More Questions about College Sports

When you say it's about money you mean that the international students pay full sticker?  Or you mean that soccer is  somehow a money maker for them and they recruit elite players? I'm assuming the former, but just making sure.

I don't know, exactly, JCG.  I meant to throw it out as an open line of questioning but re-reading my post, I see I did a lousy job of that.

I know that, generally, many schools of all sizes have tried to develop competitive sports programs to attract a larger general student base, gain more recognition and separation in a crowded environment.  Part of my current work involves surface research and contacting colleges and universities and it amazes me that such a high percentage of students these days are involved in the college sports programs.  It also amazes me how many small schools invest significantly in sports facilities, teams and team travel expenses.  I would love to have more insight behind the logic and dollars and cents.  Do they really come out ahead by attracting more students even when considering the associated costs?  Anybody? 

Then, there is the additional oddity that there are seemingly so many more foreign students these days, particularly student-athletes for some specific sports.  Of course, I get that they play more soccer in other corners of the world, but is a small NAIA or D3 really going to gain that much by bringing in moderately talented student athletes from other countries?  There is very little gate income at these smaller schools, even for the better winning programs.  I wonder what the appeal is to the school... to the students... and what the economics of that segment are.  ARE they more inclined to pay full sticker?  How much difference does it make if it helps the team win 70% of their games instead of 40-50%?  

Like I said, so many questions come to mind.

I read an article a few years back about small colleges that were getting back into football (I'm thinking D3) in an effort to attract 1) paying students, and 2) male students.  The argument was that when all things were considered, a football program was a net positive to the school.  I would assume that some of the sports programs being offered by some smaller schools are in fact activities designed to attract paying students.

The concept of having six coaches and a dedicated trainer for a soccer team might take some investigating into these folks' pay.  Assuming a student trainer and 4-5 student coaches, perhaps that works.  As for the country of origin for these players, not sure how that works in a smaller school, however at larger schools many sports (tennis, swimming come to mind) have significant foreign players who I assume were provided athletic scholarships far below 100% (wonder if home country is allowed to fund educational expenses in some cases).

Due to title 9, most colleges and universities have women's soccer teams, but no man soccer.

The highest one can get for man soccer is about d2. NAIAs will have man soccer too.  They get a lot of internationals, since most Americans know that soccer is a socialist sport. 

The extra trainers and coaches are to help them put the soccer cans back  in the equipment shed where they belong and get insoide 

Teaching Elder posted:

Due to title 9, most colleges and universities have women's soccer teams, but no man soccer.

The highest one can get for man soccer is about d2. NAIAs will have man soccer too.  They get a lot of internationals, since most Americans know that soccer is a socialist sport. 

The extra trainers and coaches are to help them put the soccer cans back  in the equipment shed where they belong and get insoide 

At present, there are 206 Division 1 men's soccer programs.

Teaching Elder posted:

Due to title 9, most colleges and universities have women's soccer teams, but no man soccer.

Title 9 is definitely a problem, at least as currently interpreted and implemented.  Because football sucks up so much air,  it makes it even harder for guys who don't play football to play sports in college.   Partly as a consequence,  there are, like 4 x the number of woman's college gymnastic teams as men's team (though in fairness there are a lot more girls doing gymnastics in HS and wanting to do it in college).  But even in a sport like soccer -- where there are more boys playing in HS than there are girls playing in HS, there are significantly fewer opportunities for men -- especially at the D1 level -- than they are for women.   Strange kind of equality Title 9 promotes.

Swampboy posted:

Teaching Elder posted:

Due to title 9, most colleges and universities have women's soccer teams, but no man soccer.

The highest one can get for man soccer is about d2. NAIAs will have man soccer too.  They get a lot of internationals, since most Americans know that soccer is a socialist sport. 

The extra trainers and coaches are to help them put the soccer cans back  in the equipment shed where they belong and get insoide 

At present, there are 206 Division 1 men's soccer programs.

Really?!?! That surprises me that there are that many... quite a few DI conferences that do not have soccer as a conference sport. One example is the SEC. Another one would be the Ohio Valley Conference. Both conferences have women's soccer but not men's. 

but interestingly, SEC member, Kentucky, does play man soccer...in conference USA.

Teaching Elder posted:

Due to title 9, most colleges and universities have women's soccer teams, but no man soccer.

The highest one can get for man soccer is about d2. NAIAs will have man soccer too.  They get a lot of internationals, since most Americans know that soccer is a socialist sport. 

The extra trainers and coaches are to help them put the soccer cans back  in the equipment shed where they belong and get insoide 

You're right! There are only 263 D1 men's soccer programs. Overall there are about 900 NCAA men's soccer programs.

RJM posted:

Teaching Elder posted:

Due to title 9, most colleges and universities have women's soccer teams, but no man soccer.

The highest one can get for man soccer is about d2. NAIAs will have man soccer too.  They get a lot of internationals, since most Americans know that soccer is a socialist sport. 

The extra trainers and coaches are to help them put the soccer cans back  in the equipment shed where they belong and get insoide 

You're right! There are only 263 D1 men's soccer programs. Overall there are about 900 NCAA men's soccer programs.

According to this chart there are actually only 205 mens programs at the D1 level;

Can you post the same chart for baseball?

Teaching Elder posted:

Due to title 9, most colleges and universities have women's soccer teams, but no man soccer.

The highest one can get for man soccer is about d2. NAIAs will have man soccer too.  They get a lot of internationals, since most Americans know that soccer is a socialist sport. 

The extra trainers and coaches are to help them put the soccer cans back  in the equipment shed where they belong and get insoide 

Did someone hijack your account?

JDFarmer posted:

Can you post the same chart for baseball?

http://www.scholarshipstats.com/baseball.html

SluggerDad posted:

RJM posted:

Teaching Elder posted:

Due to title 9, most colleges and universities have women's soccer teams, but no man soccer.

The highest one can get for man soccer is about d2. NAIAs will have man soccer too.  They get a lot of internationals, since most Americans know that soccer is a socialist sport. 

The extra trainers and coaches are to help them put the soccer cans back  in the equipment shed where they belong and get insoide 

You're right! There are only 263 D1 men's soccer programs. Overall there are about 900 NCAA men's soccer programs.

According to this chart there are actually only 205 mens programs at the D1 level;

 

 

								Athletic Scholarships		Average Athletic
	Number	Number of teams		Varsity Athletes (1)		Average team size		limit per team **		Scholarship (2)
Division	of Schools	Men's	Women's	Men	Women	Men's	Women's	Men	Women	Men	Women
NCAA  I	335	205	332	5,881	9,169	29	28	9.9	14	$         14,490	$         16,186
NCAA  II	265	211	263	6,471	7,130	31	27	9	9.9	$         6,642	$         7,541
NCAA  III	447	412	438	11,980	10,621	29	24	-	-	$         -	$         -
NAIA	198	188	192	5,354	4,587	28	24	12	12	$         6,473	$         7,248
USCAA & Other 4 year	71	69	36	1,333	645	19	18	-	-	$         655	$         1,246
NJCAA	234	215	187	5,116	3,567	24	19	18	18	$         1,691	$         2,113
CCCAA & Other 2 year	123	99	114	2,710	2,400	25	21	-	-	$         296	$         328
Totals	1,673	1,399	1,562	38,845	38,119	28	24			$         4,815	$         5,366

I saw the number 205 somewhere. Then I saw a list of teams by conference and counted them. 263. But even using this chart there are over 800 men's soccer programs. Men's soccer is hardly disappearing.

The sport I played in college -- Wrestling -- now that's a  sport that has seriously declined since back in the day -- though apparently it's grown a little in popularity recently.    Some 355   wrestling programs have shut down since the inception of Title IX.   

SluggerDad posted:

The sport I played in college -- Wrestling -- now that's a  sport that has seriously declined since back in the day -- though apparently it's grown a little in popularity recently.    Some 355   wrestling programs have shut down since the inception of Title IX.   

really a sad situation. I was a track guy and I'm not sure of the number that we've lost since title ix, but it's a bunch.  Really hit home with me when temple shut down track program.  Temple had a rich tradition in track and field, so it was shocking to me when they shut it down.    

It would be interesting to see a comparison on total opportunities in college sports lost for men, vs opportunities created for women.  I wonder if it's a net gain on total athletic opportunities, or a loss? 

They don't (maybe very little) have college soccer in Europe (they did not used to).  European soccer goes from High School to Apprentice leagues (like MILB), directly feeding the Professional leagues.  Maybe the kids coming from outside the US were not good enough for the Apprentice league (way better skills that college soccer, although US soccer seems to have closed the gap a bit) or want and education or see College soccer as a way to get into the US pro league.  The US started an apprenticeship program in the early 80's, which floundered when US soccer folded.

Just a gentle reminder that Title IX was part of the Education Amendments of 1972. Athletics is only one of nine areas of obligation mentioned in the title; admissions was the first. For historical context, in 1969 the UVA Board of Visitors was voting to gradually allow women to attend UVA over the subsequent 10 years, but capping their numbers at 35% of the undergrad population.

pabaseballdad posted:

SluggerDad posted:

The sport I played in college -- Wrestling -- now that's a  sport that has seriously declined since back in the day -- though apparently it's grown a little in popularity recently.    Some 355   wrestling programs have shut down since the inception of Title IX.   

really a sad situation. I was a track guy and I'm not sure of the number that we've lost since title ix, but it's a bunch.  Really hit home with me when temple shut down track program.  Temple had a rich tradition in track and field, so it was shocking to me when they shut it down.    

It would be interesting to see a comparison on total opportunities in college sports lost for men, vs opportunities created for women.  I wonder if it's a net gain on total athletic opportunities, or a loss? 

It's hard to believe any Philadelphia area college would eliminate track and crew. But Temple did. It wasn't due to Title IX. Women's sports also took a hit. It was done to invest in the football program and go big time.

SluggerDad posted:

The sport I played in college -- Wrestling -- now that's a  sport that has seriously declined since back in the day -- though apparently it's grown a little in popularity recently.    Some 355   wrestling programs have shut down since the inception of Title IX.   

I wrestled in college...with math.

Title IX was originally about equal opportunity for women academically, not sports. Betsy Mink was a top of her class college student. She wasn't accepted to one med school. She went to law school, wrote and sponsored Title IX and the rest is history. So blame the bigots who didn't think women belonged in med school.

I respect Patsy Mink for getting pissed off, following through and changing the world. Most politicians make promises, get to Washington and become puppets of the establishment. What's funny about this determined woman is she wasn't even five feet tall. But damn! She bit the college world in the knees.

Why would those women need to go to VA anyway?  Like that guy in the GEICO commercial said, "Women don't have jobs."

RJM posted:

pabaseballdad posted:

SluggerDad posted:

The sport I played in college -- Wrestling -- now that's a  sport that has seriously declined since back in the day -- though apparently it's grown a little in popularity recently.    Some 355   wrestling programs have shut down since the inception of Title IX.   

really a sad situation. I was a track guy and I'm not sure of the number that we've lost since title ix, but it's a bunch.  Really hit home with me when temple shut down track program.  Temple had a rich tradition in track and field, so it was shocking to me when they shut it down.    

It would be interesting to see a comparison on total opportunities in college sports lost for men, vs opportunities created for women.  I wonder if it's a net gain on total athletic opportunities, or a loss? 

It's hard to believe any Philadelphia area college would eliminate track and crew. But Temple did. It wasn't due to Title IX. Women's sports also took a hit. It was done to invest in the football program and go big time.

it was still title IX -

the fact they had or chose to cut womens and mens was due to money for football

the part that they had to cut more mens than women sports to create the above money was due to title IX

at one time title IX may have been good and needed but like most social programs it is now out of control and causes more harm then it does to help.

Take a look at this women's soccer roster.....from a small NAIA here in Ohio.....

Same school with current baseball roster

Buckeye 2015 posted:

Take a look at this roster.....from a small NAIA here in Ohio.....

Wow, 24 players, 17 countries.  Only two from the US.  I want that recruiting job .

Which brings up another point... what is being said to these international players regarding PT when you know darn well the schools haven't seen them play in person?

I always thought it would be a better strategy for these small schools to recruit a blend of good local talent with an interesting variety of "other" to assure you at least have decent community support for the program from those interested in following local kids.  

cabbagedad posted:

Buckeye 2015 posted:

Take a look at this roster.....from a small NAIA here in Ohio.....

Wow, 24 players, 17 countries.  Only two from the US.  I want that recruiting job .

Which brings up another point... what is being said to these international players regarding PT when you know darn well the schools haven't seen them play in person?

I always thought it would be a better strategy for these small schools to recruit a blend of good local talent with an interesting variety of "other" to assure you at least have decent community support for the program from those interested in following local kids.  

They are currently 3-0 and have outshot their opponents 83-12    Both the Ohio girls are from close to here.....one went to a school that graduated maybe 90 kids.....would have to be pretty interesting to play on a roster like that coming from such a small rural school.  The Ohio girls have taken 11 of the 83 shots

old_school posted:

at one time title IX may have been good and needed but like most social programs it is now out of control and causes more harm then it does to help.

old_school, Title IX isn't a social program, it's a statute. It simply says, if an educational institution is going to accept federal funding, then they can't exclude anyone from any opportunities they offer based on gender. The NCAA may be out of control with the ways they've chosen to abide by the statute. Baseball is more of a social program, at most schools.  

MidAtlanticDad posted:

old_school posted:

at one time title IX may have been good and needed but like most social programs it is now out of control and causes more harm then it does to help.

old_school, Title IX isn't a social program, it's a statute. It simply says, if an educational institution is going to accept federal funding, then they can't exclude anyone from any opportunities they offer based on gender. The NCAA may be out of control with the ways they've chosen to abide by the statute. Baseball is more of a social program, at most schools.  

The original idea behind title IX is  perfectly laudable.  Increasing opportunities for women in college sports is a really good thing.   The original idea  wasn't  to diminish opportunities for males.   It demonstrably has.    But that's  an unanticipated consequence.   There are, I think, ways to fix it, but not much will to fix it.  

cabbagedad posted:

Buckeye 2015 posted:

Take a look at this roster.....from a small NAIA here in Ohio.....

Wow, 24 players, 17 countries.  Only two from the US.  I want that recruiting job .

Which brings up another point... what is being said to these international players regarding PT when you know darn well the schools haven't seen them play in person?

I always thought it would be a better strategy for these small schools to recruit a blend of good local talent with an interesting variety of "other" to assure you at least have decent community support for the program from those interested in following local kids.  

If Olympic track stars had to run for the country they attended college USA could field two top teams.

Hillsdale College doesn't take any federal money. A few years ago out of curiosity I called the athletic department. I asked if they have to follow Title IX. Being a NCAA member requires them to adhere.

The original intent of Title IX was to eliminate discrimination in hiring practices (the glass ceiling). It later morphed into what it is now.

SluggerDad posted:

MidAtlanticDad posted:

old_school posted:

at one time title IX may have been good and needed but like most social programs it is now out of control and causes more harm then it does to help.

old_school, Title IX isn't a social program, it's a statute. It simply says, if an educational institution is going to accept federal funding, then they can't exclude anyone from any opportunities they offer based on gender. The NCAA may be out of control with the ways they've chosen to abide by the statute. Baseball is more of a social program, at most schools.  

The original idea behind title IX is  perfectly laudable.  Increasing opportunities for women in college sports is a really good thing.   The original idea  wasn't  to diminish opportunities for males.   It demonstrably has.    But that's  an unanticipated consequence.   There are, I think, ways to fix it, but not much will to fix it.  

Slugger I agree with your comment here, the intent and the reality of today are entirely different. I have seen many times in the last 5 to 7 years where boys programs in HS are cut because of Title IX and the worst part is not lack of funding it is lack of interest from the girls...it is ridiculous.

Think about it schools actually say we can't add X program because there is no interest from the girls, they can't support it and we don't want to deal with title IX issues. Very Sad.

SluggerDad posted:

MidAtlanticDad posted:

old_school posted:

at one time title IX may have been good and needed but like most social programs it is now out of control and causes more harm then it does to help.

old_school, Title IX isn't a social program, it's a statute. It simply says, if an educational institution is going to accept federal funding, then they can't exclude anyone from any opportunities they offer based on gender. The NCAA may be out of control with the ways they've chosen to abide by the statute. Baseball is more of a social program, at most schools.  

The original idea behind title IX is  perfectly laudable.  Increasing opportunities for women in college sports is a really good thing.   The original idea  wasn't  to diminish opportunities for males.   It demonstrably has.    But that's  an unanticipated consequence.   There are, I think, ways to fix it, but not much will to fix it.  

like soooo many programs what the intent is doesn't matter - what is the reality and unintended consequences. 

MidAtlanticDad posted:

old_school posted:

at one time title IX may have been good and needed but like most social programs it is now out of control and causes more harm then it does to help.

old_school, Title IX isn't a social program, it's a statute. It simply says, if an educational institution is going to accept federal funding, then they can't exclude anyone from any opportunities they offer based on gender. The NCAA may be out of control with the ways they've chosen to abide by the statute. Baseball is more of a social program, at most schools.  

IMO when our government makes a mandate that is simply not well thought out, continues on forever and ends up discriminating others...you call it what you want but it is social program!