Don't go to a big event and place with a team like that! People don't like it!
US Club rankings released
- Thread starter CoogansBluff
- Start date
Welcome to Discuss Fastpitch
Your FREE Account is waiting to the Best Softball Community on the Web.
Don't go to a big event and place with a team like that! People don't like it!
- Nov 18, 2013
- 2,258
- 113
The Midwest Speed pretty much did that last year when they ran a PGF sanctioned showcase. Unfortunately most MN teams stayed away which I didn't understand at all. At least one program, didn't send teams because they didn't want to support a competing organization. It's all about the kids and getting them opportunities though right?
- May 17, 2012
- 2,807
- 113
I don't think anyone would dispute what you said but I think it misses the mark. Take the top 25 College football poll. Nobody believes that these are the best 25 teams comprised of the best 1,300 college eligible football players in the world. It's simply based on colleges that play "Y" schedule with "X" players. Surely there better football players sitting at home that couldn't get admitted due to money, politics, injury, didn't want to play football, etc.
I don't think anyone thinks that those teams and players are on the Softball Club list are the best of the best softball players. This is why a good 18u "A" team can knock off a college softball team. College softball teams are restricted by admissions and travel teams are not. Surely there is a group of players not playing travel softball for whatever reason that could knock off that 18u "A" team as well.
- Feb 3, 2016
- 502
- 43
Can't believe that more OK teams aren't on that list. As stated must not be playing out of state enough for the big clubs to recognize. I happen love it when under dog team(s) non-club ballers upset the apple cart from time to time.
- Feb 7, 2013
- 3,188
- 48
Wow, somebody has a chip on their shoulder. Not sure where all this angst comes from but DD has played against teams from many of the top SoCal orgs on this list and very few of these families are rich, if fact the vast majority are low to middle class families that actually work very hard for their money and are doing their best to get their kids into college (and maybe have it partially paid for). You better believe that college coaches know which organizations have a a reputation of producing solid college athletes and will have success at that level (their coaching careers depend on it). I agree with others that the top 25 teams on this list consistently produce some very good ball players. Just because your DDs team isn't on this list (neither is mine) doesn't mean you have to trash it.
My last point is that very few people are getting rich from fastpitch. For every Tony Rico or Marty Tyson, there are a 100 volunteer (minimally) paid coaches who are involved in the sport only because of the love they have for the game. In fact, I would argue that the ones making the most money from softball are the one on one personal instructors who get upwards of $80 an hour (in cash, you think any of them declare this income?) giving pitching and hitting lessons out of their modest homes. With that said, if you want to make a lot of money, fastpitch is an industry you probably would want to stay away from.
Last edited:
- Feb 15, 2016
- 273
- 18
As others have stated, the rankings put far too much emphasis on number of tourneys a team enters that whoever made the rankings decides is a worthy tournament. I saw a team on there ranked about #300 that won the only tourney they entered. The team ranked #110 or so finished out of the top 10. However that team played in 4-5 other "worthy" tourneys and never placed above #15. Meanwhile the #300 team won 3 other "unworthy" tourneys and beat teams rated above them in all those tourneys. If they had entered several more "worthy" tourneys and finished consistently with where they finished against ranked opponents on "unworthy" tourneys they would easily be in the top 100 and most likely much higher. Almost all the girls on that team are committed to very good teams. These rankings are biased towards certain tournaments.
Basically, as with all of these attempts at National Rankings Lists of any type, the problem is with far too much information missing and human input i.e. weighting of the criteria. Personally, I don't think how many players they have playing in college should mean squat when being Nationally ranked but maybe that's just me. Now, if you wanted to make a national listing of the top organizations to get your DD recruited, that's a different story. However the criteria should be that they were playing for that org when the player committed and break it down by Division. Even then, when have the players committed? When they verballed or when they signed their NLI? If it's the NLI, is it fair to the team/org that actually got them to the point of developing them skill-wise and getting them noticed to the point of being offered? And this is just one small example of one small piece of everything these people have tried to incorporate into this National list.
Sorry, I don't buy it for a second.
Sorry, I don't buy it for a second.
I think you might use it for preseason conjectures, but once you have results, they should be based on how you did. So I agree. And with college commits, you might have two girls w/ SEC offers, but they haven't committed, so they get 0 points. Another team might have two preferred legacy walk-ons to LSU and get a bunch of points. So yeah, can't really use that.
Similar threads
