re: Interesting correlations between Ole Miss and Texas Tech

Both got torched by Arky last year

quote:

---

You still didn't answer the question

---

you didn't ask one. you still haven't.

Baylor is enjoying far more success right now than they usually do, and as a fan I am simply enjoying it. I went to the Alamo bowl in 2011 and it was a fantastically entertaining game. It was still a scrub bowl. The past two years Baylor has gone to significant bowls, and lost them. none of the bowls you listed for tech are significant bowls. So if you want to compare piss, I think you lose, but that wasn't the argument I was making in my original post.

Ole miss, historically, should not be considered comparable to Tech. the OP cherry picked stats that are irrelevant, unindicative, and generally expose him as clownish.

Only going by acceptance rate. I know A&M is considered a historically better academic school, but Tech has really raised their standards lately, mainly by trying to become a Tier 1 research school.

quote:

---

Interesting correlations between Ole Miss and Texas Tech

---

The correlations are obviously spurious, that is, a third variable explains the variation in both Ole Miss and Texas Tech's data.

Correlations are meaningless without a theoretical connection.

quote:

---

Pretty weird huh?

---

Not really. There are entire web sites devoted to thing kind of thing. Its an artifact of data, nothing more.

LINK /

LINK

It doesn't account for immediate 10% auto enroll. The vast majority of top 10% students that go to public Texas unis attend either Texas or A&M.

quote:

---

Only going by acceptance rate.

---

Which doesn't equal harder to get into. It is one piece of that puzzle.

It is like me buying bigger underwear and then saying "this means I have a bigger dick!" Doesn't work that way.

In all seriousness though (since it concerns what I do for a living), Tech is trying to improve their image.

Dr. Nellis has basically taken a page from Khator at UofH, down to even using the term "Tier 1."

I applaud the efforts and I think, given time, they will pay off. The problem is getting research funding requires bringing in the best professors. The students follow from that. Both schools are still a hard sell to the top researchers.

quote:

---

The problem is getting research funding requires bringing in the best professors.

---

I agree with that and since I graduated from the college of engineering, I had a firsthand view on the type of teachers/researchers that they are getting. Their engineering school will be one of the main reasons they can get to tier one status.

quote:

---

The women still are.

---

No argument from me there.

Somewhere on the web there are stats or percentages that show which school someone will pick if they get into each. Not sure where they are. To me that would be the stat you look into to see which, I don't know, gives you some bragging rights. Everybody benefits from the 10% rule in Texas and the surrounding states.

I have to say, that although because of the size of the school it may be getting to be less so, there is certainly a certain type of kid that is always going to want to go to A&M just because of the uniqueness of the mentality there. I am not sure how that ultimately affects the acceptance rate or not. For every one of those kids that sort of likes the Aggie bit, is there another that says they'd rather not have to deal with the traditions? I would think the size of the school -- the ease of being a "two percenter" -- changes up the dynamic of what vibe high schoolers get when they check out the school.