Monday, July 25, 2011

Michigan Football Fans Delight in Recruited Stars at Gridiron Kings in Florida

Brian Bennett at the Big Ten Blog notes that a number of Michigan Wolverine recruits were featured at Gridiron Kings at ESPN's Wide World of Sports Complex at Disney World.

Tweetup: Detroit Lions Ndamukong Seeks to Break His Own Twitter Tweetup Guinness World Record #SUHTweetupDET

Detroit Lions Ndamukong Suh

-- at Twitter at twitter.com/@ndamukong_suh --

Seeks to Break
his own Twitter tweetup Guinness World Record

on July 30 in downtown Detroit.

Socialhat.com writes: "A tweetup is an event where people who Twitter come together to meet in person."

The official Twitter hashtag for the tweetup is #SUHTweetupDET

Thursday, July 21, 2011

The San Francisco Giants World Series Win and Managing General Partner and CEO Bill Neukom, Stanford J.D. 1967

Ann Killion has a terrific article at Stanford Magazine about SF Giants Managing General Partner and CEO Bill Neukom, former Microsoft general counsel, former President of the American Bar Association, Stanford Law School JD 1967, who, as managing general partner and CEO of the San Francisco Giants, brought a World Series baseball title to San Francisco. The Giants under the motto "Together We're Giant" are the reigning champions.

Stanford Ready for a Number One Football Ranking: Just Look at the Early Schedules of the Top Teams

Daniel Novinson at the Bootleg notes correctly that Stanford Poised For No. 1 Ranking... Seriously.

The first seven games of the Cardinal appear to be a lock.

Just consider that that LSU and Oregon play each other to open their seasons - one must fall, early.

Other top teams run the gauntlet in mid-season and will suffer some losses.

Yes, Stanford could be ranked on top by week 7.

College Football Preseason Rankings 2011

This post is an update of a previous posting at http://sportpundit.blogspot.com/2011/06/college-football-fbs-2011-preseason.html.

The polls for the coming 2011 college football season are not out yet (only "pre-polls" (see also here), so that this posting presents some material to help prognosticate which team might emerge as national champion in 2011.

YPPSYS College Football Preseason "Rankings" 2011  

- The Top 60 of 120 FBS Division I Teams 

1. Stanford

2. Nebraska

3. Alabama

4. Oregon

5. Boise State

6. Oklahoma

7. LSU

8. Oklahoma State

9. TCU

10. Virginia Tech

11. Wisconsin

12. Arkansas

13. Florida State

14. Ohio State

15. Notre Dame

16. USC (Southern Cal)

17. Arizona State

18. Mississippi State

19. Auburn

20. South Carolina

21. Florida

22. Michigan

23. Texas

24. UCF

25. Missouri

26. Miami (Florida)

27. Georgia

28. North Carolina

29. Michigan State

30. Texas A&M

31. Washington

32. Arizona

33. San Diego State

34. Nevada

35. Utah

36. Penn State

37. Iowa

38. Maryland

39. Southern Miss

40. Tennessee

41. Louisville

42. Oregon State

43. West Virginia

44. Air Force

45. Clemson

46. Pittsburgh

47. Houston

48. South Florida

49. Tulsa

50. N.C. State

51. Colorado

52. Hawaii

53. California

54. Illinois

55. Texas Tech

56. Boston College

57. Navy

58. SMU

59. Connecticut

60. Georgia Tech

These rankings and ratings are based on the YPPSYS Final Post-Bowl 2010/2011 NCAA FBS (Division I-A) Rankings and Ratings, showing how the teams finished last year and adding notes here and there as to what has changed in the interim. OUR PRESEASON RANK FOR EACH TEAM IS GIVEN IN RED TO THE RIGHT OF LAST YEAR'S FINAL RANKING.


YPPSYS = Yards Per Play System. Net average yards per play advantage (NAYPPA) over opposing teams is an important statistic for judging the strength of football teams e.g. college football's greatest teams of the past.


We developed NAYPPA some years ago and have used it successfully since then, though with some additional tweaking -- in a new combination for this ranking list as of July, 2011 -- for strength of schedule, best win and worst loss by opponent team ranking, conference strength and won-loss record. The Boise State NAYPPA of 3.5 for the 2010 schedule is a modern-day record for Division I FBS teams. but is relativized by its weaker schedule and weaker conference. Note that we take our yards per play stats primarily from cfbstats.com.

Note how Georgia Tech, the 2010 season 60th ranked team of 120 teams in FBS, clearly manifests the balance of this rating and ranking system, having played the 60th toughest schedule, having permitted as many yards per play on average on offense as on defense and putting up a nearly even W-L record.


YPPSYS
Final
Rank
2010
season
including

bowl
games in black followed by preseason ranking in red - the arrows show the
seeming trend for 2011 while number series shows as plus 1 or minus X the strength of the QB, RB, O, D, C, S
(offense defense coaching schedule)

_________

The
Football
TEAM
that was
ranked
and
rated
NAYPPA
2010
(net
average
yards
per play
advantage)

YPP OFF
yards per play

YPP DEF
yards
per
play  


Schedule difficulty
rank

(schedule
difficulty
rank
based
on Massey
Ratings)

W-L
record
2010

Team
Rating based on yards per play advantage adjusted by schedule
difficulty, won-loss record, best win & worst loss & conference strength (acc. to Sagarin))
___________



1 (19)
(as goes "Gus" Malzahn, so "Goes" Auburn)
X-1-1-X-1
(X-Dyer-Mosley-X-Malzahn)
Auburn
(16 starters & Heisman winner QB Cameron Newton graduated)
2.0
7.4
5.4

4
14-0
1.7
2 (4)
(QB Darren Thomas & Heisman 2 LaMichael James return)
1-1-X-X-1-1
(Thomas-James-X-X-Kelly-S)
Oregon
(12 starters graduated, All-America cornerback & punt returner Cliff Harris indefinitely suspended)
2.0
6.7
4.7

6
12-1
1.6
3 (1)
(big and strong, but coaching change adds uncertainty)
1-X-1-1-X-1
(Luck-X-O-D-X-S)
Stanford
(top QB in Andrew Luck but head coach Jim Harbaugh lost to 49ers)
1.6
6.7
5.1

2
12-1
1.5
4 (3) (national championship contender, as always, under Saban)
X-1-1-1-1-X
(X-Richardson-
O-D-Saban-X)
Alabama (loaded with talent but no proven QB so reliance will be on strong run game and top defense) 2.4
7.0
4.6

14
10-3
1.5
5 (14) (scandal may cut deeper)
X-1-1-1-X-X
(X-Herron-O-D-X-X)
Ohio State (depleted by scandal, loss of head coach Tressel and graduations) 2.2
6.5
4.3

27
12-1
1.4
6 (9) (always super tough, non-BCS powerhouse, in rebuilding year) TCU (11 returning starters) 2.5
6.7
4.2

56
13-0
1.3
7 (5) (sustainable depth, the mark of a super program) Boise State (defense strong, offense lost personnel, but Kellen Moore and Doug Martin return) 3.5! 
7.5
4.0

46
12-1
1.3
8 (12) (lots of talent but lose QB) Arkansas (QB Ryan Mallett must be replaced) 1.9
7.1
5.2

12
10-3
1.2
9 (8) (lots of talent, but still not in the pink) Oklahoma State (terrific QB Weeden and magic reciver Blackmon are back) 1.9
6.9
5.0

34
11-2
0.8
10 (11) (holes in the line to fill in spite
of potent rushing attack)
Wisconsin (RBs Clay and White return and QB problem fixed via Russell Wilson) 1.4
6.7
5.3

38
11-2
0.1
11 (2)
(EA Sports
has Big Red in Rose Bowl: Cornhuskers must first master stiff Big Ten competition)
1-1-1-1-1-X
(TMagic-Rex-O-D-Pelini-X)
Nebraska (Lavonte David leads defense, offense simpler under Tim Beck: look for the pistol. Paul Myerberg ranks Huskers 5th). Who can beat the Big Red if the offense clicks? 1.5
6.1
4.6

28
10-4
0.0
12 (7) (perhaps overrated and with mediocre stats but always a force to be reckoned with) LSU (a national championship contender? doubted by the College Football Girl) 0.4
5.3
4.9

15
11-2
0.0
13 (32) (self-destructed last year and is likely to have a rough season) Arizona (Wildcats coming off a 5-game losing streak) 1.1
6.0
4.9

13
7-6
-0.2
14 (10) (where can they lose with this schedule?) Virginia Tech (easy schedule, should put the Hokies in the top 10) 0.5
6.2
5.7

19
11-3
-0.3
15 (6) (perennial powerhouse not yet in top form, lacking dominance, but should move up) Oklahoma (Sooner fans expect big things of a team with 18 returning starters, but last year's stats were not impressive)0.5
5.6
5.1

20
12-2
-0.4
16 (13) (Oklahoma game will tell us how strong the Seminoles are, and they should move up in the rankings) Florida State (will the Oklahoma beat the Seminoles?) 1.1
6.0
4.9

16
10-4
-0.4
17 (29) (defense needs serious work and Spartans likely to drop out of top 20) Michigan State (Spartans must recover from a 49-7 loss to Alabama in the Capital One Bowl) 0.9
6.2
5.3

43
11-2
-0.4
18 (33) (Aztecs bound to stay strong under Long, but surely not to stay in the top 25) San Diego State (Brady Hoke is gone but team has strengths if defense-oriented Rocky Long can keep offense potent) 2.0
6.9
4.9

79
9-4
-0.5 
19 (17)
(a school this big should always be good but the Sun Devils have recently disappointed)
Arizona State (3rd largest USA undergrad enrollment and 20 (!) returning starters) 0.8
5.8
5.0

7
6-6
-0.5
20 (18)
(a likely top 10 contender -- how to keep this head coach from being hired away?)
Mississippi St. (Dan Mullen has brought life to this once doormat Bulldogs team) 0.5
5.8
5.3

23
9-4
-0.5
21 (20)
 (the sometimes good and bad Gamecocks are not consistent in a tough SEC conference)
South Carolina (Heisman candidate Lattimore leads  expectations, but QB and defense remain questions) 0.6
6.0
5.4

11
9-5
-0.5
22 (30) (LSU beat the Aggies in the Cotton Bowl last season 41-24)
Texas A&M (Aggies picked by some as the Number 2 team of 10 teams left in the decimated Big 12 Conference) 0.8
5.6
4.8

22
9-4
-0.6
23 (37) (last year, Iowa won the close games to stay in contention)
Iowa (always tough, headed by one of the best coaches out there, Kirk Ferentz) 1.3
6.2
4.9

42
8-5
-0.6
24 (25) (Big 12 North now with the Tigers as the favorites)
Missouri (somewhat weaker since the major question is quarterback) 0.7
5.7
5.0

30
10-3
-0.6
25 (21) (Some talent but will Gator fans have to wait a bit to recover the glory of the Urban Meyer era?)
Florida (defensive guru Will Muschamp
from Texas takes over as Gators' head coach, with Charlie Weiss on offense)
0.5
5.2
4.7

18
8-5
-0.7
26 (24) (Rivals.com countdown has UCF at 45rd which we think is too low)
UCF (Nr. 1 university in the USA in undergraduate enrollment, so coming  football power status is to be expected) 1.0
5.8
4.8

95
11-3
-0.7
27 (27) (Last year Georgia went 6-6 and the best team beaten was Georgia Tech, 6-7)
Georgia (fair to good, the Bulldogs host Boise State for the season opener, and are likely to lose) 0.9
6.1
5.2

26
6-7
-0.8
28 (15) (ND Nation has a top posting on Brian Kelly and Lou Holtz: An offense in transition?)
Notre Dame (10+ Wins? is Brian Kelly the miracle worker in year two at the helm?) 0.3
5.5
5.2

17
8-5
-0.9
29 (16) (this is the last season of post-game ineligibility, a stupid NCAA sanction penalizing the innocent) USC (Trojans, a shadow of themselves, though suffering many maladies, still have top recruits) 0.1
6.0
5.9

5
8-5
-0.9
30 (28) (new QB Bryn Renner could turn this team into a national title contender)
North Carolina (Tar Heels have talent but are clouded by NCAA sanctions) 0.8
5.9
5.1

24
8-5
-0.9
31 (26) (talent is flooding into Miami because of new head coach Al Golden)
Miami (Florida) (a new coaching staff for the Hurricanes) 1.1
5.9
4.8

21
7-6
-0.9
32 (34)
(the Wolf Pack must rebuild, as QB Colin Kaepernick is gone)
Nevada (Chris Ault's pistol offense has changed the face of football) 1.4
7.0
5.6

68
13-1
-1.0
33 (43) (The Mountaineers go on NCAA probation) West Virginia (Dana Holgorsen takes over as head coach) 1.1
5.3
4.2

58
9-4
-1.0
34 (46)
(Pitt AD gets a mulligan, will it work?, team ranked 35th here)
Pittsburgh (Todd Graham of Tulsa takes over as head coach for Dave Wannstedt) 1.0
5.7
4.7

41
8-5
-1.0
35 (53) (The Sports Bank rates Cal 56th for 2011) California (strong defense and weak offense) 0.5
5.3
4.8

10
5-7
-1.0
36 (35) (Utah's first year in the Pac 12 Conference, rated 17th here) Utah (Whittingham is top but what will Norm Chow do with the offense?) 0.8
6.1
5.3

40
10-3
-1.1
37 (52) Hawaii (only 9 starters return: a rebuilding year) 2.4
7.6
5.2

81
10-4
-1.1
38 (38) Maryland (Randy Edsall of UConn takes over as head coach) 0.9
5.6
4.7

54
9-4
-1.1
39 (31) (they have top coaches and wins will come) Washington (first they have to beat SDSU, which may not be easy) -0.1
5.5
5.6

3
7-6
-1.2
40 (22) (Brady Hoke recruits the magic back to Ann Arbor starting 2012, but 2011 will still be rough) Michigan (Wolverines have the offense, but defensive improvement is the key to winning more games this year) 0.7
6.8
6.1

33
7-6
-1.2
41 (44) Air Force (Troy Calhoun continues as a winner) 0.8
6.0
5.2

64
9-4
-1.3
42 (61) Baylor (Robert Griffin at QB guarantees potent offense) 0.8
6.6
5.8

52
7-6
-1.3
43 (40) Tennessee (rocky days for Rocky Top, but a winning season looks possible) 0.3
5.7
5.4

32
6-7
-1.4
44 (57) Navy (a tough schedule for
the Midshipmen this year)
0.5
6.2
5.7

69
9-4
-1.5
45 (42) Oregon State (has only 4 home games in a stadium that is its greatest advantage) -0.5
5.2
5.7

1
5-7
-1.7
46 (50) N.C. State (Wolfpack lacks top quarterback) -0.1
5.2
5.3

29
9-4
-1.7
47 (54) Illinois (many fresh faces for the Illini)
0.3
5.7
5.4

49
7-6
-1.7
48 (23) (last year Texas, not geared to it, went to a run game, losing seven) Texas (offense needs total revamp while Muschamp is gone as OC on defense)
0.6
5.2
4.6

50
5-7
-1.7
49 (45)
(Chad Morris speeding up the team)
Clemson (shake-up in coaching staff) 0.2
5.1
4.9

25
6-7
-1.7
50 (56)
(great defense, disastrous offense)
Boston College (has three top players) 0.4
4.8
4.4

31
7-6
-1.8
51 (49)
(an offensive juggernaut ala Malzahn)
Tulsa (new head coach Bill Blankenship ) 0.3
6.5
6.2

86
10-3
-1.8
52 (36)
(a young team starts to come of age)
Penn State (16 returning starters for Joe Paterno) 0.1
5.5
5.4

48
7-6
-1.9
53 (48)
(defense leads to winning record)
South Florida (Skip Holtz in 2nd year must solve problems on offense)
0.3
5.0
4.7

67
8-5
-1.9
54 (41) Louisville (the Tyler Gabbert saga is unclear, Charlie Strong's team is better but needs QB) 0.7
5.7
5.0

71
7-6
-1.9
55 (59) (Coach Jerry Kill to Minnesota)
Northern Illinois (59th at Pre-Snap Read) 1.7
6.9
5.2

104
11-3
-1.9
56 (55) Texas Tech (Tommy Tuberville has to fix defense) -0.1
5.7
5.8

53
8-5
-2.0
57 (68) Kentucky (defense OK but offense unclear) 0.5
6.1
5.6

59
6-7
-2.0
58 (85) Cincinnati (Bearcats went from 11-0 in 2009 to 4-8) 0.7
6.0
5.3

51
4-8
-2.0
59 (76) Connecticut (Paul Pasqualoni takes over) -0.3
4.9
5.2

75
8-5
-2.4
60 (60) Georgia Tech (statistically last year the most average of the average teams)
0.0
5.7
5.7

60
6-7
-2.5
61 (58) SMU (18 starters and QB return) 1.3
6.3
5.0

80
7-7
-2.5
62 (67) Mississippi (Nutt defense remains weak) -0.5
5.8
6.3

44
4-8
-2.7
63 (62) Syracuse (Doug Marrone moving the Orangemen) 0.6
5.2
4.6

74
8-5
-2.7
64 (64) Kansas State (Wildcats short on talent) -0.6
5.8
6.4

57
7-6
-2.8
65 (65) BYU (plays as an independent this season) -0.1
5.0
5.1

61
7-6
-2.8
66 (86) Temple (Al Golden is gone) 0.8
5.5
4.7

102
8-4
-2.8
67 (66) Northwestern (strong QB in Persa but weak defense) -0.5
5.4
5.9

76
7-6
-2.9
68 (78) UCLA (Chow out, Johnson in for offense) -1.4
4.7
6.1

8
4-8
-3.0
69 (51) Colorado (will Buffs be better in Pac 12 under Jon Embree?) -0.8
5.1
5.9

36
5-7
-3.1
70 (69) Iowa State (Paul Rhoads doing well with Cyclones) -0.9
4.6
5.5

35
5-7
-3.1
71 (70) Fresno State (Pat Hill wins for Bulldogs) -0.2
5.6
5.8

77
8-5
-3.2
72 (71) Purdue (Boilermaker offense is the questionmark) -0.5
4.7
5.2

62
4-8
-3.2
73 (39) Southern Miss (highly ranked on many lists) 0.2
5.7
5.5

90
8-5
-3.3
74 (47) Houston (Case Keenum returns at QB to break more records) 0.6
6.4
5.8

89
5-7
-3.3
75 (63) Virginia (Mike London has 18 returning starters) -0.5
5.6
6.1

65
4-8
-3.4
76 (84) UAB (Callaway on the hot seat this year?) 0.0
5.8
5.8

96
4-8
-3.4
77 (79) (top defense, if only they had an offense) Kent State (1st year coach Darrell Hazell - of Ohio State - putting in spread offense) 0.5
4.9
4.4

106
5-7
-3.5
78 (80) (need more talent for SEC play) Vanderbilt (new head coach James Franklin) -1.2
4.6
5.8

47
2-10
-3.7
79 (72) Army (fortunes improving under Rich Ellerson) -0.9
4.9
5.8

98
7-6
-3.7
80 (81) Washington St. -1.8
4.9
6.7

9
2-10
-3.8
81 (82) Wake Forest -1.0
4.8
5.8

39
3-9
-3.8
82 (83) Toledo 0.2
5.5
5.3

91
8-5
-3.8
83 (73) Minnesota (new coach Kill will raise the bar) -1.3
5.3
6.6

45
3-9
-3.9
84 (87) Duke -1.2
5.2
6.4

37
3-9
-3.9
85 (97) Idaho -0.4
5.5
5.9

88
6-7
-4.0
86 (88) Indiana -1.2
5.4
6.6

87
5-7
-4.0
87 (74) Miami (Ohio) -0.2
5.2
5.4

108
10-4
-4.1
88 (89) Ohio 0.2
5.5
5.3

114
8-5
-4.1
89 (98) Louisiana Tech -0.7
5.3
6.0

78
5-7
-4.1
90 (77) Troy 0.1
5.9
5.8

111
8-5
-4.1
91 (91) Rutgers (mediocre to average) -1.2
4.6
5.8

84
4-8
-4.2
92 (92) Wyoming -0.8
5.0
5.8

70
3-9
-4.2
93 (93) UTEP -0.1
5.6
5.7

117
6-7
-4.2
94 (94) Florida Int. FIU 0.1
5.7
5.6

103
7-6
-4.3
95 (95) Marshall -0.3
4.9
5.2

93
5-7
-4.3
96 (96) Tulane -1.0
5.0
6.0

97
4-8
-4.3
97 (90) West. Michigan 0.0
5.7
5.7

107
6-6
-4.4
98 (100) East Carolina -0.8
5.7
6.5

66
6-7
-4.5
99 (75) Kansas -1.9
4.3
6.2

63
3-9
-4.7
100 (99) Colorado State -1.4
5.1
6.5

72
3-9
-4.8
101 (101) Mid. Tennessee 0.2
5.3
5.1

132
6-7
-4.8
102 (102) Utah State -1.2
4.9
6.1

82
4-8
-4.9
103 (103) Centr. Michigan -0.1
5.4
5.5

101
3-9
-5.0
104 (104) Arkansas State -0.2
5.7
5.9

105
4-8
-5.2
105 (105) Rice -1.2
5.2
6.4

94
4-8
-5.3
106 (106) San Jose State -1.2
5.2
6.4

73
1-12
-5.6
107 (107) Louis.-Monroe -0.9
4.8
5.7

110
5-7
-5.7
108 (108) North Texas -0.3
5.6
5.9

116
3-9
-5.7
109 (109) Florida Atlantic -0.7
4.9
5.6

113
4-8
-5.9
110 (110) UNLV -2.3
4.4
6.7

55
2-11
-6.0
111 (111) Ball State -1.0
4.9
5.9

122
4-8
-6.0
112 (112) Buffalo -0.7
4.2
4.9

118
2-10
-6.0
113 (113) Louis.-Lafayette -0.9
5.0
5.9

109
3-9
-6.1
114 (114) Memphis -1.8
4.8
6.6

85
1-11
-6.5
115 (115) West. Kentucky -1.2
4.8
6.0

112
2-10
-6.6
116 (116) New Mexico St. -2.5
4.3
6.8

92
2-10
-6.6
117 (117) New Mexico -2.4
4.0
6.4

83
1-11
-6.6
118 (118) Bowling Green -1.8
4.3
6.1

100
2-10
-6.9
119 (119) East. Michigan -2.3
5.0
7.3

99
2-10
-7.4
120 (120) Akron -2.0
4.3
6.3

120
1-11
-7.5

Wednesday, July 20, 2011

The Best College Athletic Program? Stanford Wins Learfield Sports Directors' Cup as Top University for Division I Athletics for the 17th Straight Year: Competing NCAA Capital One Cup is a Farce

At the 2008 Olympic Games in Beijing, Stanford athletes won 25 medals. Consider that fact in forming your opinion about the matters under discussion below.

As can be found at the NACDA OFFICIAL ATHLETIC SITE, Stanford University has won the Learfield Sports Directors' Cup for the 17th straight year in a remarkable record without parallel, outdistancing the 2nd place Ohio State Buckeyes 1550.25 points to 1277.05 points.

The Learfield Sports Directors' Cup for the top Division I college athletics program is based on performance by the highest ranking 20 teams at each university in all college sports (10 men's and 10 women's teams).

Stanford competes not only athletically but also academically AS WELL with the likes of Harvard, Princeton, Yale, and Columbia, who with Stanford are the top 5 ranking academic universities in the U.S. News and World Report), whereas Yale and Harvard in athletics e.g. finished among the also-rans at 84th and 89th place with 226.0 and 194.0 points respectively.

Stanford's achievement is all the more remarkable when one looks at the disparity in undergraduate student enrollments at competing universities -- e.g. where 2nd place Ohio State has 6 to 7 times more undergraduate students. There is no doubt that the best all-around university in America for student-athletes is Stanford.

Here are the top 10 schools on the Learfield list, their points and their enrollments, although the Directors' Cup ranks ALL SCHOOLS -- see their list):

1. Stanford - 1550.25 points (the undergraduate enrollments only 6602, of whom ca. 800 are student-athletes) - see also impact of enrollment on football
2. Ohio State - 1277.05 points (undergraduate enrollment 41348)
3. California - 1219.50 (undergraduate enrollment 25530)
4. Florida - 1212.25 (undergraduate enrollment 33628)
5. Duke - 1171.50 (undergraduate enrollment 6578)
6. North Carolina - 1160.75 (undergraduate enrollment 17981 - the Tar Heels won the first Directors' Cup and Stanford has won it every year since then)
7. Virginia - 1092.00 (undergraduate enrollment 15476)
8. Texas A&M - 1090.50 (undergraduate enrollment 38810)
9. Florida State 1079.00 (undergraduate enrollment 30803)
10. Oklahoma - 1064.75 (undergraduate enrollment 21059)

Obviously, money and scholarships have a lot to do with the Stanford success, but given Stanford's low total enrollment and stringent academic standards, the main factors for Stanford's sustained success are surely effective recruiting, top coaching, a climate of excellence, and an atmosphere of achievement.

It also helps that Stanford is ranked Number 1 among all US colleges and universities as the place to which young people dream of going for their college education. Note that Stanford also ranks at the top for many of its graduate schools.

Accordingly, there is no fault -- as some have claimed -- with the Directors' Cup method of determining the winner by treating all college sports equally.

The award was not designed for Stanford, but the award does reflect the fact that Stanford has the nation's best college athletic program when all sports are taken into account. No one really doubts this.

One should note here that a competing award having NCAA blessing, the Capital One Cup, a "corporate" moneymaker award, was just created in September, putting emphasis on a few major sports and "weighing" differently the importance of various sports against each other. As written at the Sports Business Journal Daily by Michael Smith in Cup’s scoring irks college sports execs:
"[A] national championship in cross country, tennis or golf is worth 20 points. Championships in lacrosse, track and soccer are worth 40 points. Basketball and football championships earn that school 60 points. The system was based on fan interest, attendance and other factors."
Scoring Table Capital One Cup

POINTS
1st place - 20 points, 2nd place - 12 points, - 3rd place - 10 points, 4th - 8 points, 5th - 6 points, 6th - 5 points, 7th - 4 points, 8th - 3 points, 9th - 2 points, 10th - 1 point

Comment: why e.g. a 1st place for purposes of assessing a college athletic program should be worth twice as much as 3rd place or five times as much as a 7th place is anybody's guess. This is a point evaluation system designed by ignoramuses.

SPORTS DISCRIMINATION BY THE NCAA

Worse, sports are greatly differentiated as to point totals for no conceivable ATHLETIC REASON:

GROUP 3 SPORTS
get points according to the above scoring table with NO BONUSES, i.e.:
MEN: cross country, golf, indoor track & field, tennis, ice hockey, wrestling
WOMEN: cross country, golf, indoor track & field, tennis, field hockey, rowing

GROUP 2 SPORTS get the points according to the above scoring table, but with DOUBLED point totals:
MEN: lacrosse, outdoor track & field, soccer, swimming & diving
WOMEN: lacrosse, outdoor track & field, soccer, swimming & diving

As a golfer, I can only say here that these groupings were made by even greater ignoramuses than those who did the scoring tables, although there is good reason to suspect that these were one and the same group of incompetents. Something like 30 million people play golf in the United States. How many play lacrosse? Words can not define the idiocy that seems to pervade the NCAA. It also makes great sense to make an INDOOR jump worth less than an OUTDOOR jump, presuming the sun is shining of course. What fools are these at the NCAA please?

GROUP 1 SPORTS get the points according to the above scoring table, but TRIPLED point totals:
MEN: baseball, basketball, football
WOMEN: softball, basketball, volleyball

In other words, to match the point totals given to a GROUP 1 sports champion (e.g. baseball), another college would have to win EVERY SPORT in GROUP 3 in either men's or women's competition (6 sports) -- not too likely.

Of course, the major factor for the Capital One Cup is MONEY, putting more emphasis on the sports that bring in revenues to college and conference coffers, and thus to the NCAA. This is a view of college athletics totally outside the realm of university education, but something we would expect from an NCAA that for a number of years now has greatly exceeded its competence and is working, in our view, largely to the detriment of college-athletes, and more in favor of moneyed interests.

The Capital Cup One award is really geared to the few money-making sports in college.

For the record, the inaugural winners were the University of Florida for men's sports and Stanford University for women's sports. Here are the men's standings:

Men's Capital One Cup Final Standings
1 – Florida (93 pts)
2 – Virginia (82 pts)
3 – Auburn (70 pts)
3 – Texas A&M (70 pts)
5 – Stanford (69 pts)
6 – Cal (61 pts)
7 – Connecticut (60 pts)
7 – Eastern Washington (60 pts)
7 – South Carolina (60 pts)
10 – Ohio State (52 pts) 
  As one can see from the placement of Auburn (FBS national football champion) at number 3 with 70 points and Connecticut (FBS national basketball champion) and Eastern Washington (FCS national football champion) tied at number 7 with 60 points, the winning of an FBS or FCS football championship in NCAA Division I -- worth 60 points -- makes a college a lock for a top position in the Capital One Cup, even if were not to compete in any other sports. A college that won two major sports in any year would be virtually unbeatable in this ranking system, even if it were an FCS school. Forget the rest of the athletics program.  The Capital One Cup would, for example, have us believe that FCS Eastern Washington's athletic program is to be ranked 7th nationally by performance, just below Stanford, which is of course, nonsense. In the Learfield Sports Directors' Cup Eastern Washington earned 100 points for its FCS national football championship and otherwise did not earn a single point in any other sport. Nothing against Eastern Washington, and what a great success their FCS football championship was, but you can not compare their athletics program to programs like Stanford:  Eastern Washington University athletic program

basketball (M, W) - 0 points
tennis (M, W) - 0 points
cross country (M) - 0 points
football (M) - FCS Champion - 60 points Cap1Cup - 100 points Directors' Cup
track & field (M) - 0 points
golf (W) - 0 points
soccer (W) - 0 points
volleyball (W) - 0 points

Stanford University athletic program and points according to the Directors' Cup

women's cross country - 13th, 51 points
men's cross country - 4th, 80 points
women's field hockey - 9th - 25 points
men's FBS football - 4th, 80 points
women's soccer - 2nd, 90 points
women's volleyball - 5th, 73 points
women's baseball - 3rd, 83 points
fencing - 10th, 60 points
women's gymnastics - 25th, 46.5 points
men's gymnastics - 1st, 100 points
women's swimming & diving - 4th, 80 points
men's swimming & diving - 3rd, 85 points
women's indoor track & field - 15th, 59.25 points
men's indoor track & field - 8th, 69.75 points
men's wrestling - 11th, 66 points
men's baseball - 9th, 64 points
men's golf - 31st, no points
women's golf - 23rd, no points
women's lacrosse - 9th, no points
women's rowing - 2nd, 90 points
women's softball - 9th, 64 points
women's tennis - 2nd, 90 points
men's tennis - 5th, 73 points
women's track & field - 8th, 69.75 points
men's track & field - 6th, 73.5 points
women's water polo - 1st - 100 points

IN evaluating all of these sports, the Directors' Cup gives a full overview over a college athletic program and fairly does not excessively award staggered points just to winners but also to those participating competitively.

By contrast, the Capital One Cup is just one more example that the NCAA is rotten to the core and beholden mostly to money interests and political sports polls, rather than to the welfare of all student-athletes throughout the nation. There is nothing wrong with the Directors' Cup nor with Stanford winning it regularly - 25 Olympic medals for Stanford in 2008 tell the story well. Universities wishing to compete will have to make comparable investments in their STUDENTS, not in moneyed interests.  The flaw in the Capital One Cup is that it portends to measure the success of college athletic programs, which it does not do at all. Only the NCAA could come up with this kind of an abomination. It is a farce, even if the Stanford ladies nevertheless came up first. Our comment is thus not sour apples, it is righteous indignation at an organization -- the NCAA - gone badly sour.
The NCAA needs to be totally revamped and competent people should be found to run its affairs.

Most Popular Posts of All Time

Blog Archive

The ISandIS Network

Our Websites and Blogs: 3D Printing and More 99 is not 100 Aabecis AK Photo Blog Ancient Egypt Weblog Ancient Signs (the book) Ancient World Blog AndisKaulins.com Anthropomorphic Design Archaeology Travel Photos (blog) Archaeology Travel Photos (Flickr) Archaeo Pundit Arts Pundit Astrology and Birth Baltic Coachman Bible Pundit Biotechnology Pundit Book Pundit Chronology of the Ancient World Computer Pundit DVD Pundit Easter Island Script Echolat edu.edu Einstein’s Voice Energy Environment and Climate Blog Etruscan Bronze Liver of Piacenza EU Laws EU Legal EU Pundit FaceBook Pundit Gadget Pundit Garden Pundit Golf Pundit Google Pundit Gourmet Pundit Hand Proof HousePundit Human Migrations Idea Pundit Illyrian Language Indus Valley Script Infinity One : The Secret of the First Disk (the game) Jostandis Journal Pundit Kaulins Genealogy Blog Kaulinsium Kiel & Kieler Latvian Blog LawPundit.com Law Pundit Blog LexiLine.com LexiLine Group Lexiline Journal Library Pundit Lingwhizt LinkedIn Literary Pundit Magnifichess Make it Music Maps and Cartography Megalithic World Megaliths Blog) Megaliths.net Minoan Culture Mutatis Mutandis Nanotech Pundit Nostratic Languages Official Pundit Phaistos Disc Pharaonic Hieroglyphs Photo Blog of the World Pinterest Prehistoric Art Pundit Private Wealth Blog PunditMania Quanticalian Quick to Travel Quill Pundit Road Pundit Shelfari SlideShare (akaulins) Sport Pundit Star Pundit Stars Stones and Scholars (blog) Stars Stones and Scholars (book) Stonehenge Pundit The Enchanted Glass Twitter Pundit UbiquitousPundit Vision of Change VoicePundit WatchPundit Wine Pundit Word Pundit xistmz YahooPundit zistmz