ADVERTISEMENT

Baseball - Where do we Turn?

You don't need a miraculous turnaround to beat the Citadel and Furman. We're competing in close games, but we need wins.
You don't need a miraculous turnaround to beat the Citadel and Furman. We're competing in close games, but we need wins.
Too much is placed on those loses and it not a good judgement of where we are headed. Many smaller schools have good baseball players and beat good teams but we are rebuilding both physically and mentally. It happens sometimes (ask UVA) who pounded teams and choked when it counted to a no name. Progress in not measured in a couple games it's measure in the desire to win and not liking it when you don't. I'm seeing that in this team but we can't put the cart ahead of the horse.
 
Speaking of scholarship rules, why is it that baseball has around 11 scholarships when there are nine players on the field yet football has 85 scholarship when there are basically 23 positions?
I'm not advocating necessarily for more scholarships for baseball as much as I'm advocating for a reduction in football
 
Where's the old "citadel threw their weekend guy" thread?
Fact is there is parity in baseball. It's driven by the low scholarship rule and frankly It's a good thing.
I think football should also have that same low scholarship limit but that doesn't fit the NCAA's agenda of big $$$$ where the same teams are always strong.
The University of Citadel should NEVER beat the University of South Carolina in sports!! Period!!!!
 
Too much is placed on those loses and it not a good judgement of where we are headed. Many smaller schools have good baseball players and beat good teams but we are rebuilding both physically and mentally. It happens sometimes (ask UVA) who pounded teams and choked when it counted to a no name. Progress in not measured in a couple games it's measure in the desire to win and not liking it when you don't. I'm seeing that in this team but we can't put the cart ahead of the horse.
I stand by my post. We need wins and it should be easier to get wins against inferior teams. Furman and the Citadel are inferior teams.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Legendary Cock
My son played for what you would consider an inferior seem that beat the taters at Doug Kingsmore a few years back. In fact he pitched in that game. It was a great day.
There is extra motivation to beat a big name school. There is also that desire to show the big-name programs that ignored you when you were being recruited at you deserved to be considered. In the end its not about the name on the jersey, its 18 guys on the baseball field.
 
  • Like
Reactions: jimnasium
Too much is placed on those loses and it not a good judgement of where we are headed. Many smaller schools have good baseball players and beat good teams but we are rebuilding both physically and mentally. It happens sometimes (ask UVA) who pounded teams and choked when it counted to a no name. Progress in not measured in a couple games it's measure in the desire to win and not liking it when you don't. I'm seeing that in this team but we can't put the cart ahead of the horse.
THIS. Too many people don't understand how much of a mental game baseball is. Much easier to change physical issues than mental ones, which become ingrained.
 
Recruiting is harder at USC when it comes to baseball. You sign the Nations best then BOOM he turns pro and drops you like a hot tater. It all equals out.
 
Agreed but 85 for football? Cut that back and we wouldn't have to have so many non revenue producing sports to stay "equal"
They aren't going to touch football because keeping that many men's schollies in the equation allows them to add more for women, to keep the numbers in line with the ratio of the student body. Football also pays for said women's sports.
 
Agreed but 85 for football? Cut that back and we wouldn't have to have so many non revenue producing sports to stay "equal"
Football is the money sport....gonna have a hard time convincing schools, ADs and coaches to reduce the number of scholarships for the highest revenue sport to add scholarships to one of the lowest revenue sports. I love college baseball....and would love to see it happen, but fiscally....no way.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Gamecockben1979
I am not advocating that any sport gets eliminated but speaking fiscally, as we are, you would not have to have so many non-revenue women's sports if the number of scholarships in football were reduced.
How is it fair that a guy that never sees the football field gets a full ride while a baseball player that plays every day may get a half a scholarship if he's lucky?
 
I am not advocating that any sport gets eliminated but speaking fiscally, as we are, you would not have to have so many non-revenue women's sports if the number of scholarships in football were reduced.
How is it fair that a guy that never sees the football field gets a full ride while a baseball player that plays every day may get a half a scholarship if he's lucky?
It's not fair. It's all about the money.

And as the father of two daughters, I want more non-revenue women's sports. One of mine could be getting a golf scholarship at a smaller school next year.....keeping finger's crossed as she has already gotten a few smaller schools interested.
 
It's not fair. It's all about the money.

And as the father of two daughters, I want more non-revenue women's sports. One of mine could be getting a golf scholarship at a smaller school next year.....keeping finger's crossed as she has already gotten a few smaller schools interested.
If she's a golfer, I wish her the best. That goes a long way with me.
 
  • Like
Reactions: rogue cock
It's not fair. It's all about the money.

And as the father of two daughters, I want more non-revenue women's sports. One of mine could be getting a golf scholarship at a smaller school next year.....keeping finger's crossed as she has already gotten a few smaller schools interested.

I agree and I hope it works out. Mine went to Winthrop the same way with baseball.
Anyway though what other reason is there for 85 schollies besides wanting to create the haves and have not schools in football?
Thus it makes for more money in fewer schools which makes the NCAA life easier.
I guarantee you that if they reduced the number of football scholarships it would change the face of college football. Some of these full ride guys that don't play would choose to go somewhere else. Parity would develop
 
I agree and I hope it works out. Mine went to Winthrop the same way with baseball.
Anyway though what other reason is there for 85 schollies besides wanting to create the haves and have not schools in football?
Thus it makes for more money in fewer schools which makes the NCAA life easier.
I guarantee you that if they reduced the number of football scholarships it would change the face of college football. Some of these full ride guys that don't play would choose to go somewhere else. Parity would develop
Don't disagree at all.
 
Don't disagree at all.

It's a sad thing to see and if you are "lucky" enough to see the NCAA in action, it will be evident quickly that what started out as a great mission has turned into nothing more than a money grab.
Some smaller schools still get it but in the end, the NCAA is all about itself, not the kids.
 
She loves it....used to take her to the driving range starting when she was 5 or 6. My other daughter is a lacrosse player....she's my tomboy...loves the running and contact.
Let us know where she lands. I'd like to follow her progress. We have a young lady from our area, Emily Cox, who attended Andrew Jackson in Kershaw and is a freshman on the women's golf team at Southern Miss. this year. I'm expecting big things from her.
 
Time to fire the guy. Sad to say but it is what it is, I mean 4 losses to in state schools? Now we go out and hire the best coach in the country. It's that simple

Not insinuating it's time to fire Kingston. Just sharing some concerns. The knock on Holbrook was that he was a horrible in-game coach, but a great recruiter. If we have such great players, you tell me where the problem is right now...
very little development past couple years. Impressed with Coach K post game talk. He has the desire to win and will eventually spread to his players in the next 2 years. JMO however and I am no means a coach.
 
Half the people wanted him to bunt the run in the other half her worried about the short fence.
The man coaching his team doesn’t have a damn chance. You just can’t satisfy stupid
 
  • Like
Reactions: caigmaster
Recruting a


Well apparently they ain't at this point.
South Carolina has a more impressive program and fans should expect them to beat those teams every year.

That's fine if you don't share my opinion, but it's what I believe to be true.
 
very little development past couple years. Impressed with Coach K post game talk. He has the desire to win and will eventually spread to his players in the next 2 years. JMO however and I am no means a coach.
I'm kidding around for the record. Attempting to show how ridiculous some of these reactionaries are through hyperbole
 
At some point you have to bench the guys not hitting. At least for a weekend series. If the replacement does better, leave him in. If he doesn't, then at least when the other guy comes back in he will have a fire lit under him.

We may need to face the fact that Holbrook wasn't a great recruiter, so we have less than average players. Talent can be fickle. Baseball is the most humbling sport. One day you look great - Sat. vs Florida, then within three days you lose to an "inferior team".

One thing the NC teams had was the will to win. Win anyway was the mantra and the team was cocky about it. It also helped to have Jackie, Michael Roth, Christian, etc. as those are MLB talents. When Roth took the mound, the team won. Period. Runner on 2nd in a close game in the late innings and we found a way to get him in. Price would shut the door after the 8th inning. I could go on but i think everyone gets my point.

Something is missing with the baseball program... the swag, the smart base running, ability to bunt, ability to hit a 3 run bomb. I haven't seen it with USC baseball in 5 years.
 
I believe we can help turn this program around by encouraging Coach Kingston to recruit more Seventh Day Adventists, Mormans, Dreamers and homosexuals. :D
 
The application of Title IX.

Simply not true. The NCAA can apportion more scholarships to baseball and less to football And basketball and still be in compliance with Title IX. It is an NCAA preference towards the two sports that actually generate revenue.
 
Yall trip me out, calling for Kingstons head after 21 games with players who were coached to do things a certain way for the last 2-3 years. Give this guy time to get these kids to buy into his philosophy and to get his own players.
 
Simply not true. The NCAA can apportion more scholarships to baseball and less to football And basketball and still be in compliance with Title IX. It is an NCAA preference towards the two sports that actually generate revenue.

It did start with the application of Title IX to college athletics. No Title IX, no issues regarding scholarship numbers.

From the NCAA -
"Scholarships: Title IX requires that female and male student-athletes receive athletics scholarship dollars proportional to their participation;"

Given that football has 85 scholarships, it unfairly skews the numbers in favor of men's sports (given that there is no female equivalent to football - though Title IX does not require equivalent sports be offered). Therefore, scholarships are taken away from the other men's sports to give equal scholarships to women's sports.

You are basically saying the same thing that others of us have said in this post. As has been said in this thread, the NCAA will NOT take scholarships from football to give to other men's sports because football pays the bills for said men's and women's sports.
 
Last edited:
No not crazy to question it, just silly. We hire a new coach and the fans want instant gratification but it doesn't happen that way in the real world. And when it doesn't happen overnight the fans go off the deep end. The worse thing that can happen in any Carolina sport is success, it creates the monster of false reality forever. Actually, the broken record talk begins with premature chatter about Ray not hiring the right guy etc. The record isn't where some think it should be but there are signs of heading in the right direction of you stop to see. No coach is hired to do miracles in half a season that's why they have five year contracts. We've be IN nearly every game we have played and that's a good signal.
Mind. Blown.

Quick question, Jim: Did you defend Holbrook until the bitter end?
 
We've had some great years. No doubt. But we won 2 national championships after Ray adopted a more smallball approach. He admitted as much. So it didn't matter what size field we had when we won big.

We hit 97 home runs in 2010. In 2011, the bats were changed and we hit 46. Ray didn't "adopt" the small ball theory. He was forced to change the way the game was played and adapted well.
 
We hit 97 home runs in 2010. In 2011, the bats were changed and we hit 46. Ray didn't "adopt" the small ball theory. He was forced to change the way the game was played and adapted well.
I appreciate you refreshing my memory on that. You are spot on. I guess adapting to the new bat might be a better description... at least on the repeat. With that said, in 2010 our number of sacs nearly doubled 2009. It wouldn't be too far fetched to say he may have been preparing for the new bat as early as then. I guess all that went out the window when they changed to ball in 2015. Holbrook may have pretty much abandoned smallball in 2014 in preparation of that. Couple of years later, we looked totally inept at it.
 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT