So Maryland's trying to join the Big 10 in 2014...

[No1]

He mad the ACC is better academically than the Big 10.


Why @BarNone !!!!

It's not. The fact that you used the USNWR as your proxy says a lot. The ACC is not historically better than the Big 10 academically. Adding Georgia Tech, Miami and Boston College is why it's comparable. I just didn't want to argue the point with @mastermind.

The original Big 10 vs. the original 8 members of the ACC goes to the Big 10. (You had South Carolina and NC St. )

Have you ever looked at USNWR methodology? Do you know why Stanford's president stated that critique of it in 1996? It is skewed to smaller class sizes and arbitrarily weighs student to teacher ratio and "expenditures per student", and "percentages of classes with fewer than 20 students" very high which larger universities will never be able to get to a comparable level to Boston College, Duke, Wake Forest, etc. Even the ACC's public universities have fewer students on average than the Big 10.

So, no, I'm not mad. I criticized this system back on SOHH in 08/09 and it's not taken seriously by anyone who knows much about education and people who go to those "elite" schools. I just thought that using 60 as a proxy was an arbitrary number

BTW, prior to adding Nebraska the average ranking according to USNWR for the Big 10 was 50 vs. 49 for the ACC and that's with a system skewed against it (big 10 is primarily larger schools, that are all public outside of Northwestern). So like I said, debatable. Particularly given the fact that old Big 10 member the University of Chicago is still part of the Big 10's education consortium.

 

[superunknown23]

Ridiculous

 

[Rekkapryde]

It's not. The fact that you used the USNWR as your proxy says a lot. The ACC is not historically better than the Big 10 academically. Adding Georgia Tech, Miami and Boston College is why it's comparable. I just didn't want to argue the point with @mastermind.

The original Big 10 vs. the original 8 members of the ACC goes to the Big 10. (You had South Carolina and NC St. )

Have you ever looked at USNWR methodology? Do you know why Stanford's president stated that critique of it in 1996? It is skewed to smaller class sizes and arbitrarily weighs student to teacher ratio and "expenditures per student", and "percentages of classes with fewer than 20 students" very high which larger universities will never be able to get to a comparable level to Boston College, Duke, Wake Forest, etc. Even the ACC's public universities have fewer students on average than the Big 10.

So, no, I'm not mad. I criticized this system back on SOHH in 08/09 and it's not taken seriously by anyone who knows much about education and people who go to those "elite" schools. I just thought that using 60 as a proxy was an arbitrary number

BTW, prior to adding Nebraska the average ranking according to USNWR for the Big 10 was 50 vs. 49 for the ACC and that's with a system skewed against it (big 10 is primarily larger schools, that are all public outside of Northwestern). So like I said, debatable. Particularly given the fact that old Big 10 member the University of Chicago is still part of the Big 10's education consortium.

nikka, no you did not just go back in time and Cuban B shyt. Adding in U of C too?

You got exposed trying to lump the ACC in the same class academically as other conferences and we're CLEARLY not and are better CURRENTLY than the Big 10. So yep...
















































@ this nikka talking about the ORIGINAL Big 10 members...



We talking about NOW.

 

[mastermind]

nikka, no you did not just go back in time and Cuban B shyt. Adding in U of C too?

You got exposed trying to lump the ACC in the same class academically as other conferences and we're CLEARLY not and are better CURRENTLY than the Big 10. So yep










































@ this nikka talking about the ORIGINAL Big 10 members...



We talking about NOW.

He is also pretending that some of the ACC's best universities aren't also Land Grant colleges (Maryland, UNC, UVa).

 

[FakeNews]

Currently reading on twitter that Georgia Tech may be interested in moving to the B1G 10

Jeff Ermann ‏@insidemdsports
#Rutgers is getting the most play (along with Maryland) but multiple sources maintain #GeorgiaTech is also vying for a Big 10 spot.

 

[FakeNews]

Stewart Mandel ‏@slmandel
RT @alex_prewitt: A majority is needed among the 16 Board of Regents during tomorrow morning's vote to accept Maryland's move to the Big 10.

Tech and UMD to the B1G 10

Clemson and FSU to the Big XII imo

 

[Ed MOTHERFUCKING G]

I do NOT WANT A SOUTHERN HILLBILLY SCHOOL IN THE BIG TEN

I know its ATL BUT shyt



Sent from Seattle, by way of Ann Arbor on Tapatalk: The Remix

 

[No1]

nikka, no you did not just go back in time and Cuban B shyt. Adding in U of C too?

You got exposed trying to lump the ACC in the same class academically as other conferences and we're CLEARLY not and are better CURRENTLY than the Big 10. So yep...















@ this nikka talking about the ORIGINAL Big 10 members...



We talking about NOW.

He is also pretending that some of the ACC's best universities aren't also Land Grant colleges (Maryland, UNC, UVa).

Listen, you guys have conference pride, but that doesn't excuse your ignorance and BLATANT disregard of what I actually said. @mastermind is over here talking about land grant universities when I straight up said the size of the universities in the Big 10 are larger. It doesn't matter about the category. Stop it, you and I both know you're wrong right now. Go take it up with the president of Stanford and other universities that inspired my critique. This is actually a mathematical fact. I don't even know what that point means except your attempt to defend your conference.

Rekka, I'm sorry but you're acting life a fool right now. I broke down the entire timeline. Historically and PRESENTLY the Big 10 is superior on average. Not by much, but it is. Most of my statement was about the present. U of C got one sentence, and that because it is part of the CIC which is exclusive to Big 10 universities, but go ahead because you obviously know nothing about that. We were talking academics weren't we?

The Committee on Institutional Cooperation (CIC) is the academic consortium of the universities in the Big Ten Conference plus former conference member, the University of Chicago.[1]

Through collaboration, the CIC increases the competitive advantage of its member institutions.

I would expect this out of other posters, but not the two of you. This is just blatant homerism.

UVA would be the second smallest university in the Big 10 after Northwestern, I can't believe you said that. UNC and UMD have less people than every Big 10 university but IOWA, Michigan and Northwestern.

The ACC has better universities at the top on average (Michigan and Northwestern are the only true "elite"), but it has weaknesses that the Big 10 doesn't have (or didn't pre-Nebraska). I don't have any vested interest in this. When you apply for jobs they don't look at what conference your undergrad degree was from.

 

[nomoreneveragain]

So St. Johns and G'Town are going to join the ACC as well

 

[Rekkapryde]

Listen, you guys have conference pride, but that doesn't excuse your ignorance and BLATANT disregard of what I actually said. @mastermind is over here talking about land grant universities when I straight up said the size of the universities in the Big 10 are larger. It doesn't matter about the category. Stop it, you and I both know you're wrong right now. Go take it up with the president of Stanford and other universities that inspired my critique. This is actually a mathematical fact. I don't even know what that point means except your attempt to defend your conference.

Rekka, I'm sorry but you're acting life a fool right now. I broke down the entire timeline. Historically and PRESENTLY the Big 10 is superior on average. Not by much, but it is. Most of my statement was about the present. U of C got one sentence, and that because it is part of the CIC which is exclusive to Big 10 universities, but go ahead because you obviously know nothing about that. We were talking academics weren't we?



I would expect this out of other posters, but not the two of you. This is just blatant homerism.

UVA would be the second smallest university in the Big 10 after Northwestern, I can't believe you said that. UNC and UMD have less people than every Big 10 university but IOWA, Michigan and Northwestern.

The ACC has better universities at the top on average (Michigan and Northwestern are the only true "elite"), but it has weaknesses that the Big 10 doesn't have (or didn't pre-Nebraska). I don't have any vested interest in this. When you apply for jobs they don't look at what conference your undergrad degree was from.

DUDE YOU STARTED TALKING ABOUT "FOUNDING" MEMBERS OF THE BIG 10 IN OUR ARGUMENT DISCUSSING CURRENT SCHOOLS MAN!!!! WHAT KIND OF shyt IS THAT. YOU TRIED TO TALK SLICK LIKE THE ACC WAS GARBAGE ACADEMICALLY AND WE REFUTED THAT shyt.



And as far as not looking at conference affiliation when applying for jobs, trust me, I know firsthand being a grad of Georgia Tech. It's one of the reasons I went there is due to the respect it has nationwide being a top 5 engineering school in this country.

You tried to pop shyt and had to get checked.

 

[KingpinOG]

I do NOT WANT A SOUTHERN HILLBILLY SCHOOL IN THE BIG TEN

I know its ATL BUT shyt



Sent from Seattle, by way of Ann Arbor on Tapatalk: The Remix

I would rather have Georgia Tech in the Big Ten than Rutgers. We need to get a footprint in the south for recruiting. Plus GT has great academics.

 

[Rekkapryde]

I do NOT WANT A SOUTHERN HILLBILLY SCHOOL IN THE BIG TEN

I know its ATL BUT shyt



Sent from Seattle, by way of Ann Arbor on Tapatalk: The Remix

Gizzle, you my nikka, but :lookherebruh: don't lump GT in with hillbilly again. We are FAR from it and would actually BOOST the Big 10s cred even more academically. Our B-Ball team is on the way back, our football team is more respectable than the at least half of the conference, our womens bball team is bossin.

I got respect for Michigan (even applied there, but didn't feel like writing an additional essay )

 

[Rekkapryde]

I would rather have Georgia Tech in the Big Ten than Rutgers. We need to get a footprint in the south for recruiting. Plus GT has great academics.

 

[KingpinOG]

Gizzle, you my nikka, but :lookherebruh: don't lump GT in with hillbilly again. We are FAR from it and would actually BOOST the Big 10s cred even more academically. Our B-Ball team is on the way back, our football team is more respectable than the at least half of the conference, our womens bball team is bossin.

I got respect for Michigan (even applied there, but didn't feel like writing an additional essay )

Would Georgia Tech alumni and fans want in the Big Ten?

 

[Rekkapryde]

Would Georgia Tech alumni and fans want in the Big Ten?

Depends, most of the fanbase first preference would be to go back home to the SEC being that we were a founding member, but other than them (which aint gonna happen), the Big 10 is EVERYONE's preferred choice if we did have to leave the ACC. It has academic cred (which is VERY important to the school) and has a GREAT revenue stream.

I can understand why Maryland did it, and trust me, EVERYONE in the conference HATES the Carolina mafia in regards to the ACC. They pander entirely too much to the Carolina schools.

I know the Big 10 wants a footprint in the south, and what better place to make that impact than Atlanta.

I'd love to play Indiana, OSU, Michigan, Mich State in basketball. Iowa, Nebraska, Michigan and MSU, OSU and even Penn State in football.

I know we'll probably still keep our games with Clemson and Georgia, but if Maryland does indeed bounce and we replace Maryland with wack ass UConn, I'm for it.