What is your Personal T20? Forum

[D. H2Oman]

QUESTION:
I'm in Utah (originally from the east coast)
and SUPER surprised that folks even list the U as their top 20.
Why is this???
Curious Utahns wish to know!

Is that your horse?

[loser148]

One of many...Why?

[D. H2Oman]

Just curious because I also have horses.

[loser148]

yeah? what kind???? mine are chevelle canadiennes...a rare breed!

[loser148]

do you have photos? i'd love to see them!!!!

[D. H2Oman]

yeah? what kind???? mine are chevelle canadiennes...a rare breed!

A Morgan, a thoroughbred, and two Irish sport horses. My sisters are all about eventing. I can't escape horses!

Edit: Yeah I'm sure we have a ton of photos, I'll be sure to pm you some when I get home.

[chris888777]

i'll play
1) Harvard
2) Yale
3) NYU
4) Columbia
5) Stanford
6) Chicago
7) UVA
Michigan
9) Cornell
10) Penn
11) Georgetown
12) Boalt
13) Northwestern
14 Duke
15) Notre Dame
16) Boston College
17) Vanderbilt
18) WUSTL
19) William and Mary
20) Boston University

[rw2264]

Michigan

so good.

[Space_Cowboy]

I also think I want to practice in Chicago.
1. Yale
2. Harvard
3. Stanford
4. Columbia/Chicago
5. Berkeley
6. NYU
7. Northwestern
8. Michigan/ Penn/UVA
9. Duke
10. Gtown/Cornell
11. Wustl/Vandy
12. UIUC
13. ND
14. Minnesota
15. GWU
16. UW-Madison
17. IU-Bloomington/Iowa
18. Chi-Kent
19. Loyola
20. Depaul

Dude, you have three schools listed at #8 and then move right on to #9.

I know, I hate the way US news does it where like 5 schools are tied at say 10 and the next school is ranked like 16 although its really about as good as the number 10 or 9 school. It seems deceptive to me.

Not as deceptive as ranking a school #11 when there are 15 schools ahead of it.

Might as well add my entry

Stanford
Berkeley
Harvard
Duke
Michigan
Northwestern
UCLA
(remaining USNWR T20 schools in order)

[84Sunbird2000]

1. North Carolina
2. Michigan State
3. Connecticut
4. Villanova
5. Louisville
6. Pittsburgh
7. Oklahoma
8. Missouri
9. Memphis
10. Kansas
11. Duke
12. Syracuse
13. Gonzaga
14. Yale
15. Harvard
16. Washington
17. LSU
18. UCLA
19. Arizona State
20. Wake Forest

NC lost to College of Charleston last week - they CAN'T be number 1. Plus, did you see the Cornell-Kansas game last night? Cornell got hosed near the end - clear over the back on Kansas! Or is this an overall sports rank?

[crackberry]

1. North Carolina
2. Michigan State
3. Connecticut
4. Villanova
5. Louisville
6. Pittsburgh
7. Oklahoma
8. Missouri
9. Memphis
10. Kansas
11. Duke
12. Syracuse
13. Gonzaga
14. Yale
15. Harvard
16. Washington
17. LSU
18. UCLA
19. Arizona State
20. Wake Forest

NC lost to College of Charleston last week - they CAN'T be number 1. Plus, did you see the Cornell-Kansas game last night? Cornell got hosed near the end - clear over the back on Kansas! Or is this an overall sports rank?

If it's overall sports, Stanford has to be No. 1 and no one else can be higher than like 10. We've won 15 straight Director's Cups.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Director%27s_Cup

"The University of North Carolina won the award for best Division I collegiate athletics program in its inaugural year. Since then, Stanford University has won it 15 straight years, winning 15 out of the 16 years it has been offered."

Translation: Total dominance.

[rookhawk]

If athletics + academics is the formula you're using, then I have the school for you.

Trivia = Which school (tier 1 by coincidence) produced more Olympic medalists in Beijing than any other school worldwide?

Answer = Notre Dame.

[crackberry]

If athletics + academics is the formula you're using, then I have the school for you.

Trivia = Which school (tier 1 by coincidence) produced more Olympic medalists in Beijing than any other school worldwide?

Answer = Notre Dame.

Is this a joke (I hope so, given the emoticon)?

Anyone who thinks ND beats Stanford or Duke in the athletics/academics debate is delusional.

Also, this chart should prove my point. The state of California FTW. 4 of the top 5. Impressive:

http://wiki.answers.com/Q/Which_U.S._co ... in_Beijing

[crackberry]

HAHHHAHAHHAHA the funniest post in TLS history. Stanford > Carolina in athletics. Rich.

I'll actually debate this with you if you want. Sure, you've got us beat in basketball. But we've got you beat in football, so the big two are a wash. You really want to get into the nitty gritty after that? What are you going to come at me with, women's soccer?

[crackberry]

that was not the formula, if that was the formula. Mich st. and Villanova and basically every school that is not UNC or, i dunno Texas would not be heard from.

that T20 was the rankings at the end of the Basketball season last year. Carolina on top.

I misrepresented myself, here is an update:


1.) Carolina
2.) Haters, get on your job.
3.) ''

If you're not joking, you are officially an idiot.

[crackberry]

yes, i would like to cut my teeth with my first HYS person.

Basketball, as you say,
Football, UNC and Stanford is a wash, i mean, you can evoke ancient history or something. But you flatter yourself thinking stanford football is relevent.


Womens soccer, clearly unc. Womens field hockey, clearly unc.
Lacrosse, clearly unc.

i dunno, have we mentioned dean smith?

Stanford: men's tennis, women's tennis, men's swimming, women's swimming, men's XC, women's XC, men's track & field, baseball, men's golf, men's water polo, women's water polo, women's volleyball. I'm sure there are more.

Also, Dean Smith doesn't really mean anything. He was a great basketball coach. Okay.

Honestly, I've always questioned the legitimacy of the Director's Cup because it places equal weight on Fencing as it does Football, which doesn't seem right. However, if we're going to debate OVERALL athletic departments, how can you argue with it?! We've won 15 in a row!!

[You Gotta Have Faith]

I just love how this thread has evolved into debates about sports at one's undergrad. Hahahaha.

[crackberry]

I just love how this thread has evolved into debates about sports at one's undergrad. Hahahaha.

Well to be fair, Stanford will probably also be my law school, though I concede that I am arguing in this thread in my capacity as a Stanford UG alum.

[crackberry]

no, the underlined needs to be resolved. we can evaluate overall athletic departments, w/o abandoning common sense.

Women's tennis, (just like womens field hockey) is not as important as Football, Basketball, Baseball. Alll of which Carolina dominates. Football being the exception, it is a wash.

And, a disproportionate number of Stanfords titles are from Women's sports....

So we're not going to abandon common sense but we are going to disregard women's sports. Okay, sounds good.

Carolina dominates in basketball. I will grant you that. Disregarding 2002-2007, Stanford dominates in football. Also, to claim that Carolina dominates in baseball is actually ludicrous. UNC has NEVER won a baseball championship; Stanford has won 2. UNC has 13 wins in the College World Series; Stanford has 40 wins. UNC has 7 CWS appearances; Stanford has 16. Yeah, clear dominance by UNC alright.

[crackberry]

saying stanford is better than Carolina is like saying Thomas Wolfe is better than Shakespeare because he won more noble prizes in literature, or something stupid like that.

Well, you can only win one Nobel Prize in Literature and you can only win it while you are alive. The Nobel was not given out until around 1900, which was nearly 400 years after Shakespeare died so no, he didn't win. Thomas Wolfe is still eligible but will of course not win.

So is what you're saying that UNC's dominance in basketball should be enough to trump every other sport? Because that wasn't my original claim.

[Taffybear2]

My top 20 will be any of the top 20 that let me in!!! woooooo!!!! but personally I would love to get into any non-snowy/cold schools. Those sound wonderful. I would personally like to settle where it isn't cold!!!! If you can't figure it out I hate the snow/cold.

[crackberry]

no, i am saying that, Carolina's complete national dominance in a relevent sport coupled with its strong performance in other, less relevent sports (ie the women's field hockeys of the world) make it better than a school that is just good in scrub sports, almost exclusivly. (although I was admittedly unaware of Stanfords Baseball pedigree..but it is baseball).

Alright well that is a somewhat more reasonable claim and one that I won't take serious issue with. We could quibble over the definition of "scrub sports" (ie. anything other than basketball/football vs. anything other than, say, basketball/football/baseball/soccer/tennis/golf - while UNC would win under the first set of criteria, Stanford would have a good case under the second set) but that would be an endless argument and one that I don't have the time for right now.

I'll call this a tie and let it be. It's been fun.

[crackberry]

my point was, going by national titles alone, is not the best metric. that idea suggests that all titles are created equal, and i cannot subscribe to that doctrine.

I totally agree with this, which goes back to my point about the Director's Cup. I am proud that Stanford has won 15 straight but acknowledge that it is a somewhat meaningless award that does, as you say, suggest that all titles are created equal - an assumption I take serious issue with.

[crackberry]

i must admit, you calling this a tie reads like a Berk rejection letter.

What did the UCB rejection letter say? Or was that some sort of Stanford-Cal reference I didn't get because it's way past my bedtime?

[crackberry]

i must admit, you calling this a tie reads like a Berk rejection letter.

What did the UCB rejection letter say? Or was that some sort of Stanford-Cal reference I didn't get because it's way past my bedtime?

haha, i didn;t even apply to UCB.

But apparently they ardently argue why you are so smart and great, while at the same time telling you that you have failed.

Got it. Yeah I mean my point is basically that under the terms of our original argument, I believe that Stanford at least holds its own vs. UNC. However, under the modified terms (with not all sports being created equal), I will admit that the water is much murkier.