The Director's Cup: ACC-ANALyzed

The National Association of Collegiate Directors of Athletics of American Athletics of America releases a rating system every year ranking every athletic program by the number of bullshit sports by the quality of the athletic teams competing in NCAA sanctioned sports.

This year the NACDA announced the winner as Stanford (again) and runnerup UNC. However, upon further investigation I have found that the system for crowning a champion is designed strictly for big ass athletic programs like Stanford to win rather than smaller more efficient programs such as FSU or Wake (small as in # of teams small).

First, let me explain the scoring system. The NACDA uses an exponential function to assign points. The input is final standing in the NCAA tournament (or CFB polls) and the function is based on the total number of postseason teams. The output ranges from 100 points (Champion) to 25 points (making the tournament). Certain sports with odd numbers of teams or non-tournament systems have special scoring systems.

The scoring system only accounts for the 20 best teams fielded (10M/10W), which automatically puts 50% of the ACC at a disadvantage as only UNC, Maryland, UVA, Duke, BC, and NC State have 20 or more teams.

The final overall tally:
2. UNC - 1184.25
8. UVA - 1059.00
15. FSU - 945.00
17. Duke - 891.80
28. MD - 668.80
37. Wake - 580.25
43. Miami - 491.00
46. VT - 459.25
48. GT - 452.38
53. CU - 397.00
74. NCSU - 265.30
75. BC - 262.00

This is merely a total of the 20 best teams so schools like Stanford and UNC with 30 or so teams can dominate especially in sports with smaller postseasons where Final 4 or Elite 8 status is almost guaranteed. For example, you have to beat 6 teams to win March Madness but you only have to beat 4 teams to win the Frozen Four. So schools in less-popular sports are automatically racking up big time points.

A breakdown of actual efficiencies shows a slightly different ranking of the ACC teams. If the teams were ranked by actual teams earning points in the NACDA system, FSU would win as 100% of their teams earned points (earned postseason births). UNC was second with 82% of their teams. The worst was BC with only 26% of their teams earning postseason births. The ACC received points by 59% of their competing teams for comparison's sake.

This BC fact is particularly disturbing in that they've also got the most NCAA teams of the ACC with 31, placed the lowest percentage of teams into postseason play, and got the least amount of NACDA points out of the entire ACC (despite their voluminous team advantage). I know their hockey team normally kicks ass but they've gotta do something with the rest of their dead weight programs, in my opinion.

Another interesting way to look at the system is actual team efficiency or "How many points did each school earn per competing team?" Once again FSU won with 55.59 points/team wth UNC and UVA close behind with 44.97 and 42.36 points/team, respectively. BC had 8.45 points/team.

1. FSU - 55.59 p/t
2. UNC - 44.97 p/t
3. UVA - 42.36 p/t
4. Wake - 36.27 p/t
5. Duke - 34.20 p/t
6. Miami - 32.73 p/t
7. GT - 30.16 p/t
8. VT - 27.01 p/t
9. MD - 24.77 p/t
10. CU - 20.89 p/t
11. NCSU - 11.05 p/t
12. BC - 8.45 p/t

I like the idea of awarding points based on postseason appearances but my main problem is the over-valuation of smaller tournaments. It is much more difficult to earn a bid for the Men's/Women's Basketball tournament then it would be to the fencing tournament as there are a lot less teams competing in fencing. The system should account for tournament size and regular season competition field size (more teams = more points).

Otherwise, I find the system intriguing because it is good to have a uniform "objective" metric to evaluate athletic departments. I think it's also good because it adds "weight" to sports that normally get very little (if any) coverage.

Thoughts are welcome.

Busy Tuesdays

Just received text from Winfield/Dane: "At the beach, blog abandoned for week"

Silly Bird. Spring break is for kids.

So here are some quick hits from the news world. Ninth seeded Tech is headed to Iowa to play the Hawkeyes in the Women's NCAA Tournament. Congrats to Coach Joseph. Women's bball is becoming a legit ACC team. Mark Bradley pours some gas on the fire Hewitt fire. Softball is on a five game win streak headed into today's games against Western Carolina. And the Joltin' Jackets welcome inner-metro rival Kennesaw State to the Rusty C. for a home-home series starting today.

If there's one team I've been waiting to see this year, it's baseball. I wanna see the GT bats hittin' like they used to.

Also, here is an awesome website with 1990/2008 highlights on it. Shawn Jones is a bad mother.

Georgia Tech players play on TV and in bowl games and do not pump gas after graduation

That is all.

Russell dealing with textile newbs

Russell is under fire recently for closing a plant in Honduras. Multiple universities are ending their contracts with Russell due to the happenstance that a union was forming as the plant was closing and supposed poor conditions in the textile plant.

Here's news for all the Russell haters: All cut and sew shops are exactly the same. They're all in the Caribbean, India, China, or Southeast Asia. And typically there are lines to work in these facilities because they have better conditions than all other companies in the host country.

American consumers have driven all of the cut and sew shops from America by demanding $8 t-shirts instead of $10. And here's something most people don't know... Typically, the different brand polos or sweatshirts come out of the same plant and the only thing that differentiates Nike from Reebok from Starter is the last man on the cut and sew line that stitches an emblem onto the breast.

Sure, there are "special products" but a majority of your apparel is made from the same polyester/nylon/spandex producers (like my company). Then, knitted by the same companies and finally cut and sewn by the same companies. The only real difference you see is a price tag based on brand.

Any thoughts on the Russell Athletics scandal? Do you buy only American made products?

Sports technology debate

Terence Moore opened a barrage on the Georgia Tech swim team for wearing Speedo's new LZR suits. I generally don't mind Terence Moore or any other AJC writers. They don't get under my skin. However, I think Terence Moore was trying to sound codgery and old-fashioned but came off as merely ignorant.

The article does bring up an interesting debate about performance enhancing drugs versus performance enhancing equipment. I'd say they are equivalent in certain respects because they both increase your performance. But if they're allowed by the rules, then who gives a rat's ass if you're popping vitamins or wearing Nike Shox? The LZR suits are allowed by NCAA regs so they're not cheating. Composite materials are allowed in golf/baseball/softball. High tops with ankle/arch support are allowed in basketball. The Hans device is allowed in NASCAR. All of these advances have greatly increased the competitiveness of their respective sports and allowed TONS of records to be broken.

The failure in Moore's article is that he doesn't really understand materials, fluid mechanics, or swimming in general. And for all the laymen that read this blog, the suit simply repels water BETTER than other suits on the market. All swim suits are made with materials that repel water otherwise our trunks would never dry and some people may not even be able to tread water. (On a side note, I don't think the sport of swimming would've ever even developed if not for advanced materials research) The inherent act of swimming is not altered. The swimmers are not webbing their fingers and toes or growing dorsal fins or altering their bodies. They are merely utilizing the best technology presented to them that is within the limits of the rules.

Sports technology makes sports more entertaining for the spectators. However, when sports technology creates a negative impact on a participants's quality of life (i.e. steroids), then we should take issue. If Terrence Moore really wanted a solid debate, he should've said that we should regress all the way to ancient Olympics fashion where all sports are competed in naked and with all natural materials. Women's bball/softball/etc. ratings would sky rocket. I'd venture to say the NFL would be one of the least watched sports on TV.

Anyone wanna talk dynamics or materials or add to the conversation?

Look on the bright side, the weather's nice

Woe is GT...blah blah blah. I understand that GT bball is struggling...maybe struggling is an understatement.

Personally, I am still following the bball games and particularly this coming weekend's game against State. I work with about 5 or 6 NC State grads that annoy the Hell outta me about anything and everything State. So this weekend is CRUCIAL.

Now I know Winfield is giving mad props to the upcoming baseball season but I gotta send a shoutout to one of my favorite sports at GT: softball. Reasons for enjoying softball games: 1) Women 2) Weather 3) Speed and tempo of the games 4) Great venue. You're probably all thinking, "This guy's a poser and has never been to a softball game." I'll call your bluff with Exhibit A:


That would be me in the white t-shirt in front of the front left fender of the Wreck (this would also be the last time I parked so close to the infield). I was not alone either. And this was not the only game I attended because I enjoyed the atmosphere. If I could recommend a game to attend, I'd obviously recommend Georgia games because both teams really turn it up against eachother (plus, Coach Perkins is undefeated against her alma mater). Some quick home schedule highlights, to me, are the following:

*March 14th - Kennessaw State (inner city rivalry)
*March 28th-29th - FSU series
*April 10th-11th - NC State series (Wolfpack fans show up to this series)
*April 25th-26th - UNC series

Those are some weekend series that'll let you get out and enjoy the Spring time weather in ATL and the brand new Softball stadium.

Are you boggled by passion for the non-rev sports? Are you jaded because you were on the swimming team and I didn't mention you by name? Discussion is also welcome to anyone who is ready for the weather to stay nice.

GT ISP Deal

Wonderful, 790 the Zone is back for more GT sports action... Personally, I only really care for the 2 Live Stews 'cause they'll rep GT pretty good on the show. I know a lot of GT fans don't care for them but I think Ryan Stewart really is one of the best critics/fans of GT sports on the radio.

Personally, I've met with D-Rad a few times and I've always enjoyed his enthusiasm and business approach to our athletic department. I feel like everything in the GTAA has a shine to it that it didn't have under Braine. There's a completely different approach - a hand's on approach - to every aspect of athletics and it's appreciated by this GT fan.

Concerning the media deal, I guess we're doing the best we can with what we got, right? I'd like to assume there's a reason ISP has 62 other schools under its umbrella. I normally would've complained about the lack of GT radio coverage in SC but I've got the Sirius now so that issue is resolved.

Any thoughts on 790 the Bone? Do you hate/love the 2 Live Stews? How 'bout David Pollack on our flagship?