CFB51 College Football Fan Community
The Power Five => Big Ten => Topic started by: medinabuckeye1 on July 22, 2022, 03:36:47 PM
-
The CIC, as I understand it, consists of the B1G athletic conference schools (soon to include USC and UCLA) along with the University of Chicago which was a charter member of what became the B1G but ceased competing in the league athletically prior to WWII.
Here are those 17 schools with their rankings on two academic measures. The first "2020 rank" and "2020 spend" are straightforward, objective, and clearly quantifiable. I got the research spending amounts and rankings from this site (https://ncsesdata.nsf.gov/profiles/site?method=rankingBySource&ds=HERD&o=y10&s=a). The next column is simply these 17 schools ranked compared to one-another from #1 Michigan through #17 Nebraska.
For the second academic measure I used the USNWR rankings. These are more tilted toward undergraduate academics but the list is also inherently subjective. They rank Princeton #1 and Harvard #2 but obviously you could make an argument for the reverse. Similarly, Chicago at #6 nationally is the highest ranked in the CIC with #9 Northwestern second, #20 UCLA third, and #23 Michigan fourth and you could argue Northwestern over Chicago or Michigan over UCLA.
These are sorted by the gap between each school's research ranking and their USNWR ranking. The first school listed is Minnesota. They are 20th nationally and fifth in the CIC with 2020 research spending over a little over a Billion Dollars while they are tied with Indiana for 68th nationally and 8th in the CIC in the USNWR rankings. Ie, Minnesota is MUCH better academically when judged based on graduate research programs than when judged based on undergraduate rankings. Last on the list is the University of Chicago which is a premier undergraduate institution (best in the CIC, #6 nationally) but a less impressive 57th nationally and 16th in the CIC in research spending.
(https://i.imgur.com/bBNOtdj.png)
I would divide this into three groups:
The first group consisting of MN, UMD, PSU, MSU, and IU are MUCH more impressive based on research spending than they are based on undergraduate rankings.
The middle group consisting of M, UW, tOSU, UCLA, IA, UNL, RU, and USC are roughly equally impressive or unimpressive on both metrics. They range from Michigan and UCLA which are near the top in both down to UNL which is last in the CIC in both.
The third group consisting of IL, PU, NU, and UC are much more impressive based on undergraduate rankings than they are based on research spending.
All this talk about academics isn't just because the B1G Schools, administrators, alums, and fans want to feel superior to other leagues, this is about money too. We hear that our schools stand to make ~$100 Million/year from media rights for sports. Ok, Michigan spent sixteen times that on research in 2020. Even lowly Nebraska spent more than 3x that figure on research in 2020. The CIC institutions taken together spent more than $15 BILLION on research in 2020.
This is counter-intuitive to most sports fans but frankly the money to be made from selling media rights for sports is chump change compared to the money that CIC member institutions spend on research. At the end of the day, research revenue is more important because it is a LOT more money.
Lets talk about additions:
Notre Dame:
They are the elephant in the room so lets go there first. Academically they frankly are not a good fit for the B1G. Notre Dame fans and alums usually go apoplectic when I say this but the simple fact is that Notre Dame doesn't have the academics to warrant a B1G/CIC invite. They go apoplectic because they are keenly aware of Notre Dame's stellar undergraduate rankings (#19 in USNWR which would be third in the CIC behind only UC and NU while ahead of #20 UCLA and #23 M).
In spite of ND's stellar undergraduate academics, I'm not wrong to point out that they simply don't have the academics to warrant a B1G/CIC invite because while their undergraduate academics are great, their research programs are pathetic when compared to current B1G/CIC schools. In 2020 they ranked #109 nationally with research spending of just $227 Million. That would be dead last in the B1G/CIC by nearly $100 Million behind even Nebraska which itself is ~$130 Million behind second-to-last Chicago.
I posted part of this in another thread but here are the top research spending institutions that compete in FBS:
- #2 Michigan, already B1G
- #5 Washington, PAC
- #7 UCLA, to be B1G
- #8 Wisconsin, already B1G
- #10 Stanford, PAC
- #11 Dook, ACC
- #13 UNC, ACC
- #14 aTm, SEC
- #15 Pitt, ACC
- #16 Maryland, already B1G
- #19 GaTech, ACC
- #20 Minnesota, already B1G
- #22 Penn State, already B1G
- #24 Ohio State, already B1G
- #26 Florida, SEC
- #27 USC, to be B1G
- #29 Northwestern, already B1G
- #30 California (UC-Berkley), PAC
- #31 Vanderbilt, SEC
- #36 UT-Austin, to be SEC
- #35 Arizona, PAC
- #37 Indiana, already B1G
- #38 Michigan State, already B1G
- #39 Illinois, already B1G
- #40 Rutgers, already B1G
- #41 Purdue, already B1G
Note that the list above is frankly dominated by the B1G. We have:
- Three of the top-4
- Seven of the top-14
- 14 of the top-26.
So, I think our additions to get to 20 will be:
- Notre Dame: I don't particularly like it and I think it will be a mistake in the long run but it seems like this is inevitable.
- Stanford: Both because they are the second highest research spending major football school that we don't already have and because they pair with ND.
- Washington: Because they are the highest research spending major football school that we don't already have and because they give us a school in the PAC NW.
- North Carolina: Duke has slightly better academics but North Carolina is a state flagship so it is a better fit and the academic differences are not all that big.
Among the top research spending institutions that compete in the FBS, that would give us:
- All five of the top-5.
- Seven of the top-10 (all but DOOK, aTm, and Pitt).
- 17 of the top-26.
Once we go to 20 teams, as I see it, pods are a necessity. Otherwise you'd never play the teams in the other division thus effectively making it two conferences with a CG. One oddity with pods of five teams is that each pod ends up with a team without a rivalry weekend partner. My pods:
The West Pod:
- Notre Dame
- USC
- UCLA
- Stanford
- Washington
I'm assuming here that ND would continue their tradition of playing their rivalry weekend game in California alternating between USC and Stanford. UCLA could then play the other of the two leaving Washington as the odd man out.
Great Plains Pod:
- Nebraska
- Wisconsin
- Iowa
- Minnesota
- Illinois
Nebraska/Iowa and the Axe game would continue as rivalry weekend games leaving Illinois as the odd man out.
Lakes Pod:
- Ohio State
- Michigan
- Michigan State
- Indiana
- Purdue
The Game and the Oaken Bucket game would continue as rivalry weekend games leaving Michigan State as the odd man out.
East Pod:
- Penn State
- North Carolina
- Maryland
- Rutgers
- Northwestern
Rivalry weekend is a bit more complicated here. North Carolina might want to continue their rivalry weekend tradition of playing NCST just as an OOC game. If not they could play Maryland and PSU could play Rutgers or UNC/PSU and UMD/RU would be fine. I'm intentionally leaving NU out so that they can play Illinois on rivalry weekend at least every three years.
I *THINK* the only big rivalry that I've broken up here is IL/NU. Northwestern is also the only school that is seriously out of place geographically. Well, I guess ND is as well but I assumed they'd want to keep their USC and Stanford rivalries.
Schedules for Football and Basketball:
For football the four pods would form temporary divisions rotating annually. Each team's nine league games would be:
- Four games against the other four teams in their pod, and
- Five games against the five teams in one of the other pods (rotating).
For basketball (both men's and women's) each team's 20 league games would be:
- Eight games (two each, H&H) against the other four teams in their pod, and
- 12 games against the 15 teams in the other three pods (ie, play all but three every year thus play all 15 four times every five years).
Rivalry weekend in football:
- The Game remains
- IU/PU
- ND at either USC or Stanford
- UCLA hosting the other (USC/Stanford)
- UNL vs IA
- The Axe game
- PSU vs UNC
- RU vs UMD
- Washington vs either MSU, IL, or NU (in rotation)
- Michigan State vs either Washington, IL, or NU (in rotation)
- Illinois vs either Washington, MSU, or NU (in rotation)
- Northwestern vs either Washington, MSU, or IL (in rotation)
-
great but the TV networks don't give a damn about academic spending
and these conferences are football conferences because of TV networks
that said, I do kinda like....
The West Pod:
Notre Dame
USC
UCLA
Stanford
Washington
-
As always, I appreciate MB's meticulous analysis. Always some very thought-provoking details for discussion.
I'll be honest, talk of pods and scheduling bores me to tears, but I do agree that the 4 targets MB identifies are the most logical.
We are all unsure of ND's next steps, and if given the options of B1G or nothing then I think Stanford might just abandon the conference model and go it alone regionally-- they're one of the few schools that could do it. But those are definitely 4 worthy and logical targets for the B1G, in the current environment.
-
how long before NBC or HULU or someone can decide if they can provide enuff money to keep ND independent?
a couple years? or is the writing on the wall?
is this one reason Brian Kelly jumped to the SEC?
cause the money won't be there
-
how long before NBC or HULU or someone can decide if they can provide enuff money to keep ND independent?
a couple years? or is the writing on the wall?
is this one reason Brian Kelly jumped to the SEC?
cause the money won't be there
Folks have been predicting a highly disruptive entrance of streaming services into the college football broadcasting marketplace for almost a decade now.
I kinda feel like if it were going to happen, it would have happened already.
Times change, situations are fluid, etc. so who knows what the future will bring, but I'm not sure the financiers, strategists, and their actuaries, are really finding enough value there, to move forward.
-
Instead of 4 pods of 5 it would likely be 5 pods of 4. This allows more flexibility in scheduling and permanent crossovers. Winning divisions, or pods, will be a thing of the past anyway. Everyone is moving toward the top 2 model for a CCG.
Using your additional teams...
West Pod
USC, UCLA, Stanford, Washington
Plains Pod
Wisconsin, Nebraska, Iowa, Minnesota
Lakes Pod?
Notre Dame, Illinois, Purdue, Northwestern
Central Pod?
Ohio State, Michigan, Michigan State, Indiana
East Pod
Penn State, North Carolina, Maryland, Rutgers
-
The way things are going 商会议
-
Yeah, the one thing showing the most resistance to streaming (in a good, healthy way) is live sports. Seems like people will consume nearly anything else on a delay or watch-when-you-want, except for live sports.
-
University of Chicago exited the CIC in June 2016.
-
I don't see a need for pods but if you are going to have 4 pods of 5 teams , I would put OSU in the east . Put ILL in Lakes. And put NW in Plains. Then you would have to have annual games between OSU-Mich and ILL-NW
Also why call them pods? Why not just call them divisions?
-
One alternative to pods I thought of. If you went with 10 conference games you could set up a schedule of 4 permanent rivals you play every year, 6 rivals you play 50% of the time, 9 rivals you play 33% of the time. The old 4-3(3)-3(3)(3).
For example for Notre Dame you could have
4 permanent rivals. - USC, Stanford, Purdue, MSU
6 50% rivals - Mich, PSU, Indy, OSU, NW, Iowa
9 33% rivals - UNC, MD, Rut, ILL, Wisc, Minn, NEB, Wash, UCLA
The 50% rivals could be set up to play Mich, PSU, Indy in 1 year and OSU, Iowa, NW in the other year.
The 33% rivals could be set up to play 1 east team (UNC, MD, Rut) each year. 1 central team (ILL, Wisc, Minn) each year and 1 west team (NEB, Wash, UCLA) each year.
This just seems more an ideal schedule (at least to me) for Notre Dame based on historic rivals they have played in the past.
-
Most, I think, of the research funding is Federal dollars. Professors basically get tenured, or not, based on how much they bring in. I think the tenure thing is broken, but won't get changed. The Army Research Office doles out a fair amount of grants.
-
University of Chicago exited the CIC in June 2016.
Yep. And the CIC isn't that anymore.
Home | Big Ten Academic Alliance (btaa.org) (https://www.btaa.org/)
-
Yep. And the CIC isn't that anymore.
Home | Big Ten Academic Alliance (btaa.org) (https://www.btaa.org/)
Why did I think that John Hopkins had joined the CIC when they joined the Big Ten for Lacrosse as an affiliate member?
Did they join at one point and then leave later like Chicago did?
-
I don't think they ever joined the alliance. I'm sure they would be welcome to if interested.
Chicago got out due to expansion of the conference.
-
Yeah, the one thing showing the most resistance to streaming (in a good, healthy way) is live sports. Seems like people will consume nearly anything else on a delay or watch-when-you-want, except for live sports.
well, obviously live events can be streamed
whatever transport media is used, that doesn't matter. Content is king and has value. Live sports especially football has value.
the honks who own the content want their $$$, regardless how it's delivered to whatever device
streaming had some great pricing early on to try to buy market share
eventually they had to raise prices to build a sustainable business plan.
Because they always had to pay the same as the traditional CATV providers for the content
-
Everything I watch is streamed now. Not that I watch much. Have not turned on the boob tube since we landed up here on 6/30.
-
I don't think they ever joined the alliance. I'm sure they would be welcome to if interested.
They were offered and considered it but declined, for whatever reasons. I'd guess they pretty much have a standing offer, though.
-
Yep. And I'm sure Chicago would be welcome to come back.
-
They were offered and considered it but declined, for whatever reasons. I'd guess they pretty much have a standing offer, though.
Maybe deep down John Hopkins knows that they may not be a member of Big Ten LAX forever. Once a few more Big Ten schools add LAX, the Big Ten may not need affiliate members anymore.
-
Maybe deep down John Hopkins knows that they may not be a member of Big Ten LAX forever. Once a few more Big Ten schools add LAX, the Big Ten may not need affiliate members anymore.
At first I thought you were talking about adding LAX, which already happened.
Then I realized you were talking about Lacrosse. Heh.
-
Everything I watch is streamed now. Not that I watch much. Have not turned on the boob tube since we landed up here on 6/30.
I easily go a week at a time w/o turning on the tube
especially this time of year
college football and college hoops change things
-
Friday nights are good watching. DDD baby!!
-
“Holy moly, Stromboli!”
-
They were offered and considered it but declined, for whatever reasons. I'd guess they pretty much have a standing offer, though.
They definitely have a standing offer anywhere they want. From the link I posted earlier John's Hopkins is #1 in research spending, almost double #2.
-
I also love MB posts, and I love all the data. Unfortunately I think this is a bit off.
See, TV money is driving this 100%, If you get more premier match ups, you get more eyeballs watching. It helps the TV companies to add big names together. There is nothing else influencing this right now.
The B1G Academic alliance doesn't share money, or have the money increase by adding schools. Each individual university is still 100% responsible in procuring their own research grants. What is super cool about the alliance is the removal of obstacles to allow for sharing of research, and to allow for collaboration of bigger projects. It's amazing how the B1G alliance is the largest research instruction on the planet, and I am all for adding incredible research universities to the B1G, but this current round of expansions have given up all pretense and it is %100 Football TV dollars driven.
-
I also love MB posts, and I love all the data. Unfortunately I think this is a bit off.
See, TV money is driving this 100%, If you get more premier match ups, you get more eyeballs watching. It helps the TV companies to add big names together. There is nothing else influencing this right now.
The B1G Academic alliance doesn't share money, or have the money increase by adding schools. Each individual university is still 100% responsible in procuring their own research grants. What is super cool about the alliance is the removal of obstacles to allow for sharing of research, and to allow for collaboration of bigger projects. It's amazing how the B1G alliance is the largest research instruction on the planet, and I am all for adding incredible research universities to the B1G, but this current round of expansions have given up all pretense and it is %100 Football TV dollars driven.
Maybe I'm off here but as I see it sharing and collaborating on research is a little like lending/borrowing power tools with your neighbor: If @TyphonInc (https://www.cfb51.com/index.php?action=profile;u=8) has LOTS of power tools and I have few this is a good deal for me and a crappy deal for him. However, if we both have lots of power tools this is a good deal for both of us.
Pursuing that analogy, John's Hopkins is the best possible neighbor with Michigan #2. Almost the entire B1G including UCLA and USC are at least decent neighbors to share with. Fourteen of the 16 are in the top-41 nationally with only Iowa (52) and Nebraska (81) falling short of that. Adding more good neighbors like Washington (5), Stanford (10), and UNC (13) would almost have to make the Big Ten Academic Alliance stronger. It would be like Ty and I adding neighbor @847badgerfan (https://www.cfb51.com/index.php?action=profile;u=5) who also has LOTS of power tools to our power tool sharing arrangement. OTOH, Ty and I adding some guy who doesn't have many power tools would be like the B1G adding Notre Dame.
I get that TV money is a driving force here but the research money IS bigger. I am sure that the schools recognize that. I would think that the relative strength of a potential new contributor to the research collective is at least a consideration.
-
John's Hopkins football isn't valuable
therefore, no invite
if there's an invite it academic only
academics and athletics are tow separate things
-
Instead of 4 pods of 5 it would likely be 5 pods of 4. This allows more flexibility in scheduling and permanent crossovers. Winning divisions, or pods, will be a thing of the past anyway. Everyone is moving toward the top 2 model for a CG.
We'll see.
The problem, as I see it, for very large conferences is that I think you really need to avoid any possibility of more than two undefeated teams.
If you have 20 teams playing nine league games the ONLY way to avoid that is to have two groups of 10 with every team playing their nine games against the other nine teams in their "group".
In theory you could still have a CG of the two teams with the best records but that would be strange since there would be literally no games at all between teams from different "groups". At that point I think it makes more sense to call those groups "divisions" and match the two division champions.
-
Ed Zachery!!!
Pods suck
-
YARN | You got the shot, pods. | Tin Cup (1996) | Video clips by quotes | 0cc98e1f | 紗 (getyarn.io) (https://getyarn.io/yarn-clip/0cc98e1f-85e2-4ff4-ba28-ff50f04289fa)
Greatest sports movie of all time. Maybe not.
-
I like it, but prefer Caddy Shack for golf movies
-
We'll see.
The problem, as I see it, for very large conferences is that I think you really need to avoid any possibility of more than two undefeated teams.
If you have 20 teams playing nine league games the ONLY way to avoid that is to have two groups of 10 with every team playing their nine games against the other nine teams in their "group".
In theory you could still have a CG of the two teams with the best records but that would be strange since there would be literally no games at all between teams from different "groups". At that point I think it makes more sense to call those groups "divisions" and match the two division champions.
I mean, it’s almost as if 20 – team conferences are not a particularly good way to operate, or something
-
I mean, it’s almost as if 20 – team conferences are not a particularly good way to operate, or something
Or 16
Or 14
Maybe 12.
-
maybe 10 if you have 9 conference games
-
9 or 10 is ideal to me. Full roundrobin, no CCG.
-
9 or 10 is ideal to me. Full roundrobin, no CCG.
I mean, it’s almost as if 20 – team conferences are not a particularly good way to operate, or something
Ed Zachery!!!
Pods suck
Personally I don't disagree but that ship sailed and we aren't going back.
-
Personally I don't disagree but that ship sailed and we aren't going back.
what p5 conference is using pods this season?
-
what p5 conference is using pods this season?
I meant we aren't going back to nine, 10, 11, 12, or even 14 team conferences.
None of the P5 are using pods NOW, but for now they all have 14 or less members. That is about to change.
-
I agree, but there's no good reason for it.
-
I don't pine for impossible things.
Or even very very unlikely things.
Not happening.
-
I've been hearing talk of pods, probably since the Big 12 was formed - decades
until it happens I''l root against it
-
https://twitter.com/Brett_McMurphy/status/1552044720687284224?s=20&t=5-ITovjzDL0_VDZSAqB5cA
"Warren said he was proud that USC and UCLA are AAU (Association of American University) members but also said being an AAU member is not a requirement for a potential future member."
-
Welp, sounds like they're gonna let in the retards.
-
I have a sense this is going to end badly down the road a bit. I wonder what CFB will be like in a decade.
-
Welp, sounds like they're gonna let in the retards.
I think he was referring to non-AAU Notre Dame. Their research is miniscule but they aren't retards.
-
FSU would be an interesting addition, likely would be the least akademical of the B1G schools.
-
FSU would be an interesting addition, likely would be the least akademical of the B1G schools.
From the links I posted earlier:
Florida State is #55 in USNWR rankings. In the B1G (including USC/UCLA) that would put them ninth behind tOSU and PU (tied at 49th nationally) and ahead of Maryland (59th nationally) so roughly in the middle.
Their research is less impressive. They ranked 75th nationally which would be second-to-last in the B1G behind Iowa and ahead of Nebraska.
-
Aside from the issue that USNWR rankings are complete shite, FSU clearly doesn't have a similar academic reputation to most of the B1G schools, and since we're talking about nothing more than perception here anyway, I'd say that's what's most important to those who care about the academic prestige of an athletics conference.
But it doesn't matter anyway. Warren is already stating publicly that being an AAU member isn't a requirement, which I read as an admission that any future takes aren't going to be so vigorously vetted for their academics, anyway.
-
a strong tie to Florida recruits is well worth the embarrassment of the lack of academics
-
I don't think their rankings are complete whatever, I also don't think there is a reason to think #54 is really better than #74. The top 20 or so are obviously fine schools, and we all pretty much knew that without these rankings.
I should provide a ranking of the worst things folks try and rank sometime.
But I have a Procrastinators Club meeting coming up ... soon.
-
I notice they have Wisconsin at 42 and Illinois at 47, both of which seem a bit low to me, but I may be influenced by some graduate program reps. Then UGA is at 48. I don't think too many folks would casually have those three in the same general grouping.
Whatever.
I bet it sells magazines. And gets clicks, as I just did.
-
makes you wonder how much a university would have to pay them to move up 5 spots
-
I notice they have Wisconsin at 42 and Illinois at 47, both of which seem a bit low to me, but I may be influenced by some graduate program reps. Then UGA is at 48. I don't think too many folks would casually have those three in the same general grouping.
Whatever.
I bet it sells magazines. And gets clicks, as I just did.
Exactly.
Which is why they are complete shite.
-
The Techsters here like to wave their academic superiority over Dawgs for obvious reasons, but the two schools seem to be getting close in these "rankings".
A person can get a decent education at a lot of places, or not, depending on the person I suspect. It can be a good path for many to do junior college first, or just go to a trade school.
Germany sends about 30% of their HS grads to college, in the US it's around 63%, over half. It's almost like it is a business.
-
The Techsters here like to wave their academic superiority over Dawgs for obvious reasons, but the two schools seem to be getting close in these "rankings".
A person can get a decent education at a lot of places, or not, depending on the person I suspect. It can be a good path for many to do junior college first, or just go to a trade school.
Germany sends about 30% of their HS grads to college, in the US it's around 63%, over half. It's almost like it is a business.
Absolute best electrical engineer I ever worked with was from directional school UT-San Antonio. Absolute worst electrical engineer I ever worked with was from Stanford.
It's all about what you make of it.
-
Techsters may be superior in engineering, the Dawgs better in some other disciplines
in the end it's a piece of paper of recognition of achievement
some folks maybe impressed, others not so much
-
Absolute best electrical engineer I ever worked with was from UT-San Antonio. Absolute worst electrical engineer I ever worked with was from Stanford.
It's all about what you make of it.
worst engineer I ever worked with had two degrees from Notre Dame
that impressed by boss, who hired him.
Boss had a degree from Penn State
boss later had to fire the ND grad for incompetence
-
I figure it can get your foot in a door. I used to interview folks for technician slots, pretty often. I recall interviewing three from Miami U. who were downright worthless. I ended up hiring a guy from Northwestern STATE in Louisiana who was excellent.
It really surprised me how little a lot of grads with 3.8 GPAs knew about chemistry.
-
Aside from the issue that USNWR rankings are complete shite, FSU clearly doesn't have a similar academic reputation to most of the B1G schools, and since we're talking about nothing more than perception here anyway, I'd say that's what's most important to those who care about the academic prestige of an athletics conference.
But it doesn't matter anyway. Warren is already stating publicly that being an AAU member isn't a requirement, which I read as an admission that any future takes aren't going to be so vigorously vetted for their academics, anyway.
I don't think the rankings are completely worthless but I get where you are coming from. Some of it is specific to programs. A given school may be overall middling but have a REALLY good underwater basket weaving program or vice-versa.
My guess is that Warren said that specifically because Notre Dame is not AAU.
-
Germany sends about 30% of their HS grads to college, in the US it's around 63%, over half. It's almost like it is a business.
We are getting WAY into the weeds here but this has long been a pet peeve of mine.
Only around 1/3 of US adults have a degree but around 2/3 go to college. Thus, roughly half are simply wasting their time and their (and in many cases our) money. This is a ludicrous waste and they would be vastly better off learning HVAC, auto repair, plumbing, or some other trade.
-
and of the 1/3 that have degrees, a percentage have little value
don't get my brother, the doctor of education, started on colleges printing degrees for money
-
I don't think the rankings are completely worthless but I get where you are coming from. Some of it is specific to programs. A given school may be overall middling but have a REALLY good underwater basket weaving program or vice-versa.
My guess is that Warren said that specifically because Notre Dame is not AAU.
The main problem is that some of the criteria they use are pretty much irrelevant to actual academic missions and academic outcomes. And some of those irrelevant criteria are easily manipulated because they are self-reported by the institutions, and there have been cases of these institutions getting busted for lying, but of course there's no accountability because it's just a magazine ranking anyway.
Honestly I think they're WORSE than worthless because there's evidence going back decades that they're being manipulated by various institutions. Random error would be better than the misrepresentative results of direct manipulation.
-
They certainly can be manipulated, but I'd guess the top 20 or so are good schools, and the next 30 are decent schools.
I find it amusing they rank say 233 as better than 307. And I think most folks have a general understanding of the elite schools, independent of who might be really elite in a certain major. Ask around.
I still laught at my reaction when I asked my professors about grad schools.
-
If we all know who the top 20 schools are, then the rankings for 1-20 are useless and irrelevant.
That leaves the jockeying and lying and manipulations occurring in the 21-100 ranks, and so those ratings are also completely useless and utter shite.
That's the entire point.
-
I'd be more concerned about the rankings if I thought many folks really relied on them for such decisions, e.g., going to 50 instead of 60 when perhaps 60 is overall a better fit.
-
I'd be more concerned about the rankings if I thought many folks really relied on them for such decisions, e.g., going to 50 instead of 60 when perhaps 60 is overall a better fit.
They're brought up constantly in discussions (like this one) and they're stupid and irrelevant. That's all.
I'd expect any smart person to make the college decision based on the expected quality of education in their preferred discipline, affordability, potential job prospects in their chosen field, how cute are the coeds, and other such metrics.
-
and the value of the athletic department on entertainment
-
ND, Furd, FSU and Miami and call it done.
-
add, ND and UT-Austin
no to Oklahoma, Washington, Oregon, and Stanford
cut Rutgers and MAryland
Two 8 team divisions - 9 conference games - one cross over permanent or otherwise
-
I think he was referring to non-AAU Notre Dame. Their research is miniscule but they aren't retards.
Sorry. I was referring to FSU.
-
The rankings which matter most.
ShanghaiRanking's Academic Ranking of World Universities (https://www.shanghairanking.com/rankings/arwu/2021)
-
from Shanghai??? ;)
-
I don't know of any college rankings really matter in terms of getting a good job. Obviously, a good degree from Harvard or MIT looks good, but we all know that.
One from UNC looks OK, one from Southeastern Missouri State doesn't.
-
Brother Doctor Dan talking about Texas high schools
https://youtu.be/SVpiSGxG7zw
-
from Shanghai??? ;)
It's a collaboration of experts.
-
It's a collaboration of experts.
:13:
-
It's a collaboration of experts.
It's interesting that's for sure. They've got Arizona State ranked ahead of Georgia Tech. CD should parade that all over town, in front of his snobby Tech friends.
-
That stood out to me.
Research $ has a lot to do with these rankings.
-
It's interesting that's for sure. They've got Arizona State ranked ahead of Georgia Tech. CD should parade that all over town, in front of his snobby Tech friends.
Ha. My snobby Tech friend is my neighbor who is a retired professor and he's one of the nicest people I've ever met, not a sports fan. I don't see much Tech gear here even though I'm less than two miles from campus. We walk down that way fairly often and have lunch somewhere. The amazing thing to me is seeing how many coeds there are at Tech these days.
Unrelated question, for a BSENG degree, are some programs really strong in say EE and weak in Civil? Or are they pretty good across the board if they are pretty good?
I'm not talking grad school.
-
Unrelated question, for a BSENG degree, are some programs really strong in say EE and weak in Civil? Or are they pretty good across the board if they are pretty good?
I'm not talking grad school.
There are definitely undergrad universities which specialize in one or a few disciplines in engineering, and are not as strong in other engineering disciplines. But the differences aren't necessarily all that stark, because any university that focuses on engineering in general, will spend a lot of money across the board.
Some disciplines are pretty geographically focused. If you look up the best Petroleum Engineering programs, for example, you won't be surprised at where they are located, geographically. Texas, Louisiana, Oklahoma.
-
That stood out to me.
Research $ has a lot to do with these rankings.
money makes things better
-
That makes sense, I know petro eng can be lucrative. We had folks who were Paper Engineers who were well paid as well. You probably don't find those programs in Arizona.
Paper is interesting stuff.
I'd guess a strong civil department would likely be mirrored with strong ChemEng and EE etc.
-
Brother Doctor Dan talking about Texas high schools
https://youtu.be/SVpiSGxG7zw
I couldn't teach in a rural school, especially in Utah or the deep south. I couldn't hold my tongue.
-
the school on the Res was rural, No?
-
That makes sense, I know petro eng can be lucrative. We had folks who were Paper Engineers who were well paid as well. You probably don't find those programs in Arizona.
Paper is interesting stuff.
I'd guess a strong civil department would likely be mirrored with strong ChemEng and EE etc.
Civil and Mechanical seem to go together.
Electrical and Computer and ChemE seem to go together, the first of those two for obvious reasons.
My degree is actually in Electrical and Computer Engineering, ECE, but everyone just abbreviates it to EE since that was the standard nomenclature before computers were a big deal.
-
the school on the Res was rural, No?
It's a whole other world.
-
I know, but mostly rural
-
It's a whole other world.
like the Lone Star State
-
like the Lone Star State
Which is awful. So don't move here.
Thank You For Your Support
-
I know, but mostly rural
To specify, the ancestors that provided the smallpox blankets and such. I'd have trouble teaching their kids.