Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
Final Directors Cup Standings
Author Message
Bookmark and Share
omniorange Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 10,144
Joined: Apr 2004
Reputation: 251
I Root For: Syracuse
Location:

Donators
Post: #41
RE: Final Directors Cup Standings
One possible set-up I thought that might be used at least in terms of the team sports, keep the points exactly as they are for football and men's and women's bb.

For the rest, what if it went something like this where if the championship involves less than 16 teams the max points for the champion is 50; if the championship has 16-32 teams the max points for the champion is 75; and if the championship is more than 32 teams the max points is 100?

Not sure how many teams participate in all of the championships, but I think this might be a reasonable weighting system, although I could see 60, 80, and 100 instead of 50, 75, 100 as well.

Also why not the best 18 (rather than 20), but football, men's bb, and women's bb must be included in the 18? The teams that participate in 24+ sports have too much of an advantage against those institutions that can't afford to sponsor that many sports.

Cheers,
Neil
06-26-2015 05:37 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
nzmorange Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 8,000
Joined: Sep 2012
Reputation: 279
I Root For: UAB
Location:
Post: #42
RE: Final Directors Cup Standings
(06-26-2015 10:30 AM)lumberpack4 Wrote:  
(06-26-2015 12:40 AM)nzmorange Wrote:  
(06-25-2015 10:32 PM)lumberpack4 Wrote:  
(06-25-2015 06:36 PM)nzmorange Wrote:  
(06-25-2015 06:21 PM)lumberpack4 Wrote:  [quote='nzmorange' pid='12153909' dateline='1435269194']

What's the deal with GT. It's a good engineering school, so the alums *have* money, and GT has historically fielded competitive teams, so there *should* be band wagon fans, especially in Atlanta (high pop, and few good pro teams). But, AD revenue is extremely low. What gives? I know UGA is in the state, but other schools are able to do well with nearby major rivals.

Unless my info is out of date, you need to pass the first semester of calculus to get a degree from GT. If that is the case, that alone is barrier. GT is also a smaller university than most realize and nearly every woman or foreign student they have admitted over the past 30 years is akin to a lost athletic donor. Women just don't make athletic donations like men, no do people not brought up on US Football or basketball.

The calc is irrelevant. It impacts on the field success, sure. However, GT has had plenty of success regardless. Based on their actual historical level of success, they should be better supported.

I'll compare the rest against Syracuse, which runs a relatively high revenue AD.

The women point is also over-blown. I'd be willing to bet that GT has far fewer women than most universities (as a percentage of the total population - GT is 67% male, SU is 45% male).
http://colleges.usnews.rankingsandreview...-tech-1569
http://colleges.usnews.rankingsandreview...rsity-2882

The size is also somewhere between wrong and misleading. As per wikipedia, GT is 23k students with ~14.5k undergrads. That's ~2k bigger than Syracuse on the whole with 500 fewer undergrads (GT is more graduate student-centric).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Georgia_In...Technology
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Syracuse_University

GT also has a (very slightly) higher percentage of American students. SU is "about 10%," whereas GT is "approx. 9%."
http://www.admission.gatech.edu/apply/in...l-freshman
http://www.syr.edu/currentstudents/inter...dents.html

Going by your metrics, GT should have significantly more money than Syracuse, but that isn't the case. What gives?

Comparing Syracuse to GT is like comparing an Aardvark to an Armadillo - other than the four legs and a tail, they don't have much in common. Old, Northeastern Universities have had centuries to build an alumni base and historically have had much wealthier student bases.

GT is barely 100 years old, faces direct competition from the NBA, NFL, and MLB, as well as being crowded out alumni wise in it's own metro area by UGA and probably Auburn.
"Old, Northeastern Universities have had centuries to build an alumni base and historically have had much wealthier student bases."
Georgia Tech - 1885 (first season 1892)
Syracuse - 1870 (first season 1889)
As per wikipedia, there's a 15 year difference in the schools' ages, and a 3 year difference in the programs' ages.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Georgia_In...Technology
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Syracuse_University

Also, GT is an elite engineering school. You are the only one on the planet who thinks that they have a non-wealthy alumni base.

http://www.thebestschools.org/blog/2012/...rs-degree/
(12 of the top 15 jobs have "engineer" in the name, including all of the top 5)

"GT is barely 100 years old, faces direct competition from the NBA, NFL, and MLB, as well as being crowded out alumni wise in it's own metro area by UGA and probably Auburn."

...unlike Syracuse which only has to compete with the Bills and Sabers in upstate, and the Knicks, Nets, Yankees, Mets, Red Bulls, Pinstripes (MLS expansion this year), Rangers, Islanders, Devils, Giants, and Jets in NYC metro area, and significant alumni groups from G*d knows how many major schools.

....and then the Patriots, Celtics, Red Sox, Revolution, Bruins in the state to the right, and the Eagles, Steelers, Pirates, Phillies, Penguins, Fliers, 76ers, and the Union in the state to the south.

[b]I think that you need to leave the south. You clearly have a dramatic misconception of Syracuse University, and the northeast in general.
[/i]


I think you are the one who knows very little about the South and must know very little about what majors and what family pedigrees generate wealthy alumni for most of the 20th Century. Big money does not come from Engineering - it comes from the lawyers, medical doctors and dentists, the business majors, etc. The engineers do make good money, but they don't flock to Wall Street, investment banking, or deal in what used to be cash oriented business. Syracuse has had a Law school and a B school for 100 years.

You don't seem to understand what it means to be a STEM university and how that affects everything else.

You also didn't seem to understand that GT faces their competition in their home market, not in far away DMA's. How many pro teams in Syracuse or Central NY for that matter? Cornell give you a lot of competition? How about SUNY Binghamton?

GT is not like Syracuse, not even close. The closest analogous schools in the ACC are VT and NC State and even then they are more diverse "cow colleges" when compared to GT.

The closest comparison in the NE to GT is MIT. If MIT attempted to play Division I sports then you have a nearly direct comparison, except that MIT is located in urban Boston and was drawing from the NYC-Boston Corridor and the world for many decades before the South became tolerable for non-Southerners through he advent of air conditioning and the end of segregation.

You seem to be oblivious to the fact that most of the South was a hot, humid, poor, de-facto rural **** hole until the 1960's. Perhaps you need to travel more. Since I've been in all 50 states, Puerto Rico, the Yukon, BC, Saskatchewan, Albert, Ontario, Quebec, PEI, NB, and Nova Scotia and have had the opportunity to visit about 45 or so university campuses, I think I know a little about what university is similar to another.

(I am hoping to check off my last two continents - Antarctica and South America later this year).

The last two times I was in Syracuse I said I would never go back, that I would stop at Cornell and then head to Happy Valley PA. My reasoning was that I found Syracuse rust-belt depressing - like Toledo or but not nearly as far gone.

Based on some of the other Syracuse fans postings I will try Syracuse again in the future using their guides - I will look past the rusting bridges and the busted pavement and concrete.
There's are not necessarily in order - sorry in advance

1. BUSINESS SCHOOL - AGE
Scheller College of Business (GT's business school) - 1913
Martin J. Whitman School of Business (SU's business school) - 1919
GT has had a business school longer than SU.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scheller_C...f_Business
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martin_J._...Management

2. BUSINESS SCHOOL - RANKING
Scheller - 27 (Undergrad) - 30 (Grad)
Whitman - 45 (Undergrad) - 90 (Grad)
http://grad-schools.usnews.rankingsandre...ller-01056
http://scheller.gatech.edu/news-events/l...kings.html
http://grad-schools.usnews.rankingsandre...tman-01158
http://whitman.syr.edu/recruiters/progra...kings.aspx

3. Atlanta being rural ****hole until the 1960's.
There were over half a million people living in the ATL area by 1910.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_Atlanta

4. Pro competition
1. If you don't think that the Yankees, Mets, Sox, Giants, Bills, and Patriots don't have significant and passionate followings throughout upstate, you're terribly misinformed. The Jets (a team that would be fighting to be #7 on the list of relevant pro teams in NYS) have summer camp in Cortland, a suburb of Syracuse. Regardless, cities like Rochester/Buffalo and NYC are where most of our alumni/fans live - or are at least that's the location of the highest concentration. Calling those areas "far away from SU's home" either involves using an extremely tortured definition of "home," or exhibits a profound misunderstanding of the northeast.

5. You "know" what universities are similar to each other
I disagree. However, unsubstantiated claims on the internet are cheap. SU and GT aren't similar. To that extent we agree. Where our agreement breaks down hinges on how they are different. You've given me a whole host of reasons why GT is different than SU, but all the facts (i.e. enrollment numbers, school age, degree offerings, M/F ratios, etc.) either point otherwise, or advantage GT. In other words, the end results show that they're different, but the facts indicate that they're different in ways other than the ones that you suggest. To be completely honest, I don't know how they're different in a way that advantages SU athletic financing. That's why I asked the question. However, I'm starting to think that you don't know, either. That's why you can't give me a single concise answer that is consistent with published facts.

6. "You don't seem to understand what it means to be a STEM university and how that affects everything else."
Maybe, but this is a completely random and unsubstantiated vague claim.

7. Travel
I'm sure how relevant the following is to sports boards, but I hear southern Argentina is nice, but Argentina, as a whole, is a little bit crazy right now (I assume that you're going to southern Argentina). Let me know how it is, and let me know how Antarctica is.

8. Syracuse/Ithaca/State College
*Syracuse is a very northeastern blue collar city. If you're into that, which I am, it's heaven on Earth. However, most of my friends from the south have trouble adapting. After a while, they grow to like it, but there is an adjustment. You come off as very southern, I don't see you liking it.
*Ithaca is small - tiny, actually. Cornell is breath-takingly beautiful though, and the Gorges around campus are unmatched.
*State College would be a mistake. There really isn't anything to visit and the parking is terrible (at least it was when I was there). "Downtown" consists of the college bars around campus, and the entire area smells like cows because there are cows at the ag school on campus. Unless you're 18 years old and into sneaking into bars with hoards of other minors, I doubt that you will like it. There is nearby nature, but like much of PA, the infrastructure to get there is reminiscent of 3rd world countries - thanks, Amish.

8. Money-making majors
I don't know what to tell you. I literally typed in something along the lines of "highest paying undergraduate majors" into google and sent you the link to the first site that I saw. The top 5 positions were engineers, and 12 of the top 15 were engineers (I stopped looking after #15). Doctors, dentists, and lawyers may make money, but all of those require graduate degrees, and only about 33% of college graduates (10% overall) get graduate degrees. Out of that 33%, many are in non-MD, dentist, or JD fields, especially at SU, which, like GT, doesn't have a medical school. SU has a law school, but after that the advantage probably shifts to GT because I'm guessing that GT emphasizes biology more than SU. If anything, your argument further advantages GT.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Educationa...ted_States

Like I said in my last post, I question what you know about SU and the northeast. I actually question what you know about GT. You seem to be misinformed about its academic offerings, age, location, composition, etc.
06-26-2015 06:26 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Marge Schott Offline
Banned

Posts: 5,989
Joined: Dec 2012
I Root For: YouAreButtHurt
Location: OnTopOfDwarfMountain
Post: #43
RE: Final Directors Cup Standings
(06-26-2015 02:39 PM)omniorange Wrote:  
(06-26-2015 10:18 AM)Marge Schott Wrote:  
(06-26-2015 07:33 AM)omniorange Wrote:  
(06-26-2015 02:52 AM)Marge Schott Wrote:  I care about all FSU sports and follow each. Obviously it's a little harder to "know" your swimming or tennis team, so you don't have the attachment, but I certainly give a crap.

Setting aside the Title IX issues, I often thought that Billie Jean King's Team Tennis concept would be perfect for college.

Cheers,
Neil

I have no idea what that is. After looking it up, I don't see how that's an improvement from what they do now.

It's okay. Everyone has different likes or tastes in these kind of things.

The point system for the college game is similar, but earning the points under the current system is more like professional tennis. If you win the match (2 out of 3 sets in singles) you earn the point. You lose the match you don't get any points.

Team Tennis is an entirely different set-up. One men's set, one women's set, one men's doubles set, one women's double set, and one mixed double's set are played. You win a set the way you would in regular tennis, but at 4-4 in games a 9 point tie-breaker is played rather than getting to 6 all to make the final score of that set 5-4. But unlike college tennis, the team that won set isn't the sole winner. In this 5-4 example the winning team of that set gets 5 points and the team that lost that set gets 4 points. The overall winning team at the end is the result of the cumulative games wons by each team, not sets won.

A coach is allowed one substitution, so if someone is having an off night in singles or doubles, a coach can pull that player and send in a substitute, doesn't matter if they can physically continue to play or not. The player that left that set can play a doubles or single match later that night. However, only one substitution is allowed for the entire match.

The other aspect I like about it is that the men and women play together. Which means the better teams have balance between the strengths of their men and women players.

Cheers,
Neil

I get the concept. I think it's fine. I just don't know why that sport and no others should play with a fairly significant format change compared to the major professional league of that sport.
06-26-2015 06:41 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
nzmorange Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 8,000
Joined: Sep 2012
Reputation: 279
I Root For: UAB
Location:
Post: #44
RE: Final Directors Cup Standings
(06-26-2015 10:48 AM)Lucy Wrote:  
(06-25-2015 04:53 PM)nzmorange Wrote:  
(06-25-2015 04:37 PM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  If you finished lower than GT, fielding the ACC minimum number of sports, and operating out of a bankrupt athletic department ... you've got serious issues. Especially since baseball, volleyball, and women's tennis have fallen off the radar and men's hoops has completely imploded. Men's golf and football are the only legit title chasers GT fields.

What's the deal with GT. It's a good engineering school, so the alums *have* money, and GT has historically fielded competitive teams, so there *should* be band wagon fans, especially in Atlanta (high pop, and few good pro teams). But, AD revenue is extremely low. What gives? I know UGA is in the state, but other schools are able to do well with nearby major rivals.

GT has to compete with UGA for the bandwagon fans in the ATL. Bandwagoneers in the northern part of the state not only jump on the UGA bandwagon, but those of other nearby schools like Tennessee & Clemson. South Georgia roots for FSU and West Georgia is filled with Alabama & Auburn bandwagon fans. Of all those schools, GT is by far the smallest in population.
(06-26-2015 10:52 AM)Marge Schott Wrote:  Fan wise, Gt's problem is that it isn't a large school and isn't a full scale university with great engineering. It's a great, medium sized engineering university, or institute. Whatever.

Also, not being consistently good hurts. Even under Johnson, you've only been good once in the last 5 seasons. The other four were very mediocre. And since 1990 they've apparently had more losing seasons than 10 win seasons.

I get that GT could be better if it relaxed its academics and offered more majors. I never said otherwise. I also get that GT hasn't been elite on the field, but GT has been above average - even for a P5 school. Finally, I get that GT isn't massive. I even pointed that out. It's medium-sized. However, when compared to other schools that are in a similar position (or a worse position - based on size, on the field results, and so on), GT's AD's finances are comparatively bad. My question is "why is that the case?" I'm not asking how they would be if X and Y happened.

Going to Lucy's comment, Tennessee hasn't done anything worth talking about since circa 2005, so I doubt that the UTk band wagon is too crowded in Georgia. That leaves FSU, UGA, Auburn, Alabama, and Clemson. Out of those 5, UGA, Alabama, and FSU are bigger than GT, but Auburn is GT's size and Clemson is actually roughly 2/3rd of the size of GT (as per the google/wikipedia search that I just did). Regardless, I can think of a number of different schools that face similar competitive forces that make far more money that GT. Truthfully, I don't know what GT's problem is (that's why I asked), but I would think that there has to be more to it than other colleges in the region.
06-26-2015 06:45 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
omniorange Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 10,144
Joined: Apr 2004
Reputation: 251
I Root For: Syracuse
Location:

Donators
Post: #45
RE: Final Directors Cup Standings
(06-26-2015 06:41 PM)Marge Schott Wrote:  I get the concept. I think it's fine. I just don't know why that sport and no others should play with a fairly significant format change compared to the major professional league of that sport.


Like I said, different strokes. I, personally, don't even get into pro tennis until the later rounds of the grand slam tournaments.

And you would probably only need your two hands to count the number of college tennis players that went on to become Top 10 pros in the Open Era, and only one hand for the women players at that.

There have been examples in the past with McEnroe and Connors of male tennis players who did well with a year of college under their belts. But when teenagers started to win events like Becker and Wilander, the next generation of tennis greats went pro without going to college - Sampras and Agassi to name a couple.

Now, American male tennis is so bad, that some like Isner benefited by going to college. But the next Sampras or Agassi will skip college and go directly to the pros. It is what is.

As a result, I don't see the need to make it more like the ATP or WTA. If anything making it more like WTT, the college sport could become a funnel to that league more readily than it serves as a funnel to the ATP or WTA. That way the athlete has even more options to pursue playing the sport after college.

Again, I don't feel that strongly enough about and Title IX doesn't help anyway.

Peace,
Neil
06-26-2015 07:22 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Marge Schott Offline
Banned

Posts: 5,989
Joined: Dec 2012
I Root For: YouAreButtHurt
Location: OnTopOfDwarfMountain
Post: #46
RE: Final Directors Cup Standings
(06-26-2015 05:15 PM)Lenvillecards Wrote:  
(06-25-2015 07:56 PM)Marge Schott Wrote:  
(06-25-2015 04:28 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  Director's Cup counts too many garbage sports for me to care at all.

What's worse, it counts individuals the same as teams (with few exceptions).

Give a point for each SCHOLARSHIP PLAYER and then let's talk...

You made the same complaints when I started the all acc sports champion trophy thread a year or two back.

And they still hold no water. It's not an "all sports" award if you make football worth 4-5 times more than the next largest sport. That's ridiculous.

And what "individuals" are counted the same as teams?

What would that ranking look like this year?

Well I only did it for each sports winners last year. Too much work involved. But we tossed around several concepts. Hokie Mark had the same anti non football sentiment is all.

I'll find the thread for you a little later.
06-26-2015 07:26 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
dawgitall Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 7,815
Joined: Apr 2006
Reputation: 156
I Root For: ECU/ASU/NCSU
Location:
Post: #47
RE: Final Directors Cup Standings
NC State has made huge strides under Yow's leadership. Their goal is to be in the top 25 and in five years they are up to 27.
07-01-2015 10:50 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Marge Schott Offline
Banned

Posts: 5,989
Joined: Dec 2012
I Root For: YouAreButtHurt
Location: OnTopOfDwarfMountain
Post: #48
RE: Final Directors Cup Standings
(06-26-2015 05:15 PM)Lenvillecards Wrote:  
(06-25-2015 07:56 PM)Marge Schott Wrote:  
(06-25-2015 04:28 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  Director's Cup counts too many garbage sports for me to care at all.

What's worse, it counts individuals the same as teams (with few exceptions).

Give a point for each SCHOLARSHIP PLAYER and then let's talk...

You made the same complaints when I started the all acc sports champion trophy thread a year or two back.

And they still hold no water. It's not an "all sports" award if you make football worth 4-5 times more than the next largest sport. That's ridiculous.

And what "individuals" are counted the same as teams?

What would that ranking look like this year?

http://csnbbs.com/thread-689968.html

Aside from Hokie Mark wanting it to be the ACC Football Trophy instead of All Sports Trophy, I forgot about pissy Cuse fan john crying all over that thread. Geez.
07-01-2015 11:09 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)


Copyright © 2002-2019 Collegiate Sports Nation Bulletin Board System (CSNbbs), All Rights Reserved.
CSNbbs is an independent fan site and is in no way affiliated to the NCAA or any of the schools and conferences it represents.
This site monetizes links. FTC Disclosure.
We allow third-party companies to serve ads and/or collect certain anonymous information when you visit our web site. These companies may use non-personally identifiable information (e.g., click stream information, browser type, time and date, subject of advertisements clicked or scrolled over) during your visits to this and other Web sites in order to provide advertisements about goods and services likely to be of greater interest to you. These companies typically use a cookie or third party web beacon to collect this information. To learn more about this behavioral advertising practice or to opt-out of this type of advertising, you can visit http://www.networkadvertising.org.
Powered By MyBB, © 2002-2019 MyBB Group.