Originally posted by Unregistered
View Post
If everyone understands that, then Title IX guy's rants are not necessary.
That said, there are still a few partisans affiliated with one of the local travel leagues that still like to insist otherwise: that OYSA leagues are all essentially "rec" level ball, and that girls who choose to play club within the state will be dismissed by college recruiters as second-rate, and that therefore college scouts won't bother coming to their games or otherwise attempt to recruit them, and that to have a chance at a college career, you need to travel. One particular travel league has been trying to corner the market on college recruiting for the past ten years, and whatever else I might think of US Soccer and GDA, the fact that this racket has been successfully busted is a feather in the cap of the Federation. I think most of us have now figured out that this was and is a lie, and the evidence shows that there are plenty of girls being recruited out of OYSA teams. If you're a marginal player, the extra exposure afforded by travel leagues who focus on college recruitment (hosting well-attended showcases) can't hurt you (actually it can, if you crap the bed in front of the scouts), but isn't strictly necessary.
Some girls love the travel leagues, and and can afford it, and that's OK. CU has some very good teams. (FC wishes they could finish fourth, in many cases). Other girls don't care about HS, and like the Thorns. Others think both are nuts, and are happy playing for THUSC or Eastside or Salmon Creek or GPS. All are perfectly valid choices, and all are pathways to the next level for those girls with sufficient skill and motivation.
And yes, Title IX has created a scenario where there are plenty of positions available in collegiate women's soccer. I don't consider this to be a bad thing, however.
Comment