OT: US News and World Report 2025 | Syracusefan.com

OT: US News and World Report 2025

We’ve fallen in all the rankings. I’m also curious why more hasn’t been done to fix this. We are continually shown at the bottom of the ACC. In one ranking I saw, Louisville was above us. That’s not good.
 
We all know that these rankings can be easily gamed, and that they're not good at reflecting the things that college students should actually care about.

That being said, they're also a reality and most schools do take them seriously. Apparently not SU though, since we've let our ranking drop 30 places in the past ~30 years.

SU still has a good academic brand, but this ranking is bothersome. Schools are supposed to improve the perceived value of their degree over time, not see it decline.
 
We're 73, We're 73. The days of being 44 are long over. Does the Board of Trustees care about this rating or is it irrelevant? To see schools like UMass and Michigan State rated higher is preposterous to me but I guess things are always changing.

Good article on the college rankings. Enough mediorce schools have gamed the system so badly that the rankings get more and more meaningless each year.

 
Rankings suffer when fewer first generation students attend. Does this affect the education received by students with a parent that went to college?

Rank the standardized test scores of the students and that'll tell you where smart people want to go
 
Last edited:
We all know that these rankings can be easily gamed, and that they're not good at reflecting the things that college students should actually care about.

That being said, they're also a reality and most schools do take them seriously. Apparently not SU though, since we've let our ranking drop 30 places in the past ~30 years.

SU still has a good academic brand, but this ranking is bothersome. Schools are supposed to improve the perceived value of their degree over time, not see it decline.
The brand is taking a hit. I mean we're all to a degree ego maniacs and want our degrees to mean more than when we got them. If I was confronted with a Syracuse University in the 70s in the early 90s and rated BELOW Northeastern and Umass (my brother went to NU and i think he's illiterate) I would not have applied there (I went to Newhouse which is still ~10% admission rate which is good)

It's funny that BC has basically stayed static in 30 years and Syracuse has laid an egg to bigger land grant schools. Just a baffling state of affairs. Is there someone from the university on here that can lend some credence to this? CTO?
 
We all know that these rankings can be easily gamed, and that they're not good at reflecting the things that college students should actually care about.

That being said, they're also a reality and most schools do take them seriously. Apparently not SU though, since we've let our ranking drop 30 places in the past ~30 years.

SU still has a good academic brand, but this ranking is bothersome. Schools are supposed to improve the perceived value of their degree over time, not see it decline.
Hamstrung by the price tag
US news wants first gen students, SU wants parents paying sticker price
 
Last edited:
Rankings suffer when fewer first generation students attend. Does this affect the education students with a parent that went to college?

Rank the standardized test scores of the students and that'll tell you where smart people want to go
I think that's a fools errand. Most of the kids at my son's school went to Ivy league schools with minimal scores because they are playing sports. Same with the NESCAC. If you can play a sport (any sport) the admissions policy is baseline vs premium.
 
Good article on the college rankings. Enough mediorce schools have gamed the system so badly that the rankings get more and more meaningless each year.

(why don't we game the system).

It does matter to someone otherwise they would stop publishing it. There's metrics for a reason
 
Hamstrung by the price tag
US news wants first gen students, SU wants patients paying sticker price
The rankings are flawed. Some of the inputs on college rankings are spending per student (which drives up tuition prices), endowment per student, number of Pell eligible students, selectivity, debt load and what other college presidents think of you (just a bunch of cronies rewarding each other). It doesn't tell you where you will get the best education.
 
Hamstrung by the price tag
US news wants first gen students, SU wants patients paying sticker price
That's just one component though.

Malcom Gladwell (I know, I know) actually did a fascinating podcast about the US News rankings a couple years back. Laid out how much nonsense is a part of the formula, and how easy it is to game if a school is motivated.

I suspect SU's biggest issue that its overall acceptance rate is quite high. A lot of schools intentionally suppress that to juice their ranking.
 
I think that's a fools errand. Most of the kids at my son's school went to Ivy league schools with minimal scores because they are playing sports. Same with the NESCAC. If you can play a sport (any sport) the admissions policy is baseline vs premium.
There aren't thaat many spots. I have a nephew who skis at Dartmouth, he's doing very well academically but didn't have quite the grades as his cousins but it was because he was busting his a training. I didn't know how I feel about it because all those kids (wife's side) are brilliant

They're all going to be successful, none of it matters that much but the niece with the 1570 sat should've been able to afford ivy with all the schools they have
 
That's just one component though.

Malcom Gladwell (I know, I know) actually did a fascinating podcast about the US News rankings a couple years back. Laid out how much nonsense is a part of the formula, and how easy it is to game if a school is motivated.

I suspect SU's biggest issue that its overall acceptance rate is quite high. A lot of schools intentionally suppress that to juice their ranking.
Do you remember me complaining about him or do we just kind of know each other this well at this point despite not knowing each other at all really? I will listen

I just didn't buy any complex ranking especially when it comes to socially contentious issues.It's too easy to hide some bs component that really determines all of it
 
(why don't we game the system).

It does matter to someone otherwise they would stop publishing it. There's metrics for a reason
It's expensive.
California schools can just take money from tax payers to afford the things that make rankers happy?
 
Do you remember me complaining about him or do we just kind of know each other this well at this point despite not knowing each other at all really? I will listen

I just didn't buy any complex ranking especially when it comes to socially contentious issues.It's too easy to hide some bs component that really determines all of it
Ha, I just figured that Gladwell's research-by-anecdote approach is not something you'd like. I've soured on him a LOT over the years as well. But every once in a while he does good work. His books are mostly trash but his podcast is entertaining.
 
Ha, I just figured that Gladwell's research-by-anecdote approach is not something you'd like. I've soured on him a LOT over the years as well. But every once in a while he does good work. His books are mostly trash but his podcast is entertaining.
He lost me with the ten thousand hours stuff
Who spends nine thousand hours being terrible at something (aside from all the posters here)
 
I’m not sure that SU volunteers the information to U.S. News anymore (same for the law school which has similarly fallen quite a bit from even 15 years ago); that likely affects the ranking. Also Cantor started a long slide toward mediocrity and the momentum in that direction has never really reversed.
 
Yikes. Very odd too considering some of the top schools within SU.
Yeah, Maxwell and Newhouse are pretty prestigious, but the business school, engineering school, and performing arts school are meh, and you're way better off majoring in a traditional "education path" subject (history, English, language, math) at a SUNY or Le Moyne than you are with the price tag that comes with SU - the programs are nothing special and there are no big names in academia to bolster anything. The music school is also far inferior to Potsdam, Fredonia, and Ithaca, let alone Eastman at U of R.

The University brings flash by having "professors-in-practice" at places like Newhouse, but that's not really reflective of academic leadership - that's career training.

Academically, Syracuse banks on its reputation from a few schools and really leans into big name alums to prove it. A lot of its recent prestige comes from sports, especially basketball.
 
I’m not sure that SU volunteers the information to U.S. News anymore (same for the law school which has similarly fallen quite a bit from even 15 years ago); that likely affects the ranking. Also Cantor started a long slide toward mediocrity and the momentum in that direction has never really reversed.
The rankings slide started under Buzz. The rot started with him for football and academics. Nancy gets attacked, but this isn't Nancy's fault at this point. She hasn't been on campus in 10+ years. This is all Kent and the trustees for allowing the academic hit.

But Syracuse has a national brand and if I wanted to do work in NYC or outside of NYS I feel liked you'd have a better chance of getting your resume looked with Syracuse vs. Binghamton or Buffalo. That means something.
 

Forum statistics

Threads
169,365
Messages
4,827,598
Members
5,970
Latest member
Tucker

Online statistics

Members online
136
Guests online
1,253
Total visitors
1,389


...
Top Bottom