UConn/ACC | Page 4 | The Boneyard

UConn/ACC

Status
Not open for further replies.
btstimpy said:
The Capital One Cup is nice. They give a $200k scholarship at the end. It's an ESPN created thing that represents what ESPN want to promote.

But the Gold Standard in College Athletics is the Learfield Sports Director's Cup sponsored by the National Association of Collegiate Director's of Athletics. Each college team can submit up to 20 sports programs in their athletics departments to compete, men's and women's. If you want to submit more widely contested sports like basketball, that's fine. If you want to submit ice hockey, which hardly anyone competes in, that's fine too. Submit your top 20, and good luck. It's the fairest. And it's the one widely accepted in athletics departments across the country similar to USN&WR in academics.
Expand ...
Welcome back from the Cuse board....nice to see you're still touting the Directors Cup...the Cav's must be a yrly finalist to see someone who cares so much here!?! But truthfully your insight has been sorely missed. SU fans loss is our gain!
 
Last edited:
itgoeslike said:
I'm familiar with the product. The problem is that it is anything but fair. Learfield is also antiquated and is quickly becoming irrelevant. It is easy to see why some schools would submit fencing or woman's bowling as part of their 20 sport mix—you get points no matter how bad you are. For instance, Temple finished in the bottom half nationally in fencing, but they received 51 points, or about half of what UConn received for winning the NC in basketball. At the same time, the 150th best team in the 300 team D1 basketball receive no points (which is they way it should be). It artificially favors schools that perform poorly in uncontested sports. As I stated above, they need to proportion points based upon the number of participants and it should be weighted toward teams that win championships or finish in the top tier. Teams that finish outside of the top 10% of their respective sport should receive no points.

People can judge for themselves. Look up a particular obscure sport; see where a particularly bad school at the sport placed; and look how many points they racked up.

http://thedirectorscup.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/Apr24DIRelease.pdf

It needs to change or it will simply become more and more ignored.
Expand ...

The Director's Cup is the gold standard. It is what each of the P5 Commissioners and all of the Athletics Departments in major Division I sports care about and talk about. John Swofford just brought it up yesterday during his welcome speech at Louisville. They don't even discuss the Capital One Cup or anything else. The twenty sport limit prevents a big department like Stanford or Ohio State, who field 30+ sports from running away with it, although it hasn't stopped Stanford yet. It also doesn't let a small department of 16 sports who might win one major sport National Championship win it either.

Yes if you're in women's bowling, fencing, or have a ski team, you can get points. That's part of it, but I had to go to the fourth page to even find Temple to see what you're worrying about. The issues you are complaining about are on the margin. They are not even a factor at the top. If you want to fight city hall, go ahead. But the Director's Cup is today's measurement of athletics department success nationally. It is not ignored.
 
btstimpy said:
The Director's Cup is the gold standard. It is what each of the P5 Commissioners and all of the Athletics Departments in major Division I sports care about and talk about. John Swofford just brought it up yesterday during his welcome speech at Louisville. They don't even discuss the Capital One Cup or anything else. The twenty sport limit prevents a big department like Stanford or Ohio State, who field 30+ sports from running away with it, although it hasn't stopped Stanford yet. It also doesn't let a small department of 16 sports who might win one major sport National Championship win it either.

Yes if you're in women's bowling, fencing, or have a ski team, you can get points. That's part of it, but I had to go to the fourth page to even find Temple to see what you're worrying about. The issues you are complaining about are on the margin. They are not even a factor at the top. If you want to fight city hall, go ahead. But the Director's Cup is today's measurement of athletics department success nationally. It is not ignored.
Expand ...
Well stated bstimp...for those interested.
 
billybud said:
Actually...no one cares about women's sports, Olympic sports, and assorted special interest sports like Rifle, volleyball, sand volleyball, etc...

It is football...three lengths behind, basketball....Everything else is clustered around the starting gate.
Expand ...

Football is one sport. It's the most popular no doubt, but you have to have a minimum of 15 sports to be classified Division I to compete in Division I football. A school can suck at everything else it does and win football championships if it wants to. That would be a football factory. Virginia Tech did that for years. They are now at least trying to compete in other stuff. To each his own.
 
btstimpy said:
The Director's Cup is the gold standard. It is what each of the P5 Commissioners and all of the Athletics Departments in major Division I sports care about and talk about. John Swofford just brought it up yesterday during his welcome speech at Louisville. They don't even discuss the Capital One Cup or anything else. The twenty sport limit prevents a big department like Stanford or Ohio State, who field 30+ sports from running away with it, although it hasn't stopped Stanford yet. It also doesn't let a small department of 16 sports who might win one major sport National Championship win it either.

Yes if you're in women's bowling, fencing, or have a ski team, you can get points. That's part of it, but I had to go to the fourth page to even find Temple to see what you're worrying about. The issues you are complaining about are on the margin. They are not even a factor at the top. If you want to fight city hall, go ahead. But the Director's Cup is today's measurement of athletics department success nationally. It is not ignored.
Expand ...

The fact that Swofford mentioned Learfield provides zero additional credibility (it actually dilutes it). Also, based upon your comments, you don't appear to understand how points are awarded. What page Temple happens to appear on is irrelevant. I picked Temple randomly. I could have just have easily picked UNC on the first page to illustrate they placed even worse than Temple (among the worst in the nation in fact) yet still racked up 36 points. Additionally, I haven't even started to address how mickey mouse the actual rankings are within a sport. If people want to get a laugh, they should check out the rankings for Mens Basketball. The system is designed to create the illusion of athletic prowess. It's bogus.
 
btstimpy said:
Football is one sport. It's the most popular no doubt, but you have to have a minimum of 15 sports to be classified Division I to compete in Division I football. A school can suck at everything else it does and win football championships if it wants to. That would be a football factory. Virginia Tech did that for years. They are now at least trying to compete in other stuff. To each his own.
Expand ...

Baseball has nearly 300 D-1 teams. It's ridiculous that a team that qualifies for the NCAA tournament gets less points than the worst team in other select sports. It's bogus.
 
.-.
itgoeslike said:
Baseball has nearly 300 D-1 teams. It's ridiculous that a team that qualifies for the NCAA tournament gets less points than the worst team in other select sports. It's bogus.
Expand ...

The key is to have an athletics department that has at least 10 men's and 10 women's sports that it competes very well nationally in. The department can do so in whatever sports it wants. But have 20. That way there are no complaints that Stanford gets 100 points in water polo or Nebraska gets 100 points in bowling. Find other niches to do well in, or at least do well in 20 of something.

You have to qualify for NCAA postseason in any of the sports to get points. Baseball is no exception.

Or you can put all of your resources into football and go through the motions in everything else and claim no one cares about anything but football. You can drop everything you're doing in April and go to a spring game at the stadium that is totally meaningless. There are a lot of people running around the southeast doing just that.
 
btstimpy said:
The key is to have an athletics department that has at least 10 men's and 10 women's sports that it competes very well nationally in. The department can do so in whatever sports it wants. But have 20. That way there are no complaints that Stanford gets 100 points in water polo or Nebraska gets 100 points in bowling. Find other niches to do well in, or at least do well in 20 of something.

You have to qualify for NCAA postseason in any of the sports to get points. Baseball is no exception.

Or you can put all of your resources into football and go through the motions in everything else and claim no one cares about anything but football. You can drop everything you're doing in April and go to a spring game at the stadium that is totally meaningless. There are a lot of people running around the southeast doing just that.
Expand ...

You're still not getting it. I don't have an issue with a team getting a 100 points for being a national champion in any sport, even water polo. I have an issue with a school accumulating points for being at the bottom of their respective sport, in part do to a lack of participation. I also have a problem with a team placing well behind the finalists in a given sport yet cultivating almost as many points. It unfairly props up teams that aren't competitive. It needs to be directly proportional to performance and participation. Currently, you can finish 20th out of 20 teams and benefit point wise the same as a team finishing 20th out of 300 teams. Both the ranking system and how Learfield delves out points are bogus. Its akin to the participation trophy that blurs the line between winners and losers. In this case, you can sponsor teams in obscure sports, fail to compete, yet still create the illusion that you're good athletically.
 
Unlike some people out in yahoo country, we do value sports besides football. That is what has made the ACC such a great conference. People who care about a whole host of sports get the chance to participate. The other conference that comes close to this ideal is the PAC. The rest are either too focused on football (leaving them open to risks from concussion lawsuits, etc.) or aren't very strong in sports.
 
CoastAtlantic said:
Unlike some people out in yahoo country, we do value sports besides football. That is what has made the ACC such a great conference. People who care about a whole host of sports get the chance to participate. The other conference that comes close to this ideal is the PAC. The rest are either too focused on football (leaving them open to risks from concussion lawsuits, etc.) or aren't very strong in sports.
Expand ...

Tell that to your conference mate posting up thread. He clearly only values 1 or 2 sports and assumes that everyone else should feel the same. :rolleyes:
 
btstimpy said:
The Director's Cup is the gold standard. It is what each of the P5 Commissioners and all of the Athletics Departments in major Division I sports care about and talk about. John Swofford just brought it up yesterday during his welcome speech at Louisville. They don't even discuss the Capital One Cup or anything else. The twenty sport limit prevents a big department like Stanford or Ohio State, who field 30+ sports from running away with it, although it hasn't stopped Stanford yet. It also doesn't let a small department of 16 sports who might win one major sport National Championship win it either.

Yes if you're in women's bowling, fencing, or have a ski team, you can get points. That's part of it, but I had to go to the fourth page to even find Temple to see what you're worrying about. The issues you are complaining about are on the margin. They are not even a factor at the top. If you want to fight city hall, go ahead. But the Director's Cup is today's measurement of athletics department success nationally. It is not ignored.
Expand ...
I agree, for the most part. The only issue I have with the directors cup is that the points awarded should be weighted based on participation. A men's bball championship from a pool of 320 should have a much greater value than a hockey championship over 50 other schools or men's water polo over 20 schools.
 
The B1G cares about Olympic sports. The B1G sponsors 28 sports. More than the ACC, PAC 12, SEC, and Big 12. Ohio State sponsors 36 sports and has national championships this year in women's rowing and synchronized swimming.
 
.-.
huskypantz said:
I agree, for the most part. The only issue I have with the directors cup is that the points awarded should be weighted based on participation. A men's bball championship from a pool of 320 should have a much greater value than a hockey championship over 50 other schools or men's water polo over 20 schools.
Expand ...

The points are weighted to a degree in the Director's Cup. First place finishes all get 100 points, but after that it's weighted by participation like you suggest. Third place in baseball gets 83. Third in Women's Water Polo gets 72.5. Third in Men's Volleyball gets 25.
 
Ldandy said:
Tell that to your conference mate posting up thread. He clearly only values 1 or 2 sports and assumes that everyone else should feel the same.
Expand ...

Yes, we do unfortunately have those types of individuals but, fortunately, they're a recalcitrant minority that loves to only annoy people and give the impression that they represent more than themselves.

BTW, everyone else, including FSU, decided to stay put and work to better the conference. So no further departures are expected. This kind of stability would be attractive to a school like UConn.
 
CoastAtlantic said:
BTW, everyone else, including FSU, decided to stay put and work to better the conference. So no further departures are expected. This kind of stability would be attractive to a school like UConn.
Expand ...

Oh yeah, that sounds like some rock-solid stability you got going on there.
 
Weighted? #17 in Baseball = 50 points; #17 in Mens Tennis = 50 Points; #17 in Womens Tennis = 50 Points; #17 in Mens T&F = 57 Points; #17 Mens Basketball = 50 points; #17 Womens basketball = 50 points. #13 Fencing = 51 Points; #19 Womens Gymnastics = 52.5 points; #17 Mens CC = 57 points; #17 Womens CC = 57 points; #17 in Womens VB = 50 points; and #20 in Football = 54 points. . . and so on. All one needs to do is look at the data.

Another disservice is how the Directors Cup clumps teams together in bracket tournaments. For instance, in Mens Basketball, teams 33-64 get awarded the same points. Teams 17-32 get exactly the same number of points. So a team seeded 16 in the NCAA tournament and didn't win a game picked up points while the teams that played in the NIT final and finished in the top 30 in the final rankings get no points. Bogus.

http://grfx.cstv.com/photos/schools...auto_pdf/2012-13/misc_non_event/dcscoring.pdf
 
.-.
What Ville "owns" is a large fanbase that has proven to support the various programs, especially football and basketball. You see, in ACC territory, we support our programs. Sure, some fanbases gravitate towards one sport the most, either basketball or football. What we don't do is make up excuses, like traffic, kids games, the pros, etc. We just go. Still, it's nice to know the differences between the two regions.

If we add UConn then we'd be very solid, with athletic power going from Florida all the way up to Massachusetts, including NY/Conn/CNY/WPA/Ohio Valley. That is a set-up best positioned for the future.

Also, do not forget the ACCIAC: http://acciac.org/about-the-acciac/member-institutions/
 
CoastAtlantic said:
What Ville "owns" is a large fanbase that has proven to support the various programs, especially football and basketball. You see, in ACC territory, we support our programs. Sure, some fanbases gravitate towards one sport the most, either basketball or football. What we don't do is make up excuses, like traffic, kids games, the pros, etc. We just go. Still, it's nice to know the differences between the two regions.

If we add UConn then we'd be very solid, with athletic power going from Florida all the way up to Massachusetts, including NY/Conn/CNY/WPA/Ohio Valley. That is a set-up best positioned for the future.

Also, do not forget the ACCIAC: http://acciac.org/about-the-acciac/member-institutions/
Expand ...
Take a look at BC attendance for pretty much anything and get back to me.
 
CoastAtlantic said:
What Ville "owns" is a large fanbase that has proven to support the various programs, especially football and basketball. You see, in ACC territory, we support our programs. Sure, some fanbases gravitate towards one sport the most, either basketball or football. What we don't do is make up excuses, like traffic, kids games, the pros, etc. We just go. Still, it's nice to know the differences between the two regions.

If we add UConn then we'd be very solid, with athletic power going from Florida all the way up to Massachusetts, including NY/Conn/CNY/WPA/Ohio Valley. That is a set-up best positioned for the future.

Also, do not forget the ACCIAC: http://acciac.org/about-the-acciac/member-institutions/
Expand ...

LOL here ya go.

ar11765951044996.jpg
 
TRest said:
Take a look at BC attendance for pretty much anything and get back to me.
Expand ...

So what conference doesn't have outliers? In any large organization there will be one or two. What about the support with the rest?
 
.-.
NickyNewark said:
No doubts...they never mentioned markets of which doubtless the "Terps" is overwhelmingly larger...ville don't really own anything even in Kentucky and any part(and that includes W.Conn) of the wealthy populous midatlantic is a "goldmine"!
Expand ...
The college sports fans in the Commonwealth of Kentucky care about one thing, college basketball. The jealosy in Lexington right now is at its highest fever pitch ever. No one in Lexington gives a flip about college football. The envy of the slate of games that will be flowing through the Yum Center in Louisville vs the boredom of what flows through Rupp Arena every year is driving them crazy. They absolutely hate Duke, and now they have to watch Louisville play Duke. I have three UK grads as cousins. I can assure you of this fact. Check back in 5 years to find out who owns the attention of college sports fans in Kentucky.

Your statement about who owns something is more appropriate for Maryland. In their region all the attention is on Redskins, Ravens, Orioles, Nationals, Wizards, and Capitals. That's why Maryland, who is almost twice the size of UVA, gets lower attendance, has lower fundraising, has less fan interest, runs a deficit budget, and has cut sports. What little extra sponsorship Maryland got out of the community 20 years ago is now going to the Nationals, who are the latest team on the scene. Being in the Big Ten won't change much for Maryland other than making the deficit smaller. But they are talking about increased spending, so nothing will change.
 
btstimpy said:
The college sports fans in the Commonwealth of Kentucky care about one thing, college basketball. The jealosy in Lexington right now is at its highest fever pitch ever. No one in Lexington gives a flip about college football. The envy of the slate of games that will be flowing through the Yum Center in Louisville vs the boredom of what flows through Rupp Arena every year is driving them crazy. They absolutely hate Duke, and now they have to watch Louisville play Duke. I have three UK grads as cousins. I can assure you of this fact. Check back in 5 years to find out who owns the attention of college sports fans in Kentucky.

Your statement about who owns something is more appropriate for Maryland. In their region all the attention is on Redskins, Ravens, Orioles, Nationals, Wizards, and Capitals. That's why Maryland, who is almost twice the size of UVA, gets lower attendance, has lower fundraising, has less fan interest, runs a deficit budget, and has cut sports. What little extra sponsorship Maryland got out of the community 20 years ago is now going to the Nationals, who are the latest team on the scene. Being in the Big Ten won't change much for Maryland other than making the deficit smaller. But they are talking about increased spending, so nothing will change.
Expand ...
Thank's for the interesting information....don't we have a Md poster here to respond? Seem's the move has stirred some passions in the ACC? I thought the state of MD was smaller in population than Va by 3.5 or 4M? Its certainly smaller geographically!! Va is almost as populous as N.C. or N.J. no?I figured Md at just under 6M??
 
btstimpy said:
The college sports fans in the Commonwealth of Kentucky care about one thing, college basketball. The jealosy in Lexington right now is at its highest fever pitch ever. No one in Lexington gives a flip about college football. The envy of the slate of games that will be flowing through the Yum Center in Louisville vs the boredom of what flows through Rupp Arena every year is driving them crazy. They absolutely hate Duke, and now they have to watch Louisville play Duke. I have three UK grads as cousins. I can assure you of this fact. Check back in 5 years to find out who owns the attention of college sports fans in Kentucky.
Expand ...

If true, that's good for us. If Kentucky wants to move to a better basketball conference, like the B1G, they would provide a potential partner for us. Or they could lobby to bring us into the SEC.
 
NickyNewark said:
Thank's for the interesting information....don't we have a Md poster here to respond? Seem's the move has stirred some passions in the ACC? I thought the state of MD was smaller in population than Va by 3.5 or 4M? Its certainly smaller geographically!! Va is almost as populous as N.C. or N.J. no?I figured Md at just under 6M??
Expand ...

It's not worth responding to prolonged bitterness. UVa and UMD will both be fine. No biggie.

To your other point, the state of Virginia is more populous than Maryland, but UMD has a higher enrollment than UVa.
 
Last edited:
Pat125 said:
It's not worth responding to prolonged bitterness. UVa and UMD will both be fine. No biggie.

To your other point, the state of Virginia is more populous than Maryland, but UMD has a higher enrollment than UVa.
Expand ...
Thank's brother...I thought so but not as densely populated and I think Md is more popular than the Cav's are in their homestate !?! Bitter? That sounds exactly like the feeling's conveyed by bstimpy...your right responding to him is futile...he knows it all and will give you a headache if you disagree lol!
 
Well Nicky...ESPN has rated Louisville, of all metered areas, with more households that watch ESPN basketball....for 12 straight years...ESPN thinks Louisville is the bee's knees.

"Once again, the Louisville television market was the highest-rated metered market for ESPN’s regular college basketball season telecasts, averaging a 4.5 rating for the entire season. Greensboro, N.C., Kansas City and Raleigh-Durham N.C. finished tied for second with a 2.8 rating.

The ratings are an industry standard used to estimate the percentage of households in a media market that are tuned to a station while a program is being aired.

It’s the 12th consecutive year that Louisville has finished the season as the top television market for college basketball on ESPN.

And it’s not just ESPN that has experienced the big ratings in the past in the Louisville market."
 
.-.
Status
Not open for further replies.

Forum statistics

Threads
168,346
Messages
4,566,217
Members
10,468
Latest member
ADD3LA


Top Bottom