old rankings???
by: Honest
Honestly, if there's one thing I've realized on GR, it's that everyone is obsessed with old rankings. By this, I mean that people on here will deny certain houses are moving up and certain houses are moving down.
For example, Gamma Phi has long been socializing with middle tier frats and pulling good girls. So, why are so many people continuously putting them in the bottom tier? On the same note, while Alpha Gam has just recently shown improvement, they've risen quickly and are now also socializing with the middle tier too. Also, their past few pledge classes are very solid. Bottom tier sororities don't have the same caliber of girls or social calendars as these two, so why are they lumped into bottom with those houses?
Also, sigma kappa is continuously considered middle tier when their social calendar rivals the new row top tier. They're well known on campus for having beautiful girls, and are very obviously recruiting better than the rest of the middle tier. So why on earth are they still considered just average?
On the other hand, Chi O is an "old row" sorority that has had multiple years of bad pledge classes and has a social calendar similar to that of the bottom tier. So why do we consider them top tier still?
All I'm saying is that holding onto old reputations is ridiculous. Frats have obviously realized the changes in the sororities mentioned because their social calendars have changed.
Thoughts? Anymore examples?
#1 by: Eh
I think all the lower mid/ bottom sororities have shown improvement over the last few years. SDT could be an exception to that I guess but only because they limit themselves to a smaller segment of PNMs. Sure gamma phi and AGD have improved but so have DZ, DG, AXO, SK and Pi Phi. That's why the rankings themselves haven't really changed. They've all shown improvement so no one has really passed anyone else yet. Also there are only 4-5 really terrible frats so all the bottom tier sororities socialize with at least a couple of better frats. The only place I really agree with you is about chi o. They've not only failed to improve, but their reputation is slowly getting worse so they e definitely fallen. They must just have a heavy presence on this site or something lol.
Commentby: Superficial Feb 21, 2016 10:35:26 AM
Social calendar is not the only thing that matters. Anyone who thinks that hasn't figured out what Greek life is really about. Ranking based on social calendars is just stupid and petty.
- 31
- 26
by: What??Feb 21, 2016 4:38:05 PM
The simple fact of the matter is that prettier girls get better socials... Every rank on this site is based on looks and social calendars.
If sororities were ranked based on sisterhood, SDT would be at the top every time... But they're not. That doesn't mean they're not wonderful girls.
Don't pull the higher than thou attitude when you're on GR too. We all know what ranks are based off.
- 43
- 45
by: KD...Feb 29, 2016 8:59:31 PM
#3 by: Yuck
"Bottom tier sororities don't have the same caliber of girls or social calendar" as non-bottom sororities.
YOU ARE TAKING GREEK LIFE TOO SERIOUSLY!! CHILL OUT!!
This just fuels to the perception that nongreeks gave about us being shallow. Every chapter has great girls who are unique in their own way.
by: YesFeb 23, 2016 10:44:03 AM
And social calendar is only ONE PART of a sorority. It is not the defining factor by any means.
- 15
- 11
by: WellFeb 23, 2016 4:46:02 PM
The OP has a good point though. When a sorority has better girls & a better calendar, they're ranked higher. It sucks but it's true. I saw someone earlier on this thread mention how most ranks on this site are determined by that, and even though it's shallow, it's true.
- 14
- 15
by: agreeFeb 24, 2016 7:24:31 PM
I agree with you for sure. It's super shallow, but "better" girls are usually the prettier ones. I don't believe these rankings should be a thing either, BUT I'm always confused when I get on here and see people who are surprised to see ranks on greekRANK. I feel like everyone needs to be honest with themselves. Unless a rank specifically says "based on sisterhood" or "based on campus involvement" it means it's basically on looks and social calendar. It's impossible to judge a sorority completely by its girls' personalities because you can't meet all the girls or even the majority of the girls, so most of the time it's just looks.
- 12
- 11
by: wowFeb 24, 2016 9:14:08 PM
by: ?Feb 24, 2016 11:34:15 PM
But why should we only rank based on looks? Yes this site is about rankings, but those rankings should totally consider other factors like involvement, gpa, and most importantly sisterhood in addition to looks and social calendars. PNMs deserve to know who excels in all those areas and honestly most sorority women here are not shallow enough to care only about looks.
- 16
- 10
by: GPAFeb 25, 2016 3:00:18 PM
If GPA were the main consideration, SDT would be top. If it were service hours, it would be DG. However, ALL the sororities have fairly high GPAs, ALL serve the community, ALL have fairly strong sisterhoods, and ALL are extremely involved in campus. So the only main difference between houses are their looks and calendars.
If you don't think that's what ranks are based on, then the "bottom" houses should be MUCH higher, but they're not. It seems shallow, but that's the only real difference between the houses.
- 11
- 13
by: YESFeb 27, 2016 11:08:42 PM
Post Reply
Before you type: Remember, do not post names, initials, or any derogatory content.
YOU MAY ALSO LIKE
Didn't find your school?Request for your school to be featured on GreekRank.
by: OPFeb 20, 2016 5:36:00 PM
I see what you're saying, but I have to disagree that ranks haven't changed. The most evident way to see this is through social calendars. To say Alpha Gam and Gamma Phi have the same calendars as DG, DPhiE, and SDT is just to deny facts. The same goes for SK and the top tier. When sororities have middle tier calendars why would you deny them the middle tier label and insist they're bottom tier? That doesn't make any sense.
- 40
- 49
Report