I find the the whole notion of amateurism in this day and age a complete sham. Just the fact that we even need to have these discussions makes my BP spike. I don't want to derail the topic though so don't mind me in my little corner stewing with indignant outrage.
Does anyone know whether Pugh's rights are retained by the Thorns beyond the 2016 draft? That is, after she graduates UCLA, would the Thorns still be the team she would report too? Just curious.
Thorns never had Pugh's rights. They got the top spot in the allocation order in the trade they made. So to answer your question, no, she would not report to the thorn unless they got her rights somehow in the future.
They have allowed the pro exception for longer than that. Danny Ainge played for the Blue Jays and returned to play college basketball. Bloom's case was more about endorsements and sponsorships. It's understandable why the NCAA would be more hesitant about those than players who relied solely on their professional contract as income. Someone would find a way to use other-sport sponsorships to encourage that athlete to play for "their team" in the NCAA eligible sport. The NCAA rules were originally pretty much in line with the IOC amateurism rules (sometimes even laundry money and college tuition were debated as making an athlete professional). The schools wanted to keep money out of the equation, so they put in some pretty hard and fast rules that now look antiquated as they evolved.
If I recall correctly, the Thorns still have the top spot in the allocation order. I'm not sure when the order changes, but it's some time after the current season. I believe that if Pugh were to be designated as a player to be allocated before the order changes, then the Thorns would have the rights to her. Thus, if Pugh were to decide to go pro, the timing would be an important factor in terms of where she goes, if it's to be in the NWSL.
Here's how they word it: All Players who have exhausted their college eligibility or who will graduate in the 2016-17 year are eligible for the College Draft. Signing with an agent might be enough to show proof of "exhausted eligibility." The interesting thing is she might be eligible to sign as an amateur player and not jeopardize her eligibility, but NWSL rules limit amateur players to cover for NT call-ups. Of course, figuring out who could sign her -- allocation or discovery -- would be interesting. She could, however, just train with an NWSL for the fall.
Things can always change with Pugh. She could blow up during the Olympics, sign with Potsdam, and get a $500,000 endorsement deal with Bitburger.
So the ranking is redone after every season so I guess the Thorns have until the Championship match to use their number one UFI pick.
Had the privilege of seeing Pugh in person last night in KC. I'm jumping on her bandwagon. She was impressive!
There were plenty of people earlier who didn't think she was worthy to be on the 18 player roster for the Olympics.
really? which fools think that? i'm keeping tabs as they clearly have no understanding about this sport. It takes just a game watching her play to see she has it. As Mia said: Speed kills, technical skill annihilates. Pugh's the read deal.
And her defense just salts the earth. Pugh was dominant. I don't think she lost a challenge/turned over until after the 70th minute.
http://www.newyorker.com/news/sporting-scene/the-next-great-american-soccer-star?intcid=mod-latest Pugh, the second-youngest Olympian in the history of the U.S. women’s team—Cindy Parlow was a month younger in 1996—should play a major role in the Rio Games, where the American women look to become the first team ever to take home gold following a World Cup win. Not bad for someone who is a month removed from finishing her final high-school project. (It was on a decidedly second-semester-of-senior-year topic: how fashion correlates with your personality. “Did I learn anything?” Pugh said recently. “No, not really, to be completely honest.”)
I do get the impression from the various article that Pugh thinks this is all some kind of mistake and she isnt as big a deal as everyone thinks. Maybe she just doesnt watch her own games,
That's a hard question - but, I think it's purely hypothetical. I don't think there's a chance that Pinoe will be in 2015 form. It would be tough for me to keep Pinoe out, because of her chemistry with Kling. They played with one mind in the WC. Ultimately, you would take someone else off the field to make room for Pinoe. (But, like I said, I think it's purely hypothetical). At anyrate, having Pinoe, Tobin, Dunn, and Pugh, gives Ellis a great opportunity to play matchups. Like, I would play Dunn vs. Necib.
Against France Ill sign for anything except what she did the last time...move Pugh to the right and Heath to the left. I thought she successfully took Pugh out of the match for long stretches. If u want Pugh out there play her on the left against Thomis. If u dont want her out there play Dunn on the left.
I think it will be pretty hard to keep Pugh out of any starting lineup. Seriously, she is the most precocious player since Hamm.
I agree but I have to think the tight schedule should be considered. Giving Dunn, Pugh and Heath each two starts in group probably sets them up better for the knockout rounds than starting Pugh and Heath in the first two and hoping they can rest players in the Columbia match. They could get away with the same kind of rotation at CM without losing much regardless of combination.