Congrats. It might be different for girls, but for boys getting non-football, non-basketball scholarships the money is so little. After the football, basketball and Title 9 money is dished out, there’s crumbs left for everyone else. Boys will often get better scholarship from D3 rather than D1 schools, they just get a “need” scholarship in lieu of an athletic scholarship.
SoccerFan4Life
PREMIER
coachrefparent
GOLD
NumberTen
SILVER ELITE
Agreed
sandshark
SILVER ELITE
My all world short guy team. Pretty decent squad I would say although they wouldn’t enjoy rotating at keeper and corners would be an adventure.
Ngolo Kante 5’6”
Dani Alves 5’7”
Jordi Alba 5’7”
Marco Verratti 5’6”
Andres Iniesta 5’7”
Eden Hazard 5’7”
David Silva 5’6”
Alexis Sanchez 5’6”
Philippe Coutinho 5’7”
Raheem Sterling 5’6”
Lionel Messi 5’7”
My guess is those American “scouts” so obsessed with size would have passed on almost every one of these guys.
Short people - they got little hands
And little eyes
And they walk around
Tellin' great big lies
They got little noses
And tiny little teeth
They wear platform shoes
On their nasty little feet
Well, I don't want no short people
Don't want no short people
Don't want no short people
Round here
Short people are just the same
Short people got nobody
To love
They got little baby legs
And they stand so low
You got to pick 'em up
Gotta disagree with u here. Soccer bodies and skills are different. 3 sub limitations means minimum you need 7 players (not including goalie) to run for 90 minutes. Soccer favors smaller, sleeker athletes than basketball or football (Why carry extra weight for 90 minutes? Who needs extra foot of height when the ball is at your feet?)
If you look at the world’s greatest soccer players and rising youngsters, guys like Messi, C. Ronaldo, Neymar, Suarez, Mbappe, O. Dembele, all of them are too short to be NBA players. And of that group, only Ronaldo and Suarez could possibly play NFL, but I doubt it.
Sons of Pitches
SILVER ELITE
My parents are 5'8" and 5'6", I am 6'4" and played college basketball. My wife was a college gymnast and is 5'1", our 14 year old daughter is 5'8" and growing taller everyday it seems. This seems like yet another failure in our scouting system. Scouting kids and offering scholarships before they are fully developed is just another example of why our system is failing in many aspects.
smellycleats
SILVER ELITE
For boys. Best female athletes choose soccer.
outside!
DA
Title IX has nothing to do with how much scholarship money is available for male sports. Females make up more than half the population and more than half of the number of undergraduate college students. I am not able to quickly find what the proportion is of scholarship dollars, but I would be surprised if women get more than half of the scholarship dollars available due to the unequal opportunities for female athletes at younger ages in the US due to various factors (cultural, tradition, etc.). Football is the biggest reason non-football male athletes have fewer athletic scholarship opportunities.
My observation is the the best female athletes choose individual sports and not soccer.
No money and fame are....
Again there are always exceptions but for the most part, offsprings tend to share genetic characteristics with their parents. Not an opinion - its a fact.
While gene can get passed down not obvious from immediate parents, it is in the family some where or the source same from a different gene pool or some mutation/stimulation has occurred that is not the norm.
Clearly you daughter has inherited your height and even if she stopped growing at this level, she would be consider to be on the tall side for general female population. So the scout would look at you and see her height at 14 yrs and probably think that there may be a bit left but being female, they would take into an account where else she is in her puberty phase and make the call.
False. Men’s football and basketball earn the the money and are the golden goose. Women’s sports and the remaining men’s sports spend the money. Colleges will only allocate so much money to non-revenue sports. To balance the REVENUE EARNING 97 men’s football and basketball scholarships doled out (85 football 12 b-ball), about 97 NON-REVENUE women’s sports scholarships have to be handed out to comply with Title 9. Very little is left over for NON-REVENUE men’s sports scholarships.
Basically, the non-revenue sports are competing for the football and basketball money. Title 9 guarantees that non-revenue women’s sports will get a lot more of the football/basketball dollars than non-revenue men’s sports.
I can’t believe you are blaming football, which along with men’s basketball, produced the money that funds women’s scholarships, as the reason why male athletes have fewer scholarships. Without football and men’s basketball, there’s no money to fund any scholarships. You are creating a false equivalency between REVENUE EARNING scholarships and NON-REVENUE EARNING SCHOLARSHIPS. Title 9 is obviously the only reason why men’s sports outside of football and basketball have so little funding.
I don’t have an issue with women’s sports receiving football money. My opinion is, non-revenue sports should split the money equally between the boys and girls. Because the way things are done now, a lot of men’s sports, like wrestling, men’s track and field, gymnastics, lacrosse, soccer, volleyball are getting wiped out at the college level.
It’s like college men’s sports have gone to divorce court and got stuck with all the bills and child and spousal support and then we don’t even get to play or watch our own games. It sucks.
coachrefparent
GOLD
Maybe, but they should choose golf or tennis or another sport they can make some money.
He's not blaming football, he's blaming football scholarships, which is exactly what you are saying. As noted Title 9 requires that the total scholarship $$ for men/women be roughly equal. Your proposal for non-revenue sports equally splitting wouldn't fit the bill.
And yes, Outside is correct when he states "Title IX has nothing to do with how much scholarship money is available for male sports." The reason there is little $$ left for soccer and other small sports for men, is because all (most of) the men's $ is given to the big sport players.
Colleges choose to give a lot of scholarship $$ for revenue generating sports (as it keeps the $$ machine working), but they don't have to under Title 9.
Uhh OK you lost me. Not sure what you’re getting at. Outside is blaming football/football scholarships, I’m saying it’s obviously Title 9 as the reason why men’s college sports outside of football and basketball get so little funding. I’m incredulous people are even disputing this.
Yes, I know that. Title 9 essentially mandates that the finite amount of money available to non-revenue sports be given mainly to women’s sports, which is starving men’s sports outside of football and b-ball. Hence the logical conclusion Title 9 has promoted women’s sports at the expense of mens non-revenue sports.
Huh? Explain to me how it makes sense to starve the golden goose to feed any non-revenue sport, men of women. It’s crazy how you guys are reaching to absolve Title 9 for its role in decimating men’s college sports outside of football and b-ball.
It’s not that hard. It’s a zero-sum game with regard to the football and b-ball money provided to non-revenue sports. The more dollars given to women’s sports, as mandated by Title 9, the less dollars for the smaller men’s sports. I’m pretty sure without Title 9 that’s not how money would be allocated. So it’s logical to say Title 9 is the reason smaller men’s sports are financially hurting at college level.
Your attempt to absolve Title 9 by suggesting colleges not fund men’s football and basketball to fund smaller men’s sports is not even a solution, it’s financially undoable.
Multi Sport
DA
Have you ever visited a major D1 Football training facility? Insanely over the top. But they use them as a recruiting tool...