OUCH - AD is a DNQ
OUCH - AD is a DNQ
A report published on June 30th does not look so good for us. Here is the link:
http://mac-smack.blogspot.com/2009/06/m ... letic.html
http://mac-smack.blogspot.com/2009/06/m ... letic.html
- Redwingtom
- Peregrine

- Posts: 5251
- Joined: Thu Jul 22, 2004 11:16 pm
I think we all want our sports to succeed, but this is about the 3rd or 4th time I've seen this list and I still don't know what the hell we did to get a DNQ. Does anybody know what we failed to do to even qualify to be in this meaningless ranking system?BGSUVA wrote:well maybe its just me, but I would like for our sports to succeed...Redwingtom wrote:Meaning?
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Not a damn thing!
I just don't think we scored any points. It's a pretty cool idea for about 15 schools in the country to compete for, but for the other 300-some schools, meh.hammb wrote:I think we all want our sports to succeed, but this is about the 3rd or 4th time I've seen this list and I still don't know what the hell we did to get a DNQ. Does anybody know what we failed to do to even qualify to be in this meaningless ranking system?BGSUVA wrote:well maybe its just me, but I would like for our sports to succeed...Redwingtom wrote:Meaning?
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Not a damn thing!
We won regular season titles in MBB, WBB, baseball (and was there another one or two?) but didn't advance to the national tournament, or get votes in the AP popularity contest, so we didn't score any points in this list.
"I don't believe I can name a coach, anywhere, anytime, anyhow, who did it better than Doyt Perry."
-1955 BG Assistant Bo Schembechler
BGSUsports.com - Where ESPN.com goes for BG history.
-1955 BG Assistant Bo Schembechler
BGSUsports.com - Where ESPN.com goes for BG history.
- Redwingtom
- Peregrine

- Posts: 5251
- Joined: Thu Jul 22, 2004 11:16 pm
I tried to read through the criteria on their website and it is without a doubt the most complicated scoring system I have ever seen. It takes 10 mens sports and 10 womens sports and assigns points based on your finish and whether that particular sport has an associated NCAA championship also carries weight.hammb wrote:I think we all want our sports to succeed, but this is about the 3rd or 4th time I've seen this list and I still don't know what the hell we did to get a DNQ. Does anybody know what we failed to do to even qualify to be in this meaningless ranking system?BGSUVA wrote:well maybe its just me, but I would like for our sports to succeed...Redwingtom wrote:Meaning?
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Not a damn thing!
Bottom line, I don't think we finished high enough in any of the sports to get a point. I guess regular season titles mean nothing...only the stupid conference championships or our basketball teams would have at least gotten something. So actually, it's not that we did not qualify, we just did not get any points in their convoluted scoring system.
Redwingtom
- Bull_In_Exile
- Egg

- Posts: 32
- Joined: Sun Nov 23, 2008 10:21 am
DNQ means you finished below 271 in terms of all division one schools..hammb wrote:I think we all want our sports to succeed, but this is about the 3rd or 4th time I've seen this list and I still don't know what the hell we did to get a DNQ. Does anybody know what we failed to do to even qualify to be in this meaningless ranking system?BGSUVA wrote:well maybe its just me, but I would like for our sports to succeed...Redwingtom wrote:Meaning?
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Not a damn thing!
Bull Run - An unofficial UB fan blog.
Makes sense.Bull_In_Exile wrote:DNQ means you finished below 271 in terms of all division one schools..hammb wrote:I think we all want our sports to succeed, but this is about the 3rd or 4th time I've seen this list and I still don't know what the hell we did to get a DNQ. Does anybody know what we failed to do to even qualify to be in this meaningless ranking system?BGSUVA wrote:well maybe its just me, but I would like for our sports to succeed...Redwingtom wrote:Meaning?
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Not a damn thing!
It's wrong, but I suppose that makes sense.
We won regular season conference titles in both men's & women's hoops. We also were bowl eligible with a 1A football team. There is no denying the fact that these are far & away the 3 most important sports any university fields. With that level of performance you're telling me that we were more than 272nd in terms of D1 universities?
Cool...tells me these rankings are more worthless than I originally figured. Thanks for the clarification. At first I was willing to give the benefit that there was some loophole or something that prevented us from qualifying. Now that I know that it's pretty simple...I couldn't care less.
- Redwingtom
- Peregrine

- Posts: 5251
- Joined: Thu Jul 22, 2004 11:16 pm
Also, Stanford has won this mythical ranking for 15 years in a row now so that should tell you something about it. It must have been that women's rowing title that put them over the hump this year!hammb wrote:Makes sense.Bull_In_Exile wrote:DNQ means you finished below 271 in terms of all division one schools..hammb wrote:I think we all want our sports to succeed, but this is about the 3rd or 4th time I've seen this list and I still don't know what the hell we did to get a DNQ. Does anybody know what we failed to do to even qualify to be in this meaningless ranking system?BGSUVA wrote:well maybe its just me, but I would like for our sports to succeed...Redwingtom wrote:Meaning?
.
.
Not a damn thing!
It's wrong, but I suppose that makes sense.
We won regular season conference titles in both men's & women's hoops. We also were bowl eligible with a 1A football team. There is no denying the fact that these are far & away the 3 most important sports any university fields. With that level of performance you're telling me that we were more than 272nd in terms of D1 universities?
Cool...tells me these rankings are more worthless than I originally figured. Thanks for the clarification. At first I was willing to give the benefit that there was some loophole or something that prevented us from qualifying. Now that I know that it's pretty simple...I couldn't care less.
Redwingtom
- UK Peregrine
- Transcendent Illuminati

- Posts: 2875
- Joined: Thu Aug 19, 2004 11:48 am
- Location: Grand Valley State University
- Contact:
We didn't make any NCAA tournaments. WNIT, bowl eligibility, and conference titles are not good enough to earn points for the Director's Cup. You have to play in a bowl game or be in an NCAA tournament for your respective sport (e.g. College World Series).hammb wrote:
We won regular season conference titles in both men's & women's hoops. We also were bowl eligible with a 1A football team. There is no denying the fact that these are far & away the 3 most important sports any university fields. With that level of performance you're telling me that we were more than 272nd in terms of D1 universities?
Yeah, I realize that now. My point is simple: if that alone is the criteria by which they're grading the athletic departments then I have no interest in these rankings.UK Peregrine wrote:We didn't make any NCAA tournaments. WNIT, bowl eligibility, and conference titles are not good enough to earn points for the Director's Cup. You have to play in a bowl game or be in an NCAA tournament for your respective sport (e.g. College World Series).hammb wrote:
We won regular season conference titles in both men's & women's hoops. We also were bowl eligible with a 1A football team. There is no denying the fact that these are far & away the 3 most important sports any university fields. With that level of performance you're telling me that we were more than 272nd in terms of D1 universities?
There are a number of MAC teams that are ranked ahead of us in this system that I would not trade our athletic year for, not ever. Some of them must have made a tournament for mixed doubles badminton or something, but who cares? BG was middle of the MAC pack in football; won conference titles in both hoops, and didn't we win the MAC regular season baseball title as well? Yeah, I'm disappointed that we didn't make any of the tournaments, but in my mind it is foolish to rank schools like OU or UT or NIU ahead of us because they did make the tournament in some minor sport.
Just seems like a pretty foolish way to rank teams, IMO.
-
h2oville rocket
- Peregrine

- Posts: 6691
- Joined: Wed Oct 12, 2005 7:21 pm
- Location: Waterville, ohio
Agree with the last sentence BUT UT made the NCAA in the most popular team sport in the world. Hardly minor.hammb wrote:Yeah, I'm disappointed that we didn't make any of the tournaments, but in my mind it is foolish to rank schools like OU or UT or NIU ahead of us because they did make the tournament in some minor sport.
Just seems like a pretty foolish way to rank teams, IMO.
Are you talking about soccer?h2oville rocket wrote:Agree with the last sentence BUT UT made the NCAA in the most popular team sport in the world. Hardly minor.hammb wrote:Yeah, I'm disappointed that we didn't make any of the tournaments, but in my mind it is foolish to rank schools like OU or UT or NIU ahead of us because they did make the tournament in some minor sport.
Just seems like a pretty foolish way to rank teams, IMO.
Welcome to the United States.
Soccer is irrelevant.
