There's nothing inaccurate about this data. You simply don't like it.
2017: 26th
2018: 30th (Mostly "Vince")
2019: 35th (100% "Vince")
2019 Directors Cup Standings...
- Thread starter zipp_rivals
- Start date
- Status
2017: 26th
2018: 30th (Mostly "Vince")
2019: 35th (100% "Vince")
Again, 3 years of “data” is good for anecdotal conversation. Still waiting for you to add to that conversation. A good start would be to comment on the underlying programs.
When does he get us back to 26th? Why don’t you wait until next year to see if we get all the way back to our all time best finish ... I guess you consider that impossible, because we lost so much ground this year... all the way down to 35th?
If slipping to 35th has you this scared, you probably pissed your paints in 2010 when we “fell” all the way to 41st!
I don't think you understand what "anecdotal evidence" means and when it's most useful.
It doesn't simply mean fluff you wanna promote when you don't like actual data...
For perspective, let's look at the other data points you have confidence in...
- The largest annual improvement since we have data was in 2011: 7 positions.
- The lowest we've been in the last decade EXCEPT for 2013 with its vacated wins: 34th.
- Average annual absolute change (omitting 2013): 2.4 positions.
I'll also reiterate that even a miraculous 26th finish next year doesn't fully restore confidence. The trajectory--love that word--we were on had us around 22rd in 2020. That's "business as usual" and "no hiccup" by most definitions...
Actually I said “anecdotal comments” and “anecdotal conversation”, but this thread has shown that accuracy isn’t a priority of yours. That aside, really I’m just seeing if you can converse like a normal human being. Offer some thoughts on the individual programs that comprise the “data”. You might actually enjoy this exercise!
I don't try to discuss things with people in denial. They need more help than I can offer.
An anecdote is a story. There's no reason to comment/converse on a story you came up with while trying to deny what facts and real evidence are telling you...
Last edited:
I’m not sure if Zipp is normal or not? But he sure can stir some threads and get folks participating in some crazy a$$ back & forth. 
You have nothing of value to add. Peddler of inaccurate data. Sad what you’ve become.
Back to actual sports. Pretty awesome that the Cards will most likely be top 10 preseason in Men’s basketball, women’s basketball and baseball. In fact I saw 2 prognosticators that tab the Cardinal 9 as their favorite to win in Omaha. I’m curious where the Cards stack up in some of the other non-revenue sports?
Actually, we have data back many years further back - all the way to 1994. That data was published by UofL last week in the announcement that we finished 35th this year. Go read the article. There’s no doubt that Jurich did a great job building up this program, as our average Director’s Cup ranking in the four years before he stepped on campus was 113th.
Those numbers weren't published by Learfield. That was U of L's publication. If you have an independent reference, please link it.
And it's pretty easy to see why U of L would try to present meaningless data that are irrelevant in 2019. Kinda like slapd!cks touting championships from 80 years ago. It's an attempted deflection from current performance...
Feel free to provide some further insight on those non-revenue sports.
As mentioned previously, this thread was prematurely posted, when the baseball season had not been completed yet and the final DC standings not yet determined, reflecting a pre-conceived bias. Anyway, as has also been mentioned, the DC standings reported in this thread contain finishes from 2012-2015 that were not adjusted for the vacation of wins by the basketball program during that period. When adjusted accordingly, the final DC standings for UofL would have been lower by an average of 5 positions during the years 2012-2015, blowing up the long-term trend originally illustrated.
But, let’s continue to look at the finishes for UofL as listed in this thread. The “trend’ from 2014 through 2019 is a finish of 29 or 30, with the exception of two years, #26 in 2017 and #35 in 2019. Looks like 2017 was a little better than normal, and then we have now witnessed the horror of a five position drop in 2019. So, the two years under Tyra (only two!) can be viewed as right on track in the first year, with a minimal drop of five positions in the second year.
In addition, let’s remember that statistics can always be interpreted in many different ways. The latest trend illustrated in this thread depicts a trend of only 3 years, 2017-2019. Well, let’s look at the trend of the football program during that period in terms of wins: 9, 8, and 2. Certainly looks like that trend would result in 0 wins in 2019, so Coach Satterfield, all you have to do is get 1 win and you have turned around the “Zipp trend” this year for the football program.
Let’s look at the DC finishes another way… The Directors Cup finishes referenced in this thread for the years from 2010-2017 (even when NOT corrected to reflect the average 5 position drop from 2012-2015 due to the vacation of all basketball wins) average out to a finish of 32.375. By contrast, the finishes for the two years for which Tyra has been the AD average out to a finish of 32.5. Almost EXACTLY the same result, with those two years being right on par with the overall average standings for the past decade, and again not adjusted for basketball. Especially considering that the two flagship programs are on the mend, the future “trend” for UofL sports certainly looks promising.
But, let’s continue to look at the finishes for UofL as listed in this thread. The “trend’ from 2014 through 2019 is a finish of 29 or 30, with the exception of two years, #26 in 2017 and #35 in 2019. Looks like 2017 was a little better than normal, and then we have now witnessed the horror of a five position drop in 2019. So, the two years under Tyra (only two!) can be viewed as right on track in the first year, with a minimal drop of five positions in the second year.
In addition, let’s remember that statistics can always be interpreted in many different ways. The latest trend illustrated in this thread depicts a trend of only 3 years, 2017-2019. Well, let’s look at the trend of the football program during that period in terms of wins: 9, 8, and 2. Certainly looks like that trend would result in 0 wins in 2019, so Coach Satterfield, all you have to do is get 1 win and you have turned around the “Zipp trend” this year for the football program.
Let’s look at the DC finishes another way… The Directors Cup finishes referenced in this thread for the years from 2010-2017 (even when NOT corrected to reflect the average 5 position drop from 2012-2015 due to the vacation of all basketball wins) average out to a finish of 32.375. By contrast, the finishes for the two years for which Tyra has been the AD average out to a finish of 32.5. Almost EXACTLY the same result, with those two years being right on par with the overall average standings for the past decade, and again not adjusted for basketball. Especially considering that the two flagship programs are on the mend, the future “trend” for UofL sports certainly looks promising.
Just learned yesterday that the softball team picked up a huge transfer from Auburn. Pitching is paramount in softball and the woman they picked up was one of the top pitchers in the SEC. Softball was already trending well so this should only help.
Do they recalculate Directors Cup standings from previous years after a team has to forfeit qualifying points like a Championship?
First of all, the results are what they are. If you don't like your wins vacated, you need to talk to the guy who voluntarily vacated them. Same guy who's now responsible for your Directors Cup standings.
Secondly, adding wins back to our record would have made the red bars look WORSE by comparison. The same guy's red bars.
26 to 35 is a drop of nine positions in two years. There's no other drop of that magnitude on the chart presented.
We only have a couple data points for "Vince" so far. So you tell me how many years "Vince" gets to show what he's doing in nonrevenue sports that he said would keep trucking along without issues when he took the job.
I don't understand your point... No one said last year's performance in football was OK. That doesn't become the bar for next year's team, esp. when "Vince" chose to spend $15 million plus Satterfield's $3+ million salary to turn it around. How that translates to a low or no bar for Satterfield is not relevant to this debate.
And if you go back more years, you get a worse average rank than "Vince's". So what? Does that mean "Vince" gets to slide all the way back down the mountain in his measurables? And that it's OK for U of L to go back to where it was 20 years ago in athletics? Let me know where I can get one of those $900,000 jobs...
Zipp, the consistent inconsistency that you display in your anti-Tyra crusade is truly amazing. You went to great lengths to essentially say that the recent 2-year DC "trend" exhibits a precipitous decline. And that’s for a 2-year trend that is easily within the bounds of the historical finishes for the previous decade, and for which the average of those 2 years matches up exactly with the average for the previous 8 years. In this case, the inconsistency can readily be seen when reviewing our discussion from another thread…. In that case, I indicated that I was pleased with the trend under Tyra of no major NCAA infractions during the past 2 years, as opposed to multiple major NCAA infractions every year from 2011-2015, plus during 2017 (yes, the final verdict, and the penalty, is not in yet on the 2017 infractions, but is there any doubt that major infractions occurred then?). You, in turn, argued that this was meaningless, as 2 years was not enough time to truly establish a real trend. Now you say otherwise. Which is it – Is 2 years enough time to identify a trend, or is more time needed? Either answer can be reasonably defended, but your attempt to argue it both ways in your anti-Tyra crusade is not worth any more time.
AND during that decade we showed steady improvement--to a point we're now deteriorating from. You don't get to go back and say we're no worse than a decade ago. "Vince" didn't say he needed ten years, and he wouldn't get that from anyone holding him to a standard of performance anyway. You're simply whitewashing his results and trying to remove any form of standard for him to perform against.
Isn't 'no infractions' a minimum standard, or is there an allowable level of NCAA issues? Are two years enough to pinpoint issues with self dealing? His daughter's real estate business, and his own professional soccer franchise playing at Lynn Stadium? Are two years long enough to judge our financials? All of this stuff goes hand in hand, and "Vince" shouldn't need any fake accomplishments if he's doing such a great job...
- Status