SC Soccer Forums SCSoccer.com Forums College, Pro & International Soccer USC recruiting

well you addressed everything else so why not just finish it off, geez do you have a life belligerent? i mean come on these people have valid points with the exception of D2 being as good as D1. you are being belligerent right now, at least you live up to the name, but honestly, how long did it take you to post this, kind of seems a bit over the top

thank you belligerent for gracing the scsoccer world with your presence...not only did you explain nothing but you sounded extremely arrogant in the process...thank you belligerent for all that you do

Valid points? Are you serious? Most of the comments so far have been wild assumptions, seemingly based on absolutely nothing factual.

I apologize if any of that came off as arrogant - not my intent. Belligerent? Absolutely! Do I have a life? Do you mean outside of scsoccer.com? How long did that take? Definitely much more time than it was worth. Over the top? Possibly.

Wizzie, thank you - I always try to live up to the name.

???, your posts appear to reflect your screen name, just like mine. And, you are welcome - twice.

Should this thread move to the College, Pro & International Soccer thread? I would expect you would obtain better response/reaction from the COLLEGE thread.

and you successfully killed it Sv dad congrats

If you only look at the title of the thread, sure. But most of the talk was about high school players being (or not being) recruited.

In response to your comment about possibly having a better "response/reaction" from the college thread, just look at the numbers. The college thread has less than 20% of the number of posts than the Boys High School thread has.

So, to answer your question, no it didn't make sense (to me, at least - obviously someone of importance around here agreed with you).

And it really, really pains me to agree with wizzie, but you did pretty much kill it.

This D2 programs being better than D1 programs is ridiculous. I do believe on any given day any team can win. But honestly on a day to day basis the D1 teams would win 8 or 9 out of 10 times. That is why they are D1. The top tier teams in D2 could compete in D1 for sure and thats why Upstate switched over. These other losses are usually what we refer to as "upsets".

ClemSoccer had a good point bringing this up. Why would he take so many in state players, especially these people? I don't see it helping the program out all that much even if they are practice players. But I'm assuming they are preferred walk-ons except Cates.

And no analysts are well respected even though they are paid. Half the time they are wrong.

And you are assuming that they will be "practice players" and self-admittedly, preferred walk-ons. Again, why not go to the source and ask the question?

Is it at all possible that this man, who has led a successful program for 29 years, might just see something that all these other people do not? Does it always have to be SO obvious to everyone else in order to make sense?

So, if "knowledgable" analysts are wrong half the time, where does that leave clem?

Yes I'm assuming this. I am willing to make what I consider a "safe" assumption and also assume the risk associate with it. If this were a "risky" assumption I probably wouldn't make it but I'm assuming its not risky (cause it really isn't, and you just keep asking rhetorical questions). Certainly there aren't limited to being practice players if they grow and become better than the solid talent USC brings in. Chances are they won't though.

Honestly I've never seen these players play but I'm sure Berson wouldn't see anything that I don't. I might have played Cates against Dutch Fork but don't remember...regardless he should be playing at USC. And counter-intuitively, Clem is probably right since the analysts are wrong. Certainly I agree with him.

And do you care to comment on D2 programs? Or was I right?