Wow! PSU up to #3 in Director's Cup...

[Judge Smails]

LS Directors Cup[/B]
‏@LSDirectorsCup




25m25 minutes ago








LS Directors Cup
Next DI Standings Released! (PDF)

Top 5:
1 - @GoStanford

2 - @GoHeels
3 - @GoPSUsports
4 - @UWBadgers

5 - @UCLAAthletics

This post was edited on 4/16 10:25 AM by Judge Smails

 

[PSU_Nut]

Penn State will drop a lot off in the spring. Always happens that way.

 

[pandaczar12]

This still can't be right!

Pitt, still one spot behind Akron, appears to have dropped two places. Everyone knows that Pitt has the premier athletic department (who has never won an NCAA national title, who's football team has a losing record in recent years, who's basketball team always chokes) in the country.

 

[Grant Green]

unfortunately psunut is right. I've had a running bet since 1998 with a gator on who finishes ahead. Almost every year we are way ahead after winter and we drop big after spring. Florida crushes it in spring. I haven't won since like 2000
Posted from Rivals Mobile

 

[The Spin Meister]

Only 3.5 points outta second! If the B1G had referees instead of enablers, we beat both Suckeyes and MeChicken and are in second.

 

[Cosmos]

Pretty exciting stuff. Sure to garner a few headlines.

 

[Nit777]

We have 820 points versus 854 at the same point last year.

We will score about 50 for women's gymnastics in the winter totals.

However, in the spring we will probably only score in men's volleyball (and that is not a given); both men's and women's outdoor track and field and women's lacrosse.

We might get a few points out of either men's or women's golf or tennis.

Probably nothing from men's lacrosse,baseball or softball.

We still have a good shot at being the highest scoring school in the BIG.

 

[PSU_Nut]

Originally posted by Grant Green:
unfortunately psunut is right. I've had a running bet since 1998 with a gator on who finishes ahead. Almost every year we are way ahead after winter and we drop big after spring. Florida crushes it in spring. I haven't won since like 2000

Posted from Rivals Mobile

It a shame that the NCAA doesn't have more obscure spring sports with like 20 schools participating so Penn State can earn more points like they do in the winter.

 

[Judge Smails]

^ Troll.*

nm

 

[fairgambit]

Originally posted by PSU_Nut:

It a shame that the NCAA doesn't have more obscure spring sports with like 20 schools participating so Penn State can earn more points like they do in the winter.

Penn State earned winter points in wrestling, women's swimming and diving, and men's swimming & diving, hardly obscure sports. The other points came from fencing, which admittedly has a limited field, but it is on a par, for example, with the spring sport of Women's Water Polo where no team outside of California has ever finished higher than 4th in the NCAA Tournament. That is obscure, and yet Stanford has proudly added Cup Points by winning championships 3 of the last 4 years. Stanford has dominated the Directors Cup by making a living on "obscure sports". I will add the Directors Cup includes sports like Rifle, Skiing, and Bowling, to name a few. Obscure sports are where you want to find them.


This post was edited on 4/16 3:32 PM by fairgambit

 

[Nit777]

Response to PSU Nut and Fairgambit

First PSU NUT
What are obscure sports?

If your kid was playing one, would it be obscure?

I will admit that I consider sports such as skiing, rifle, men's and women's water polo, fencing, women's bowling and men's volleyball as being less interesting to most fans as compared to other sports because so few schools play them.

However, we only compete in two of them and do quite well. Almost all other schools have football, hoops x 2, soccer x 2, swimming x 2, golf x 2, tennis x 2, CC x 2, track and field x 2, softball, baseball, women's volleyball, etc. which are core sports for us. We also compete in lacrosse x 2 which is growing in participation.

PSU competes in 30 sports, equaled only by Stanford with 30 and exceeded by OSU with 31. We compete in hockey and wrestling which are both big boy sports despite the fact that most schools do not participate. Certainly you do not consider them as obscure.

I am glad that we give our students many opportunities to compete and grow.

Second Fairgambit
Granted, Stanford competes in a few more 'obscure' sports than we do, but to suggest that they make a living from obscure sports is simply inaccurate. They compete well in just about everything, often scoring in 24-25 sports and being able to 'throw out' their five lowest scores providing they score in ten men's and ten women's events.

To me, the big advantages for Stanford are weather and the fact that any kid who is playing a sport which does not have a pro career possibility is nuts to not take a scholarship to Stanford.

Both PSU and Stanford participate in 30 sports. I think the overlap is 26-27 sports, thus, there is little room for Stanford to make a living from obscure sports.

 

[9fold]

Let's put it this way. You can't win a Director's Cup with just football and basketball.

 

[fairgambit]

Re: Response to PSU Nut and Fairgambit

Originally posted by Nit777:
First PSU NUT
What are obscure sports?

If your kid was playing one, would it be obscure?

I will admit that I consider sports such as skiing, rifle, men's and women's water polo, fencing, women's bowling and men's volleyball as being less interesting to most fans as compared to other sports because so few schools play them.

However, we only compete in two of them and do quite well. Almost all other schools have football, hoops x 2, soccer x 2, swimming x 2, golf x 2, tennis x 2, CC x 2, track and field x 2, softball, baseball, women's volleyball, etc. which are core sports for us. We also compete in lacrosse x 2 which is growing in participation.

PSU competes in 30 sports, equaled only by Stanford with 30 and exceeded by OSU with 31. We compete in hockey and wrestling which are both big boy sports despite the fact that most schools do not participate. Certainly you do not consider them as obscure.

I am glad that we give our students many opportunities to compete and grow.

Second Fairgambit
Granted, Stanford competes in a few more 'obscure' sports than we do, but to suggest that they make a living from obscure sports is simply inaccurate. They compete well in just about everything, often scoring in 24-25 sports and being able to 'throw out' their five lowest scores providing they score in ten men's and ten women's events.

To me, the big advantages for Stanford are weather and the fact that any kid who is playing a sport which does not have a pro career possibility is nuts to not take a scholarship to Stanford.

Both PSU and Stanford participate in 30 sports. I think the overlap is 26-27 sports, thus, there is little room for Stanford to make a living from obscure sports.

I can't disagree with you. My point was that many would find sports other than football and basketball, "obscure" and, for the reasons you cited, Stanford picks up a lot of Cup points from them. I think if you ask most college fans, they would trade 10 titles in field hockey, tennis, water polo, volleyball, etc., for one football, or basketball championship. I was more responding to Nut's suggestion that Penn State picks up a lot of points in lesser sports while the Stanfords of the world do it in major sports. If you are in the top 10 in the Directors Cup, you are adding a lot of points from "obscure sports".

 

[Nit777]

Agreed