buhehehe. No, seriously, you guys. For all of South Carolina's geographic, financial, conference leverage, they're continually beat by their lesser funded ACC neighbors. eh? On top of that, no SEC competition in the entire Carolinas and all the way up the Atlantic Ocean. Clemson came back and blew right by the Smithfield mgmt team. No, indeed, it's not a good environment. ...cp....show these guys a downward, or flat, treeeend!... Any College Cup appearances by the Smithfields in all their years? I think it's zero. Anything above par for an SEC East skool?...the closest sexy SEC skool to the soccer manufacturing plants of the northeast...an SEC skool actually near an airport... It would take some effort to actually "lose" there.
You must be desperate for someone to talk with you Holmes. Ok I will, What are you talking about???? it is very hard to understand your ramble and code talk. So that is the standard that has to be reached for married couples whom coach together. Make the final 4. I think there are a lot of coaches that have not done that. And frankly not many SEC schools period. And yes if you cant beat the ACC schools you just are not getting it done!!!! Again a lot of coaches are in the same boat. CP I am guessing that South Carolina is not in a downward slope... I must be crazy to be responding to this person....
ACC programs get better players, though, don't they? I'd take better players over a bigger budget. Besides, ACC programs have more than enough money. They have full allotments of scholarships, and most of them have really good facilities and support staff. So while SEC programs may have bigger budgets, the difference isn't likely to be a deal maker or breaker. This point always causes arguments, but IN GENERAL, the ACC has an advantage over the SEC in academics. Academics matter when recruiting female student-athletes, and until there's a pro league paying 7 figure salaries, they always will. If Duke and South Carolina are after the same player, and both are offering a full scholarship, not too many families are going to pick South Carolina. Virginia, Notre Dame, Wake Forest, North Carolina, same thing (this is one reason why Florida State has gone foreign in order to compete at the top of the conference). There are obviously very good players in the SEC, and good academic programs too, like Vandy and Florida. But we're talking about South Carolina, a fine institution which, nevertheless, is going to be at a disadvantage competing for players with the above ACC schools. So it's no surprise or shame that they lose to them.
buhehehe. I think you agree with me, with your jokes, of course...."not getting it done". Come on, cp, give it to 'em , the Smithson's graph is downward or flatline over so many years with so many advantages and resources. I heard they even lost a prize verbal to UNC at the 11th hour. And notice, I'm not saying the nepotism is the sole reason for their under-achievement, but it breeds low morale. The bosses wife telling everybody what to do...no semi-independent voices...spies...distrust...family-run oligarchy. And regarding how other SEC's don't win either, I pointed out USC's advantages over them given their access to the dense northeast via air, road and nautical miles
Let's try this method for posting South Carolina's chart. The blue line -- an 8 period moving average -- is the best indicator. Using that, or using a simple 10-year straight line trend, the program is on the rise.
Good points, I could see it for Stanford and Duke, but look at softball, for example. SEC way over ACC. I think it's simply the UNC program gave the ACC a decades headstart. All the initial runoff from UNC went to their conference schools and put them ahead. It's about perceived best soccer for most of these parents (Duke and Stanford give the best of both worlds, although their recruits are usually over-rated in terms of results). Look at the elite travel leagues, travel trumps school and is clearly destructive to academia. I used to see parents complaining about notices from school admins about excessive tournament absences (threats to hold back, etc.). Some of those ODP kids going on those international trips, what'd they miss, like 2 weeks!?
why, RtD? WAC, what needs a new thread?...the stuff which applies to "vacant seats", the funny "tolerant" jokes or my asking for UCF/USC performance charts (and subsequent responses) which actually apply to "Hot Seat" speculation?
Just click Quote, and within the reply editor, it displays the IMG file correctly I don't know why. I suspect the editor forces it to actually pull the URL, since the URL itself is an editable piece of metadata within a reply. I think I was the one who posted that tip, too Delete the image before you actually post the reply, or it'll go back to its dormant IMG stealth mode within the reply. At least it's consistent that way.
Thanks. I've never had the problem -- I have a PC with Windows (10). Perhaps that has something to do with it?
cp, would you say the positive slope of the best fit line for USC is dramatic improvement, modest improvement or a little better than a standstill? Are earlier than seeding NCAA losses factored into it at all? Thank you, again. I'm going to try the quote trick to check out UCF.
The positive slope over the 10-year period is a hefty improvement. The most recent part of the 6-year rolling average trend line (the blue line) is not dramatic, but it's good and I'd say a little more than modest. My charts to not take the NCAA Tournament into account, they're based on the regular season plus conference tournaments.
I have Nick Bochette at Albany -- I'm not sure where I saw it, and looking at their website I don't see an announcement yet. Otherwise, the list looks correct to me.
South Carolina versus ACC over the last four years. 2013 SC vs Duke 2-1 Win SC vs Clemson 2-1 Win 2014 SC vs Clemson 0-1 Loss SC vs Clemson (NCAA Tourn) PKs Win SC vs North Carolina (NCAA Tourn) 1-0 Win SC vs Florida St (NCAA Tourn) 0-5 Loss 2015 SC vs NC State 3-0 Win SC vs Clemson 1-2 Loss 2016 SC vs NC State 3-0 Win SC vs Clemson 2-1 Win SC vs North Carolina (NCAA Tourn) 0-1 Loss Overall: SC 7 Wins - 4 Losses South Carolina in Elite Eight in two of the last three years. They look more than competitive versus the ACC and I would venture to say most schools would take the Elite Eight in two of the last three years.
Oregon, Texas, OSU, UCF for sure. All should be open in coming seasons. All struggle to motivate and Lead by example. Handed jobs that they shouldn't have. Better female role models out there. I believe all handed new 2-3 year contracts or more on the rumor mill. Not sure on UCF staff. Holmes: Not too sure what's to like about Walker: It's widely known she puts herself before anything or anyone else. Cancels banquets, demeans players, officials, staff, just a very Narcissistic and Delusional individual. Just look at her history of treatment of staff not just her assistants but also admin school staff - not in good terms with professors, athletic admin, Academics etc... - living in OH I get this first hand from people previously and currently employed at OSU in roles other than athletics. None of her assistants or former players that I run into say anything but negatives about the OSU WSoccer experience and Walker specifically. I know several players, staff and former assistants. Just ask around the coaches, players, youth club doc's etc.....it's clear that Walker isn't liked. Then there is her treatment of players and the two or three pending lawsuits which if true speak for themselves. Not even discussing her ability as a coach.. Kat Mertz is one that is liked by her peers but struggles on and off the field definitely not Walker. Rumors with some facts backing them - Columbus crew and FC Cincinnati taking a serious focus on Female youth soccer pushing for DA spots in the near future which could open doors for more talent from OH growing and potentially staying within the great state of OH. Improving the college game.
If Ohio state ever drop Walker and hire a competent head coach they can compete for a national championship. And agreed about Mertz, surely she should do better with the resources she has and the reputation of the school.
It's curious to me that Oregon keeps getting very good recruits. I know the school is a draw but geez don't the players/parents do their homework? Or maybe a scholy at a pac-12 school is the prize and who cares about the rest. This season will be a talented team. She has done the job of getting better talent there...now some wins will help her cause.
I think the facilities do most of the recruiting for them. I can't imagine being a 16 year old walking into the house that NIKE built and not be blown away.
I think coach(es) are way down the list during this phase. After-all, the high school P5 commit tweet is the pinnacle moment for a girl's youth soccer career. The hearts and soccer ball emojis...the "congrats and loves" from current/former travel teammates....a distant memory during "hell week"...."what did I get myself into?"...followed by natural (with maturity) concerns about academic balance, pressure, P.T...now the coach is in the picture...and the parent's ego is out....so who is to blame? The coach. Parent/player were sold a bill of goods. To their credit, I remember college coaches making attempts to be candid and forthright about the realities during recruiting, camps, etc. Especially if they could talk to player groups sans the parents. I guess it is in their ultimate interest to do so. But it falls on deaf ears. The logo on the fleece or coat is all that matters.