collapse

* '23-'24 SOTG Tally


2023-24 Season SoG Tally
Kolek11
Ighodaro6
Jones, K.6
Mitchell2
Jones, S.1
Joplin1

'22-23
'21-22 * '20-21 * '19-20
'18-19 * '17-18 * '16-17
'15-16 * '14-15 * '13-14
'12-13 * '11-12 * '10-11

* Big East Standings

* Recent Posts

2024 Transfer Portal by Jockey
[Today at 03:02:03 PM]


2024 Coaching Carousel by lawdog77
[Today at 02:11:28 PM]


NIL Future by Hards Alumni
[Today at 02:10:10 PM]


2024 Mock Drafts by Uncle Rico
[Today at 12:50:35 PM]


2024 NCAA Tournament Thread by warriorchick
[Today at 12:06:20 PM]


MU Gear by Pepe Sylvia
[Today at 11:45:12 AM]


Big East 2024 Offseason by MU82
[Today at 11:11:25 AM]

Please Register - It's FREE!

The absolute only thing required for this FREE registration is a valid e-mail address.  We keep all your information confidential and will NEVER give or sell it to anyone else.
Login to get rid of this box (and ads) , or register NOW!

* Next up: The long cold summer

Marquette
Marquette

Open Practice

Date/Time: Oct 11, 2024 ???
TV: NA
Schedule for 2023-24
27-10

Author Topic: "Academic Standards"  (Read 11624 times)

HoopsMalone

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 1821
Re: "Academic Standards"
« Reply #25 on: May 14, 2009, 11:57:35 AM »

Every state has a school like Madison.  It is where many of the top students in (mostly) the public high schools want to go.  By and large Madison doesn't impress people from outside the state, and those other schools don't impress kids from Wisconsin.  That's fine.

Very true, but UW-Madison should not think it is this tough school or highly respected school.  They are good, but at the end of the day in an interview Marquette and UW are the same thing.

ZiggysFryBoy

  • Registered User
  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 5115
  • MEDITERRANEAN TACOS!
Re: "Academic Standards"
« Reply #26 on: May 14, 2009, 12:39:14 PM »
"easy classes" that I took at MU 1996-summer 2000:

History of Rock n Roll w/ Dr. Naylor
Jewish Thought and Practice
Intro to Advertising.

bma725

  • Registered User
  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 2440
Re: "Academic Standards"
« Reply #27 on: May 14, 2009, 12:46:32 PM »
Very true, but UW-Madison should not think it is this tough school or highly respected school.  They are good, but at the end of the day in an interview Marquette and UW are the same thing.

You've got to be kidding.  The notion that UW not a highly respected school is one of the most ridiculous things ever posted on this board.

There's a reason they rank in the top 35 according to US News.  There's a reason UW is tied with Harvard and Princeton for most Fortune 500 CEOs as graduates.  There's a reason the London Times named it the 55th best university in the world.  There's a reason the Gourman Report ranked it as the third best undergraduate public school in the country.

Not only that, but the notion that a resume saying MU and one saying UW get the same thing just isn't true.  The UW name carries a ton of weight, especially when you get into the scientific fields.

Hards Alumni

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 6637
Re: "Academic Standards"
« Reply #28 on: May 14, 2009, 12:47:13 PM »
You've got to be kidding.  The notion that UW not a highly respected school is one of the most ridiculous things ever posted on this board.

There's a reason they rank in the top 35 according to US News.  There's a reason UW is tied with Harvard and Princeton for most Fortune 500 CEOs as graduates.  There's a reason the London Times named it the 55th best university in the world.  There's a reason the Gourman Report ranked it as the third best undergraduate public school in the country.

Not only that, but the notion that a resume saying MU and one saying UW get the same thing just isn't true.  The UW name carries a ton of weight, especially when you get into the scientific fields.


you beat me to it bma

StillAWarrior

  • Registered User
  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 4212
Re: "Academic Standards"
« Reply #29 on: May 14, 2009, 12:50:12 PM »
You've got to be kidding.  The notion that UW not a highly respected school is one of the most ridiculous things ever posted on this board.

There's a reason they rank in the top 35 according to US News.  There's a reason UW is tied with Harvard and Princeton for most Fortune 500 CEOs as graduates.  There's a reason the London Times named it the 55th best university in the world.  There's a reason the Gourman Report ranked it as the third best undergraduate public school in the country.

Not only that, but the notion that a resume saying MU and one saying UW get the same thing just isn't true.  The UW name carries a ton of weight, especially when you get into the scientific fields.


I can't comment on most of the specifics in this post, but I do know that here in Cleveland, UW is pretty highly regarded.  People have heard of Marquette, but typically don't know where it is.  All they know is that it's a basketball school...which isn't so bad.  I'm not saying UW is better or worse than MU, but I do know that it's thought of as a good school.
Never wrestle with a pig.  You both get dirty, and the pig likes it.

4everwarriors

  • Registered User
  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 16017
Re: "Academic Standards"
« Reply #30 on: May 14, 2009, 01:00:06 PM »
"easy classes" that I took at MU 1996-summer 2000:

History of Rock n Roll w/ Dr. Naylor
Jewish Thought and Practice
Intro to Advertising.


Dude, did you take that gem, "Individual and Dual Sports?" I pulled an all-nighter for the final. Studying golf, tennis, and bowling was a bitch. Lab consisted of bowling at the Y. Maurice Lucas was a member of my 4 person bowling team. Frazier, Ostrand, and Spychalla were also in the class.
My English lecture with John Pick included Chones, Lackey, McGuire, Frazier, and Lens' pop. Pick wearing a rubber chicken around his neck for "The Rhyme of the Ancient Mariner" was priceless.
"Give 'Em Hell, Al"

4everwarriors

  • Registered User
  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 16017
Re: "Academic Standards"
« Reply #31 on: May 14, 2009, 01:32:25 PM »
Speaking as a double graduate of MU, UW-Madison is an outstanding school with tougher admission standards, especially for Wisconsin residents. In addition, their endowment dwarfs Marquette's. Each offers their students a different experience and to compare and contrast the two is rather pointless. Don't let your emotions confuse the obvious, UW is one of the country's outstanding universities whose graduates are well thought of by industry, professional and graduate schools.

Sorry ecompt.
"Give 'Em Hell, Al"

Canned Goods n Ammo

  • Registered User
  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 5008
  • Ammo, clean shaven Ammo.
Re: "Academic Standards"
« Reply #32 on: May 14, 2009, 01:53:30 PM »
Speaking as a double graduate of MU, UW-Madison is an outstanding school with tougher admission standards, especially for Wisconsin residents. In addition, their endowment dwarfs Marquette's. Each offers their students a different experience and to compare and contrast the two is rather pointless. Don't let your emotions confuse the obvious, UW is one of the country's outstanding universities whose graduates are well thought of by industry, professional and graduate schools.

Sorry ecompt.

Shockingly enough, I agree with you 100%.

UW is a great school. I can openly admit that.

I still hate everything about "Bucky", but it's a great school.

TVDirector

  • Registered User
  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 1173
Re: "Academic Standards"
« Reply #33 on: May 14, 2009, 02:27:29 PM »
Rick Majerus--as a Raymond's assistant-- used to teach a class called something like "the Philosophy of Coaching."





took it.
rick was awesome... knew every diner, every HS coach, everywhere.

spartan3186

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 901
Re: "Academic Standards"
« Reply #34 on: May 14, 2009, 02:31:59 PM »
At Duke most of the b-ball players major in sociology. At many schools there are majors like geography, communications, etc. that the athletes (and lazy, unmotivated students) gravitate towards for majors.

How many of you majored in a hard science, by the way? Doubt there were many here with a pre-med focus.

Biochemistry and Molecular Biology- 2008

ecompt

  • Registered User
  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 3339
Re: "Academic Standards"
« Reply #35 on: May 14, 2009, 02:36:41 PM »
I never said UW wasn't a fine school. What I said was that to build a Top 25 Division I football team and powerhouse men's and women's hockey teams they need to take a bunch of kids who wouldn't normally be accepted there. And once there they can hide these kids in programs like Phys. Ed, which MU cannot do.

reinko

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 2696
Re: "Academic Standards"
« Reply #36 on: May 14, 2009, 02:53:11 PM »
You've got to be kidding.  The notion that UW not a highly respected school is one of the most ridiculous things ever posted on this board.

There's a reason they rank in the top 35 according to US News.  There's a reason UW is tied with Harvard and Princeton for most Fortune 500 CEOs as graduates.  There's a reason the London Times named it the 55th best university in the world.  There's a reason the Gourman Report ranked it as the third best undergraduate public school in the country.

Not only that, but the notion that a resume saying MU and one saying UW get the same thing just isn't true.  The UW name carries a ton of weight, especially when you get into the scientific fields.


The only issue, I have with your comment bma is about Fortune 500 CEOs.  UW graduates what 9,000 a year?  Harvard and Princeton together graduate about 2,600-2,800 per year.  Kind of a BS # IMO, but the rest I agree.

I got rejected from UW, best thing I could have ever happened to me. 

Suck on this Bucky!

ChicosBailBonds

  • Registered User
  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 22695
  • #AllInnocentLivesMatter
    • Cracked Sidewalks
Re: "Academic Standards"
« Reply #37 on: May 14, 2009, 03:00:08 PM »
Speaking as a double graduate of MU, UW-Madison is an outstanding school with tougher admission standards, especially for Wisconsin residents. In addition, their endowment dwarfs Marquette's. Each offers their students a different experience and to compare and contrast the two is rather pointless. Don't let your emotions confuse the obvious, UW is one of the country's outstanding universities whose graduates are well thought of by industry, professional and graduate schools.

Sorry ecompt.

UW_Madison is a great school.  I think at the end of the day, however, the crying over there is pretty weak because we're talking about student athletes.  The difference between admission standards for student athletes at UW-madison and MU is nil.  So they can pontificate about UW-madison's ratings, blah, blah, blah, but they don't mean a squirt of piss in terms of accepting athletes to their teams (or ours) for that matter.  A student athlete that is accepted to MU would be accepted to UW-madison.  Period.   Just look at the clowns they've had over the years on the football, hockey and basketball teams (even soccer) to illustrate the point. 

Ron Dayne is exhibit one and ends all arguments on the spot.  UW-madison will accept anyone, if they choose, that they feel is worth taking the risk on.  MU is no different.   Their whining is just nonsense, they need to look into the mirror.

GooooMarquette

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 9489
  • We got this.
Re: "Academic Standards"
« Reply #38 on: May 15, 2009, 12:32:30 PM »
You've got to be kidding.  The notion that UW not a highly respected school is one of the most ridiculous things ever posted on this board.

There's a reason they rank in the top 35 according to US News.  There's a reason UW is tied with Harvard and Princeton for most Fortune 500 CEOs as graduates.  There's a reason the London Times named it the 55th best university in the world.  There's a reason the Gourman Report ranked it as the third best undergraduate public school in the country.

Not only that, but the notion that a resume saying MU and one saying UW get the same thing just isn't true.  The UW name carries a ton of weight, especially when you get into the scientific fields.


Yes, there are reasons.  And those reasons relate to UW's larger and more prestigious graduate and professional programs, extensive research by internationally-known professors, broad (and sometimes esoteric) majors that aren't available at many other schools...and many other reasons that have no impact whatsoever for most undergraduate students.

As a result, the value of an undergraduate degree is pretty much the same as an undergraduate degree at a school like MU or many others.  The value of a PhD in Biochemistry might be different...but tell me how many football or basketball players from UW have those?

I am speaking from firsthand knowledge, as I attended and have degrees from both schools.  For undergraduates, MU is every bit as good as UW.  The differences start only when you go back for a graduate or professional degree.

As a matter of fact, I witnessed firsthand some situations where things that improved UW's reputation on paper actually compromised the undergraduate education.  I worked directly with an internationally-renouned researcher in cardiovascular physiology - huge funding from NIH, AHA and other places - the kind of reputation that US News loves.  Well, this guy was also in charge of teaching an undergraduate physiology course, and he basically ignored that part of the job.  I asked him why, and he muttered something about his research being more important, and that the curriculum was OK on autopilot.  And knowing many other folks in the biological sciences at UW, this was a common feeling.  In contrast, I worked with people who taught similar courses at MU, and they almost universally viewed teaching as the most important aspect of their job.  Result?  UW gets great external ratings, does great research, and provides nearly incomparable opportunities for graduate and professional students.  But if you just want to go and get a BS or BA, you will probably be just as well off (maybe even better) at a school like MU.
« Last Edit: May 15, 2009, 12:42:01 PM by GooooMarquette »

Hards Alumni

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 6637
Re: "Academic Standards"
« Reply #39 on: May 15, 2009, 12:40:14 PM »
well, that and alumni associations and networking.

GooooMarquette

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 9489
  • We got this.
Re: "Academic Standards"
« Reply #40 on: May 15, 2009, 12:43:00 PM »
well, that and alumni associations and networking.

Ahhh...the "bigger is better" theory....

WellsstreetWanderer

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 2108
Re: "Academic Standards"
« Reply #41 on: May 15, 2009, 12:45:09 PM »
"My English lecture with John Pick included Chones, Lackey, McGuire, Frazier, and Lens' pop. Pick wearing a rubber chicken around his neck for "The Rhyme of the Ancient Mariner" was priceless."


   John Pick was one of my favorite teachers at MU. Others were Roger Parr and "DAD Murphy"  Sorry if you didin't get to know them

AZWarrior

  • Registered User
  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 1702
Re: "Academic Standards"
« Reply #42 on: May 15, 2009, 01:04:32 PM »
At Duke most of the b-ball players major in sociology. At many schools there are majors like geography, communications, etc. that the athletes (and lazy, unmotivated students) gravitate towards for majors.

How many of you majored in a hard science, by the way? Doubt there were many here with a pre-med focus.

Electrical Engineering
All this talk of rights.  So little talk of responsibilities.

GooooMarquette

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 9489
  • We got this.
Re: "Academic Standards"
« Reply #43 on: May 15, 2009, 01:11:48 PM »
How many of you majored in a hard science, by the way? Doubt there were many here with a pre-med focus.

Biology '83...followed by med school.  And yes, I had plenty of friends who did the same, ending up at med schools like UW, the Medical College of Wisconsin, the University of Chicago and Northwestern.  All from little old Marquette.

If this kind of thing surprises you, it makes me wonder who you hung around with....

Hards Alumni

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 6637
Re: "Academic Standards"
« Reply #44 on: May 15, 2009, 01:19:07 PM »
i think he was mostly referencing people who populate this board.