Ron Wellman's Performance Metrics (Part 1) UPDATE New Low Achieved!

thedeacfan said:

I did this a while back but made a mistake. I did the calculations as though BC, Miami, and VaTech were members for the entire 20 year period. I sincerely apologize for that mistake because it made Ron Wellman look bad... when in fact the truth was even worse. :rulz:

Here's a look at how Wake has "contributed" to the ACC's competitiveness over the last 20 years (Ron Wellman's tenure as AD). This is Wake's actual overall athletic performance in the ACC as reflected in the Director's Cup standings.

Years Wake finished in the top third of the ACC	0
Years Wake finished in the top half of the ACC	3
Years Wake finished in the middle of the ACC (5th of 9)	2
Years Wake finished in the bottom half of the ACC	15
Years Wake finished in the bottom third of the ACC	11
Years Wake finished last in the ACC	5

Obviously Ron Wellman is not being judged based on Wake's performance in the Director's Cup...

I pulled the Director's Cup standings from their website. The completed results for the last 20 years are posted.

http://www.nacda.com/directorscup/nacda-directorscup-previous-scoring.html

Mr. Wellman has been successful at deflecting criticism for our poor performance in the Director's Cup. This is apparently accomplished by attributing the poor performance to the fact that Wake does not participate in as many sports as other schools. Not surprisingly, this excuse is only somewhat valid and is primarily just more AD "spin". Since a maximum of 20 sports (10 male & 10 female) can be used to calculate the point totals, a school that participates in more than 20 sports has more opportunities to use a better performing team in place of a lower performing team. However, the emphasis and weighting of the scoring system is on WINNING. The number of participation points awarded is minimal. A school like Wake that does NOT have winning as a priority, is never going to score well regardless of how many sports they participate in.

For the last three years 5 of 12 ACC schools have participated in less than 20 sports. GaTech & Miami had 17 sports, Wake had 18 sports, and Clemson & Florida St. had 19 sports.

School	#Sports	Director's Cup 2011	Director's Cup 2012	Director's Cup 2013
GaTech	17	59	72	74
Miami	17	51	59	71
WFU	18	74	92	98
Clemson	19	47	54	52
Florida St	19	9	5	11

* The table was updated to include the final 2013 Director's Cup standings on June 27, 2013. The score of 98 by Wake in 2013 is the lowest score ever for an ACC school in the Director's Cup competition.

Out of the 12 schools in the ACC, Wake has been the poorest performing for the last three years in a row. Florida State had only one more sport than Wake, but finished as one of the top schools nationally all three years. Obviously you do not have to participate in 20+ sports to score well. It is more important that you do well in the sports for which you do compete. In other words, Wake's poor scoring for the last two years has had much more to do with the fact that our Athletic Department is content to field non-competitive teams. This year we finished in the bottom half of the conference in 14 of 18 sports. Last year, we finished in the bottom half of the conference in 15 of the 18 sports in which we participated. Year before last, we finished in the bottom half of the conference in 13 of the 18 sports in which we participated.

Such a broad, pervasive, and consistent pattern of failure across so many fields of endeavor can only be attributed to decisions being made at the top. Ron Wellman is FAILING to field championship caliber athletes and teams. Given what we are seeing with the basketball program, is fielding championship caliber teams even a goal anymore? Are Wake athletes now supposed to be content with getting a "participation trophy"?

http://grfx.cstv.com/photos/schools/acc/genrel/auto_pdf/2012-13/misc_non_event/1213accrecordbook.pdf

ETA...

Click to expand...

thedeacfan said:

One of the red herring arguments that is used to excuse our poor performance in the Director's Cup is that the other schools participate in more sports so they have more opportunities to score. I say that it's not how many sports you participate in; it's how well you do in the sports in which you DO participate. I have given some thought as to how to prove or disprove either theorm.

I have already pointed out that 4 other ACC teams participate in fewer than 20 sports and they are all performing better than we are in the competition. But what about the other 7 ACC teams who do field more than 20 teams? I began to wonder what a comparison would like if those teams were pointed in the Director's Cup based on their 20 worst scores instead of their 20 best? In other words, how do we compare to the worst of the worst? As I looked at the Director's Cup website, I realized that I had all the information needed to make that comparison if I was willing to take the time to manually create a spreadsheet. Last night, I did just that.

Once I had all the points for all the sports input into the spreadsheet, I looked at each individual school. For example, Carolina participates in 25 sports. So I subtracted Carolina's best 5 scores from the calculation. That has the same effect as if those sports got "0" points. Carolina went from having a total score of 1075.33 to having a total score of 629.33. That score would have placed Carolina in the standings at ranking of ~31 instead of 8th. For NCSU who only competes in 21 sports, I subtracted only one (the highest) score. They went from 633.6 to 555.6. And their ranking dropped from 34 to ~38. I used that methodology for all 7 schools.

As expected, comparing Wake's performance to the other ACC schools worst performing teams did not significantly improve Wake's standing among ACC schools. In fact, the only school who dropped below Wake was BC. BC was the outlier dropping 79 spots. The average position drop for all other ACC schools including BC was almost 16 positions. The average position drop for the other ACC teams excluding BC was less than 10.

School	2013 Director's Cup Ranking	~2013 Ranking based on 20 Worst
UNC	8	31
FlSt	11	11
Duke	12	38
Va	20	47
NCSU	34	38
VaTech	36	38
Md	44	57
Clem	52	52
Mia	71	71
GaTech	74	74
BC	76	155
WFU	98	98

Even when we compare to the other school's worst teams, it's still very ugly. Hopefully this puts an end to the argument that we are expected to do poorly in the Director's Cup because other ACC schools participate in more sports.

Click to expand...

thedeacfan said:

As we approach the start of conference play, I thought we should take a minute to review the abysmal record of the man who got us here... "Oh Heavens Yes!"

Click to expand...

pourdeac said:

We're currently 19th. I wouldn't call that bad.

Click to expand...

thedeacfan said:

The long slide will begin on January the 9th. That's when football gets added to the scoring sheet.

Click to expand...

Rafi said:

Looking at the teams below us, I would guess we'll drop about 10 spots. Does that look right to you?

Click to expand...

Rafi said:

Wake is ranked 27th in the final fall sports ranking, and right in the middle of the ACC.

http://grfx.cstv.com/photos/schools.../2013-14/misc_non_event/Jan9DIConferences.pdf

Click to expand...

TheNines said:

The crazy part is that if he had made a rational hire 3 years ago OR a rational fire 1 year ago, nobody would even realize how bad he has been. I know that I had a huge amount of confidence in the man, even a few months after he hired Bz. Now, I wouldn't trust the guy to take out the trash.

Click to expand...