Author
Topic: The Death of College Football - Realignment, NIL, Portal, Etc.
(Read 86488 times)

FearlessF · « **Reply #70 on:** May 15, 2023, 01:53:06 PM »

Quote from: OrangeAfroMan on May 15, 2023, 01:32:10 PM

I love the 1-person sample sizes, guys.

well, when you are listing the "worst".
that implies 1 person

utee94 · « **Reply #71 on:** May 15, 2023, 02:01:28 PM »

It's also not a sample-- it has no intention of being "representative" of any larger group. It's a simple statement of opinion.

OrangeAfroMan · « **Reply #72 on:** May 15, 2023, 02:02:52 PM »

The topic of the conversation is the larger group - college classes > > > college rankings. You know, tens of thousands of people.
.
I know, I know. I'm wrong again.

utee94 · « **Reply #73 on:** May 15, 2023, 02:05:14 PM »

I've worked with several good engineers from Stanford as well. One of my best friends is an excellent engineer from Stanford.

None of that changes my statement, that the absolute worst engineer I've ever worked with, was a Stanford graduate.

FearlessF · « **Reply #74 on:** May 15, 2023, 02:15:12 PM »

https://www.alotfinance.com/article/vertical/slideshow/the-college-not-worth-attending-in-each-state-ranked/19100/4?camp_id=232312&utm_campaign=232312&utm_content=23853767729110269&utm_medium=23853767728660269&utm_source=fb&fbclid=IwAR2IwhI2RQZs2hv5sfVjSEmVRWRnWwlFvCeEzw6c1S56rRwTAxZPE7OxtgM

medinabuckeye1 · « **Reply #75 on:** May 15, 2023, 02:25:29 PM »

Quote from: OrangeAfroMan on May 15, 2023, 02:02:52 PM

The topic of the conversation is the larger group - college classes > > > college rankings. You know, tens of thousands of people.
.
I know, I know. I'm wrong again.

I think the samples of one were posted here to illustrate the point that there ARE exceptions, not to try to argue that UTSA Engineers on average are better than Stanford Engineers.

You aren't wrong, samples of one say little or nothing about the average which, I think, was your point.

For example, on average Bill Gates and I are REALLY wealthy but that won't help you if you want to borrow money from me.

Cincydawg · « **Reply #76 on:** May 15, 2023, 02:39:26 PM »

My worst bosses (I had about 20):

Italian woman - she took the cake
Indian man - Tennessee, claimed an MS in ChemEng, I saw no evidence of such
Man - Ohio State, conniving and dumb
Man - Ohio State, I really don't think he could read
Man - Harvard, he wasn't that bad, just completely useless, later got promoted to sinecure

Best was two, man from Ohio State and another guy from Liverpool of all places.

I had some bad VPs as well but I tried to stay under their radar.

utee94 · « **Reply #77 on:** May 15, 2023, 02:45:01 PM »

Worst boss I ever had was a CU grad. She was married and also sleeping with at least 2 of my peers, her subordinates, on our team. Total trash person, but I don't think it had anything to do with CU.

FearlessF · « **Reply #78 on:** May 15, 2023, 03:04:47 PM »

if it was Colorado University it was all on Ralphie

utee94 · « **Reply #79 on:** May 15, 2023, 03:11:30 PM »

Yup, Colorado. Ralphie is a cow.

FearlessF · « **Reply #80 on:** May 15, 2023, 03:18:12 PM »

apparently, so was she

betarhoalphadelta · « **Reply #81 on:** May 15, 2023, 03:25:14 PM »

Quote from: medinabuckeye1 on May 15, 2023, 11:41:35 AM

Ohio also has a "transfer module" where the core stuff (basically first two years) transfer en-masse between Ohio's colleges and universities. Thus, if you go to Cuyahoga Community College (Cleveland area) or Columbus State (duh) or any other Ohio college or University you can take out the entire module then transfer that module as one piece to any other Ohio College or University.

I think this is also huge here in California. The UC (vs the Cal State) programs are much more difficult to get into as a freshman than as a transfer. So a lot of students do gen-ed at community college and then transfer into the UC system.

betarhoalphadelta · « **Reply #82 on:** May 15, 2023, 03:38:08 PM »

Quote from: medinabuckeye1 on May 15, 2023, 12:14:21 PM

I think you are right about ranges. I don't think hiring managers are looking at a graduates from Ohio State and Purdue and saying "forget the Boilermaker, they are only #51, we are going with the Buckeye, they are #49", nor are they saying "forget the Scarlett Knight or Terp, those schools are tied for #55, we are going with the Boilermaker, they are #51."

That said, at some point you get far enough apart that it DOES make a difference. A degree from #10 Northwestern is clearly more valuable than a degree from #151 Nebraska.

Where exactly those lines are is hazy and varies by individual.

However I think once you're 5+ years out of school, the name on the college degree matters a lot less than the work experience after college.

Also note that future earnings seem to be unrelated to what school you attend, if you look at individual students rather than averages:

https://www.nytimes.com/2000/04/27/business/economic-scene-children-smart-enough-get-into-elite-schools-may-not-need-bother.html

Quote

Our research found that earnings were unrelated to the selectivity of the college that students had attended among those who had comparable options. For example, the average earnings for the 519 students who were accepted by both moderately selective (average College Board scores of 1,000 to 1,099) and highly selective schools (average scores greater than 1,275), varied little, no matter which type of college they attended.

One group of students, however, clearly benefited from attending a highly selective college: those from lower-income families -- defined approximately as the bottom quarter of families who send children to college. For them, attending a more selective school increased earnings significantly.

Restricting the comparison to those with similar choices helps solve the selection bias problem because these students were equivalent in the eyes of the admissions committees.

More important, students who applied to equally selective schools revealed that they had similar aspiration levels and self-confidence. If the comparison is restricted to students who applied to equally selective schools -- regardless of whether they were admitted -- attending a more selective school is still unrelated to earnings.

I thought the last bit was interesting. It can be intuitive that if an individual student applies to a highly-selective and a less-selective school and is admitted to both, their earnings are going to be the same. After all, since much of future earnings relate to their individual ambition and ability, it seems to suggest that a student capable of getting into the highly-selective school is likely to be successful either way.

But it's less intuitive that you can back it down into what schools a student applied to, whether admitted or not. But again it points to individual ambition and ability--if you think you could get into Stanford and UT-SA, and apply to both, you're probably ambitious enough that even though you're not admitted to Stanford, you're likely to be as successful (as measured by earnings) as those who were.

medinabuckeye1 · « **Reply #83 on:** May 15, 2023, 05:01:07 PM »

Quote from: betarhoalphadelta on May 15, 2023, 03:38:08 PM

However I think once you're 5+ years out of school, the name on the college degree matters a lot less than the work experience after college.

Also note that future earnings seem to be unrelated to what school you attend, if you look at individual students rather than averages:

https://www.nytimes.com/2000/04/27/business/economic-scene-children-smart-enough-get-into-elite-schools-may-not-need-bother.html

I thought the last bit was interesting. It can be intuitive that if an individual student applies to a highly-selective and a less-selective school and is admitted to both, their earnings are going to be the same. After all, since much of future earnings relate to their individual ambition and ability, it seems to suggest that a student capable of getting into the highly-selective school is likely to be successful either way.

But it's less intuitive that you can back it down into what schools a student applied to, whether admitted or not. But again it points to individual ambition and ability--if you think you could get into Stanford and UT-SA, and apply to both, you're probably ambitious enough that even though you're not admitted to Stanford, you're likely to be as successful (as measured by earnings) as those who were.

This general concept is something I've looked into before not just in this context but also on the college/no college question.

Colleges love to push a stat that college graduates earn almost $1M more in their lifetimes than non-college graduates. This, however, is a true but extremely misleading statistic due to selection bias. The category of "College Graduates" includes nearly all of our geniuses and other highly intelligent people and almost nobody below about 90IQ.

I'd like to see college/non-college lifetime earnings by IQ. My guess is that at the lower end it is close to even and the non-college group might even earn more because those people get the promotions in their blue-collar fields while the lower tier graduates tend not to get promoted in their white collar fields. However, as you advance to higher levels of IQ, I would expect the gap to widen because the non-college group will generally hit a ceiling long before the college group.

I once read that Neil Armstrong wanted to go to an elite East-Coast school but was advised by a family friend that he could get a perfectly good education at Purdue. He went to Purdue and walked on the moon.

Another way to think of this is that it is obvious that people who graduate from say Harvard or MIT earn more than "people who don't" but that isn't close to a fair comparison. The fair comparison would be something more like comparing the lifetime earnings of the last ten people who get in to the lifetime earnings of the first ten people who do not get in.

Perhaps the BEST B1G Forum anywhere, here at College Football Fan Site, CFB51!!!

The 'Old' CFN/Scout Crowd- Enjoy Civil discussion, game analytics, in depth player and coaching 'takes' and discussing topics surrounding the game. You can even have your own free board, all you have to do is ask!!!

Anyone is welcomed and encouraged to join our FREE site and to take part in our community- a community with you- the user, the fan, -and the person- will be protected from intrusive actions and with a clean place to interact.

Topic: The Death of College Football - Realignment, NIL, Portal, Etc.

FearlessF

Re: UW and UO to Big Ten ~ Memorial Day?

utee94

Re: UW and UO to Big Ten ~ Memorial Day?

OrangeAfroMan

Re: UW and UO to Big Ten ~ Memorial Day?

utee94

Re: UW and UO to Big Ten ~ Memorial Day?

FearlessF

Re: UW and UO to Big Ten ~ Memorial Day?

medinabuckeye1

Re: UW and UO to Big Ten ~ Memorial Day?

Cincydawg

Re: UW and UO to Big Ten ~ Memorial Day?

utee94

Re: UW and UO to Big Ten ~ Memorial Day?

FearlessF

Re: UW and UO to Big Ten ~ Memorial Day?

utee94

Re: UW and UO to Big Ten ~ Memorial Day?

FearlessF

Re: UW and UO to Big Ten ~ Memorial Day?

betarhoalphadelta

Re: UW and UO to Big Ten ~ Memorial Day?

betarhoalphadelta

Re: UW and UO to Big Ten ~ Memorial Day?

medinabuckeye1

Re: UW and UO to Big Ten ~ Memorial Day?