Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
Oklahoma President Increasing Research To Improve AAU Metrics
Author Message
jrj84105 Offline
All American
*

Posts: 2,689
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 252
I Root For: Utes
Location:
Post: #21
RE: Oklahoma President Increasing Research To Improve AAU Metrics
I think we’ll get in in another generation. We (Utah) score poorly on selectivity, but demographic changes in the state (rapidly growing population with even more rapidly growing non-Mormon population) will inherently make it harder to get into the state’s secular flagship provided enrollment remains capped.
08-17-2018 07:29 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Statefan Offline
Banned

Posts: 3,511
Joined: May 2018
I Root For: .
Location:
Post: #22
RE: Oklahoma President Increasing Research To Improve AAU Metrics
(08-17-2018 07:13 PM)Stugray2 Wrote:  The Nebraska ranking list is interesting as among the AAU schools but not current members are

(1 & 2 are grad schools, not eligible)

31 Yesheva (R2)
37 Dartmouth (R2)

40 UAB
43 Tufts
43 UMBC (R2)
48 Utah
52 UC Santa Cruz
55 RPI (R2)
57 Wake Forest (R2)
59 Miami (FL)
61 UIC
62 Cincy
64 Colorado State
67 Oregon State
68 GWU
69 New Mexico
72 Wayne State
72 UC Riverside

We were probably beyond the consideration line at 50. The Carnegie R2 schools are out too.

UAB is skewed by the med school, and I think everyone knows that, which is why they are never considered. Tufts is probably too narrow focused. Thus Utah, Santa Cruz, and longer shot Miami are probably the extent of the possibles at the moment.

NC State, VT, and OU are sitting at 91. There is no way in hell NC State was under consideration. What a laughable lie.

I get that you have some sort of problem and are not thorough enough to notice the data table supplied by the Nebraska FOI packet contains number from 2005-2007. That's information 6-3 years prior to the letter swap between Perlman and the AAU. Hopefully such hastiness has never impacted one of your grants. 03-shhhh
(This post was last modified: 08-17-2018 07:30 PM by Statefan.)
08-17-2018 07:29 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Statefan Offline
Banned

Posts: 3,511
Joined: May 2018
I Root For: .
Location:
Post: #23
RE: Oklahoma President Increasing Research To Improve AAU Metrics
(08-17-2018 07:21 PM)jrj84105 Wrote:  
(08-17-2018 06:29 PM)Statefan Wrote:  
(08-17-2018 03:15 PM)CliftonAve Wrote:  
(08-17-2018 02:59 PM)GoldenWarrior11 Wrote:  Out of curiosity, just anyone know what the waiting list looks like? Or what the pecking order might be?

Yes, it's easy to see the OU-to-B1G realignment connection there with the AAU reference, but - as JR said - this should, ideally, be the goal of every university president. Anything you can do to improve the academics, the perception and the performance of the school is gold for alumni and potential applicants.

A few years ago some of the schools bandied about were Dartmouth, Georgia and NC State. Cincinnati was also on the finalist list several years back but I doubt we would get in anytime soon.

NC State failed to get in by one vote back in 2011 (You must get 3/4th of the members or 47 votes. No public member and no votes have been held since 2012, when Boston was admitted. Since they keep the numbers relatively finite a school like Kansas, Oregon, etc., would likely need to be kicked out and then you likely get NC State, VT, and Cincy to a vote. Since Duke and UNC are already in and all three are in the same metro, it's a tough sled for NC State. The Big 10 only makes up 21% of the AAU, in fact no bloc can get you in (rough blocks are B10, PAC 12/California schools, Ivy League and NY/Mass schools with Carnige Mellon and Johns Hopkins, and a southern bloc of UNC, Duke, UVa, GT, Florida, Texas, Tulane, Vandy, TMAU and Mizzou.


Oklahoma would need 50 years of steady improvement to make the cut. AAU lite schools are research intensive, graduate research intensive - AAU lite would be NC State, VT, Cincy, UGa, UAB, and USF. My guess is that Kansas, then Mizzou are in the most "trouble". I also suspect that home state politics plays a role meaning that if UVa does not support VT, or UNC and Duke do not support NC State, that you have little to no chance.

I think Kansas and Missouri are good guesses. Buffalo, Stonybrook, Oregon, and Iowa State are others that I think are at least in the bottom 25%.

Buffalo and Stoney just got added so to speak. Everyone has been put on a rotating review, but they only look at 4-5 a year.
08-17-2018 07:32 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Stugray2 Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 7,175
Joined: Jan 2017
Reputation: 679
I Root For: tOSU SJSU Stan'
Location: South Bay Area CA
Post: #24
RE: Oklahoma President Increasing Research To Improve AAU Metrics
(08-17-2018 07:29 PM)Statefan Wrote:  I get that you have some sort of problem and are not thorough enough to notice the data table supplied by the Nebraska FOI packet contains number from 2005-2007. That's information 6-3 years prior to the letter swap between Perlman and the AAU. Hopefully such hastiness has never impacted one of your grants. 03-shhhh

Data doesn't change much on the academic side from decade to decade.

NC State is nowhere near close enough to be considered. I called you a liar. And asked you to provide a link. So far no link, so you are a liar still.
08-17-2018 07:33 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
JRsec Offline
Super Moderator
*

Posts: 37,888
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation: 7737
I Root For: SEC
Location:
Post: #25
RE: Oklahoma President Increasing Research To Improve AAU Metrics
(08-17-2018 07:33 PM)Stugray2 Wrote:  
(08-17-2018 07:29 PM)Statefan Wrote:  I get that you have some sort of problem and are not thorough enough to notice the data table supplied by the Nebraska FOI packet contains number from 2005-2007. That's information 6-3 years prior to the letter swap between Perlman and the AAU. Hopefully such hastiness has never impacted one of your grants. 03-shhhh

Data doesn't change much on the academic side from decade to decade.

NC State is nowhere near close enough to be considered. I called you a liar. And asked you to provide a link. So far no link, so you are a liar still.

I find that language a bit terse, but I also find the claims of being close to entrance to be mystifying given the nature of the procedures. When the metrics are met, and should there be an opening, only then does the AAU generate an application and that is handled by a computer. So if a school has not received an application it doesn't really matter where they are on any list of research ratings. If they did and were included on the ballot after a review then they can claim they were close.

So if you make it to a voting stage for membership then I think it's fair to say you almost got in. If not then I don't see how anyone could claim they were close.

So if N.C. State made it to a vote, where would that data be found? Are those who fail to receive enough votes simply not mentioned as a part of protocol? I guess you would have to ask a voting member who was there if you are to settle your dispute if they don't record for public viewing the votes. But keep it civil.
(This post was last modified: 08-17-2018 09:16 PM by JRsec.)
08-17-2018 09:07 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
DavidSt Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 23,011
Joined: Dec 2013
Reputation: 732
I Root For: ATU, P7
Location:
Post: #26
RE: Oklahoma President Increasing Research To Improve AAU Metrics
Unless you are a flagship school that got the politicians in their state removed the flagship from your school, and started pouring resources and money into another in state school. Idaho is slowly losing ground to Boise State in this expect.

Now, we are seeing AAU schools do not belong as AAU, but then you do see schools like UAB who have the metrics, but is also having a Jealous UAT board jealous of them growing bigger.

That is why I said we may have to start a new big boys club at the D1 level. I could see Colorado Mines, Wayne State Michigan and Missouri S&T move up from D2. What each state wants is to get as many of their public schools up at a higher level. Wayne State Michigan is up there to be the third Michigan school that are AAU level.
08-17-2018 09:18 PM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
CougarRed Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 11,448
Joined: Feb 2006
Reputation: 429
I Root For: Houston
Location:
Post: #27
RE: Oklahoma President Increasing Research To Improve AAU Metrics
(08-17-2018 03:52 PM)jrj84105 Wrote:  This is a leaked document from the AAU to Nebraska that shows who was in line.

https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/...eview.html


Oklahoma isn’t even in the first 30 out.

Great find. Fairly similar to the 2010 ARWU rankings, which listed 139 US universities (excluding all the medical schools from ARWU). For then non-AAU members, here's how the rankings match up. Big discrepancies in bold:

School = AAU rank / ARWU rank (adjusted for med schools)
Rockefeller = 1/26 (not eligible)
UCSF = 2/17 (not eligible)
Boston = 37/43
Arizona St = 87/45
Utah = 49/46
Ga Tech = 31/54-66
NC St = 91/54-66
Ore St = 67/54-66
Georgia = 110/54-66
Tufts = 43/54-66
UC Riverside = 72/54-66
UC Sant Cruz = 52/54-66
Hawaii = 79/54-66
UMass = 90/54-66
Miami = 59/54-66
Colo St = 64/67-82
Dartmouth = 37/67-82
Florida St = 94/67-82
UAB = 40/67-82
UConn = 81/67-82
Delaware = 83/67-82
Illinois-Chicago = 61/67-82
VCU = 78/67-82
Rensselaer = 55/83-102
GW = 68/83-102
New Mexico = 69/83-102
Cincy = 62/83-102

Houston = 104/83-102
Kentucky = 98/83-102
Notre Dame = 99/83-102
South Carolina = 103/83-102
USF = 87/83-102
Vermont = 79/83-102
Wash St = 112/83-102
Yeshiva = 31/83-102
Clemson = 123/103-125
Kansas St = 123/103-125
Georgetown= 83/103-125
Saint Louis = 110/103-125
Suny Albany = 85/103-125
Temple = 121/103-125
Alaska = 76/103-125
Nevada = 105/103-125
New Hampshire = 102/103-125
Oklahoma = 91/103-125
Rhode Island = 115/103-125
Wake Forest = 57/103-125
Wayne St = 72/103-125

Northeastern = 121/126-139
Wyoming = 117/126-139
Utah St = 105/126-139

Of course, some schools failed to make both lists. For example, Louisville made AAU and missed ARWU. Texas Tech made ARWU but missed AAU.
(This post was last modified: 08-18-2018 10:39 AM by CougarRed.)
08-18-2018 10:38 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
bullet Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 66,299
Joined: Apr 2012
Reputation: 3285
I Root For: Texas, UK, UGA
Location:
Post: #28
RE: Oklahoma President Increasing Research To Improve AAU Metrics
(08-17-2018 05:10 PM)jrj84105 Wrote:  Based on the Georgia Tech invite, I’m going to guess that when a non-AAU crosses the 50th percentile becoming better than an average AAU school, then changes will be made. There were only 3 FBS schools above the 25%. Otherwise there is a lot of history and inertia to overcome with few AAU schools down in Nebraska territory. Nebraska and 3 other AAU members (assuming one is Syracuse) were ranked far below the rest, and are probably the only schools at risk for being booted any time in the near future. Non-FBS schools are at the front of the line to move in as replacements, but the FBS schools were listed as follows:

UAB
Utah
Wake Forest
—-25th Percentile——
Miami
Cincinnati
Colorado State
Oregon State
New Mexico
Hawaii
UConn
—-AAU Member—-
ASU
USF
UMASS
VT
NC State
Oklahoma
——AAU Member——
FSU
Louisville
Kentucky
NM State
Notre Dame
Mississippi
South Carolina
Houston
——AAU——-
Utah State
Nevada
——Nebraska——

That next to last AAU member was probably Syracuse, who dropped out.
08-18-2018 08:56 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
jrj84105 Offline
All American
*

Posts: 2,689
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 252
I Root For: Utes
Location:
Post: #29
RE: Oklahoma President Increasing Research To Improve AAU Metrics
That was noted.
08-18-2018 10:46 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
USAFMEDIC Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 5,914
Joined: Jun 2010
Reputation: 189
I Root For: MIZZOU/FSU/USM
Location: Biloxi, MS
Post: #30
RE: Oklahoma President Increasing Research To Improve AAU Metrics
(08-17-2018 04:00 PM)JRsec Wrote:  
(08-17-2018 03:52 PM)jrj84105 Wrote:  This is a leaked document from the AAU to Nebraska that shows who was in line.

https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/...eview.html


Oklahoma isn’t even in the first 30 out.

It was interesting to see a page of potential schools ahead of Oklahoma who was 1/3 of a page ahead of Nebraska.
The Huskers kept their status just long enough to be accepted by the B1G. Of course the B1G knew they were losing AAU status, but money and national brands talk. In summation, the B1G sold out their high and mighty principles.05-stirthepot
08-19-2018 12:50 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Stugray2 Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 7,175
Joined: Jan 2017
Reputation: 679
I Root For: tOSU SJSU Stan'
Location: South Bay Area CA
Post: #31
RE: Oklahoma President Increasing Research To Improve AAU Metrics
All the data that is public keeps pointing at Utah. That they are also a flagship I think helps them if somebody gets added.

The number is not a hard 60 as it has fluctuated slightly up and down. But I think they want to keep somewhat exclusive among the 115 Carnegie R1 schools. More schools have moved into the R1 category (e.g., West Virginia, K State, Texas Tech, Ole Miss off the top of my head from the last go around, I think there is another FBS school the moved up, and I know UC Santa Criz moved up as well, while Mississippi State moved down to R2 as did Dartmouth). If the ratio is roughly the same, you would think 2 or 3 more schools could get promoted to AAU status. And possibly a 3rd in Canada to reflect the growth in that Nation, especially in the West Coast (University of British Columbia is ranked in almost all categories really close to McGill and Toronto).

We shall see. I like Utah as a choice, but supposedly U of Miami has really strong metrics in relationship to their size (this is factor when looking at schools like Arizona State, NC State, USF and Florida State where sheer size gives them big numbers in some categories, but as ratio to size it's not as impressive). So I am going to stick with Utah followed by Miami, with UBC in Canada as the most likely should the AAU expand.
08-19-2018 12:57 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
jrj84105 Offline
All American
*

Posts: 2,689
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 252
I Root For: Utes
Location:
Post: #32
RE: Oklahoma President Increasing Research To Improve AAU Metrics
Utah had a hard time getting into the PAC due to academics. Remember that every time people say the Texahoma 4 was a half hour from happening while dismissing Larry Scott’s claim that it was never that close.

IMO UCSD is closer today to getting voted into the PAC than Oklahoma State ever was.
08-19-2018 11:47 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
UTEPDallas Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 6,002
Joined: Oct 2004
Reputation: 330
I Root For: UTEP/Penn State
Location: Dallas, TX
Post: #33
RE: Oklahoma President Increasing Research To Improve AAU Metrics
(08-19-2018 11:47 AM)jrj84105 Wrote:  Utah had a hard time getting into the PAC due to academics. Remember that every time people say the Texahoma 4 was a half hour from happening while dismissing Larry Scott’s claim that it was never that close.

IMO UCSD is closer today to getting voted into the PAC than Oklahoma State ever was.

Well, Okie State and Texas Tech were part of the package to get the biggest prize of them all: Texas. Oklahoma is a big prize as well but like Texas, it’s not that easy to go by themselves. The only schools in the Big XII that meet the Pac-12 criteria are Texas, Oklahoma, Kansas and perhaps Iowa State. The rest are just package deals with their big brothers. The non Big XII school that more or less meets the criteria is Rice but even then, it would have to be in a package deal with Texas and still, the Owls have lots of obstacles to overcome to be in a package deal.

As for the AAU, I always thought Utah and UAB were on top of the list. Looks like I wasn’t wrong.
(This post was last modified: 08-19-2018 01:36 PM by UTEPDallas.)
08-19-2018 01:36 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
billybobby777 Offline
The REAL BillyBobby
*

Posts: 11,898
Joined: May 2013
Reputation: 502
I Root For: ECU, Army
Location: Houston dont sleepon
Post: #34
RE: Oklahoma President Increasing Research To Improve AAU Metrics
(08-18-2018 10:38 AM)CougarRed Wrote:  
(08-17-2018 03:52 PM)jrj84105 Wrote:  This is a leaked document from the AAU to Nebraska that shows who was in line.

https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/...eview.html


Oklahoma isn’t even in the first 30 out.

Great find. Fairly similar to the 2010 ARWU rankings, which listed 139 US universities (excluding all the medical schools from ARWU). For then non-AAU members, here's how the rankings match up. Big discrepancies in bold:

School = AAU rank / ARWU rank (adjusted for med schools)
Rockefeller = 1/26 (not eligible)
UCSF = 2/17 (not eligible)
Boston = 37/43
Arizona St = 87/45
Utah = 49/46
Ga Tech = 31/54-66
NC St = 91/54-66
Ore St = 67/54-66
Georgia = 110/54-66
Tufts = 43/54-66
UC Riverside = 72/54-66
UC Sant Cruz = 52/54-66
Hawaii = 79/54-66
UMass = 90/54-66
Miami = 59/54-66
Colo St = 64/67-82
Dartmouth = 37/67-82
Florida St = 94/67-82
UAB = 40/67-82
UConn = 81/67-82
Delaware = 83/67-82
Illinois-Chicago = 61/67-82
VCU = 78/67-82
Rensselaer = 55/83-102
GW = 68/83-102
New Mexico = 69/83-102
Cincy = 62/83-102

Houston = 104/83-102
Kentucky = 98/83-102
Notre Dame = 99/83-102
South Carolina = 103/83-102
USF = 87/83-102
Vermont = 79/83-102
Wash St = 112/83-102
Yeshiva = 31/83-102
Clemson = 123/103-125
Kansas St = 123/103-125
Georgetown= 83/103-125
Saint Louis = 110/103-125
Suny Albany = 85/103-125
Temple = 121/103-125
Alaska = 76/103-125
Nevada = 105/103-125
New Hampshire = 102/103-125
Oklahoma = 91/103-125
Rhode Island = 115/103-125
Wake Forest = 57/103-125
Wayne St = 72/103-125

Northeastern = 121/126-139
Wyoming = 117/126-139
Utah St = 105/126-139

Of course, some schools failed to make both lists. For example, Louisville made AAU and missed ARWU. Texas Tech made ARWU but missed AAU.

I about spit out my drink. Did that say Louisville and AAU in the same sentence?
08-19-2018 01:59 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
jrj84105 Offline
All American
*

Posts: 2,689
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 252
I Root For: Utes
Location:
Post: #35
RE: Oklahoma President Increasing Research To Improve AAU Metrics
(08-19-2018 01:36 PM)UTEPDallas Wrote:  Well, Okie State and Texas Tech were part of the package to get the biggest prize of them all: Texas. Oklahoma is a big prize as well but like Texas, it’s not that easy to go by themselves. The only schools in the Big XII that meet the Pac-12 criteria are Texas, Oklahoma, Kansas and perhaps Iowa State. The rest are just package deals with their big brothers. The non Big XII school that more or less meets the criteria is Rice but even then, it would have to be in a package deal with Texas and still, the Owls have lots of obstacles to overcome to be in a package deal.

As for the AAU, I always thought Utah and UAB were on top of the list. Looks like I wasn’t wrong.

There are a few important lines from Chip Brown’s post mortem. Everything Chip says of course paints UT in a positive lining (see Wilner’s Post for viewing things in the opposite light):
Brown: https://texas.rivals.com/news/how-the-bi...ck-to-life
Wilner: http://blogs.mercurynews.com/collegespor...cy-theory/

[Image: E9764532-8348-4988-BF22-DCD7BEC6D32A_zpstjbzpg0f.jpeg]
OKSU was working off the assurances of Dodds who was the point man for PAC negotiations, not based on assurances directly from the PAC.

[Image: 457C406A-9102-4918-8849-A0089AC5A825_zpshkgdr94b.jpeg]

At the last minute... sure. Did the PAC presidents mislead Scott, or did Scott promise Dodds more than what he could deliver, or did Dodds overpromise OKSU. Somebody was a little disingenuous in their conversations. But as anyone can surmise based upon the PAC presidents’ priorities, the purely market-based economics of realignments at the time, and OU’s position in the academic pecking order, OU simply did not have long enough coattails for OKSU to ride into the PAC on.
(This post was last modified: 08-19-2018 02:23 PM by jrj84105.)
08-19-2018 02:18 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
jrj84105 Offline
All American
*

Posts: 2,689
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 252
I Root For: Utes
Location:
Post: #36
RE: Oklahoma President Increasing Research To Improve AAU Metrics
The school with long coat tails (in addition to UT) was A&M.

A&M, not OU, had the demographic and academic cache required to make the OKSU pill easier to swallow.

UT was in on its own merits and carried TTU.

A&M was in on its own merits and could have carried OKSU.

OU was in on its own, but couldn’t carry a parter as evidenced by the PAC’s rejection of the OU/OSU pairing.

Kansas and Utah were likewise in on their own merit.

Once A&M was out, which was expected all along, so was OKSU.
08-19-2018 02:34 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
UTEPDallas Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 6,002
Joined: Oct 2004
Reputation: 330
I Root For: UTEP/Penn State
Location: Dallas, TX
Post: #37
RE: Oklahoma President Increasing Research To Improve AAU Metrics
(08-19-2018 02:34 PM)jrj84105 Wrote:  The school with long coat tails (in addition to UT) was A&M.

A&M, not OU, had the demographic and academic cache required to make the OKSU pill easier to swallow.

UT was in on its own merits and carried TTU.

A&M was in on its own merits and could have carried OKSU.

OU was in on its own, but couldn’t carry a parter as evidenced by the PAC’s rejection of the OU/OSU pairing.

Kansas and Utah were likewise in on their own merit.

Once A&M was out, which was expected all along, so was OKSU.

From what I remember back then and based on what was reported here in Big XII country in May/June 2010 is that the Big XII South minus Baylor was going to the Pac-10 and it’s the reason why Colorado got invited first. They didn’t want Baylor to tag along under any circumstances like they did when the Big Eight expanded to 12 in the mid 90s. Baylor started making inquiries to the MWC and Kansas to the Big East. I remember reading Kenneth Starr’s full page letter in The Dallas Morning News to Baylor grads and fans about upcoming challenges for Baylor athletics. It’s when Texas A&M told Scott no when things started getting complicated. He had the green light to go to Lawrence, Kansas to issue an invite to KU but everything fell apart when Texas decided to stay in the Big XII. Utah was in the conversation as well and was a back up plan and at the end it worked on Utah’s favor.

Let’s not forget A&M and Missouri decided to stay in the Big XII in 2010 which had only lost Colorado and Nebraska at that point. It was a year later when A&M and Missouri decided to leave for the SEC (Baylor sued A&M for leaving) and the ACC raided the Big East which in turn put another realignment domino from the Big Ten to the Sun Belt. It was during that time when Oklahoma and Oklahoma State asked the newly formed Pac-12 for admission and they were bluntly told “call us when you get Texas on board”. This is the argument I’ve had with Texas Tech fans all these years. They keep saying “Larry Scott flew to Lubbock to issue an invitation and that invitation is still in effect if we want to go by ourselves”. I keep telling them “sure, that was contingent on Texas going West” but they keep believing they don’t need Texas if they want to go to the Pac-12. When I point out football blue blood Oklahoma being rejected in 2011, they just say because they’re not in Texas and Tech is.
08-19-2018 03:10 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
jrj84105 Offline
All American
*

Posts: 2,689
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 252
I Root For: Utes
Location:
Post: #38
RE: Oklahoma President Increasing Research To Improve AAU Metrics
That was the speculation of a bunch of anonymous twitter “dudes” reading tea leaves. Univerisity presidents, ADs, and others have gone on the record since. Their accounts negate much of what the twitterverse said about the PAC16 including everything the “dudes” said about Baylor.

The timing of Colorado’s early invite was attributable to the PAC’s commitment to expand (either to 12 or 16). There was no permutation that didn’t include Colorado, so they got the invite first.

The Texocentric notion that Baylor would have an even minuscule chance of forcing a PAC invite doesn’t fly when one considers that a Calicentric version of reality recognizes UT as the fifth best school in the UC system and Baylor’s entire research apparatus as being of similar scale to Cal’s center for gender studies in 17th century romantic poetry. UT may be the big prize in college football, but their politics simply don’t hold much weight with the PAC core.
08-19-2018 05:08 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Stugray2 Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 7,175
Joined: Jan 2017
Reputation: 679
I Root For: tOSU SJSU Stan'
Location: South Bay Area CA
Post: #39
RE: Oklahoma President Increasing Research To Improve AAU Metrics
(08-19-2018 02:34 PM)jrj84105 Wrote:  The school with long coat tails (in addition to UT) was A&M.

A&M, not OU, had the demographic and academic cache required to make the OKSU pill easier to swallow.

UT was in on its own merits and carried TTU.

A&M was in on its own merits and could have carried OKSU.

OU was in on its own, but couldn’t carry a parter as evidenced by the PAC’s rejection of the OU/OSU pairing.

Kansas and Utah were likewise in on their own merit.

Once A&M was out, which was expected all along, so was OKSU.

This is pretty accurate. Utah was the fall back. Getting CU to keep Baylor out was not really in their thinking, just that they always wanted CU and never wanted a religious school like Baylor or BYU.

Tech and OK State are tough sells to the P12 Chancellors and Presidents, who just do not see them as peer institutions. Scott and his reps were probably trying to pull together the best group they could. I think OK State being R2 is why the P12 tried to swap them out for KU, that was just one too many academic side weaknesses for them to accept. Scott probably got the B12 South minus Baylor half in the bag via his intermediates and pushed the concept back to the expansion committee Chancellors and they probably said, Tech we can live with for Texas, but not OK State for anyone. I do not think the P12 considered A&M's really strong preference in-house for the SEC, although I think Texas folks were well aware. Thus I conclude A&M had no connection with OK State swap suggestion -- it came before the P12 had any inkling A&M would likely say no. And I don't think OK State was the reason Texas got cold feet. I think it was A&M that gave them the cold feet. They also probably reasoned without OK State that OU might bail too, and there would go the two biggest rivalry games for Texas.

Don't think for a minute that Missouri or A&M were not already talking to the SEC. The reports out of the Oklahoma, Nebraska and other factions talking with the B1G were running under the assumption that Missouri was going to jump to the SEC. That it took another year to happen officially doesn't mean the SEC wasn't active. They were just in stealth mode and more deliberate. While Missouri surprised me, I do remember a few folks were saying A&M and the SEC was possible long before it got public. The informal indirect talks may have started while Texas and the B1G were in a courtship dance. No question word filtered to Austin that Aggies were not idle, and the North division folks were aware of Missouri's interest. Larry Scott and the P12 however were possibly unaware, and clearly didn't know all the intricacies of B12 gossip and politics.
(This post was last modified: 08-19-2018 05:38 PM by Stugray2.)
08-19-2018 05:28 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
The Cutter of Bish Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 7,281
Joined: Mar 2013
Reputation: 217
I Root For: the little guy
Location:
Post: #40
RE: Oklahoma President Increasing Research To Improve AAU Metrics
(08-17-2018 03:09 PM)Wedge Wrote:  
(08-17-2018 02:12 PM)The Cutter of Bish Wrote:  And we can't look at this as straight research dollar intake.

That's not because of politics, it's because the research community ranks the amount of highly-regarded research ahead of just throwing whatever amount of money into one bucket and labeling that bucket "research".

Caltech and Princeton, for example, are relatively small institutions. Princeton has about 900 full-time faculty. Caltech has about 300. They're ranked highly by research peers -- they're both top 10 worldwide in the ARWU ranking, for example -- because of the amount of top-notch research produced per capita. AAU reflects similar priorities. I'm pretty sure that of all the US universities ranked in ARWU's worldwide top 100, the only ones not in AAU are those not eligible because their institution doesn't offer undergraduate degrees (e.g., UC San Francisco and UT's Southwestern Medical Center in Dallas).

I think the qualification of research type is a bit political but I don’t disagree with you. Where I’m coming from is how you have these other schools considerably ahead of current AAU members per their own rankings (that they used to flush out UNL), but aren’t in the club. It’s not as cut and dry as “top sixty schools are in” with a revolving door...there’s something else to it. And not the ARWU. Reviewing what the AAU demanded of Nebraska...enrollment data (what kids can get in here) for all levels, and what is your faculty up to? Is the assumption selectivity defines quality?

I don’t take the stuff on boards totally seriously, but UNL getting booted from the AAU seemed to produce some interesting takes from “within.” It didn’t help that there wasn’t a common chancellory between it and other parts of UN, but, it wasn’t a secret faculty were running out of there and were miserable, either. Kind of the same with Syracuse. The AAU knew where to hit UNL. When producing faculty walk, your reputation isn’t far behind. It’s not like Rice and Brandeis are pulling in tons of money and rank so far ahead of other schools; they at least retain and attract top faculty, and they are highly selective. That goes a long way, even without direct correlation between such things. Plus, specific to Rice, one of those targeted by UNL, they have been trying to get into medical research through that odd relationship/share they have with Baylor Medical. So, even if Rice doesn’t post huge numbers, they still look and feel like a school rooted in research. But the numbers still don’t fully add up. Especially for Brandeis.
(This post was last modified: 08-20-2018 05:15 AM by The Cutter of Bish.)
08-19-2018 08:36 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)


Copyright © 2002-2024 Collegiate Sports Nation Bulletin Board System (CSNbbs), All Rights Reserved.
CSNbbs is an independent fan site and is in no way affiliated to the NCAA or any of the schools and conferences it represents.
This site monetizes links. FTC Disclosure.
We allow third-party companies to serve ads and/or collect certain anonymous information when you visit our web site. These companies may use non-personally identifiable information (e.g., click stream information, browser type, time and date, subject of advertisements clicked or scrolled over) during your visits to this and other Web sites in order to provide advertisements about goods and services likely to be of greater interest to you. These companies typically use a cookie or third party web beacon to collect this information. To learn more about this behavioral advertising practice or to opt-out of this type of advertising, you can visit http://www.networkadvertising.org.
Powered By MyBB, © 2002-2024 MyBB Group.