|
Post by rlb2024 on Mar 5, 2015 13:29:59 GMT -6
Tulane football is making money now that they have their own stadium. Moving to the Superdome killed the program as I would go to their games in the 70s and they would draw 50 to 60k per game. I remember seeing Heisman trophy winner Tony Dorsett play for Pittsburgh play Tulane in those days and having a very large crowd. Tulane's lack of performance and support by the student body knocked attendance down to half of what it used to be. Now that they have their own stadium, the support is returning and there are already talks that the stadium they have now needs to be increased as the attendance is a success again for the program. Don't forget, the history of Tulane is solid and Tulane not only were in the Sugar Bowls in their own stadium, but also were in the first Rose Bowl. I understand. But there's a difference in attendance and actually making money. I read a while back over half of d1 football programs actually lose money. That said, I still say Tulane could and should have mens soccer. As should UNO (no football) and Loyola.
Louisiana's state colleges by and large are vastly different from the rest of the country. In most states this size (and even in larger states) there are only a couple of true D1 schools and the rest end up being d2 or d3. Wisconsin comes to mind.
There's really no need for 11-12 D1 football programs in this state. Granted I may be in the minority with that sentiment.
I don't see Tulane adding men's soccer. They don't even have women's soccer -- they are the only school out of 11 in the American Athletic Conference that doesn't have women's soccer. (Eight of the schools in the AAC have men's soccer.) Sand Volleyball is a varsity women's sport at Tulane . . .
|
|
|
Post by usasoccerboy on Mar 5, 2015 15:24:09 GMT -6
When you have no college teams in your state, it is seen as an improvement to have a college program. Problem is that the high School and college system is what hampers the development of the national program as again, College soccer limits the development of the national team caliber player. So, what is the other option? Develop true professional clubs to fill in the void. Sign up kids at 13 and 14, get them away from the academic amateur system and make them pros from the beginning. This would not only jeopardize the academic system as those players would no longer be eligible for NCAA or HS soccer, but would also develop players who want to be 365 days a year soccer players. They would like Pele, shine boots at 12, and compete on youth pro teams and train only for soccer so no playing this sport and then playing that sport. This is what happens in other countries, and the benefit is our national program would improve. If you object, then play in the academic systems and give up any chance in developing into a professional player.
|
|
|
Post by playwide on Mar 5, 2015 15:50:50 GMT -6
Tulane not having a funded Women's team is shameful and frankly unbelievable for a University of their standing.
The fact that they don't have a men's team is shocking, given the fact that every University they compare themselves to while recruiting students has a funded Men's program.
Tulane is locked into a 1950's version of college athletics. Baseball, Football, Basketball, and Leave it to Beaver...
The irony, is that one of their board members and their most visible supporters, owns the world's biggest sporting franchise/brand a soccer team valued at over $3 billion. Go figure.....Tulane, please join us in the current century.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 6, 2015 12:08:39 GMT -6
When you have no college teams in your state, it is seen as an improvement to have a college program. Problem is that the high School and college system is what hampers the development of the national program as again, College soccer limits the development of the national team caliber player. So, what is the other option? Develop true professional clubs to fill in the void. Sign up kids at 13 and 14, get them away from the academic amateur system and make them pros from the beginning. This would not only jeopardize the academic system as those players would no longer be eligible for NCAA or HS soccer, but would also develop players who want to be 365 days a year soccer players. They would like Pele, shine boots at 12, and compete on youth pro teams and train only for soccer so no playing this sport and then playing that sport. This is what happens in other countries, and the benefit is our national program would improve. If you object, then play in the academic systems and give up any chance in developing into a professional player. I understand what you're saying. But it's a little more complex than that. Academy players overseas don't usually sign their first contracts until 18 or 19. Academy players are referred to as being "on scholarship."
Which means the club is responsible for their academics as well as their "footballing education". Some clubs actually stress the academic side while others do the bare minimum mandated by their respective footballing associations.
Their are a lot of European academy graduates that, although exceptional players, were not deemed ready by their clubs. Dom Dwyer at Sporting Kansas City is a perfect example of a player that got a second chance by coming to the states and playing college soccer. You can find players from these academies scattered through all divisions of college soccer.
College soccer may not be ideal for developing pros. But it isn't the kiss of death either regarding development. The main thing that needs to happen is they should be able to spread the season out more as well as have fewer restrictions on training. And of course, the level of coaching needs to improve drastically across the board. We need more coaches like Vidovich at Wake Forest and Caleb Porter (formerly at Akron) out there.
Of course it all starts at youth level. Get that right and the rest becomes much, much easier.
Eventually when the US has enough pro clubs and a true pyramid (complete with pro/rel in place) then college soccer will be less relevant to the grand plan.
Quite a few famous footballers actually got college degrees while playing in the lower leagues. It happens. Ruud van Nistelroy and Didier Drogba were "late bloomers" and didn't play in the top divisions until the age of 23.
Not every player is going to make it at 18 or 19. In fact, the majority don't. Especially defenders and keepers.
It is naïve for Americans to think that you can't pursue a professional career and a university degree simultaneously.
Most pros don't train more than 4 hours a day. That leaves a solid 10-12 hours of the day to take classes and study.
Like anything else in life, it requires setting priorities and having the discipline to see it through.
|
|