Rants, comments, thoughts and funny - mostly funny - on all things Michigan and college football.

If you have ideas, tips, links or pictures for the blog, e-mail us at: MichiganZone at gmail dot com.

Thanks for checking out the M Zone. And if you enjoy the site, please pass the link on to a friend or two. We'd sure appreciate it.

Twitter: @MZoneBlog

Facebook/MZoneBlog

Best Of Tat and Tresselgate

M Zone Videos

Best Of MZone 2.0

Best Of The Original MZone

Tosu Favorites

MZone Archive

Tuesday, March 07, 2006

We're Number 5?

The title of this post doesn't refer to some pre-season football poll. Nor does it refer to the Wolverine basketball team's seed in the Big Ten tournament. Nope, it's Michigan's ranking in a scientific poll on cuteness. And no, there weren't only five schools tested. There were, in fact, 10. As we all too recently found out, a fifth place finish in football is unacceptable, but to finish fifth out of ten when measuring cuteness? Well, in A2, that should be reason to have a parade down State Street.

The study was performed by a couple of University of Chicago students, Aaron Puri and Jason Scimeca. For anyone who's been to the Hyde Park campus, you'll know why they did this. For those that haven't, let me quote the Chicago Crimson article about the study:

They (Puri and Scimeca) noted the common belief that the U of C lacks attractive women, summed up by popular campus T-shirts claiming that “the squirrels are cuter than the girls.”

This fact was never more shockingly revealed to me than when I was an undergrad in Ann Arbor and a buddy who went to U of C (CU if you're from the Big 12) came to visit. He was astounded by how many good-looking women attended Michigan (yes, he was sober).

So the motivation for the study is clear. I won't bore you with the math behind it - it's all at the site and is sound. Basically, they took a random sample of female pictures from Facebook.com representing the ten schools tested and posted them to Hot or Not to get the public's opinion. The results are as follows:

1. Albion College 7.60
2. Michigan State 7.55
3. Oregon 7.52
4. Vanderbilt 7.49
5. Michigan 7.11
6. Princeton 7.06
7. UCLA 6.78
8. Stanford 6.75
9. Puget Sound 6.35
10. Univ. of Chicago 6.07

Some of the rankings are no surprise. Seeing Sparty at #2 makes sense, as does U of C being at the bottom. What's so funny is how far below #9 they are. And remember, this was an impartial survey. Some things don't make sense, though. There's no way UCLA should be below Michigan. Perhaps it was just a poor random sample. UCLA is a big school and, along with all of the stereotypical California girls that go to school in Westwood, there are plenty of desirable co-eds. Or perhaps Bob Toledo was coaching the Bruin co-eds that year. And Stanford at #8 out of 10 just doesn't sound right. Perhaps there's an anti-Pac 10 bias as many claim with the football polls.

Also, the list of schools leans heavily toward the more serious academic institutions, with a couple of exceptions. Where's Florida State? Where are the SEC schools? How about some schools in Texas? Maybe Puri and Scimeca were trying to gauge U of C's performance against comparable academic institutions. Or maybe they were afraid of making U of C look even worse than it does against some of these academic powers. In any event, hats off to Puri and Scimeca. We love being able to ridicule the University of Chicago on the blog. Michigan/Chicago is a rivalry that goes way back. After all, they won six Big Ten football titles (as many as Sparty and four more than Indiana).

Finally, Puri and Scimeca say on their site that they'll add more schools to the study. Perhaps if M Zone readers gave them some encouragement, they'd be more inclined to do so. Or maybe we should be happy with a number 5 ranking and leave it at that.

11 comments:

The King said...

Uh...

Utterly absurd, top to bottom.

Anonymous said...

These results are flawed. I noticed the schools listed, and said to myself, they are all elite academic institutions, until I read Oregon (chuckle, chuckle). I also noticed that UCLA was ranked ahead of USC? It is a known fact that SC has better coeds, and Arizona State's are even that much nicer (At least the ones who aren't doing porn).

SlimRod said...

They obviously have never been to Florida State University. Not just the quantity but the quality...

Robert said...

Anonymous must've started at the bottom of the list. Michigan State, "elite academic institution?" Really now.

Kirbdaddy said...

couldn't they have picked a better SEC school than Vandy??? Sheesh!

Kirbdaddy said...

Hot women at Albion??? I'm not real familiar with that institution. Isn't it a small liberal arts college??? Such institutions are typically not bastions of hot chicks.

steve said...

Umm... I can name the top 5 real easy...

Ole Miss, Auburn, Georgia, Southern Cal, and FSU. That's the worst list I have ever seen for rating the coeds.

Yost said...

I think folks are missing the point: that they simply picked 10 random schools total. This wasn't the Top 10 list, this is the ranking of the 10 schools they used. Please. Does anybody think Michigan would be on an all encompassing list with schools like ASU, SC and any SEC university?

Kirbdaddy said...

This is true Yost, I'm a Kentucky alum and UM girls aren't even close.

ferencv said...

I've always thought that Michigan girls were quite hot actually. And UCLA girls are definately better than USC's..... I guess if you like chunky blonde chicks, then the SEC is for you (my visits to UGA and USC were truly terrifying--dear lord that was a lot of blubber), but I'll take the thin girls of Michigan or Washington any day. Granted, SEC girls look easier....And aren't small expensive liberal arts colleges known for their hot girls?

Anonymous said...

I go to Albion College and out of the entire student body there are about four good-looking girls. This poll is absolutely bogus.