(06-22-2014 07:08 AM)TodgeRodge Wrote:  

(06-22-2014 06:57 AM)mj4life Wrote:  I have yet to see any real evidence that athletic conference affiliation has any direct impact on academic rankings or research dollars. Sure most schools want to associate with like minded schools as much as possible but several ACC,SEC & B12 schools are among the top academic& research institutions in the country.

it doesn't

here is a list of the 2012 federal research and development funding

https://ncsesdata.nsf.gov/profiles/site;...g&o=fr&s=a

if you order them by funding levels you will see that Johns Hopkins (few of any would know that is a university much less anything about their academics) is first then 5th is UCSF that does not even have athletics and UCSD is well ahead of any of the UC schools in a D1-A conference and they are DII and a ton of other schools with little or no athletics programs of known reputation and a ton of medical schools that have no athletics at all

Didn't John Hopkins just move their La Cross team over to B1G?

(06-21-2014 11:28 PM)slowknight Wrote:  The pac 10 has no interest in houston, their academicas are terrible and they aare a dumb commutwer school.

Glad your the authority slow. Please. You don't know..

(06-22-2014 08:01 AM)chargeradio Wrote:  Too bad the B1G can't invite Rochester and MIT - they rank ahead of the usual suspects for expansion on this list.

Hahaha. That would be very cool!

(06-21-2014 10:24 PM)10thMountain Wrote:  Yawn.

Delaney wishes he were half the Lex Luthor that poorly written article claims he is.

The B1G is in a dying part of the country and is desperate to stay ahead of its demographic doom.

Delany and Scott get there marching orders from the Presidents of the B1G/PAC don't get it twisted, Delany and Scott might present candidates its the conference Presidents who lay down the criteria they want in a school for admission and they are the ones who vote to admit or decline a candidate behind close doors and mark off th list who will never be considered. These men and women who run these schools are academicians first and foremost, not AD's they are about federal research dollars the honey pot and prestige for their respective schools, academically individually and collectively. You don't believe they have a much wider agenda? Time will tell the story, give 10-15 years when the GOR's run out, LHN contract w/ESPN runs out.

Academics in the ACC are "downtrodden" according to UVA? Really?...

BU to B1G as hockey only? So BU is going to leave what many consider the best hockey league in the country,where they can basically bus to very game (except ND) to join a league where their nearest mate is PSU? Where exactly might they get the $$ to do this?

Why would the BIG be interested in them? Great hockey tradition aside? There are a few other schools closer to the B1G footprint that would offer just as much in hockey.
If the B1G wants exposure (which they already have), in the Northeast they could more easliy schedule OOC games with any of the Hockey east schools. No need to bring BU in as a conference mate

(06-22-2014 09:01 AM)BIgCatonProwl Wrote:  

(06-22-2014 07:08 AM)TodgeRodge Wrote:  

(06-22-2014 06:57 AM)mj4life Wrote:  I have yet to see any real evidence that athletic conference affiliation has any direct impact on academic rankings or research dollars. Sure most schools want to associate with like minded schools as much as possible but several ACC,SEC & B12 schools are among the top academic& research institutions in the country.

it doesn't

here is a list of the 2012 federal research and development funding

https://ncsesdata.nsf.gov/profiles/site;...g&o=fr&s=a

if you order them by funding levels you will see that Johns Hopkins (few of any would know that is a university much less anything about their academics) is first then 5th is UCSF that does not even have athletics and UCSD is well ahead of any of the UC schools in a D1-A conferencCIe and they are DII and a ton of other schools with little or no athletics programs of known reputation and a ton of medical schools that have no athletics at all

Didn't John Hopkins just move their La Cross team over to B1G?

CIC membership came with the invite so it matters

(06-22-2014 09:56 AM)MJG Wrote:  

(06-22-2014 09:01 AM)BIgCatonProwl Wrote:  

(06-22-2014 07:08 AM)TodgeRodge Wrote:  

(06-22-2014 06:57 AM)mj4life Wrote:  I have yet to see any real evidence that athletic conference affiliation has any direct impact on academic rankings or research dollars. Sure most schools want to associate with like minded schools as much as possible but several ACC,SEC & B12 schools are among the top academic& research institutions in the country.

it doesn't

here is a list of the 2012 federal research and development funding

https://ncsesdata.nsf.gov/profiles/site;...g&o=fr&s=a

if you order them by funding levels you will see that Johns Hopkins (few of any would know that is a university much less anything about their academics) is first then 5th is UCSF that does not even have athletics and UCSD is well ahead of any of the UC schools in a D1-A conferencCIe and they are DII and a ton of other schools with little or no athletics programs of known reputation and a ton of medical schools that have no athletics at all

Didn't John Hopkins just move their La Cross team over to B1G?

CIC membership came with the invite so it matters

the CIC is nothing but a mechanism to make the haring of OUTSIDE grant money easier

and there is ZERO that stops universities that are not in the same conference from working together on grants and there is zero that stops universities that are not in a formal consortium from partnering on grants and contracts it happens all the time in academia

the CIC has ZERO money of it's own and NO money for grants or contracts comes with CIC membership

and UT Austin works with Arizona (PAC 12) and Chicago (CIC) on the GMT Telescope project while their "competitors" (not exactly a competition, but most likely only 1 will be built) are the UC System (2 PAC 12 schools), Cal Tech and others

so again academic collaboration happens outside the CIC and outside and inside of numerous formal and informal consortium and agreements

(06-22-2014 09:42 AM)gosports1 Wrote:  Academics in the ACC are "downtrodden" according to UVA? Really?...

At least they are one state to the south.

(06-22-2014 10:55 AM)bullet Wrote:  

(06-22-2014 09:42 AM)gosports1 Wrote:  Academics in the ACC are "downtrodden" according to UVA? Really?...

At least they are one state to the south.

I always knew UNC and NC State (and Duke) and the research triangle and top notch academics

but it was not the fact that UNC was so blatantly cheating to let morons slide for athletics that made me lose respect for them it was the fact that they let it get so out of control that someone from within had to call them out on it and the they tried to ruin the reputation of that person......that was just flat disgusting and it really is a shot at academic integrity for the whole university

like everything it is the attempted coverup that really gets people to lose respect for you

(06-22-2014 06:57 AM)mj4life Wrote:  I have yet to see any real evidence that athletic conference affiliation has any direct impact on academic rankings or research dollars. Sure most schools want to associate with like minded schools as much as possible but several ACC,SEC & B12 schools are among the top academic& research institutions in the country.

Of course in the case of UNC it is academic because the "student athletes" don't actually attend classes, write papers or take tests themselves.

(06-22-2014 09:42 AM)gosports1 Wrote:  Academics in the ACC are "downtrodden" according to UVA? Really?...

BU to B1G as hockey only? So BU is going to leave what many consider the best hockey league in the country,where they can basically bus to very game (except ND) to join a league where their nearest mate is PSU? Where exactly might they get the $$ to do this?

Why would the BIG be interested in them? Great hockey tradition aside? There are a few other schools closer to the B1G footprint that would offer just as much in hockey.
If the B1G wants exposure (which they already have), in the Northeast they could more easliy schedule OOC games with any of the Hockey east schools. No need to bring BU in as a conference mate

I agree. IMO, this is one of the most biased and uninformed perspectives I have ever read on here. IMO, most of what is written represents a view of what the writer would LIKE to exist rather than what DOES exist. The writer loses all credibility, IMO, when he/she states: "UVA is "not happy with the downtrodden academics of the ACC." Really?? Let's see, 8 of the 15 ACC schools are in the Top 50 of the 2014 USN&WR Survey:

#7 Duke
#18 Notre Dame
#23 UVA
#23 Wake Forest
#30 UNC
#31 Boston College
#36 GT
#47 Miami

Yeah, right, "downtrodden academics". Good Lord! Frankly, I think the OP should be embarrassed to have posted this and give it the credibility he gave it in the first post.

Oh, and one other thing, the notion that the writer puts forth that athletics and related TV money will be a dominant factor in how research dollars are awarded by the federal government and other institutions is, IMO, absurd and shows that the writer knows little of this process.

The BU to the BiG hockey comment is beyond ridiculous, IMO, for precisely the reasons you stated.

(06-22-2014 05:34 PM)Eagle78 Wrote:  

(06-22-2014 09:42 AM)gosports1 Wrote:  Academics in the ACC are "downtrodden" according to UVA? Really?...

BU to B1G as hockey only? So BU is going to leave what many consider the best hockey league in the country,where they can basically bus to very game (except ND) to join a league where their nearest mate is PSU? Where exactly might they get the $$ to do this?

Why would the BIG be interested in them? Great hockey tradition aside? There are a few other schools closer to the B1G footprint that would offer just as much in hockey.
If the B1G wants exposure (which they already have), in the Northeast they could more easliy schedule OOC games with any of the Hockey east schools. No need to bring BU in as a conference mate

I agree. IMO, this is one of the most biased and uninformed perspectives I have ever read on here. IMO, most of what is written represents a view of what the writer would LIKE to exist rather than what DOES exist. The writer loses all credibility, IMO, when he/she states: "UVA is "not happy with the downtrodden academics of the ACC." Really?? Let's see, 8 of the 15 ACC schools are in the Top 50 of the 2014 USN&WR Survey:

#7 Duke
#18 Notre Dame
#23 UVA
#23 Wake Forest
#30 UNC
#31 Boston College
#36 GT
#47 Miami

Yeah, right, "downtrodden academics". Good Lord! Frankly, I think the OP should be embarrassed to have posted this and give it the credibility he gave it in the first post.

Oh, and one other thing, the notion that the writer puts forth that athletics and related TV money will be a dominant factor in how research dollars are awarded by the federal government and other institutions is, IMO, absurd and shows that the writer knows little of this process.

The BU to the BiG hockey comment is beyond ridiculous, IMO, for precisely the reasons you stated.

There has been a recent development on this board that is both very curious and, yes, a bit disturbing to me.

I find myself more than infrequently agreeing with a Boston College fan.

What is this world coming to?

(06-21-2014 11:28 PM)slowknight Wrote:  The pac 10 has no interest in houston, their academicas are terrible and they aare a dumb commutwer school.

LOL uh....maybe you need some school?

(06-22-2014 05:34 PM)Eagle78 Wrote:  

(06-22-2014 09:42 AM)gosports1 Wrote:  Academics in the ACC are "downtrodden" according to UVA? Really?...

BU to B1G as hockey only? So BU is going to leave what many consider the best hockey league in the country,where they can basically bus to very game (except ND) to join a league where their nearest mate is PSU? Where exactly might they get the $$ to do this?

Why would the BIG be interested in them? Great hockey tradition aside? There are a few other schools closer to the B1G footprint that would offer just as much in hockey.
If the B1G wants exposure (which they already have), in the Northeast they could more easliy schedule OOC games with any of the Hockey east schools. No need to bring BU in as a conference mate

I agree. IMO, this is one of the most biased and uninformed perspectives I have ever read on here. IMO, most of what is written represents a view of what the writer would LIKE to exist rather than what DOES exist. The writer loses all credibility, IMO, when he/she states: "UVA is "not happy with the downtrodden academics of the ACC." Really?? Let's see, 8 of the 15 ACC schools are in the Top 50 of the 2014 USN&WR Survey:

#7 Duke
#18 Notre Dame
#23 UVA
#23 Wake Forest
#30 UNC
#31 Boston College
#36 GT
#47 Miami

Yeah, right, "downtrodden academics". Good Lord! Frankly, I think the OP should be embarrassed to have posted this and give it the credibility he gave it in the first post.

Oh, and one other thing, the notion that the writer puts forth that athletics and related TV money will be a dominant factor in how research dollars are awarded by the federal government and other institutions is, IMO, absurd and shows that the writer knows little of this process.

The BU to the BiG hockey comment is beyond ridiculous, IMO, for precisely the reasons you stated.

don't forget UofL! hahahaha

(06-22-2014 07:04 PM)TerryD Wrote:  

(06-22-2014 05:34 PM)Eagle78 Wrote:  

(06-22-2014 09:42 AM)gosports1 Wrote:  Academics in the ACC are "downtrodden" according to UVA? Really?...

BU to B1G as hockey only? So BU is going to leave what many consider the best hockey league in the country,where they can basically bus to very game (except ND) to join a league where their nearest mate is PSU? Where exactly might they get the $$ to do this?

Why would the BIG be interested in them? Great hockey tradition aside? There are a few other schools closer to the B1G footprint that would offer just as much in hockey.
If the B1G wants exposure (which they already have), in the Northeast they could more easliy schedule OOC games with any of the Hockey east schools. No need to bring BU in as a conference mate

I agree. IMO, this is one of the most biased and uninformed perspectives I have ever read on here. IMO, most of what is written represents a view of what the writer would LIKE to exist rather than what DOES exist. The writer loses all credibility, IMO, when he/she states: "UVA is "not happy with the downtrodden academics of the ACC." Really?? Let's see, 8 of the 15 ACC schools are in the Top 50 of the 2014 USN&WR Survey:

#7 Duke
#18 Notre Dame
#23 UVA
#23 Wake Forest
#30 UNC
#31 Boston College
#36 GT
#47 Miami

Yeah, right, "downtrodden academics". Good Lord! Frankly, I think the OP should be embarrassed to have posted this and give it the credibility he gave it in the first post.

Oh, and one other thing, the notion that the writer puts forth that athletics and related TV money will be a dominant factor in how research dollars are awarded by the federal government and other institutions is, IMO, absurd and shows that the writer knows little of this process.

The BU to the BiG hockey comment is beyond ridiculous, IMO, for precisely the reasons you stated.

There has been a recent development on this board that is both very curious and, yes, a bit disturbing to me.

I find myself more than infrequently agreeing with a Boston College fan.

What is this world coming to?

LOL! I don't know, Terry. Since we are both grads from Catholic schools, maybe it is a sign that the Rapture is upon us!

(06-22-2014 07:22 PM)Bearcats#1 Wrote:  

(06-22-2014 05:34 PM)Eagle78 Wrote:  

(06-22-2014 09:42 AM)gosports1 Wrote:  Academics in the ACC are "downtrodden" according to UVA? Really?...

BU to B1G as hockey only? So BU is going to leave what many consider the best hockey league in the country,where they can basically bus to very game (except ND) to join a league where their nearest mate is PSU? Where exactly might they get the $$ to do this?

Why would the BIG be interested in them? Great hockey tradition aside? There are a few other schools closer to the B1G footprint that would offer just as much in hockey.
If the B1G wants exposure (which they already have), in the Northeast they could more easliy schedule OOC games with any of the Hockey east schools. No need to bring BU in as a conference mate

I agree. IMO, this is one of the most biased and uninformed perspectives I have ever read on here. IMO, most of what is written represents a view of what the writer would LIKE to exist rather than what DOES exist. The writer loses all credibility, IMO, when he/she states: "UVA is "not happy with the downtrodden academics of the ACC." Really?? Let's see, 8 of the 15 ACC schools are in the Top 50 of the 2014 USN&WR Survey:

#7 Duke
#18 Notre Dame
#23 UVA
#23 Wake Forest
#30 UNC
#31 Boston College
#36 GT
#47 Miami

Yeah, right, "downtrodden academics". Good Lord! Frankly, I think the OP should be embarrassed to have posted this and give it the credibility he gave it in the first post.

Oh, and one other thing, the notion that the writer puts forth that athletics and related TV money will be a dominant factor in how research dollars are awarded by the federal government and other institutions is, IMO, absurd and shows that the writer knows little of this process.

The BU to the BiG hockey comment is beyond ridiculous, IMO, for precisely the reasons you stated.

don't forget UofL! hahahaha

Yes, because the ranking of one school completely out weighs the other 8 that are the absolute cream of the crop of the P5 conferences. Nice try!

Undergraduates and media focus on US News rankings but they are easily skewed and gamed by the university. In essence they measure only the reputation of the undergraduate education, and don't measure the overall university by omitting the graduate and research componenent which is what B10 universities are about. For example:

"ARWU considers every university that has any Nobel Laureates, Fields Medalists, Highly Cited Researchers, or papers published in Nature or Science. In addition, universities with significant amount of papers indexed by Science Citation Index-Expanded (SCIE) and Social Science Citation Index (SSCI) are also included. In total, more than 1000 universities are actually ranked and the best 500 are published on the web.

Ranking Criteria and Weights

Universities are ranked by several indicators of academic or research performance, including alumni and staff winning Nobel Prizes and Fields Medals, highly cited researchers, papers published in Nature and Science, papers indexed in major citation indices, and the per capita academic performance of an institution. For each indicator, the highest scoring institution is assigned a score of 100, and other institutions are calculated as a percentage of the top score. The distribution of data for each indicator is examined for any significant distorting effect; standard statistical techniques are used to adjust the indicator if necessary. Scores for each indicator are weighted as shown below to arrive at a final overall score for an institution. The highest scoring institution is assigned a score of 100, and other institutions are calculated as a percentage of the top score. An institution's rank reflects the number of institutions that sit above it.
Indicators and Weights for ARWU

Criteria

Indicator

Code

Weight

Quality of Education Alumni of an institution winning Nobel Prizes and Fields Medals Alumni 10%
Quality of Faculty Staff of an institution winning Nobel Prizes and Fields Medals Award 20%
Highly cited researchers in 21 broad subject categories HiCi 20%
Research Output Papers published in Nature and Science* N&S 20%
Papers indexed in Science Citation Index-expanded and Social Science Citation Index PUB 20%
Per Capita Performance Per capita academic performance of an institution PCP 10%
Total 100%
* For institutions specialized in humanities and social sciences such as London School of Economics, N&S is not considered, and the weight of N&S is relocated to other indicators. "


For 2013 the Big 10 ranked as follows:

17. Wisky
18. Michigan
19. Illinois
21. Minnesotta
22. Northwestern
24. Maryland
37. Penn State
38. Purdue
39. Rutgers
41. Ohio State
50. Indiana
50. Michigan State
53-67. Iowa
86-108. Nebraska

By comparison the ACC:

23. Duke
30. UNC
39. Pitt
53-67. GT
53-67. UVa
68-85. NC State
68-85. Florida State
68-85. Miami
68-85. Virginia Tech
86-108. Notre Dame*
109 - 131 Clemson
109 - 131 Syracuse
109 - 131 Wake Forest*
132-149 Boston College*
Above 150 - Louisville
* Undergraduate focused universities.

Here's the SEC:

35. Vandy
43. UF
53-47. UGa
53-47. Texas A&M
68-85. Tennessee
86-108. LSU
86-108. Kentucky
86-108. Mizzou
109-131. South Carolina
132-149. Auburn
132-149. Arkansas
Above 150 - Ole Miss
Above 150 - MSU

ARWU rankings are one metric for how graduate research universities measure each other. B10's are all graduate research intensive, while the ACC mixes in several undergraduate focused universities. ACC universities are also smaller - on average 40% smaller than their B10 counterparts. The size of the average ACC graduate research component will also be smaller than that found in the B10.

For those enamoured with the AAU, consider that they have capped their membership at 63 with 2 from Canada. While you can't really take the ARWU rankings and make a match, since they are output measures, they help understand the difficulty of getting into the 63.

The last two voted in were GT and Boston University. When GT was voted upon NC State and Cincy were also being voted upon. You need 75% of the schools voting yes to gain admission. NC State is in the 68-85 range. Cincy is 86-108. The last two tossed out of the AAU are Nebraska 86-108, and Syracuse, 109-131.

From a practical standpoint, if your ARWU ranking is 68-85 you are on the cusp of being dumped from the ARWU, and you are at the cusp of getting an AAU vote. Kansas, Mizzou, SUNY-Buffalo, and Brandies are all above that range at 86-108.

As far as those who play B-5 football, those not in the AAU but at 85 and ranked better (meaning might one day make the AAU) include Miami, FSU, NC State, VT, Georgia, Tennessee.

Mizzou and Kansas who are in the AAU, could easily find their future to be like Nebraska and Syracuse - dumped out from AAU.

No one should be under any illusion they can "work hard" to improve academics in order to get into the AAU, to then get into the B10.

(06-21-2014 11:28 PM)slowknight Wrote:  The pac 10 has no interest in houston, their academicas are terrible and they aare a dumb commutwer school.

That's awesome!

BTW, here are some facts on the 2013-14 freshman class:

Houston 1140 avg SAT, 34% graduated HS in the Top 10%
Utah 1125 SAT, 21% Top 10%
Oregon 1115 SAT, 25% Top 10%
Arizona St 1110 SAT, 29% Top 10%
Arizona 1095 SAT, 31% Top 10%
Oregon St 1095 SAT, 25% Top 10%
Wash St 1030 SAT, 30% Top 10%

And while Washington (1180 SAT, Not Available Top 10%) and Colorado (1170 SAT, 27% Top 10%) are ahead of UH, they are within shouting distance.

Clearly, Stanford, Cal, UCLA and USC are off the charts. But if they were the standard, then Utah and Colorado would not have gotten in, and Oklahoma, Texas Tech and Oklahoma St would not have been invited.

Here are the numbers for those three Big 12 schools that the Pac 12 was willing to take:

Oklahoma 1155 SAT, 33% Top 10%
Texas Tech 1110 SAT, 22% Top 10%
Okla St 1100 SAT, 28% Top 10%

That's a message board post. That almost makes bleacher report seem credible....almost.
CJ

(06-23-2014 04:01 AM)CardinalJim Wrote:  That's a message board post. That almost makes bleacher report seem credible....almost.
CJ

Obviously, freshman metrics are just one part of the picture.

But I think many people just don't know. They assume UH is barely one step above some open enrollment community college. That nearly anyone with a pulse can get in.

Clearly, they are misinformed.