Menu
What's new
By:
Filters
AllBuffs | Unofficial fan site for the University of Colorado at Boulder Athletics programs

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • Prime Time. Prime Time. Its a new era for Colorado football. Consider signing up for a club membership! For $20/year, you can get access to all the special features at Allbuffs, including club member only forums, dark mode, avatars and best of all no ads ! But seriously, please sign up so that we can pay the bills. No one earns money here, and we can use your $20 to keep this hellhole running. You can sign up for a club membership by navigating to your account in the upper right and clicking on "Account Upgrades". Make it happen!

Official ****braska Hate Thread

BuffSurveyor said:
Thanks for being so informed about Nebraska's AAU situation. You are a smart guy. NOT!
Click to expand...
CitizenKane said:
That is simple.
1. Nebraska is an AG school focusing on non peer reviewed Agricultural Research. Non peer reviewed research does not have the same level of academic rigor or merit as peer reviewed research (For obvious reasons).
2. The AAU gives greater emphasis to STEM programs when evaluating institutions. So the fact that you can milk the udder off a cow doesn't help.
3. Like most other institutions, the medical campus for Nebraska isn't a part of the main campus, but because Nebraska has almost no other major research interests, they tried to count the medical campus as part of the institution. Which was a completely bush league move. Eventually (and it took a while), the AAU caught on to what the corn were doing and let them know their thoughts on the matter (This particular fact created much political ill will between the Nubs and other member entities which would come to cost Nebraska).
4. Total research financing at Nebraska has been low for more than 50 years. Recent increases in this financing look impressive as a percentage, but would still leave the financing for research at Nebraska so low that they were being outpaced by a large number non member institutions.
5. The faculty that Nebraska has been hiring aren't of adequate quality to consistently be accepted and participate in the National Acadamies of Science, Engineering and Math. Those that qualify, for the most part, haven't participated (and why the hell not!?!?!?).
6. The AAU finally did the right thing and stopped assuming that member institutions would just be granted continuing membership and started to compare their institutions to other institutions not in the top 62. Not shockingly they found several of these entities didn't met the standard (Nebraska and Syracuse are two examples).

The University of Nebraska has tried to spin what happened as strictly political and not their fault, but that is FAR from the case. The University had opportunity after opportunity to increase research funding and grant applications and to increase their STEM focus and they just didn't do it. Instead, they basically lied on their submittal documents and included research from the medical campus (which is really part of a different entity). Even with the medical campus research Nebraska had been warned multiple times to increase research or they would be put on review (Which could lead to them losing their status).

The real question anyone with ANY academic integrity should be asking is how and why was Nebraska allowed to be part of the AAU for so long when they were such a substandard academic entity. The answer is that the AAU had too many people in it that wanted to be nice and didn't want to harm anyone by kicking them out, even if they hadn't met the standard for years and years and....ok in Nebraska's case, decades.

Nebraska has even said, all that matters is a quality education, but the bottom line here is that the AAU helps measure a quality education. Not in some abstract manner. Not in the, "We create quality Digital Humanities graduates," sort of way. Instead in a way that positively impacts and advances human society. I am sure Nebraska is producing some great landscape and turf graduates. The other students who have gone there, particularly in Natural Resources, Architecture, any of the Arts & Sciences or Business school should demand a refund.
Click to expand...
This is an ass kicking of such epic proportions, I'm semi-speechless.
 
CitizenKane said:
That is simple.
1. Nebraska is an AG school focusing on non peer reviewed Agricultural Research. Non peer reviewed research does not have the same level of academic rigor or merit as peer reviewed research (For obvious reasons).
2. The AAU gives greater emphasis to STEM programs when evaluating institutions. So the fact that you can milk the udder off a cow doesn't help.
3. Like most other institutions, the medical campus for Nebraska isn't a part of the main campus, but because Nebraska has almost no other major research interests, they tried to count the medical campus as part of the institution. Which was a completely bush league move. Eventually (and it took a while), the AAU caught on to what the corn were doing and let them know their thoughts on the matter (This particular fact created much political ill will between the Nubs and other member entities which would come to cost Nebraska).
4. Total research financing at Nebraska has been low for more than 50 years. Recent increases in this financing look impressive as a percentage, but would still leave the financing for research at Nebraska so low that they were being outpaced by a large number non member institutions.
5. The faculty that Nebraska has been hiring aren't of adequate quality to consistently be accepted and participate in the National Acadamies of Science, Engineering and Math. Those that qualify, for the most part, haven't participated (and why the hell not!?!?!?).
6. The AAU finally did the right thing and stopped assuming that member institutions would just be granted continuing membership and started to compare their institutions to other institutions not in the top 62. Not shockingly they found several of these entities didn't met the standard (Nebraska and Syracuse are two examples).

The University of Nebraska has tried to spin what happened as strictly political and not their fault, but that is FAR from the case. The University had opportunity after opportunity to increase research funding and grant applications and to increase their STEM focus and they just didn't do it. Instead, they basically lied on their submittal documents and included research from the medical campus (which is really part of a different entity). Even with the medical campus research Nebraska had been warned multiple times to increase research or they would be put on review (Which could lead to them losing their status).

The real question anyone with ANY academic integrity should be asking is how and why was Nebraska allowed to be part of the AAU for so long when they were such a substandard academic entity. The answer is that the AAU had too many people in it that wanted to be nice and didn't want to harm anyone by kicking them out, even if they hadn't met the standard for years and years and....ok in Nebraska's case, decades.

Nebraska has even said, all that matters is a quality education, but the bottom line here is that the AAU helps measure a quality education. Not in some abstract manner. Not in the, "We create quality Digital Humanities graduates," sort of way. Instead in a way that positively impacts and advances human society. I am sure Nebraska is producing some great landscape and turf graduates. The other students who have gone there, particularly in Natural Resources, Architecture, any of the Arts & Sciences or Business school should demand a refund.
Click to expand...
This was as well written of a response I’ve ever seen on the inter webs I have ever seen. I’m in complete awe.
 
vinniew_11 said:
This was as well written of a response I’ve ever seen on the inter webs I have ever seen. I’m in complete awe.
Click to expand...

Your response, on the other hand...:p

tenor.gif
 
Nebraska is still a member of the Big Ten Academic Alliance (formerly the CIC) and I am wondering if the prestigious University of Illinois Chicago was so embarrassed about being in a group with Nebraska that they decided they didn't want to be a part of that BTAA but continue to work with that group perhaps selectively.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Ten_Academic_Alliance
 
BuffSurveyor said:
Sweet! Please tell the rest of us why you think Nebraska lost its AAU membership.
Better go do some proper research and get back to us. Links are required or GTFO.
Click to expand...
CitizenKane said:
That is simple.
1. Nebraska is an AG school focusing on non peer reviewed Agricultural Research. Non peer reviewed research does not have the same level of academic rigor or merit as peer reviewed research (For obvious reasons).
2. The AAU gives greater emphasis to STEM programs when evaluating institutions. So the fact that you can milk the udder off a cow doesn't help.
3. Like most other institutions, the medical campus for Nebraska isn't a part of the main campus, but because Nebraska has almost no other major research interests, they tried to count the medical campus as part of the institution. Which was a completely bush league move. Eventually (and it took a while), the AAU caught on to what the corn were doing and let them know their thoughts on the matter (This particular fact created much political ill will between the Nubs and other member entities which would come to cost Nebraska).
4. Total research financing at Nebraska has been low for more than 50 years. Recent increases in this financing look impressive as a percentage, but would still leave the financing for research at Nebraska so low that they were being outpaced by a large number non member institutions.
5. The faculty that Nebraska has been hiring aren't of adequate quality to consistently be accepted and participate in the National Acadamies of Science, Engineering and Math. Those that qualify, for the most part, haven't participated (and why the hell not!?!?!?).
6. The AAU finally did the right thing and stopped assuming that member institutions would just be granted continuing membership and started to compare their institutions to other institutions not in the top 62. Not shockingly they found several of these entities didn't met the standard (Nebraska and Syracuse are two examples).

The University of Nebraska has tried to spin what happened as strictly political and not their fault, but that is FAR from the case. The University had opportunity after opportunity to increase research funding and grant applications and to increase their STEM focus and they just didn't do it. Instead, they basically lied on their submittal documents and included research from the medical campus (which is really part of a different entity). Even with the medical campus research Nebraska had been warned multiple times to increase research or they would be put on review (Which could lead to them losing their status).

The real question anyone with ANY academic integrity should be asking is how and why was Nebraska allowed to be part of the AAU for so long when they were such a substandard academic entity. The answer is that the AAU had too many people in it that wanted to be nice and didn't want to harm anyone by kicking them out, even if they hadn't met the standard for years and years and....ok in Nebraska's case, decades.

Nebraska has even said, all that matters is a quality education, but the bottom line here is that the AAU helps measure a quality education. Not in some abstract manner. Not in the, "We create quality Digital Humanities graduates," sort of way. Instead in a way that positively impacts and advances human society. I am sure Nebraska is producing some great landscape and turf graduates. The other students who have gone there, particularly in Natural Resources, Architecture, any of the Arts & Sciences or Business school should demand a refund.
Click to expand...

There you go Fusker troll. A nicer person than me provided you an answer. You honestly expected me to waste time to research why your ****hole school lost its AAU status?
It doesn’t matter. It lost it. Not sure why you need Buff fans on a Buff board to explain it for you.
Oh and GFY and **** the Nubs!
 
CitizenKane said:
That is simple.
1. Nebraska is an AG school focusing on non peer reviewed Agricultural Research. Non peer reviewed research does not have the same level of academic rigor or merit as peer reviewed research (For obvious reasons).
2. The AAU gives greater emphasis to STEM programs when evaluating institutions. So the fact that you can milk the udder off a cow doesn't help.
3. Like most other institutions, the medical campus for Nebraska isn't a part of the main campus, but because Nebraska has almost no other major research interests, they tried to count the medical campus as part of the institution. Which was a completely bush league move. Eventually (and it took a while), the AAU caught on to what the corn were doing and let them know their thoughts on the matter (This particular fact created much political ill will between the Nubs and other member entities which would come to cost Nebraska).
4. Total research financing at Nebraska has been low for more than 50 years. Recent increases in this financing look impressive as a percentage, but would still leave the financing for research at Nebraska so low that they were being outpaced by a large number non member institutions.
5. The faculty that Nebraska has been hiring aren't of adequate quality to consistently be accepted and participate in the National Acadamies of Science, Engineering and Math. Those that qualify, for the most part, haven't participated (and why the hell not!?!?!?).
6. The AAU finally did the right thing and stopped assuming that member institutions would just be granted continuing membership and started to compare their institutions to other institutions not in the top 62. Not shockingly they found several of these entities didn't met the standard (Nebraska and Syracuse are two examples).

The University of Nebraska has tried to spin what happened as strictly political and not their fault, but that is FAR from the case. The University had opportunity after opportunity to increase research funding and grant applications and to increase their STEM focus and they just didn't do it. Instead, they basically lied on their submittal documents and included research from the medical campus (which is really part of a different entity). Even with the medical campus research Nebraska had been warned multiple times to increase research or they would be put on review (Which could lead to them losing their status).

The real question anyone with ANY academic integrity should be asking is how and why was Nebraska allowed to be part of the AAU for so long when they were such a substandard academic entity. The answer is that the AAU had too many people in it that wanted to be nice and didn't want to harm anyone by kicking them out, even if they hadn't met the standard for years and years and....ok in Nebraska's case, decades.

Nebraska has even said, all that matters is a quality education, but the bottom line here is that the AAU helps measure a quality education. Not in some abstract manner. Not in the, "We create quality Digital Humanities graduates," sort of way. Instead in a way that positively impacts and advances human society. I am sure Nebraska is producing some great landscape and turf graduates. The other students who have gone there, particularly in Natural Resources, Architecture, any of the Arts & Sciences or Business school should demand a refund.
Click to expand...
Day-umm.
 
On the other hand you can find graduates of Nebraska's Athletic Training program everywhere. Wonder why that would be?
 
CitizenKane said:
That is simple.
1. Nebraska is an AG school focusing on non peer reviewed Agricultural Research. Non peer reviewed research does not have the same level of academic rigor or merit as peer reviewed research (For obvious reasons).
2. The AAU gives greater emphasis to STEM programs when evaluating institutions. So the fact that you can milk the udder off a cow doesn't help.
3. Like most other institutions, the medical campus for Nebraska isn't a part of the main campus, but because Nebraska has almost no other major research interests, they tried to count the medical campus as part of the institution. Which was a completely bush league move. Eventually (and it took a while), the AAU caught on to what the corn were doing and let them know their thoughts on the matter (This particular fact created much political ill will between the Nubs and other member entities which would come to cost Nebraska).
4. Total research financing at Nebraska has been low for more than 50 years. Recent increases in this financing look impressive as a percentage, but would still leave the financing for research at Nebraska so low that they were being outpaced by a large number non member institutions.
5. The faculty that Nebraska has been hiring aren't of adequate quality to consistently be accepted and participate in the National Acadamies of Science, Engineering and Math. Those that qualify, for the most part, haven't participated (and why the hell not!?!?!?).
6. The AAU finally did the right thing and stopped assuming that member institutions would just be granted continuing membership and started to compare their institutions to other institutions not in the top 62. Not shockingly they found several of these entities didn't met the standard (Nebraska and Syracuse are two examples).

The University of Nebraska has tried to spin what happened as strictly political and not their fault, but that is FAR from the case. The University had opportunity after opportunity to increase research funding and grant applications and to increase their STEM focus and they just didn't do it. Instead, they basically lied on their submittal documents and included research from the medical campus (which is really part of a different entity). Even with the medical campus research Nebraska had been warned multiple times to increase research or they would be put on review (Which could lead to them losing their status).

The real question anyone with ANY academic integrity should be asking is how and why was Nebraska allowed to be part of the AAU for so long when they were such a substandard academic entity. The answer is that the AAU had too many people in it that wanted to be nice and didn't want to harm anyone by kicking them out, even if they hadn't met the standard for years and years and....ok in Nebraska's case, decades.

Nebraska has even said, all that matters is a quality education, but the bottom line here is that the AAU helps measure a quality education. Not in some abstract manner. Not in the, "We create quality Digital Humanities graduates," sort of way. Instead in a way that positively impacts and advances human society. I am sure Nebraska is producing some great landscape and turf graduates. The other students who have gone there, particularly in Natural Resources, Architecture, any of the Arts & Sciences or Business school should demand a refund.
Click to expand...

All Hail this post! F*** Nebraska!
 
CitizenKane said:
That is simple.
1. Nebraska is an AG school focusing on non peer reviewed Agricultural Research. Non peer reviewed research does not have the same level of academic rigor or merit as peer reviewed research (For obvious reasons).
2. The AAU gives greater emphasis to STEM programs when evaluating institutions. So the fact that you can milk the udder off a cow doesn't help.
3. Like most other institutions, the medical campus for Nebraska isn't a part of the main campus, but because Nebraska has almost no other major research interests, they tried to count the medical campus as part of the institution. Which was a completely bush league move. Eventually (and it took a while), the AAU caught on to what the corn were doing and let them know their thoughts on the matter (This particular fact created much political ill will between the Nubs and other member entities which would come to cost Nebraska).
4. Total research financing at Nebraska has been low for more than 50 years. Recent increases in this financing look impressive as a percentage, but would still leave the financing for research at Nebraska so low that they were being outpaced by a large number non member institutions.
5. The faculty that Nebraska has been hiring aren't of adequate quality to consistently be accepted and participate in the National Acadamies of Science, Engineering and Math. Those that qualify, for the most part, haven't participated (and why the hell not!?!?!?).
6. The AAU finally did the right thing and stopped assuming that member institutions would just be granted continuing membership and started to compare their institutions to other institutions not in the top 62. Not shockingly they found several of these entities didn't met the standard (Nebraska and Syracuse are two examples).

The University of Nebraska has tried to spin what happened as strictly political and not their fault, but that is FAR from the case. The University had opportunity after opportunity to increase research funding and grant applications and to increase their STEM focus and they just didn't do it. Instead, they basically lied on their submittal documents and included research from the medical campus (which is really part of a different entity). Even with the medical campus research Nebraska had been warned multiple times to increase research or they would be put on review (Which could lead to them losing their status).

The real question anyone with ANY academic integrity should be asking is how and why was Nebraska allowed to be part of the AAU for so long when they were such a substandard academic entity. The answer is that the AAU had too many people in it that wanted to be nice and didn't want to harm anyone by kicking them out, even if they hadn't met the standard for years and years and....ok in Nebraska's case, decades.

Nebraska has even said, all that matters is a quality education, but the bottom line here is that the AAU helps measure a quality education. Not in some abstract manner. Not in the, "We create quality Digital Humanities graduates," sort of way. Instead in a way that positively impacts and advances human society. I am sure Nebraska is producing some great landscape and turf graduates. The other students who have gone there, particularly in Natural Resources, Architecture, any of the Arts & Sciences or Business school should demand a refund.
Click to expand...
this is very interesting -- I wouldn't object if you decided to go back and add sources to your claims.

very small data set, but I've worked with three people who graduated from NU in engineering -- all three were superior engineers than the two MIT grads I've worked with (@Buffnik -- I forced myself to dangle a participle).

context: I'm a CU fan and a Wisconsin fan, so by definition I root against the corn in all athletics. I'm simply not, yet, convinced the academic trash talk being posted here is lacking a healthy amount of hyperbole (noting that CU's academics are such that Buff alums can look down at damn near anyone they want to).

full disclosure of further context: most VT alums are bitter as hell that the AAU won't let us in (at least those who are aware of the AAU and the significance of membership).
 
Last edited:
Notice how the corn troll vanishes like a fart in the wind whenever he gets owned? He will of course show up again and pretend this exchange never took place.
 
Highlander said:
Totally warranted, Hokie.

Shanghai University Ratings:
https://www.usnews.com/best-colleges/rankings/national-universities
CU: 90th (schools around that range include Marquette, University of San Diego, St Louis University, and Indiana University.
NU: 124th (schools around that range include CSU, ASU, UofA, and UC Riverside)

By the way, VT is 69th.
Click to expand...

You linked to the usnews rankings, not the shanghai rankings. We are are much higher than 90th in the country in the shanghai rankings(43rd in the world)as those rankings are based on quantitative factors such as research money, published articles by faculty, and how often those articles are cited in other articles.usnews bases its rankings on surveys of people who have axes to grind, as the whole point of the usnews rankings is to grind axes.

To be fair, research isnt always a reflection of quality. But CU is a research university, so it matters very much for us to be ranked highly in the arwu.

For those who care, nebraska lincoln was ranked around 200 in the world.

http://www.shanghairanking.com/ARWU2017.html
 
buffedup said:
Notice how the corn troll vanishes like a fart in the wind whenever he gets owned? He will of course show up again and pretend this exchange never took place.
Click to expand...

That post had a lot of, you know, words, so he might not know that he was owned in the first place. In which case, he’ll be back once his mom forgives him for getting a mess on the keyboard while he was looking at “recruiting videos” and lets him use the internet again.
 
BuffsRising said:
You linked to the usnews rankings, not the shanghai rankings. We are are much higher than 90th in the country in the shanghai rankings(43rd in the world)as those rankings are based on quantitative factors such as research money, published articles by faculty, and how often those articles are cited in other articles.usnews bases its rankings on surveys of people who have axes to grind, as the whole point of the usnews rankings is to grind axes.

To be fair, research isnt always a reflection of quality. But CU is a research university, so it matters very much for us to be ranked highly in the arwu.

For those who care, nebraska lincoln was ranked around 200 in the world.

http://www.shanghairanking.com/ARWU2017.html
Click to expand...
Oops. I had both open and thought I was reviewing the Shanghai one.

Buffs: 43
Knubs: 151-200

Thanks for catching that!
 
BuffsRising said:
You linked to the usnews rankings, not the shanghai rankings. We are are much higher than 90th in the country in the shanghai rankings(43rd in the world)as those rankings are based on quantitative factors such as research money, published articles by faculty, and how often those articles are cited in other articles.usnews bases its rankings on surveys of people who have axes to grind, as the whole point of the usnews rankings is to grind axes.

To be fair, research isnt always a reflection of quality. But CU is a research university, so it matters very much for us to be ranked highly in the arwu.

For those who care, nebraska lincoln was ranked around 200 in the world.

http://www.shanghairanking.com/ARWU2017.html
Click to expand...
That's also the main criteria that the leadership at the Pac-12 institutions uses to evaluate whether a school is a "peer institution".
 
Highlander said:
Totally warranted, Hokie.

Shanghai University Ratings:
https://www.usnews.com/best-colleges/rankings/national-universities
CU: 90th (schools around that range include Marquette, University of San Diego, St Louis University, and Indiana University.
NU: 124th (schools around that range include CSU, ASU, UofA, and UC Riverside)

By the way, VT is 69th.
Click to expand...
You said Shanghai rankings (also known as ARWU) but have the USNews rankings (generally known as an inferior ranking system, and one which is more applicable to undergrad studies than the entire university). In the ARWU, CU is #43. Kept scrolling but didn’t find Corn.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top