Unfair advantage?
Is USC's tuition too high to compete in sports?
Q: Don't you think that an expensive private school like USC is at a huge disadvantage in baseball due to the limited number (11.78) of scholarships? Most schools split scholarships, but this still makes SC over $25K a year for a player. Compare that cost to a Fullerton, Long Beach, ASU, or UCLA. I guess SC should only recruit rich kids
A: This is not just a problem for baseball. It also affects track and field and men's volleyball among others. It's really difficult when you have 11-12 scholarships and you offer a kid a half-scholarship, which means he pays $25,000. At UCLA or Cal State Fullerton, it's far less if you get a partial. In track, schools like UCLA can offer to pay for a kid's books and they think they are getting rewarded. At USC, paying for books won't even make a recruit smile. That's why Mike Gillespie's success at USC in baseball was so impressive. He did it despite the scholarship limitation and despite losing top recruits to the baseball draft.
And it's why when USC wins the dual meet in men's track, Ron Allice should get a raise and the UCLA coach should probably be fired.
I'm thankful for the high tuition at USC, giving CS Fullerton and the Big West a chance at least in baseball. Go Titans!
Scott, thanks for the answer. Allice was at a track camp my daughter attended and he said they don't turn anyone away from walking on. This is mainly due to the dual meets. Last year he had people score points against UCLA that came out only for that dual meet. I think a band member placed in the pole vault.
The baseball thing doesn't make sense. SC was a powerhouse just a few years ago. I am not sure what has happened over the last few years. Another big thing to consider on college baseball is that the best of the best recruits go pro. Others sports are not as impacted by that as baseball.
I also think that there is a ton of baseball talent in So Cal. SC has not done a good job of finding the best talent. Not sure how much time is spent in the recruit evaluation process, but that would appear to be an issue for SC over the last few years.
That excuse seems to make sense, but how does Stanford keep doing so well? And how is a private school like Rice a national power? They have the same obstacles as SC.