SC Soccer Forums SCSoccer.com Forums College, Pro & International Soccer How many college games did you attend?

Chico would hate for anyone but himself to have a good point.

aye

Chapindad: I picked Clemson because almost every fact you were using to buttress your argument was breathtakingly incorrect. 1400 attendees per USC-Upstate game when the actual was 91? USC-Upstate having higher attendance due to more in-state players when they have fewer than USC? These aren't complicated facts. If you had picked Clemson, and used the numbers, you could have at least presented a cogent argument that held the variable of the state in which the university resides constant. As it is, you shot yourself in your own foot at the beginning of all of this.

If I appear a bit terse, it's because this is the 2nd or 3rd year you've verbally defecated upon the USC women's program and perhaps I'm growing a bit tired of the sheer inanity of it all. It would honestly be easier to dismiss you as someone angry at USC for not recruiting from your club and/or your team but who is thrilled that USC Upstate pays more attention to you -- but what I am trying to do is to take your arguments at face value and understand them. In short, I am trying to treat you with respect while examining your arguments with the skepticism I try to have whenever I participate on this message board.

Honestly...I'd love for you to have a good point...just work on being able to argue it without having to resort wholly created "facts" and ad hominem attacks.

kickman: It does remind you of elementary school, doesn't it? (Me included!)

Yeah, Chapinboy. Take that! My Dad is bigger than your Dad!

kickman: Under the "stopped watch" theory, if you eliminate everything Chapindad said in his first post except the following:

quote:

---

I think success also breeds attendance. [...] USC women's has not had a lot of success [...]

---

I think that it's insanely hard to argue with "success [...] breeds attendance". It just seems...obvious. It's more fun to go watch a program that is winning. If you have to pick a top factor, that isn't a bad one. Unfortunately, of course, it runs head on into the other theory regarding recruiting local players. Columbia has some excellent female players; but the Columbia-area clubs don't exactly provide them the showcase that they need to show their talent. Playing premier, with goal differentials of -40 and higher, isn't going to get a player a lot of looks unless she's scoring three goals a game.

I think that the point about club might be a major factor in SC. Clemson is in the upstate, which since at least since 1998 seems to have dominated club play. A lot of upstate players seem to have gone to Clemson. Maybe the Columbia area's dismal record in club soccer is a factor as well. After all, last year Alex Mouton was recruited successfully into USC and this year I've heard that Shannon Bigbie will sign with USC. They both have in common that they didn't play for a Columbia team while being recruited. Of the six (6!) players at Clemson, 4 are from the upstate, 1 is from Charleston, and 1 is from Florence.

Finally, when talking about Clemson -- at least 20 years ago when I went there -- you've got the "do we go to the soccer game or get drunk on grain alcohol" theory of "not much to do." I've no clue if it still applies...

Chico,

I will concede that my numbers on USC Upstate are wrong. I know I saw that number on there site somewhere about 4 months ago but I must have seen the total number and and thought it was the avg. I just searched the site to try and find the number again just to find my error but I can't seem to might the stats for it now. Which I was surprised also by the number which is why it stuck in my head and not any of the other schools I looked at but then quickly dismissed once I saw how close the dorms where to the soccer field. I will also admit that I have talked with Coach Kendall in the past and am very impressed and I am not easily impressed. I will also admit that I have not been happy with USC women's soccer in a very long time going back to Sue Kelly. I had hoped with the hiring of Coach Smith that she wouldn't make the same mistakes as Sue, but she seems to be falling into the same trap. My love for USC is also why I am the most disappointed in the program it has nothing to do with recruiting or lack of, I don't play college soccer. If you child cheats on a test, I really don't care but if my child cheats on a test then I am busting a blood vissle. Last year when Coach Smith added 4 SC players to her team I posted my excitement for USC but then this year she recruited 1 and lost 1 player SC player. I also didn't start the topic so I appologize for not waffling on the topic and always preaching the same thing year after year but when I believe in something I don't change.

I've followed the Lady Gamecocks for awhile too and am most disappointed in the coaching staffs lack of interest in SC talent. It seems to me that you could easily go 6-12 with in-state talent compared to the current roster that has four SC players and around ten girls from all over the place. If you're going to recruit from nationally, then you should yield national results, not 6-12 and 2-9 in the SEC.

Chapindad/202677: It sounds like the three of us are USC Women soccer team fans and we're all disappointed in the last season and that our disagreement is over local versus national recruiting. Here's my honest question: isn't it counterintuitive to expect the USC Women's program to increase its success rate while simultaneously not trying to recruit the best players USC can find? When the college recruiting evaluations come out from the third-party rating services, shouldn't we want USC to have as high a ranking as possible while also recruiting the absolute best players in South Carolina?

This year, as I understand it, Blakely Mattern and Shannon Bigbie from SC will sign with USC (note: there may be others, these are just the ones I've heard about.) And yes, I did hear that one SC girl is transferring out of USC looking for more playing time. But it does seem that the number of SC players is going up over time, doesn't it?

I agree on the surface that national recruiting would seem to be the best stradegy if you only look at numbers and the paper stats of players. And if this was poki-mon then they best stats would always win. But sports doesn't always work that way. Chemistry is a key component on any team, which is why local(in-state) recruiting is so important to any team in any sport. This isn't just a problem with USC women's soccer but the football program has been taking a big hit on this for a long time and Steve Spurrier is working to fix this problem. Now don't get me wrong. If a top 25 player can be recruited then do it but if you have a choice between a top 100 player and a local top 200 player then go for the local player.

I remember a few years back when Holtz was playing Clemson at the end of the season and Holtz had to explain to most of the players what the rivally meant. Local players wouldn't need an explaination. Local players will not want to lose to an SEC team just because of it being a loss but they will have the added weight of lossing in front of people they grew up with and againist teams the grew up hating.