»
Topic: TNET: Clemson athletics rank in lower tier of Power 5 average
Replies: 55   Last Post: Jul 7, 2018 7:03 PM by: OhWiseOne®
This topic has been archived - replies are not allowed.


[ Archives - Tiger Boards Archive ]
Start New Topic
Replies: 55  

TNET: Clemson athletics rank in lower tier of Power 5 average

[1]
Posted: Jul 5, 2018 1:15 PM
 

 
Clemson athletics rank in lower tier of Power 5 average

Yahoo Sports averaged the last five years of the all-sports Directors' Cup this week to judge the health of Power 5 programs nationally, where Clemson came in 5 Read Update »



Re: TNET: Clemson athletics rank in lower tier of Power 5 average

[5]
Posted: Jul 5, 2018 2:04 PM
 

uh what? How do we end up 50th and coots 30th when we finished top 20 in the 3 major sports.

List is garbage, yahoo is garbage


Re: TNET: Clemson athletics rank in lower tier of Power 5 average


Posted: Jul 5, 2018 2:17 PM
 

Women’s basket is weighted heavily in this rating


Re: TNET: Clemson athletics rank in lower tier of Power 5 average

[1]
Posted: Jul 6, 2018 7:00 AM
 

Just like clem81NC has stated, it's garbage and it smells, looks, and it reads to be absolute trash!!!

2019 white level memberbadge-donor-10yr.jpg

Re: TNET: Clemson athletics rank in lower tier of Power 5 average

[1]
Posted: Jul 6, 2018 7:15 AM
 

While I agree with you, my question is WHY? What a big nothing burger in the real world, along with all the other very minor sports that most folks don't care much about, nor do they pay anything much to go see. Just a way to make some "have nots" feel better about themselves.

2019 orange level memberbadge-donor-10yr.jpg

Because Sports Like Transgender Masturb@ation Count Toward

[4]
Posted: Jul 5, 2018 2:07 PM
 

Your rankings

2019 orange level memberbadge-donor-10yr.jpg

Don't care won natty***

[6]
Posted: Jul 5, 2018 2:07 PM
 



2019 white level memberbadge-donor-15yr.jpg

Not good (being 52nd) in recruiting really smart players!

[3]
Posted: Jul 5, 2018 2:11 PM
 

Like: The type guy who picked #1 Stanford over us recently.

Guess this figure makes it more real now, to me, why Univ of sc surpassed us in recently released total sports rankings.

2019 orange level memberbadge-donor-10yr.jpgmilitary_donation.jpg

To All CLEMSON TiGERS..Sending you Bright Light from the Carolina Coast and hoping you get to witness a huge Orange sunset tonight. Go Tigers!


Re: Not good (being 52nd) in recruiting really smart players!

[1]
Posted: Jul 5, 2018 4:25 PM
 

Wasn't aware of the poor ranking re: recruiting, but have sensed that something isn't going that well regarding recruiting in general. With our facilities, record, history, etc., what the he## is the problem?


Re: TNET: Clemson athletics rank in lower tier of Power 5 average

[7]
Posted: Jul 5, 2018 2:24 PM
 

I would love to talk trash but the reality is no one cares about he majority of the women’s and Olympic sports.

badge-donor-05yr.jpgmilitary_donation.jpg

"Smelley, Garcia, and Beecher are going to lead you to 4-8." - york_tiger


Re: TNET: Clemson athletics rank in lower tier of Power 5 average

[2]
Posted: Jul 5, 2018 2:27 PM
 

AND JUST WHAT WOULD YOU TALK TRASH ABOUT ANYHOO

badge-donor-05yr.jpg

Re: TNET: Clemson athletics rank in lower tier of Power 5 average

[1]
Posted: Jul 5, 2018 4:26 PM
 

Sorry, your point?


Re: TNET: Clemson athletics rank in lower tier of Power 5 average

[2]
Posted: Jul 5, 2018 2:47 PM
 

Why don't they normalize these ratings to the size of the university. I could care less what Yahoo reports about ANYTHING sports.

military_donation.jpg

Re: TNET: Clemson athletics rank in lower tier of Power 5 average

[1]
Posted: Jul 5, 2018 2:51 PM
 

what a bunch of yahoos


Re: TNET: Clemson athletics rank in lower tier of Power 5 average

[1]
Posted: Jul 6, 2018 7:07 AM
 

Yes, and this just reaffirms that Yaaa-who sports is what it is, garbage with no merit to anyone but maybe their yaaa-who web site readers that real life has never been clear to them!!!

2019 white level memberbadge-donor-10yr.jpg

This is bogus "Click Bait"

[7]
Posted: Jul 5, 2018 2:53 PM
 

Besides the fact that I personally do not care about this made up competition. It is obvious that the criteria is slanted to those institutions that have a greater pool of men's and women's sports to pull from. The only criteria is it has to be 19 or 20 sports, half women's half men's, "Four of which must be Baseball and Men's Basketball, Women's Basketball and Women's Volleyball." So, if you have a school that has 32 sponsored programs (like Stanford) can cherry pick the remaining teams with the highest average and boost there overall score. This is why Stanford has won this award 24 years in a row. Clemson only has 19 sponsored programs (if I am not mistaken) so like it or not they have to use all of there teams whether or not they did well in competition or not. While other schools can use their championship in competitive basket weaving, and women's bass fishing to round out the top 19.


Re: This is bogus "Click Bait"


Posted: Jul 5, 2018 3:05 PM
 

Completely agree with this post.


Re: This is bogus "Click Bait"

[1]
Posted: Jul 6, 2018 7:10 AM
 

And poor click bait at that!!!

2019 white level memberbadge-donor-10yr.jpg

Re: TNET: Clemson athletics rank in lower tier of Power 5 average

[4]
Posted: Jul 5, 2018 3:13 PM
 

I wouldn't say this is bogus BS. The criteria may not be fair (don't know) I tried to read it the other day and some of the websites wouldn't come up. Anyway, it does say we need to do better in ALL sports.

I know some of you could careless about Men's or Wimmens sports other than football but having a top rating in this could tip a potential recruit for various other sports like Tennis, Golf, VB, and basketball m & w. Call it garbage if you want but it ticks me off we're ranked 52nd. If Florida and UGA can be consistently in the top ten then why can't Clemson?

As stated above we probably won't ever be number one because of the number of programs.
my personal opinion is I'd like to be tops and competing in every sport year end and year out both academically and athletically. We seem to have a handle on academically. I just hope DRAD takes it more serious than a lot of fans. Whatever system Florida has, seems to have worked for the last two decades and they take every sport serious.

2019 orange level member2016_pickem_champ.jpg

Completely agree

[1]
Posted: Jul 5, 2018 4:22 PM
 

Like HS track meets - the more participates, the greater the odds and the more potential points you can achieve.
Schools like Stanford, UCLA, Penn St. have HUGE athletic programs sponsoring teams in every sport imaginable. They get points from all of the little sports that CU doesn't and won't have. Easy to see how the Directors Cup is weighted for the large schools with greater participation in all the possible sports.


Re: Completely agree


Posted: Jul 5, 2018 4:33 PM
 

I'm just concentrated on football. Can we really make living with a steady stream of 3-stars? Is our 3-star, really equal to Alabama's 5-star?? Really?


Re: Completely agree

[2]
Posted: Jul 5, 2018 6:10 PM
 

I'll take the bait . Yes we can ...We can continue to go to playoffs and win championships . While you and the rest of the coots are mired in mediocrity . Like really that's the way it's gonna go . Sorry good luck with Vandy they will probably beat you this year .


Re: Completely agree

[2]
Posted: Jul 6, 2018 7:28 AM
 

That is an idiotic thing to say, we have lost to Bama by 5 points with a team that had MANY 3 stars players, and we beat Bama with a team with MANY 3 star players, AND we have LOST to Bama with many 4 star players with some really good 5 star players on that team. Ahhh, what was your question again!!!!

2019 white level memberbadge-donor-10yr.jpg

Re: TNET: Clemson athletics rank in lower tier of Power 5 average

[5]
Posted: Jul 5, 2018 3:16 PM
 

I don’t know what’s more shocking... that the TigerNet staff would share such a ridiculous article OR that Yahoo still exists in 2018.


Re: TNET: Clemson athletics rank in lower tier of Power 5 average


Posted: Jul 5, 2018 3:26 PM
 

yawn!

2019 white level member

Great, another area SCU is better than us.

[3]
Posted: Jul 5, 2018 4:01 PM
 

We'll never hear the end of this.

2019 orange level memberbadge-donor-05yr.jpg

"I've played multiple sports and would bet any amount that I'm still more athletic than you at this present time...."


Fake News.***

[2]
Posted: Jul 5, 2018 4:13 PM
 




Re: TNET: Clemson athletics rank in lower tier of Power 5 average

[2]
Posted: Jul 5, 2018 4:30 PM
 

This is a ####### joke. Tanner was probably chair of the selection committee.

2019 orange level member

Re: TNET: Clemson athletics rank in lower tier of Power 5 average

[2]
Posted: Jul 5, 2018 4:31 PM
 

If only we had an equestrian team!


Meaningless


Posted: Jul 5, 2018 5:08 PM
 

Clemson's bucks are going right where they need to be. I'm not losing a second of sleep over a non-revenue sport.


Re: TNET: Clemson athletics rank in lower tier of Power 5 average


Posted: Jul 5, 2018 5:31 PM
 

Don't know how I'll be able to sleep after learning this terribly disturbing news. May need to raid my dog's Alprazolam stash.

2019 white level memberbadge-donor-15yr.jpg

the only good politician is a dead politician.


that seems inaccurate

[2]
Posted: Jul 5, 2018 5:34 PM
 

considering a sweet 16 appearance in MBB
another CFP appearance,
top 10 mens soccer team,
NCAA 2nd round in women soccer,
solid track programs,
Men's golf deep tournament run,
women's golf won a regional,
women's tennis made the NCAA tournament 2nd round
baseball top 10 seed nationally


I mean that's more successful sports than non successful ones. Poor seasons in women's basketball, volleyball and men's tennis really hurt that badly in this metric?


Re: that seems inaccurate


Posted: Jul 5, 2018 5:49 PM
 

Well I guess we get some boost once women’s softball gets ramped up.


the only thing I can think is that they weight very elite

[1]
Posted: Jul 5, 2018 5:55 PM
 

programs heavily. That schools with more elite programs but also bad programs get more points than a school with a lot of solid sports like Clemson but really only 1 truly elite at this point (football, although men's soccer was national runner up not long ago)


Re: the only thing I can think is that they weight very elite

[1]
Posted: Jul 5, 2018 6:20 PM
 

What would you consider "a really solid sport"? I would say that you'd need to be a program that finishes Top 25 at least 3 out of 5 years.

How many sports other than football does Clemson do that? All I can think is baseball and maybe men's soccer?


Re: that seems inaccurate


Posted: Jul 5, 2018 6:16 PM
 

We also don't even bother have sports like:

Women's Softball (for now)
Wrestling
Swimming/Diving
Lacrosse
Hockey


Re: that seems inaccurate

[1]
Posted: Jul 5, 2018 6:22 PM
 

That is why the Tigers are not ranked higher. The more programs you have the higher your score


less than 100 D1 schools have wrestling

[1]
Posted: Jul 5, 2018 6:41 PM
 

Lacrosse or hockey.


Re: less than 100 D1 schools have wrestling

[1]
Posted: Jul 5, 2018 8:12 PM
 

I understand what you all are saying and T I P, I’m not concerned about getting beat out by Stanford, UCLA.

I’ll try to find the link again but I looked at this the other day and they had rankings for the last 30 years... I think. Know it went back to 90’s and the programs that concern me was how Florida, Texas, uga, tosu, and Michigan were all close to or consistently in top 15 and we were rarely close to the top 25.

Not a problem to go All In in FB, but Clemson is Clemson and I want when people hear Clemson, they think dominance in all sports both athletically And Academically!!! Don’t want to hear we’re a small school. It can and should be done.

Now, all that said, some of the blame lies with the SC hs system and schools that’s a complete mess. Athletically as well as academically.

2019 orange level member2016_pickem_champ.jpg

Re: class of 09 nailed it


Posted: Jul 5, 2018 8:39 PM
 

These are Olympic sports classifications brought into the NCAA by very lucrative athletic programs.

If we had both Rowing and Lightweight Rowing for Women's, and Rowing for Men's, how far would we have to travel--with our 'boats'--in order to compete?

M/W Gymnastics? That's SEC-B1G stuff
M/W Water Polo?
M/W Fencing?
M/W Lacrosse and W Field Hockey?
W Squash?
Can't you see someone's daughter coming to the shores of Lake Hartwell to win an NCAA championship in Beach Volleyball?

What i find utterly mind-boggling is that these programs are not temporary based on the enrollment of some very committed kids, but these schools have invested in world class coaches and in some cases facilities, too--and then some schmuck says Clemson is not getting enough bang for its buck.

So having facilities and 3 full-time coaches for an athletic program that wins a championship no one cares about with 6 athletes IS getting bang for your buck? And I'm not talking about the rest of the world not caring, i mean the Stanford students and fans. Stanford athletes have to learn not to expect fan support cause they rarely get any (at least at the Stanford events i attended.) Heh, heh. Of course, i was always cheering for the opposition.


Re: class of 09 nailed it

[3]
Posted: Jul 5, 2018 8:53 PM
 

I remember when Clemson had a world class fencing program and i was darn proud of it. I guess it’s just me.

2019 orange level member2016_pickem_champ.jpg

Re: fencing team


Posted: Jul 5, 2018 11:29 PM
 

Was it varsity or club?

Was it dependent on the coach?

Who did they compete against?


Re: maybe a good idea


Posted: Jul 5, 2018 11:59 PM
 

When you look at the athletic blue bloods ahead of us (almost all with incredible endowments, regardless of their current football prowess), it becomes obvious: these guys aren't working the system (as i initially thought); they ARE the system.

Every school that wins a championship must have competitors. What if John Heisman's sport had not spread outside the South? National championships would be easy today! So instead of starting more sports like softball, where we are playing some serious catch up to the blue bloods, let's contact some regional competitors like FSU, UVA, even UNC (I'm gonna puke) and discuss some potential new varsity teams where we might become good very quickly. Or at least make the top 4 nationally.

Olympic Cycling has a good future.
Team racquetball or badminton.
Various shooting sports should be natural.
Rythmic gymnastics.
Whitewater kayaking. What a regional sport!

Quick, get me Radakovich's email! No, not Andy. His dad!


Re: maybe a good idea


Posted: Jul 6, 2018 5:44 PM
 

Do equestrian and bass fishing fit this regional sports criteria?


"fewer" dude , "fewer"


Posted: Jul 5, 2018 8:53 PM
 

That ##### drives me crazy


Re: that seems inaccurate

[1]
Posted: Jul 5, 2018 8:35 PM
 

this article is a Yahoo writer doing a 5-year average of the director's cup. But we were actually even lower than that for 2017-18 at 52nd. It's pretty much because all sports are weighted equally and it counts the best 19 scores. We only have 16 sports. I think we scored points for 8 sports, which means we counted 11 zeroes. Stanford has 36 sports, so they get to pick their best 19 out of 36. I'd also assume it's easier to do well in those niche sports that only have a handful of teams competing.


Re: that seems inaccurate

[1]
Posted: Jul 5, 2018 9:49 PM
 

Stanford may have 36 sports, but there are only 29 sports eligible for D1 in the Directors cup

http://grfx.cstv.com/photos/schools/nacda/sports/directorscup/auto_pdf/2016-17/misc_non_event/bracketdef.pdf

Baseball, M/W basketball, and WVB (??) must be included in the score. Then it is the top 15 sports other than those.


Re: that seems inaccurate


Posted: Jul 6, 2018 12:09 AM
 

Darn, this info stymies my idea.

Nevertheless, if we can pretend to be a blue blood, we can create interest at other institutions, and then petition the NCAA to allow entry to the Director's Cup from these new introductory sports.

What could go wrong?


Re: that seems inaccurate


Posted: Jul 6, 2018 3:35 PM
 

How can football be an Ins sport and not a Team sport? Also, Clemson does have Women's rowing, not sure about light rowing, that was finishing in ACC behind UVA(won at least to Nat Campionships recently), but with expansion, now behind ND and BC and maybe Cuse .


Re: TNET: Clemson athletics rank in lower tier of Power 5 average

[1]
Posted: Jul 5, 2018 6:08 PM
 

Didn’t yahoo get replaced with some little startup company anyways? I can’t remember the name let me google it right quick.


This is why we are financially stable


Posted: Jul 5, 2018 8:37 PM
 

pizzes off the snowflakes though

2019 orange level memberbadge-donor-05yr.jpg


hmmm

[2]
Posted: Jul 5, 2018 8:51 PM
 

Since football and men's basketball is all 95% of College fans care about, and we were top-notch in both this past season, I will say this ranking has absolutely no meaning in less you're a coot.


"unless", dude, "unless"


Posted: Jul 6, 2018 2:51 PM
 

that #### drives me crazy.


OK Poindexter

[1]
Posted: Jul 6, 2018 1:43 PM
 

And how many universities, administrations and AD’s would change places in a second?

2019 purple level memberbadge-donor-05yr.jpg

Re: change places....


Posted: Jul 6, 2018 6:07 PM
 

I don't know, really. Would we? Ever?

Sure, even a blue blood would love to be a perennial CFP finalist like Clemson.

But i gotta figure they believe they're reaping benefits from this Director's Cup thing, or they wouldn't be so heavily invested in it. Maybe it's because they are set up to expand in Women's Sports, and 60% of students are women, and female athletes don't require (command) scholarships like males do. So they will be perpetuating their athletic programs at bargain rates, the wave of the future.

Or something. I don't know. All i know is that blue bloods don't like to lose, but they lose to Dabo quite graciously. Maybe they're willing to concede football so long as we never look behind door #2 labeled "Women's Programs."


A Yahoo Sports Poll is as accurate as a CNN Poll

[1]
Posted: Jul 7, 2018 7:03 PM
 

Look, people who write for Yahoo know nothing about Sports. Look at Yahoo and look at their "journalists"... Their "thing" is really the Transgender Bathroom Privileges issue.

2019 white level memberbadge-donor-05yr.jpg

Replies: 55  

TIGER TICKETS

FB GAME: Fiesta Bowl
FOR SALE: Asking what I paid through Iptay....$275 Row 30 Seat 13 and 14 Text or email Go Tigers!

Buy or Sell CU Tickets and More in Tiger Tickets!

[ Archives - Tiger Boards Archive ]
Start New Topic
4850 people have read this post