It's Club Soccer - Don't Complain About it

JJP said:
No, my math comment was directed towards calculating how the flow of money to women’s sports from football and bball revenues was draining the budget for smaller men’s sports. I have no comment on the math between baseball and girls softball.

As to the money they get, it’s not dependent on who has the better skill set. I watched Jenny Finch strike out Bonds and Pujols and thought she was amazing. The point is people pay to watch the top baseball players, not the top soft ballers, so the top baseball players deserve the money they earn.

I’m all for the football money going into funding other sports at each university. The football student athletes are generating the revenue and receiving only a scholarship, which vastly underplays their labor. I’d rather see that revenue go to the students than administrators. I just think too much of that football money is being spent on women’s sports where there’s no real interest or demand and it’s lead to men’s sports getting cut.

I’m not going to post on this topic anymore, it’s been said, and there’s tons of material on the internet. But it’s obvious that college men’s sports have been shafted by T9 and political correctness, and it probably makes T9 advocates uncomfortable that their gains have come at the cost of the smaller men’s sports. Blaming football and basketball for spending their own money is just crazy talk, not a solution. I could solve 90% of the world’s problems if I could spend everyone else’s money, gee I wonder why people won’t let me do that?

I’m gonna be honest and say that the excuses for women’s sports not having money and trying to spend the football budget and boosters money should end. There are plenty of women making a lot of money. Those women can buy tickets, watch games, and be boosters for their favorite women’s sport.
Click to expand...

T9 is not about wealth distribution. All the football or basketball money in the world would not prevent a men's program being scrapped i favor of T9.

That said, I see nothing wrong with football or basketball money that is not needed for the actual program to be funneled to other sports or other college programs.
 
Multi Sport said:
Bleacher report has a great article on the 25 best 5-7 players and shorter in the world. That would make for one heck of a team...
Click to expand...

My player's college team is always one of the shortest on the field with 5 starters that were 5'5 or shorter. It hurt them on set pieces but they were only outpossessed once all year and that was 52/48 in the NCAA final. Height is nice but it isn't everything.
 
MakeAPlay said:
My player's college team is always one of the shortest on the field with 5 starters that were 5'5 or shorter. It hurt them on set pieces but they were only outpossessed once all year and that was 52/48 in the NCAA final. Height is nice but it isn't everything.
Click to expand...

The so-called "possession" stat is pretty much meaningless. For instance, who has possession while the clock is ticking as the ball is being retrieved for a throwin - the team that kicked it out, or the team that will throw it in?
 
espola said:
The so-called "possession" stat is pretty much meaningless. For instance, who has possession while the clock is ticking as the ball is being retrieved for a throwin - the team that kicked it out, or the team that will throw it in?
Click to expand...

The 3 best teams at holding possession all made the College Cup on the women's side. I am going to go with it matters A LOT!! The thing that they emphasize the most in training is holding possession by connecting passes and trying to pierce lines with passing.

I trust her more than a dilettante.
 
MakeAPlay said:
The 3 best teams at holding possession all made the College Cup on the women's side. I am going to go with it matters A LOT!! The thing that they emphasize the most in training is holding possession by connecting passes and trying to pierce lines with passing.

I trust her more than a dilettante.
Click to expand...

You didn't answer the question.

And I didn't say that possession wasn't important. I merely pointed out that the oft-quoted measurement of it is ill-defined garbage,
 
espola said:
You didn't answer the question.

And I didn't say that possession wasn't important. I merely pointed out that the oft-quoted measurement of it is ill-defined garbage,
Click to expand...

Your question was rhetorical. I'm sure that you have the time to look it up and answer the question for all of us. Please don't ask me questions that you can Google the answers for. The stuff that I talk about isn't on Google....
 
MakeAPlay said:
Your question was rhetorical. I'm sure that you have the time to look it up and answer the question for all of us. Please don't ask me questions that you can Google the answers for. The stuff that I talk about isn't on Google....
Click to expand...

You apparently don't know what "rhetorical question" means.
 
MakeAPlay said:
My player's college team is always one of the shortest on the field with 5 starters that were 5'5 or shorter. It hurt them on set pieces but they were only outpossessed once all year and that was 52/48 in the NCAA final. Height is nice but it isn't everything.
Click to expand...
man city killing set pieces with short players. killed ManU twice and Mou loves touting his team of trees. sometimes desire and coaching - Pep is an okay coach
 
Not_that_Serious said:
man city killing set pieces with short players. killed ManU twice and Mou loves touting his team of trees. sometimes desire and coaching - Pep is an okay coach
Click to expand...
Being a ManU fan for half my life I dislike Mou. He stifles play by not letting his players attack. He's afraid of losing which happens anyways. And, Pep is a better coach.
 
Last edited:
espola said:
The so-called "possession" stat is pretty much meaningless. For instance, who has possession while the clock is ticking as the ball is being retrieved for a throwin - the team that kicked it out, or the team that will throw it in?
Click to expand...
That's not how possession is calculated. Typically this time is excluded and not factored in to the possession % calculation. Meaning in a 90 minute game possession is typically calculated at somewhere around 70 minutes depending on out of bounds, free kicks, corners, etc.
 
LASTMAN14 said:
Oh, E...you don't believe in possession soccer. We have debated this on other threads. And, I know you know what a rhetorical question is, as you employ it in many of your replies.:rolleyes:
Click to expand...

I get a chuckle when I see people (especially coaches) referring to possession as if it were a real thing. There is no agreement on how to measure it, and the methods admittedly include subjective judgments. But then again so do classic stats like shots on goal, assists, and saves.
 
espola said:
I get a chuckle when I see people (especially coaches) referring to possession as if it were a real thing. There is no agreement on how to measure it, and the methods admittedly include subjective judgments. But then again so do classic stats like shots on goal, assists, and saves.
Click to expand...
I guess passing the ball and making passes in succession is not a real thing either as it is a key concept in possession. :confused: However one calculates something that does not exist doesn't really matter because it's not real, right?
 
LASTMAN14 said:
I guess passing the ball and making passes in succession is not a real thing either as it is a key concept in possession. :confused: However one calculates something that does not exist doesn't really matter because it's not real, right?
Click to expand...

Increasing one's possession score, if we can agree what that it is, is certainly something worth striving for, but it's not a good measure of who won the game.
 
espola said:
Increasing one's possession score, if we can agree what that it is, is certainly something worth striving for, but it's not a good measure of who won the game.
Click to expand...
Just to recant this post for clarification. Your saying that possession is now real if we can agree on what it is?
 
LASTMAN14 said:
Just to recant this post for clarification. Your saying that possession is now real if we can agree on what it is?
Click to expand...
Wait, and it's not a good measure of who won the game? That's a narrow perspective that requires more clarification because I can present scenarios to argue that point. Even scenarios where the better team lost and still won because we all know who did despite the score line.
 
espola said:
I get a chuckle when I see people (especially coaches) referring to possession as if it were a real thing. There is no agreement on how to measure it, and the methods admittedly include subjective judgments. But then again so do classic stats like shots on goal, assists, and saves.
Click to expand...
Right here in your first sentence. You imply that possession does not exist.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top