tell me about NPL
![[Post New]](/jforum/templates/default/images/icon_minipost_new.gif){kind=icon}
Anonymous
This is absurdly dumb. |
Anonymous
Data is from NCAA. If people are concerned about scholarships, you have to look a D1 and D2 only. Those numbers are 2.8% for boys and 4.3% for girls. The statement that almost ‘none’ are getting scholarships is inaccurate. Most of the D1 and D2 players have some form of scholarship ( kind of need to have something to sign an NLI), but few have full scholarships. Coming back to the discussion about girls, CCL1 players may end up playing soccer at some colleges but it will be increasingly rare. With the 7 VA teams and another 5 or so MD teams competing in GA and ECNL, college coaches are not likely going to spend much time looking at CCL. It will be good for keeping HS kids playing in the off season, but kids who want to play in college should look at one of the 12 teams above. There will still be exceptions with the 21 and 22 recruiting classes, but by the time the 23s and 24s get into active recruiting CCL won’t be on college coach radars. |
Anonymous
Tell that to the parent of a college basketball player who is on full scholarship. Soccer parents are part of the created culture. They want to taught their kids as elite. When in fact the landscape of the sport in the USA allows for pay to play kids who can afford to pay seem to be the best. This also excludes the actual elite kids from playing because they cant financially meet the criteria. Save the argument that all clubs give scholarships for kids that cant afford the cost. That is BS simply because if that was meant to include rather exclude your top clubs entire 1st teams would be made up of all scholarship kids. Travel soccer in the USA is driven by the dollar so there will always be financially well off kids filling the rosters rather than the more talented kids who aren't. Nobody can argue these facts. |
Anonymous
You are wrong. I said that few CCL players are getting scholarships, not that travel soccer players generally are not getting scholarships. That is undeniable. Most scholarships are going to players outside the CCL. 3 out of 62 VA players were on teams that would be CCL today. Arlington, Loudoun, BRYC, McLean and VDA are all outside CCL, and they, along with DCU, accounted for the overwhelming number of 2020 boys commits from this area. |
Anonymous
These are NCAA issues and not the fault of the parents: https://www.ncsasports.org/recruiting/how-to-get-recruited/scholarship-facts
The parents did not create how the NCAA awards scholarships. You're blaming the wrong thing. Club soccer is not college soccer and frankly, college coaches are paid to win. They will only recruit the best players that they can and if the player is worth it they will get them the most money they can. Making college affordable to as many people as possible is a larger issue and one that I support but sports is not responsible for the high cost of college. Kids shouldn't need sports to afford a college education. |
Anonymous
Thats all true but when you use the terms recruited and committed you give the impression of being rewarded with athletic scholarships. When in fact Its just like committing to a higher level travel team per say. Just as drop out rate is in travel soccer. It continues in college as players year to year stop playing and just like travel soccer 99% of players either quit or age out. Reality is if your in the top 25% of travel soccer players and are willing to Pay full tuition to play college soccer and you are willing to go anywhere in the USA to find a roster you can make regardless of the name or location of the school. You can find a college team to play for. |
Anonymous
The terms fit because they are accurate. Players are recruited by college coaches and when the player agree to play for and attend a particular school they have committed. There is no cattle call tryout for college soccer programs. You seem to think that a partial scholarship is not an investment in the players at all. How that money is distributed by the coaching staff varies from program to program but with limited full scholarships available it is still a significant commitment to the player in terms of the programs relative scholarship situation. Most kids do get some form of money especially if multiple schools are interested in the same player. But make no mistake, most parents well into the soccer recruiting process understands that partial scholarships is the norm and that full rides are extremely rare. Nobody going through the process believes otherwise. No parent is believing that just because a kid commits that they are getting a full ride, we all know better. But what is more rare than full rides are walk on players. Considering the walk on is already a paying customer it would stand to reason that if college soccer is simply pay to play that recommending kids to simply apply to the school of their dreams and just join the team as a walk on. |
Anonymous
parents of soccer players and the players themselves don't have that impression unless they are beyond naive. For most players around here, the important thing about being recruited is short circuiting the admissions process not getting a full ride |
Anonymous
Everyone pays for college. How many kids go to college for free? Academic scholarships are limited, financial aid is limited. Everyone at the college is paying for it, I really don't understand what your point is. Women's soccer is not a headcount sport like football or basketball. claiming that kids and parents are deluded or a part of some giant soccer pay to play industrial complex is absurd at this point. 95% of students are not paid to be students that is just not how college works for anyone. |
Anonymous
did you miss the word 'don't'? |
Anonymous
Yes, I was more commenting on the following point: the important thing about being recruited is short circuiting the admissions process not getting a full ride |
Anonymous
how is that not true? there are some full rides, but no one (absent maybe a handful of players) is getting them. On the other hand, everyone knows that being a recruited athlete makes the admissions process far easier |
Anonymous
Because the advantage varies greatly across schools. Soccer not being a head count sport means performance based revenue is not the same driving motivation for admitting subpar students relative to head count, revenue generating sports like football and basketball. Women's soccer loses money. While the requirement to win is still there for the coaches the school is not going to dramatically lower admission requirements for women soccer players because there is little financial incentive to do so. A highly recruited women's soccer player at UVA may need a 3.6 to get accepted while a basketball player or football player of similar recruitment interest might only need a 3.2 GPA to get accepted. |
Anonymous
the player with the 3.6 will get accepted though. Their peers with the same stats may or may not. That's the advantage |
Anonymous
Yes but a soccer player with a 3.2 will not get accepted. That is the difference. Other kids with a 3.6 and don't bring anything else to the table don't get in. But with 4-8 recruiting classes per year I don't think many kids are getting declined in favor of a soccer player. But a soccer player or any other athlete is bringing something to the school that other students simply are not able to contribute in the same way. THAT is the difference. |