A Talk with Campus Leaders

andrew said:
Data was last released in 08. It's more like 200 to 250 commonly, and ours are pushing 400. It's a significant difference, and I expect it's probably higher now as I believe our average incoming sat score has gone up (could be wrong on this, on phone.)

http://blog.al.com/solomon/2008/12/admission_qualifications.html?mobRedir=false

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I777 using Tapatalk 2
Click to expand...

UF is also one of the highest. Maybe they should reign in their program a bit. I will go over to their board and get this initiative started.
 
andrew said:
Data was last released in 08. It's more like 200 to 250 commonly, and ours are pushing 400. It's a significant difference, and I expect it's probably higher now as I believe our average incoming sat score has gone up (could be wrong on this, on phone.)

http://blog.al.com/solomon/2008/12/admission_qualifications.html?mobRedir=false

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I777 using Tapatalk 2
Click to expand...

Our increase in average SAT is at least partially due to a sellout on a different front, an academic sellout to move towards the questionable ranking methods of a few magazine publishers.

I prefer and defend the old GT way of giving students the benefit of the doubt on the way in, but that can lower your average SAT score. I prefer and defend the old GT way of making up for that broader admission policy with more rigor to get out with a diploma, but that lowers your graduation rate.

So the Hill has sold out by raising admission standards but making it easier to graduate, and I think that is a shame. For the most part there was correlation between those with high scores coming in and achievement at GT. But we also had a significant number who excelled at GT who might not be admitted today. Conversely more than a few who entered with top scores could not hack it at GT, and I for one am happy they did not get a GT diploma ( my National Merit Scholar freshman roommate was one such failure. )

The only ranking that matters to me is how employers value candidates from a particular school.
 
KrazieJacket said:
UF is also one of the highest. Maybe they should reign in their program a bit. I will go over to their board and get this initiative started.
Click to expand...

Looking at the SEC ranking my guess is they all have about the same level for football players and the differential is accounted by difference in the quality of school alone.

P.S.
Another post postulated that we could end up being like Rice, but it is ironic that our average football SAT scores are even higher than Rice.
 
Isn't GT also considered one of the most miserable places to attend.... I think that should factor into our recruiting rankings. It is pretty obvious CPJ should start sending flowers and chocolates to our players on their birthdays. Once recruits hear about this we might jump ten to fifteen spots in recruiting rankings.
 
lonestarjacket said:
Looking at the SEC ranking my guess is they all have about the same level for football players and the differential is accounted by difference in the quality of school alone.

P.S.
Another post postulated that we could end up being like Rice, but it is ironic that our average football SAT scores are even higher than Rice.
Click to expand...

RICE as in football record.
 
gtphd said:
RICE finished the season with a better football record than GT and made a bowl game without a waiver.
Click to expand...

Therefore they have a better football team. It's science.
 
Deke said:
Therefore they have a better football team. It's science.
Click to expand...

Hey, I wasn't the one claiming that GT's football record would be like Rice's football record with fewer special admits.
 
GoldZ said:
RICE as in football record.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I get it. I just found it interesting that Rice has lower academic standards for football than we do. And that is despite the fact they really don't pretend to compete at the highest level.

It supports your argument; just go with it.
 
gtphd said:
Hey, I wasn't the one claiming that GT's football record would be like Rice's football record with fewer special admits.
Click to expand...

No, I was, on a historical basis of course. You were trying, lamely, to counter my point with this year's wee bit of data.
 
so now people are saying that our football team would lose to ...

BowlOfRice.jpg


a bowl of rice?
 
lonestarjacket said:
Yeah, I get it. I just found it interesting that Rice has lower academic standards for football than we do. And that is despite the fact they really don't pretend to compete at the highest level.

It supports your argument; just go with it.
Click to expand...

The only reason they don't contend at the highest level anymore is that they were shuffled out when the Big 8 and SWC were merged. They played big boy football until that happened and they ended up in the WAC or something. Kind of like when we left the SEC and became and afterthought. We would still be not pretending to compete at the highest level if the ACC hadn't picked us up.

Highest level = f(conference affiliation)
 
Good point '92, but I interpret our AA mission statement ref to competing at the highest level, to mean we not only schedule at the highest level, but we are also competitive at said highest level. We get a chance to do that even in the ACC vs the 2 or 3 best teams in it any given year, plus ugag and the bowl game. This grouping ain't been going so well for us.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top