What is your Personal T20? Forum

[Aqualibrium]

Things i'm interested: spitting hot fire, ripping and rhyming, dropping puffy's cheese cake on the sidewalk.

1.Dylan
2.Dylan
3.Dylan
4.Dylan
5.Dylan
6.Dylan
7.Dylan
etc...

[HerseyChris]

Things I'm interested in: working in Seattle (though I also like NYC), clerkships, enviro or tax, and prestige I guess?
1. Stanford
2. Harvard
3. Berkeley
4. Yale
5. Columbia
6. NYU
7. UW
8. NW
9. UPenn
10. UChicago
11. UCLA
12. USC
13. Georgetown
14. ND?
15. Lewis and Clark

Can't name 20, sorry.

[HerseyChris]

yes, i would like to cut my teeth with my first HYS person.

Basketball, as you say,
Football, UNC and Stanford is a wash, i mean, you can evoke ancient history or something. But you flatter yourself thinking stanford football is relevent.


Womens soccer, clearly unc. Womens field hockey, clearly unc.
Lacrosse, clearly unc.

i dunno, have we mentioned dean smith?

Stanford: men's tennis, women's tennis, men's swimming, women's swimming, men's XC, women's XC, men's track & field, baseball, men's golf, men's water polo, women's water polo, women's volleyball. I'm sure there are more.

Also, Dean Smith doesn't really mean anything. He was a great basketball coach. Okay.

Honestly, I've always questioned the legitimacy of the Director's Cup because it places equal weight on Fencing as it does Football, which doesn't seem right. However, if we're going to debate OVERALL athletic departments, how can you argue with it?! We've won 15 in a row!!

Agreed, Dean Smith means nothing. He won what, 2 national championships in 35+ years? Big deal.

Also, how can you (ntzsch) discount Stanford's football history and then bring up Dean Smith? It doesn't make sense.

Academics+Athletics = Stanford win.
Athletics = too close to call, weighting in sports makes it subjective.

[Dignan]

yes, i would like to cut my teeth with my first HYS person.

Basketball, as you say,
Football, UNC and Stanford is a wash, i mean, you can evoke ancient history or something. But you flatter yourself thinking stanford football is relevent.


Womens soccer, clearly unc. Womens field hockey, clearly unc.
Lacrosse, clearly unc.

i dunno, have we mentioned dean smith?

Stanford: men's tennis, women's tennis, men's swimming, women's swimming, men's XC, women's XC, men's track & field, baseball, men's golf, men's water polo, women's water polo, women's volleyball. I'm sure there are more.

Also, Dean Smith doesn't really mean anything. He was a great basketball coach. Okay.

Honestly, I've always questioned the legitimacy of the Director's Cup because it places equal weight on Fencing as it does Football, which doesn't seem right. However, if we're going to debate OVERALL athletic departments, how can you argue with it?! We've won 15 in a row!!

Agreed, Dean Smith means nothing. He won what, 2 national championships in 35+ years? Big deal.

Also, how can you (ntzsch) discount Stanford's football history and then bring up Dean Smith? It doesn't make sense.

Academics+Athletics = Stanford win.
Athletics = too close to call, weighting in sports makes it subjective.

b/c Dean Smith revolutionized the sport of basketball. again, i do not think that number of titles is all that is important.

If revolutionizing a sport counts, then Stanford gets to use Bill Walsh, who first instituted his west coast offense while the head coach at Stanford in the 1970s.

[84Sunbird2000]

yes, i would like to cut my teeth with my first HYS person.

Basketball, as you say,
Football, UNC and Stanford is a wash, i mean, you can evoke ancient history or something. But you flatter yourself thinking stanford football is relevent.


Womens soccer, clearly unc. Womens field hockey, clearly unc.
Lacrosse, clearly unc.

i dunno, have we mentioned dean smith?

Stanford: men's tennis, women's tennis, men's swimming, women's swimming, men's XC, women's XC, men's track & field, baseball, men's golf, men's water polo, women's water polo, women's volleyball. I'm sure there are more.

Also, Dean Smith doesn't really mean anything. He was a great basketball coach. Okay.

Honestly, I've always questioned the legitimacy of the Director's Cup because it places equal weight on Fencing as it does Football, which doesn't seem right. However, if we're going to debate OVERALL athletic departments, how can you argue with it?! We've won 15 in a row!!

Agreed, Dean Smith means nothing. He won what, 2 national championships in 35+ years? Big deal.

Also, how can you (ntzsch) discount Stanford's football history and then bring up Dean Smith? It doesn't make sense.

Academics+Athletics = Stanford win.
Athletics = too close to call, weighting in sports makes it subjective.

b/c Dean Smith revolutionized the sport of basketball. again, i do not think that number of titles is all that is important.

and i am not discounting stanford football, i am just saying that they, like Carolina, are really not all that impressive as football schools. unc has a football history but is pretty far gone. like Chap, Stanford has never won a BSC bowl game, and won the pac-10 (ACC) only once outright in the last the 30 years.

Have you ever watched a tape of an NC game before the shot clock? He revolutionized basketball by making it as slow and dull as 1940s NBA games (19-17 anyone?). He won his two titles with astounding talent and recruiting, not amazing coaching (I mean, James Worthy and Jordan!?).

[tarheel87]

If we were going solely by their most recent teams we'd beat you guys in baseball and football...

[je_ne_regrette_rien]

1. Yale
2. Yale
3. Yale
4. Yale
5. Yale
(you get the picture)

[crackberry]

If we were going solely by their most recent teams we'd beat you guys in baseball and football...

That was not the argument.

[prezidentv8]

People arguing for UNC must be kidding. Stanford demolishes UNC by any overall measurement of their athletic programs. UNC beats Stanford on basketball. Stanford arguably wins everything else (not literally everything but you catch my drift). And any case for UNC over Stanford in football or baseball is pretty much clown shoes.

[rw2264]

georgetown
GWU
ucla
hastings
the end.

[prezidentv8]

People arguing for UNC must be kidding. Stanford demolishes UNC by any overall measurement of their athletic programs. UNC beats Stanford on basketball. Stanford arguably wins everything else (not literally everything but you catch my drift). And any case for UNC over Stanford in football or baseball is pretty much clown shoes.

Yea, i just dont think that the two titles S won in 1987/88 (baseball) and the not all that impressive football pedigree of Stanford, overcomes the fact that Carolina is the most dominate basketball program in history.



And, as Tarheel87 mentioned, chances are we would get ya'll in baseball and football for the past 5-10 years. I think UNC baseball has been to the final 4 (or whatever baseball calls it) in baseball for the past for years.

As for the less-popular sports, I really had no idea about Stanford's absurd penchant for excelling in things like tennis and xcountry, or whatever. But Carolina is not exactly a slouch in that department, see w soccer, field hockey, etc,

but, i must admit, i very much underestimated S athletics.

just curious, what to S ppl view as S's athletic claim to fame is? Tiger? Tennis? or is it just winning the most titles that dont matter?

Hey, I'm the first person to rag on Stanford, but again...as long as you're talking overall sports, basketball isn't carrying the day by itself.

[section90]

1. Yale
2. Stanford
3. Harvard
4. Berkley
5. Columbia
6. NYU
7. Penn
8. Chicago
9. Michigan
10. Northwestern
11. Duke
12. Georgetown
13. UVA
14. WUSTL
15. Cornell
16. UCLA
17. Texas
18. Vandy
19. BU
20. Minnesota

[im_blue]

1. Yale
2. Harvard
3. Stanford
4. Columbia
5. Chicago
6. NYU
7. Virginia
8. Michigan
9. Berkeley
10. Penn
11. Duke
12. Northwestern
13. Cornell
14. Georgetown
15. UCLA
16. USC
17. Texas
18. Vanderbilt
19. Notre Dame
20. WUSTL

[crackberry]

just curious, what to S ppl view as S's athletic claim to fame is? Tiger? Tennis? or is it just winning the most titles that dont matter?

Tiger, McEnroe, Elway, a ton of Olympians, mainly in swimming.

Our women's tennis team is also outrageous. Really the only comparison in NCAA history is, ironically, UNC women's soccer.

[im_blue]

just curious, what to S ppl view as S's athletic claim to fame is? Tiger? Tennis? or is it just winning the most titles that dont matter?

Tiger, McEnroe, Elway, a ton of Olympians, mainly in swimming.

Our women's tennis team is also outrageous. Really the only comparison in NCAA history is, ironically, UNC women's soccer.

Michelle Wie

[chadwick218]

My personal T20 is pretty close to the USNWR rankings + WUSTL, UIUC, ND, IU-B, and SMU (for Dallas only).

[Cara]

Since you're defining it as schools for which I would pay full sticker than my T20 is HYSCCN.

[Pearalegal]

1. Yale
2. Penn
3. Michigan
4. Harvard
5. Cornell
6. UVA
7. NYU
8. Berk
9. ND
10. Boston College
11. Texas
12. GWU
13. W&M
14. Boston University
15. Northwestern
16. GWU
17. WashU
18. UCLA
19. UNC
20. Columbia

[crackberry]

1. Yale
2. Penn
3. Michigan
4. Harvard
5. Cornell
6. UVA
7. NYU
8. Berk
9. ND
10. Boston College
11. Texas
12. GWU
13. W&M
14. Boston University
15. Northwestern
16. GWU
17. WashU
18. UCLA
19. UNC
20. Columbia

Berkeley and UCLA but no Stanford. Interesting/weird.

[prezidentv8]

Berkeley and UCLA but no Stanford. Interesting/weird.

Eh, I omitted Stanford too.

[crackberry]

Berkeley and UCLA but no Stanford. Interesting/weird.

Eh, I omitted Stanford too.

Can I ask why? I know you went to a CSU and hate Stanford but, seriously, why?