SC Soccer Forums SCSoccer.com Forums College, Pro & International Soccer Bias Against SC Players?

Last month it was argued that some South Carolina universities are biased against South Carolina players. I spent a little time researching this; here's what I found (see the table at the bottom of this post).

Of the 40 SC players currently rostered at the 11 SC D1 schools, the range of SC players per university ranges from a low of 5% (Francis Marion, a fairly new D1 program) to 36% (Wofford). The average number of SC players per team is 3.6, the median is 3. The average percentage of SC players per team is 17%, the median is 15%.

Of the two largest schools in the state, 25% of Clemson's roster are SC players while 17% of USC's players are SC players. Both are at or above the average; somewhat surprising given their play in more competitive conferences. Clemson seems to have had the advantage of being located in the stronger upstate region of SC.

One other thing that was raised in a previous thread was the perceived lack of midstate players rostered. This is absolutely true; the midstate lags tremendously. See this link for more discussion with respect to this.

Bottom line: while it might feel great to demonize certain coaches for not recruiting enough SC players or for not recruiting enough from a certain area, you might want to look at the bigger picture to understand what is going on. SC midstate soccer on the women's side at ages U18 and under needs to get fixed; not the recruiting practices of SC D1 coaches.



[Caveat emptor: Data is worth no less than what you paid for it. ]

[Version 2: Changed one player from DSC to Northside.]

This topic has come up a lot since the inception of scsoccer.com. A lot of people are mad and upset about SC schools not having more SC players on their roster. And, I still contend it is hogwash. We are not a state that produces 30+ D.1 caliber female soccer players every year. We are a state that produces a handful of D.1 talent every year. I believe we are moving in that direction, but the 20th best player in North Carolina may be better than the 10th best in SC. That player from NC may not be good enough to make the team at Chapel Hill but may be a star at Clesmon. Is the contention that the coach should take the SC player and disregard the better player? And, how many of our top soccer players decide to attend college and not play soccer.

If you as a college coach can get a better player from out-of-state then why should you feel obligated to take a SC player who may be of poorer quality?

Also, are some of the top level girls in this state interested in playing for a SC team or are they leaving the state to play for bigger or better programs outside of SC such as possibly Georgia or Tennessee?? Remember, our two biggest schools in SC (Clemson and USC) have both had less than superb seasons the past few years. The team on your list who had the best year record wise was, i believe, Furman, and it's hard for smaller schools like that who play in smaller conferences that do not have the big name recognition to recruit the blue chip players.

Incidently, the two teams with the most SC players (Wofford and Citadel) typically post the worst records in the SoCon.

What about the men? Not so fast my friend.

Tyler Durden: The discussion in December centered around the women's program; that coupled with my having more interest in the women's side of soccer led to this. I'm hoping someone else on SCSoccer.com will jump in and analyze the men's side. Also, as I said in the linked thread on clubs, it's my guess (and only a guess) in terms of the midstate that the men's side isn't nearly as abysmal as the women's side.

With respect to the midstate, I'm hoping that someone will get on and help me understand what I'm missing (on either thread) from the perspective of the women's side. Typically, after I do any type of analysis of win/loss-related activity, I get a few somewhat snide remarks (think "Eurofan" last year) about having too much focus on wins and losses. Okay...so now we have more data about elite player development...and it looks just as bad or worse for the midstate. Again...what am I missing?

Chico,

I asked it before. I see all your stats and hear your complaints. You seem to always claim ignorance to your own stats. What is the fixed for all the clubs in Columbia? I rarely complain unless I have a solution. It may be wrong but I at least give it a try and actually try to execute on it.

Later

>> [Chapindad] I asked it before. I see all your stats and hear your complaints. You seem to always claim ignorance to your own stats.<<

The "ignorance" I am claiming (i.e., "what am I missing?") is centered around the fact that there seem to be others who disagree with me on this board. I try to empathize with other's positions; however, I'm having tremendous trouble here because it seems so straightforward. Thus, given that I certainly could have data wrong or could have misinterpreted the data, I'm wondering what am I missing from the other perspective on this.

>> [Chapindad] What is the fixed for all the clubs in Columbia? I rarely complain unless I have a solution. It may be wrong but I at least give it a try and actually try to execute on it.<<

Where you and I last left this was that you felt that the USC women's soccer coaches were the problem and I thought that it was the clubs themselves in the midstate that were the reason USC didn't have more players from the midstate. I've undertaken this research to first check my position, and then to offer it to you and others so that you can tell me whether you agree or if I'm missing something.

Have I convinced you? Are you agreeing that there is a tremendous problem in the midstate with respect to the opportunities we are offering our children in elite women's soccer, and asking me how I would fix it?

I heard that the womens coach from Clemson was watching the U17 game in Disney. After about 5 minutes watching the game he made the remark that "there's nothing on the field that I want". He then turned around and started watching the Texas game on the adjacent field.

I still believe that if we are going to see our kids go to these good D1 schools then we will have to field good teams that can compete on a regional/national level.

Chico, I love your posts, very enlightening. One thing that I'd love to know from these numbers are how many players are getting scholarships to play at these schools. Most coaches will pick up local players so they can field a good practice, but I wonder how many of these girls are getting anything to play. I guess it's going to be difficult to tell, but I wonder how many of these SC players are actually "starters".

Even those these are small state schools, there are probably some starters from SC:
Newberry - 28% SC players
Lander - 57% SC players
Erskine - 70% SC players
PC 64%
As Chico listed in his chart, Wofford has 36%.
If the girls want to play in-state, get lottery money and some scholarship money; then their best bet to have fun, play a lot of soccer and get a good education may be with one of these 5 schools.
If ya wanta go to a bigger school and ride the bench for a couple years and then maybe, play a half as a junior/senior, then its Clemson or Carolina. Same applies to boys as well, although very few state schools select any decent percentage of SC players, except PC and Newberry:
Erskine 13%
Newberry 44%
Lander 26%
Wofford 15%
PC 40%
Clemson 3%
USC 10%
Furman 8%

Mikensc: Clemson has done a good job in the past in bringing in SC girls.

That U17 team was a finalist in the Predator bracket [second highest bracket] at Disney, dominated its CASL showcase games, was 3rd in RIIIPL this year after losing a heartbreaker to GSA on the last weekend of play, was a quarterfinalist at regionals last year, has 5 region pool players in the 1988 (1), 1989 (3), and 1990 (1) ODP groups, had the lowest goal count against in RIIIPL-East and the third leading scorer and productivity player in RIIIPL-East, etc., etc., etc.

[Disclaimer: My kid plays on that U17G team...but she's too young to be recruited at this time even if there was any interest...so I don't yet have any grudges that I know of.]

In terms of "starters" and "playing time" and the like, I do know that the four SC players currently rostered at USC, three of them got a good number of starts and playing time [of the three, one got injured] during the season. For Clemson, I know that at least two of them [and maybe more] got a good number of starts and playing time. I don't follow Clemson as closely, so it could be many more than two. I'd love to put this stuff in the numbers, but I'd have to quit sleeping at all if I did.

In any case, I'm married to someone who is a rabid USC fan and thus I'm proscribed from ever wanting Clemson to do well. But I do cheer for the players...for example, as I understand it Julie Bolt had a very good freshman season at midfield.

Congratulations to Lindsey Beam of UNC-Charlotte...I read today that she made the cut for the U20 women's national team.