(09-11-2013 01:00 PM)The Cutter of Bish Wrote:  

(09-11-2013 12:17 PM)Wedge Wrote:  

(09-11-2013 11:52 AM)lumberpack4 Wrote:  2. How small is your university? A small number of seats, helps to gin up a higher selectivity scale.

Another way that some private schools have manipulated the statistics reported to US News is by not offering admission to certain excellent students because they are likely to choose another school.

I read an article a few years ago that mentioned that several schools (IIRC Duke and Emory among them) ask on their applications for the names of the other schools the applicant has applied to. The way they use this information is that if they think the applicant is likely to go to one of the other schools they've applied to, they don't offer them admission -- because when you offer admission to a student who chooses another school, that lowers the percentage of offerees who choose your school, and hurts your US News ranking.

So, for example, if a student from New Hampshire applies to Duke, and mentions on their application that they have also applied to Harvard, Yale, and Princeton, and their grades and test scores are easily good enough to get offers of admission from HYP, then Duke will reject that application, not because the student isn't well-qualified (obviously they are very well qualified), but because Duke is pretty sure the student will choose one of HYP over Duke.

Yeah, and this is something public institutions just can't do. If you're an out-of-state resident, schools like Virginia and Cal-Berkeley are almost as difficult to get into as anyone on the top of the list. The schools are structured/subsidized to give a significant degree of preference to in-state applicants. You can boast better numbers than the person living in the state, but it's the statey who gets in. Thus, their enrollment profile and admit rates are skewed.

I know in PA, the state school system (not the Commonwealth one of state-related institutions, which include PSU, Pitt, and Temple) was forced to pretty much admit any PA resident who had their diploma or GED and applied for state financial aid back in the 90's. Their perception tanked thereafter.

The Commonwealth schools, not fully public, who had the enrollment to do so, started making their satellite campuses into four-year institutions when, before, they were 2+2's for the main campus. The same legislation that "opened up" the state system to any and all in PA was also given to these schools, but they, unlike the state system ones, could deflect students away from their main campuses and into the satellites, thereby "salvaging" the enrollment profile and admit rate numbers for their main campuses that were used to "rank" the institutions (then used to prop up the value of the other campuses).

This is what West Virginia, Kentucky, and UofL have been up against as well. It seems to be a practice that flourishes along the Appalachian spine and down the valleys.

When it's part of your mission to take on the education of nearly everyone in the state, it's going to be a drag, but the flip side is that getting a kid into school if they are an athlete, becomes easy. That's been an issue with NC schools in the ACC versus NC schools not in the ACC, in the past.

Of course, UNC can enroll a cantaloupe, and get him or her a degree if they just wont shoot anyone or call to much attention to themselves. That's a lot more difficult at the ACC's STEMS like VT, NC State, and GT.

Did you know that there has not been a kid academically ineligible in basketball at UNC since the mid 1970's.

(09-11-2013 01:00 PM)The Cutter of Bish Wrote:  I know in PA, the state school system (not the Commonwealth one of state-related institutions, which include PSU, Pitt, and Temple) was forced to pretty much admit any PA resident who had their diploma or GED and applied for state financial aid back in the 90's. Their perception tanked thereafter.

The Commonwealth schools, not fully public, who had the enrollment to do so, started making their satellite campuses into four-year institutions when, before, they were 2+2's for the main campus. The same legislation that "opened up" the state system to any and all in PA was also given to these schools, but they, unlike the state system ones, could deflect students away from their main campuses and into the satellites, thereby "salvaging" the enrollment profile and admit rate numbers for their main campuses that were used to "rank" the institutions (then used to prop up the value of the other campuses).

There's never been such legislation in Pennsylvania or any forcing of schools to accept students.

The state-owned and opperated schools (PASSHE) in Pennsylvania all generally started as Normal Schools, ie teachers colleges. They've never been regarded as other than serviceable local colleges with the general reputation of modest admission standards. That did not change in the 90s. Most are located in rural areas or small towns and have not grown substantially, with the exception of Indiana University of Pennsylvania (IUP). They're all NCAA Division II schools, athletically, and all but one sponsors football.

Penn State's 19 branch campuses all started as 2-year junior colleges. When Penn State moved to make them all into 4-year campuses, and I believe that was in the mid- to late-90s for most of them, it infuriated the state school system (and many lawmakers) as duplication of public services. However, Penn State has much more political clout than the PSSHE, and it proceeded unabated. About 40% of all undergraduate students at Penn State at any one time are in their branch campuses. 60% of all PSU students start at a branch campus and then transfer with their 2+2 plan. The admission criteria of these schools are considerably lower than their main campus, or even most PSSHE schools. Admission statistics are not reported in combination although there is no differentiation in diplomas. 15 of Penn State branches are USCAA (small colleges), while two are are Division NCAA III, athletically.

All four of Pitt's regional campuses were created when Pitt was private, before it became state-related in 1966, with the first campus established in 1927 at the request of the Johnstown area school district. Three of the campuses were moved to 4-year status in 1970, 1979, and 1988, and one is still a very small, two-year school. None of them overlap geographically with PSSHEA schools' service areas. There is no formal transfer plan except in a few specialized academic programs. The three four-year schools are mostly self-contained colleges. Two are listed in Princeton Review's Best Colleges guide. Athletically, one Pitt campus is NCAA Division II, while two others are Division III, and the smallest operates under the PCAA, which oversees Pennsylvania junior colleges.

Temple has one regional campus (unless you count its operation in Japan). That campus is in the Philadelphia suburbs and created from a merger of the Pennsylvania School of Horticulture for Women and Ambler Junior College that was absorbed by Temple in 1958, also before Temple became state-realted. It began offering its first bachelors degrees in 1987. Temple's Ambler campus as no sports of its own, but is actually home to Temple's varsity baseball, soccer and softball teams.

(09-11-2013 03:30 PM)lumberpack4 Wrote:  Did you know that there has not been a kid academically ineligible in basketball at UNC since the mid 1970's.

You should say there hasn't been a basketball player at UNC to receive inadequate grades. That would be the technically correct way to say it...

I'd be willing to bet there have been a few players that would have been academically ineligible, if they had to take the classes the rest of the student body takes, and actually earn the grades. But considering the facts that have come out recently, we know that ain't happening...

(09-11-2013 12:02 PM)CardinalJim Wrote:  The Louisville fans I’ve met, the Louisville people I’ve met, are representative of their University: good, decent, real, down-to-earth, easy-going, unpretentious, regular working people who love their Cardinals. No silver spoons here. No Reeds or Chivingtons or Garlands or Jaspers among this group. Lots of Marks and James and Franks and Tammys who love their Cardinals and exist in large enough numbers that Louisville will posses one of the biggest fan bases upon entering the ACC. UL won’t be another BC or Wake or Georgia Tech or Miami – ACC schools with fan-bases so tiny as to embarrass the conference by their (lack of) attendance at championship games and bowls.

And good, decent, real people are unique to UL? You make it sound like your average fan is living in a double wide. Not that there is anything wrong with that, but still not sure what point you're trying to make. And trust me, there are Garlands and Jaspers among your fanbase. Not sure why that's a problem.

Why should GT be embarrassed, we're a small school. Keep this fact in mind; as of 2012 only ~102,000 students have graduated from GT with an undergrad degree in it's entire history (1885). How many of those are still alive? Also, 15-20% of our student body is international.

When I was at GT less than 15 years ago; there were only 7k undergrads. Today, there are almost 15k which is amazing growth w/o compromising our standards.

We're not lucky to have a significant number of sidewalk fans. We're in a pro town with a large number of transplants and the locals are brainwashed to be UGA fans. FYI, I grew up a UGA fan till I went to GT.

What I am embarrassed by is that on campus for game day; there are students going to the library to study instead of going to the game. Now, maybe for most of them English wasn't their first language, but still it irks me.

(09-11-2013 03:30 PM)lumberpack4 Wrote:  When it's part of your mission to take on the education of nearly everyone in the state, it's going to be a drag, but the flip side is that getting a kid into school if they are an athlete, becomes easy. That's been an issue with NC schools in the ACC versus NC schools not in the ACC, in the past.

Of course, UNC can enroll a cantaloupe, and get him or her a degree if they just wont shoot anyone or call to much attention to themselves. That's a lot more difficult at the ACC's STEMS like VT, NC State, and GT.

Totally agree with you here. And I'll say it's the most difficult for GT. Sure there are other top academic schools that are very successful at football (Stanford, USC, Notre Dame, etc). However, those schools have plenty of majors that athletes can hide in.

Georgia Tech only offers 36 undergraduate degrees. Take a look here (GT degrees). Try selling these to your average football prospect who cares nothing about education.

I can't think of another division 1 FBS school that has GT's challenge of academic requirements and limited majors. Maybe the service academies, but that's a whole other level with getting kids who are willing to enter active service after school.

Also, the GT administration (aka the Hill) has made it more difficult for special admits in recent years. If you took our 1990 team that won the national championship; I doubt half would qualify today.

(09-12-2013 11:50 PM)gpburdell Wrote:  

(09-11-2013 12:02 PM)CardinalJim Wrote:  The Louisville fans I’ve met, the Louisville people I’ve met, are representative of their University: good, decent, real, down-to-earth, easy-going, unpretentious, regular working people who love their Cardinals. No silver spoons here. No Reeds or Chivingtons or Garlands or Jaspers among this group. Lots of Marks and James and Franks and Tammys who love their Cardinals and exist in large enough numbers that Louisville will posses one of the biggest fan bases upon entering the ACC. UL won’t be another BC or Wake or Georgia Tech or Miami – ACC schools with fan-bases so tiny as to embarrass the conference by their (lack of) attendance at championship games and bowls.

And good, decent, real people are unique to UL? You make it sound like your average fan is living in a double wide. Not that there is anything wrong with that, but still not sure what point you're trying to make. And trust me, there are Garlands and Jaspers among your fanbase. Not sure why that's a problem.

Why should GT be embarrassed, we're a small school. Keep this fact in mind; as of 2012 only ~102,000 students have graduated from GT with an undergrad degree in it's entire history (1885). How many of those are still alive? Also, 15-20% of our student body is international.

When I was at GT less than 15 years ago; there were only 7k undergrads. Today, there are almost 15k which is amazing growth w/o compromising our standards.

We're not lucky to have a significant number of sidewalk fans. We're in a pro town with a large number of transplants and the locals are brainwashed to be UGA fans. FYI, I grew up a UGA fan till I went to GT.

What I am embarrassed by is that on campus for game day; there are students going to the library to study instead of going to the game. Now, maybe for most of them English wasn't their first language, but still it irks me.

I didn't write the article. You need to take that with with Chadd Scott of ChuckOliver.net
CJ

(09-11-2013 06:26 PM)bitcruncher Wrote:  

(09-11-2013 03:30 PM)lumberpack4 Wrote:  Did you know that there has not been a kid academically ineligible in basketball at UNC since the mid 1970's.

You should say there hasn't been a basketball player at UNC to receive inadequate grades. That would be the technically correct way to say it...

I'd be willing to bet there have been a few players that would have been academically ineligible, if they had to take the classes the rest of the student body takes, and actually earn the grades. But considering the facts that have come out recently, we know that ain't happening...

In addition to blatant cheating, UNC has other advantages. UNC allows a student to take 18 hours over the summer - 6 hours in something called Maymester - classes that meet just during the month of May, then there are the two regular summer sessions. This allows an athlete to take a huge under-load in the Fall or Spring and make it up in the Summer. Rather than calculating eligibility after a semester, UNC calculates it after a year - so kids that would ineligible in the Spring, have until the middle of August to get eligible. Recently UNC had a baseball player do this, obtaining 4 A's in the summer while he was playing Legion Baseball.

You gotta love it.

(09-10-2013 06:43 PM)lumberpack4 Wrote:  

(09-10-2013 05:57 PM)MJG Wrote:  

(09-10-2013 02:23 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(09-10-2013 01:52 PM)4x4hokies Wrote:  ACC
7 Duke
18 Notre Dame
23 Virginia
23 Wake Forest
30 North Carolina
31 Boston College
36 Georgia Tech
47 Miami
62 Clemson
62 Syracuse
62 Pittsburgh
69 Virginia Tech
91 Florida State
101 NC State
161 Louisville
Average: 54.9

Big 10
12 Northwestern
28 Michigan
37 Penn State
41 Illinois
41 Wisconsin
52 Ohio State
62 Maryland
68 Purdue
69 Rutgers
69 Minnesota
73 Michigan State
73 Iowa
75 Indiana
101 Nebraska
Average 57.2

Pac 12
5 Stanford
20 Cal
23 UCLA
23 USC
52 Washington
86 Colorado
109 Oregon
119 Arizona
121 Utah
128 Washington State
142 Arizona State
142 Oregon State
Average: 80.8

SEC
17 Vanderbilt
49 Florida
60 Georgia
69 Texas A&M
86 Alabama
91 Auburn
97 Missouri
101 Tennessee
112 South Carolina
119 Kentucky
128 Arkansas
135 Louisiana State
142 Mississippi State
150 Mississippi
Average: 96.9

Big 12
52 Texas
75 Baylor
82 TCU
101 Iowa State
101 Kansas
101 Oklahoma
135 Kansas State
142 Oklahoma State
161 Texas Tech
170 WVU
Average: 112

American
52 Tulane
57 UConn
60 SMU
86 Tulsa
121 Temple
135 Cincinnati
170 UCF
170 USF
181 ECU
190 Houston
(207-261) Memphis
(12 Nat Lib Arts) Navy
Avg of those ranked: 122.2

I'll let someone else do the rest...

The median of the Pac 12, SEC and Big 12 is basically identical, 98, 99 and 101. ACC with its private schools is highest at 42, B1G at 65 and AAC at 135.

MWC would make sense to include since they have Big 12 candidates also a top and bottom ten of the rest.

In addition to the obvious biases, there is a fundamental bias toward smaller sized universities and to curriculums that push kids out in short order.

Louisville is really helping those ACC conference rankings? Rank is the right word when speaking of the Cards.

(09-11-2013 12:02 PM)CardinalJim Wrote:  

(09-11-2013 11:52 AM)lumberpack4 Wrote:  

(09-11-2013 11:26 AM)CardinalJim Wrote:  I believe by simply joining The ACC will boost UofL up in this useless poll just like it did FSU back in 1993 and that in itself is the problem. In 2009 CBS called the rankings a joke because they amount to no more than a "beauty contest." Same bias that exists in sports polls exists in these egg head polls. US News does this list to sell magazines and, of course, give the Nerds something to feel good about as they compare pocket protectors and sweater vests.

Bottom line is when ESPN starts paying millions of dollars to broadcast the debate team, I'll care about it.
CJ

Yes, just being in the ACC will cause you to rise. US News's methodology can be translated as follows:

1. How old is your university and how big is the endowment (endowment being somewhat a function of age as being 350 years old helps with your endowment as compared to a university that is only 150 years old) This means more money at play per student. This is a distinct edge for a Harvard, UNC, UVA, versus a Lousiville, FSU, even NC State.

2. How small is your university? A small number of seats, helps to gin up a higher selectivity scale. A small number of seats is also usually associated with an expensive private university, and many students are scared off due to the perceived cost, even in the university does FAFAS cost of admission pricing. Clemson elected to stay small a decade or so ago, and their seats have not grown with the State's population. You can game this by encouraging people to apply who have no change to get in and you can further game this by targeting out of state applications from the northeast.

Does the university allow you a first and/or second year general college that allows you to take classes without forcing you into a major as opposed to schools that force you into a major and then if you change majors, forces your to add a year or more to your stay. NC State for example is a very unforgiving STEM and changing majors is punitive, whereas you can glide along at UNC or Duke for two years before making a decision and majors typically are capped at just 30-36 hours, whereas a lot of NC State's STEM majors are plastered with co-requisites and pre-requisites that often gin up the hours need to 50-70.

Most importantly, the rankings only address undergraduate education and in most cases today, the undergraduate education is barely an entry into the door, you need a graduate degree or specialty to really make any money.

Age isn't a problem for UofL. It was founded in 1798. The problem for UofL is it was a private university until the early 70's. Chadd Scott describes Louisville best when he wrote a piece on why ACC fans will love UofL:

"To understand the fans and the Louisville people, you must understand the University. The University of Louisville, especially since World War II, was designed to serve non-traditional college students. UL was a commuter school. It attracted adults with jobs and children and responsibilities outside of beer bongs and Frisbee golf. It attracted racial minorities unwelcome elsewhere, part-time students, residents finishing degree programs begun elsewhere and those sampling secondary education, perhaps the first in their family to do so. Those students don't typically impress U.S. News and World Report.

The University of Louisville wasn’t operating to attract national merit scholars and tenured professors earning $150,000 a year who spend only a fraction of their time in the classroom while they work on their fifth book no one has read. UL served the 34-year-old working mother of two who wants to complete her degree in order to earn a few thousand more dollars a year at work to support her family. That purpose is every bit as noble as the breathtaking research occurring at Duke or Georgia Tech.

The Louisville fans I’ve met, the Louisville people I’ve met, are representative of their University: good, decent, real, down-to-earth, easy-going, unpretentious, regular working people who love their Cardinals. No silver spoons here. No Reeds or Chivingtons or Garlands or Jaspers among this group. Lots of Marks and James and Franks and Tammys who love their Cardinals and exist in large enough numbers that Louisville will posses one of the biggest fan bases upon entering the ACC. UL won’t be another BC or Wake or Georgia Tech or Miami – ACC schools with fan-bases so tiny as to embarrass the conference by their (lack of) attendance at championship games and bowls.

The academic mission and clout of the University of Louisville has changed dramatically since its 1950’s-1980s commuter school roots. You can read more about that here. The Cardinals’ successful athletic programs and the pride they’ve instilled in the University have been a major catalyst into transforming UL from a much scoffed-at commuter school to an ascending urban research institution that's now a destination for top students across the country."

Well, we can't say that is true. UL joined the ACC in November 2012, rankings come out in September 2013 and not much change? How do you account for that? Nothing a bag of cash can't solve, right guys??? My oooooold kentucky home.

(09-13-2013 06:49 AM)lumberpack4 Wrote:  

(09-11-2013 06:26 PM)bitcruncher Wrote:  

(09-11-2013 03:30 PM)lumberpack4 Wrote:  Did you know that there has not been a kid academically ineligible in basketball at UNC since the mid 1970's.

You should say there hasn't been a basketball player at UNC to receive inadequate grades. That would be the technically correct way to say it...

I'd be willing to bet there have been a few players that would have been academically ineligible, if they had to take the classes the rest of the student body takes, and actually earn the grades. But considering the facts that have come out recently, we know that ain't happening...

In addition to blatant cheating, UNC has other advantages. UNC allows a student to take 18 hours over the summer - 6 hours in something called Maymester - classes that meet just during the month of May, then there are the two regular summer sessions. This allows an athlete to take a huge under-load in the Fall or Spring and make it up in the Summer. Rather than calculating eligibility after a semester, UNC calculates it after a year - so kids that would ineligible in the Spring, have until the middle of August to get eligible. Recently UNC had a baseball player do this, obtaining 4 A's in the summer while he was playing Legion Baseball.

You gotta love it.

Completely undermines all of the students who bust their ass to get a degree.

(09-13-2013 03:22 PM)ncbeta Wrote:  

(09-13-2013 06:49 AM)lumberpack4 Wrote:  

(09-11-2013 06:26 PM)bitcruncher Wrote:  

(09-11-2013 03:30 PM)lumberpack4 Wrote:  Did you know that there has not been a kid academically ineligible in basketball at UNC since the mid 1970's.

You should say there hasn't been a basketball player at UNC to receive inadequate grades. That would be the technically correct way to say it...

I'd be willing to bet there have been a few players that would have been academically ineligible, if they had to take the classes the rest of the student body takes, and actually earn the grades. But considering the facts that have come out recently, we know that ain't happening...

In addition to blatant cheating, UNC has other advantages. UNC allows a student to take 18 hours over the summer - 6 hours in something called Maymester - classes that meet just during the month of May, then there are the two regular summer sessions. This allows an athlete to take a huge under-load in the Fall or Spring and make it up in the Summer. Rather than calculating eligibility after a semester, UNC calculates it after a year - so kids that would ineligible in the Spring, have until the middle of August to get eligible. Recently UNC had a baseball player do this, obtaining 4 A's in the summer while he was playing Legion Baseball.

You gotta love it.

Completely undermines all of the students who bust their ass to get a degree.

I took a year of summer school. I don't think it undermines students. I actually liked it much better having the classes 5 times a week instead of 2 or 3 times.

(09-13-2013 06:49 AM)lumberpack4 Wrote:  

(09-11-2013 06:26 PM)bitcruncher Wrote:  

(09-11-2013 03:30 PM)lumberpack4 Wrote:  Did you know that there has not been a kid academically ineligible in basketball at UNC since the mid 1970's.

You should say there hasn't been a basketball player at UNC to receive inadequate grades. That would be the technically correct way to say it...

I'd be willing to bet there have been a few players that would have been academically ineligible, if they had to take the classes the rest of the student body takes, and actually earn the grades. But considering the facts that have come out recently, we know that ain't happening...

In addition to blatant cheating, UNC has other advantages. UNC allows a student to take 18 hours over the summer - 6 hours in something called Maymester - classes that meet just during the month of May, then there are the two regular summer sessions. This allows an athlete to take a huge under-load in the Fall or Spring and make it up in the Summer. Rather than calculating eligibility after a semester, UNC calculates it after a year - so kids that would ineligible in the Spring, have until the middle of August to get eligible. Recently UNC had a baseball player do this, obtaining 4 A's in the summer while he was playing Legion Baseball.

You gotta love it.

Nothing that you listed is any special advantage for UNC. I expect that almost every major university participating in college sports brings its athlete sin over the summer to lighten their course load during the school year. How else could anyone go on the road for such lengthy trips like the NCAA tournament and handle any academic requirements?

I'm sure that Maymester was not invented for athletes and that many regular students are doing the same thing.

The practice of calculating eligibility for the year is not a UNC invention. It's in the NCAA rules. I sincerely doubt that UNC is the only one doing this. Schools that opt to monitor their student athlete's eligibility more frequently during the school year are doing a better job for the student athletes even if they don't appreciate it at the time and are placing a greater emphasis on academics, but that doesn't mean that UNC has any special advantage or that there is any hint of anything improper.

(09-13-2013 03:36 PM)4x4hokies Wrote:  

(09-13-2013 03:22 PM)ncbeta Wrote:  

(09-13-2013 06:49 AM)lumberpack4 Wrote:  

(09-11-2013 06:26 PM)bitcruncher Wrote:  

(09-11-2013 03:30 PM)lumberpack4 Wrote:  Did you know that there has not been a kid academically ineligible in basketball at UNC since the mid 1970's.

You should say there hasn't been a basketball player at UNC to receive inadequate grades. That would be the technically correct way to say it...

I'd be willing to bet there have been a few players that would have been academically ineligible, if they had to take the classes the rest of the student body takes, and actually earn the grades. But considering the facts that have come out recently, we know that ain't happening...

In addition to blatant cheating, UNC has other advantages. UNC allows a student to take 18 hours over the summer - 6 hours in something called Maymester - classes that meet just during the month of May, then there are the two regular summer sessions. This allows an athlete to take a huge under-load in the Fall or Spring and make it up in the Summer. Rather than calculating eligibility after a semester, UNC calculates it after a year - so kids that would ineligible in the Spring, have until the middle of August to get eligible. Recently UNC had a baseball player do this, obtaining 4 A's in the summer while he was playing Legion Baseball.

You gotta love it.

Completely undermines all of the students who bust their ass to get a degree.

I took a year of summer school. I don't think it undermines students. I actually liked it much better having the classes 5 times a week instead of 2 or 3 times.

What I meant was UNC handing out grades to their players undermines students who work hard. I like summer school.

I was not there when the students were in summer school. I'm sure many of them are more than capable of obtaining degrees. The students who do not make it in professional sports and are given free passes make their fellow alumni look bad in the workforce.