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

JJP said:
Yea . . . show me the math on how a sport, football, that makes money, causes the axing of non-revenue men’s sport. But non-revenue women’s sports, which must be funded and lose money, bear no responsibility.
Click to expand...
Stop wasting your efforts.

T9 is effectively an entitlement program and its irrelevant if it makes sense or not. It just is.
 
outside! said:
Due to the shorter distance to the plate, the time for a fastpitch softball to go from the pitcher to the catcher is shorter than in baseball. Somewhere on the internet is a video of MLB batters being embarrassed by a college softball pitcher....
Click to expand...

You gotta do the math.

Baseball pitched at 95mph=139 ft/s over 90 ft distance = 1.54 ft/s
Softball pitched at 60mph=88 ft/s over 60 ft distance = 1.47 ft/s

Baseball is moving faster. On the top of that, the velocity difference between a fastball, breaking ball and change up can be over 0.25 ft/s over the 90 ft distance so the timing is changed significantly (~16%).

The thing with softball pitch that makes it difficult for baseball batters to hit is fact that the players are not used to the ball rising over the trajectory rather down coming down. Not the relative speed over the distance.
 
mirage said:
You gotta do the math.

Baseball pitched at 95mph=139 ft/s over 90 ft distance = 1.54 ft/s
Softball pitched at 60mph=88 ft/s over 60 ft distance = 1.47 ft/s

Baseball is moving faster. On the top of that, the velocity difference between a fastball, breaking ball and change up can be over 0.25 ft/s over the 90 ft distance so the timing is changed significantly (~16%).

The thing with softball pitch that makes it difficult for baseball batters to hit is fact that the players are not used to the ball rising over the trajectory rather down coming down. Not the relative speed over the distance.
Click to expand...

That should be 1.54 seconds and 1.47 seconds.

You're welcome.
 
Regarding fast pitch softball vs. baseball: It's been scientifically demonstrated that it is impossible for hitters (either softball or baseball) to see and react to the ball after it comes out of the hand. Human reaction time and neuro-communication isn't fast enough. Their ability to hit the ball comes from anticipation. That anticipation is grooved in from years of experience and visual observation. The reason MLB players struggle at hitting fast-pitch softball pitches is because they can't anticipate the ball location because the visual cues are completely different than what they are trained on. If you gave an MLB player a week of practice, they would adjust and be going yard soon enough. It works the other way, too. If you put a good fast-pitch softball hitter at the plate against a 90mph MLB flame-thrower, they'd strike out, too. It has nothing to do with one being "harder" or "faster" than the other.
 
espola said:
That should be 1.54 seconds and 1.47 seconds.

You're welcome.
Click to expand...

Thanks for catching my error but actually its inverse as I did it while in a meeting in a conference room and did it upside down.

90 ft covered at 139 ft/sec = 0.65 sec to go from the mound to home plates.

60 ft covered at 88 ft/sec = 0.68 sec to go from the pitching plate to home plate for softball.

Technically, smaller baseball results in shorter reaction time than bigger softball by 0.03 seconds.

The basic point is still the same and valid
 
JJP said:
It’s a good thing that the girls get to play, but the way T9 works has had a huge distorting effect. When a girls team has 40 soccer players and they’re realistically going to play about 16, how is that a good thing? You’ve spent money on 20+ players who aren’t that great, who are never going to play. I see colleges starting women’s teams in obscure sports where there’s no interest and putting in women athletes who have never even done that sport (think it was some obscure rowing variation sport).

That money should have gone to a dedicated student athlete who has practiced and loves their sport.
Click to expand...

Wow. In that last statement you are basically stating that female collegiate athletes who have been awarded scholarships are not dedicated, do not practice, and do not love their sports.

... And the money should go to boys instead... because they are more worthy... because????... the boys have practiced and loved their sports more... of course.

That is a bold statement.

Your thinking is really the textbook definition of why Title 9 is necessary.
 
JJP said:
C’mon. T9 has been around for 25+ years. Several generations of women have been supported, exposed to sports and played it.

Do you know how hard it is to hit a major league pitch, how incredible the hand eye of a MLB player is? And it’s not like a lot of men are heading off to Europe in soccer and making it big. As far as I know it’s just Pulisic and Giuseppe Rossi.
Click to expand...

Try landing a a backward-handspring-double-back-flip combination on a balance beam (Simone Biles).
 
mirage said:
Thanks for catching my error but actually its inverse as I did it while in a meeting in a conference room and did it upside down.

90 ft covered at 139 ft/sec = 0.65 sec to go from the mound to home plates.

60 ft covered at 88 ft/sec = 0.68 sec to go from the pitching plate to home plate for softball.

Technically, smaller baseball results in shorter reaction time than bigger softball by 0.03 seconds.

The basic point is still the same and valid
Click to expand...

You should also correct for the actual release point which brings both closer to the batter.
 
espola said:
You should also correct for the actual release point which brings both closer to the batter.
Click to expand...

If you're going to count that, include the batter's box dimension and where the hitter stands too...

And actually, my original post was correct. I was talking about the rate the ball travels and not how long it takes to get to the plate. Your post correcting me confused me so I recalculated for amount of time it takes to get to the plate based on established distances.

Btw, did you ever play baseball? I did. Or are you just pontificating as usual....
 
espola said:
You should also correct for the actual release point which brings both closer to the batter.
Click to expand...
And a Softball pitcher typically leaves the rubber before releasing the ball so the distance is even closer.

The two toughest pitches to hit for a Baseball player in Softball? Rise and change-up.
 
Real Deal said:
You guys are something else. Men have all the opportunities in sports. Hands down. A man who is good enough at baseball, will certainly forgo college to play since he can make zillions playing pro. A man who is good enough at soccer will be on a fully-funded Academy or off to Europe. Heck, US Soccer would prefer they not play in college anyway! Good enough at tennis? He can go join the pro-circuit where the male athletes make double+ what their female counterparts make. Etc etc etc. Unless she is a tennis phenom or maybe an exotic dancer, a woman is pretty much maxed out if she can make the Ice Capades or the Dallas Cowgirls, where she will rake in a whopping $150 per game with no pay for r

There are millions of dollars out there for talentedcollege? C'mon guys.
Click to expand...
Who cares about equality in sports. The goal for women is equality in pay in the workforce. Honestly you are selling women short. There's more famous women C-Level executives in the IT industry now a days. Don't focus on the athletic part of the equality because the market will continue to sell men's sports over women's sports. Consumers will continue to watch male sports over women's sports. Our own daughters prefer to watch men's baseball over softball on TV. Us women's soccer and gymnastics are the only exception.
 
SoccerFan4Life said:
Yes but still not enough and the ceiling for women unfortunately stays at the level below CEO. There needs to be a bigger balance and I would rather see scholarship money going into women interested in math, science, finance, instead of scholarships for sports.
Click to expand...

Are the two mutually exclusive?

Some women excel at math, science, finance-- and some excel at sports.

I know what you are saying, and I'm not trying to jump on you, but it is telling--- women deserve opportunities in all of these areas.
 
Real Deal said:
Are the two mutually exclusive?

Some women excel at math, science, finance-- and some excel at sports.

I know what you are saying, and I'm not trying to jump on you, but it is telling--- women deserve opportunities in all of these areas.
Click to expand...

They do but Ultimately a career in softball, gymnastics, basketball ends in college and even women's soccer or men's soccer doesn't lead to a profitable career. MLS pays $60k or so. Honestly most sports for both men and women don't lead to much money. The big 3 do lead to a very rewarding professional career with lots of money but it's still a very small percentage of the overall athletic population.

Bottom line colleges are giving away too much money on sports both men and women. In my industry starting salaries begin at $80k and robotics and other science begin at $100k. I would never want my daughter to do college sports. I want her to be a scientist or engineering. for now youth soccer is awesome for my little one and I will enjoy it until it ends.
 
SoccerFan4Life said:
They do but Ultimately a career in softball, gymnastics, basketball ends in college and even women's soccer or men's soccer doesn't lead to a profitable career. MLS pays $60k or so. Honestly most sports for both men and women don't lead to much money. The big 3 do lead to a very rewarding professional career with lots of money but it's still a very small percentage of the overall athletic population.

Bottom line colleges are giving away too much money on sports both men and women. In my industry starting salaries begin at $80k and robotics and other science begin at $100k. I would never want my daughter to do college sports. I want her to be a scientist or engineering. for now youth soccer is awesome for my little one and I will enjoy it until it ends.
Click to expand...
But what does she want? I am an engineer and firmly believe only people that really want to be engineers should be engineers. The others don't make very good engineers. There are many ways to be successful and I stress to my children to look at the big picture and try to fit their interests towards a career that is both financially and personally rewarding.
 
SoccerFan4Life said:
..........In my industry starting salaries begin at $80k and robotics and other science begin at $100k. I would never want my daughter to do college sports. I want her to be a scientist or engineering. for now youth soccer is awesome for my little one and I will enjoy it until it ends.
Click to expand...

I just want to say that playing collegiate sports and technical/STEM BS are not mutually exclusive.

There are plenty of STEM majors playing all sort of sports and getting good grades.
 
outside! said:
But what does she want? I am an engineer and firmly believe only people that really want to be engineers should be engineers. The others don't make very good engineers. There are many ways to be successful and I stress to my children to look at the big picture and try to fit their interests towards a career that is both financially and personally rewarding.
Click to expand...

This statement is true just about every professional career, not just engineers....
 
mirage said:
You gotta do the math.

Baseball pitched at 95mph=139 ft/s over 90 ft distance = 1.54 ft/s
Softball pitched at 60mph=88 ft/s over 60 ft distance = 1.47 ft/s

Baseball is moving faster. On the top of that, the velocity difference between a fastball, breaking ball and change up can be over 0.25 ft/s over the 90 ft distance so the timing is changed significantly (~16%).

The thing with softball pitch that makes it difficult for baseball batters to hit is fact that the players are not used to the ball rising over the trajectory rather down coming down. Not the relative speed over the distance.
Click to expand...
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.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top