A new season for men’s soccer? - Printable Version
+- The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board)
+-- Forum: C-House! (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-4.html)
+--- Forum: The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-5.html)
+--- Thread: A new season for men’s soccer? (/thread-18929.html)
+- The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board)
+-- Forum: C-House! (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-4.html)
+--- Forum: The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-5.html)
+--- Thread: A new season for men’s soccer? (/thread-18929.html)
A new season for men’s soccer? - BobK - 02-03-2020
https://www.inquirer.com/soccer/college-soccer-reform-sasho-cirovski-maryland-jeremy-gunn-stanford-20200122.html
Seems a bit strange
RE: A new season for men’s soccer? - ColoradoTree - 02-03-2020
(02-03-2020, 09:45 AM)BobK Wrote: https://www.inquirer.com/soccer/college-soccer-reform-sasho-cirovski-maryland-jeremy-gunn-stanford-20200122.html
Seems a bit strange
From a high school and "what we're used to" perspective, absolutely. A sport usually has one season, and that's that.
But once I got over the shock factor, I got on board with this almost immediately. It seems the primary motivation for the proponent of this is to better align the college soccer season with the pro soccer schedule (in which seasons are lengthier everywhere, and where two half-seasons are the norm everywhere except in MLS) to improve the idea of college soccer as a positive for pro teams for their not-quite-ready-but-not-afterthoughts-either prospects.
And it's Coach Gunn, of course, who makes the academic argument in favor of the change. Games spread out across both the fall and spring means fewer midweek games, which means far fewer missed classes. From a student-athlete perspective (apparently 80% are in favor of the change, per the cited survey), you spread games out across the whole year, making your spring more difficult but your fall a lot less difficult. Plus, injury rates go way down when you're playing one game a week versus two.
I'm a big fan of this idea. Makes college soccer more relevant to the pro leagues it seeks to feed while also (in my view) improving the student-athlete experience and reducing the risk of injury. And specifically for the Stanford calendar, you'd no longer have men's soccer players trying to juggle finals with NCAAs.
RE: A new season for men’s soccer? - Viking_Guy - 02-03-2020
Also, you wouldn't be playing the College Cups in some godforsaken snowbowl in the east in December.
VG
RE: A new season for men’s soccer? - martyup - 02-03-2020
I just want to know why some of the boys in the photo are wearing sports bras? Umm . . . not that there is anything wrong with boys wearing sports bras, it just seems a little out of place. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
RE: A new season for men’s soccer? - BobK - 02-03-2020
I forget what they are but not sports bras Marty
RE: A new season for men’s soccer? - BostonCard - 02-03-2020
(02-03-2020, 02:32 PM)BobK Wrote: I forget what they are but not sports bras Marty
They are cardiac monitoring devices, and also record GPS and a bunch of other data so the coaches can analyze.
BC
RE: A new season for men’s soccer? - 82lsju - 02-03-2020
(02-03-2020, 02:32 PM)BobK Wrote: I forget what they are but not sports bras Marty
for performance monitoring
https://www.catapultsports.com/
RE: A new season for men’s soccer? - Papa John - 02-03-2020
(02-03-2020, 12:51 PM)Viking_Guy Wrote: Also, you wouldn't be playing the College Cups in some godforsaken snowbowl in the east in December.
VG
Although Santa Barbara in December is not too bad!
Having said that, it would be nice to align the college game with professional soccer in terms of substitutions.
RE: A new season for men’s soccer? - ColoradoTree - 02-03-2020
(02-03-2020, 02:50 PM)Papa John Wrote: Having said that, it would be nice to align the college game with professional soccer in terms of substitutions.
A sharp reduction in the number of available substitutions would seem to increase injury risk for those starters, I would think. Some reduction from the current 11 (plus the ability to re-enter) would be fine, but I'm not sure a total alignment with the 3-sub professional rule is necessary. Maybe split the difference somewhat and go with the FIFA rule for international friendlies--i.e., 6 subs a side?
RE: A new season for men’s soccer? - Viking_Guy - 02-03-2020
Papa John -
Neither is San Jose. But Chester, PA, Cary, NC, and even College Station, TX have had awful conditions for the two College Cups in recent seasons.
An April or May championship would make the venue choices a lot more varied.
VG
RE: A new season for men’s soccer? - martyup - 02-03-2020
(02-03-2020, 02:42 PM)BostonCard Wrote:(02-03-2020, 02:32 PM)BobK Wrote: I forget what they are but not sports bras Marty
They are cardiac monitoring devices, and also record GPS and a bunch of other data so the coaches can analyze.
BC
![[Image: ?u=https%3A%2F%2Fmedia.giphy.com%2Fmedia...f=1&nofb=1]](https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=https%3A%2F%2Fmedia.giphy.com%2Fmedia%2FmgqefqwSbToPe%2Fgiphy-downsized-large.gif&f=1&nofb=1)
RE: A new season for men’s soccer? - ca245 - 02-04-2020
since the modified schedule is being sold to the NCAA on the basis of benefitting student-athletes physical and mental well, aren’t the arguments also applicable to WSoc?
RE: A new season for men’s soccer? - 82lsju - 02-04-2020
(02-04-2020, 09:17 AM)ca245 Wrote: since the modified schedule is being sold to the NCAA on the basis of benefitting student-athletes physical and mental well, aren’t the arguments also applicable to WSoc?
and basketball??
RE: A new season for men’s soccer? - ColoradoTree - 02-04-2020
(02-04-2020, 09:17 AM)ca245 Wrote: since the modified schedule is being sold to the NCAA on the basis of benefitting student-athletes physical and mental well, aren’t the arguments also applicable to WSoc?
They are, for the most part*. From what I understand, this will be something of a trial run for the men, and if it goes well, the women are expected to follow suit sooner rather than later. It all depends on whether the results show what the proponents expect them to show.
* The benefits to student-athletes would be the same, but the animating purpose of the rule change--raising the profile of men's college soccer and making it a more viable pathway to professional soccer--isn't applicable to the women for a few reasons. First, college soccer is already the primary (and darn near the sole) pathway to professional soccer in this country for women. Second, while the NWSL has a similar schedule to the MLS, and foreign women's clubs generally have a similar schedule to foreign men's clubs, the balance of power is different--i.e., hundreds of men's European clubs would destroy MLS clubs, but only a handful of women's European clubs are on par with NWSL clubs. So, the impetus to align your schedule to a European calendar isn't as strong. And finally, you don't have the same Development Academy system in the NWSL as you do in MLS (and around the world). You do have developmental teams and some youth programs, to be sure, but it's nowhere near on the same level.
Fundamentally, I think the student-athlete benefits are real but modest. Do you completely upend a system that's working OK for modest benefits? I get why you'd want to do it for the men, as you'd be raising the profile of the men's college game and potentially getting professional clubs more interested in men's college players. There, you get the modest student-athlete benefits plus potential systemic benefit to men's college soccer in general. But are the student-athlete benefits worth it without the systemic benefit? I think the men going first here makes a lot of sense, and then if the student-athlete benefits look like they're worth it, then the women make the same change.
RE: A new season for men’s soccer? - oldalum - 02-04-2020
Paul Ratcliffe is strongly in favor of splitting up the fall season as the men are doing. IMHO, I think the benefits to the women student-athletes are not speculative or minor. Right now, they are playing two seasons, but the first is both long and compressed with games, while the second is short and leisurely. It makes sense to me to even them out more, which would have the added advantage of eliminating the current spring season exhibition games entirely. The only disadvantage I see to the players is that studying abroad might not be possible during the school year, only in the summer. But, of course, I'm open to learning more! :)
RE: A new season for men’s soccer? - ColoradoTree - 02-04-2020
(02-04-2020, 11:37 AM)oldalum Wrote: IMHO, I think the benefits to the women student-athletes are not speculative or minor.
I agree! I intended "modest" to be something north of minor and something south of earth-shaking. But they're definitely real, and they're considerable. FWIW, I expect the change in the men's game (if it happens) to be well-received, and for the women to make the change a year or two later.
RE: A new season for men’s soccer? - teejers1 - 02-04-2020
(02-03-2020, 02:57 PM)ColoradoTree Wrote:(02-03-2020, 02:50 PM)Papa John Wrote: Having said that, it would be nice to align the college game with professional soccer in terms of substitutions.
A sharp reduction in the number of available substitutions would seem to increase injury risk for those starters, I would think. Some reduction from the current 11 (plus the ability to re-enter) would be fine, but I'm not sure a total alignment with the 3-sub professional rule is necessary. Maybe split the difference somewhat and go with the FIFA rule for international friendlies--i.e., 6 subs a side?
College is not pro - the more kids who can play, the better. Of course, I don't even like the 3-sub rule for the pro game. Why? Why not have free substitutions (or at least more subs); thus rewarding the more complete team/roster?
RE: A new season for men’s soccer? - ColoradoTree - 02-05-2020
(02-04-2020, 05:04 PM)teejers1 Wrote:(02-03-2020, 02:57 PM)ColoradoTree Wrote:(02-03-2020, 02:50 PM)Papa John Wrote: Having said that, it would be nice to align the college game with professional soccer in terms of substitutions.
A sharp reduction in the number of available substitutions would seem to increase injury risk for those starters, I would think. Some reduction from the current 11 (plus the ability to re-enter) would be fine, but I'm not sure a total alignment with the 3-sub professional rule is necessary. Maybe split the difference somewhat and go with the FIFA rule for international friendlies--i.e., 6 subs a side?
College is not pro - the more kids who can play, the better. Of course, I don't even like the 3-sub rule for the pro game. Why? Why not have free substitutions (or at least more subs); thus rewarding the more complete team/roster?
This isn't necessarily my fight--the college substitution rule hasn't really bothered me that much--but I do think there are some fair arguments for limiting it. Primarily, it distorts the game. Rather than players learn to conserve energy and use space, coaches can have their players sprint full-out for a certain amount of time and then just get subbed off when they need a rest, only to come back in the second half. It can make for a brand of soccer that is more about speed and physicality and less about tactical acumen.
Not sure that's enough of a reason to outweigh the benefits of more kids getting playing time, but that's the argument (at least, as I understand it to be). And it played out when I was at Stanford, when one of my good friends started but was subbed off with 15 minutes to go in each half so that a crazy fast player could come on with fresh legs and wreak a little havoc on the other team's back line. Nothing wrong with that--it's certainly within the rules. But it's still a bit odd for someone used to the international or professional game.
RE: A new season for men’s soccer? - oldalum - 02-05-2020
(02-05-2020, 09:40 AM)ColoradoTree Wrote: coaches can have their players sprint full-out for a certain amount of time and then just get subbed off when they need a rest, only to come back in the second half. It can make for a brand of soccer that is more about speed and physicality and less about tactical acumen.You have described UNC to a "T". Dorrance this year substituted 6 or 7 players en masse for the last 15-20 minutes of the first half. In the championship game against us, his strategy was partly foiled because the second team had to wait on the sideline for a long time until an opportunity arose when they could come in.
Against WSU in the national semifinal, for example, Dorrance put in 6 subs by the 32nd minute, and a 7th in the 39th minute. Then he put 6 starters back in for the start of the second half, made 7 substitutions by the 63rd minute, then made 11 more substitutions over the rest of the half.
RE: A new season for men’s soccer? - Papa John - 02-05-2020
It's a bit late for me to jump back in, but I appreciate the comments from ColoradoTree and oldalum. The substitution rule changes the college game so much that players are not getting the technical and tactical training that they need to succeed in the pros. I can't think of a more drastic, rule-based difference between the college and professional versions of a major sport.
But you need the current substitution rule if you have teams playing twice--or even three times!--within a week. The only way to change it is to stretch out the season.
I like the idea of having a one-match-per-week nonconference season in the fall, take off December and January and start the one-match-per-week conference schedule in February. Regular season ends in April, scrap the conference tournament if you have one (Pac-12 does not), and you have the rest of April and all of May for five or six rounds of NCAA tournament play.
The College Cup will have to be reconsidered. Last fall, the Stanford women played Friday/Sunday in San Jose, CA. To stretch that over two weekends would have required UNC to travel cross-country four times. So maybe you do like American football and have the two semifinals and finals matches played in different, but predetermined, locations.