- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message

Louisville president: "SEC academic standards are too low".
Posted on 9/22/11 at 2:44 pm
Posted on 9/22/11 at 2:44 pm
Their ranking: 167
Posted on 9/22/11 at 2:46 pm to busey
I have never heard anything good (or bad) about Louisville. Is the Big East full of brain trusts?
Posted on 9/22/11 at 2:46 pm to busey
Translation: Athletically....We can't compete.
Posted on 9/22/11 at 2:47 pm to LSU82BILL
quote:
Translation: Athletically....We can't compete.
Or..."We didn't and will not get an SEC invite."
Posted on 9/22/11 at 2:47 pm to spslayto
It was even funnier the other day when Charlie Strong went on TV with a message to UL students who are UK fans and wear UK gear to class. He basically said they need to support their university, even if they couldn't get into UK. Yes, he actually said that.

Posted on 9/22/11 at 2:52 pm to busey
I don't care what he says...the Louisville president would get down on both knees and open his mouth extra wide for an invitation to join the SEC.
Posted on 9/22/11 at 2:52 pm to busey
A&M, UF, UGA and Vandy disagree
Posted on 9/22/11 at 3:06 pm to Big Kat
quote:
A&M, UF, UGA and Vandy disagree
I know those US news rankings have recieved a lot of criticism because of what they use to rank schools but at 167 I think most of the SEC would look pretty sound compared to that.
Posted on 9/22/11 at 3:14 pm to theGarnetWay
No doubt. LSU has come a long way the last 10 years if Jindal doesn't frick it up. But that's a topic for another forum. Don't want to threadjack
Posted on 9/22/11 at 3:15 pm to theGarnetWay
For reference, the lowest ranked team in the SEC is State which is like 140 something I believe.
Posted on 9/22/11 at 3:32 pm to busey
Do you have a link? Given the relative stature of Louisville academics I just can't see how he could say something like that with a straight face.
Posted on 9/22/11 at 3:39 pm to GumBro Jackson
They were talking about it on Kentucky Sports Radio today, but they hadn't heard it first person and were also looking for verification. This is all I could come up with. If this is it, it's kinda disappointing.
LINK
LINK
Posted on 9/22/11 at 3:40 pm to GumBro Jackson
LINK
Take it fwiw. There is no way they have people go and seriously study every one of these schools and then gives sound rankings on them. Hell for ECU it just said something about 6.0% of girls are in a sorority and 7.0% of guys are in a fraternity. Thats it. Says nothing of their academics.
If I can find an old link Clemson shamelessly trys to skew these rankings to appear higher on the list.
Take it fwiw. There is no way they have people go and seriously study every one of these schools and then gives sound rankings on them. Hell for ECU it just said something about 6.0% of girls are in a sorority and 7.0% of guys are in a fraternity. Thats it. Says nothing of their academics.
If I can find an old link Clemson shamelessly trys to skew these rankings to appear higher on the list.
Posted on 9/22/11 at 3:44 pm to theGarnetWay
Clemson's skewing technique

quote:
Last week’s controversy over a Clemson University official’s admission that the land-grant institution had “walked the fine line between illegal, unethical, and really interesting” in efforts to rise in the U.S. News & World Report rankings reminded us of a special report we published two years ago.
In remarks at a meeting of the Association for Institutional Research, the Clemson official, Catherine E. Watt, said that the university’s single-minded pursuit of a higher ranking had led it to manipulate class sizes, to double its tuition so it would lower student-faculty ratios, and to rank all other colleges but Clemson as “below average” in U.S. News surveys of academic reputation.
Posted on 9/22/11 at 3:47 pm to busey
Though this is getting off topic there was a Clemson fan the other day on an SC board mentioning how SC had stayed true to its mission. To be a school designed to help kids in this state get a good education. Clemson has gone away from that and has gone for more academic appeal rather than helping the kids of our state.
With that said SC has been accepting more out of state kids than usual but still small compared to in-state kids. I think we've doing that to get out of state tuition considering we're becoming more and more of a public school with less public funding.
With that said SC has been accepting more out of state kids than usual but still small compared to in-state kids. I think we've doing that to get out of state tuition considering we're becoming more and more of a public school with less public funding.
Back to top

8







