View Single Post
Old 11-17-2012, 09:40 PM   #128
Alohajrtennis
Semi-Pro
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 468
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Misterbill View Post
What is the source for this? I checked US News and World Report and UW is #46, so maybe that is the source?

US News and World Report is mostly "input" based. See this link.

http://colleges.usnews.rankingsandre...versities/data

So, "input"-based is what we should look at and respect? Or "output-based"? Someone said, "Input = high school students. Output = college graduate. If you measure a schools solely by what it takes in(SAT,GPA's,ect) you are not really measuring any thing the school does, besides recruit."

I am either confused, or getting dragged in by someone who wants to argue for the sake of arguing............or both

Anyway, your most recent conclusions about UW's academic reputation, and Clark's substantive research, are reinforcing my opinion that UW is at a tennis recruiting disadvantage, academically and/or athletically, to most of its Pac-12 competition and many top programs in the South, Southeast, and even several in the Big Ten.
You make my head spin. You are confused, and/or arguing for the sake of arguing.

US News is the source for the original rankings. Here's another were they are 35. http://www.thebestcolleges.org/rankings/top-50/. That particular list has UCLA behind them at 41, which seem more right to me, but that is just an opinion,as in fact are all these "rankings". I posted another one yesterday that had them 16. I am sure I could spend some time and come up with more sources but I am not going to. There is no point. I stated from the beginning that USC, Cal and Stanford were academically superior, that UCLA was close, but that those four, and UW, were significantly more academically prestigious than the balance of the conference. Then thread then went off on a tangent that had to do with what qualified an institution as 'prestigious', as another poster took exception to my usage of that word in the same sentence as UW, and seems to believe that prestigious(tm) should be reserved for exclusive use by a small number Ivy and Ivy equivalent colleges, one of which I suspect he attended.

Where we separate is I don't see how you reach the conclusion that UW "is tennis recruiting disadvantage, academically and/or athletically, to most of its Pac-12 competition" when in fact, as far as academic reputation, it's about 5th (and arguably 4th) academically in a conference of 12(albeit on that does not field a tennis team). Academically, it's certainly not at a disadvantage to Arizona and Arizona State, who have been much more successful at recruiting American Blue Chips and Five Stars.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Misterbill View Post
If Jill Hultquist is able to get one top-50 TRN each year, I think she is doing great.
I would agree with this, but she has only gotten one Top 50 TRN recruit in the past seven years, and that was 2008.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Misterbill View Post
EDIT: If you have time, maybe some readers would find it useful if you share with the Board the sources for your conclusion that UW is generally in the top-50 American universities. Not a challenge, I'm cool if you you don't
I'll pass. I have done more than enough. I'll just stick with my unproven assertion. I really have no idea why you are having a hard time believing this, other than that challenging the academic reputation of UW supports your arguments in support of coach Hulquist;
Alohajrtennis is offline