[yvonne]

Actually, the Directors Cup is presented at a football halftime every year.

The Directors Cup is important because it quantitatively and qualitatively signifies the school with the best overall athletic program. Like an Oscar, it's an award given by one's peers.

You'll often see other schools measuring their programs by how they performed in the standings:

•Â  http://espn.go.com/blog/colleges/michiga...ectors-cup
•Â  http://www.chatsports.com/clemson-tigers...0-10024152
•Â  http://jmiketaylor.com/uk-still-poised-f...of-top-15/

The first few Directors Cups were sponsored by Sears, and some segment of the Stanford fandom separated out the Olympic and "non-revenue" sports as being "Sears Sports," and therefore less important. The problem with that thinking is that although many of Stanford's successes were fueled by success in "non-revenue" sports, the standings actually give the most weight to sports such as basketball in which a large number of teams compete.

Note how the athletic department focused on football's contribution year the Rose Bowl performance figured into the equation. Here's Stanford's 2011-12 Directors Cup press release, which leads with a quote from the football coach about Andrew Luck. Over the past few years, I've seen football players tweets about the Directors Cup. They're proud of it. While they're closest to their teammates, they see themselves as part of the fraternity of Stanford athletes, not as a separate breed apart.

Finally, not only is the Directors Cup an award given by fellow athletic directors, but also unlike the other multi-sport award's system, it equally values men's and women's sports, allowing schools to score in an equal number of sports for each gender.

[yvonne]

Actually, the Directors Cup is presented at a football halftime every year.

The Directors Cup is important because it quantitatively and qualitatively signifies the school with the best overall athletic program. Like an Oscar, it's an award given by one's peers.

You'll often see other schools measuring their programs by how they performed in the standings:

•Â  http://espn.go.com/blog/colleges/michiga...ectors-cup
•Â  http://www.chatsports.com/clemson-tigers...0-10024152
•Â  http://jmiketaylor.com/uk-still-poised-f...of-top-15/

The first few Directors Cups were sponsored by Sears, and some segment of the Stanford fandom separated out the Olympic and "non-revenue" sports as being "Sears Sports," and therefore less important. The problem with that thinking is that although many of Stanford's successes were fueled by success in "non-revenue" sports, the standings actually give the most weight to sports such as basketball in which a large number of teams compete.

Note how the athletic department focused on football's contribution year the Rose Bowl performance figured into the equation. Here's Stanford's 2011-12 Directors Cup press release, which leads with a quote from the football coach about Andrew Luck. Over the past few years, I've seen football players tweets about the Directors Cup. They're proud of it. While they're closest to their teammates, they see themselves as part of the fraternity of Stanford athletes, not as a separate breed apart.

Finally, not only is the Directors Cup an award given by fellow athletic directors, but also unlike the other multi-sport award's system, it equally values men's and women's sports, allowing schools to score in an equal number of sports for each gender.