[TrumpCard]

I suggest that we encourage Hulk to post whatever recruiting information he chooses and that we encourage him to post that information wherever on this board he chooses. 

Here is the reason for my suggestion:  Hulk posted a treasure trove of data on various recruits a month and a half ago.  In response to a minority view that recruiting information should be separated, Yvonne gave Hulk his own pinned thread in which to post updates.  Although that seemed like a good solution at the time, since then, to the best of my recollection, Hulk has never used the pinned thread or posted any more updates here.  (Maybe he posted that Kelly eliminated Stanford, but certainly no comprehensive updates.) 

I think Hulk enjoys the back and forth conversation on recruiting and that he would post more often here if we encouraged him to create new topics whenever he wanted.  Note that he responded to my new thread on whales, which I intentionally posted outside the 2016 recruiting topic to see if I could draw him in. 

[TrumpCard]

I suggest that we encourage Hulk to post whatever recruiting information he chooses and that we encourage him to post that information wherever on this board he chooses. 

Here is the reason for my suggestion:  Hulk posted a treasure trove of data on various recruits a month and a half ago.  In response to a minority view that recruiting information should be separated, Yvonne gave Hulk his own pinned thread in which to post updates.  Although that seemed like a good solution at the time, since then, to the best of my recollection, Hulk has never used the pinned thread or posted any more updates here.  (Maybe he posted that Kelly eliminated Stanford, but certainly no comprehensive updates.) 

I think Hulk enjoys the back and forth conversation on recruiting and that he would post more often here if we encouraged him to create new topics whenever he wanted.  Note that he responded to my new thread on whales, which I intentionally posted outside the 2016 recruiting topic to see if I could draw him in. 

[yvonne]

The problem I was addressing was that a lot of Hulk's good information was getting lost amongst the comments. He's certainly more than welcome to create as many posts as he'd like. The purpose of pinning it wasn't to restrict it, but to highlight it.

[yvonne]

The problem I was addressing was that a lot of Hulk's good information was getting lost amongst the comments. He's certainly more than welcome to create as many posts as he'd like. The purpose of pinning it wasn't to restrict it, but to highlight it.

[Hulk01]

Appreciate the kind words.

If some Cardboarders are like me, they--for reasons I don't understand and that certainly will make no sense to many others--they rarely look "above the line."  I can go days without remembering I posted "up there."

Not a criticism by any means.  Just my perhaps-odd experience.

And as for recruiting, I've never seen a recruiting class this enthusiastic about Stanford, and so well-informed.  (Credit the internet, no doubt, but also the staff for sending recruits anything that sheds a warm light on the school and program.  And there's never been so much.  No least of all, Princeton Review has recognized Stanford as "America's number one Dream School" for both parents and students for the third consecutive year, and Stanford has surpassed Harvard for selectivity for the first time, and for fundraising for the severaleth consecutive year.

All that, plus articles about the Stanford students getting tech jobs starting at $120,000 a year, seems to be having an effect.

[Hulk01]

Appreciate the kind words.

If some Cardboarders are like me, they--for reasons I don't understand and that certainly will make no sense to many others--they rarely look "above the line."  I can go days without remembering I posted "up there."

Not a criticism by any means.  Just my perhaps-odd experience.

And as for recruiting, I've never seen a recruiting class this enthusiastic about Stanford, and so well-informed.  (Credit the internet, no doubt, but also the staff for sending recruits anything that sheds a warm light on the school and program.  And there's never been so much.  No least of all, Princeton Review has recognized Stanford as "America's number one Dream School" for both parents and students for the third consecutive year, and Stanford has surpassed Harvard for selectivity for the first time, and for fundraising for the severaleth consecutive year.

All that, plus articles about the Stanford students getting tech jobs starting at $120,000 a year, seems to be having an effect.

[FarmBoy]

If some Cardboarders are like me, they--for reasons I don't understand and that certainly will make no sense to many others--they rarely look "above the line."  I can go days without remembering I posted "up there."

It's not just use. For some reason, the formatting of that section makes pass it over immediately. I assume it's all "rules for the board" and "introduce yourself if you're new" type posts and not really active discussion. I have to remind myself to look back up there to see if there's any 2016 recruiting news.

[FarmBoy]

If some Cardboarders are like me, they--for reasons I don't understand and that certainly will make no sense to many others--they rarely look "above the line."  I can go days without remembering I posted "up there."

It's not just use. For some reason, the formatting of that section makes pass it over immediately. I assume it's all "rules for the board" and "introduce yourself if you're new" type posts and not really active discussion. I have to remind myself to look back up there to see if there's any 2016 recruiting news.

[Bruce Wang]

Stanford has surpassed Harvard for selectivity for the first time.

Two years in a row now IIRC.

[Bruce Wang]

Stanford has surpassed Harvard for selectivity for the first time.

Two years in a row now IIRC.

[oman]

His incendiary movie reviews have increased my participation 137%, at least since his Chef review.

[oman]

His incendiary movie reviews have increased my participation 137%, at least since his Chef review.

[BostonCard]

I never found it a problem, since the main 2016 recruiting thread is pinned at the top.  Be that as it may, if other people weren't posting because they didn't see it, that's an issue.

For my part, I agree with TrumpCard.  Even though I don't slavishly follow recruiting, I love reading Hulk's take on it.

By the way, I would love to see a re-calibration of the probabilities that Hulk posted some time ago.

BC

[BostonCard]

I never found it a problem, since the main 2016 recruiting thread is pinned at the top.  Be that as it may, if other people weren't posting because they didn't see it, that's an issue.

For my part, I agree with TrumpCard.  Even though I don't slavishly follow recruiting, I love reading Hulk's take on it.

By the way, I would love to see a re-calibration of the probabilities that Hulk posted some time ago.

BC

[needle]

In response to a minority view that recruiting information should be separated, Yvonne gave Hulk his own pinned thread in which to post updates.

I posted the complaint. Is it really a minority view? IIRC, Yvonne has tried to sort this question out in the past.

In any case, I kind of feel like there is a middle ground, and we're already there. A few random football recruiting posts on the main board (and I think I've seen this lately) don't irk me in the least. Just don't strafe the board with new thread after new thread on the same topic. That's what happened that led me to post my complaint.

[needle]

In response to a minority view that recruiting information should be separated, Yvonne gave Hulk his own pinned thread in which to post updates.

I posted the complaint. Is it really a minority view? IIRC, Yvonne has tried to sort this question out in the past.

In any case, I kind of feel like there is a middle ground, and we're already there. A few random football recruiting posts on the main board (and I think I've seen this lately) don't irk me in the least. Just don't strafe the board with new thread after new thread on the same topic. That's what happened that led me to post my complaint.

[Hulk01]

Probabilities are up overall.

First, Costello committed.

Bumps on OT Clark Yarbrough, WR Dylan Crawford, DE Khalid Kareem, LB Jeffrey McCulloch, NT Mike Williams, and WR Demetris Robertson. 

Terrific grades report from Garrett Rand.

No major slippage, except concern about Okonya not wanting to venture far from Georgia.

Overall arrows up, with running back the one question spot.

[Hulk01]

Probabilities are up overall.

First, Costello committed.

Bumps on OT Clark Yarbrough, WR Dylan Crawford, DE Khalid Kareem, LB Jeffrey McCulloch, NT Mike Williams, and WR Demetris Robertson. 

Terrific grades report from Garrett Rand.

No major slippage, except concern about Okonya not wanting to venture far from Georgia.

Overall arrows up, with running back the one question spot.

[TrumpCard]

Bumps on . . . LB Jeffrey McCulloch

Him too?  Or do you mean Curtis Robinson?
Check out his criteria for deciding, his grades, and his timetable:
http://bleacherreport.com/articles/24229...ll-success

[TrumpCard]

Bumps on . . . LB Jeffrey McCulloch

Him too?  Or do you mean Curtis Robinson?
Check out his criteria for deciding, his grades, and his timetable:
http://bleacherreport.com/articles/24229...ll-success

[Hulk01]

Arrows up on both.

Your mother is a college professor and you want to play college football.

You get a four year scholarship offer from Stanford. 

You tell mom, "I'm thinking of turning it down."

Hmmmm. . .

[Hulk01]

Arrows up on both.

Your mother is a college professor and you want to play college football.

You get a four year scholarship offer from Stanford. 

You tell mom, "I'm thinking of turning it down."

Hmmmm. . .

[larkinforever]

[quote author=Hulk01 link=topic=12004.msg116286#msg116286 date=1428435716]
Stanford has surpassed Harvard for selectivity for the first time.

Two years in a row now IIRC.
[/quote]

Assuming selectivity means acceptance rate, it's actually the 3rd year in a row.
Class of 2019 Harvard 5.3%, Stanford 5.0%*
2018 Harvard 5.9%, Stanford 5.1%
2017 Harvard 5.8%, Stanford 5.7%

*Class of 2019 not yet final (and won't be for months, until the waitlist candidates are sorted) - in recent years Stanford hasn't admitted anyone from the waitlist, but Harvard has admitted a small number in some years, none in other years.

[larkinforever]

[quote author=Hulk01 link=topic=12004.msg116286#msg116286 date=1428435716]
Stanford has surpassed Harvard for selectivity for the first time.

Two years in a row now IIRC.
[/quote]

Assuming selectivity means acceptance rate, it's actually the 3rd year in a row.
Class of 2019 Harvard 5.3%, Stanford 5.0%*
2018 Harvard 5.9%, Stanford 5.1%
2017 Harvard 5.8%, Stanford 5.7%

*Class of 2019 not yet final (and won't be for months, until the waitlist candidates are sorted) - in recent years Stanford hasn't admitted anyone from the waitlist, but Harvard has admitted a small number in some years, none in other years.

[dabigv13]

Darnit I thought this thread was going to be about the consumption of Irish children.

[dabigv13]

Darnit I thought this thread was going to be about the consumption of Irish children.

[yvonne]

I thought that was a Modest Proposal.

[yvonne]

I thought that was a Modest Proposal.

[washingtonismoney]

Isn't the better metric yield rather than acceptance rate?

[washingtonismoney]

Isn't the better metric yield rather than acceptance rate?

[Nan3cy]

Isn't the better metric yield rather than acceptance rate?

I think that's right. As the number of applications submitted by each high school senior goes up, by definition the average acceptance rate will go down. But out of 2000 or so four-year colleges in the U.S., there aren't more than a few dozen that actually enroll more than half of the students they accept. At the same time, the Stanford yield rate has gone up a bunch in the last 20 years.

[Nan3cy]

Isn't the better metric yield rather than acceptance rate?

I think that's right. As the number of applications submitted by each high school senior goes up, by definition the average acceptance rate will go down. But out of 2000 or so four-year colleges in the U.S., there aren't more than a few dozen that actually enroll more than half of the students they accept. At the same time, the Stanford yield rate has gone up a bunch in the last 20 years.

[CTcard]

[quote author=washingtonismoney link=topic=12004.msg116368#msg116368 date=1428545666]
Isn't the better metric yield rather than acceptance rate?

I think that's right. As the number of applications submitted by each high school senior goes up, by definition the average acceptance rate will go down. But out of 2000 or so four-year colleges in the U.S., there aren't more than a few dozen that actually enroll more than half of the students they accept. At the same time, the Stanford yield rate has gone up a bunch in the last 20 years.
[/quote]

I also mostly agree, but would add the thought that one must specify for just what you are looking for a metric.

Does anyone know a place where year by year yield rates are tabulated? 

[CTcard]

[quote author=washingtonismoney link=topic=12004.msg116368#msg116368 date=1428545666]
Isn't the better metric yield rather than acceptance rate?

I think that's right. As the number of applications submitted by each high school senior goes up, by definition the average acceptance rate will go down. But out of 2000 or so four-year colleges in the U.S., there aren't more than a few dozen that actually enroll more than half of the students they accept. At the same time, the Stanford yield rate has gone up a bunch in the last 20 years.
[/quote]

I also mostly agree, but would add the thought that one must specify for just what you are looking for a metric.

Does anyone know a place where year by year yield rates are tabulated? 

[BostonCard]

Isn't the better metric yield rather than acceptance rate?

No metric is perfect, and yield rates can also be manipulated.  For example, an easy way to increase yield rates is to take more marginal applicants from the early admission pool and to move it to become a (binding) early decision model (as opposed to early action, which is not binding).  Schools can also tweek who they accept to increase the yield rate.  Big data allows schools to predict the likelihood that someone is going to accept an offer based on things like demographics, academic achievement, legacy status, and where else they've applied.  We've also talked about how some schools *cough* USC *cough* do a form of academic greyshirting where they admit people to their spring semester.

BC

[BostonCard]

Isn't the better metric yield rather than acceptance rate?

No metric is perfect, and yield rates can also be manipulated.  For example, an easy way to increase yield rates is to take more marginal applicants from the early admission pool and to move it to become a (binding) early decision model (as opposed to early action, which is not binding).  Schools can also tweek who they accept to increase the yield rate.  Big data allows schools to predict the likelihood that someone is going to accept an offer based on things like demographics, academic achievement, legacy status, and where else they've applied.  We've also talked about how some schools *cough* USC *cough* do a form of academic greyshirting where they admit people to their spring semester.

BC

[Nan3cy]

I'd love to see year-by-year yield rates but have never seen such a table. It's been a while since I've looked at the USN&WR college issue, and I don't remember if the current year's yield rate is shown in the information for each school.

I became aware of the importance of the yield rate years ago when we toured Tufts and the admissions officer who talked to the group before the tour said that Tufts got about 12,000 applications for its incoming class of 1,100. What he didn't mention is that Tufts admitted about 4,400 students for its class of 1,100 -- thus highlighting Tufts' status as everyone's favorite backup school.

[Nan3cy]

I'd love to see year-by-year yield rates but have never seen such a table. It's been a while since I've looked at the USN&WR college issue, and I don't remember if the current year's yield rate is shown in the information for each school.

I became aware of the importance of the yield rate years ago when we toured Tufts and the admissions officer who talked to the group before the tour said that Tufts got about 12,000 applications for its incoming class of 1,100. What he didn't mention is that Tufts admitted about 4,400 students for its class of 1,100 -- thus highlighting Tufts' status as everyone's favorite backup school.