28 Rosters Spots/28 Scholarships for NCAA Women's Soccer

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This change to smaller roster sizes is painful but will be for the best in the long run. A roster of 30-40 for college soccer is absurd. And the players put in so much time and effort, they should be rewarded with a scholarship/NIL $.

They won't be getting scholarships. The rule is that schools are allowed to offer up to the limit. The only way that happens is if schools choose to use soccer to balance football for title IX.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This change to smaller roster sizes is painful but will be for the best in the long run. A roster of 30-40 for college soccer is absurd. And the players put in so much time and effort, they should be rewarded with a scholarship/NIL $.

They won't be getting scholarships. The rule is that schools are allowed to offer up to the limit. The only way that happens is if schools choose to use soccer to balance football for title IX.

Well, I think that answers the question about why Penn State recruits were decomitted.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This change to smaller roster sizes is painful but will be for the best in the long run. A roster of 30-40 for college soccer is absurd. And the players put in so much time and effort, they should be rewarded with a scholarship/NIL $.

They won't be getting scholarships. The rule is that schools are allowed to offer up to the limit. The only way that happens is if schools choose to use soccer to balance football for title IX.

Well, I think that answers the question about why Penn State recruits were decomitted.

The reasons for them being decommitted had nothing to do with scholarships, and everything to do with roster caps.

[Anonymous]

Seven per year plus or minus one is solid frankly. Dumb teams like UNC take tons of girls knowing full well they won't play and they can leave in the portal. Girls are too blind to realize this and think playing for a tier 1 school is better... then they get their first life lesson that it's defiantly not

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Seven per year plus or minus one is solid frankly. Dumb teams like UNC take tons of girls knowing full well they won't play and they can leave in the portal. Girls are too blind to realize this and think playing for a tier 1 school is better... then they get their first life lesson that it's defiantly not

NCAA is considering giving all D1 athletes 5 years of eligibility.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Seven per year plus or minus one is solid frankly. Dumb teams like UNC take tons of girls knowing full well they won't play and they can leave in the portal. Girls are too blind to realize this and think playing for a tier 1 school is better... then they get their first life lesson that it's defiantly not

NCAA is considering giving all D1 athletes 5 years of eligibility.

This will make it even worse for the girls looking to be recruited.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Seven per year plus or minus one is solid frankly. Dumb teams like UNC take tons of girls knowing full well they won't play and they can leave in the portal. Girls are too blind to realize this and think playing for a tier 1 school is better... then they get their first life lesson that it's defiantly not

NCAA is considering giving all D1 athletes 5 years of eligibility.

This will make it even worse for the girls looking to be recruited.

They’ll have to play at lower program and use the transfer portal. Like the men.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Seven per year plus or minus one is solid frankly. Dumb teams like UNC take tons of girls knowing full well they won't play and they can leave in the portal. Girls are too blind to realize this and think playing for a tier 1 school is better... then they get their first life lesson that it's defiantly not

NCAA is considering giving all D1 athletes 5 years of eligibility.

This will make it even worse for the girls looking to be recruited.

They’ll have to play at lower program and use the transfer portal. Like the men.

There will be less players recruited out of HS if there are 5 years of eligibility.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Seven per year plus or minus one is solid frankly. Dumb teams like UNC take tons of girls knowing full well they won't play and they can leave in the portal. Girls are too blind to realize this and think playing for a tier 1 school is better... then they get their first life lesson that it's defiantly not

NCAA is considering giving all D1 athletes 5 years of eligibility.

What’s the source for this rumor you’re floating?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Seven per year plus or minus one is solid frankly. Dumb teams like UNC take tons of girls knowing full well they won't play and they can leave in the portal. Girls are too blind to realize this and think playing for a tier 1 school is better... then they get their first life lesson that it's defiantly not

NCAA is considering giving all D1 athletes 5 years of eligibility.

What’s the source for this rumor you’re floating?

https://sports.yahoo.com/docs-ncaa-considering-applying-football-redshirt-rule-to-athletes-in-all-sports-154903963.html

[Anonymous]

How will ECNL respond? They need to shrink - cut teams and make it even more competitive, because the college opportunities won’t be there. But they won’t.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:How will ECNL respond? They need to shrink - cut teams and make it even more competitive, because the college opportunities won’t be there. But they won’t.

Nope. Because it’s all about money. Ask for transparency. How many D1 commits from Club? How many players start at RL and move up? How many players from RL commit to play in college?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How will ECNL respond? They need to shrink - cut teams and make it even more competitive, because the college opportunities won’t be there. But they won’t.

Nope. Because it’s all about money. Ask for transparency. How many D1 commits from Club? How many players start at RL and move up? How many players from RL commit to play in college?

Tons, my kids being one of them.

This isn't an ECNL/GA/MLSnext or bust situation.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How will ECNL respond? They need to shrink - cut teams and make it even more competitive, because the college opportunities won’t be there. But they won’t.

Nope. Because it’s all about money. Ask for transparency. How many D1 commits from Club? How many players start at RL and move up? How many players from RL commit to play in college?

Tons, my kids being one of them.

This isn't an ECNL/GA/MLSnext or bust situation.

"Tons" might be a bit of an overstatement.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Seven per year plus or minus one is solid frankly. Dumb teams like UNC take tons of girls knowing full well they won't play and they can leave in the portal. Girls are too blind to realize this and think playing for a tier 1 school is better... then they get their first life lesson that it's defiantly not

NCAA is considering giving all D1 athletes 5 years of eligibility.

Just saw that.

Even more bad news for high school players.

My kid's college team currently has 5 5 years and 6 Seniors. They only took 2 Freshmen (who ride the bench).

The men's players are getting older and older and more and more are using the transfer portal for new players--not rising Freshmen.

This just will make it even tougher for recruitment. STUDY HARD FELLAS. Soccer isn't your ticket.