Does Nebraska matter in the B1G?

Volbound1700 said:
I am going to get trolled for this one but is the B1G really anything that special in Academics.

I would take Vanderbilt over any B1G school. Plus Academic rankings seem to be more about how aligned the school is with the mainstream liberal media than it is about Academic performance. Look at Texas A&M, you wouldn't consider them anything special but they seem to graduate the most students that get employed.

I know Michigan and Northwestern have a great reputation. Purdue is known for its engineering. But most of the rest of the schools seem to be no different than any of the other Power 5 leagues, just big public schools. I don't see them employing anymore people than UT, UK, or any insert public school from any other league.

I would say also that both the ACC and Pac12 have stronger schools. ACC has Duke, UNC, Boston College, Notre Dame (kind of), Georgia Tech, Virginia, and even Virginia Tech which is known for its engineering.

I would take the four Pac12 California schools over anyone in the B1G except may Northwestern.

Not trying to diminish the B1G Academically but I just don't see enough there to justify the arrogant attitude that they have. Unless your the Ivy League, MIT, Stanford, Cal, Vanderbilt, Washington U in St Louis, John-Hopkins, Emery & Henry, etc.; I don't think you have that much bragging rights.

BTW, my sister graduated in the Science field from Vanderbilt and did a lot of summer internships that included Duke, UMass, BYU, etc. Out of all the schools, Duke was the least impressive and UMass probably had the best program but wasn't on the radar (at least from the perspective of her ability to grow and learn).

Another issue with these "highly" ranked schools is that they are graded by professors. Professors are graded by their ability to research and write papers, not necessarily their ability to teach.
Click to expand...
HAL didn't become aware at Vanderbilt.
 
NU_FTW said:
For being a supposed "law" student/graduate, you sure are pretty dim.

From a dumbass retarded on the outside looking in, sure you might just assume it is recruiting, but you'd be a dumbass for thinking that. Our recruiting hasnt changed.


If you were to actually follow college football, i dont know maybe you are one of the young pups you claim doesnt know anything about Nebraska football, you'd realize that our coaching blunders is the main reason.

Our coaching mistakes started with that asshat west coast 900 page game day playbook dickhead destroying our identity and culture, carried on with blo peeni and was utterly dismantled under smilin mikey with his optional strength and conditioning programs.

We havent had anything resembling an offensive line (unless you are speaking of how utterly offended we should be to call that product an O Line) without our bread and butter big beefy o-line we have no pass protect we have no running lanes we have no production..


anybody with half a brain can see that regardless of talent on the field if you have a shit oline that talent is going to get hurt, destroyed, and underproduce.


Perhaps your peabrain "law dawg" degree can understand this.
Click to expand...
Always with the insults. What is it with you Nebraska fans that can't just engage substantively on a sports board? I can't believe I have to do this, but I am not at all dim. Vandy grad, UGA law, that's top 15 undergrad, top 25 law school. 61 years old, successful attorney and businessman. So, the "dim" insults get you nowhere, and I am always open for people to disagree with my thoughts on football. Not a young pup, obviously. I've been following college football since I was old enough to watch, so I'm a college football fanatic like most others here. Just trying to enjoy this new site for substantive conversations about college football, but you guys who don't do anything but throw out insults make it hard. I like the banter back and forth, but you guys don't add anything of substance.

As to you finally responding substantively, bad coaching makes some sense. I'm a huge Osborne fan. I was lucky to meet him in the RDU airport a few years ago when he was visiting Duke and we were both flying out. Sat next to him in 1st class, and had a great conversation with him about football. I grew up in his era, so we had a lot in common. So your coaching has certainly dropped off. I like your new coach, but a little surprised after what he did at UCF that he hasn't done better.

Your insistence that it isn't recruiting makes no sense to me. In the 90s, you guys got the best players. No one had bigger and better OL than you. You even say this in your post ... you say you no longer have your bread and butter OL ... isn't that recruiting? Why aren't you getting the bread and butter OL? What am I missing when you say it isn't recruiting, but then say you have "shit oline talent." Talent is recruiting. You should be top 10, not hovering between 18-25. That type of recruiting doesn't work. I'd be interested in how you think that can get reversed. I thought Frost would turn that around, especially hitting Florida hard where he made connections.

I've said in several posts I'd like to see you guys get better ... CFB is better when NE, USC, UCLA, UT are good, at least from the perspective of someone my age who grew up with those programs being good. Glad to discuss football, friendly banter is cool. Don't have time to waste on the insults.
 
WhosYourDawggy said:
Always with the insults. What is it with you Nebraska fans that can't just engage substantively on a sports board? I can't believe I have to do this, but I am not at all dim. Vandy grad, UGA law, that's top 15 undergrad, top 25 law school. 61 years old, successful attorney and businessman. So, the "dim" insults get you nowhere, and I am always open for people to disagree with my thoughts on football. Not a young pup, obviously. I've been following college football since I was old enough to watch, so I'm a college football fanatic like most others here. Just trying to enjoy this new site for substantive conversations about college football, but you guys who don't do anything but throw out insults make it hard. I like the banter back and forth, but you guys don't add anything of substance.

As to you finally responding substantively, bad coaching makes some sense. I'm a huge Osborne fan. I was lucky to meet him in the RDU airport a few years ago when he was visiting Duke and we were both flying out. Sat next to him in 1st class, and had a great conversation with him about football. I grew up in his era, so we had a lot in common. So your coaching has certainly dropped off. I like your new coach, but a little surprised after what he did at UCF that he hasn't done better.

Your insistence that it isn't recruiting makes no sense to me. In the 90s, you guys got the best players. No one had bigger and better OL than you. You even say this in your post ... you say you no longer have your bread and butter OL ... isn't that recruiting? Why aren't you getting the bread and butter OL? What am I missing when you say it isn't recruiting, but then say you have "shit oline talent." Talent is recruiting. You should be top 10, not hovering between 18-25. That type of recruiting doesn't work. I'd be interested in how you think that can get reversed. I thought Frost would turn that around, especially hitting Florida hard where he made connections.

I've said in several posts I'd like to see you guys get better ... CFB is better when NE, USC, UCLA, UT are good, at least from the perspective of someone my age who grew up with those programs being good. Glad to discuss football, friendly banter is cool. Don't have time to waste on the insults.
Click to expand...
You refused to read what has already been written........

Nebraska is going to take time to rebuild the culture we had in the 90's

it is more than just that but it all falls on coaching and admin, it was never about talent or ability to recruit the same talent we always have.

we had retards like tim beck at OC who thought hey instead of running the same play that is working until they find a way to defend it, lets get cute and as soon as it works lets switch to something that doesnt.... just mind boggling stupidity

Nebraska never "got" the best players, we DEVELOPED them.... Nebraska was a pioneer (the pioneer) in college football strength and conditioning.... there was nobody doin what we did.

Nebraska was always about doing more with less.


95 Starting lineup (arguably one of the best teams in all of CFB)
1602879604761.png


doesnt exactly help your case any does it....
 
NU_FTW said:
You refused to read what has already been written........

doesnt exactly help your case any does it....
Click to expand...
I haven't refused to read anything. I am a voracious reader, and will read anything about sports. You provide me links like you did in the thread above, I'll read it. Thanks for the link.

I have no case here, and if what your article states here is other than what I was putting forward I'll admit that. It's a sports board. That's what we are supposed to do. That's part of the problem. Because so many people here's first reactions are to attack the poster, you think that anything anyone writes is negative or an attack. It isn't. I made post where I listed 5 reasons why I thought your team was where it was, in a post titled "Does Nebraska matter in the B1G?" I thought that is what one did in a post like that ... kick around ideas as to whether NE matters. I'll argue my points like everyone else, but I don't see you or anyone as the enemy, or dislike them so long as they are civil - well, except of UTjr, UF and Aubbie fans.

I'll read the article and respond.
 
WhosYourDawggy said:
I haven't refused to read anything. I am a voracious reader, and will read anything about sports. You provide me links like you did in the thread above, I'll read it. Thanks for the link.

I have no case here, and if what your article states here is other than what I was putting forward I'll admit that. It's a sports board. That's what we are supposed to do. That's part of the problem. Because so many people here's first reactions are to attack the poster, you think that anything anyone writes is negative or an attack. It isn't. I made post where I listed 5 reasons why I thought your team was where it was, in a post titled "Does Nebraska matter in the B1G?" I thought that is what one did in a post like that ... kick around ideas as to whether NE matters. I'll argue my points like everyone else, but I don't see you or anyone as the enemy, or dislike them so long as they are civil - well, except of UTjr, UF and Aubbie fans.

I'll read the article and respond.
Click to expand...
We here in nebraska and on the many forums on the interwebz have been having this debate for the better part of 2 decades, this subject isnt exactly new, some of use get a bit short when the same dead horse gets beaten again and again.


Nebraska being in the B1G and recruiting isnt the issue and hasnt been. It has been Coaching, S&C and Culture to put it as macro short and sweet as possible. Recruiting and our conference has been the least of our issues (retention of said recruiting classes has been a bigger issue than getting them here in the first place, that is already getting better under Frost too)
 
NU_FTW said:
Nebraska was always about doing more with less.

95 Starting lineup (arguably one of the best teams in all of CFB)
View attachment 7129


doesnt exactly help your case any does it....
Click to expand...

I am curious ... what point are you making with this chart. Everyone on it is an AA, or All State. I'd bet those OL are the biggest there were, even if they are small by comparison. Those would be 5* and 4* in today's world, not 3*. What am I missing?
 
NU_FTW said:
We here in nebraska and on the many forums on the interwebz have been having this debate for the better part of 2 decades, this subject isnt exactly new, some of use get a bit short when the same dead horse gets beaten again and again.


Nebraska being in the B1G and recruiting isnt the issue and hasnt been. It has been Coaching, S&C and Culture to put it as macro short and sweet as possible. Recruiting and our conference has been the least of our issues (retention of said recruiting classes has been a bigger issue than getting them here in the first place, that is already getting better under Frost too)
Click to expand...
Fair enough. I was on SportsHoopla for a couple years, 2013-2105, then left and just was on UGA sites. Came back 6 months ago because I wanted more general CFB info. So, I don't know what has or hasn't been discussed. I also think you are a fine fit in the B1G. You would be fine in the B12 as well. I miss OU v. NE, that's for sure.
 
Blackshirts BLVD said:
Unfortunate for us and I believe the CFB world, but fair point.

Not sure I put too much weight in this because... that's nothing new. Most of the good recruits always came from the south and Nebraska has always been in "the middle of nowhere", but they made it work for decades. Substitute this by playing off the first one, since no recruits have witnessed greatness from Nebraska, the walk on program has deteriorated as well as the FCS and G5s stepping broadening - the luster that used to exist in Nebraska has died down. Kids used to WANT to come here. Kids used to pass up scholarship offers at these G5s and FCSs before, but not now.

Fair point, though historically, Nebraskas biggest recruiting grounds have been Texas and Florida to my knowledge. I could be wrong though.

Another unfortunate, but fair point. Hope this changes.

tenor.gif


lol
Click to expand...

you make me want to go to the garage and jump off it with a rope attached to my neck
 
WhosYourDawggy said:
I am curious ... what point are you making with this chart. Everyone on it is an AA, or All State. I'd bet those OL are the biggest there were, even if they are small by comparison. Those would be 5* and 4* in today's world, not 3*. What am I missing?
Click to expand...
That wouldnt even be top 10...................... they would have been an average of 2.8 star and 3.2 star if you go buy the articles guess on star ratings....
 
WhosYourDawggy said:
Fair enough. I was on SportsHoopla for a couple years, 2013-2105, then left and just was on UGA sites. Came back 6 months ago because I wanted more general CFB info. So, I don't know what has or hasn't been discussed. I also think you are a fine fit in the B1G. You would be fine in the B12 as well. I miss OU v. NE, that's for sure.
Click to expand...
We have the right guys at the helm, patience/time is all we need now and Nebraska will be back. 3 years and Frosts S&C is already working magic on beefing up our boys.
 
Volbound1700 said:
I am going to get trolled for this one but is the B1G really anything that special in Academics.

I would take Vanderbilt over any B1G school. Plus Academic rankings seem to be more about how aligned the school is with the mainstream liberal media than it is about Academic performance. Look at Texas A&M, you wouldn't consider them anything special but they seem to graduate the most students that get employed.

I know Michigan and Northwestern have a great reputation. Purdue is known for its engineering. But most of the rest of the schools seem to be no different than any of the other Power 5 leagues, just big public schools. I don't see them employing anymore people than UT, UK, or any insert public school from any other league.

I would say also that both the ACC and Pac12 have stronger schools. ACC has Duke, UNC, Boston College, Notre Dame (kind of), Georgia Tech, Virginia, and even Virginia Tech which is known for its engineering.

I would take the four Pac12 California schools over anyone in the B1G except may Northwestern.

Not trying to diminish the B1G Academically but I just don't see enough there to justify the arrogant attitude that they have. Unless your the Ivy League, MIT, Stanford, Cal, Vanderbilt, Washington U in St Louis, John-Hopkins, Emery & Henry, etc.; I don't think you have that much bragging rights.

BTW, my sister graduated in the Science field from Vanderbilt and did a lot of summer internships that included Duke, UMass, BYU, etc. Out of all the schools, Duke was the least impressive and UMass probably had the best program but wasn't on the radar (at least from the perspective of her ability to grow and learn).

Another issue with these "highly" ranked schools is that they are graded by professors. Professors are graded by their ability to research and write papers, not necessarily their ability to teach.
Click to expand...
Below is a post that @Wild Turkey posted on Hoopla 10/7/2013 - I can't remember what I ate for breakfast yesterday, but I remembered that thread and others like it. So, the rankings on this are 7 years old, and as you noted politics has entered it and changed a lot of these rankings. You can find more recent listings at: BCS Academic Rankings

But the conclusions I had from similar research I did was this:

- ACC is clearly the best, top to bottom. Other than Louisville, they really don't have a bad school.
- Big10 is the most consistently strong across the board. They are simply solid in the middle, sort of like their women ... they are stout, with almost all schools slotted 27-89 - NWU and NE on the ends.
- PAC10 is best at the top with 4 in the top 27 ... 7 years later, they are still the best at the top, but have OSU and WSU weighing them down at the bottom, along with Utah and the Arizona schools.
- SEC is weird and rather uninspiring ... only Vandy at the top, then UF, UGA and TAMU all solid in the middle, then it seriously drops off from there.
- B12 is just bad, not really in the discussion (but see my thoughts on rankings below, as their are fine schools in the B12).

All that said, and as you point out, rankings are subjective in a lot of ways. For example, I was dual enrolled at Vandy in the School or Arts and Sciences and the School of Engineering. I have great and very successful friends who graduated from Vandy's engineering school, yet NC State which is ranked overall much lower than Vandy has a much better engineering school. If I wanted to go into engineering today, I'd be better off going to NC State instead of Vanderbilt or UNC as it is ranked far higher as an engineering school, while the other two are ranked higher in general. My youngest son goes to Loyola Marymount in LA, but is smart as hell and could have gone to any non-Ivy he wanted to. LMU is about 65 in the rankings, but he is in the School of Film and Television, which is ranked no. 7 for that type of program. So, you have to look at the program you are going to be in.

Alabama is another great example of where rankings can go wrong. My oldest son is there and he got into both UNC and UGA, but chose Bama. First, he got close to a full ride there as they are giving away money. They also have 66% out of state student body. Let that sink in. Alabama has a student body that is 66% out of state. He lives with 9 other guys, not a one from Alabama. Their student body is diverse like a private school - Vandy, Duke, NW, etc. - and we really liked that. Plus they have gone on a spending spree over the past 15 years and their facilities are incredible. They get dinged in the rankings because they give way more merit aid rather than financially based aid. But, their incoming GPA and scores have been raised dramatically. So, rankings have to be looked at closely.

Here's Wild Turnkey's SportsHoopla post:

Here is an older article on conference academic ratings:

So I checked out every football school's overall ranking and then computed them as a conference average. Voila, the results:

1. ACC -- 51.2

2. Big Ten -- 57.5

3. Pac 12 -- 81.75

4. SEC -- 98.7

5. Big 12 -- 113.1

6. Big East -- 130.6

It probably won't come as any surprise that the ACC's 14 schools -- I included Pitt and Syracuse -- averaged a 51.2 -- which is downright amazing -- but how about the top level strength in the Pac 12? Four schools in the top 25? Wow. And how about the bottom half of the Pac12? Ouch.

The SEC's 14 team average is better than the Big 12's 10 team average -- in fact, if you put the top ten of the SEC against the top ten of the Big 12 to equalize the conference sizes, the SEC's average is 80.28, which demolishes the Big 12's 113.1 even more substantially. Even if you remove the top two SEC schools from the tally, Vanderbilt and Florida, the bottom 12 SEC schools are still better than the Big 12's top ten. So that Texas academics argument? Yeah, like most things trotted out by the Longhorns, it's complete crap.

As for the worst of the major BCS conferences, that honor belongs to Memphis, a school that isn't even ranked among the top national universities. (Boise State is ranked as the 62nd best regional school in the West, which probably makes it better than Memphis too.) If you don't even think it's fair to include the Big East as a major conference then West Virginia and Texas Tech are tied at 165 as the two worst academic schools in the top five conferences.

Here's how all the conferences rank with the inclusion of their individual schools. (Please stop with your emails about how the U.S. News rankings are biased against your school. I'm sure these rankings aren't perfect, but they're infinitely better than having to listen to Texas fans talk about how their academics are too strong for the SEC. Newsflash, Longhorns, you'd be the ninth highest ranked school in the state of California and you're ranked below Miami, which would make you the 8th best ACC school. Hook'em.).

ACC -- Average of 51.2

8. Duke
24. Virginia
27. Wake Forest
30. North Carolina
31. Boston College
36. Georgia Tech
44. Miami
58. Syracuse
58. Maryland
58. Pittsburgh
68. Clemson
72. Virginia Tech
97. Florida State
106. North Carolina State

Big Ten: Average of 57.5

12. Northwestern
29. Michigan
41. Wisconsin
46. Penn State
46. Illinois
56. Ohio State
65. Purdue
68. Minnesota
72. Michigan State
72. Iowa
83. Indiana
101. Nebraska

Pac 12: Average of 81.75

6. Stanford
21. Cal
24. UCLA
24. USC
46. Washington
97. Colorado
115. Oregon
120. Arizona
125. Utah
125. Washington State
139. Arizona State
139. Oregon State

SEC -- Average of 98.7

17. Vandy
54. Florida
63. Georgia
65. Texas A&M
77. Alabama
89. Auburn
97. Missouri
101. Tennessee
115. South Carolina
125. Kentucky
134. LSU
134. Arkansas
151. Ole Miss
160. Mississippi State

Big 12 -- average 113.1

46. Texas
77. Baylor
92. TCU
101. Iowa State
104. Oklahoma
106. Kansas
139. Kansas State
139. Oklahoma State
165. Texas Tech
165. West Virginia

Big East -- Average of 130.6

58. SMU
63. UConn
68. Rutgers
125. Temple
139. Cincinnati
160. Louisville
165. San Diego State
170. South Florida
174. Central Florida
184. Houston

Memphis (unranked)
Boise State (#62 regional western college)

To be fair Navy also isn't ranked and would likely be a top 25 caliber school.

If you will look close the following schools are all ranked higher than Nebraska according to US News:

Vandy
Florida
Georgia
Texas A&M
Alabama
Auburn
Missouri

Tennessee is tied with them.

So over half the conference is ranked higher than Nebraska or tied with them and if you added them to the SEC it would barely move the needle. What have we learned? Honestly that you don't know what the fuck you are talking about.
 
NU_FTW said:
We have the right guys at the helm, patience/time is all we need now and Nebraska will be back. 3 years and Frosts S&C is already working magic on beefing up our boys.
Click to expand...
I thought he was a good hire, and was glad that UF didn't hire him. I think he would have done a much better job at UF than MuLLLen is doing.
 
WhosYourDawggy said:
I thought he was a good hire, and was glad that UF didn't hire him. I think he would have done a much better job at UF than MuLLLen is doing.
Click to expand...
Frost isnt just a Football guy he is really really brilliant as a person too, i think he would do well anywhere that has good support (kansas is a death sentence for any HC to be honest)
 
NU_FTW said:
Frost isnt just a Football guy he is really really brilliant as a person too, i think he would do well anywhere that has good support (kansas is a death sentence for any HC to be honest)
Click to expand...
I like the coach at Minnesota, too. Two young, dynamic guys.
 
Angry Red said:
See Texas and be quiet
Click to expand...

What is there to see with Texas? If Texas gets the right coach -- they can become elite again, they have one of the largest states for elite recruits.

Many of the top Texas guys are going out of state, which is what has helped programs like OSU go to the next level recruiting, as they have raided Texas in the last 4 or 5 years.

Nebraska doesn't have the in state talent. Social media and huge explosion of football camps the past 10-15 years -- it doesn't matter where an elite recruit is, the top programs will find them. Then they have a choice between Nebraska or Bama. Nebraska or Clemson. Nebraska or Ohio State.....etc. Nebraska isn't going to win those recruiting battles.

What does Nebraska have to sell recruits on? Big rivalry games? No. Elite Academics? No. Playing in a big television market? No.

Other blue bloods are in the same boat to a lesser extent.
 
NewPhoneWhoDis said:
What is there to see with Texas? If Texas gets the right coach -- they can become elite again, they have one of the largest states for elite recruits.

Many of the top Texas guys are going out of state, which is what has helped programs like OSU go to the next level recruiting, as they have raided Texas in the last 4 or 5 years.

Nebraska doesn't have the in state talent. Social media and huge explosion of football camps the past 10-15 years -- it doesn't matter where an elite recruit is, the top programs will find them. Then they have a choice between Nebraska or Bama. Nebraska or Clemson. Nebraska or Ohio State.....etc. Nebraska isn't going to win those recruiting battles.

What does Nebraska have to sell recruits on? Big rivalry games? No. Elite Academics? No. Playing in a big television market? No.

Other blue bloods are in the same boat to a lesser extent.
Click to expand...
whos retarded alt are you?

typical scUM retarded nonsense
 
WhosYourDawggy said:
Below is a post that @Wild Turkey posted on Hoopla 10/7/2013 - I can't remember what I ate for breakfast yesterday, but I remembered that thread and others like it. So, the rankings on this are 7 years old, and as you noted politics has entered it and changed a lot of these rankings. You can find more recent listings at: BCS Academic Rankings

But the conclusions I had from similar research I did was this:

- ACC is clearly the best, top to bottom. Other than Louisville, they really don't have a bad school.
- Big10 is the most consistently strong across the board. They are simply solid in the middle, sort of like their women ... they are stout, with almost all schools slotted 27-89 - NWU and NE on the ends.
- PAC10 is best at the top with 4 in the top 27 ... 7 years later, they are still the best at the top, but have OSU and WSU weighing them down at the bottom, along with Utah and the Arizona schools.
- SEC is weird and rather uninspiring ... only Vandy at the top, then UF, UGA and TAMU all solid in the middle, then it seriously drops off from there.
- B12 is just bad, not really in the discussion (but see my thoughts on rankings below, as their are fine schools in the B12).

All that said, and as you point out, rankings are subjective in a lot of ways. For example, I was dual enrolled at Vandy in the School or Arts and Sciences and the School of Engineering. I have great and very successful friends who graduated from Vandy's engineering school, yet NC State which is ranked overall much lower than Vandy has a much better engineering school. If I wanted to go into engineering today, I'd be better off going to NC State instead of Vanderbilt or UNC as it is ranked far higher as an engineering school, while the other two are ranked higher in general. My youngest son goes to Loyola Marymount in LA, but is smart as hell and could have gone to any non-Ivy he wanted to. LMU is about 65 in the rankings, but he is in the School of Film and Television, which is ranked no. 7 for that type of program. So, you have to look at the program you are going to be in.

Alabama is another great example of where rankings can go wrong. My oldest son is there and he got into both UNC and UGA, but chose Bama. First, he got close to a full ride there as they are giving away money. They also have 66% out of state student body. Let that sink in. Alabama has a student body that is 66% out of state. He lives with 9 other guys, not a one from Alabama. Their student body is diverse like a private school - Vandy, Duke, NW, etc. - and we really liked that. Plus they have gone on a spending spree over the past 15 years and their facilities are incredible. They get dinged in the rankings because they give way more merit aid rather than financially based aid. But, their incoming GPA and scores have been raised dramatically. So, rankings have to be looked at closely.

Here's Wild Turnkey's SportsHoopla post:

Here is an older article on conference academic ratings:

So I checked out every football school's overall ranking and then computed them as a conference average. Voila, the results:

1. ACC -- 51.2

2. Big Ten -- 57.5

3. Pac 12 -- 81.75

4. SEC -- 98.7

5. Big 12 -- 113.1

6. Big East -- 130.6

It probably won't come as any surprise that the ACC's 14 schools -- I included Pitt and Syracuse -- averaged a 51.2 -- which is downright amazing -- but how about the top level strength in the Pac 12? Four schools in the top 25? Wow. And how about the bottom half of the Pac12? Ouch.

The SEC's 14 team average is better than the Big 12's 10 team average -- in fact, if you put the top ten of the SEC against the top ten of the Big 12 to equalize the conference sizes, the SEC's average is 80.28, which demolishes the Big 12's 113.1 even more substantially. Even if you remove the top two SEC schools from the tally, Vanderbilt and Florida, the bottom 12 SEC schools are still better than the Big 12's top ten. So that Texas academics argument? Yeah, like most things trotted out by the Longhorns, it's complete crap.

As for the worst of the major BCS conferences, that honor belongs to Memphis, a school that isn't even ranked among the top national universities. (Boise State is ranked as the 62nd best regional school in the West, which probably makes it better than Memphis too.) If you don't even think it's fair to include the Big East as a major conference then West Virginia and Texas Tech are tied at 165 as the two worst academic schools in the top five conferences.

Here's how all the conferences rank with the inclusion of their individual schools. (Please stop with your emails about how the U.S. News rankings are biased against your school. I'm sure these rankings aren't perfect, but they're infinitely better than having to listen to Texas fans talk about how their academics are too strong for the SEC. Newsflash, Longhorns, you'd be the ninth highest ranked school in the state of California and you're ranked below Miami, which would make you the 8th best ACC school. Hook'em.).

ACC -- Average of 51.2

8. Duke
24. Virginia
27. Wake Forest
30. North Carolina
31. Boston College
36. Georgia Tech
44. Miami
58. Syracuse
58. Maryland
58. Pittsburgh
68. Clemson
72. Virginia Tech
97. Florida State
106. North Carolina State

Big Ten: Average of 57.5

12. Northwestern
29. Michigan
41. Wisconsin
46. Penn State
46. Illinois
56. Ohio State
65. Purdue
68. Minnesota
72. Michigan State
72. Iowa
83. Indiana
101. Nebraska

Pac 12: Average of 81.75

6. Stanford
21. Cal
24. UCLA
24. USC
46. Washington
97. Colorado
115. Oregon
120. Arizona
125. Utah
125. Washington State
139. Arizona State
139. Oregon State

SEC -- Average of 98.7

17. Vandy
54. Florida
63. Georgia
65. Texas A&M
77. Alabama
89. Auburn
97. Missouri
101. Tennessee
115. South Carolina
125. Kentucky
134. LSU
134. Arkansas
151. Ole Miss
160. Mississippi State

Big 12 -- average 113.1

46. Texas
77. Baylor
92. TCU
101. Iowa State
104. Oklahoma
106. Kansas
139. Kansas State
139. Oklahoma State
165. Texas Tech
165. West Virginia

Big East -- Average of 130.6

58. SMU
63. UConn
68. Rutgers
125. Temple
139. Cincinnati
160. Louisville
165. San Diego State
170. South Florida
174. Central Florida
184. Houston

Memphis (unranked)
Boise State (#62 regional western college)

To be fair Navy also isn't ranked and would likely be a top 25 caliber school.

If you will look close the following schools are all ranked higher than Nebraska according to US News:

Vandy
Florida
Georgia
Texas A&M
Alabama
Auburn
Missouri

Tennessee is tied with them.

So over half the conference is ranked higher than Nebraska or tied with them and if you added them to the SEC it would barely move the needle. What have we learned? Honestly that you don't know what the fuck you are talking about.
Click to expand...

As stated the rankings are subjective. It really doesn't matter unless you are in the top 30 Universities anyways. There isn't much of a difference between Mississippi State, Clemson, Tennessee, Minnesota, etc. Most of the public state schools are just that, public state schools.

There are only 2-3 B1G schools that stand out. The others are pretty average. It also depends on program as well. Certain programs favor others.

As good as Vanderbilt is in the rankings, I have seen many Vandy grads that are dumb as rocks and struggle to get jobs as well. You are right about Vandy engineering, in fact it is 3rd in Tennessee in most people's eyes (ranked behind UT-Knoxville and Tennessee Tech). However, Vandy's law program, for example, blows away anything in Tennessee (at least on rankings).

However, my beef with rankings is that they are based on alumni, history, and facilities, not on teachers. Professors are graded by their ability to write papers, not teach students. There are tons of overrated professors good at writing thesis that can't teach college students and it shows.

Overall, the B1G is an ATHLETIC Conference, not an Academic Force. They have no reason to play academic snob to anyone. They are nothing special. They have 1-3 schools that may move the needle and the rest are just local public universities.
 
Volbound1700 said:
I am going to get trolled for this one but is the B1G really anything that special in Academics.

I would take Vanderbilt over any B1G school. Plus Academic rankings seem to be more about how aligned the school is with the mainstream liberal media than it is about Academic performance. Look at Texas A&M, you wouldn't consider them anything special but they seem to graduate the most students that get employed.

I know Michigan and Northwestern have a great reputation. Purdue is known for its engineering. But most of the rest of the schools seem to be no different than any of the other Power 5 leagues, just big public schools. I don't see them employing anymore people than UT, UK, or any insert public school from any other league.

I would say also that both the ACC and Pac12 have stronger schools. ACC has Duke, UNC, Boston College, Notre Dame (kind of), Georgia Tech, Virginia, and even Virginia Tech which is known for its engineering.

I would take the four Pac12 California schools over anyone in the B1G except may Northwestern.

Not trying to diminish the B1G Academically but I just don't see enough there to justify the arrogant attitude that they have. Unless your the Ivy League, MIT, Stanford, Cal, Vanderbilt, Washington U in St Louis, John-Hopkins, Emery & Henry, etc.; I don't think you have that much bragging rights.

BTW, my sister graduated in the Science field from Vanderbilt and did a lot of summer internships that included Duke, UMass, BYU, etc. Out of all the schools, Duke was the least impressive and UMass probably had the best program but wasn't on the radar (at least from the perspective of her ability to grow and learn).

Another issue with these "highly" ranked schools is that they are graded by professors. Professors are graded by their ability to research and write papers, not necessarily their ability to teach.
Click to expand...
Top to bottom the B1G is, by far, the top academic conference. Outside of Nebraska, the rest of the conference is ranked in top 80. Other conferences have a few really good academic schools, but then they have a bunch where the academics are not good. The PAC has really good schools with Stanford, UCLA, Washington, but then half the conference is ranked in the 100's.
Academics really isn't a selling point to the overwhelming majority of football recruits, but if you ever see a 5 star recruit going to a Stanford, Michigan, Notre Dame, etc. -- it will be a guy with elite academics.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top