(02-17-2016 10:59 AM)zharkins Wrote:  Unfortunately, your attitude and delusions of grandeur seem to be indicative of most Cajun fans....

And do you really have the audacity to accuse us of 'delusions of grandeur' when your president.....not a stupid fan on on a sports forum, but your president.....can assert that your 'peers' are schools like lsu, auburn, UH, TAM, etc.???
Do you really think those schools were ever 'peers' of ltu? More importantly, do you really think for one second that any of those schools ever considered ltu-r as a 'peer' of their's????



That, my friend, is the ultimate in delusion of grandeur. And it came from your president.
The old expression 'the fish rots from the head first' has never been more apt.

(02-17-2016 12:12 PM)LaCajunsFan Wrote:  And do you really have the audacity to accuse us of 'delusions of grandeur' when your president.....not a stupid fan on on a sports forum, but your president.....can assert that your 'peers' are schools like lsu, auburn, UH, TAM, etc.???
Do you really think those schools were ever 'peers' of ltu? More importantly, do you really think for one second that any of those schools ever considered ltu-r as a 'peer' of their's????

That, my friend, is the ultimate in delusion of grandeur. And it came from your president.
The old expression 'the fish rots from the head first' has never been more apt.

Why would you post the same thing twice? Wanted to start a new page so someone skipping to the end wouldn't see where I continue to uncover more of your...ahem...untruths?

Just would like this to be at the end :)

(02-17-2016 11:15 AM)LaCajunsFan Wrote:  I could spend a lot of my time disputing most of what you posted, and figures, but all that would mean is that the circular argument would continue.

You can't, because the facts I posted links to haven't changed in the last 30 minutes.

Also, you continue to pretend like the two rankings measure the same thing, while they do not. Carnegie focuses exclusively on research dollars and doctoral degrees granted, which ULL beats Tech in hands down.

US News & World Report heavily weights their rankings differently and only uses the Carnegie Classification to divide schools into National, Regional, etc. The model is 22.5% undergrad academic reputation based on surveys, 22.5% to retention, 20% to faculty resources (class size, salary, highest degree %, student-faculty ration, and full time faculty %), 12.5% to student selectivity, 10% to financial resources, 7.5% to graduation rate, and 5% to alumni giving. We do well in several categories and not so well in some of the lesser categories. What Carnegie Measures is only a subset of the 10% weight in financial resources.

And finally...

(02-17-2016 11:15 AM)LaCajunsFan Wrote:  But what is extremely important to note is that there aren't any T1 schools with an R3 Carneige Classification.

Here are all the schools that are Tier 1 US News and R3 Carnegie
Adelphi University
Andrews University
Ashland University
Azuza Pacific University
Biola University
Clark University
Clarkson University
DePaul University
Edgewood College
Hofstra University
Immaculata University
Louisiana Tech University
Maryville University of St. Louis
Pace University
Pepperdine University
Seton Hall University
St. Johns University
SUNY College of Environmental Science and Forestry
University of La Verne
University of San Diego
University of San Francisco
University of the Pacific
Widener University

You are either really lazy or worse. Basically you suck at facts and truth.

I'm done fact checking your BS that you pull out of your butt. Everyone knows you for what you are now.

(02-17-2016 12:18 PM)zharkins Wrote:  Just would like this to be at the end :)

(02-17-2016 11:15 AM)LaCajunsFan Wrote:  I could spend a lot of my time disputing most of what you posted, and figures, but all that would mean is that the circular argument would continue.

You can't, because the facts I posted links to haven't changed in the last 30 minutes.

Also, you continue to pretend like the two rankings measure the same thing, while they do not. Carnegie focuses exclusively on research dollars and doctoral degrees granted, which ULL beats Tech in hands down.

US News & World Report heavily weights their rankings differently and only uses the Carnegie Classification to divide schools into National, Regional, etc. The model is 22.5% undergrad academic reputation based on surveys, 22.5% to retention, 20% to faculty resources (class size, salary, highest degree %, student-faculty ration, and full time faculty %), 12.5% to student selectivity, 10% to financial resources, 7.5% to graduation rate, and 5% to alumni giving. We do well in several categories and not so well in some of the lesser categories. What Carnegie Measures is only a subset of the 10% weight in financial resources.

Again, ltu-r made a HUGE deal about becoming R2. You cannot try to dismiss its relevance now with a bunch of unrelated data to try to deny that you have now lost that standing. No amount of spinning will change that fact.

And finally...

(02-17-2016 11:15 AM)LaCajunsFan Wrote:  But what is extremely important to note is that there aren't any T1 schools with an R3 Carneige Classification.

Here are all the schools that are Tier 1 US News and R3 Carnegie:

Sorry, but these are all PRUVATE schools, which for obvious reasons cannot be compared to public schools. Apples and oranges.

Private Schools:
Adelphi University, Andrews University, Ashland University, Azuza Pacific University,
Biola University, Clark University, Clarkson University, DePaul University, Edgewood College, Hofstra University, Immaculata University, Maryville University of St. Louis, Pace University, Pepperdine University, Seton Hall University, St. Johns University, University of La Verne, University of San Diego, University of San Francisco, University of the Pacific, Widener University

Public schools:
Ltu-r
SUNY College of Environmental Science and Forestry
(Not sure what's going on with ths one...I admit I missed it in my survey. I plan on doing research to figure out what's going on with it.....stay tuned.)



You are either really lazy or worse. Basically you suck at facts and truth.

I'm done fact checking your BS that you pull out of your butt.

LOL: some fact checker. Didn't you see the obvious issue that these were all private schools when you were doing your 'fact checking'. Or did you just pull something, anything, out your butt to try to refute the status of ltu-r????

Everyone knows you for what you are now.

Yes, that I posted facts, you posted a bunch of unrelated bs red herrings to try to deny the decline in academic standing of ltu-r.

And I reposted the chart because you didn't answer my question about 'delusions of grandeur.' Do you really think that those schools are 'peers' of ltu-r?

More importantly, can you say with a straight face that those schools consider ltu-r ias a 'peer' ....although I should use the past tense, because now even his very dubious set of critirea to make those claims is no longer true. But even that will not phase him.

Well, if you meant public, you should say public. I shouldn't have to assume.

And last time I checked, SUNY stood for State University of New York, so you are wrong again.

At least you are consistent though.

Everything you have posted except the fact that Tech dropped to R3 has been proven outdated, wrong, or made up. Adding more CAPS and Bold to your posts doesn't change that.

Also, someone on RaginPagin said that if you asked a La Tech fan about the USNWR rating formula they wouldn't want to discuss it. I posted it the post you just quoted. Maybe you should take it back and share it.

Then point out how embarrassing the the 3rd point on ULL's Rankings and Recognition page is...

"The University's graduation rate has risen over 49 percent during the last decade."

Yes, the 4 year graduation rate is now an impressive 15%, up from 9% (OMG) from 10 years ago. That is 66% better though, ULL deserves more credit. At least the current 15% puts you ahead of Grambling (by 3%), Southeastern (by 1%) and (UNO by 2%).

(02-17-2016 01:00 PM)LaCajunsFan Wrote:  And I reposted the chart because you didn't answer my question about 'delusions of grandeur.' Do you really think that those schools are 'peers' of ltu-r?

More importantly, can you say with a straight face that those schools consider ltu-r ias a 'peer' ....although I should use the past tense, because now even his very dubious set of critirea to make those claims is no longer true. But even that will not phase him.

Actually, if there are only 2 public schools in R3 that are USNWR Tier 1, we can just change it to Carnegie Foundation RU and our peers are the same. And of course Texas A&M and LSU don't consider us peers, but we were in a conference with UH and are still in a conference with UAB, so they must not have had a problem considering us peers.

Again, I don't know why I bother responding. You will just make up something that I have to look up and post a link to in order to disprove.

(02-17-2016 01:00 PM)zharkins Wrote:  Well, if you meant public, you should say public. I shouldn't have to assume.

No, I should not have assumed that you would understand the basic distinction between private schools and public ones. Like every other person who knows anything about schools. Heck, even your own president made sure to make that spdustinctin on his his now hilarious publication. But we can agree that I should have my audience better.

And last time I checked, SUNY stood for State University of New York, so you are wrong again.

I've already addressed this. It is one I missed, but they seem to be an anomaly: very small school with a heavy focus on one thing, forestry???? IDK, but will be checking into it.

At least you are consistent though.

Yes, because my point all along has been that the drop in T1 and R2 status without question reflects a drop in academic standing. No amount of other, unrelated stats you try to throw out, or personal attacks you make on me will change that.

Everything you have posted except the fact that Tech dropped to R3 has been proven outdated, wrong, or made up.

But lol, the drop to R3, and drop in T1 ranking are the main points. The rest of your bs is just that: bs.

(02-17-2016 01:12 PM)zharkins Wrote:  Also, someone on RaginPagin said that if you asked a La Tech fan about the USNWR rating formula they wouldn't want to discuss it. I posted it the post you just quoted. Maybe you should take it back and share it.


Then point out how embarrassing the the 3rd point on ULL's Rankings and Recognition page is...

"The University's graduation rate has risen over 49 percent during the last decade."

Yes, the 4 year graduation rate is now an impressive 15%, up from 9% (OMG) from 10 years ago. That is 66% better though, ULL deserves more credit. At least the current 15% puts you ahead of Grambling (by 3%), Southeastern (by 1%) and (UNO by 2%).

Are you really this stupid? Can you not understand basic graphs??? Our graduation rate in 1998 was a dismal 32%. A decade later it is now 48%, which is a 16% increase, and is very close to that of ltu-r. This is definetly an issue we are focusing on.

Guess you got that 15% rate out your butt, your usual source.

(02-17-2016 01:23 PM)zharkins Wrote:  

(02-17-2016 01:00 PM)LaCajunsFan Wrote:  And I reposted the chart because you didn't answer my question about 'delusions of grandeur.' Do you really think that those schools are 'peers' of ltu-r?

More importantly, can you say with a straight face that those schools consider ltu-r ias a 'peer' ....although I should use the past tense, because now even his very dubious set of critirea to make those claims is no longer true. But even that will not phase him.

Actually, if there are only 2 public schools in R3 that are USNWR Tier 1, we can just change it to Carnegie Foundation RU and our peers are the same.

You cannot be serious. Let me make sure I understand this: your president made a claim that those schools were your 'peers' based on R2, T1 and public schools (remember that one, lol?). So now that you have dropped to R3, and the graph is not hilariously wrong, you want to drop off the R3 status.....to make that idioctic claim even more idioctic? Omg.

And of course Texas A&M and LSU don't consider us peers, but we were in a conference with UH and are still in a conference with UAB, so they must not have had a problem considering us peers.

What about all the others???? No way in hell tjose people consider you guys as 'peers.' Yiu may all be public and T1, but for the vast majority of those schools it starts and ends there. For you to keep insisting otherwise is the very definition of 'delusions of grandeur.'

Again, I don't know why I bother responding. You will just make up something that I have to look up and post a link to in order to disprove.

I have disproved far more of your bs. So yeah, you should probably just stop.

(02-17-2016 01:54 PM)LaCajunsFan Wrote:  Guess you got that 15% rate out your butt, as usual.[/b][/i][/align]

Or I got it from a number of sources that all agree.

http://colleges.usnews.rankingsandreview...yette-2031

http://theadvocate.com/news/10484168-123...ntinues-to (This says 15.5%)

Or the best resource to see nice charts and graphs from the UL System itself (that's how I found the 9% and could compare to other UL institutions).

https://data.ulsystem.edu/SASVisualAnalyticsViewer/

The difference is I was quoting 4 year graduation and you are quoting 6 year graduation. And I didn't even expect you to assume something. I spelled it right out clear as day... ULL students eventually get it, it just takes a little longer.


  ULL Grad Rates.jpg (Size: 81.75 KB / Downloads: 4)

There is a picture so you don't have to read through text when you click the link (which apparently you haven't so far in this thread).

But whether you measure it by 4 or 6 years, the fact remains that we are making huge gains on our graduation rates. Meaning our academics are in the upswing.

Besides which, whether it is 4 or 6 years, what the heck does the does the UL grad rates have to do with the facts that ltu-R has dropped in academic ranking in both their Carnegie classification, and their T1 status????

(02-17-2016 02:04 PM)LaCajunsFan Wrote:  I have disproved far more of your bs. So yeah, you should probably just stop

What is one fact or figure I have posted that has been inaccurate for you to disprove? And if you think barking "La Tech's declining academic standing" is disproving something...well, actually I guess it wouldn't surprise me.

So far you have been wrong about...

-"the Carneige Classification is the cornerstone of all college evaluations, and is the indisputable benchmark used by everyone."
False

--UL also has more research money than the rest of the ULS schools combined.
False.

--UL is a Rockefeller Institute of Government Top 100 public research universities,
False

--UL is a designated National Foundation Research Center and is a Top 10 fastest growing R&D university in the US.
False

--UL has nationally ranked doctoral programs in Computer Science, Engineering, Business and Nursing.
False

--UL has one of the Top 10 Electrical Engineering graduate programs in the country.
False

--UL's Business School is a Top 100 by Princeton Review.
False.

--UL is the #1 on-line college in Louisiana and #39 in the country.
False

--And we did this while using less the half % of state funds that ltu-r has to prop up their athletic program.....at the expense of their academics.
False

--But what is extremely important to note is that there aren't any T1 schools with an R3 Carneige Classification.
False

--Guess you got that (4 year graduation rate of) 15% rate out your butt, as usual.
False


Now that I think about it, it would have taken much less time to list the things you were right about. Live and learn.

You continue to post things that have nothing to do with the main point I was making: the downgrading of ltu-R from R2 to R3, as well as a dropping in T1 ranking undeniably denotes a decline in your academics. Period.

(02-17-2016 02:38 PM)LaCajunsFan Wrote:  But whether you measure it by 4 or 6 years, the fact remains that we are making huge gains on our graduation rates. Meaning our academics are in the upswing.

Besides which, whether it is 4 or 6 years, what the heck does the does the UL grad rates have to do with the facts that ltu-R has dropped in academic ranking in both their Carnegie classification, and their T1 status????

Explain again how the sky is falling on our USNWR ranking and this is the year you expect us to drop a couple of spots out of Tier 1?

2010 NR
2011 Tied for 194
2012 Tied for 199
2013 Tied for 190
2014 Tied for 201
2015 Tied for 201
2016 Tied for 199

Ooooh. Caught you reaching in the back door again to falsify your facts and figures. I should have looked this up earlier. We actually got two spots better in the most recent report and didn't drop. You were wrong again when I didn't even expect you to be wrong!

http://news.latech.edu/2015/09/09/louisi...ld-report/

Updated score 12-0 me. Nevermind, it is basketball season...each fact check basket is worth two points. I'm up 24-0.

(02-17-2016 03:05 PM)zharkins Wrote:  

(02-17-2016 02:38 PM)LaCajunsFan Wrote:  But whether you measure it by 4 or 6 years, the fact remains that we are making huge gains on our graduation rates. Meaning our academics are in the upswing.

Besides which, whether it is 4 or 6 years, what the heck does the does the UL grad rates have to do with the facts that ltu-R has dropped in academic ranking in both their Carnegie classification, and their T1 status????

Explain again how the sky is falling on our USNWR ranking and this is the year you expect us to drop a couple of spots out of Tier 1?

Because you are at the bottom of the list of T1's, and have also dropped down to R3 Carnegie classification. And remember: there is only one other public school that is R3 and T1??? And no telling what the suny story is.

And you keep score with the same amount of integrity that your prez used when making those idiotic 'peer' claims.

(02-17-2016 03:13 PM)LaCajunsFan Wrote:  And you keep score with the same amount of integrity that your prez used when making those idiotic 'peer' claims.

You're lucky I didn't choose football as a scoring system. It would look a lot like some of our more recent contests.

(02-17-2016 03:16 PM)zharkins Wrote:  

(02-17-2016 03:13 PM)LaCajunsFan Wrote:  And you keep score with the same amount of integrity that your prez used when making those idiotic 'peer' claims.

You're lucky I didn't choose football as a scoring system. It would look a lot like some of our more recent contests.

Well, on that point we will finally have something to agree on. Although we've made great strides in 4-5 years, we are no where near where we should be in FB. Not many cajun fans will argue with you on that one.

But FB is not the point of my posts: ULM and ltu-r....now both R3 schools. But I think you knew that already, lol.

I sincerely hope your admin is not as complacent with those facts as you guys seem to be, lol.

(02-16-2016 03:16 PM)zharkins Wrote:  I'll bite.

The fact that you equate research $ with academics is interesting.
Carnegie focuses in on research while US News is more of an overall university rating.

In the face of severe budget cuts, it seems Louisiana Tech has prioritized dollars to retain faculty in order to provide an excellent learning environment at the expense of research spending for the time being. By every other measure, (enrollment, average ACT score, starting salaries, etc.) Louisiana Tech is improving.

You hear crickets out of Ruston about it because other than the 2011 press clipping posted, I have never heard or seen it used in any Louisiana Tech materials before, probably because they knew it was unsustainable given the funding environment in the state.

I also find it interesting that ULL is missing from the graphic that shows all those top public universities in both classifications.

Based on the 2014 federal research funding data (the latest) our http://ncsesdata.nsf.gov/datatables/herd...ST_22.html

LSU #108 $94.7 million, $3,110/student
ULL #260 $10.7 million, $569/student
La Tech #287 $7.7 million, $683/student
ULM # 580 $0.5 million, $59/student

It's good to try to give an answer to the questions asked. However, no answer will satisfy, no matter how accurate or informative. You are trying to make reasonable and logical responses, which is foreign to some.