As long as school presidents make up 25% of the US News system they are worthless. We've all all seen the Florida Presidents sheet, it took him about 12 seconds to complete it

Why is the University of Louisiana at Lafayette (ULL) ranked as a Tier 2 academic school by US News and World Report where LSU A&M and Louisiana Tech are ranked much higher as a Tier 1. Tulane University of Louisiana is in the stratosphere ranked a Number 52 academically in the nation.

(01-20-2014 07:49 PM)Savacool Wrote:  Why is the University of Louisiana at Lafayette (ULL) ranked as a Tier 2 academic school by US News and World Report where LSU A&M and Louisiana Tech are ranked much higher as a Tier 1. Tulane University of Louisiana is in the stratosphere ranked a Number 52 academically in the nation.

subjective rankings mean nothing.........oh and.......scoreboard

(01-20-2014 07:26 PM)Minutemen429 Wrote:  As long as school presidents make up 25% of the US News system they are worthless. We've all all seen the Florida Presidents sheet, it took him about 12 seconds to complete it

exactly....

(01-20-2014 06:21 PM)TomThumb Wrote:  

(01-20-2014 04:49 PM)Zombiewoof Wrote:  Because there is no disagreement on what a school's athletic budget is or what their revenue is or what their undergrad enrollment is, but there can be strong disagreement on how these academic rankings are based and their relevance. I would prefer to use numbers that we can agree are factual, then broaden the discussion based on the priorities of each conference.

You could always start a new thread to discuss this the way you want with the numbers you want. I happen to find the OPs numbers interesting and much closer to how I would order certain schools than I would have expected.

I appreciate it, TomThumb. It has been a fun exercise and helped put some perspective on schools that many of us do not know much about.

Good and helpful thoughts (except JunkYardCard in post #49... the 99.9% of Louisville fans who exhibit class and civility may want to note to him about how he is portraying the school...)

What I am hearing is that nobody loves any academic ranking. Some like USNWR, some like ARWU, some neither. I tend to agree with those who asked "Fine, but what do we use instead?" The problem with weighing ARWU is that 51 of the 129 FBS schools do not even have an ARWU ranking, meaning that they are not top 500 in the world. Is this the end all/be all of P5 decision making? No, but it is a part of it. In my opinion, ARWU is the most reliable balance to the perceived slant toward liberal arts in the USNWR. For those who suggest that USNWR is too subjective and based sometimes on perception... you may be right. However, is perception not a major part of realignment, as well?

I heard some suggestions to weigh football and basketball more evenly... I and others felt good about 80/20, some like 70/30... how about 75/25? That will be easier to compute, anyway. I'll start working on it this week and post it later.

(01-20-2014 08:16 PM)swampbear Wrote:  

(01-20-2014 07:26 PM)Minutemen429 Wrote:  As long as school presidents make up 25% of the US News system they are worthless. We've all all seen the Florida Presidents sheet, it took him about 12 seconds to complete it

exactly....

Cool story, but it's worth only 15%.

The majority of US News' methodology is OBJECTIVE.

(01-20-2014 09:55 PM)bigblueblindness Wrote:  Good and helpful thoughts (except JunkYardCard in post #49... the 99.9% of Louisville fans who exhibit class and civility may want to note to him about how he is portraying the school...)

What I am hearing is that nobody loves any academic ranking. Some like USNWR, some like ARWU, some neither. I tend to agree with those who asked "Fine, but what do we use instead?" The problem with weighing ARWU is that 51 of the 129 FBS schools do not even have an ARWU ranking, meaning that they are not top 500 in the world. Is this the end all/be all of P5 decision making? No, but it is a part of it. In my opinion, ARWU is the most reliable balance to the perceived slant toward liberal arts in the USNWR. For those who suggest that USNWR is too subjective and based sometimes on perception... you may be right. However, is perception not a major part of realignment, as well?

I heard some suggestions to weigh football and basketball more evenly... I and others felt good about 80/20, some like 70/30... how about 75/25? That will be easier to compute, anyway. I'll start working on it this week and post it later.

Good work BigBlue. Very interesting system.

(01-20-2014 09:55 PM)bigblueblindness Wrote:  Good and helpful thoughts (except JunkYardCard in post #49... the 99.9% of Louisville fans who exhibit class and civility may want to note to him about how he is portraying the school...)

What I am hearing is that nobody loves any academic ranking. Some like USNWR, some like ARWU, some neither. I tend to agree with those who asked "Fine, but what do we use instead?" The problem with weighing ARWU is that 51 of the 129 FBS schools do not even have an ARWU ranking, meaning that they are not top 500 in the world. Is this the end all/be all of P5 decision making? No, but it is a part of it. In my opinion, ARWU is the most reliable balance to the perceived slant toward liberal arts in the USNWR. For those who suggest that USNWR is too subjective and based sometimes on perception... you may be right. However, is perception not a major part of realignment, as well?

I heard some suggestions to weigh football and basketball more evenly... I and others felt good about 80/20, some like 70/30... how about 75/25? That will be easier to compute, anyway. I'll start working on it this week and post it later.

Dude, you are really not fooling anyone. You've devised a system whereby you've carefully selected criteria to make your school look better. For an Ex: UConn, academically is rated way higher than Uk, yet you have your school rated 2 slots higher than them?

Btw, I hear your school is downsizing their football stadium... nice touch! I'm sure we'd see a much different outcome if the state of Ky quit pouring money into the sinkhole in LexLutherton. Maybe spread it around more fairly?

Also, nice touch to try & minimize the impact of hoops and appear oh-so reasonable, from a ky fan. Btw, I hear your football stadium is too big, and for all the unwarranted amounts of money your school gets from the state it is failing to make a real bang for the buck. I mean, compared to the 120+ schools ranked ahead of you, and even those ranked lower who have to get by w/ less, but do so more efficiently.

What a waste...

(01-20-2014 09:55 PM)bigblueblindness Wrote:  Good and helpful thoughts (except JunkYardCard in post #49... the 99.9% of Louisville fans who exhibit class and civility may want to note to him about how he is portraying the school...)

What I am hearing is that nobody loves any academic ranking. Some like USNWR, some like ARWU, some neither. I tend to agree with those who asked "Fine, but what do we use instead?" The problem with weighing ARWU is that 51 of the 129 FBS schools do not even have an ARWU ranking, meaning that they are not top 500 in the world. Is this the end all/be all of P5 decision making? No, but it is a part of it. In my opinion, ARWU is the most reliable balance to the perceived slant toward liberal arts in the USNWR. For those who suggest that USNWR is too subjective and based sometimes on perception... you may be right. However, is perception not a major part of realignment, as well?

I heard some suggestions to weigh football and basketball more evenly... I and others felt good about 80/20, some like 70/30... how about 75/25? That will be easier to compute, anyway. I'll start working on it this week and post it later.

ARWU should be taken out. It's about graduate research. You're trying to rank athletic departments that for the most part have very few graduate students. Keep USN&WR because it's pretty much what everyone follows. What does your scale look like with these tweaks?

How did you get 2.8 for Houston? Shoundnt it be a 3.0?

1. Undergraduate Students - (5) 25,000+, (4) 20,000+, (3) 15,000+, (2) 10,000+, (1) less than 10,000

2. USNWR - (5) 1-75, (4) 76-149 and service academies, (3) 150-200, (2) 201+ or high ranked regional, (1) average to low ranked regional

3. ARWU - (5) 1-75, (4) 76-199, (3) 200-299, (2) 300-499, (1) Not Ranked

4. Football Attendance - (5) 75,000+, (4) 55,000+ (3) 40,000+ (2) 20,000+ (1) less than 20,000

5. Revenue - (5) $87 mil +, (4) $65 mil +, (3) $40 mil +, (2) $25 mil +, (1) less than $25 mil

(01-21-2014 12:30 AM)Crimsonelf Wrote:  

(01-20-2014 09:55 PM)bigblueblindness Wrote:  Good and helpful thoughts (except JunkYardCard in post #49... the 99.9% of Louisville fans who exhibit class and civility may want to note to him about how he is portraying the school...)

What I am hearing is that nobody loves any academic ranking. Some like USNWR, some like ARWU, some neither. I tend to agree with those who asked "Fine, but what do we use instead?" The problem with weighing ARWU is that 51 of the 129 FBS schools do not even have an ARWU ranking, meaning that they are not top 500 in the world. Is this the end all/be all of P5 decision making? No, but it is a part of it. In my opinion, ARWU is the most reliable balance to the perceived slant toward liberal arts in the USNWR. For those who suggest that USNWR is too subjective and based sometimes on perception... you may be right. However, is perception not a major part of realignment, as well?

I heard some suggestions to weigh football and basketball more evenly... I and others felt good about 80/20, some like 70/30... how about 75/25? That will be easier to compute, anyway. I'll start working on it this week and post it later.

Dude, you are really not fooling anyone. You've devised a system whereby you've carefully selected criteria to make your school look better. For an Ex: UConn, academically is rated way higher than Uk, yet you have your school rated 2 slots higher than them?

Btw, I hear your school is downsizing their football stadium... nice touch! I'm sure we'd see a much different outcome if the state of Ky quit pouring money into the sinkhole in LexLutherton. Maybe spread it around more fairly?

Also, nice touch to try & minimize the impact of hoops and appear oh-so reasonable, from a ky fan. Btw, I hear your football stadium is too big, and for all the unwarranted amounts of money your school gets from the state it is failing to make a real bang for the buck. I mean, compared to the 120+ schools ranked ahead of you, and even those ranked lower who have to get by w/ less, but do so more efficiently.

What a waste...

So.... both Kentucky and Louisville will not be posted in the revised numbers, thus eliminating my blinding bias.

(01-21-2014 10:29 AM)IAH Wrote:  How did you get 2.8 for Houston? Shoundnt it be a 3.0?

1. Undergraduate Students - (5) 25,000+, (4) 20,000+, (3) 15,000+, (2) 10,000+, (1) less than 10,000

2. USNWR - (5) 1-75, (4) 76-149 and service academies, (3) 150-200, (2) 201+ or high ranked regional, (1) average to low ranked regional

3. ARWU - (5) 1-75, (4) 76-199, (3) 200-299, (2) 300-499, (1) Not Ranked

4. Football Attendance - (5) 75,000+, (4) 55,000+ (3) 40,000+ (2) 20,000+ (1) less than 20,000

5. Revenue - (5) $87 mil +, (4) $65 mil +, (3) $40 mil +, (2) $25 mil +, (1) less than $25 mil

FWIW - I've given thought to the OP's ideas for over 5 years now. What should be proxied by the various available measures, in any good system, is:

Academic Performance Excellence (several proxy measures combined)
Athletics Performance Excellence (several proxy measures combined)
Depth and Rate of Athletic Program and University Overall Support (measures such as living alumni and endowments and budgets, for example, go here)
Rate of change & acceleration in the above measures (these can be short/medium and long term trends and directions)
Measures of Available Market Size (there are many many of these in our market focused society - Alumni, Avail TV Mkt sizes, many of which are a little arbitrary))

(01-21-2014 10:29 AM)IAH Wrote:  How did you get 2.8 for Houston? Shoundnt it be a 3.0?

1. Undergraduate Students - (5) 25,000+, (4) 20,000+, (3) 15,000+, (2) 10,000+, (1) less than 10,000

2. USNWR - (5) 1-75, (4) 76-149 and service academies, (3) 150-200, (2) 201+ or high ranked regional, (1) average to low ranked regional

3. ARWU - (5) 1-75, (4) 76-199, (3) 200-299, (2) 300-499, (1) Not Ranked

4. Football Attendance - (5) 75,000+, (4) 55,000+ (3) 40,000+ (2) 20,000+ (1) less than 20,000

5. Revenue - (5) $87 mil +, (4) $65 mil +, (3) $40 mil +, (2) $25 mil +, (1) less than $25 mil

Houston reported an undergraduate enrollment of 23,187 for the 2012-13 school year. They may have gone over 25,000 this year (2013-14), but every school's numbers are from last year since all the data is available. Like I said before, every school should be seen as a +/- 0.2. There are just too many close cut-offs. This is just to give a general idea, anyway.

(01-21-2014 11:05 AM)IHAVETRIED Wrote:  

(01-21-2014 10:29 AM)IAH Wrote:  How did you get 2.8 for Houston? Shoundnt it be a 3.0?

1. Undergraduate Students - (5) 25,000+, (4) 20,000+, (3) 15,000+, (2) 10,000+, (1) less than 10,000

2. USNWR - (5) 1-75, (4) 76-149 and service academies, (3) 150-200, (2) 201+ or high ranked regional, (1) average to low ranked regional

3. ARWU - (5) 1-75, (4) 76-199, (3) 200-299, (2) 300-499, (1) Not Ranked

4. Football Attendance - (5) 75,000+, (4) 55,000+ (3) 40,000+ (2) 20,000+ (1) less than 20,000

5. Revenue - (5) $87 mil +, (4) $65 mil +, (3) $40 mil +, (2) $25 mil +, (1) less than $25 mil

FWIW - I've given thought to the OP's ideas for over 5 years now. What should be proxied by the various available measures, in any good system, is:

Academic Performance Excellence (several proxy measures combined)
Athletics Performance Excellence (several proxy measures combined)
Depth and Rate of Athletic Program and University Overall Support (measures such as living alumni and endowments and budgets, for example, go here)
Rate of change & acceleration in the above measures (these can be short/medium and long term trends and directions)
Measures of Available Market Size (there are many many of these in our market focused society - Alumni, Avail TV Mkt sizes, many of which are a little arbitrary))

Ambitious... I would be very interested to see what you come up with if you decide to go for it.

Does anyone know where to find the apparel/merchandising ranks that include CLC schools as well as those with other arrangements? I can't find where to place 59 of the schools since the CLC website only provided the top 75 earners from last year. Some very big schools don't use CLC, either (namely Ohio State, Southern Cal, Oregon, Michigan, Iowa).

(01-21-2014 12:00 PM)bigblueblindness Wrote:  

(01-21-2014 10:29 AM)IAH Wrote:  How did you get 2.8 for Houston? Shoundnt it be a 3.0?

1. Undergraduate Students - (5) 25,000+, (4) 20,000+, (3) 15,000+, (2) 10,000+, (1) less than 10,000

2. USNWR - (5) 1-75, (4) 76-149 and service academies, (3) 150-200, (2) 201+ or high ranked regional, (1) average to low ranked regional

3. ARWU - (5) 1-75, (4) 76-199, (3) 200-299, (2) 300-499, (1) Not Ranked

4. Football Attendance - (5) 75,000+, (4) 55,000+ (3) 40,000+ (2) 20,000+ (1) less than 20,000

5. Revenue - (5) $87 mil +, (4) $65 mil +, (3) $40 mil +, (2) $25 mil +, (1) less than $25 mil

Houston reported an undergraduate enrollment of 23,187 for the 2012-13 school year. They may have gone over 25,000 this year (2013-14), but every school's numbers are from last year since all the data is available. Like I said before, every school should be seen as a +/- 0.2. There are just too many close cut-offs. This is just to give a general idea, anyway.

I see 23K does sound low, I always thought we had like 32K undergrad students and like 40K overall.

Your point system is a good way to highlight where we need to improve, there is no question that we would be in a lot better shape if we could avg above 40K per game.

(01-21-2014 12:37 PM)IAH Wrote:  

(01-21-2014 12:00 PM)bigblueblindness Wrote:  

(01-21-2014 10:29 AM)IAH Wrote:  How did you get 2.8 for Houston? Shoundnt it be a 3.0?

1. Undergraduate Students - (5) 25,000+, (4) 20,000+, (3) 15,000+, (2) 10,000+, (1) less than 10,000

2. USNWR - (5) 1-75, (4) 76-149 and service academies, (3) 150-200, (2) 201+ or high ranked regional, (1) average to low ranked regional

3. ARWU - (5) 1-75, (4) 76-199, (3) 200-299, (2) 300-499, (1) Not Ranked

4. Football Attendance - (5) 75,000+, (4) 55,000+ (3) 40,000+ (2) 20,000+ (1) less than 20,000

5. Revenue - (5) $87 mil +, (4) $65 mil +, (3) $40 mil +, (2) $25 mil +, (1) less than $25 mil

Houston reported an undergraduate enrollment of 23,187 for the 2012-13 school year. They may have gone over 25,000 this year (2013-14), but every school's numbers are from last year since all the data is available. Like I said before, every school should be seen as a +/- 0.2. There are just too many close cut-offs. This is just to give a general idea, anyway.

I see 23K does sound low, I always thought we had like 32K undergrad students and like 40K overall.

Your point system is a good way to highlight where we need to improve, there is no question that we would be in a lot better shape if we could avg above 40K per game.

Houston is in that grouping just outside the P5 where location becomes a major factor (the 2.8 schools are ranked 69-73 in my formula) . Houston, USF, Cincinnati, and San Diego State are very similar, and whichever conference is expanding gives each one a leg up. SDSU is probably in the worst shape because the PAC is very unlikely to ever pick them up.

(01-21-2014 12:37 PM)IAH Wrote:  

(01-21-2014 12:00 PM)bigblueblindness Wrote:  

(01-21-2014 10:29 AM)IAH Wrote:  How did you get 2.8 for Houston? Shoundnt it be a 3.0?

1. Undergraduate Students - (5) 25,000+, (4) 20,000+, (3) 15,000+, (2) 10,000+, (1) less than 10,000

2. USNWR - (5) 1-75, (4) 76-149 and service academies, (3) 150-200, (2) 201+ or high ranked regional, (1) average to low ranked regional

3. ARWU - (5) 1-75, (4) 76-199, (3) 200-299, (2) 300-499, (1) Not Ranked

4. Football Attendance - (5) 75,000+, (4) 55,000+ (3) 40,000+ (2) 20,000+ (1) less than 20,000

5. Revenue - (5) $87 mil +, (4) $65 mil +, (3) $40 mil +, (2) $25 mil +, (1) less than $25 mil

Houston reported an undergraduate enrollment of 23,187 for the 2012-13 school year. They may have gone over 25,000 this year (2013-14), but every school's numbers are from last year since all the data is available. Like I said before, every school should be seen as a +/- 0.2. There are just too many close cut-offs. This is just to give a general idea, anyway.

I see 23K does sound low, I always thought we had like 32K undergrad students and like 40K overall.

Your point system is a good way to highlight where we need to improve, there is no question that we would be in a lot better shape if we could avg above 40K per game.

I forgot who pointed it out, but the number reported to the NCAA is likely full-time undergrads. Part timers probably do not get included in this reported number.

(01-21-2014 12:07 PM)bigblueblindness Wrote:  Does anyone know where to find the apparel/merchandising ranks that include CLC schools as well as those with other arrangements? I can't find where to place 59 of the schools since the CLC website only provided the top 75 earners from last year. Some very big schools don't use CLC, either (namely Ohio State, Southern Cal, Oregon, Michigan, Iowa).

There you go. If you want to get to a metric that has actually driven realignment, this one is probably a lot closer.