Recruiting class size

Transfer,Injurys,kids just leaving the program all factors,but even more for these two schools. This is both coaches 1st recruiting class,they want there own kids to replace some kids they didnt want

 

Texas A&M lost 8 seniors, recruited 12 with one being a transfer. By the way, take a look at the big production they did up on their recruits, background and a picture gallery as well. Very impressive. Click on each players name when you get on the page.

http://signingday.aggieathletics.com/

Make sure when you click on the picture gallery from the menu, you then click on the picture of the player to see the slide show.

 

Texas A&M always does a great job posting recruiting information, definitely the best in the Big 12, always with the names right away and also photos.

It very much pains me to praise anything A&M, but they earn it there.

 

Acutually they only had 23 on the Roster so that would only give them 27 players assuming there is no transfers.

 

I don't know the details of the A&M team, but with injury or national team redshirts, and so on, it can get tricky for a coach to manage the roster so that a quarter of the team graduates each year. A coach could end up bringing in an equal number of players each year and still end up with a large portion finishing up at the same time. It happened several years ago at Washington (Tina Frimpong Ellertson's last year, Solo's too, I think) and they've been recovering ever since.

There's some discussion about incoming class size and roster size that also indicates Title IX may have some influence on teams keeping large rosters, such as to balance football numbers. I don't know if that happens or not, but it is interesting that among the perennial top level teams, Portland (at 21 this year) and Santa Clara (at 22 this year) tend to carry some of the smaller rosters. The WCC doesn't have football, so maybe there's something to the Title IX point. If those two schools are not influenced by Title IX in roster size, it might be some evidence that 20-22 is more the ideal than what many schools carry. On the other hand, both schools were hit pretty hard by injuries this year and suffered from it, Santa Clara in a big way and Portland in terms of player fatigue by the end of the year.

Another interesting thing is that Portland and Santa Clara very seldom lose players to transfers. I can think of only a handful at Portland over the last 10 years who did not play four years for the Pilots. That may be a result of their having rosters towards the small end of the spectrum.

 

Yes A&M had injury problems to some key players as well.

 

A&M brought in 12 players because they lost 8 key seniors. This is a very large but talented class that will be overlooked nationally. But Coach G has been very selective in recruiting players that will fit our system and has signed most of the Real Colorado National club team that won the Youth National Championship in 2006. It's a physically gifted, very tall class that will have A&M in contention for their 5th consecutive Big 12 title in '08.

And, yes, A&M underachieved this season with a loaded team that should have won the national title at home. We had some key injuries to defensive stars that led to our upset in the 2nd round. Although Texas will be favored to win the conference in '08, it would be a mistake to think A&M won't be right there with them.

 

How many of these players will play in a season, all 24-27? If they do not play, do they redshirt? If they do not get in a game during their first year of college and redshirt, how are they getting better, in training? Are all of these players on scholarship? Being from Tx, I had the chance to see A&M a few times. Great team. I know they had many seniors, but I would bet that only 16-17 players saw significant playing time during the season.

 

Schools like portland and sc can hide there number also. So if school say hold 27 but they only want 21 they can put 6 kids on there opening day roster. Which we never see and count those kids then take them of the roster so for title IX they have 27 but to us they have 21.also it helps not having football in number of kids you must hold.

 

uheardithear, I can't say for Santa Clara, but I know what Portland's opening roster has been and who the players at school have been for at least the last 10 years. The players on the opening roster always stay on it for the entire year. In fact, although they had 21 this year, that is the high end for them. They've been slowly increasing the number over the years, but I think it's primarily to find the lowest possible number that gives them insurance in case of injuries. Back in the day when Clive Charles was coaching, especially early, he clearly was a believer in the professional system -- 11 players expected to be able to play an entire game, supplemented by 3 subs. The Pilots now sub more, but their philosophy still seems to be to carry a relatively small roster. There's no question in my mind this is good for the players, and feeling a very high obligation to the players on the squad clearly is a strong value of the coaching staff.

 

uheardithear,

I'm with casocrfan---what?

I'm not real clear on what you just tried to say, but in Portland's case there are no hidden or stashed players.

If you go to the website, you'll see 21 names on the roster. Of those 21, 4 had medical redshirts, Korie Nicholson, Megan Sweeney, Mehan Rapinoe, and Rachel Rapinoe. There is one other player who was on the roster before the season began, but decided not to continue her soccer career. She's still in school at UP, and my guess is she will finish there.

That means there are were 17 players available this year to play, with no player "waiting in the wings" on campus. any additions to those 21 players for next year will only come fron the 5 recruits coming in as freshmen. You of course have to deduct the 6 seniors who used up their eligibility and graduated.

Both Rapinoe sisters have applied for and will probably be granted, a year extension on their 5 year clocks due to their ACL tears.

The only "Stashing" occcured was that Nicholson and Sweeney might have been able to play at the end of the season, though probably at less that 100%. All four remained as part of the roster of 21.

There aren't any other D1 women's soccer players anywhere on the campus. It's a small place, you can't hide anyone there.

Next year you will see 20 names on the roster at the start of the season, assuming everyone heals up or isn't playing on a National team. It appears that 2 or 3 will be called away.

Expect 17 or 18 players who will suit up for the team. It's virtually guaranteed all those will see game time.

 

I didn't say d 1 players. These are rosters you will NEVER see becasue it goes to the ad. But coaches sometimes put kids on the non published roster to meet there participation number if hey have one. Inside info. These are kids they might know of that will just be going to school/ Guys teams do it all the time to raise the team GPA inside info

 

um--

You are only allowed to count roster players in the GPA.

 

OK - uheardithere is being called out. You are either delusional, believing the bs someone else is giving you, or you're familiar with the most unethical athletic departments in the US -

1- you don't submit different rosters to the AD, your SID, your compliance/academic folks, and your opponents whenever you feel like it or it meets some specific need. In order for ANYONE to even train with the team, they need to be certified as eligible so ANYONE in the Athletic Department could see or find that original roster. This is true of even most US High Schools.
Now, you can cut kids and trim rosters for games and travel and add kids with walkon tryouts and such but once ANYONE appears on your roster for a game, even if they don't appear in the match, they may lose a year of eligibility. There are exceptions for redshirts and medical issues but the kids read and sign off on NCAA paperwork every year agreeing to all these terms.

Who do you know is willing to give up a year of college eligibility so the coach can make some Title IX or GPA number but not actually be on the real roster??? Please give some specific examples of the ghost players you're talking about and the coaches that "hide" them...

2 - ALL the players that appear on the roster at any time thoughout the year are captured for academic and compliance reasons. You don't get to pick smart kids to keep on your roster and dumb ones to drop - at least not DURING the semester. They are either IN or OUT of the team if they are eligible to appear in games and the coach/staff is liable for every player's academic performance for the entire year. Even players who are "red shirting" or scholarship kids still enrolled but not actively on the team are counted for academic reporting (like final semester Srs). In DI, rosters are especially scrutinized now -google NCAA APR and do some research.

3- Title IX - Proportionality is only 1 of 3 ways to demonstrate Title IX compliance and since it's the most difficult, most schools don't even use it - especially football schools. The "historical record" and "interest" tests are much more easily met so they are commonly used. The current OCR is not even rigorously enforcing Title IX complaints - there's a 4 year backlog on many investigations and they even were allowing schools to meet the "interest" test with an e-mailed survey to students!

Generally, unless there's some specific injunction or court ruling in force (and there are some out there), it is crazy to think that when baseball or football adds 30 kids any given year, that the soccer and softball teams have an increase mandated..... that's why the proportionality test of Title IX compliance is not practical. Look up "Title IX compliance" in your school library and check it out...

4- read my post about over-recruiting in the cal recruits thread if you want. Big rosters are, in many cases, a function of recruiters that take the safe road and pack their rosters with young players.

Now, if you have specific examples of roster manipulation occuring for gender equity or academic reasons in US college soccer programs, please share. I think parents and colleagues would find that information quite interesting.

ek

 

Without getting to much into it and at the expense of making all of you mad I would have to say that "most" of you have no idea what you are talking about when it comes to Title IX..... Hidding players on a roster... not happening. The OCR is very active and intouch to what is going on. Do you really think a school can get away with "hidding players". Participation #s are a reality at a lot of schools. There is also scholarship issues as well. Trying to make sure that the duplicated # of athletes does not get to out of wack. Not only do you have to have participation %s match that of the school you have to provide scholarships that shows you are supporting the under represented gender. Thus you can not just have 15 walk-ons that do not play and are "hidden"... The formula is very complicated at times and most of you do not know the whole deal. Before you start to make comments that make you appear as you know what you are talking about you should do some research. Schools hire lawyers who are versed in Title IX just so they can get it right...but you guys have the answers.. LOL

 

Adams State in Colorado just announced a recruiting class of 18. Boogles the mind.

 

Ok you guys are all right. You have all coached in the NCAA and know everything that goes on behind the scenes. Have a great day and don't talk about what you have no idea about. Interns haha check the correct roster to see if interns are on SOME rosters as players for there gpa. Its kids who dont want to play college that sometimes have there named used. NO idea. But really you dont need to know

 

I'm pretty sure there are one or two on here with some NCAA DI coaching experience. I'm also sure there are some people here with a lot of experience with various programs and have a pretty good knowledge of how things work.

All Eddie asked you for were some specific examples to back up the claims you've made. I've heard of some questionable things in regard to various practices in certain places but what you describe are things I've never seen or experienced so it would be interesting to hear where these things go on.

Don't just take your ball and go home, it makes people question your credibility even more. Let's hear your specific experiences and knowledge that backs up what you've said so far.

 

Fair enough. But not calling out programs as many are friends. But people are naive if they dont think things go on they cant read on a website or in a book

 

OK, uheardithear, first of all, I am a lawyer, who is familiar with Title IX issues. So, let's use the West Coast Conference as an example -- a Conference that does not have football. Can you tell us a single specific fact you know that demonstrates that a WCC team is padding its beginning of the year roster with players who then are dropped from the team, in order to reach some Title IX result? If not, then it seems you should agree that you are talking about "some" teams, but not about all of them as your entries suggest.

 

And certainly all this dropping of players has a negative impact on a team's APR does it not?

 

Scholarship athletes only count in the APR. Walk-ons do not count toward the APR. If a scholarship athlete leaves the team then it counts against you. If a walk-on leaves the team then it does not count against you.