All of these candidates would raise their own performance as a result with P5 money, attendance and athletic programs, including BB for Men and Women. Big XII would be the big loser.
A man can dream!

Moderators: PonyPride, SmooPower
So both USC and Northeastern have desirable locations and attract wealthy students from other countries. How are they so different? Perhaps USC got a head start, but USC wasn't so desirable not so long ago ("University of Spoiled Children" -- your reference). A school has to start somewhere; hasn't USC been accused of gaming the U.S. News algorithm in the past?orguy wrote:What does "conservative" have to do with anything? It is not USC's business school that has put them near the top of the rankings. Try research oriented disciplines like Engineering, Science, and Medicine. Throw in a location that attracts top notch wealthy students from all over the world and you have a recipe for success. Not to mention a historically good football program. No longer the "University of Spoiled Children".
Regarding Boston; Northeastern really should be removed from that list. A school that was mired in overpriced mediocrity for years and simply targeted the US News algorithm as a way to improve its stature. Still a quite sniff able school in the Boston area. Taking wealthy European students with high SAT's does not make an elite University (though it seems US News disagrees).
The counselors' one-year response rate was 9 percent for the spring 2016 surveys, up slightly from 7 percent in spring 2015.
I can assure you, no one views Northeastern alums as being the brightest. They are like UNT in Boston. And nobody views them as a rich school either--you have Harvard, MIT, Boston College, Tufts, Boston University, Brandeis, Wellesley and you think Northeastern is viewed as the rich school?Pony^ wrote:So both USC and Northeastern have desirable locations and attract wealthy students from other countries. How are they so different? Perhaps USC got a head start, but USC wasn't so desirable not so long ago ("University of Spoiled Children" -- your reference). A school has to start somewhere; hasn't USC been accused of gaming the U.S. News algorithm in the past?orguy wrote:What does "conservative" have to do with anything? It is not USC's business school that has put them near the top of the rankings. Try research oriented disciplines like Engineering, Science, and Medicine. Throw in a location that attracts top notch wealthy students from all over the world and you have a recipe for success. Not to mention a historically good football program. No longer the "University of Spoiled Children".
Regarding Boston; Northeastern really should be removed from that list. A school that was mired in overpriced mediocrity for years and simply targeted the US News algorithm as a way to improve its stature. Still a quite sniff able school in the Boston area. Taking wealthy European students with high SAT's does not make an elite University (though it seems US News disagrees).
I don't know anything about Northeastern other than they have done well in the rankings. I was just pointing out that orguy indicated rich foreigner's were attracted to both USC and Northeastern. I have a much higher opinion of USC than Northeastern, but USC also made a big move in the rankings a number of years ago. Not trying to say that Northeastern is better or wealthier than the more established schools in the Boston area.deucetz wrote:I can assure you, no one views Northeastern alums as being the brightest. They are like UNT in Boston. And nobody views them as a rich school either--you have Harvard, MIT, Boston College, Tufts, Boston University, Brandeis, Wellesley and you think Northeastern is viewed as the rich school?
Agreed. Look at what the cowtown college has been able to achieve soley because of football.East Coast Mustang wrote:No reason SMU shouldn't be well positioned to shoot up the rankings in the coming years with all of the economic and population growth in the DFW area. Having our football and basketball teams nationally relevant would certainly help.
Who cares what a high school counselor thinks. Most of them probably have education degrees and went to a UTD or TAMU commerce type school to begin with. As a group high school counselors are often jealous of the privates and/or state flagships simply because they did not have the opportunity to go to one themselves.Pony^ wrote:Regarding the US News Counselor Survey --
One has to wonder if the metric is worthwhile after reviewing the results, and taking the counselors' very low participation rate into account. Does anyone really think Texas A&M Corpus Christi is on par with UT Dallas and significantly above Texas Tech and UH?
The counselors' one-year response rate was 9 percent for the spring 2016 surveys, up slightly from 7 percent in spring 2015.
http://www.usnews.com/education/best-co ... e-rankings
deucetz wrote:I can assure you, no one views Northeastern alums as being the brightest. They are like UNT in Boston. And nobody views them as a rich school either--you have Harvard, MIT, Boston College, Tufts, Boston University, Brandeis, Wellesley and you think Northeastern is viewed as the rich school?Pony^ wrote:So both USC and Northeastern have desirable locations and attract wealthy students from other countries. How are they so different? Perhaps USC got a head start, but USC wasn't so desirable not so long ago ("University of Spoiled Children" -- your reference). A school has to start somewhere; hasn't USC been accused of gaming the U.S. News algorithm in the past?orguy wrote:What does "conservative" have to do with anything? It is not USC's business school that has put them near the top of the rankings. Try research oriented disciplines like Engineering, Science, and Medicine. Throw in a location that attracts top notch wealthy students from all over the world and you have a recipe for success. Not to mention a historically good football program. No longer the "University of Spoiled Children".
Regarding Boston; Northeastern really should be removed from that list. A school that was mired in overpriced mediocrity for years and simply targeted the US News algorithm as a way to improve its stature. Still a quite sniff able school in the Boston area. Taking wealthy European students with high SAT's does not make an elite University (though it seems US News disagrees).
Education Degree equals Basket weaving. Reaching out to these folks is difficult. Most were C students in High School who decided to major in Education simply because they could magically overnight become "A" students. The education major is a joke. So sorry SMU brought that degree back.gostangs wrote:Speaking in generalities, most high school counselors are former teachers that didn't like teaching, and in the Texas area they mostly went to A&M or some such average big state school. They value different things then are offered by top academic schools, and tend to steer kids where they think they can get in.
This is an area we need to figure out - because it is hurting our ranking pretty dramatically.