Online Now 160

Panther247 Board

The home for all discussion on Pitt athletics

On this Board 58
Record: 1446 (12/21/2012)

Online now 142
Record: 1921 (4/30/2012)

Reply

CBS Sports: two sources say ACC will make more money than B12

  • getmyjive11 said...

    It's been out since 2006....

    Nope. Not the Apple TV device that is is out.It is going to be an Apple branded television. They've been developing it for years an it is one of their major projects. It is speculated that it will revolutionize TV, just like the ipod did for music and the iPhone did for mobile.
    http://news.cnet.com/8301-13579_3-57557499-37/apple-tv-hinted-at-by-ceo-tim-cook/

    signature image

    CrazyPaco

  • Pitt0008mmd said...

    No worries .. we all make mistakes.

    I'd like to point out .. Paco never made mention of the CIC or ACCIAC. So the averages were valid within the context of that thread.

    Yep, I was comparing conferences in that post, not academic consortiums. Chicago is not a member of the Big10. It is only a member of the CIC.

    Chicago withdrew, completely, from the B10 in 1946. The CIC was formed in 1958 and invited UC at that time. The CIC is a separate entity. UC is not a member of the Big 10 Conference in any way.

    PS:
    ACC= (8+17+24+27+30+31+36+44+58+58+68+72+97+106+160)/15 = 55.7333333
    B10 = (12+29+41+46+46+56+58+65+68+68+72+72+83+101)/14 = 58.3571429
    CIC = (4+12+29+41+46+46+56+58+65+68+68+72+72+83+101)/15 = 54.7333333

    Essentially, Louisville is 16 ranking spots away from putting the ACCIAC ahead of the CIC...and that would require very little movement for UL based on how close the scores are around 140-160.

    This post has been edited 7 times, most recently by CrazyPaco on 12/19/2012 at 11:59 AM

    signature image

    CrazyPaco

  • getmyjive11 said...

    EDIT: In regards to Penn State, they have grown their research dollars, just not at the pace of other schools. They are starting to get their medical school up to par, so you should see that number increase.

    That is because federal expenditures for academic R&D have essentially tripled over the same time frame. That is why in raw dollars PSU looks like they have kept pace...because all research schools look like they do if you don't put it into context. But when you actually examine if they have kept pace in so far as attracting the same overall % of available dollars, they have not. They have fallen, as I showed, in comparison to the examples of Georgia Tech that have stayed consistent and Pitt which has grown the proportion of federal R&D that it has received over the same period.

    The raw dollar argument fails to account for the actual R&D environment across all of academia.

    As far as PSU's medical school, I can quickly give you the difference in NIH awards between 2006 and 2012. This is just the medical schools. PSU has improved, but it is still largely a non-factor. No disrespect, but biomedical sciences is my field.
    PSU-Hershey Medical Center moved from 70th position (0.38% of total) in 2006 to 60th position (0.47% of total) in 2012.
    In comparison, Pitt's School of Medicine moved from 8th position (2.50%) to 6th position (2.76%). For overall NIH funding in 2012 (all components, not just the med school), Penn State-Hershey falls to 91st. Penn State-University Park, separately, is 93rd. (If you want to combine them together, Penn State would come out at 61st...behind IUPUI). Pitt is currently 6th in total NIH funding.

    This post has been edited 4 times, most recently by CrazyPaco on 12/19/2012 at 12:34 PM

    signature image

    CrazyPaco

  • CrazyPaco said...

    That is because federal expenditures for academic R&D have essentially tripled over the same time frame. That is why in raw dollars PSU looks like they have kept pace...because all research schools look like they do if you don't put it into context. But when you actually examine if they have kept pace in so far as attracting the same overall % of available dollars, they have not. They have fallen, as I showed, in comparison to the examples of Georgia Tech that have stayed consistent and Pitt which has grown the proportion of federal R&D that it has received over the same period.

    The raw dollar argument fails to account for the actual R&D environment across all of academia.

    As far as PSU's medical school, I can quickly give you the difference in NIH awards between 2006 and 2012. This is just the medical schools. PSU has improved, but it is still largely a non-factor. No disrespect, but biomedical sciences is my field. PSU-Hershey Medical Center moved from 70th position (0.38% of total) in 2006 to 60th position (0.47% of total) in 2012. In comparison, Pitt's School of Medicine moved from 8th position (2.50%) to 6th position (2.76%). For overall NIH funding in 2012 (all components, not just the med school), Penn State-Hershey falls to 91st. Penn State-University Park, separately, is 93rd. (If you want to combine them together, Penn State would come out at 61st...behind IUPUI). Pitt is currently 6th in total NIH funding.

    I never was comparing Pitt's med school to psu's. Clearly, PSU is behind and it would take a drastic change to catch up to Pitt (not happening). All I am saying is that they are making progress.

    getmyjive11

Pittsburgh
247Sports
Features
Resources
Connect

247Sports In partnership with CBS Sports