NoGoal
DA
I agree, probably because they can post without an alias.
2017-2018 D1 Women's Soccer Talk!
- Thread starter gkrent
- Start date
I have players in the Big12 I'm watch! and the SEC!
MakeAPlay
DA
Just based upon last season, the spring and the incoming players here is my top 5:
1. ACC: With Florida St., North Carolina and Duke all being bonafide contenders (It is likely that 1-3 of those teams will make it to the college cup) makes this conference tough to contend with. Add in a darkhorse Notre Dame side and sprinkle in Virginia and you have a very top heavy league. NC State should be good again but we will see if last year was a fluke. The bottom half of the conference is horrible but with 6 legitimate top 25 teams they are the preaseason top conference.
Pac 12: Stanford and UCLA are two of my 6 legitimate college cup contenders. Add in talented Cal and $C teams. Utah could be a top 10 team and Colorado looks to follow up their amazing turnaround last year with another solid year. That gives them 6 teams that will be in the preseason top 25 which puts them right there with the ACC. If Cal is can live up to their hype and/or $C can find suitable replacements for their graduated players then they could easily end up in the top 10.
Big Ten: Penn St. will be the favorite to win it all. Rutgers, Northwestern, Michigan and Ohio St. will be good. Wisconsin, Indiana and Nebraska could all surprise. Penn St. Wisely scheduled a tough preseason schedule so that they are ready for the other 5 title contenders come late in the season.
SEC: Florida is a top 10-12 team and Texas A&M, Auburn and Arkansas will be very good too. Add in Missouri and Tennessee and you have a decently strong conference. The bottom teams are pretty bad but the quality at the top makes up for it.
WCC: The last spot was tough but I have to give the WCC the edge over the Big 12. Santa Clara, BYU and Pepperdine are legit top 25 teams. LMU will be good and USD should be decent too. Even Portland and USF will be okay. The top teams separate them from the rest. The Big 12 has WVU at the top and everyone else is an also ran. In the WCC there won't be one team that steamrolls everyone.
MAP, before you move on to next season, be sure to catch SC's illustrious 2016 campaign on rewind all day today on the PAC-12 network. Lol
MakeAPlay
DA
The one game that I cared about I have seen multiple times and they got thoroughly outplayed. Not to mention that that 6 or 7 of those players are now in the pros so they can't miraculously save $C's a$$ this time around. Their coach is going to have to coach them on how to play soccer if they want to return to the Sweet 16.
Nothing you can say about $C will get my goat. They may have been national champs but they weren't city champs and they were sub .500 against teams from the state of California. Not to mention that they are going to get creamed this year by the team that matters to me.
Good luck to you and your player.
NoGoal
DA
I don't mean to shift gears, but I keep hearing about CAL Athletics Department in financial distress to the tune of 18 million in the red per year. The culprit is the stadium retrofit and the new athletic training center.
https://www.google.com/amp/www.merc...athletics-something-has-to-give-but-what/amp/
It doesn't help when they offer, womens lacrosse (35 players), womens field hockey (29 players), womens beach volleyball (19 players) as varsity sports or 30 varsity sports for both men and women. The most in the Pac12 conference.
https://www.google.com/amp/www.merc...athletics-something-has-to-give-but-what/amp/
It doesn't help when they offer, womens lacrosse (35 players), womens field hockey (29 players), womens beach volleyball (19 players) as varsity sports or 30 varsity sports for both men and women. The most in the Pac12 conference.
What's the difference between Cal offering women's lacrosse and women's soccer? I don't get it.
NoGoal
DA
Um, do you see lacrosse or field hockey as a popular youth sport?
http://insportscenters.com/most-popular-youth-sports/
http://www.engagesports.com/blog/post/1488/youth-sports-participation-statistics-and-trends
I concur that women's lacrosse is not as popular as women's soccer - right now. But if popularity is the litmus test, we probably would have very few women's sports at all. Even women's soccer has only been around for about 20 years in the Pac-10/12.
NoGoal
DA
If I started a national roller blade hockey club league. Does it mean the universities should offer a varsity program for it? #nope
NoGoal
DA
The key word in your paragraph "right now".
If CAL had to eliminate a few varsity sports "right now". Would you eliminate women soccer before womens lacrosse, field hockey and beach volleyball?
NoGoal
DA
When Kansas St was looking to add a new womens varsity sport a couple of years ago. They added womens soccer, not womens field hockey or womens lacrosse or womens beach volleyball. I'm sure there wasn't a debate, but womens lacrosse can be bigger than womens soccer in 30 years.
We are talking past each other. The athletic budget applies to both men and women's sports. I'm saying you have to eliminate men's sports before you eliminate any women's sports. You are ignoring Title IX. If popularity is what we based the athletic budget on, we probably wouldn't have many women's sports at all.
If you eliminate lacrosse, what men's sport are you going to eliminate to stay Title IX compliant? And is that men's sport less competitive/popular than women's soccer? Probably not.
And they wear protective equipment.
NoGoal
DA
I understand the Title IX implication. I didn't bring up a men's sport, because I wanted to discuss which women sport would be eliminated. Since you brought up the men's, it's a fairly easy decision, eliminate the non-revenue mens sport that's least popular....how about Rugby and it's roster of 59 players. I'm curious how many scholarships are offered for Rugby?
For women, it's 12 in NCAA DI or DII. For men, none.
http://www.scholarshipstats.com/ncaalimits.html
NoGoal
DA
Better yet, eliminate the positions who approved the earthquake retrofitting for the outdated stadium who put the athletic department in this mess in the 1st place. You would think with bright professions and administrators....they would have analyzed and projected what yearly expense would have been prior to approving. It might have been cheaper leasing the Oakland Coliseum, like UCLA with the Rose Bowl.