Jump to content

Kyle Porter grad transfers to UH; Tristian Houston grad transfers to SW OK State


Machinator

Recommended Posts

8 minutes ago, futureman said:

uh, sure.  why is that hard for you to grasp?

Because by all accounts he's actually a serious student.  Why not transfer to a school with some academic rigor?  He's certainly not going to U of H to realistically enhance his pro football prospects.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Amos Moses said:

Because by all accounts he's actually a serious student.  Why not transfer to a school with some academic rigor?  He's certainly not going to U of H to realistically enhance his pro football prospects.

meh.   UH isn’t harvard but it’s a fine enough school.  plenty of smart people there.  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, futureman said:

meh.   UH isn’t harvard but it’s a fine enough school.  plenty of smart people there.  

Futureman isn't usually this correct, so y'all should pay attention. UH is not and will likely never be a first tier university, but some first tier people do actually occasionally go through there. It's not your daddy's "Cougar High".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, 6th Street said:

UH is probably the best he could do - don't think there were a bunch of schools banging down the door to land his 1.2 ypc.

I'd have thought given his excellent performance at McCombs he'd have chosen a better school a level down. Guess he just wanted play in front of his family and get an ok degree.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, texifornia said:

I'd have thought given his excellent performance at McCombs he'd have chosen a better school a level down. Guess he just wanted play in front of his family and get an ok degree.

Well he wasn't going to beat out Abe Willow or Trey Flowers at Penn, so being a Quaker was right out. Where else was he gonna go?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

49 minutes ago, Walden Ponderer said:

Futureman isn't usually this correct, so y'all should pay attention. UH is not and will likely never be a first tier university, but some first tier people do actually occasionally go through there. It's not your daddy's "Cougar High".

Sadly, it is.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, HtownHorn said:

Something tells me he's going to have a big season for Dana.

Maybe playing in only  4 games last season will allow him to be fresher so he has a chance to do well.  Who knows, Dana's offense might be a better fit for KP??

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Machinator changed the title to Kyle Porter grad transfers to UH; Tristian Houston is in the transfer portal
11 minutes ago, Enchubben said:

Isn’t it harder to get into UH than Aggy?

no it is not even close

http://admissions.tamu.edu/freshman/admitted

http://www.uh.edu/undergraduate-admissions/apply/freshman/

it is harder to get into Tech than UH and has been for a decade or more (probably much more)

https://www.depts.ttu.edu/admissions/apply/status/first_freshmen/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

no it is not even close
http://admissions.tamu.edu/freshman/admitted
http://www.uh.edu/undergraduate-admissions/apply/freshman/
it is harder to get into Tech than UH and has been for a decade or more (probably much more)
https://www.depts.ttu.edu/admissions/apply/status/first_freshmen/

Those links are simply admission requirements. The acceptance rate at A&M has been on the rise (i. e. Easier to get into) from about 66% three years ago. UH has been around 60% (i e harder to get into than A&M
Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, MirrOlure said:


Those links are simply admission requirements. The acceptance rate at A&M has been on the rise (i. e. Easier to get into) from about 66% three years ago. UH has been around 60% (i e harder to get into than A&M

 

you do not understand what acceptance rate actually means it is a meaningless indicator that massive amounts of people believe has some meaning

the only thing acceptance rate tells you is about the number of students admitted (or not admitted) Vs the number of applicants......it gives you zero indication of the actual qualifications of those admitted or of the standards of admission 

thus is is meaningless in comparisons for universities

here is an example using some extreme numbers.....if you have one university named say "Wheat" and Wheat had admissions requirements of top 5% of your HS class and a 1350 on the SAT or you are not admitted.....and Wheat had 5,000 applicants and 3,000 of those applicants met that top 5% and 1350 SAT requirement then Wheat would have a 60% acceptance ratio

if another school called "Good Bull" had admissions requirements of top 25% of high school class and a 950 on the SAT and they had 80,000 applicants and 20,000 of those applicants met that top 25% of HS class and 950 SAT then Good Bull would have a 25% acceptance rate

so someone that (completely wrongly) places any value at all on acceptance rate would look at Good Bull Vs Wheat and totally wrongly assume that Good Bull was a much harder university to get into because they have a 25% acceptance rate Vs a 60% rate for Wheat

yet the 25% of students admitted to Good Bull had a 950 SAT and were in the top 25% of their HS class Vs Wheat where students were in the top 5% of their class and had a 1350 SAT

and more so the only factor that really plays into Good Bull having that lower acceptance rate is that they had a much higher number of applicants that could not even meet the 25% HS class and 950 SAT

there is nothing that indicates it is more difficult to be admitted to a university simply because that university has more applicants that are border line regarded

acceptance rate is simply an indication that a university had a larger or smaller pool of unqualified applicants with no regard to the actual qualifications of those admitted or denied or the qualifications for admission

also one can go here

https://www.usnews.com/best-colleges/tx?_sort=acceptanceRate&_sortDirection=asc

if you sort those by acceptance rate no one on earth would think it is more difficult to get into Jarvis Christian College than it is to get into Rice or UT (or anywhere else)

 

Edited by ButtFumble
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 
you do not understand what acceptance rate actually means it is a meaningless indicator that massive amounts of people believe has some meaning
the only thing acceptance rate tells you is about the number of students admitted (or not admitted) Vs the number of applicants......it gives you zero indication of the actual qualifications of those admitted or of the standards of admission 
thus is is meaningless in comparisons for universities
here is an example using some extreme numbers.....if you have one university named say "Wheat" and Wheat had admissions requirements of top 5% of your HS class and a 1350 on the SAT or you are not admitted.....and Wheat had 5,000 applicants and 3,000 of those applicants met that top 5% and 1350 SAT requirement then Wheat would have a 60% acceptance ratio
if another school called "Good Bull" had admissions requirements of top 25% of high school class and a 950 on the SAT and they had 80,000 applicants and 20,000 of those applicants met that top 25% of HS class and 950 SAT then Good Bull would have a 25% acceptance rate
so someone that (completely wrongly) places any value at all on acceptance rate would look at Good Bull Vs Wheat and totally wrongly assume that Good Bull was a much harder university to get into because they have a 25% acceptance rate Vs a 60% rate for Wheat
yet the 25% of students admitted to Good Bull had a 950 SAT and were in the top 25% of their HS class Vs Wheat where students were in the top 5% of their class and had a 1350 SAT
and more so the only factor that really plays into Good Bull having that lower acceptance rate is that they had a much higher number of applicants that could not even meet the 25% HS class and 950 SAT
there is nothing that indicates it is more difficult to be admitted to a university simply because that university has more applicants that are border line regarded
acceptance rate is simply an indication that a university had a larger or smaller pool of unqualified applicants with no regard to the actual qualifications of those admitted or denied or the qualifications for admission
also one can go here
https://www.usnews.com/best-colleges/tx?_sort=acceptanceRate&_sortDirection=asc
if you sort those by acceptance rate no one on earth would think it is more difficult to get into Jarvis Christian College than it is to get into Rice or UT (or anywhere else)
 

You use a shitton of words to say nothing.
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Machinator changed the title to Kyle Porter grad transfers to UH; Tristian Houston grad transfers to SW OK State
On 3/27/2019 at 7:55 PM, ButtFumble said:

 

you do not understand what acceptance rate actually means it is a meaningless indicator that massive amounts of people believe has some meaning

the only thing acceptance rate tells you is about the number of students admitted (or not admitted) Vs the number of applicants......it gives you zero indication of the actual qualifications of those admitted or of the standards of admission 

thus is is meaningless in comparisons for universities

here is an example using some extreme numbers.....if you have one university named say "Wheat" and Wheat had admissions requirements of top 5% of your HS class and a 1350 on the SAT or you are not admitted.....and Wheat had 5,000 applicants and 3,000 of those applicants met that top 5% and 1350 SAT requirement then Wheat would have a 60% acceptance ratio

if another school called "Good Bull" had admissions requirements of top 25% of high school class and a 950 on the SAT and they had 80,000 applicants and 20,000 of those applicants met that top 25% of HS class and 950 SAT then Good Bull would have a 25% acceptance rate

so someone that (completely wrongly) places any value at all on acceptance rate would look at Good Bull Vs Wheat and totally wrongly assume that Good Bull was a much harder university to get into because they have a 25% acceptance rate Vs a 60% rate for Wheat

yet the 25% of students admitted to Good Bull had a 950 SAT and were in the top 25% of their HS class Vs Wheat where students were in the top 5% of their class and had a 1350 SAT

and more so the only factor that really plays into Good Bull having that lower acceptance rate is that they had a much higher number of applicants that could not even meet the 25% HS class and 950 SAT

there is nothing that indicates it is more difficult to be admitted to a university simply because that university has more applicants that are border line regarded

acceptance rate is simply an indication that a university had a larger or smaller pool of unqualified applicants with no regard to the actual qualifications of those admitted or denied or the qualifications for admission

also one can go here

https://www.usnews.com/best-colleges/tx?_sort=acceptanceRate&_sortDirection=asc

if you sort those by acceptance rate no one on earth would think it is more difficult to get into Jarvis Christian College than it is to get into Rice or UT (or anywhere else)

 

^^^ That's good bull.  

 

BTW, if you get accepted to aggy, this is where you activate your account:

howdylogo.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.



×
×
  • Create New...