2018 World Cup

Yes. Very true. This pay to play system was developed to support a giant industry. All club sports including soccer, volleyball, baseball are designed for profit, not for developing elite athletes to compete against the world. Rich white kids fund a system but were is the result? The goal is to make money, not professional athletes.

The French won the World Cup with poor kids from immigrant families. International soccer clubs search for the best kids and bring them to their academy to teach them. They don't ask the parents for money. MLB is being dominated by Latin Americans. They come from very poor countries. In general, USA is not searching for the best, only the club fees.

 

Yep, there are 2 categories for sports scholarships. Head count and equivalency. Head count sports are held to a certain number and all are full-ride and usually only for sports that generate revenue. For Div1 Men, head count sports include only football and basketball. For Div1 women, it's basketball, tennis, volleyball, and gymnastics.

All others are equivalency. There is still a set number but the money can be allocated amongst several athletes. All Div2 and NAIA are equivalency. What typically happens is that coaches will identify a couple of marquee players who will get a full ride and then divide the balance between the rest. Most schools can supplement the balance IF the athlete can qualify for academic scholarships. That doesn't happen very often at private schools.

Where it gets stupid is the allocation. Baseball gets the equivalent of 11.7 scholarships. Most teams have more than twice as many kids on their roster. It's easy to see why private schools are fucked. Softball has 7.2 and most teams carry around 20 or more. Cross Country/Track and Field? A measly 12.6. That should tell you what's going on at schools where teams are successful at both. If you are a sprinter going to Oregon for instance, from out of state, with no money, that's $50k. USC is worse at over $70k a year but we don't have jack when it comes to X-Country. Soccer BTW is 9 for men and 9.9 for women.

And pretty much all the kids who are going to get that money have already been identified by the time they are in 9th grade. Club coaches keep telling the lie that 11th grade is the magical year. Total facking bullshit. And colleges suck too. Their classes are often "full" years before they are even supposed to have been allowed contact with the athletes. But they will tell hopeful kids and their parents that they should attend a camp so the coaches can really see them play. Joke. They just want money for their program.

 

I would have thought the full ride sports for women would only be basketball. I could see softball getting it but tennis, vollyball and gymnastics no way.

Big Daddy Phil probably takes good care of the track guys at Oregon.

 

Well let's face it, there are no revenue-generating sports for women. Tennis is surprising to me as is gymnastics to an extent. But volleyball? Come on....very popular sport around the country. Nobody really cares about women's basketball.

I'll let GDF take that one, lol.

 

Volleyball is very popular in California but I don't know about the rest of the country. I like watching both men's and women's vball in the Olympics but that's about the only time I ever hear about it. The LSU women's beach volleyball team won the national championship and it barely made a ripple in the local news.

 

Penn St and Texas have been powerhouses over the last decade. And I hate to say it but Florida has been very strong as well. Although I am talking strictly the ladies here. Men's volleyball doesn't get as many viewers except maybe at the Olympic level.

 

Most colleges don't even have men's volleyball. They don't like to spend any money on men's minor sports because that would make them have to spend more on women's minor sports to keep the proper Title IX balance. LSU dropped wrestling about the time Title IX was implemented.

 

Glad that is over