Honest question

[CoachJD]

If it's true that so few girls actually get to play college softball

I think this is probably not as true as people think it is.

It is true, from a pure numbers standpoint, that a very small percentage of high school softball players go on to play in college. It's also true that a very small percentage of high school students who take a geometry class go on to study engineering.

In my time coaching high school ball, I've had 16 seniors graduate. None have gone on to play in college. I think three of them had the talent to do so if they really wanted to and found the right spot, but all three had non-softball college plans. 0 of my 16 players have played in college. 0 of my 16 players had any real intention to play in college (I am sure those three at least would happily join the school team if invited, but they're at D1 schools and they aren't D1 players; I do not consider that "wanting to play in college").

Why are we including those 16 girls in the stats about how few HS softball players get a chance to play in college?

 

[CoachJD]

If there only 20 college teams in the US, you would be correct. But, there are hundreds (thousands?) of college teams.

FWIW, NCSA says there are 1,500+ college softball teams from D1 down to NJCAA.

And, to further your point, there are like 150,000,000 travel teams at this point, so it's probably pretty easy for some college coaches to miss some talented players.

 

[marriard]

There are lots of JUCO players who could play D1. However, I can think of some who absolutely dominated at that level but fell short simply because they weren't up to the academics.

The top half of Florida JUCO competition is basically D1 softball and full of kids who couldn't get there academically, just wanted to stay close to home, or saw the financial advantage of how State Colleges work in Florida. Nowhere near enough D1 softball programs in Florida for the talent in the state.

 

[MNDad]

I think this is probably not as true as people think it is.

It is true, from a pure numbers standpoint, that a very small percentage of high school softball players go on to play in college. It's also true that a very small percentage of high school students who take a geometry class go on to study engineering.

In my time coaching high school ball, I've had 16 seniors graduate. None have gone on to play in college. I think three of them had the talent to do so if they really wanted to and found the right spot, but all three had non-softball college plans. 0 of my 16 players have played in college. 0 of my 16 players had any real intention to play in college (I am sure those three at least would happily join the school team if invited, but they're at D1 schools and they aren't D1 players; I do not consider that "wanting to play in college").

Why are we including those 16 girls in the stats about how few HS softball players get a chance to play in college?

This is my problem with claiming such a low percentage of HS players move on to college too. Most of them either don’t want it or don’t want to put the work in to make it happen.

We’ve got JUCO’s up here with 10-12 kids and D3’s with JV teams. A kid has a 100% of playing college softball if they want to at these schools.

 

[PDM]

I guess my point was, if travel ball took a bit of a back seat to high school, and emphasis was redirected to building high school programs, the level of competition there would increase, not to mention the rivalries among the schools when they might play towns and cities in their own counties. If towns don't have large soft ball programs, how are girls suddenly available to fill travel teams? I'm saying, couldn't the entire premise be flipped so that high school wasn't dismissed and looked down upon and was made to be more competitive? Money directed to travel could be redirected to the high school programs instead and would go a long way to improve their facilities, hire some assistant coaches, etc. No one dismisses high school football as being inferior, do they? And those teams require dozens of players.
The other point I was trying to make was that, unless it's a high level showcase, where all girls are college material at some level, there are many low level showcases where literally a small handful of girls might have scouts there to observe them, scouts that have already been contacted by the girls. These showcases are being funded by teams of girls that have little chance of being scouted. What would one of these girls have to do to grab the attention of a coach and what chance that they would be watching right at that moment? If a lower level team is attending a showcase and have one or two studs at most on their team, let's face it, that team is funding the trip for those two girls to have an opportunity to get seen, missing school and costing their families a lot of money in travel expenses. Sure, perhaps the others could catch the eye of a JUCO coach but, really? Seems one might be able to walk on at a JUCO if a decent player. If a high school player was dominating in high school and standing out, I think they'd be found regardless of a showcase or not, especially if the programs were at a point to be taken seriously. And, the girls might have more time to direct to their studies which is very important as well to colleges. As it is, girls are literally missing days of school to travel to tournaments and getting home late on a Sunday for school the next morning? There seems to be something wrong with this equation. I know this is really going outside the box and it's unlikely the wheel is going to be reinvented, but let's be honest about the reality. Thousands of girls, families and teams, are funding showcases for a chosen few.

I agree with everything you said, except that the level of play in HS ball would not be affected much by having no TB. I've been to thee tournaments and I haven't seen much that made me think they were special places where stars were born. For the most part, they featured a lot of average teams and average players. There are very few, if any secret weapons just waiting to be discovered at most showcases.

 

[Lance Steckler]

in my area, teams without TB players are teams with no chance to compete. They will show up and take their beatings. Regardless of division or league they are in.

 

[Orange Socks]

I agree with everything you said, except that the level of play in HS ball would not be affected much by having no TB. I've been to thee tournaments and I haven't seen much that made me think they were special places where stars were born. For the most part, they featured a lot of average teams and average players. There are very few, if any secret weapons just waiting to be discovered at most showcases.

Are you speaking about HS tourneys or TB tourneys? If you are talking about TB not having special players, you are at the wrong tournaments. If you don't have TB, you would basically have teams with Rec ball players and no pitching. I would ask that you rethink your comment. TB existed BEFORE HS softball ever existed. Without TB there would be NO HS ball.

 

[mmeece]

I agree with everything you said, except that the level of play in HS ball would not be affected much by having no TB. I've been to thee tournaments and I haven't seen much that made me think they were special places where stars were born. For the most part, they featured a lot of average teams and average players. There are very few, if any secret weapons just waiting to be discovered at most showcases.

The level of play would suffer tremendously without travel ball (at least for the teams that were going to any good at all). By the very nature of the word "average" you are correct that most teams and players at travel tournaments are average for where they are playing. On a field full of good players, a good player is the norm. But, when you put most of those same "average" travel ball players on a HS ball field they jump out at you. I've seen it so many times; a player I saw as nothing special in travel ball simply stands out so obviously when they play with the average HS ball player.

 

[Lance Steckler]

the odds of a HS age player being even a 'serviceable' pitcher without playing and practicing year round, is virtually nil.

 

[Eric F]

I agree with everything you said, except that the level of play in HS ball would not be affected much by having no TB.

Maybe I'm not understanding your point correctly, but I strongly disagree with the level of play not being affected by TB. In my observations, HS ball has made the difference between TB players and non-TB players glaringly obvious. My DD has been playing TB since she was 10yo. She's played in many hundreds of games, and had many thousands of reps in every skill. Coming in to HS ball as a freshman she was reunited with former rec ball and MS teammates who have not played TB. The difference in the skill development, game knowledge, and the speed at which they play the game (mentally and physically) is miles apart. This is a result of years of good coaching and WAY more reps than non-TB players get. My DD's HS team is a mix of TB players, non-TB players, and some first-timers. The teams at the top of their league are stacked deep with TB talent on the entire roster. My DD's team takes pride in their effort if they don't get run-ruled by those teams. The level of play is absolutely affected by TB.