Collins’ salary 56th among FBS coaches USA Today Report

yeti92

Helluva Engineer
Messages
3,033
forensicbuzz said:
Well, just because you can't find it, doesn't mean it's not there. I'm not saying it is anymore, but it definitely was 30 years ago. My recollection is not anecdotal, it was factual.
Click to expand...

I never said that it doesn't mean it's not there, all I have said from the beginning is that I want to see the text of this law, and that I cannot find it or any reference to it so it doesn't seem to exist.

"I already question the statistics. By Georgia Law, 60% of admitted students have to be Georgia natives" sure sounds like you believe it be current law. If not, then questioning the data based on a 30 year old, no longer existing law doesn't make any sense. Unless by "anymore" you are saying you said it was current law, and now are recanting your statement.

The anecdotal part I was referring to was your statement about having tons of Asian/international friends that went to football games. That doesn't tell us anything about the larger Asian/International student populations' interest in sports, only your limited experience with it.

My numbers are from the GT fact book for the appropriate year, same as you.

Whether to include grad students or not, and who we are considering peers for the purpose of this discussion are obviously points of disagreement, and that's fine.
 
forensicbuzz

forensicbuzz

21st Century Throwback Dad
Messages
8,816
Location
North Shore, Chicago
yeti92 said:
I never said that it doesn't mean it's not there, all I have said from the beginning is that I want to see the text of this law, and that I cannot find it or any reference to it so it doesn't seem to exist.

"I already question the statistics. By Georgia Law, 60% of admitted students have to be Georgia natives" sure sounds like you believe it be current law. If not, then questioning the data based on a 30 year old, no longer existing law doesn't make any sense. Unless by "anymore" you are saying you said it was current law, and now are recanting your statement.

The anecdotal part I was referring to was your statement about having tons of Asian/international friends that went to football games. That doesn't tell us anything about the larger Asian/International student populations' interest in sports, only your limited experience with it.

My numbers are from the GT fact book for the appropriate year, same as you.

Whether to include grad students or not, and who we are considering peers for the purpose of this discussion are obviously points of disagreement, and that's fine.
Click to expand...
As I said in my reply, it was a law (or rule). It may not be anymore. That's not recanting anything, it's clarifying why I said what I said and giving context. It's also recognizing, as you pointed out, it may no longer be required. My comment was in direct response to you saying you couldn't find the statute (or it might have been a UGS rule, but I didn't want to appear to "move the goalposts" by suggesting that). So, I recognized that it might not be in effect anymore. However, as I also provided data, we do have more than a 60% in-state undergraduate population right now.

Anecdotes aren't bases and I wasn't using it as a basis. I was using it to point out that stereotyping and personal biases aren't bases either.

When we're talking about students showing up in the student section of football games, it's all about the undergraduate population. If you want to throw in graduate students, well, then I think you're being disingenuous to the discussion. Graduate students, unless they went to the same school for their undergraduate degree, don't typically go to football games.

But if you want to play, I'll play (cherry-picked to highlight more of our peers academically and athletically). So, yeah, even with including graduate students, we look just like our peers.

International presence on campus (Source)
UCSD (17%)
Northeastern (16%)
University of Washington (15%)
Georgetown (14%)
Syracuse (14%)
Cal-Berkeley (13%)
Illinois (13%)
Miami (13%)
Penn State (12%)
Purdue (12%)
Rice (12%)
USC (12%)
Stanford (11%)
UCLA (11%)
Northwestern (10%)
Rutgers (10%)
UCONN (10%)
Georgia Tech (9%)
Vanderbilt (9%)
Wake Forest (9%)
Boston College (8%)
 

yeti92

Helluva Engineer
Messages
3,033
forensicbuzz said:
When we're talking about students showing up in the student section of football games, it's all about the undergraduate population. If you want to throw in graduate students, well, then I think you're being disingenuous to the discussion. Graduate students, unless they went to the same school for their undergraduate degree, don't typically go to football games.

But if you want to play, I'll play (cherry-picked to highlight more of our peers academically and athletically). So, yeah, even with including graduate students, we look just like our peers.

International presence on campus (Source)
UCSD (17%)
Northeastern (16%)
University of Washington (15%)
Georgetown (14%)
Syracuse (14%)
Cal-Berkeley (13%)
Illinois (13%)
Miami (13%)
Penn State (12%)
Purdue (12%)
Rice (12%)
USC (12%)
Stanford (11%)
UCLA (11%)
Northwestern (10%)
Rutgers (10%)
UCONN (10%)
Georgia Tech (9%)
Vanderbilt (9%)
Wake Forest (9%)
Boston College (8%)
Click to expand...
Like I said, we disagree there and that's fine. Grad students are part of the campus makeup and some attend football games, I think they should be counted. I also think if we are having a discussion about our peers in regards to attending football games, we should be considering teams we play regularly and who we are geographically near and live amongst, not academic peers. How does the list look when you add UGA, Auburn, Clemson, USC, UT, UF, FSU, Bama and remove UCSD, Georgetown, Washington, etc.?

How are the numbers affected when adjusting for Asians, which are not International but do make up a significant portion of Georgia Tech's enrollment? Ignore that being Asian does not mean you aren't interested in sports - it doesn't, far more likely is that being a nerd makes you not interested in sports. Just want to see what the numbers show.
 
Squints

Squints

Helluva Engineer
Messages
1,254
GTpdm said:
Apples to carburetors. Athletic programs spend money voluntarily donated to them by supporters. Washington does not.

...or wait, does it? Can I write off my federal taxes as a voluntary charitable contribution, and then deduct the expense from my federal taxes?
View attachment 11453
Click to expand...

I must have hallucinated those mandatory student athletic fees I had to pay when I attended grad school. ;)
 
Northeast Stinger

Northeast Stinger

Helluva Engineer
Messages
10,720
augustabuzz said:
The problem began with the income tax that was going to tax only the top 1%. Sound familiar?
Click to expand...
We should all pay our fair share. I don’t have an employer either but my tax bill is never zero like the guy whose income is 10,000 X greater than mine.
Squints said:
I must have hallucinated those mandatory student athletic fees I had to pay when I attended grad school. ;)
Click to expand...
At uga the athletic fee is around $53 a semester. It’s used to offset the cost to students of tickets to athletic events and to maintain athletic facilities. Uga raises around $3.5 million with these fees.

But clearly the big edge is in what supporters pay. My friend teaches at uga and he had to give up his parking privileges a few years ago because the athletic department was getting astronomical fees from “donors” so they could park their RVs with hookups on campus during football season.
 
Top