Ultimate College Softball
Register Calendar Latest Topics
 
 
 


Reply
  Author   Comment   Page 1 of 2      1   2   Next
3leftturns

Registered:
Posts: 11,450
Reply with quote  #1 

Superb... one of the beautiful campuses

 

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
March 14, 2017
 
CLEMSON TO ADD SOFTBALL; WOMEN'S DIVING CONCLUDES FINAL SEASON OF COMPETITION
 
CLEMSON, S.C. - Clemson Athletics announced plans today to sponsor intercollegiate softball as a substitute for the women's diving program, which competed in its final season in 2017.
 
"Softball is a tremendously popular sport among young women in the state of South Carolina and around the nation," Director of Athletics Dan Radakovich said. "We've evaluated our sport offerings over the past few years and believe this is our best path forward. Among other considerations, softball will allow us to provide an opportunity to compete quickly with the other 13 softball-playing schools of the Atlantic Coast Conference, for increased exposure with our television partners and allow for our continued compliance with Title IX participation ratios."
 
Women's diving has competed as a stand-alone program since the university discontinued its men's and women's swimming and men's diving programs following the 2011-12 season. Clemson's womenโ€™s diving program is the lone diving-only women's program in the ACC, and operates at a competitive disadvantage as championship scoring is based on combined swimming and diving points.
 
"Any time changes to sport offerings are made, it can be difficult for current student-athletes and coaches, as well as for our former letterwinners. I want to express our gratitude to Coach Leslie Hasselbach-Adams and the young women in our program for the way they've represented our university and competed with integrity and class," Radakovich said.
 
Diving student-athletes can remain at Clemson with their current levels of financial aid and continue to receive academic support and other benefits provided to active student-athletes throughout the duration of their eligibility. Should they wish to continue their competitive diving careers, each of our student-athletes will be given their full and immediate release to transfer to any school of their choosing.
 
A timeline for the development of the softball program is being finalized with a potential first pitch in February 2020, coinciding with the linear launch of the ACC Network.
 
"Since I arrived at Clemson in late 2012, the most common question I've received from our fans, supporters and young women throughout the state has been, 'Are you going to add softball?' and I'm happy to now have a definitive answer," Radakovich said. "There's a lot to be done between now and the first pitch, including construction of a softball stadium and hiring coaches and support personnel, but I know there's excitement around Clemson and throughout our state for the launch of this program." 
 
3leftturns

Registered:
Posts: 11,450
Reply with quote  #2 
Among the 29 schools in the SEC and ACC, it leaves Miami, Wake Forest and Vanderbilt as the only ones without the sport.

Miami, yapping like USC does about not enough space for a facility, is the most egregious outlier ...imo

UMassFan

Registered:
Posts: 5,128
Reply with quote  #3 
Quote:
Originally Posted by 3leftturns
Among the 29 schools in the SEC and ACC, it leaves Miami, Wake Forest and Vanderbilt as the only ones without the sport.

Miami, yapping like USC does about not enough space for a facility, is the most egregious outlier ...imo


Wake won't be adding softball anytime soon. Lacrosse would be the next sport added there.

__________________
Go!
Go U!
Go UMass!
Go UMass!
Mangler

Registered:
Posts: 205
Reply with quote  #4 
Vandy has stated that adding softball wasn't in their best interest.

AKA it doesn't make money
3leftturns

Registered:
Posts: 11,450
Reply with quote  #5 
The TV ratings just get better every year.

But, no sport other than football or men's basketball 'makes money'
PH2

Registered:
Posts: 304
Reply with quote  #6 
This makes sense in the broader context of why they are dropping dive and the fact that they had to add something for Title IX purposes.  If Vandy was in the same circumstance, they may decide softball is the best option for continued compliance with Title IX.  What they've said is they aren't going to add it just to add it, which makes sense.
Wilmer1

Registered:
Posts: 186
Reply with quote  #7 
Take away the television money that the NCAA gets for basketball, I would venture to say that most D-1 basketball teams would not be profitable.  I would also venture to say that of all of the womens sports that are broadcasted on t.v. (i.e. basketball, lacrosse, etc.) softball by far obtains the highest ratings.    
NCexile

Registered:
Posts: 643
Reply with quote  #8 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wilmer1
Take away the television money that the NCAA gets for basketball, I would venture to say that most D-1 basketball teams would not be profitable.  I would also venture to say that of all of the womens sports that are broadcasted on t.v. (i.e. basketball, lacrosse, etc.) softball by far obtains the highest ratings.    


The big picture is the NCAA funds everything it does from revenue it generates over the the next three from March Madness.  
jayrot

Registered:
Posts: 17,100
Reply with quote  #9 
Hopefully Radkodick handles softball at Clemson better than he did at GT.

And they're about 5 years too late bc they could've had a real program starter if they had pulled Hoover in for basically free.
Ij10

Registered:
Posts: 118
Reply with quote  #10 
Quote:
Originally Posted by jayrot
Hopefully Radkodick handles softball at Clemson better than he did at GT.

And they're about 5 years too late bc they could've had a real program starter if they had pulled Hoover in for basically free.

Hoover ,Matty Moss, Abby Cheek , Etc... Some good players coming from SC.
jayrot

Registered:
Posts: 17,100
Reply with quote  #11 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ij10
Hoover ,Matty Moss, Abby Cheek , Etc... Some good players coming from SC.


Even Leslie Jury would've been a good player to grab to start a program around.  

I guess easier said than done though, as Bev couldn't get Moss.

My point was just referencing the fact that Hoover's mother was a coach at Clemson.
SballfanNBama

Registered:
Posts: 933
Reply with quote  #12 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mangler
Vandy has stated that adding softball wasn't in their best interest.

AKA it doesn't make money


Yeah and their women's bowling and lacrosse teams are raking in the money
Ij10

Registered:
Posts: 118
Reply with quote  #13 
Quote:
Originally Posted by jayrot


Even Leslie Jury would've been a good player to grab to start a program around.  

I guess easier said than done though, as Bev couldn't get Moss.

My point was just referencing the fact that Hoover's mother was a coach at Clemson.

Yes sir I forgot that her mom was a coach their. ๐Ÿ‘
jayrot

Registered:
Posts: 17,100
Reply with quote  #14 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ij10
Yes sir I forgot that her mom was a coach their. ๐Ÿ‘


My very first GT sporting event was a GT volleyball game vs. Clemson.  I was hooked from that moment on.  That GT/Clemson volleyball rivalry used to be pretty solid.
Still_JAD

Registered:
Posts: 421
Reply with quote  #15 
Great news! Would love for Miami and WF to add softball too. Would also like to see the SEC make Vandy start a program.
jayrot

Registered:
Posts: 17,100
Reply with quote  #16 
Honestly shocked Miami doesn't have a softball tream. They're in the middle of one of the biggest hot beds for softball on the East Coast.
1janiedough

Registered:
Posts: 2,537
Reply with quote  #17 
Quote:
Originally Posted by jayrot
Honestly shocked Miami doesn't have a softball tream. They're in the middle of one of the biggest hot beds for softball on the East Coast.


Same with pansy USC!
jayrot

Registered:
Posts: 17,100
Reply with quote  #18 
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1janiedough


Same with pansy USC!


Wait, you're an SC fan too? They need a team so bad but financially they're not willing to make the investment.
1janiedough

Registered:
Posts: 2,537
Reply with quote  #19 
Quote:
Originally Posted by jayrot
Wait, you're an SC fan too? They need a team so bad but financially they're not willing to make the investment.


No, not an SC fan at ALL.  I don't think it would be a successful program anyway because of where the campus is located and it is landlocked as far as putting a new stadium at USC proper.  Even more so, the location sucks.
jayrot

Registered:
Posts: 17,100
Reply with quote  #20 
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1janiedough


No, not an SC fan at ALL.  I don't think it would be a successful program anyway because of where the campus is located and it is landlocked as far as putting a new stadium at USC proper.  Even more so, the location sucks.


lol I was about to say that'd be weird for an AZ fan.

As a graduate of USC I absolutely loved the campus. Sure, areas south of the campus can get dodgy, but stay out of there and you're fine. I obviously find the landlocked thing to be an excuse. They've found plenty of places to put other venues, and I feel like it's only a matter of time before USC starts procuring more land around the school.

They obviously found a place for the beach volleyball courts. Granted they won a national championship in year 3 if I remember correctly.

My proposal would be invest in building a new Dedeaux field at a new location and create a softball field at the existing location. Or, move the soccer complex on campus in the place of the baseball field and create an off campus complex of baseball/softball field where the soccer field is currently located. Anyway, I feel it's an excuse and they're just don't want to spend the money on any other women's sports programs. They had no problem shelling out money for that craptastic basketball program.
3leftturns

Registered:
Posts: 11,450
Reply with quote  #21 
Wow... I literally NEVER would have guessed USC as the alma mattress.

Shocked every day
1janiedough

Registered:
Posts: 2,537
Reply with quote  #22 
I think a USC softball program would end up being just above the Stanford softball team should they start one.
3leftturns

Registered:
Posts: 11,450
Reply with quote  #23 
Say what??? I would put USC admissions a level below the stringency of Stanford's
1janiedough

Registered:
Posts: 2,537
Reply with quote  #24 
Quote:
Originally Posted by 3leftturns
Say what??? I would put USC admissions a level below the stringency of Stanford's


Not as far as school but competition...none!
3leftturns

Registered:
Posts: 11,450
Reply with quote  #25 
USC would be a perennial Top 10-20 team within 5 years of inception
Kurosawa

Registered:
Posts: 2,629
Reply with quote  #26 
Quote:
Originally Posted by SballfanNBama


Yeah and their women's bowling and lacrosse teams are raking in the money


Softball is expensive because you need a dedicated stadium, batting cages, etc. For lacrosse, all you need is available time on a soccer field.
outofzone

Registered:
Posts: 990
Reply with quote  #27 
Quote:
Originally Posted by 3leftturns
USC would be a perennial Top 10-20 team within 5 years of inception


Surely you jest?? No doubt it would be a popular place to recruit from and an awesome local to play in. Seems they would be recruiting every other SoCal kid on top of any other kid UCLA etc...might be interested in. Looks like a recipe for diluting the regional softball programs...while I love parity, not sure there would be enough studs to vault the new program into the top 20 in that short time frame. 

Nice brain fart though. 
jayrot

Registered:
Posts: 17,100
Reply with quote  #28 
Quote:
Originally Posted by 3leftturns
Wow... I literally NEVER would have guessed USC as the alma mattress.

Shocked every day


Grad school. Undergrad at GT.
jayrot

Registered:
Posts: 17,100
Reply with quote  #29 
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1janiedough
I think a USC softball program would end up being just above the Stanford softball team should they start one.


Oh come on. USC could do at least as well as Oregon State.
jayrot

Registered:
Posts: 17,100
Reply with quote  #30 
Quote:
Originally Posted by 3leftturns
USC would be a perennial Top 10-20 team within 5 years of inception


Fully agree. At the hands of someone like Cal, they could easily build their recruiting base. Obviously the cream of the crop would still follow the tradition of UCLA and Arizona, but at this point with schools like Cal, Stanford, and ASU on the decline they'd be able to pull some decent recruits based on what I've seen at local travel ball tournaments.
Previous Topic | Next Topic
Print
Reply

Quick Navigation:

Easily create a Forum Website with Website Toolbox.