There is no stopping these boys. The Princeton Review unveiled its annual list of biggest party schools and the winner is ... Florida! The Gators edged fellow Southeastern Conference member Mississippi, with Penn State finishing third. On the other end is Brigham Young, voted No. 1 among stone-cold sober schools. **** CONTENT REMOVED**** Here are the top 20 party schools: 1. University of Florida 2. University of Mississippi 3. Penn State University 4. West Virginia University 5. Ohio University 6. Randolph-Macon College (Ashland, Va.) 7. University of Georgia 8. University of Texas 9. University of California Santa Barbara 10. Florida State University 11. University of New Hampshire 12. University of Iowa 13. University of Colorado 14. Indiana University 15. Tulane University 16. University of Illinois 17. Arizona State University 18. University of Tennessee 19. University of Alabama 20. Loyola University New Orleans Here are the top 20 stone-cold sober schools: 1. Brigham Young University, Provo. 2. Wheaton College, Wheaton, Ill. 3. U.S. Coast Guard Academy, New London, Conn. 4. College of the Ozarks, Point Lookout, Mo. 5. Grove City College, Grove City, Pa. 6. U.S. Air Force Academy, Colorado Springs, Colo. 7. U.S. Naval Academy, Annapolis, Md. 8. Wellesley College, Wellesley, Mass. 9. Thomas Aquinas College, Santa Paula, Calif. 10. Calvin College, Grand Rapids, Mich. 11. U.S. Military Academy, West Point, N.Y. 12. Wesleyan College, Macon, Ga. 13. Franklin W. Olin College of Engineering, Needham, Mass. 14. City University of New York-Queens College, Flushing, N.Y. 15. Webb Institute, Glen Cove, N.Y. 16. Berea College, Berea, Ky. 17. Agnes Scott College, Decatur, Ga. 18. City University of New York-Baruch College, New York. 19. Simmons College, Boston. 20. Bryn Mawr College, Bryn Mawr, Pa.
These are two lists I'm glad that ND's name is not on. Not a big party school but also not a sterile environment.
That was kind of a low blow there, George. Sorry we don't make a habit of playing the service academies every year.....
Aquila, For the record, that comment was the Princeton Review's.... not mine! You should write them a letter!
Actually if you look at that list of 20 you won't find a single school on any Div 1 schedule except the Service Academies.
I noticed that the SEC is well represented on the party school list. Florida has been missing from the top of that list for some years now, it's good to see us making a comeback! :roll: :roll: :roll:
Actually I don't think the SEC schools play anyone on the 2nd list. ND plays 3 though. Kind of sounds like something MCG would say after being called out for badmouthing OSU 8)
Yeah, don't shoot me...I'm just the reporter! :lol: Still, the issue of weak non-conf. schedules falls back on all of us, to a pretty big extent. I wish something could be done to the system that would penalize teams for too weak of a schedule and reward them for putting more competitive football games out for those fans who shell out the big bucks.
Isn't this the job of voters - media, coaches, etc - in the various polls? Aren't they to consider the relative difficulty of schedules played by teams with similar won/loss records when deciding which to rank higher and which to rank lower? EG ..... shouldn't a team with a 1-loss record against BCS division teams with .666 winning %s be ranked higher than a team with 1-loss against BCS division teams with, say, an aggregate .400 winning %?
Gaterz....all else being equal I think strength of schedule is THE deciding factor. Last year it didn't have a chance to play out that way because there were too many teams with two losses. As I have proposed in my look ahead topic "consensus rankings" I think it could very well be a factor this year but you never know...the two loss bugaboo could again strike the major conference champions and allow a one loss team with no quality wins escape into the NC game.
Part of the problem is the risk of losses outweighs the black mark of the schedule rank... But again, I think that the biggest reason is $...you make more getting the cannon fodder to come to your home turf than in scheduling a home and home series with another big power. You guys continue to knock our schedule because of last years ranking. In the past 8 years we have played at Arizona, had Home-and-home games with UCLA, Washington, NC State, Texas, and now USC...and in next couple of years will be playing Miami (FL) and Cal in Home and homes. Oh, and we just announced a Home and Home with Tennessee in 2018 and 2019. (Tom...we might hafta hook up if I'm still alive.) But I know...just a tired, old argument.
Excuse me, but low schedule ranking or not, we were also a major conference champion and did manage to avoid the two loss bugaboo. Maybe we didn't have any quality wins, but some of those losses for the two loss teams were not exactly "quality losses" either.
You guys actually think the voters take into account strength of schedule??? If so South Florida would have never made it all the way to #2 and WVA would not have been ranked ahead of a 1 loss Ohio State team before they goofed up against Pitt in their last game. Terry
Stu, the compelling point in the argument that seems to be suspiciously absent from the rants...as evidenced by the results, the pollsters clearly look at not only the wins but the losses as well.....imagine that? We have not lost to a team that did not play in a BCS bowl in 3 years.....nobody else comes close to that.
You guys are very sensitive. You need to toughen up :lol: I didn't even read the comments.... just looked at the lists. Next time I'll take out any content that may be considered hazardous to your egos 8)
Well, I think voters should take it into consideration, never said they do. Second, there was merit to ranking WVA ahead of tOSU last season ... based upon difficulty of schedule ... as WVA played a more difficult schedule, as per the NCAA. Heck, the weekend WVA lost to an as yet unbeaten USF, tOSU was defeating a 1-win (over MiamiOhio) and ultimately 1-11 Minnesota team. Having said that, given the outcome of the last two BCS+1 games, there is reason to think maybe voters don't consider the difficulty of the schedule played.
So you are saying that a TWO LOSS WVa should have jumped over tOSU into the title game based on their schedule rank (#40 Sagarin) being OH SO MUCH TOUGHER then tOSU's (#53). This on the weekend after LOSING to PITTSBURGH (ranked the #60 powerhouse in the country, by the way, compared to our earlier loss to #30 Illinois). WTF???? :roll: :roll: :roll: