12-02-2014, 05:17 PM
...How are we #18 in athletics if Harvard is #9? I can see us being low if all you care about is football and basketball (but even then we should be fairly high...), but below Harvard? That's a serious wtf.
As we knew all along...
Please explain how Harvard's athletics are ranked #9 in the nation.
BC
BC
Forget Harvard - They have B.erkeley at #10. That's eight slots ahead of us for those scoring at home.
Huh?
Perhaps the scoring team REALLY, REALLY likes Rugby.
(Well known jock schools Princeton, Cornell and Dartmouth are 1, 2 & 3 in their athletics section.)
Huh?
Perhaps the scoring team REALLY, REALLY likes Rugby.
(Well known jock schools Princeton, Cornell and Dartmouth are 1, 2 & 3 in their athletics section.)
In 1938 Neville Chamberlain declared "Peace in our time", Superman first appeared in Action Comics, Seabiscuit beat War Admiral ....... and C.a.l last won the Rose Bowl.
Forget Harvard - They have B.erkeley at #10. That's eight slots ahead of us for those scoring at home.
Huh?
Perhaps the scoring team REALLY, REALLY likes Rugby.
(Well known jock schools Princeton, Cornell and Dartmouth are 1, 2 & 3 in their athletics section.)
Huh?
Perhaps the scoring team REALLY, REALLY likes Rugby.
(Well known jock schools Princeton, Cornell and Dartmouth are 1, 2 & 3 in their athletics section.)
In 1938 Neville Chamberlain declared "Peace in our time", Superman first appeared in Action Comics, Seabiscuit beat War Admiral ....... and C.a.l last won the Rose Bowl.
12-02-2014, 10:23 PM
(12-02-2014, 05:58 PM)leftcoast link Wrote:(Well known jock schools Princeton, Cornell and Dartmouth are 1, 2 & 3 in their athletics section.)
Yeah as a Cornell undergrad I have no idea where that came from. I guess the basketball team's single DI victory last year really impressed them.
(12-02-2014, 05:58 PM)leftcoast link Wrote:(Well known jock schools Princeton, Cornell and Dartmouth are 1, 2 & 3 in their athletics section.)
Yeah as a Cornell undergrad I have no idea where that came from. I guess the basketball team's single DI victory last year really impressed them.
12-02-2014, 10:30 PM
(12-02-2014, 05:58 PM)leftcoast link Wrote:Forget Harvard - They have B.erkeley at #10. That's eight slots ahead of us for those scoring at home.
Huh?
Perhaps the scoring team REALLY, REALLY likes Rugby.
(Well known jock schools Princeton, Cornell and Dartmouth are 1, 2 & 3 in their athletics section.)
Clearly it's not only the varsity level athletes that go into their classification, as they are trying to gauge how much athletics would affect attending student. In their full methodology page they explain that intramural leagues are included as well:
Quote:Sports (5%): Best intramural sports (1.67%, Niche); number of varsity athletes and division classification (1.67% each, U.S. Department of Education).
(12-02-2014, 05:58 PM)leftcoast link Wrote:Forget Harvard - They have B.erkeley at #10. That's eight slots ahead of us for those scoring at home.
Huh?
Perhaps the scoring team REALLY, REALLY likes Rugby.
(Well known jock schools Princeton, Cornell and Dartmouth are 1, 2 & 3 in their athletics section.)
Clearly it's not only the varsity level athletes that go into their classification, as they are trying to gauge how much athletics would affect attending student. In their full methodology page they explain that intramural leagues are included as well:
Quote:Sports (5%): Best intramural sports (1.67%, Niche); number of varsity athletes and division classification (1.67% each, U.S. Department of Education).
12-03-2014, 12:40 AM
Last time I was at Harvard (October 2012) I watched a Quidditch tournament invovling Harvard and another 7 local universities, which was fascinating. Does Stanford have a competitive Quidditch team? If not, maybe this is our problem.....
All models are wrong; some models are useful......
George Box
Last time I was at Harvard (October 2012) I watched a Quidditch tournament invovling Harvard and another 7 local universities, which was fascinating. Does Stanford have a competitive Quidditch team? If not, maybe this is our problem.....
All models are wrong; some models are useful......
George Box
12-03-2014, 10:15 AM
Stanford Quidditch won the Big Sweep last month.
https://www.facebook.com/StanfordQuidditch
https://www.facebook.com/StanfordQuidditch
12-03-2014, 01:06 PM
(12-02-2014, 10:30 PM)Gauss link Wrote:[quote author=leftcoast link=topic=11265.msg107243#msg107243 date=1417568318]
Forget Harvard - They have B.erkeley at #10. That's eight slots ahead of us for those scoring at home.
Huh?
Perhaps the scoring team REALLY, REALLY likes Rugby.
(Well known jock schools Princeton, Cornell and Dartmouth are 1, 2 & 3 in their athletics section.)
Clearly it's not only the varsity level athletes that go into their classification, as they are trying to gauge how much athletics would affect attending student. In their full methodology page they explain that intramural leagues are included as well:
Quote:Sports (5%): Best intramural sports (1.67%, Niche); number of varsity athletes and division classification (1.67% each, U.S. Department of Education).[/quote]
OK, but IM sports at Stanford are pretty strong. It is hard to believe that the ivy league teams have more varsity athletes and better intramural sports, and that the difference is large enough to overcome Stanford's advantage in division classification (unless, the Ivy Leagues are simply considered Div. I, with no distinction between Div 1A and Div 1AA [now that D1A has a playoff, is it still called the FBS?])
BC
(12-02-2014, 10:30 PM)Gauss link Wrote:[quote author=leftcoast link=topic=11265.msg107243#msg107243 date=1417568318]
Forget Harvard - They have B.erkeley at #10. That's eight slots ahead of us for those scoring at home.
Huh?
Perhaps the scoring team REALLY, REALLY likes Rugby.
(Well known jock schools Princeton, Cornell and Dartmouth are 1, 2 & 3 in their athletics section.)
Clearly it's not only the varsity level athletes that go into their classification, as they are trying to gauge how much athletics would affect attending student. In their full methodology page they explain that intramural leagues are included as well:
Quote:Sports (5%): Best intramural sports (1.67%, Niche); number of varsity athletes and division classification (1.67% each, U.S. Department of Education).[/quote]
OK, but IM sports at Stanford are pretty strong. It is hard to believe that the ivy league teams have more varsity athletes and better intramural sports, and that the difference is large enough to overcome Stanford's advantage in division classification (unless, the Ivy Leagues are simply considered Div. I, with no distinction between Div 1A and Div 1AA [now that D1A has a playoff, is it still called the FBS?])
BC
Redrum
Unregistered
Unregistered
12-03-2014, 01:43 PM
...sort of like that oddball German/European sport of team handball, only with a much smaller goal. Either that, or it's all a great RF. Anybody got a capsule explanation of game and rules?
...sort of like that oddball German/European sport of team handball, only with a much smaller goal. Either that, or it's all a great RF. Anybody got a capsule explanation of game and rules?
12-03-2014, 02:08 PM
Here are the US muggle rules for quidditch: http://www.usquidditch.org/about/rules
These differ from wizarding quidditch, in which the snitch is self-propelled, and the players fly on their brooms.
These differ from wizarding quidditch, in which the snitch is self-propelled, and the players fly on their brooms.
Here are the US muggle rules for quidditch: http://www.usquidditch.org/about/rules
These differ from wizarding quidditch, in which the snitch is self-propelled, and the players fly on their brooms.
These differ from wizarding quidditch, in which the snitch is self-propelled, and the players fly on their brooms.
12-03-2014, 02:55 PM
Per http://ope.ed.gov/
Stanford has 839 participants in varsity sports (no indication of how many of those are no longer undergraduates) out of 6,980 students, at a rate of about 12%.
Princeton had 1051 participants in varsity sports out of 5,234 (20%)
My alma mater is much smaller and has a rate of 25%. Claremont McKenna lists 494 participants out of 1307 students (38%).
Obviously the quality of Stanford's varsity sports is #1, but the quantity of students nor the student ratio is not #1.
Stanford has 839 participants in varsity sports (no indication of how many of those are no longer undergraduates) out of 6,980 students, at a rate of about 12%.
Princeton had 1051 participants in varsity sports out of 5,234 (20%)
My alma mater is much smaller and has a rate of 25%. Claremont McKenna lists 494 participants out of 1307 students (38%).
Obviously the quality of Stanford's varsity sports is #1, but the quantity of students nor the student ratio is not #1.
Per http://ope.ed.gov/
Stanford has 839 participants in varsity sports (no indication of how many of those are no longer undergraduates) out of 6,980 students, at a rate of about 12%.
Princeton had 1051 participants in varsity sports out of 5,234 (20%)
My alma mater is much smaller and has a rate of 25%. Claremont McKenna lists 494 participants out of 1307 students (38%).
Obviously the quality of Stanford's varsity sports is #1, but the quantity of students nor the student ratio is not #1.
Stanford has 839 participants in varsity sports (no indication of how many of those are no longer undergraduates) out of 6,980 students, at a rate of about 12%.
Princeton had 1051 participants in varsity sports out of 5,234 (20%)
My alma mater is much smaller and has a rate of 25%. Claremont McKenna lists 494 participants out of 1307 students (38%).
Obviously the quality of Stanford's varsity sports is #1, but the quantity of students nor the student ratio is not #1.
Redrum
Unregistered
Unregistered
12-03-2014, 03:40 PM
Terrestrially-bound bipeds running around with a completely non-functional broom between their legs at all times. In Harry Potter novels/movies the brooms have a vital purpose & are an essential part of the game. In this version of quidditch, they contribute nothing and are an actual handicap to performance.
Sort of like the venerable three-legged race where the object is to see how funny it is to hobble people and see how they cope.
Sort of like the venerable three-legged race where the object is to see how funny it is to hobble people and see how they cope.
Terrestrially-bound bipeds running around with a completely non-functional broom between their legs at all times. In Harry Potter novels/movies the brooms have a vital purpose & are an essential part of the game. In this version of quidditch, they contribute nothing and are an actual handicap to performance.
Sort of like the venerable three-legged race where the object is to see how funny it is to hobble people and see how they cope.
Sort of like the venerable three-legged race where the object is to see how funny it is to hobble people and see how they cope.
« Next Oldest | Next Newest »