Flutie Effect

[JTrue]

https://www.si.com/college-basketball/2018/03/17/umbc-virginia-upset-doug-flutie-jairus-lyles

Not sure who all caught this article today, but it's something that's been discussed on here multiple times over the years in regards to athletics investment vs. academics.

Also, it is the Flutie Effect...**** auto-correct.

Edited March 18, 2018 by Brad
Title corrected

[CousinRicky]

USF was the beneficiary of that after 2007 football.

[Paisa el Toro]

2 hours ago, Bourbon Bull said:

USF was the beneficiary of that after 2007 football.

Quite true.

[NewEnglandBull]

5 hours ago, Bourbon Bull said:

USF was the beneficiary of that after 2007 football.

For about 30 minutes...

[CousinRicky]

33 minutes ago, NewEnglandBull said:

For about 30 minutes...

Not so. Enrollment applications increased dramatically IIRC and had continued for years.  

Edited March 18, 2018 by Bourbon Bull

[NewEnglandBull]

2 hours ago, Bourbon Bull said:

Not so. Enrollment applications increased dramatically IIRC and had continued for years.  

Sorry not buying...any increase could be attributed to many factors. Saying it was because of one year of one moment where we were #2 is something that is illogical. I would think a greater reason was the upgrade of the campus that occurred in the mid/late 1990s as well as the increase in academic quality.

Edited March 19, 2018 by NewEnglandBull

[JTrue]

6 minutes ago, NewEnglandBull said:

 

 

Sorry not buying...any increase could be attributed to many factors. Saying it was because of one year of one moment where we were #2 is something that is illogical. I would think a greater reason was the upgrade of the campus that occurred in the mid/late 1990s as well as the increase in academic quality.

 

 

So your argument is that the increase in applications for fall 2008 were due to campus upgrades in the 1990s?

[NewEnglandBull]

26 minutes ago, JTrue said:

So your argument is that the increase in applications for fall 2008 were due to campus upgrades in the 1990s?

I am assuming he was talking about years after...My assumption is that the effect is predicated on multiple years after the player left. By that definition, 2007 does not work. First no one player had an impact over multiple years. However, even if it is team based and there was indeed a bump, it would have to be for multiple years (not just 2008). BC has increased for about three or four years. But even if this did occur, attributing it to one year and one moment of being #2 is silly. Again, I would attribute this to an increase in academic quality and facilities. Would one year of football success (and let’s face it at the end it was not all that successful) create a bump for four years after??? Last, if a school does well in applicants because of athletic success would not the opposite also be true? I don’t think we lost applicants when Skippy was coach. Again, from a pure research perspective it is difficult at best to find an independent variable when it comes to applicants (discounting decreases in tuition or other student costs). 

Edited March 19, 2018 by NewEnglandBull

[JTrue]

22 minutes ago, NewEnglandBull said:

I am assuming he was talking about years after...My assumption is that the effect is predicated on multiple years after the player left. By that definition, 2007 does not work. First no one player had an impact over multiple years. However, even if it is team based and there was indeed a bump, it would have to be for multiple years (not just 2008). BC has increased for about three or four years. But even if this did occur, attributing it to one year and one moment of being #2 is silly. Again, I would attribute this to an increase in academic quality and facilities. Would one year of football success (and let’s face it at the end it was not all that successful) create a bump for four years after??? Last, if a school does well in applicants because of athletic success would not the opposite also be true? I don’t think we lost applicants when Skippy was coach. Again, from a pure research perspective it is difficult at best to find an independent variable when it comes to applicants (discounting decreases in tuition or other student costs). 

You did read that article, right? I think what Bourbon was saying was that for a year or two after our rise to #2 in 2007, we enjoyed a little boost to our applications (and therefore able to be a bit more picky in our acceptance raising our academic profile) as a result of our increase in media attention. 

[NewEnglandBull]

4 minutes ago, JTrue said:

You did read that article, right? I think what Bourbon was saying was that for a year or two after our rise to #2 in 2007, we enjoyed a little boost to our applications (and therefore able to be a bit more picky in our acceptance raising our academic profile) as a result of our increase in media attention. 

But scientifically is this bump due “entirely” from the season? Did it have “some” impact? Maybe, but what percentage if at all? What I am saying is that there are simply too many variables to say football was the sole reason. Further, other factors could’ve complemented the football factor.