And the busting of chops can be heard all the way to the Olentangy. Well played, good sir.
The nutty Michigan coverage isn't so much about Harbaugh as it is a signal to the Big Ten that Fox wants to party.
"The academic support at Ohio State, there is no way you can fail. Even if you’re giving minimal effort there is no way you can fail.”
So, the sign.
It caused Ramzy to do some deep musings on what the value of an education is anyway. I'm not here to speak on Michigan's general studies major or clustering, but rather to point out that the sign is a bald-faced lie. It highlights three impressive-sounding fields in which Ohio State has many majors and Michigan has few. You will be unsurprised to find out virtually all of these players are walk-ons.
According to OSU's 11-12 media guide…
Meanwhile Mark Huyge can make, like, boats and stuff. There's always a tiny number of football players who are superfreak enough to put 40 hours a week into an "extracurricular activity" and still get a serious degree, but they are few, especially at a place like Michigan that won't even admit you to the B-school until you've scored a 3.8+ in your fist two years.
If you're looking to get a scholarship from Ohio State there's a 90% chance you will end up in the usual communications/"sport and leisure"/taco preparation majors. Which is fine. I just went to a coaching clinic—playing football in college is challenging both mentally and physically.
Just don't pretend you're something you're not. Ask Jim Tressel about how that works out in the long run. Enjoy your bowl this year, guys.
[UPDATE: Should clarify that I also excluded kickers and longsnappers for obvious reasons.]
[HT: Michael Scarn's diary.]
And the busting of chops can be heard all the way to the Olentangy. Well played, good sir.
At least I think so. Let's not pick on Ramzy, okay? Ramzy's point was essentially, 'Hey, it is kind of silly to make a big deal out of ad hoc lists of majors.' I suspect that you, Brian, and you, Ramzy, are largely in agreement about the monumental lack of importance in all of this. And that is news. (Also decidedly minor news was the apparent flame-war that erupted in the OSU blogosphere about photo credits for the picture of the sign inside the Woody Hayes Center. Brian you might want to throw up a photo credit, or at least ask Ramzy about that kerfuffle.)
I am not so easy on the OSU graduate assistant/student assistant/secretary/whatever who made the sign. And I am not so easy on Meyer (who must have approved it or directed it).
The sign is baloney and is easily and deservedly laughed off. I just don't see any reason to diss Ramzy, when he was mostly teeing up his general agreement with you, Brian. Maybe (probably) I am reading too much into this.
OSU football's sign = Flamebait
Ramzy's ElevenWarriors column = Insightful
Your oh-so-important-message is now at the very top of the comments and will be read by all.
not this shit again
I don't want to protest too much, but General Studies is not *necessarily* a joke major. Rick Snyder received a B.G.S. from UM, then went on to get his MBA and JD and, oh yeah, become governor. No matter what you think of him, this is clearly not the educational/professional trajectory of someone taking "Philosophy of Football" for 14 credits every semester.
And when you have football practice from 2:00 -6:00 five days a week, you often can't take a lot of specific upper-level courses. That's probably the biggest reason why athletes often go onto to BGS. Most of them do, in fact, have a specific course area of study, but in order to graduate on time, they often have to end up officially as "General Studies" because they don't have time to fit some specific requirements into their schedule while they're playing sports.
How thoroughly correct you both are. +1 for both of you.
And all the more reason to be pissed off at Jim Harbaugh for his baseless attack on the Michigan BGS degree program when he was at Stanford; I have little doubt that the genesis of the OSU sign was Harbaugh's old quote, followed by a quick count of BGS kids on the team. Note the bold #1 in our column on the sign. Somebody in Columbus was playing around with Word, and a press guide, and the old Harbaugh quote, essentially. Period. I don't think there was a helluva lot of thought, otherwise.
Jim Harbaugh; still supplying bulletin-board material for Michigan opponents 25 years later...
They may not take the upper-level courses when they want, but more often than not that class will be offered at 8am on Friday morning and the athlete will have to suck it up. Similar to Huyge, I managed UM football and Mechanical Engineering for 4 years, alongside 3 other ME footballers. We may not have all played, but the time commitment is all the same. And if guys are truly serious about their degree, they'll stay the extra semester or two to meet the rigorous requirements.
The 2-6 thing is an issue, but they also take classes in the spring and summer semesters and most of them have 5 years to graduate.
at big schools absolutely have a different price to pay when it comes to competing at the higher level and getting school done in the same time. In comparison, as a graduate of the AF Academy, and an intercollegiate athlete (swimming) our season was just as demanding, working out 3-4 hours a day, usually split up between two sessions though. The football players at AFA practiced just as much, also having a full load of comparably higher level classes (core engineering classes and the like) as well as military responsibilities. It CAN be done, but it comes at a price.
AFA is not the football factory that UM or OSU or most schools we competed against. The one difference is that we didn't have the luxury to graduate in 5 yrs. You cut it in 4 or you're gone. Again, everything comes at a price. To make it to the NFL, to compete at that higher level...it takes a VERY special kid to do all that AND graduate in 4 yrs with a degree in something other than General Studies. Anyone who successfully does that deserves our respect. UM academics certainly is a cut above and anyone who gets done there, even in 5 yrs (suspecting there's a high number of them who go on to use their 4th yr of eligibility on a year of grad school) has already made the first cut be getting into the school in the first place.
I do want to protest too much! My UM BGS got me a free ride (tuition + stipend) for an Ivy-league PhD followed by a tenure-track gig at Princeton!
Jesus, just take the high road...
If you refer to Urban Meyer as "Jesus," then (1) I have questions about that but (2) I agree with your message to him.
If you're telling Brian to take the high road, then I think you might want to clarify how fact-checking this is somehow taking the low road.
No one talks bad about our academics and gets away with it dammit!
I got two degrees from Michigan and TA'ed five courses there. Can I talk bad about our academics? There are legitimate issues that can be raised about any school's treatment of student-athletes.
I said this in the other thread, but the sign really pulls the attention away from the main difference between a Michigan and Ohio State education:
At Michigan, you're competing against other people of high enough caliber to get accepted into Michigan. Michigan happens to be a school where people will pay the highest out-of-state public school tuition to attend.
At Ohio State, you're competing against Bubba and somebody that didn't get into Miami.
Major be damned, the most important difference is that you get a Michigan degree versus an OSU degree and that can't be overstated.
Right. All the deep musings aside, a Mich degree is worth more than an OSU degree because people think that a Mich degree is worth more than an OSU degree.
More could be said, but that's the essence of it: there's a high degree of overlap between perception and reality when it comes to what an education is worth.
Actually, no. The vast majority of my colleagues (I work in Corporate Wealth Management) see no difference in the merits of any Big Ten school besides Northwestern. I honestly don't value one over the other when hiring and know for a fact that many of my contemporaries throughout the industry don't care one bit what school the candidate went to as long as they recognize it by name. The only time there is any extra recognition for a school is when it's an Ivy or one of Stanford, Duke, Northwestern.
I'm not sure why the above post is "Trolling".
I'm involved in hiring at a VERY large (and blue) tech company, and we don't hold Michigan engineering in higher regard than a variety of other schools in the midwest, including MSU and Michigan Tech. In fact, we get a lot of very good engineers out of Tech. State, Tech, UM, Illinois, Purdue, Minnesota, Wisconsin, OSU, Penn State and Iowa State all produce very good engineering graduates.
And as I've said below, after a couple of years, nobody cares where you went to school. I was shocked to find out how many "Distinguished Engineers" went to Michigan State.
Take a look at the NFL. They don't just draft from top BCS schools. They know that what a kid was like in high school is not really an indicator of what they're going to be in the work place. Sure, the competition is better in the top BCS schools, but a lot changes between the ages of 16 to 22. Other businesses are the same way. Kids mostly choose schools for financial and geographic reasons. It's silly for businesses to narrow their hiring scope based on trivial ranking differences.
Totally agree. I worked for several large manufacturing companies and a degree from Michigan, Purdue, Michigan Tech, and several others are all treated the same. The interview and specifics about the person make the difference. Michigan is a very good school, but most companies don't view it as superior when hiring a technical degree.
On the bright side, when I worked at Dow Chemical, at least my area of the company frowned on taking any MSU grads.
I think you guys are missing my point.
I don't mean prestige - I agree that the value of where you did your undergrad significantly decreases as you gain experience. Employers want experience. (You also happened to point out quite a few well-respected engin schools - Illinois, Purdue, Minnesota, Penn State, ISU and Tech are great programs and MSU & OSU are very good - so I don't know if you chose the best examples)
You talk about the NFL - and that's a great parallel - except you don't point out the fact that the guys getting drafted from I-AA and DII performed at a much higher level than their peers and are hired at a more lower rate than those that played DI BCS football. Immediate graduation placement happens the same way using GPA, standardized test scoring, degree prestige, extracurriculars, etc., especially at ultra competitive firms (or grad schools) that are more similar to the NFL than a large corporation (no offense intended). Once you've made the league (got your first job), it's mostly performance-based.
Back to my point - students learn about their concentration (finance, econ, chem engin, etc.) and skills to perform in that field but they also learn work habits, acceptable minimum quality standards, competitive drive etc. based on who they are competing with each and every day that allow them to succeed in a career.*
We can point to an exception to any rule by saying IBM has great MSU engineers; my buddy is an MSU chem engin grad that makes 2x what I do right now but he also graduated Summa Cum in 3 years from the Honor college. He was going to succeed no matter the degree. The idea is that a Michigan degree is worth more because you are better prepared to succeed. Rising tide lifts all boats sort of thing.
*This is (just) one reason why I think student : faculty ratio is such a dumb measurement of a education's quality and why you see universities like Michigan, Cal, UCLA (and Harvard & Stanford even though they benefit) talking so much shit about USNWR rankings. You're an adult in college, if you need a small class size to ask your professor/GSI for help you're in trouble already. You don't get to choose how many people your boss manages when you're done with college.
Listen, I didn't go to UM but have been a fan of the university since I was 12 (the past 25 years). My Uncle attended UM back in the 70's but being from Nova Scotia, Canada it just wasn't going to happen for me.
Currently I am the cheif of internal medicine at a hospital here in Canada and received my degree from one of the better medical schools in Canada. I did so because I was under the same misconception most people on here are: that employers look at where a degree is from when hiring someone.
Being involved in the hiring and recruiting process at our hospital, and knowing many people in the corporate world, I can say this almost never happens. Experience, interview, relevent degree, references, grades during your university degree...these thinigs play a key role, but where that degree came from doesn't.
I will say there are some schools that essentially get black listed, that happens, but for the most part it is whether you have a degree and how you performed while attaining it that matters, not where it's from.
If people here think (and it sounds like they do) that a perspective employer would look at two candidates; one with a UM degree that had average to above average grades and one with an degree from MSU in the same field with really good grades and would give the job to the UM grad simply because they went to a better school you are not just kidding yourselves, you're borderline delusional.
All things being equal, where you got your degree may play a role, but it won't get you a job over another canditate from an "inferior" school who performed better while attaining their degree.
What they're saying is if there's a candidate with really good grades from U-M, and there's a candidate with really good grades from MSU, and you're taking the MSU guy, your department isn't very smart.
The thing about CWM is that we work with firms in every field, including medicine, law, and engineering. The decision makers in those fields that I am in contact with all tell me the same thing, that only a handful of colleges truly merit a bump for a candidate. Unfortunately, both Michigan and OSU aren't in the handful.
Fair enough. I didn't mean that the difference btw M and OSU was vast, necessarily. Just that the perception of the difference is significant, even if you think that M and OSU students "learn" the same things.
Chicago? Wash U.? CalTech or MIT? Amherst, Swarthmore, Carleton or any of a couple of dozen other liberal arts colleges?
What's striking about your list is that the only schools that even merit consideration to be on it or off it are schools with D1 athletic programs. It's an interesting if inadvertent commentary on the marketing value of those programs.
I understand what you are getting at, but it is much tougher to get into UM than it is to get into OSU. That is why people think the education is better (and they are correct). There is a reason Michigan is ranked so much higher than OSU.
Honestly, I can't say that I know enough about Michigan's entrance standards to speak to this. I know with OSU, though, getting into the campus in Columbus is no small feat. The average ACT is a 28 and last I saw the average High School GPA coming in was a 3.6.
Link or it didn't happen.
28 ACT? PFFFFFFT.
If the 25th percentile is a 26 and the 75th percentile is a 30, 28 wouldn't be an unreasonable guess for the median.
There's an effect that smears some of the information in this table: not everyone takes both the ACT and SAT and in general, at least in Ohio and I'm guessing throughout the midwest, the only-SAT group is stronger than the only-ACT group because the SAT is required by a lot of top tier schools, especially on the east coast. (Or at least this used to be the case--I haven't kept up on this stuff at all.) People tend to look at these tables as representative of the entire student body, but they may not be.
The main difference between Michigan and Ohio (leaving aside their treatment of athletes and the way athletics is integrated into university governance, which is a different matter altogether) is that Michigan has two major state universities and Ohio only has one. I'm guessing the overall pool of students isn't all that different in the two states, but in Michigan its split between UM and MSU and in Ohio they all go to OSU. (There are also more strong liberal arts schools in Ohio that probably strip off a bit of the top layer, but I doubt that has much effect on the mean or the median.)
If you look at any measure of admissions requirements at the three schools, OSU tends to be at or just below the average of M and MSU--pretty much what you'd expect.
Can someone with experience in law explain if this is illegal in any way? It seems like slander/libel.
No, it is not illegal in any way shape or form.
I'm sure the 5 criminology majors they claim on the sign would never allow a *gasp* CRIME happen by the football program.
Slander/libel are extremely difficult to prove in the case of "public figures" (the University would certainly be considered one). You'd have to prove not just that the material is false, but what is called "actual malice", meaning that the purveyor of the material either knew the material was false or published the material with reckless disregard for the truth. In other words, if they happen to just be wrong, you most likely lose. Then even if you win, trying to prove damages would be virtually impossible in something so subjective as football recruiting.
It can't be slander/libel if it's true.
Yea, I failed to see what part of the sign is a "bald-faced lie" as Brian started the post with. Selective information, and potentially misleading? Sure. But I didn't see where the lie is. If OSU claimed to have 20 engineers, then it would have been a lie.
Something can be factually accurate and still be deceptive, aka lying. Irrelevant information can be as powerful a tool as false information, sometimes more so.
So similar to how Brian decided not to include scholarship kickers/snappers in his computation? Although I think the difference is that the sign did not have any qualifiers saying "Ohio State Scholarship Players", while Brian explicitly stated he was counting scholarship players. The first may be misleading, but the latter is most certainly misinformation.
I like it. Nicely done.
I wish we could see later outcomes for the non-NFL guys who played football at Michigan. I bet that they do very, very well. It seems like those guys have a strong network of people to take care of them after school, some skills that are valued in the workforce (leadership, willingness to be part of a team, commitment, etc.), and a Michigan degree.
More generally, in what parallel universe must we be where OSU is criticizing Michigan's academics?
I just miss the days when I didn't like the Ohio coach (Woody Hayes), but respected him. It's hard to respect coaches like Tressel and Urban when they have trouble with a simple thing like the truth.
And Jordan Whiting, the one business major, is considering transfering.
I could make a statement like, "Urban is clearing out all the Buckeyes who care about an education for 5 star recruits who need tatoos", but I won't.
"Enjoy your bowl this year, guys."
That sign is garbage, and the coach that put it out is garbage. Attacking a world-class institution, for doing everything right.
Without the football team, Ohio wouldn't have ten communication majors. Not ten.
Comments like these are why I love mgoblog. I'm scrolling down, checking out what everyone has to say while thinking about the topic, then bam! A hilarious comment out of left field that makes me bust out laughing. Give yourselves a round of applause, everyone.
I hope that made sense.