[ColoradoTree]

https://www.inquirer.com/soccer/college-...00122.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.

[ColoradoTree]

https://www.inquirer.com/soccer/college-...00122.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.