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

JJP

SILVER ELITE
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.
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.
 

Mullet

SILVER
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.
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.
 
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...
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.
 
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.
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?
 
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?
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.
 
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.
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,
 
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,
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....
 
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....
You apparently don't know what "rhetorical question" means.
 
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.
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
 
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
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:

Frank

SILVER ELITE
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?
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.
 
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:
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.
 
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.
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?
 
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?
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.
 
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.
Just to recant this post for clarification. Your saying that possession is now real if we can agree on what it is?
 
Just to recant this post for clarification. Your saying that possession is now real if we can agree on what it is?
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.
 
Top