Fun with graphs....B1G (and Pitt) graduation rates.

[PSUEngineerx2]

BobPSU92, in response to your comment yesterday in my other thread (see below), I wanted to provide some additional information which you (and other board members) may enjoy.



B1G Graduation Success Rate comparison (all available data in NCAA's database is shown):



And, to educate our frequent Pitt visitors, the same graph above with Pitt's data also included:

 

[psu00]

BobPSU92, in response to your comment yesterday in my other thread (see below), I wanted to provide some additional information which you (and other board members) may enjoy.

View embedded media

B1G Graduation Success Rate comparison (all available data in NCAA's database is shown):

View embedded media

And, to educate our frequent Pitt visitors, the same graph above with Pitt's data also included:

View embedded media

Nice work. Looks like Minnesota, Michigan St, and Ohio St have suddenly decided graduation is important the last few years. The comparison with Pitt is always worth seeing- mainly because it irritates their fans. .

 

[PSUEngineerx2]

Thank you psu00. I have prepared (just playing around really for entertainment) over the years several different graphs comparing various sets of college football data - I will try to post as time allows.

 

[fairgambit]

BobPSU92, in response to your comment yesterday in my other thread (see below), I wanted to provide some additional information which you (and other board members) may enjoy.

View embedded media

B1G Graduation Success Rate comparison (all available data in NCAA's database is shown):

View embedded media

And, to educate our frequent Pitt visitors, the same graph above with Pitt's data also included:

View embedded media

I love graphs! Good job!

 

[john4psu]

I thought all of Pitt's football players were pre-med. N'est-ce pas?

 

[fairgambit]

I thought all of Pitt's football players were pre-med. N'est-ce pas?

Geeze John, now I have to have a French translator to use this board.

 

[BobPSU92]

Excellent work. Thanks!

 

[LemonEars]

This graph means nothing since all the Pitt football players (Boyd, etc.) are dual majors in Biomedical Engineering and Theoretical Physics. All the Penn State players graduate in Manure Treatment Strategy. Also, the tremendous cultural opportunities in Oakland distract their players from classes while there is nothing to do in Happy Valley but study and fish. The pitters are never at a loss for excuses - be it pathetic recruiting classes, game attendance, or graduation rate. Give them credit for creativity!

 

[PSU_Nut]

BobPSU92, in response to your comment yesterday in my other thread (see below), I wanted to provide some additional information which you (and other board members) may enjoy.

View embedded media

B1G Graduation Success Rate comparison (all available data in NCAA's database is shown):

View embedded media

And, to educate our frequent Pitt visitors, the same graph above with Pitt's data also included:

View embedded media

Just wanted to point out that you incorrectly say those are graduation rates. They are not graduation rates. They are graduation success rates which is very different from graduation rates. It just measures the percentage of athletes who either graduate or leave the university while academically eligible. So in theory it is possible to have 100% GSR rate but never graduate a single player.

 

[PSUEngineerx2]

Just wanted to point out that you incorrectly say those are graduation rates. They are not graduation rates. They are graduation success rates which is very different from graduation rates. It just measures the percentage of athletes who either graduate or leave the university while academically eligible. So in theory it is possible to have 100% GSR rate but never graduate a single player.

You are correct. Please see the title I used on the vertical axis, i.e., Graduation Success Rate, %.

 

[mbahses]

Just wanted to point out that you incorrectly say those are graduation rates. They are not graduation rates. They are graduation success rates which is very different from graduation rates. It just measures the percentage of athletes who either graduate or leave the university while academically eligible. So in theory it is possible to have 100% GSR rate but never graduate a single player.

Pfffftttttttttttttttttt!

 

[PSU_Nut]

You are correct. Please see the title I used on the vertical axis, i.e., Graduation Success Rate, %.

I just think the GSR is completely useless measure and just like the APR is another way for the NCAA to hide poor graduation rates for players.

Rutgers Men's basketball is a perfect example. In the latest GSR they scored a perfect 100%. So they must be doing well and guys are graduating right? Well think again their graduation rate was only 42%. This is a perfect example why the NCAA hypes up these calculations.

 

[JoeBatters1]

I just think the GSR is completely useless measure and just like the APR is another way for the NCAA to hide poor graduation rates for players.

Rutgers Men's basketball is a perfect example. In the latest GSR they scored a perfect 100%. So they must be doing well and guys are graduating right? Well think again their graduation rate was only 42%. This is a perfect example why the NCAA hypes up these calculations.

So what's your point? You think Paterno's track record with upholding the student athlete ideal is bogus? This thread is not about people's thoughts on the GSR - it's about Paterno's record in staying true to the student-athlete ideal.

 

[psu00]

Thank you psu00. I have prepared (just playing around really for entertainment) over the years several different graphs comparing various sets of college football data - I will try to post as time allows.

I hope you do. I like seeing different conferences and schools compared to one another in this stuff. It sure beats the ncaa's APR (?? Or whatever they call it?) where it seems "everyone gets a trophy" for graduating players despite reality.

 

[PSUEngineerx2]

I just think the GSR is completely useless measure and just like the APR is another way for the NCAA to hide poor graduation rates for players.

Rutgers Men's basketball is a perfect example. In the latest GSR they scored a perfect 100%. So they must be doing well and guys are graduating right? Well think again their graduation rate was only 42%. This is a perfect example why the NCAA hypes up these calculations.

I have access to the FGR (Federal Graduation Rate) data for all schools/years that I showed in the above graphs. I will make new plots using the FGR values and post over the next few days. Let's see if the resulting graphs look much different - you now have me curious.

 

[PSU_Nut]

So what's your point? You think Paterno's track record with upholding the student athlete ideal is bogus? This thread is not about people's thoughts on the GSR - it's about Paterno's record in staying true to the student-athlete ideal.

No I just think GSR is a useless data set that proves nothing about upholding student athlete ideal. It just tell you how good a school is at keeping kids eligible and above NCAA minimum standards. It had nothing to do with Joe. If you were not so sensitive you would see I was criticizing the NCAA and their BS.

 

[PSU_Nut]

I have access to the FSR (Federal Graduation Rate) data for all schools/years that I showed in the above graphs. I will make new plots using the FSR values and post over the next few days. Let's see if the resulting graphs look much different - you now have me curious.

I would imagine you will see a bigger difference between Penn State and the other schools because Penn State tries to get players to graduate and not just keep them eligible at all cost.

 

[PSUEngineerx2]

I would imagine you will see a bigger difference between Penn State and the other schools because Penn State tries to get players to graduate and not just keep them eligible at all cost.

I believe you will be proven correct. A majority of schools had such embarrassingly poor graduation rates that the NCAA more recently "invented" the GSR. This was a ploy by the NCAA to artificially inflate the graduation rate numbers so they could claim success at improving graduation rates.

Of course, Joe's graduation rates never needed to be artificially inflated because, as you know, they were stellar for decades.

The new FGR plots will show us just how full of sh*t the NCAA is with their "newly invented" GSR values. This alone makes it worth my time.

 

[PSU_Nut]

I believe you will be proven correct. A majority of schools had such embarrassingly poor graduation rates that the NCAA more recently "invented" the GSR. This was a ploy by the NCAA to artificially inflate the graduation rate numbers so they could claim success at improving graduation rates.

Of course, Joe's graduation rates never needed to be artificially inflated because, as you know, they were stellar for decades.

The new FGR plots will show us just how full of sh*t the NCAA is with their "newly invented" GSR values. This alone makes it worth my time.

The APR is an even bigger joke. You a freshmen that passes 12 credit in his first year with a 0.8 GPA earns as many points toward the score as a Sr who graduates.

 

[mj1962]

BobPSU92, in response to your comment yesterday in my other thread (see below), I wanted to provide some additional information which you (and other board members) may enjoy.

View embedded media

B1G Graduation Success Rate comparison (all available data in NCAA's database is shown):

View embedded media

And, to educate our frequent Pitt visitors, the same graph above with Pitt's data also included:

View embedded media

Waiting to see captain reilly spin this

 

[TheGLOV]

Pitt is dead to me!

Good & dead!!!!!!