So Much For The Myth Of Powerful ACC Softball

[mike412]

. The ACC qualified no teams for the Softball College World Series, after FSU lost to LSU today. The ACC had only FSU make the Super Regionals. The SEC qualified 8 of which 3 are going to the CWS; the PAC12 qualified 5 of which 3 also are going to the CWS; and the Big 12 qualified 2 of which both won their Super Regionals. The only power conference doing worse than the ACC: the Big 10 which had no teams in the Super Regionals.

I bring this up because one argued rationale for not adding Women's Lacrosse is that we would do poorly because of powerful ACC teams like Duke and UNC. Neither of those teams made the NCAA quarterfinals. One ACC team made it all the way to the finals: BC.

The same excuse sometimes is used to justify our poor performances in baseball, soccer and softball. There is no legitimate excuse. Is BC in a hotbed of HS lacrosse? Hardly. Are Washington and Oregon in hotbeds of HS Softball? Nope. Both are in the CWS. BC's team is mainly from states which have strong HS lacrosse programs. Oregon and Washington's softball teams are primarily from California.

We can't -- and shouldn't -- excuse what have basically been perennially terrible programs in baseball, softball, men's and women's soccer and pretty much every other "minor" sport. It comes down to a lack of funding -- for coaching, recruiting and facilities. That is something we should not allow the University to get away with. At a minimum, it should pick a couple of those sports and invest the necessary funds in them. Football always will be #1, but other sports should not be neglected. Either give those sports enough funding to win or drop them.

 

[goalieman]

. The ACC qualified no teams for the Softball College World Series, after FSU lost to LSU today. The ACC had only FSU make the Super Regionals. The SEC qualified 8 of which 3 are going to the CWS; the PAC12 qualified 5 of which 3 also are going to the CWS; and the Big 12 qualified 2 of which both won their Super Regionals. The only power conference doing worse than the ACC: the Big 10 which had no teams in the Super Regionals.

I bring this up because one argued rationale for not adding Women's Lacrosse is that we would do poorly because of powerful ACC teams like Duke and UNC. Neither of those teams made the NCAA quarterfinals. One ACC team made it all the way to the finals: BC.

The same excuse sometimes is used to justify our poor performances in baseball, soccer and softball. There is no legitimate excuse. Is BC in a hotbed of HS lacrosse? Hardly. Are Washington and Oregon in hotbeds of HS Softball? Nope. Both are in the CWS. BC's team is mainly from states which have strong HS lacrosse programs. Oregon and Washington's softball teams are primarily from California.

We can't -- and shouldn't -- excuse what have basically been perennially terrible programs in baseball, softball, men's and women's soccer and pretty much every other "minor" sport. It comes down to a lack of funding -- for coaching, recruiting and facilities. That is something we should not allow the University to get away with. At a minimum, it should pick a couple of those sports and invest the necessary funds in them. Football always will be #1, but other sports should not be neglected. Either give those sports enough funding to win or drop them.

It looks like they are ready to invest more in wrestling and it looks like wrestling fans are ready to support the effort with donations ..... hopefully that program will become a top tier program.

The AD has to make sure football continues to grow and also get men's and women's basketball straightened out, then maybe baseball can be improved .... I don't expect us to be an upper level ACC baseball team but we should not be a cellar dweller either.

 

[mike412]

Do you think any BC alumnus realistically expected them to be an NCAA finalist? They have a lower AD budget than us and there has been a clamoring for them to reduce sports so they can devote more $ to FB. But, they hired a young coach who starred on a Maryland national championship team a decade ago and gave her enough money to recruit and look what happened.

PSU just throws money at programs: for wrestling, volleyball, lacrosse and hockey it has worked. For softball, basketball and baseball, it hasn't. But hiring a good, young coach and giving her legitimate facilities and a reasonable staff and recruiting budget worked for BC.

 

[DiehardPanther]

Do you think any BC alumnus realistically expected them to be an NCAA finalist? They have a lower AD budget than us and there has been a clamoring for them to reduce sports so they can devote more $ to FB. But, they hired a young coach who starred on a Maryland national championship team a decade ago and gave her enough money to recruit and look what happened.

PSU just throws money at programs: for wrestling, volleyball, lacrosse and hockey it has worked. For softball, basketball and baseball, it hasn't. But hiring a good, young coach and giving her legitimate facilities and a reasonable staff and recruiting budget worked for BC.

PS alums pump a lot more $ into their sports programs. There is absolutely no comparison. The majority of the focus should be on Football and Basketball. Those are and should be the 2 priorities for the AD.

 

[Joe the Panther Fan]

The SEC qualified 8 of which 3 are going to the CWS;

There are 13 schools in the SEC that play women's softball. All 13 of them made the NCAA tournament.

I wonder if any other conference has ever had a performance like that in any other sport?

 

[TIGER-PAUL]

Well, it literally took Pitt a 100 years to get its own soccer field.
We have, what 4 EWL wresting and 1 EAGL gymnastics champs in all that time?
This just had some ACC info.
http://www.dailypress.com/sports/teel-blog/dp-teel-time-acc--2016-17-vt-uva-post.html