Water Polo Planet

A very reasonable request has been made to not clutter the NCAA thread with further discussion of the "foreigners" issue.

But I thought a response to Valkyrie's last question was warranted.

He asked how I'd feel if Duke (a private university that, like Stanford, can do what it wants and not risk being accused of squandering public resources) had a bunch of foreign players on its basketball team. Duke's current roster has a Croatian and an Aussie on it. Other ACC teams seem to be playing that game too. https://www.dukebasketballreport.com/2016/1/16/10778602/international-players-starting-in-the-acc

Does the NCAA place any limits on foreign players in basketball, soccer, hockey, or any other sport? Apparently not.

Actually, what he asked was: What if this was the basketball roster at UCLA, DUKE, would there be fan support? TV dollars?

Anyone remember Hakeem Olajuwon? Dikembe Mutumbo? Patrick Ewing? Tim Duncan (who many of us would have loved to see play water polo)?
I seem to recall some fan support when those guys were playing college ball, and I think they filled a few seats and sold some TV ads.

If we want limits on foreign players, that should be the policy for all sports, not just polo.

I don't think that's a good policy, and even if it was, I don't think the NCAA is likely to go there. Feel free to argue otherwise, but please do a little research before doing so.

Ehpolo, a poor comparison when you have 1 foreigner on college or pro basketball Team, but when all but 1 of first team All-League Roster are foreigners and the majority of the second team is, this is not serving the community nor the sport of USA water polo, or the native-born Californian's, It is not all about tax dollars, but is it serving the "Greater public good of its citizenry / society, nor the sport of WP if we can't develop our own talent in sports and professional fields. You can't compare Soccer to Water Polo( as many do on this board) as USA Soccer is never a contender for a World Title,( and won't be for 10-20-30 years, until Robots are allowed to play the game) but for those newbies on the board, the USA was a contender on the World stage in Water Polo since 1924 when they won the Bronze in Paris with Tarzan, himself competing, (Johnny Weissmuller) the US was World Champion runner-up in '84, '88', 2008.

Show me one sport in the U.S. where a league is dominant by the majority of "non-US born" individuals. Polo20Polo completely misses the mark with European/Middle Eastern Pro Basketball teams-- IT IS STIPULATED HOW MANY NON-Homegrown individuals can play on a team. If it wasn't many, of the teams could be dominated by American players. But you can't have more than maybe 2 American's or Brazilian on these professional Basketball teams. Like I pointed out-- Why call it USA WaterPolo--

If the foreigners are better players they deserve to be listed 1st team! The only way the US players will get better is by playing with and against better players. Who cares where they were born! No player deserves to be 1st team or any team if their play doesn’t back it up. What’s next .... participation medal for our college players? Real Life doesn’t work like that! The bottom line is Serbia, Croatia, Italy & other countries have & produce better age group development programs for their Boys.

We keep seeing the argument that 'foreigners' are taking away spots that taxpayers should get. From what I can see, only 8% of the UC budget (for all Universities) comes from public appropriations. In fact, more revenue is generated via tuition and fees than from public appropriations according to the financial data (if I am interpreting it correctly): https://www.universityofcalifornia.edu/ ... pense-data

We've also had the discussion about where money for students comes from - and little of it comes from taxpayer funds. If not scholarships (most are academic), then the money generally comes from grants, loans and family bank accounts.

The only thing we are left with is the issue of whether UC/Cal State school admissions should be only for California students or not. If so, then how can we justify students from other states being admitted when so many California students are rejected? And what about private Universities, since they are funded without taxpayer revenues. If not for Californians only, then we are left with the argument of US vs non-US students, which becomes a nationalistic argument that cannot be won by reason - either you are a nationalist or you are not.

Presuming you are OK with some percentage of the student population being from outside the US, how can you put restrictions on whether those students can participate in any given sport? If they have the skills, should they not be able to participate? Would you restrict the number that can participate in any other activities - whether it be the arts, the sciences, etc.? If not, why not?

In the end, it is an emotional argument. Those who already know the 'answer' will never admit to having a bad argument no matter how many rebuttals are made. For the principal individual making this argument, it has morphed from being about taxpayers funding the students, to taxpayers funding the institution to being about the good ole USA as each argument has been refuted. Emotional pleas cannot be won via rational discussion, as reason is always waved aside.

The fact is, college is a business. Those running the institutions are doing it for money. While they will want to keep the general public happy, in the end they will engage in whatever practices that will ensure they get the revenues they want - regardless of what geographic location the money originates from.

Valkyrie wrote:Show me one sport in the U.S. where a league is dominant by the majority of "non-US born" individuals.

Ummm, NHL?

MLB is getting there, 30% at present.

Valkyrie wrote:when you have 1 foreigner on college or pro basketball Team, but when all but 1 of first team All-League Roster are foreigners.

Confused by this.

If you are referring to the MPSF weren't 3 of the 7 All MPSF first team native born Americans? And 4 of 7 on the second?

http://grfx.cstv.com/photos/schools/mps ... l-mpsf.pdf

GoBears! wrote:

Valkyrie wrote:when you have 1 foreigner on college or pro basketball Team, but when all but 1 of first team All-League Roster are foreigners.

Confused by this.

If you are referring to the MPSF weren't 3 of the 7 All MPSF first team native born Americans? And 4 of 7 on the second?

http://grfx.cstv.com/photos/schools/mps ... l-mpsf.pdf

I think that he was referring to the GCC where the Player of the Year, both Co-Newcomers of the Year and 6 of the 7 First Team players were foreigners.

You want to know what's really funny about this conversation? I was just remembering back to the days when one of the primary anti-foreign voices posting here used to post under a different screen name and consistently referred to his son as "the Euro". What happened?

hmmm wrote:You want to know what's really funny about this conversation? I was just remembering back to the days when one of the primary anti-foreign voices posting here used to post under a different screen name and consistently referred to his son as "the Euro". What happened?

Same poster, different name.

Rbpolo0414 wrote:

hmmm wrote:You want to know what's really funny about this conversation? I was just remembering back to the days when one of the primary anti-foreign voices posting here used to post under a different screen name and consistently referred to his son as "the Euro". What happened?

Same poster, different name.

That happens a lot on WPP. It's pretty easy though, to see the forest through the trees. Also, I say (about foreign-born water polo players)...it's just a part of reality that's here to stay. Remember: "Competition is always a good thing".

Why is this always a topic of debate? It's pretty simple if you ask me. Foreigners are good for the game. Period. I've been fortunate enough to have played with many throughout my career and you know what, they only made me better. It is a good experience for them to come from overseas and have the opportunity to obtain an American education, as it is a good experience for their domestic teammates here to learn from them not only in the water, but also make international networking connections through them as well. Those who think otherwise are parents who are unhappy with their child's talent and playing time (or lack thereof).

improvethegame wrote:Why is this always a topic of debate? It's pretty simple if you ask me. Foreigners are good for the game. Period. I've been fortunate enough to have played with many throughout my career and you know what, they only made me better. It is a good experience for them to come from overseas and have the opportunity to obtain an American education, as it is a good experience for their domestic teammates here to learn from them not only in the water, but also make international networking connections through them as well. Those who think otherwise are parents who are unhappy with their child's talent and playing time (or lack thereof).

Exactly. Thank you!

Valkyrie wrote:Show me one sport in the U.S. where a league is dominant by the majority of "non-US born" individuals. Polo20Polo completely misses the mark with European/Middle Eastern Pro Basketball teams-- IT IS STIPULATED HOW MANY NON-Homegrown individuals can play on a team. If it wasn't many, of the teams could be dominated by American players. But you can't have more than maybe 2 American's or Brazilian on these professional Basketball teams. Like I pointed out-- Why call it USA WaterPolo--

http://hockeynow.ca/college/makar-headl ... grad-class

NCAA Hockey = 501 Canadians

Edit: It appears there are 60 D1 Hockey programs meaning that we have an average of 8.35 per team

At some level, of course foreigners help not only the teams but also the elite US players on the roster.

At another - I think it's around 50% of the recruits - "good" HS athletes are knocked out of participation altogether and displaced in the admissions game. 'Great' athletes must find other schools. This ultimately does hurt the US national team, as evidenced in other sports. The Ben Hallocks will always be admitted to Stanford and play on a national level. But the supporting cast does not get a chance to develop at a high level on an A-plus team. If CIF 2nd teamers (broad example) want to keep playing polo, they must join weaker programs. Ultimately the pool of talent is drained over time. And late bloomers go unidentified.

Regarding taxes and the UC system, the more specific point for polo is that college programs are by far and away the biggest training spend after parents. It is the US transition to the elite ranks, absent a club system. And it is a zero sum game.

REGULAR SEASON CHAMPIONS
UNIVERSITY OF THE PACIFIC
CONFERENCE TOURNAMENT CHAMPIONS

UNIVERSITY OF THE PACIFIC

PLAYER OF THE YEAR
NAME CLASS POS SCHOOL HOMETOWN
Luke Pavillard SO ATT Pacific Perth, Australia

NEWCOMER OF THE YEAR
NAME CLASS POS SCHOOL HOMETOWN
Jacob Mercep FR ATT San Jose State Dubrovnik, Croatia
Fynn Schuetze FR ATT UC Irvine Hildesheim, Germany

FIRST-TEAM GCC ALL-CONFERENCE
NAME CLASS POS SCHOOL HOMETOWN
Engin Ege Colak SO CTR Pacific Istanbul, Turkey
Reed Cotterill SR UTL UCSB Sydney, Australia
Duncan Lynde SR CTR Long Beach State Laguna Beach, CA
Matej Matijevic SR GK UC Irvine Zagreb, Croatia
Lovre Milos SR ATT UC Irvine Zagreb, Croatia
Luke Pavillard SO ATT Pacific Perth, Australia
Mark Urban SR ATT Pepperdine Budapest, Hungary

SwimCoach wrote:

GoBears! wrote:

Valkyrie wrote:when you have 1 foreigner on college or pro basketball Team, but when all but 1 of first team All-League Roster are foreigners.

Confused by this.

If you are referring to the MPSF weren't 3 of the 7 All MPSF first team native born Americans? And 4 of 7 on the second?

http://grfx.cstv.com/photos/schools/mps ... l-mpsf.pdf

I think that he was referring to the GCC where the Player of the Year, both Co-Newcomers of the Year and 6 of the 7 First Team players were foreigners.