Shaw with a savage take:

"It doesn't make sense for us to go hold a camp some place where there might be one person in the entire state that's eligible to get into Stanford."

Odd given that he has a fair number of kids on his roster from "SEC Country"

(07-24-2017 10:35 AM)tcufrog86 Wrote:  Odd given that he has a fair number of kids on his roster from "SEC Country"

Well his state might boycott him if he came here to hold a camp so......

Would be interesting to know the average of the football team's "academic admissions stats", like high school GPA and test scores, vs the average of the undergrad student body.

Also would be interesting if he is given a quota per year of slots for kids who are two or more standard deviations below the average, or something to that effect.

(07-24-2017 10:35 AM)tcufrog86 Wrote:  Odd given that he has a fair number of kids on his roster from "SEC Country"

The largest number of Stanford undergrads (but not the majority) are from California. Take one guess which state is second in the number of Stanford undergrads.

(It's possible that Shaw knows this answer and was just being a smartass.)

TEXAS!!!!!

They really like those Texas kids at Stanford and not just for Athletics. They are all over the campus. Arizona is the other school in the P12 with a heavy Texas contingent (almost equal to Cali; curiously ASU is almost all Cali for out of state). Then again Stanford and Arizona recruit the upper end of Texas kids. The SEC goes for the other end.

He obviously wasn't talking about Texas in the OP quote unless he was just being a dummy.

The states that would fit the quote would be Miss, S Carolina, etc ... but Stanford wouldn't hold camps there in the first place. So it doesn't make a lot of sense anyway.

(07-24-2017 01:14 PM)Stugray2 Wrote:  TEXAS!!!!!

They really like those Texas kids at Stanford and not just for Athletics. They are all over the campus. Arizona is the other school in the P12 with a heavy Texas contingent (almost equal to Cali; curiously ASU is almost all Cali for out of state). Then again Stanford and Arizona recruit the upper end of Texas kids. The SEC goes for the other end.

When you say Stanford and Arizona recruit the upper end of Texas kids, do you mean academically? If so, Stanford I see....but Arizona would be very similar to the middle of the pack SEC schools academically (like a Alabama, Missouri, or Tennessee).

It's a major party school, for one (though they all are), and it has much better research opportunities than those you just named. It's not an elite PAC in research, but it's up there.

(07-24-2017 02:27 PM)tcufrog86 Wrote:  

(07-24-2017 01:14 PM)Stugray2 Wrote:  TEXAS!!!!!

They really like those Texas kids at Stanford and not just for Athletics. They are all over the campus. Arizona is the other school in the P12 with a heavy Texas contingent (almost equal to Cali; curiously ASU is almost all Cali for out of state). Then again Stanford and Arizona recruit the upper end of Texas kids. The SEC goes for the other end.

When you say Stanford and Arizona recruit the upper end of Texas kids, do you mean academically? If so, Stanford I see....but Arizona would be very similar to the middle of the pack SEC schools academically (like a Alabama, Missouri, or Tennessee).

Yes I mean high end. They only recruit high end from out of state, they have plenty of dolts in state. A lot of schools have that duel role, average in-state and exceptional out-of-state. Nebraska and UDel come to mind with their honors program steep discounts for out-of-state students. tOSU offer similar, but they have higher in-state standards. I know because my son recently went through the college application game (4 and 5 years ago). UofA took only a couple of 3.5, 1900 SAT kids from my son's HS (and Aaron Gordon ... who, while a nice guy my son played basketball with, is not too brilliant and his GPA was not very great, even with a lot of "help"; he did meet NCAA minimums).

Alabama is at the bottom of the SEC academically with LSU and the Mississippi schools. Alabama is not even an R1 institution. They took a sub 3.0 kid from my son's HS ... it was cheap, and a better school than any in the West he could get into. UAB is actually the better academic and research school


... I am not saying Arizona is a great school, more like average. As a research school it's far ahead of all but two SEC schools (A&M, Florida ... maybe Vandy if you account for it's small size), but as an undergrad school its somewhere between Missouri and Georgia; so yeah Kentucky would be about where I'd put them, just behind Missouri and ahead of Tennessee and Arkansas.

Out of curiosity, I tallied the home states of their current roster. They have players from 27 different states. Their top four are California (27), Texas (9), Utah (6) and Arizona (4). About what you'd expect.

The next tier includes Washington, Louisiana, and New Jersey at 4 each, then Maryland, Florida and North Carolina at 3 each. Ohio, Oregon, Hawaii and Illinois produce 2 each.

Twelve states plus Canada account for 1 each.

So I guess Shaw has a point, except for the snarky part.

(07-24-2017 03:19 PM)Stugray2 Wrote:  

(07-24-2017 02:27 PM)tcufrog86 Wrote:  

(07-24-2017 01:14 PM)Stugray2 Wrote:  TEXAS!!!!!

They really like those Texas kids at Stanford and not just for Athletics. They are all over the campus. Arizona is the other school in the P12 with a heavy Texas contingent (almost equal to Cali; curiously ASU is almost all Cali for out of state). Then again Stanford and Arizona recruit the upper end of Texas kids. The SEC goes for the other end.

When you say Stanford and Arizona recruit the upper end of Texas kids, do you mean academically? If so, Stanford I see....but Arizona would be very similar to the middle of the pack SEC schools academically (like a Alabama, Missouri, or Tennessee).

Yes I mean high end. They only recruit high end from out of state, they have plenty of dolts in state. A lot of schools have that duel role, average in-state and exceptional out-of-state. Nebraska and UDel come to mind with their honors program steep discounts for out-of-state students. tOSU offer similar, but they have higher in-state standards. I know because my son recently went through the college application game (4 and 5 years ago). UofA took only a couple of 3.5, 1900 SAT kids from my son's HS (and Aaron Gordon ... who, while a nice guy my son played basketball with, is not too brilliant and his GPA was not very great, even with a lot of "help"; he did meet NCAA minimums).

Alabama is at the bottom of the SEC academically with LSU and the Mississippi schools. Alabama is not even an R1 institution. They took a sub 3.0 kid from my son's HS ... it was cheap, and a better school than any in the West he could get into.

That's because of how the University and System are organized.

Those rankings are not quality rankings but merely rankings based on expenditure on certain programs.

UA has a far more competitive student body than ASU or Arizona, major recruiting grounds for Stanford. 40% of the kids have a 30 or higher on the ACT. In fact, UA's student body is competitive in any major conference in the nation.

But, don't let facts get in the way of a good ignorance driven rant.

(07-24-2017 03:19 PM)Stugray2 Wrote:  

(07-24-2017 02:27 PM)tcufrog86 Wrote:  

(07-24-2017 01:14 PM)Stugray2 Wrote:  TEXAS!!!!!

They really like those Texas kids at Stanford and not just for Athletics. They are all over the campus. Arizona is the other school in the P12 with a heavy Texas contingent (almost equal to Cali; curiously ASU is almost all Cali for out of state). Then again Stanford and Arizona recruit the upper end of Texas kids. The SEC goes for the other end.

When you say Stanford and Arizona recruit the upper end of Texas kids, do you mean academically? If so, Stanford I see....but Arizona would be very similar to the middle of the pack SEC schools academically (like a Alabama, Missouri, or Tennessee).

Yes I mean high end. They only recruit high end from out of state, they have plenty of dolts in state. A lot of schools have that duel role, average in-state and exceptional out-of-state. Nebraska and UDel come to mind with their honors program steep discounts for out-of-state students. tOSU offer similar, but they have higher in-state standards. I know because my son recently went through the college application game (4 and 5 years ago). UofA took only a couple of 3.5, 1900 SAT kids from my son's HS (and Aaron Gordon ... who, while a nice guy my son played basketball with, is not too brilliant and his GPA was not very great, even with a lot of "help"; he did meet NCAA minimums).

Alabama is at the bottom of the SEC academically with LSU and the Mississippi schools. Alabama is not even an R1 institution. They took a sub 3.0 kid from my son's HS ... it was cheap, and a better school than any in the West he could get into.

Arizona's acceptance rate is around 75%...so not really a difficult school to get into for undergrad. I'm pretty familiar with UofA (both my parents went there and my dad was on the faculty for a number of years), and your comments regarding in-state do have some merit. Due to Arizona's relative lack of public universities compared to its population both UofA and Arizona State are somewhat tied by the state legislature as to admissions expectations for in-state applicants.

At the end of the day, college admissions is complex when you start looking at the big chunk of "standard" applicants (i.e. not amazing students, amazing athletes, or amazing extracurricular). I've heard all sorts of stories, for example, I had a good friend in high school who didn't get into the University of Oklahoma but got into Ohio State with a bit of merit based scholarship.

(07-24-2017 03:19 PM)Stugray2 Wrote:  Alabama is at the bottom of the SEC academically with LSU and the Mississippi schools. Alabama is not even an R1 institution. They took a sub 3.0 kid from my son's HS ... it was cheap, and a better school than any in the West he could get into. UAB is actually the better academic and research school

Alabama's medical school is one of the country's best. Yes, I said Alabama's because UAB exists to house that institution. It was decided decades ago that the school was better off being moved to Birmingham rather than staying on the main campus. After many years, the state created an undergrad division for them when the need arose. Make no mistake, however, that the medical school was sponsored and built all these many years by UA whether it has Crimson and White slapped on it or not.

More research is funded at the medical school than any other department in the UA System. That aspect of UAB is exceptional, however, their undergrad is not that impressive. It has improved and will continue to improve though as the state grows and perhaps one day needs another flagship.

Point being, rankings are like most statistics. You can make them say what you want them to say. It would be better for UA's "rankings" if the medical school was designated under UA rather than UAB, but the administration and research wouldn't necessarily be better off. The UA System fully funds one exceptional medical school and therefore there's no reason to have a second on on the Tuscaloosa campus. Same reason the UA System funds one law school in Tuscaloosa rather than giving one to each of the System's members.

Nope.

Alabama does not get credit for research done at UAB or UAH. They are separate institutions.

https://ncsesdata.nsf.gov/herd/2015/html...ST_17.html
#41 UAB
#130 Auburn
#153 UA Huntsville
#181 Alabama

(07-25-2017 09:28 AM)MplsBison Wrote:  Nope.

Alabama does not get credit for research done at UAB or UAH. They are separate institutions.

https://ncsesdata.nsf.gov/herd/2015/html...ST_17.html
#41 UAB
#130 Auburn
#153 UA Huntsville
#181 Alabama

No they do not.

That's becaue of how things are organized.

Comparing UA, with its separate organizational structure to others is comparing apples to oranges and that's why pure research expenditure rankings mean nothing. The programs UA excel at are simply not research dollar intensive--law and accounting for example.

For what it's worth, the medical school in Alabama is licensed as the University of Alabama School of Medicine and that is its formal name.

The system works, you can get a world class education in this state in any program you wish, medical, law, engineering, etc. The system works and that's precisely why this state has such a massive asset that swings well above our weight as a poor state.

For as much petty animosity and the inferiority complex UAB fans, all 27 of them, hold for UA it really only exists on the internet, and this Board in particular.

(07-25-2017 07:08 AM)AllTideUp Wrote:  

(07-24-2017 03:19 PM)Stugray2 Wrote:  Alabama is at the bottom of the SEC academically with LSU and the Mississippi schools. Alabama is not even an R1 institution. They took a sub 3.0 kid from my son's HS ... it was cheap, and a better school than any in the West he could get into. UAB is actually the better academic and research school

Alabama's medical school is one of the country's best. Yes, I said Alabama's because UAB exists to house that institution. It was decided decades ago that the school was better off being moved to Birmingham rather than staying on the main campus. After many years, the state created an undergrad division for them when the need arose. Make no mistake, however, that the medical school was sponsored and built all these many years by UA whether it has Crimson and White slapped on it or not.

More research is funded at the medical school than any other department in the UA System. That aspect of UAB is exceptional, however, their undergrad is not that impressive. It has improved and will continue to improve though as the state grows and perhaps one day needs another flagship.

Point being, rankings are like most statistics. You can make them say what you want them to say. It would be better for UA's "rankings" if the medical school was designated under UA rather than UAB, but the administration and research wouldn't necessarily be better off. The UA System fully funds one exceptional medical school and therefore there's no reason to have a second on on the Tuscaloosa campus. Same reason the UA System funds one law school in Tuscaloosa rather than giving one to each of the System's members.

To put it bluntly, UAB is where you go when you didn't get into UA or AU and Samford is too expensive.

(07-25-2017 12:27 PM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  The system works, you can get a world class education in this state in any program you wish, medical, law, engineering, etc. The system works and that's precisely why this state has such a massive asset that swings well above our weight as a poor state.

You're exactly correct.

But the thing is -- you don't even need to say this. Alabama is at the literal top of the food chain when it comes to college athletics. It doesn't have to "defend" its academics, a single iota. It, along with Auburn for that matter, don't have to prove diddly poo, academically or athletically. They already have it made in the shade.

(07-25-2017 12:28 PM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  To put it bluntly, UAB is where you go when you didn't get into UA or AU and Samford is too expensive.

What about UNA, UAH, Troy, Jacksonville St, UWA, USA?

(07-25-2017 12:28 PM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  

(07-25-2017 07:08 AM)AllTideUp Wrote:  

(07-24-2017 03:19 PM)Stugray2 Wrote:  Alabama is at the bottom of the SEC academically with LSU and the Mississippi schools. Alabama is not even an R1 institution. They took a sub 3.0 kid from my son's HS ... it was cheap, and a better school than any in the West he could get into. UAB is actually the better academic and research school

Alabama's medical school is one of the country's best. Yes, I said Alabama's because UAB exists to house that institution. It was decided decades ago that the school was better off being moved to Birmingham rather than staying on the main campus. After many years, the state created an undergrad division for them when the need arose. Make no mistake, however, that the medical school was sponsored and built all these many years by UA whether it has Crimson and White slapped on it or not.

More research is funded at the medical school than any other department in the UA System. That aspect of UAB is exceptional, however, their undergrad is not that impressive. It has improved and will continue to improve though as the state grows and perhaps one day needs another flagship.

Point being, rankings are like most statistics. You can make them say what you want them to say. It would be better for UA's "rankings" if the medical school was designated under UA rather than UAB, but the administration and research wouldn't necessarily be better off. The UA System fully funds one exceptional medical school and therefore there's no reason to have a second on on the Tuscaloosa campus. Same reason the UA System funds one law school in Tuscaloosa rather than giving one to each of the System's members.

To put it bluntly, UAB is where you go when you didn't get into UA or AU and Samford is too expensive.

Lmao wrong. I got accepted to UA and UAB and went to UAB. Keep painting with that broad brush though.

(07-26-2017 12:16 PM)Blazer4Life14 Wrote:  

(07-25-2017 12:28 PM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  

(07-25-2017 07:08 AM)AllTideUp Wrote:  

(07-24-2017 03:19 PM)Stugray2 Wrote:  Alabama is at the bottom of the SEC academically with LSU and the Mississippi schools. Alabama is not even an R1 institution. They took a sub 3.0 kid from my son's HS ... it was cheap, and a better school than any in the West he could get into. UAB is actually the better academic and research school

Alabama's medical school is one of the country's best. Yes, I said Alabama's because UAB exists to house that institution. It was decided decades ago that the school was better off being moved to Birmingham rather than staying on the main campus. After many years, the state created an undergrad division for them when the need arose. Make no mistake, however, that the medical school was sponsored and built all these many years by UA whether it has Crimson and White slapped on it or not.

More research is funded at the medical school than any other department in the UA System. That aspect of UAB is exceptional, however, their undergrad is not that impressive. It has improved and will continue to improve though as the state grows and perhaps one day needs another flagship.

Point being, rankings are like most statistics. You can make them say what you want them to say. It would be better for UA's "rankings" if the medical school was designated under UA rather than UAB, but the administration and research wouldn't necessarily be better off. The UA System fully funds one exceptional medical school and therefore there's no reason to have a second on on the Tuscaloosa campus. Same reason the UA System funds one law school in Tuscaloosa rather than giving one to each of the System's members.

To put it bluntly, UAB is where you go when you didn't get into UA or AU and Samford is too expensive.

Lmao wrong. I got accepted to UA and UAB and went to UAB. Keep painting with that broad brush though.

k