[BigEasyCard]

Stanford is second to Michigan in first Fall standings which include WCC, MCC, and FH.  Here's the press release with links to the full standings:

http://www.nacda.com/sports/directorscup...17aab.html

Michigan has 219.5 points versus 141 points for the same three sports last year.  Stanford has 185 points versus 190 points for the same three sports last year.

With a revised scoring structure this year, it will be more difficult for Stanford to retain the Cup.

Geaux Cardinal!

[BigEasyCard]

Stanford is second to Michigan in first Fall standings which include WCC, MCC, and FH.  Here's the press release with links to the full standings:

http://www.nacda.com/sports/directorscup...17aab.html

Michigan has 219.5 points versus 141 points for the same three sports last year.  Stanford has 185 points versus 190 points for the same three sports last year.

With a revised scoring structure this year, it will be more difficult for Stanford to retain the Cup.

Geaux Cardinal!

[M T]

I hadn't seen the scoring changes.  NACDA wrote

The committee adjusted the philosophy of the program to read as follows - A program that honors institutions maintaining a broad-based program, achieving success in many sports, both men's and women's, in which all sports that the NCAA, NAIA or NJCAA offers a championship, along with Division IA football, and all student-athletes that compete in those sports, are treated equally.

But it isn't the case that they treat "all sports ... equally".  They instead discard some results in some sports.  Moreover, they treat 4 sports unequally by requiring them to be in the set of sports counted for by each school.

I didn't know that "many" has its meaning changed to "19 or fewer".

But, still, NACDA's criteria is more clear than whatever is in second place! 

[M T]

I hadn't seen the scoring changes.  NACDA wrote

The committee adjusted the philosophy of the program to read as follows - A program that honors institutions maintaining a broad-based program, achieving success in many sports, both men's and women's, in which all sports that the NCAA, NAIA or NJCAA offers a championship, along with Division IA football, and all student-athletes that compete in those sports, are treated equally.

But it isn't the case that they treat "all sports ... equally".  They instead discard some results in some sports.  Moreover, they treat 4 sports unequally by requiring them to be in the set of sports counted for by each school.

I didn't know that "many" has its meaning changed to "19 or fewer".

But, still, NACDA's criteria is more clear than whatever is in second place! 

[fullmetal]

Yet another "Anybody But Stanford" Cup scoring structure has emerged  ::)

[fullmetal]

Yet another "Anybody But Stanford" Cup scoring structure has emerged  ::)

[FarmDad.01]

The What's-in-Your-Wallet Cup was founded in 2010 to anoint collegiate sports excellence by Anyone But Stanford. Strange sports get bonus points. It awards two annual $200,000 scholie prizes, by gender. Without looking it up, I believe Cardinal women have brought home $800,000 to date and Cardinal men $200,000. That's more than half what all other schools combined have earned.

[FarmDad.01]

The What's-in-Your-Wallet Cup was founded in 2010 to anoint collegiate sports excellence by Anyone But Stanford. Strange sports get bonus points. It awards two annual $200,000 scholie prizes, by gender. Without looking it up, I believe Cardinal women have brought home $800,000 to date and Cardinal men $200,000. That's more than half what all other schools combined have earned.

[BigEasyCard]

With today's National Championship by Women's Soccer, the Cardinal now stand at 285 points, which is 45 points ahead of the total earned by the same four teams last year.

Geaux Cardinal!

[BigEasyCard]

With today's National Championship by Women's Soccer, the Cardinal now stand at 285 points, which is 45 points ahead of the total earned by the same four teams last year.

Geaux Cardinal!

[BigEasyCard]

Yet another "Anybody But Stanford" Cup scoring structure has emerged  ::)

The new structure counts MBB, WBB, WVB, Baseball, and up to fifteen other sports (regardless of gender).  For the past two years MBB and Baseball earned no Cup points.  Requiring certain sports hurts us, compared to the previous scoring structure.  Removing the previous limit of best ten sports for each gender might help us.  Here's a link to the revised scoring structure:

http://www.nacda.com/sports/directorscup...17aaf.html

If each team continues to strive for excellence in their own sport, Stanford will continue to stand out in the Cup competition.

Geaux Cardinal!

[BigEasyCard]

Yet another "Anybody But Stanford" Cup scoring structure has emerged  ::)

The new structure counts MBB, WBB, WVB, Baseball, and up to fifteen other sports (regardless of gender).  For the past two years MBB and Baseball earned no Cup points.  Requiring certain sports hurts us, compared to the previous scoring structure.  Removing the previous limit of best ten sports for each gender might help us.  Here's a link to the revised scoring structure:

http://www.nacda.com/sports/directorscup...17aaf.html

If each team continues to strive for excellence in their own sport, Stanford will continue to stand out in the Cup competition.

Geaux Cardinal!

[DC 86]

[quote author=fullmetal link=topic=18258.msg216889#msg216889 date=1512347477]
Yet another "Anybody But Stanford" Cup scoring structure has emerged  ::)

Removing the previous limit of best ten sports for each gender might help us.
[/quote]

My first impression is that it could help us in absolute terms but not in relative terms given that many schools struggle to score in women's sports, but I don't know for sure. Based on the last few years' results what is your impression of how total scoring would have been altered under the new "15 regardless of gender" structure?

[DC 86]

[quote author=fullmetal link=topic=18258.msg216889#msg216889 date=1512347477]
Yet another "Anybody But Stanford" Cup scoring structure has emerged  ::)

Removing the previous limit of best ten sports for each gender might help us.
[/quote]

My first impression is that it could help us in absolute terms but not in relative terms given that many schools struggle to score in women's sports, but I don't know for sure. Based on the last few years' results what is your impression of how total scoring would have been altered under the new "15 regardless of gender" structure?

[BigEasyCard]

[quote author=BigEasyCard link=topic=18258.msg216943#msg216943 date=1512368010]
[quote author=fullmetal link=topic=18258.msg216889#msg216889 date=1512347477]
Yet another "Anybody But Stanford" Cup scoring structure has emerged  ::)

Removing the previous limit of best ten sports for each gender might help us.
[/quote]

My first impression is that it could help us in absolute terms but not in relative terms given that many schools struggle to score in women's sports, but I don't know for sure. Based on the last few years' results what is your impression of how total scoring would have been altered under the new "15 regardless of gender" structure?
[/quote]

I went back and looked at 2015-16 and 2016-17 under the new scoring structure.

For 2015-16, the 19 qualifying sports total 1,341.50 versus the official score of 1,526.50.  WBB counts under both scenarios.  Under the new rules, we include WVB (50), MBB (0), and Baseball (0) for a total of 50 points.  We lose 235 points for WCC (61.5), MSW (61.5), Fencing (57), and WR (57).

For 2016-17, the 19 qualifying sports total 1,413.50 versus the official score of 1,517.50.  WBB, WVB, and Baseball count under both scenarios.  Under the new rules, we include MBB (0).  We lose 104 points for M Golf (54) and WR (50).

To the extent that our competition performs better in the four required sports, we will be at a disadvantage.  Perhaps another CardBoarder will offer some insight on this.  There may have been some discussion of this when we first learned of the changes last May, but I don't recall the details.

Geaux Cardinal!

[BigEasyCard]

[quote author=BigEasyCard link=topic=18258.msg216943#msg216943 date=1512368010]
[quote author=fullmetal link=topic=18258.msg216889#msg216889 date=1512347477]
Yet another "Anybody But Stanford" Cup scoring structure has emerged  ::)

Removing the previous limit of best ten sports for each gender might help us.
[/quote]

My first impression is that it could help us in absolute terms but not in relative terms given that many schools struggle to score in women's sports, but I don't know for sure. Based on the last few years' results what is your impression of how total scoring would have been altered under the new "15 regardless of gender" structure?
[/quote]

I went back and looked at 2015-16 and 2016-17 under the new scoring structure.

For 2015-16, the 19 qualifying sports total 1,341.50 versus the official score of 1,526.50.  WBB counts under both scenarios.  Under the new rules, we include WVB (50), MBB (0), and Baseball (0) for a total of 50 points.  We lose 235 points for WCC (61.5), MSW (61.5), Fencing (57), and WR (57).

For 2016-17, the 19 qualifying sports total 1,413.50 versus the official score of 1,517.50.  WBB, WVB, and Baseball count under both scenarios.  Under the new rules, we include MBB (0).  We lose 104 points for M Golf (54) and WR (50).

To the extent that our competition performs better in the four required sports, we will be at a disadvantage.  Perhaps another CardBoarder will offer some insight on this.  There may have been some discussion of this when we first learned of the changes last May, but I don't recall the details.

Geaux Cardinal!

[Farm93]

Florida was the school that could have claimed #1 in two prior years if this was the scoring system in place.  The one year they were super close in the system of the day, and either the year before or after.  I don't remember which one, but it was Florida and they would have won twice.

They have strong programs in WBB, WVB, Baseball and MBB.  And often score well in 19 sports.

This season USC, UNC, Texas, Florida and UCLA all could put together a collection of sports to make it work for them in the new system.  For each they would need strong tallies in most of those four AND require Stanford to have soft tallies in those four sports.

The basketball teams look VERY vulnerable relative to Stanford standards, so now the question will be can any of those 5 schools put together enough success, especially in the core four, to beat out Stanford. Florida looks like they could do it in the core, but they had a very bad football year.  That alone hurts them a lot.

The others would need to put together a very special year to really make it work.  For the moment the bigger worry is Stanford's potential shortfall in WBB.

[Farm93]

Florida was the school that could have claimed #1 in two prior years if this was the scoring system in place.  The one year they were super close in the system of the day, and either the year before or after.  I don't remember which one, but it was Florida and they would have won twice.

They have strong programs in WBB, WVB, Baseball and MBB.  And often score well in 19 sports.

This season USC, UNC, Texas, Florida and UCLA all could put together a collection of sports to make it work for them in the new system.  For each they would need strong tallies in most of those four AND require Stanford to have soft tallies in those four sports.

The basketball teams look VERY vulnerable relative to Stanford standards, so now the question will be can any of those 5 schools put together enough success, especially in the core four, to beat out Stanford. Florida looks like they could do it in the core, but they had a very bad football year.  That alone hurts them a lot.

The others would need to put together a very special year to really make it work.  For the moment the bigger worry is Stanford's potential shortfall in WBB.

[Langdude]

Hey all:

I'm sort of lazy. Would anyone mind posting a summary of the different "all sports" awards (e.g., the Directors Cup, or Sears Cup, or whatever it's called), and what they basically value/measure? Any history of the development of these cups/awards would also be appreciated. I follow them, but not as closely or academically as I'd like.

-m.

[Langdude]

Hey all:

I'm sort of lazy. Would anyone mind posting a summary of the different "all sports" awards (e.g., the Directors Cup, or Sears Cup, or whatever it's called), and what they basically value/measure? Any history of the development of these cups/awards would also be appreciated. I follow them, but not as closely or academically as I'd like.

-m.

[BigEasyCard]

Hey all:

I'm sort of lazy. Would anyone mind posting a summary of the different "all sports" awards (e.g., the Directors Cup, or Sears Cup, or whatever it's called), and what they basically value/measure? Any history of the development of these cups/awards would also be appreciated. I follow them, but not as closely or academically as I'd like.

-m.

You can learn plenty from these links:

Directors' Cup 
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NACDA_Directors%27_Cup
https://thedirectorscup.com/

Capital One Cup
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capital_On...ge_sports)
http://www.capitalonecup.com/

Hope these help.

Geaux Cardinal!

[BigEasyCard]

Hey all:

I'm sort of lazy. Would anyone mind posting a summary of the different "all sports" awards (e.g., the Directors Cup, or Sears Cup, or whatever it's called), and what they basically value/measure? Any history of the development of these cups/awards would also be appreciated. I follow them, but not as closely or academically as I'd like.

-m.

You can learn plenty from these links:

Directors' Cup 
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NACDA_Directors%27_Cup
https://thedirectorscup.com/

Capital One Cup
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capital_On...ge_sports)
http://www.capitalonecup.com/

Hope these help.

Geaux Cardinal!

[BigEasyCard]

With Men's Soccer winning the National Championship again, the Cardinal student athletes add 100 Cup points to their YTD total.  Unofficially the total is now 385 which is 45 points ahead of last year.  Stanford still has scoring opportunities for WVB and football.

Geaux Cardinal!

[BigEasyCard]

With Men's Soccer winning the National Championship again, the Cardinal student athletes add 100 Cup points to their YTD total.  Unofficially the total is now 385 which is 45 points ahead of last year.  Stanford still has scoring opportunities for WVB and football.

Geaux Cardinal!

[Langdude]

Thanks, BEC.

Are these the only two all-sports awards?

-m.

[Langdude]

Thanks, BEC.

Are these the only two all-sports awards?

-m.

[BigEasyCard]

Thanks, BEC.

Are these the only two all-sports awards?

-m.

I don't know of any others.  But other posters might ...

Geaux Cardinal!

[BigEasyCard]

Thanks, BEC.

Are these the only two all-sports awards?

-m.

I don't know of any others.  But other posters might ...

Geaux Cardinal!

[2006alum]

They've updated for Men's and Women's Soccer. We're up to 385, as previously reported. Michigan follows at 269.5, followed by UCLA (234), Penn State (232.50) and North Carolina (230). I suspect some of those schools will be our chief competition under the new scoring system, since they're solid in the four mandatory scoring sports (football, MBB, WBB, and WVB). Right now the only one we're guaranteed to bring home meaningful points in is WVB. If we lost to TCU and fell out of the top 25, I believe we'd end up scoring only 25 points, because 26th place (45 points) is for non-ranked bowl winners, and 50th (25 points) is for non-ranked bowl losers.

[2006alum]

They've updated for Men's and Women's Soccer. We're up to 385, as previously reported. Michigan follows at 269.5, followed by UCLA (234), Penn State (232.50) and North Carolina (230). I suspect some of those schools will be our chief competition under the new scoring system, since they're solid in the four mandatory scoring sports (football, MBB, WBB, and WVB). Right now the only one we're guaranteed to bring home meaningful points in is WVB. If we lost to TCU and fell out of the top 25, I believe we'd end up scoring only 25 points, because 26th place (45 points) is for non-ranked bowl winners, and 50th (25 points) is for non-ranked bowl losers.

[BigEasyCard]

.... I suspect some of those schools will be our chief competition under the new scoring system, since they're solid in the four mandatory scoring sports (football, MBB, WBB, and WVB). Right now the only one we're guaranteed to bring home meaningful points in is WVB. If we lost to TCU and fell out of the top 25, I believe we'd end up scoring only 25 points, because 26th place (45 points) is for non-ranked bowl winners, and 50th (25 points) is for non-ranked bowl losers.

I share the concern about the required sports, but a quick review of current Top 25 rankings makes me feel a bit better about this factor.  I looked at the current Top 10 schools as well as some top finishers from last year (Ohio State, USC, Florida, Texas, Oregon). 

Stanford is the only one of these fifteen schools currently ranked in the Top 25 in three of the required sports.

The following schools have two Top 25 rankings:

Duke
Florida
Ohio State
Oregon
Penn State
Texas
UCLA
USC
Wisconsin

The following schools have one Top 25 ranking:
Michigan
UNC
VA

While admittedly imperfect and incomplete, this simple analysis suggests we may not be that bad off relative to our competitors.

In another few weeks we can drill into this in more detail when WVB and Football have been finalized.

In any event, having each team and student athlete represent Stanford to the best of their ability is the objective.

Geaux Cardinal!

[BigEasyCard]

.... I suspect some of those schools will be our chief competition under the new scoring system, since they're solid in the four mandatory scoring sports (football, MBB, WBB, and WVB). Right now the only one we're guaranteed to bring home meaningful points in is WVB. If we lost to TCU and fell out of the top 25, I believe we'd end up scoring only 25 points, because 26th place (45 points) is for non-ranked bowl winners, and 50th (25 points) is for non-ranked bowl losers.

I share the concern about the required sports, but a quick review of current Top 25 rankings makes me feel a bit better about this factor.  I looked at the current Top 10 schools as well as some top finishers from last year (Ohio State, USC, Florida, Texas, Oregon). 

Stanford is the only one of these fifteen schools currently ranked in the Top 25 in three of the required sports.

The following schools have two Top 25 rankings:

Duke
Florida
Ohio State
Oregon
Penn State
Texas
UCLA
USC
Wisconsin

The following schools have one Top 25 ranking:
Michigan
UNC
VA

While admittedly imperfect and incomplete, this simple analysis suggests we may not be that bad off relative to our competitors.

In another few weeks we can drill into this in more detail when WVB and Football have been finalized.

In any event, having each team and student athlete represent Stanford to the best of their ability is the objective.

Geaux Cardinal!

[Canalejas]

Too bad we missed out on points for men's water polo.

[Canalejas]

Too bad we missed out on points for men's water polo.

[Farm93]

Too bad we missed out on points for men's water polo.

Imagine they finished 3rd.  That's 55 points.  In the new system it is likely the 15th best non-mandatory result for Stanford will be above that 55 point level. 

Points in the mandatory sports are critical in this new format.
Football beating TCU would be great.  Football playing well enough to remain in the top 25 would be helpful.
WBB will hopefully rally in Pac-12 play, get into the tournament, and reach the Sweet 16 (T-9th in Directors' Cup).
WVB getting to the Final Four is very helpful (T-3 or better and 83 or more points)
MBB?  Ummmm, well...anyway.

If Stanford outperforms Florida, UNC, UCLA, Michigan and Texas in the mandatory four, then it would be very hard for any school to pass Stanford with the optional 15 in any year.  Top 25 FB+ Top 4 WVB + T-9 WBB will be very hard for others to match, forget beat.

The soccer double puts Stanford in a very good place for the optional 15.

It is looking solid for 2017-2018

[Farm93]

Too bad we missed out on points for men's water polo.

Imagine they finished 3rd.  That's 55 points.  In the new system it is likely the 15th best non-mandatory result for Stanford will be above that 55 point level. 

Points in the mandatory sports are critical in this new format.
Football beating TCU would be great.  Football playing well enough to remain in the top 25 would be helpful.
WBB will hopefully rally in Pac-12 play, get into the tournament, and reach the Sweet 16 (T-9th in Directors' Cup).
WVB getting to the Final Four is very helpful (T-3 or better and 83 or more points)
MBB?  Ummmm, well...anyway.

If Stanford outperforms Florida, UNC, UCLA, Michigan and Texas in the mandatory four, then it would be very hard for any school to pass Stanford with the optional 15 in any year.  Top 25 FB+ Top 4 WVB + T-9 WBB will be very hard for others to match, forget beat.

The soccer double puts Stanford in a very good place for the optional 15.

It is looking solid for 2017-2018

[BigEasyCard]

Women's Volleyball finishes third, earning 83 Cup points.  Unofficially the total is now 468 which is 28 points ahead of last year.  Stanford still has a scoring opportunity for football which last year finished 12th for 64.5 points.

Geaux Cardinal!

[BigEasyCard]

Women's Volleyball finishes third, earning 83 Cup points.  Unofficially the total is now 468 which is 28 points ahead of last year.  Stanford still has a scoring opportunity for football which last year finished 12th for 64.5 points.

Geaux Cardinal!

[ColoradoTree]

Given baseball's new importance this year, I wanted to make sure I understood how it is scored.  I couldn't find a good explanation online, but based on last year's final standings, it seems like it's a modified version of a 64-team bracket system, but with the double-elimination nature of the regionals and the CWS brackets forcing some tweaks.  3rd or 4th place in a regional (equivalent to losing in the first round of the basketball tournament) gets you 25 points, while losing in the regional final (akin to a Round of 32 loss, as this narrows the universe of teams from 32 to 16) gets you 50 points.  Winning your regional but losing the super regional gets you 64 points.  4th place in your CWS bracket then gets you 73 points, 3rd place gets you 78 points, losing in your bracket final gets you 83 points, winning your bracket but losing the best-of-three championship final gets you 90, and winning the whole enchilada gets you the usual 100. 

BigEasyCard, does that look right?  If so, then just making the regional final is a big enough jump in points that it could allow Stanford to fend off a challenge in the spring from someone like Florida or North Carolina. 

[ColoradoTree]

Given baseball's new importance this year, I wanted to make sure I understood how it is scored.  I couldn't find a good explanation online, but based on last year's final standings, it seems like it's a modified version of a 64-team bracket system, but with the double-elimination nature of the regionals and the CWS brackets forcing some tweaks.  3rd or 4th place in a regional (equivalent to losing in the first round of the basketball tournament) gets you 25 points, while losing in the regional final (akin to a Round of 32 loss, as this narrows the universe of teams from 32 to 16) gets you 50 points.  Winning your regional but losing the super regional gets you 64 points.  4th place in your CWS bracket then gets you 73 points, 3rd place gets you 78 points, losing in your bracket final gets you 83 points, winning your bracket but losing the best-of-three championship final gets you 90, and winning the whole enchilada gets you the usual 100. 

BigEasyCard, does that look right?  If so, then just making the regional final is a big enough jump in points that it could allow Stanford to fend off a challenge in the spring from someone like Florida or North Carolina.