Stanford at the Tokyo Olympics - Printable Version
+- The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board)
+-- Forum: C-House! (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-4.html)
+--- Forum: The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-5.html)
+--- Thread: Stanford at the Tokyo Olympics (/thread-22071.html)
+- The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board)
+-- Forum: C-House! (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-4.html)
+--- Forum: The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-5.html)
+--- Thread: Stanford at the Tokyo Olympics (/thread-22071.html)
RE: Stanford at the Tokyo Olympics - Farm93 - 08-01-2021
(08-01-2021, 04:41 PM)PVTree Wrote: So, what's the Stanford medal count? Are we top 20?I know there is the "If Stanford was a nation" concept, but the concept is really flawed.
Many of the medals are earned by individuals on relays or as members of teams. In those cases the individuals get gold, but it is not as if Stanford alums were the only members of the squad.
Even when Katie the great was a key figure in the relays there were non-Stanford types that were involved with those results too.
Tracking the number of athletes and their success relative to other universities and colleges has merit IMHO.
It would be as if Stanford University claimed that because of the efforts of Mark Madsen and Brook Lopez that Stanford has won more NBA titles than the Toronto Raptors. Or given the success of Elway, Plunkett, Ertz and others Stanford University, if a franchise, would have more Super Bowl championships than several NFL franchises.
FWIW - I do suspect that Stanford only squads could get a few medals in a number of swimming relays and perhaps the women's water polo title.
RE: Stanford at the Tokyo Olympics - BostonCard - 08-01-2021
We are all aware of the drawbacks; this is just for bragging rights.
BC
RE: Stanford at the Tokyo Olympics - Softball Fan - 08-01-2021
I agree concept is flawed but Cardboard is not the only one to keep count.
https://about.usc.edu/history/uscs-olympic-heritage/
https://usctrojans.com/news/2021/7/19/usc-trojans-2020-tokyo-olympics-61-athletes-most-united-states-universities-colleges.aspx
Going into the 2020 Olympic Games, if USC were a country entering its athletes in the Olympic Games, its 305 all-time Summer Olympics medals would place it 13th among all participating countries. And in 11 different Olympics, USC’s medal count would have positioned it among the top 12 competing nations.
RE: Stanford at the Tokyo Olympics - 82lsju - 08-01-2021
(08-01-2021, 08:10 PM)paloalto Wrote: I agree concept is flawed but Cardboard is not the only one to keep count.
https://about.usc.edu/history/uscs-olympic-heritage/
https://usctrojans.com/news/2021/7/19/usc-trojans-2020-tokyo-olympics-61-athletes-most-united-states-universities-colleges.aspx
Going into the 2020 Olympic Games, if USC were a country entering its athletes in the Olympic Games, its 305 all-time Summer Olympics medals would place it 13th among all participating countries. And in 11 different Olympics, USC’s medal count would have positioned it among the top 12 competing nations.
and then there are the winter Olympic medals, USC has none (at least that's my take after quickly scanning their list which show medal winners as well as participants in winter and summer games) and we have at least one (Debi Thomas) and five more if you count Eric Heiden (his medals were before his time in the med school but we count medal from athletes who won them in high school and matriculated at Stanford but had no medals while at Stanford) and maybe some more....
RE: Stanford at the Tokyo Olympics - DC 86 - 08-01-2021
(08-01-2021, 08:32 PM)82lsju Wrote: and five more if you count Eric Heiden (his medals were before his time in the med school but we count medal from athletes who won them in high school and matriculated at Stanford but had no medals while at Stanford)
Heiden did win his medals prior to coming to Stanford but he has an undergraduate degree (BS 1984 in Biology) as well as his MD (awarded 1991). He transferred from Wisconsin as an undergrad. Still a relatively shaky connection but stronger than if he had graduated from Wisconsin undergrad and only attended the Med school.
RE: Stanford at the Tokyo Olympics - DC 86 - 08-01-2021
(08-01-2021, 04:50 PM)BobK Wrote: 2-7-4. 13 thus far
Strong Stanford gold medal opportunities coming up this week in WWP, WVB and women's soccer. All three teams ranked #1 in the world, although to varying degrees none of the three has been as dominant as expected.
RE: Stanford at the Tokyo Olympics - teejers1 - 08-01-2021
(08-01-2021, 09:38 PM)DC 86 Wrote:(08-01-2021, 04:50 PM)BobK Wrote: 2-7-4. 13 thus far
Strong Stanford gold medal opportunities coming up this week in WWP, WVB and women's soccer. All three teams ranked #1 in the world, although to varying degrees none of the three has been as dominant as expected.
WVB or did you mean WSoc? Both a bit shaky, imo, the former more than the latter.
RE: Stanford at the Tokyo Olympics - DC 86 - 08-01-2021
(08-01-2021, 09:49 PM)teejers1 Wrote:(08-01-2021, 09:38 PM)DC 86 Wrote:(08-01-2021, 04:50 PM)BobK Wrote: 2-7-4. 13 thus far
Strong Stanford gold medal opportunities coming up this week in WWP, WVB and women's soccer. All three teams ranked #1 in the world, although to varying degrees none of the three has been as dominant as expected.
WVB or did you mean WSoc? Both a bit shaky, imo, the former more than the latter.
I'm not sure whether I have more confidence in WVB or WSoc, neither one is looking close to what was expected. Jordan Thompson and Jordyn Poulter being injured is a big deal; whether they return for the knockout rounds could decide that team's fate. WSoc hasn't looked sharp and has played negatively but with a hot GK and an experienced core makes you believe they can find ways to win. WWP lost an Olympic game for the first time since 2008 but are still solid favorites.
RE: Stanford at the Tokyo Olympics - 82 Card - 08-02-2021
(08-01-2021, 11:17 PM)DC 86 Wrote: I'm not sure whether I have more confidence in WVB or WSoc, neither one is looking close to what was expected. Jordan Thompson and Jordyn Poulter being injured is a big deal; whether they return for the knockout rounds could decide that team's fate. WSoc hasn't looked sharp and has played negatively but with a hot GK and an experienced core makes you believe they can find ways to win. WWP lost an Olympic game for the first time since 2008 but are still solid favorites.
WSoc is out of the running for gold. One penalty kick early in the game got past backup goalie. That's all she wrote. 1-0 Canada. Bronze game on Thursday.
RE: Stanford at the Tokyo Olympics - PalmTree - 08-02-2021
Steven Solomon did not advance out of the men's 440m semis. Valerie Allman uncorked a 68.3M throw to lead in Women's discus before faulting her second attempt due to slick conditions and then competition getting called after onset of a torrential downpour. Women's PV with Katerina Stefanides in Group B was also suspended
Wish we had some of that rain....
RE: Stanford at the Tokyo Olympics - DC 86 - 08-02-2021
(08-02-2021, 03:08 AM)82 Card Wrote: WSoc is out of the running for gold. One penalty kick early in the game got past backup goalie. That's all she wrote. 1-0 Canada. Bronze game on Thursday.
Actually in the 74th minute and the backup GK went the right way but the penalty was perfect, no GK in the world would have stopped it. Unfortunately the foul was committed by Tierna Davidson.
RE: Stanford at the Tokyo Olympics - 82lsju - 08-02-2021
(08-01-2021, 09:00 PM)DC 86 Wrote:(08-01-2021, 08:32 PM)82lsju Wrote: and five more if you count Eric Heiden (his medals were before his time in the med school but we count medal from athletes who won them in high school and matriculated at Stanford but had no medals while at Stanford)
Heiden did win his medals prior to coming to Stanford but he has an undergraduate degree (BS 1984 in Biology) as well as his MD (awarded 1991). He transferred from Wisconsin as an undergrad. Still a relatively shaky connection but stronger than if he had graduated from Wisconsin undergrad and only attended the Med school.
are you implying that being a transfer is what makes the connection shaky (asks this transfer who never considered my connection to Stanford shaky, of course I was never going to win an Olympic medal (or any other sort of award for athletic achievement)).......makes me now wonder if there is a secret handshake taught freshman year that I never learned to identify "real alums"....
![[Image: 440px-SNice.svg.png]](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/e/e0/SNice.svg/440px-SNice.svg.png){kind=small}
and a follow up on who you think should count as Stanford Olympic medalists, one of my classmates won an Olympic medal in 1976 before enrolling in 1978, she missed the 1980 Olympics due to the boycott (she was on the 1980 Olympic team and she did compete for Stanford while an undergrad), does that make her connection shaky too given she won as a high school student and not a Stanford student?
RE: Stanford at the Tokyo Olympics - DC 86 - 08-02-2021
(08-02-2021, 07:33 AM)82lsju Wrote:(08-01-2021, 09:00 PM)DC 86 Wrote:(08-01-2021, 08:32 PM)82lsju Wrote: and five more if you count Eric Heiden (his medals were before his time in the med school but we count medal from athletes who won them in high school and matriculated at Stanford but had no medals while at Stanford)
Heiden did win his medals prior to coming to Stanford but he has an undergraduate degree (BS 1984 in Biology) as well as his MD (awarded 1991). He transferred from Wisconsin as an undergrad. Still a relatively shaky connection but stronger than if he had graduated from Wisconsin undergrad and only attended the Med school.
are you implying that being a transfer is what makes the connection shaky (asks this transfer who never considered my connection to Stanford shaky, of course I was never going to win an Olympic medal (or any other sort of award for athletic achievement)).......makes me now wonder if there is a secret handshake taught freshman year that I never learned to identify "real alums"....
and a follow up on who you think should count as Stanford Olympic medalists, one of my classmates won an Olympic medal in 1976 before enrolling in 1978, she missed the 1980 Olympics due to the boycott (she was on the 1980 Olympic team and she did compete for Stanford while an undergrad), does that make her connection shaky too given she won as a high school student and not a Stanford student?
The transfer status is irrelevant. What makes it shaky is that he trained for and won his five gold medals while he was a student at Wisconsin, and transferred to Stanford after the fact when he was fully retired from speed skating.
What if Katie Ledecky retired from swimming today, and then transferred to Harvard to finish her education, and then Harvard included her seven gold medals in their press releases about Harvard athletes at the Olympics? that is more or less Heiden's case.
My own feeling is that if someone is a Stanford athlete then it doesn't matter if they win a medal before or after they are were enrolled in school. It's those athletes whose time at Stanford was strictly as a regular student (e.g. Shawn Green) who are in a different category. Nobody would include Green's 328 home runs in a tabulation of how many homers Stanford has recorded in MLB, just as nobody would claim Bill Walton as one of our most accomplished basketball players. I understand that Heiden was a cyclist while he was at Stanford but of course his Olympic accomplishments were exclusively in speed skating.
Ultimately I am in favor of counting as many as possible since it's a PR exercise and other schools are very loose in how they make their tabulations, so if Stanford adopted a stricter formula it would be handicapping itself relative to other schools.
RE: Stanford at the Tokyo Olympics - ColoradoTree - 08-02-2021
(08-02-2021, 07:21 AM)DC 86 Wrote:(08-02-2021, 03:08 AM)82 Card Wrote: WSoc is out of the running for gold. One penalty kick early in the game got past backup goalie. That's all she wrote. 1-0 Canada. Bronze game on Thursday.
Actually in the 74th minute and the backup GK went the right way but the penalty was perfect, no GK in the world would have stopped it. Unfortunately the foul was committed by Tierna Davidson.
I thought O'Hara was one of the few bright spots of an otherwise frantically sloppy first half, consistently getting forward and passing to a midfielder who would promptly lose possession.
When Press came into the game, she tried a novel approach to soccer called "shooting the ball," which the team hadn't really been trying to that point. Problem was that she wasn't getting the opportunity for really good shots.
The midfield play was just abysmal. The forwards didn't do much of anything in the first half, but they also almost never had the ball, so it's hard to blame them too much, but they seemed to lose possession quickly the few times they did get it. I have no problem with how our defense played in the first half--quickly snuffed out any challenges and O'Hara and Dunn did a good job moving forward. Davidson had done a nice job, which is why that foul that led to the penalty is so harsh.
Naeher was fine before she got hurt. Having Franch in her place didn't cost us a bit. Like DC noted, it was an absolutely perfect penalty, Franch dove the right way and covered a good deal of ground, but no keeper can stop a perfectly placed penalty. Other than that, Canada didn't have any good chances the entire time Franch was in, so you can't say her presence contributed to the loss.
Losing 1-0 on that penalty (technically correct but really dubious) feels harsh because Canada certainly didn't do anything to win the game and was in no sense the better team. But it's not like the USWNT deserved to go through, either. We didn't have great chances or sustained periods of possession. Canada played a very CONCACAF game--defense-first, aggressively physical, stay organized and attack passing lanes in the defensive third, content to attack on counters rather than build possession themselves. (Except for the latter part of the first half, when Canada seemed on the front foot a little more.) We were the better team, on balance. But by no means were we good.
Sigh. Onto the Bronze medal match....
RE: Stanford at the Tokyo Olympics - BobK - 08-02-2021
It’s GOLD. Valarie Allman wins the Discus
RE: Stanford at the Tokyo Olympics - 82lsju - 08-02-2021
(08-02-2021, 07:51 AM)DC 86 Wrote: Ultimately I am in favor of counting as many as possible since it's a PR exercise and other schools are very loose in how they make their tabulations, so if Stanford adopted a stricter formula it would be handicapping itself relative to other schools.
this is my take as well.
RE: Stanford at the Tokyo Olympics - Softball Fan - 08-02-2021
Good analysis of the US women's soccer match against Canada. I believe that is three out of five matches in the Olympics the USA team did not score a goal. My uneducated 2 cents: Either the wrong offense is being used for this team's personnel or the USA simply isn't as good as advertised prior to the Olympics.
RE: Stanford at the Tokyo Olympics - fullmetal - 08-02-2021
(08-02-2021, 08:48 AM)BobK Wrote: It’s GOLD. Valarie Allman wins the Discus
Amazing! :)
RE: Stanford at the Tokyo Olympics - 82 Card - 08-02-2021
(08-02-2021, 07:51 AM)DC 86 Wrote: Ultimately I am in favor of counting as many as possible since it's a PR exercise and other schools are very loose in how they make their tabulations, so if Stanford adopted a stricter formula it would be handicapping itself relative to other schools.
This is Stanford AD's approach. They list Bill Toomey as a Stanford Olympic Champion: https://gostanford.com/news/2021/8/2/track-field-allman-wins-gold.aspx Toomey did his collegiate athletics and Colorado but bot a graduate education degree at Stanford. Toomey was a hero in my formative years so I'm in favor of counting him.
RE: Stanford at the Tokyo Olympics - ColoradoTree - 08-02-2021
(08-02-2021, 09:36 AM)paloalto Wrote: Good analysis of the US women's soccer match against Canada. I believe that is three out of five matches in the Olympics the USA team did not score a goal. My uneducated 2 cents: Either the wrong offense is being used for this team's personnel or the USA simply isn't as good as advertised prior to the Olympics.
I mean, we're the top-ranked team in the world, we just won the World Cup in 2019, and we entered the Olympics on a 40-some game unbeaten streak (against some great teams, too). In the Olympic qualifying final in February 2020, we beat Canada 3-0, and we beat them 1-0 in the SheBelieves Cup earlier this year. We have the best collection of talent of any national team in the world. It's not that we're not as good as advertised. And the results under Vlatko to date suggest that our general tactical approach has been working.
But obviously I can't say it worked here. Something was just plain off this tournament, and it's not something that really emerged in 2020 or 2021 in the runup to the Olympics. We looked dominant in every game coming in except for a 1-1 draw with Sweden in Stockholm in April (which, I dunno, man, sometimes when you play a top 5 team in the world on the road, you do well to get a draw).
Maybe that's the main thing--we'd been too successful, and just like the NCAA basketball tournament, you want to take a loss at some point so your team experiences that feeling and regains the hunger to fix it. We did seem to lack a certain confident hunger, and we also lacked the ability to adjust to unexpected tactics. When Sweden beat us in Rio, we responded by revamping tactics and becoming a much more possession-focused team that would build through the back, rely on our midfielders, and get better chances that way than the old "just bomb it into Abby Wambach and she'll head it in" days. That's what won us the World Cup in 2019, and that's basically who we've been since. Possession has been pretty easy for a few years now. Against Sweden, it was impossible. They were anticipating passes and cutting off lanes, swarming attackers, etc. Standard stuff, but they stuck to it and we just couldn't respond. Then, my goodness, this Canada match. We had a good 10-15 minutes at the start, but after that, it was like our mids forgot how to complete passes and handle the ball. I don't know how a team just sort of collectively forgets the basics, but I'm all ears if someone has an idea. The mentality just wasn't there, and it's hard to pinpoint why. Like we'd just woken up and our body and brain weren't quite on the same page yet.
Bizarre that it happens with this roster, too, since we basically ran it back with the 2019 version of the team. If anyone was going to be experienced enough to respond on the fly and not be overwhelmed by the moment, it was this group. Anyway, after the Bronze medal match, that likely means the end to competitive matches for the USWNT for Rapinoe, Lloyd, and maybe Sauerbrunn, and I'd expect a lot of new faces coming into the mix before 2023, with that generation of O'Hara/Press/Heath/Morgan potentially starting to see some turnover, too.