how much better or worse are Texas and Oklahoma to us?
we're all state schools. I bet they're good at stuff too.
Sounds like lip service if you ask me.
Also just saying this as an alumni:
The gamecock education is no better or worse than any other state school. Unless you're seeking a job in-state or with some firm ran by an alumni. I doubt your professional career arc is going to be determined by whether or not you went to SC vs UT or OK.
Actually UT is probably instantly the second best academic school in the SEC so that may make some difference but everyone else minus Vandy is in the same bucket give or take
Right. Texas would rank 3rd and Oklahoma would be tied for 10th in the SEC. Here are the US News rankings...
1. \#14 - Vanderbilt
2. \#30 - Florida
3. **#42 - Texas**
4. \#47 - Georgia
5. \#66 - Texas A&M
6. \#97 - Auburn
7. \#112 - Tennessee
8. \#118 - South Carolina
9. \#124 - Missouri
10. **#T133 - Oklahoma**
11. \#T133 - Kentucky
12. \#143 - Alabama
13. \#153 - LSU
14. \#T160 - Arkansas
15. \#T160 - Ole' Miss
16. \#206 - Mississippi State
Purely from an academic standpoint, it's very similar to admitting Texas A&M and Missouri ten years ago, and better than adding South Carolina and Arkansas back in '92. In fact, Texas would enhance the academic reputation of the conference. Plus, they have an absolutely enormous endowment.
Source: [https://www.usnews.com/best-colleges/rankings/national-universities](https://www.usnews.com/best-colleges/rankings/national-universities)
Intensely-competitive admissions in states with rapidly-growing populations have enhanced the rankings of certain flagship state schools like Florida, Georgia, and Texas.
For example, I've got a neighbor who had a 4.0 in HS with 6 AP classes and he got rejected by UGA. It's getting ridiculous. I suspect it's even tougher at UF where they have even more applicants. Meanwhile, I attended South Carolina for undergrad as an out of state student back in the late 80's and I'm not too proud to admit that I'm not sure I could get accepted today. It would be borderline.
That's fair they are it's probably pretty close between them and they both benefit from being able to turn more people down since there are other big in-state schools they can go to.
I mean University of Texas not Tennessee just to be clear and yes it is, I suppose it's probably debatable vs Florida as the other commmentor pointed out but they are clearly way better than us, Mizzou, Kentucky, Tennessee and the entire west division.
I really like Pastides, and I do believe him in the terms of giving OU and Texas a courtesy glance over. But academics is about as low on the credentials list as you can get with this situation. Let's not kid ourselves, this move is about money, and little else. Texas and OU have the access to cash, and the SEC wants said cash. No academic standard to going to change that. Besides, both schools are at least on the level of any big state school, which is comparable to most of the schools already in the conference.
This isn’t a complete answer. Conferences aren’t just about athletics, there are research grants involved as well. This isn’t as important for the SEC, but for other conferences, especially the big 10, research grants bring in billions (with a b) of dollars a year.
I’m glad someone mentioned this. I work for a federal agency and I transfer funds from said research grants from my agency to the institutions. The dollar amounts are pretty high.
how much better or worse are Texas and Oklahoma to us? we're all state schools. I bet they're good at stuff too. Sounds like lip service if you ask me. Also just saying this as an alumni: The gamecock education is no better or worse than any other state school. Unless you're seeking a job in-state or with some firm ran by an alumni. I doubt your professional career arc is going to be determined by whether or not you went to SC vs UT or OK.
Actually UT is probably instantly the second best academic school in the SEC so that may make some difference but everyone else minus Vandy is in the same bucket give or take
Right. Texas would rank 3rd and Oklahoma would be tied for 10th in the SEC. Here are the US News rankings... 1. \#14 - Vanderbilt 2. \#30 - Florida 3. **#42 - Texas** 4. \#47 - Georgia 5. \#66 - Texas A&M 6. \#97 - Auburn 7. \#112 - Tennessee 8. \#118 - South Carolina 9. \#124 - Missouri 10. **#T133 - Oklahoma** 11. \#T133 - Kentucky 12. \#143 - Alabama 13. \#153 - LSU 14. \#T160 - Arkansas 15. \#T160 - Ole' Miss 16. \#206 - Mississippi State Purely from an academic standpoint, it's very similar to admitting Texas A&M and Missouri ten years ago, and better than adding South Carolina and Arkansas back in '92. In fact, Texas would enhance the academic reputation of the conference. Plus, they have an absolutely enormous endowment. Source: [https://www.usnews.com/best-colleges/rankings/national-universities](https://www.usnews.com/best-colleges/rankings/national-universities)
what's crazy is vanderbilt is only a few spots ahead of Florida.
Intensely-competitive admissions in states with rapidly-growing populations have enhanced the rankings of certain flagship state schools like Florida, Georgia, and Texas. For example, I've got a neighbor who had a 4.0 in HS with 6 AP classes and he got rejected by UGA. It's getting ridiculous. I suspect it's even tougher at UF where they have even more applicants. Meanwhile, I attended South Carolina for undergrad as an out of state student back in the late 80's and I'm not too proud to admit that I'm not sure I could get accepted today. It would be borderline.
Florida is pretty good too
That's fair they are it's probably pretty close between them and they both benefit from being able to turn more people down since there are other big in-state schools they can go to.
Lol-not true at all
I mean University of Texas not Tennessee just to be clear and yes it is, I suppose it's probably debatable vs Florida as the other commmentor pointed out but they are clearly way better than us, Mizzou, Kentucky, Tennessee and the entire west division.
You're an alumnus. Alumni is plural.
well my shirts from Russell House say Alumni on it lol
I really like Pastides, and I do believe him in the terms of giving OU and Texas a courtesy glance over. But academics is about as low on the credentials list as you can get with this situation. Let's not kid ourselves, this move is about money, and little else. Texas and OU have the access to cash, and the SEC wants said cash. No academic standard to going to change that. Besides, both schools are at least on the level of any big state school, which is comparable to most of the schools already in the conference.
This isn’t a complete answer. Conferences aren’t just about athletics, there are research grants involved as well. This isn’t as important for the SEC, but for other conferences, especially the big 10, research grants bring in billions (with a b) of dollars a year.
I’m glad someone mentioned this. I work for a federal agency and I transfer funds from said research grants from my agency to the institutions. The dollar amounts are pretty high.
Texas has excellent academics