertson and played in the old Dixie Classic against the Big 4 (Duke, UNC, NC State, Wake)
2. Find a better system than US News. Sure it has its problems, but it's better than anything that I've ever seen and nobody on this forum has come up with anything better. Also, anyone with a basic understanding of statistics can tell you why opinions can still paint an accurate picture, even if every individual school has a bias. Furthermore, measuring outputs is exceedingly hard. Measuring salaries would favor urban engineering schools in Democratic states with high costs of living, measuring employment rates would favor art schools (all artists are employed...they're just "self employed"), and so on.
ARWU for one Measuring outputs for education entities usually means things like research, publishing, awards, grants, doctoral production, etc. All that is measured now is the SAT scores of entering students and the number of applications versus the number that matriculate. These are easy to game. Gin up or subsidize the application fee and you improve your score. Make accepted students retake the SAT as a senior or the summer before matriculation and you gin up your scores. Be a small institution in a highly educated state and you gin up your scores.
3. The AAU is irrelevant to pretty much everything. It was a B1G marketing point, which is the only reason why anyone knows what it is. The ACC doesn't use either that or its research as a selling point, so it doesn't matter for ACC purposes. Anyway, the AAU isn't about to add UC, or any other school for that matter. They're trying to be more selective and you do that by kicking people out and not bringing in new members.
AAU membership is rough gauge of the top 50-55 research schools in the US. 55-63 is both debatable and some are on their way out. My point is that Cincy was considered for a vote in 2010, along with NC State and GT. GT, made it, NC State missed by one vote, I don't know how Cincy did in the vote, but they got a vote - getting a vote is itself a sign that your peers consider you to be in the top 70 or so research schools.
4. Had UL not been available, UCONN would have been chosen and some ACC schools probably would have left. I feel like I come off as ragging on UL a lot because I say things like I see them, both for better and for worse, but I really am thankful that UL was able to save us and hold the conference together.
You are wrong about that. UConn would not have 12 of 15 ACC votes to join. BC, VT, Clemson, FSU, GT, and NC State would not have voted for UConn.
With respect, you are on the outside looking in with regards to ACC matters. I and family members have worked for several ACC schools and maintain solid contacts at 4 schools. UConn was at least six votes short.
RE "Southern part of Ohio": Syracuse University is in the middle of the state of NY, but that doesn't make us Midwestern...
RE Outputs: "research, publishing, awards, grants, doctoral production, etc." And ALL of those are completely irrelevant to the quality of education conferred and are only of questionable relevance to the school's reputation to confer a quality education. Also, depending on the rankings, employment rates and average starting salary are also measured.
Wrong - US News Does Not Measure This
Washington Monthly measure that.
RE US News: Do you think that only some of the schools know that? Only some schools attempt to game the rankings - some don't care.
RE AAU: When UC joins you can rub it in my face. However, in reality, their chance of joining is roughly the same as UCONN and that is 0%. Anyway, AAU DOESN'T MATTER. It only seems to matter because the B1G used it as a selling point and people who have never done any academic research bought into it.
You miss the point. Perhaps that is why AAU tossed Syracuse out?
RE UCONN: Evidently you missed the part where I said "some ACC schools probably would have left."
No, you said that UConn would be voted in and then that some would leave. You have the horse and the cart confused.
Big 10 schools rank from number 3 to number 65 in the production of doctoral students. That's all 14 including Rutgers and MD. The research intensive part of the ACC ranks 23-59 in doctoral production despite having less than half the overall number of students.
UNC -23
NCSU - 34
GT - 36
VT - 37
Pitt - 39
UVa - 49
FSU -50
Duke - 59
The undergraduate focused part of the ACC is mostly new.
Miami - 96
Clemson - 100
Louisville - 105
ND - 107
Syracuse - 114
BC - 116
Wake Forest - 240
Adding Syracuse has not changed the ACC's overall culture, and the ACC's culture is set by the schools in North Carolina, Virginia, South Carolina and Georgia. You might begin to chap at that in the coming years.
Anyway, Cincinnati, with a doctoral production at 88, is right in the middle of the bifurcated academic profile of ACC schools and more like the research schools than you. Indeed, when you get right down to it, you and BC are the real outliers.
|
|