Started By
Message

College Football Top 25, Ranked by Academics (Time Magazine)

Posted on 12/19/14 at 1:54 pm
Posted by skrayper
21-0 Asterisk Drive
Member since Nov 2012
30812 posts
Posted on 12/19/14 at 1:54 pm
Article:
LINK /#

Rankings (Academically - only applied towards teams in the Top 25 of the playoff poll):
#1 TCU
#2 UCLA
#3 Alabama
#4 Clemson
#5 Arizona St
#6 Ohio St
#7 Georgia
#8 Utah
#9 Arizona
#10 KSU
#11 Auburn
#12 Louisville
#13 Mississippi State
#14 Oregon
#15 Mizzou
#16 Baylor
#17 Georgia Tech
#18 LSU
#19 Michigan State
#20 Wisconsin
#21 Minnesota
#22 Florida State
#23 Boise St
#24 Ole Miss
#25 USC

Methodology used:

quote:

To compile the rankings, New America started with each school’s football graduation success rate (GSR). The GSR is an NCAA metric that, unlike the federal graduation rate, doesn’t penalize schools for having players who transfer or leave for the pros–as long as those players depart in good academic standing. The higher the school’s graduation success rate, the higher they start out in New America’s rankings.

But New America penalized schools for graduating football players at different rates than the overall male student body at the school. To compare players to students, New America relied on federal rates, since there’s no GSR for the general population. The bigger the discrepancy, the harsher the penalty. It’s important to note that even if a school graduated football players at higher rates than the overall male student population — four schools in the top 25, TCU, Arizona State, Arizona, and Boise State, did so — the difference was counted as a penalty. Why? “We were not going to reward schools with really low overall graduation rates,” says Holt. In fact, schools got an added bonus for having high overall rates.

TCU, for example, has a 77% federal graduation rate for football players, and a 73% federal graduation rate for all male students. This four point difference is relatively minor. But Boise St. has a 70% football graduation rate, and a 31% graduation rate for all the male students. The low overall rate hurts the school tremendously in these rankings: despite a strong 85% graduation success rate for football players, Boise State fell to 24th in these rankings.
Posted by WG_Dawg
Hoover
Member since Jun 2004
86428 posts
Posted on 12/19/14 at 1:55 pm to
quote:

#3 Alabama


quote:

#17 Georgia Tech


Posted by GIbson05
Member since Feb 2009
4292 posts
Posted on 12/19/14 at 1:57 pm to
quote:

#3 Alabama

Kicking arse on the field and in the classroom.
Posted by skrayper
21-0 Asterisk Drive
Member since Nov 2012
30812 posts
Posted on 12/19/14 at 2:00 pm to
quote:

WG_Dawg


Actually, Alabama does a much better job of graduating their players than Tech does. Bama has a GSR of 80, while Tech is much lower at 66.

LINK
Posted by WG_Dawg
Hoover
Member since Jun 2004
86428 posts
Posted on 12/19/14 at 2:01 pm to
Cool, that has nothing to do with which one has better academics.

And yes, I'm fully aware that the article you linked in the OP takes in different metrics like graduation rates and whatnot. That has nothing to do with which school is better.
Posted by Phat Phil
Krispy Kreme
Member since May 2010
7371 posts
Posted on 12/19/14 at 2:01 pm to
quote:

#3 Alabama

Posted by craigbiggio
Member since Dec 2009
31805 posts
Posted on 12/19/14 at 2:01 pm to
Can't take TCU seriously knowing goldennugget went there
Posted by JackVincennes
NOLA
Member since Jan 2014
3892 posts
Posted on 12/19/14 at 2:03 pm to
Alabama #3
Clemson #4
Holy shite!!!


The same guys did prep football in Louisiana:
John Curtis #2
Jesuit#16
Newman #24

Posted by GFunk
Denham Springs
Member since Feb 2011
14966 posts
Posted on 12/19/14 at 2:03 pm to
From the publication that brought you Vladimir Putin as its "Man of the Year".
Posted by skrayper
21-0 Asterisk Drive
Member since Nov 2012
30812 posts
Posted on 12/19/14 at 2:04 pm to
quote:

Cool, that has nothing to do with which one has better academics.

And yes, I'm fully aware that the article you linked in the OP takes in different metrics like graduation rates and whatnot. That has nothing to do with which school is better.


It has at least some impact in regards to the academics of the actual players. Not the institution as a whole, but the football program and its relation to it. What's better, a degree from Alabama or no degree from Tech?

But no, I would never make the argument that Tech is below Alabama academically as an entire institution. That would be absurd. Tech is one of the top institutions in the country.
Posted by Korin
Member since Jan 2014
37935 posts
Posted on 12/19/14 at 2:07 pm to
How is GT #17 when they're a top 10 public in the USNWR and an AAU member?
Posted by skrayper
21-0 Asterisk Drive
Member since Nov 2012
30812 posts
Posted on 12/19/14 at 2:10 pm to
quote:

How is GT #17 when they're a top 10 public in the USNWR and an AAU member?


Because they don't care about their football players.
Posted by LegendOfCobb
Athens of the West
Member since Jun 2014
2363 posts
Posted on 12/19/14 at 2:11 pm to
Wouldn't the shittier school graduate their players at a higher rate? Sticking with our existing comparison, it's a hell of a lot easier to graduate from Bama than it is from GT.
Posted by Old Hellen Yeller
New Orleans
Member since Jan 2014
9414 posts
Posted on 12/19/14 at 2:11 pm to
Because their football players aren't graduating. That obviously has a lot to do with the high standards at GT, but no degree is no degree.
Posted by LegendOfCobb
Athens of the West
Member since Jun 2014
2363 posts
Posted on 12/19/14 at 2:13 pm to
Do players that get processed, but remain on medical hardship scholarship (thereby having only school to focus on, without the added workload of a football player) count?

Ugh that sentence is a mess. Whatever.
This post was edited on 12/19/14 at 2:14 pm
Posted by Korin
Member since Jan 2014
37935 posts
Posted on 12/19/14 at 2:14 pm to
This is like using acceptance rate to say that one school is better than the other.
Posted by skrayper
21-0 Asterisk Drive
Member since Nov 2012
30812 posts
Posted on 12/19/14 at 2:14 pm to
quote:

Wouldn't the shittier school graduate their players at a higher rate? Sticking with our existing comparison, it's a hell of a lot easier to graduate from Bama than it is from GT.


By that logic, one would also conclude that it's harder to get in to Tech, and therefor have smarter people and should balance out. I mean, that's what we hear all the time, right? That the students are smarter? If the only difference is one is "easier" than the other, but smarter kids are going to the "harder" universities, then it should balance out.
Posted by LegendOfCobb
Athens of the West
Member since Jun 2014
2363 posts
Posted on 12/19/14 at 2:15 pm to
frick you I come to these boards for low brow debate regarding each member institution's relative academic merits!
Posted by skrayper
21-0 Asterisk Drive
Member since Nov 2012
30812 posts
Posted on 12/19/14 at 2:15 pm to
quote:

This is like using acceptance rate to say that one school is better than the other.


I wouldn't know, I've never used that metric to determine which school is better or worse.

Honestly, with how expensive it is to go to school these days, any student that gets their degree is impressive.
Posted by LegendOfCobb
Athens of the West
Member since Jun 2014
2363 posts
Posted on 12/19/14 at 2:16 pm to
Skrayper, I think your post is spot on for the average student, but fails to take into account the fact that athletes are generally getting into schools they have no business being in.

Eta: the one about the relative rigor of schools balancing out the relative achievement of entrants.
This post was edited on 12/19/14 at 2:19 pm
Page 1 2 3 4 5
Jump to page
first pageprev pagePage 1 of 5Next pagelast page

Back to top
logoFollow SECRant for SEC Football News
Follow us on Twitter and Facebook to get the latest updates on SEC Football and Recruiting.

FacebookTwitter