I may have seen a few texts/tweets/fb messages/TexAgs posts about it.

We need to add women's crew and men's surfing!

Stanford CHOOSES to fund and participate in so many sports. They also excel in most of them. We could do the same thing, but we don't. I don't want to see the scoring changed at all. It is supposed to measure overall excellence, not averaged excellence in a few sports.

The real standout school is Texas. They have by far the most money, but choose to massively over-spend on a few. They have the money to fund lacrosse, wrestling, men's vball, rowing etc. but instead they spend a few million extra for under-performing coaches.

[This message has been edited by SpicewoodAg (edited 6/15/2011 9:26a).]

I looks like Cross Country hurts us.

Texas does have an NCAA rowing team. That is their 20th team.

If my math and estimations are correct, averaging the finishes of each team the school has (NCAA Championship teams):

Stanford would finish with 57.25 points
A&M would finish with 55.5 points

A&M fares better here because of the reasons discussed earlier. Still, Stanford would take the crown.

where it hurts is when Stanford can count their highest scoring teams...we have to count all..notice this year, they have points in sports we don't enter...one year, the year we played them in a Super Regional in softball, they didn't even need that many points...they used coed bowling...

hellcat, see above. It would significantly tighten the gap, but Stanford still has the best athletics program in the country, year-in and year-out. The fact that they can fund 25 or more programs for the same cost as we can fund 19, and still average a higher finish than us, speaks volumes to how well-managed the department is.