Tuesday March 24, 2009
| |||||||||||||||||||
|
|
Tuesday March 24, 2009
Championships A reader (Charles) e-mailed in and said, “Mickey—Championships begin with scholarships? I give to IPTAY every year but when do the championships begin? When I was a student at Clemson we won tennis, golf, soccer, track, football and women’s basketball championships. What is the problem?” This was the major topic of the day for my radio show this morning and I did some research on the topic. First, some background information: *South Carolina was a member of the ACC from 1953-1971. *Georgia Tech joined the league in 1978. *Florida State joined the league in 1991. *Virginia Tech and Miami joined the league in 2004 and Boston College became a full member in 2005. Therefore the ACC had eight schools from 1953-1971, seven schools from 1972-1977, eight schools from 1978-1991, nine schools from 1991-2004, eleven schools in 2004 and 12 schools since 2005. *Clemson currently competes in 19 varsity sports that compete for ACC titles. *The ACC gives out championships in 25 sports. Clemson does not field varsity teams in field hockey, men’s lacrosse, women’s lacrosse, women’s golf, softball and wrestling. *Clemson dropped wrestling in 1995. Here are the ACC Championships by sport at Clemson: Men’s Basketball (0). Women’s Basketball (2)-1996, 1999. Baseball (14)-1954, 1958, 1959, 1967, 1976, 1978, 1979, 1980, 1981, 1989, 1991, 1993, 1994, 2006. Men’s Soccer (13)-1972, 1973, 1974, 1975, 1976, 1977, 1978, 1981, 1982, 1985, 1998, 2001. Women’s Soccer (0). Golf (9)-1982, 1987, 1988, 1990, 1997, 1998, 2000, 2003, 2004. Men’s Indoor Track (12)-1987, 1989, 1990, 1991, 1992, 1993, 1997, 1998, 1999, 2000, 2001, 2002. Men’s Outdoor Track (11)-1980, 1982, 1989, 1990, 1991, 1993, 1997, 1998, 2000, 2001, 2004. Men’s Cross Country (7)-1978, 1980, 1981, 1982, 1983, 1987, 1988. Women’s Indoor Track (1)-1992. Women’s Outdoor Track (2)-1991, 1999. Women’s Cross Country (1)-1986. Men’s Tennis (11)-1969, 1980, 1981, 1983, 1984, 1985, 1986, 1987, 1988, 1989, 1997. Women’s Tennis (8)-1978, 1979, 1980, 1982, 1983, 1985, 1986, 2004, 2007. Volleyball (2)-1997, 2007. Men’s Swimming and Diving (1)-1986. Women’s Swimming and Diving (4)-1987, 1988, 1989, 1997. Wrestling (1)-1991. Here is a look at Clemson’s ACC Championships by Year: Here are Clemson’s ACC title’s by Decade: Some of the data tell us: *The Tigers won six titles in 1981, 1991, 1997. *Clemson won five titles in 1982, 1986, 1988, 1989. I think it is fair to point out several factors when looking at the data: *The ACC has more sports today than ever before. The conference continues to add championships. *I am not sure it is fair to look at the data from the 1950s and 1960s and compare them to today. Clemson and the ACC had fewer sports then. For example, Clemson did not play soccer for the first 15 or so years of the conference. Women’s basketball was not a championship sport in the league until 1978. In response to Charles’s e-mail, it is apparent that Clemson is in a downturn in terms of ACC titles in the last five years. Clemson has won only three titles in the last five years. Today I wanted to present some facts concerning Clemson and ACC titles. In tomorrow’s blog I will try to examine the reasons for Clemson’s recent lack of titles compared to the 1980s and 1990s. The Brad Hughes All-State Insurance Agency
Prayer List Those who need our prayers include:
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Account Settings | TigerActive Chat | TigerNet Forums | Tiger Tickets | T-Mail
Please mail any comments, corrections or suggestions
Disclaimer and Privacy Statement Copyright © 1995-2010 TigerNet
Interested in advertising on TigerNet?
I can think of one reason why, taken straight from Clemson University's webiste.
http://www.clemson.edu/president/whytop20/index.html
In 2001, the University adopted a vision to become one of the nation’s top-20 public universities. That vision, along with a comprehensive set of goals and a focused academic plan, is driving Clemson to improve quality on every front — academics, research, public service and student life.
No mention of ATHLETICS!!!
Posted by Tiger95 on March 24, 2009 at 09:50 AM EDT #
Barker's fault.
Posted by otisman on March 24, 2009 at 10:02 AM EDT #
You nailed it Tiger95!
While Clemson is doing a fine job moving up the ratings list for top public Universities in many areas, athletics is not one of them.
I graduated in '94 and agree that athletics is only part of the 'Clemson experience' that I enjoyed and hope my children do as well. However, it is an integral part which seems to missed by many top Admin folks.
There are admirable and lofty goals defined for Clemson University by the 'top brass' & high expectations and hopes from fans of Clemson athletics.
Let's hope the coaches, athletes, and fans begin getting the same support from the Administration that other areas enjoy. Then maybe we can have a top 20 athletic program that puts some new banners around Tigertown.
Posted by tigerP94 on March 24, 2009 at 10:27 AM EDT #
Did Barker not set similar goals for athletics when he first came on board?
I don't have a link, but I remember clearly some sort of announcement of his fairly significant expectations in athletics. top 10, Final-4, BCS, etc., etc. Maybe someone can dig up the info.
The Top 20 Public University goal gets a lot of attention ... maybe because it is actually close to becoming reality.
On the other hand, for whatever reason, the athletic objectives seem to have fallen by the wayside.
Why is that? Whose fault is it??
Posted by apextiger on March 24, 2009 at 10:48 AM EDT #
MP,
If you assume that all universities are equal in a given year, and assume that all have equal chance at each championship for that year, then there are a certain number of championships each can earn on average.
Then comparing the actual won to the average available per school, a varying trend can be tracked for each year. By looking at each season individually and tracking the actual compared to expected, you can see the trend with the # of schools and # of championships taken into account.
Of course all schools are not even, but we are looking for trends, not numbers.
Posted by TigerGrad'93 on March 24, 2009 at 10:55 AM EDT #
GT did not join until the mid eighties.
Posted by CM Shack on March 24, 2009 at 12:04 PM EDT #
Why can't we win Championships and also be a Top 20 Public University?
Posted by Locotiger on March 24, 2009 at 02:51 PM EDT #
Whenever this topic comes up, someone (or 15 people) inevitably say it's "Barker's fault" and suggest that the administration's goal of becoming a top 20 public university somehow interferes with athletic success. First of all, those people are wrong. Secondly, I have a few questions for them:
1. Did you not read President Barker's 10-year plan for Clemson? In it, he specifically outlined athletic goals (e.g., a national championship in football, two final fours in basketball, several championships in Olympic sports, etc.).
2. Athletes we recruit at Clemson are not held to the standard of the general student body - not even close. The top 20 goal for the university has no impact on the athletes.
(continued in next post)
Posted by Judge Keller on March 24, 2009 at 07:54 PM EDT #
3. The AARC was created as a way to evaluate potential student-athletes at Clemson and their chances of earning a Clemson degree. Such a committee is not unique to college athletics, and the objectives include making sure students have a fair chance to earn a degree, as well as prevent the athletic department from losing scholarships and/or players to attrition. It benefits everyone involved - the university, the athletic department, and the student-athlete. It's not a perfect system, but it's a noble effort.
Again, it is ridiculous to blame Clemson's academic goals for our lack of recent athletic championships. They are virtually unrelated, and the mere suggestion that they are somehow linked always makes me question the motives of those doing the asking. Are you for Clemson University, or just for Clemson athletics? There is a HUGE difference.
Posted by Judge Keller on March 24, 2009 at 07:54 PM EDT #
Great topic and excellent analysis. Thanks for the info. and keep up the good work.
Posted by tigerfan40 on March 25, 2009 at 09:12 PM EDT #
MP--
CU did have a field hockey program in the early late 70's and early 80's. In fact it was quite successful, as I recall. Reason given for dropping the program was scheduling opponents at that time. There were girls there on scholarship and they were competitive with other programs such as UVA; WF; Duke and UNC.
Posted by bbrown cren on March 27, 2009 at 08:07 AM EDT #