Reply to thread

Message: [QUOTE="chicago312, post: 2284168, member: 8226"] You're right. The CMUP report gives a good snapshot of the hard metrics--research funding, financial resources, faculty quality and breadth of doctoral programs. It doesn't take into account the soft metrics at all such as NRC rankings of doctoral programs or undergraduate reputation (other than the median SAT metric). UC is not a serious candidate. They score well on total research and federal research (driven almost solely by the med school), and are an utter non-starter elsewhere. There is no chance that schools like Chicago or Princeton (or even the top public flagships) vote in Cincinnati any more than they vote in UAB. And like others have said. A potential public candidate needs to be more than just better than the lowest ranked current members. It probably need to be somewhere around the median for publics, and I don't think UC manages close to that even in research funding. Too many UC followers put too much stock in what their recently departed President had to say. He was a real snake oil salesman and sunshine pumper. He was going to get UC into the AAU. He was going to get them designated as a Comprehensive Cancer Center (literally an impossibility since Ohio already has three). He was going to get them into a P5. He was going to have the state of Ohio designate them as a co-flagship to Ohio State. He promised to stay ten years to make it happen. He bailed out after only three leaving a legacy of nothing more than 40,000 tweets. [/QUOTE]

Verification: First name of men's bb coach