|
|
Post by atlfutboldad on Sept 13, 2021 17:23:25 GMT -5
Here's a breakdown (only the top leagues). These numbers should show that the game should not be tailored for the scant minority who will play professionally. College soccer is not professional academies. Its good at what it does, educating young people who sacrificing time and effort for the pride of the school. Soccer for Men: 412,351 boys play high school soccer in the US - 1 in 11 high school players will play in college - 1 in 5,355 high school players will be drafted to the MLS - 1 in 447 college players will be drafted in the MLS So, for MLS, really your only chance making a name/career/livable wage for yourself in soccer, a mere 82 out of 412K will play MLS (for likely a short time) after playing in college. Soccer for Women: 373,391 girls play high school soccer in the US 1 in 10 high school players will play in college 1 in 10,316 high school players will be drafted to the NWSL 1 in 986 college players will be drafted in the NWSL For girls, 37 out of 373K will play NWSL after playing some in college. www.elitedaily.com/sports/odds-going-pro-sports-will-make-rethink-day-job |
|
|
|
Post by oraclesfriend on Sept 13, 2021 17:52:14 GMT -5
Just curious what sub rules you think is appropriate for NCAA? I do find it interesting that ECNL, GA, other league's rules are stricter than college. I will say that I don't think that colleges should have no re-entry at all. I think the pro rules will make it a very unpleasant season for most college players. I think college soccer ought to resemble the pro game. A greater number of subs wouldn’t be the worst thing but Definitely no re entry to the game after you’ve been subbed. It makes it a completely different game if you can come off and rest and re enter. Fine for kids but not aspiring pros. I disagree. College programs carry about 30 players on their rosters. With no reentry you would not be able to play a large number of your players. Plus it would be hard to develop depth and train your younger players if they never enter the game. How do you build a consistent program? Unlike pros you cannot just trade and draft new players and you never have players for longer than 4 (occasionally 5) years. It would destroy the NCAA to not allow reentry. The transfer portal would be a nightmare. I also agree with atlfutboldad that too few college players go pro. You listed quite a few people but it would take days to write out all of those that did not go pro. You went far enough back to have players that are now retired. |
|
|
|
Post by bogan on Sept 13, 2021 18:18:28 GMT -5
I think college soccer ought to resemble the pro game. A greater number of subs wouldn’t be the worst thing but Definitely no re entry to the game after you’ve been subbed. It makes it a completely different game if you can come off and rest and re enter. Fine for kids but not aspiring pros. I disagree. College programs carry about 30 players on their rosters. With no reentry you would not be able to play a large number of your players. Plus it would be hard to develop depth and train your younger players if they never enter the game. How do you build a consistent program? Unlike pros you cannot just trade and draft new players and you never have players for longer than 4 (occasionally 5) years. It would destroy the NCAA to not allow reentry. The transfer portal would be a nightmare. I also agree with atlfutboldad that too few college players go pro. You listed quite a few people but it would take days to write out all of those that did not go pro. You went far enough back to have players that are now retired. It’s fine to disagree-he just said there was no debate-I disagree for (elite) men. For women I would agree. |
|
|
|
Post by rifle on Sept 13, 2021 20:07:40 GMT -5
I think college soccer ought to resemble the pro game. A greater number of subs wouldn’t be the worst thing but Definitely no re entry to the game after you’ve been subbed. It makes it a completely different game if you can come off and rest and re enter. Fine for kids but not aspiring pros. I disagree. College programs carry about 30 players on their rosters. With no reentry you would not be able to play a large number of your players. Plus it would be hard to develop depth and train your younger players if they never enter the game. How do you build a consistent program? Unlike pros you cannot just trade and draft new players and you never have players for longer than 4 (occasionally 5) years. It would destroy the NCAA to not allow reentry. The transfer portal would be a nightmare. I also agree with atlfutboldad that too few college players go pro. You listed quite a few people but it would take days to write out all of those that did not go pro. You went far enough back to have players that are now retired. As a thought experiment I might suggest that unlimited subs but no re entry allowed could actually increase the need for depth and the use of the bench. Regardless you enlightened me on the roster count. Thirty players seems… ridiculous. Or elite or something. |
|
|
|
Post by bogan on Sept 13, 2021 20:22:56 GMT -5
rifle said “ Regardless you enlightened me on the roster count. Thirty players seems… ridiculous. Or elite or something.” Sounds like, regardless of the substitution rules, there are a lot of players who won’t see the field. But that’s true in a lot of college sports.
|
|
|
|
Post by atlfutboldad on Sept 13, 2021 22:33:33 GMT -5
30 would likely include walk-ons...you need players to scrimmage with.
Colleges usually sign 6-9 incoming freshmen per year. There's usually about 3-5 who finish up playing soccer as a senior. Expect to lose 1-3 from each class each year. The attrition over 4 years is normal (injuries, rigor of college course-load, disinterest, etc). You HAVE TO sign more than you need, because half of the freshmen you sign won't be there as seniors (and you don't know which ones). Seniors = leadership.
But 83 of 37,000 freshmen/sophomores/juniors/seniors in a given year will end up going MLS pro. Maybe its 200 if you consider USL. Why on earth would you cater to such a small minority? That's like half of 1 percent.
On the opposite side, why would an elite male who really thinks they're pro caliber play in college? If you're great, you're better off playing USL and working your way up. That's how it works in Europe and elsewhere.
|
|
|
|
Post by bogan on Sept 14, 2021 4:12:18 GMT -5
30 would likely include walk-ons...you need players to scrimmage with. Colleges usually sign 6-9 incoming freshmen per year. There's usually about 3-5 who finish up playing soccer as a senior. Expect to lose 1-3 from each class each year. The attrition over 4 years is normal (injuries, rigor of college course-load, disinterest, etc). You HAVE TO sign more than you need, because half of the freshmen you sign won't be there as seniors (and you don't know which ones). Seniors = leadership. But 83 of 37,000 freshmen/sophomores/juniors/seniors in a given year will end up going MLS pro. Maybe its 200 if you consider USL. Why on earth would you cater to such a small minority? That's like half of 1 percent. On the opposite side, why would an elite male who really thinks they're pro caliber play in college? If you're great, you're better off playing USL and working your way up. That's how it works in Europe and elsewhere. I agree with you-If my son wanted the opportunity to try to go pro, personally, i’d try to get him on with a German club. However, there are those that say college is an avenue. The problem in the States is that we don’t really have a dedicated pathway. The percentage going pro in soccer for all pathways in the US is <1%. The highest number is baseball at around 10%…but that includes the farm system. …But as far as catering…the elite D1s are already considering 10 month schedules and other changes…why? Because their athletes will and do compete at a higher level…many are international. So I can see why they would consider going to FIFA rules…whether they should or will is another question. |
|
|
|
Post by oraclesfriend on Sept 14, 2021 7:29:12 GMT -5
Being on the recruiting trail now I would say that the schools we have looked at have high 20's (this school has 28) players on their rosters that are there on scholarship. The schools we visited this weekend plays 21-22 players per game and I think that is great. Some of the girls only get 8 minutes or so. The keepers split the game evenly. The best players are on the field for 75 minutes. Don't forget that every says the college game is a grind. Not enough rest between games. There is a high rate of injury and illness (close quarters cause flu and other things like mono in normal years and covid now).
Having had many talks with people one and two years older 28 scholarship players on a roster is pretty standard at D1. One school I recently heard has close to 40 players right now. Remember too that in Georgia with the Zell Miller a good student can have no athletic money given at all and still have a great scholarship and play on the field a lot, but not technically be a scholarship athlete.
Also there are a number of schools that play their walk ons. Last year Boston College played a girl who had been playing on their club team for her freshman and sophomore years. She joined BC as a junior and played.
As for the sub rules I don't know that I agree with the second half reentry or the unlimited number of substitution moments but I do think the ECNL/GA sub rules would be reasonable in college.
|
|
