(07-17-2014 10:40 PM)lumberpack4 Wrote:  

(07-17-2014 09:30 PM)jrj84105 Wrote:  Here are the FBS schools in the top 100 in order:
1) Stanford
2) Cal
3) UCLA
4) Michigan
5) NW
6) Wisconsin
7) Duke
8) ILL
9) UT
10) UW
11) RU
12) UVA
13) UNC
14) PSU
15) tOSU
16) UMN
17) USC
18) Purdue
19) Pitt
20) FLA
21) Utah
22) Colorado
23) ND
24) AZ
25) Vandy
26) UMD
27) GT

B1G: 10 (including expansion schools PSU, UMD, and RU)
PAC: 8 (including expansion schools UU and CU)
ACC: 6 (including expansion school Pitt and B1G targets UVA and UNC)
SEC: 2
BigXII: 1 (including PAC target UT)

This sure argues the importance of academics in expansion.

Here are the rest for the P5

28 - TAMU
29 - ASU
30 - Michigan State
31 - Indiana
32 - Iowa
33 - Miami
34 - Wake Forest
35 - Iowa State
36 - Mizzou
37 - Kansas
38 - Georgia
39 - LSU
40 - Tennessee
41 - NC State
42 - Oklahoma
43 - FSU
44 - Kentucky
45 - Oregon State
46 - VT
47 - South Carolina
48 - Kansas State
49 - Louisville
50 - BC
51 - Nebraska
52 - Oregon
53 - Oklahoma State
54 - Alabama
55 - West Va
56 - Ole Miss
57 - Syracuse
58 - Baylor
59 - Arkansas
60 - Texas Tech
61 - Mississippi State
62 - Clemson
63 - Auburn
64 - TCU

If you use the rankings with all the US schools you get the following:

B10

Average 41
Range 16-145
Top 4 Average - 18

P12

Average 51
Range 2-126
Top 4 Average - 11

ACC

Average 80
Range 19-163
Top 4 Average - 27

SEC

Average 105
Range 38-171
Top 4 Average 56

B12

Average 122
Range 22-230
Top 4 Average 71

What jumps out immediately is that the B10 and SEC are extremely homogenous leagues. The P12 and ACC are very diverse, the ACC more so. The B12 is has one huge outlier - Texas. There are 58 spots between the B12's first and second school 22 to 80 for Iowa State.

That range between one and two are 2 and 6 in the P12, 16 and 17 in the B10, 19 and 26 in the ACC, and 38 to 46 in the SEC.

Hmmm... Looks like the ACC did indeed compromise on their academic standards... when they invited Syracuse. :coffee3:

I don't as much about Syracuse as I should. They seem to have been in free fall for quite some time. Is it the rise of Stoney and Binghamton, changing demographics, or what? Nebraska and Oregon also seem to have slid down the pole. Is it a change to a more undergraduate focus?

(07-18-2014 03:48 PM)lumberpack4 Wrote:  I don't as much about Syracuse as I should. They seem to have been in free fall for quite some time. Is it the rise of Stoney and Binghamton, changing demographics, or what? Nebraska and Oregon also seem to have slid down the pole. Is it a change to a more undergraduate focus?

What I've read is simply that Syracuse is focusing much less on research. So they were at the bottom of the AAU and dropped out rather than being kicked out and they don't rate well on rankings like this. But they are like TCU in that they have a better reputation than they do in this type of ranking.

(07-18-2014 03:48 PM)lumberpack4 Wrote:  I don't as much about Syracuse as I should. They seem to have been in free fall for quite some time. Is it the rise of Stoney and Binghamton, changing demographics, or what? Nebraska and Oregon also seem to have slid down the pole. Is it a change to a more undergraduate focus?

Biomedical research has increased relative to other disciplines in academia. A lot of public land grant institutions (Oregon and Nebraska for example) were created away from the states' population centers. Medical research happens where there are hospitals and hospitals are located in metropolitan areas. States with rural flagship universities, like Nebraska, Oregon, Illinois, etc have to have separate health sciences universities in the population centers. This hurts these rural schools compared to metropolitan land grant schools with on campus medical centers and the biomedical research they enable.