- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Mandatory Pitch Counts for College Pitchers?
Posted on 6/12/13 at 2:20 pm
Posted on 6/12/13 at 2:20 pm
Trying to kill some time until things get going Saturday.
For a little background:
This topic came up during the Supers when UNC coach John Fox put in Kent Emanuel a day after he threw 124 pitches in a start. He let him go for another 51. Emanuel was the third round pick of the Astros in this years draft. Kyle Peterson, an ESPN analyst covering the games, made the argument for mandary pitch counts in the college game (much like they currently have in Little League and some high school associations) to help protect the arms of athletes who will rely on them for the foreseeable future.
Here are two articles recently written taking opposing sides:
For
Against
I've been unfortunate enough to require Tommy John surgery forcing me to take a fifth year (csb), so I have a pretty strong opinion on the topic that I'll save for later in the thread.
So what say you?
For a little background:
This topic came up during the Supers when UNC coach John Fox put in Kent Emanuel a day after he threw 124 pitches in a start. He let him go for another 51. Emanuel was the third round pick of the Astros in this years draft. Kyle Peterson, an ESPN analyst covering the games, made the argument for mandary pitch counts in the college game (much like they currently have in Little League and some high school associations) to help protect the arms of athletes who will rely on them for the foreseeable future.
Here are two articles recently written taking opposing sides:
For
Against
I've been unfortunate enough to require Tommy John surgery forcing me to take a fifth year (csb), so I have a pretty strong opinion on the topic that I'll save for later in the thread.
So what say you?
22
Posted on 6/12/13 at 2:21 pm to ell_13
nice thread, btw....
Posted on 6/12/13 at 2:21 pm to ell_13
I'm agin it.
Posted on 6/12/13 at 2:21 pm to ell_13
Posted on 6/12/13 at 2:22 pm to ell_13
I'm against it. Coaches should be smart, but not mandated by some arbitrary limit. If a coach abuses kids, the good players will go elsewhere.
Posted on 6/12/13 at 2:22 pm to ell_13
For it. A good coach should already have the ability to put the athletes future over the current result, but some coaches do not.
I dont think it should be strict but I do believe after pitching over 100 pitches someone should not come back less than 2 days later and pitch 50.
I dont think it should be strict but I do believe after pitching over 100 pitches someone should not come back less than 2 days later and pitch 50.
Posted on 6/12/13 at 2:23 pm to Choupique19
quote:
I'm against it. Coaches should be smart, but not mandated by some arbitrary limit. If a coach abuses kids, the good players will go elsewhere.
This
Posted on 6/12/13 at 2:24 pm to Choupique19
Against. Kids won't go play for a coach who throws them too much. In the UNC example, all the kid had to do was say his arm wasn't ready. They don't need to be babied.
Posted on 6/12/13 at 2:24 pm to SouthOfSouth
so what is the primary limit? what is the appropriate time frame to wait if thrown over X # of pitches?
I'll go ahead an answer briefly... against.
I'll go ahead an answer briefly... against.
Posted on 6/12/13 at 2:27 pm to ell_13
College coaches make money on those arms. you can't restrict their usage.
Posted on 6/12/13 at 2:28 pm to Choupique19
quote:
I'm against it. Coaches should be smart, but not mandated by some arbitrary limit. If a coach abuses kids, the good players will go elsewhere.
Pretty much hit the nail on the head there
Posted on 6/12/13 at 2:32 pm to Tigah in the ATL
quote:
College coaches make money on those arms. you can't restrict their usage.
Not saying I don't agree, but wouldn't that be an argument for? Come the end of the season, they'll do whatever it to secure their paycheck, even at the expense of a player trying to make their own money off their arm.
Posted on 6/12/13 at 2:32 pm to Cap Crunch
quote:
Coaches should be smart, but not mandated by some arbitrary limit. If a coach abuses kids, the good players will go elsewhere.
what about bad coaches that ruin players? I'm neither for nor against but i think this rule wouldn't change how "good coaches" coach as opposed to keeping bad coaches from riding someone's arm off.
$10 says clay dirks is for it.
Posted on 6/12/13 at 2:34 pm to poochie
I'd be for it but it has some be something extreme like 130-140 pitches.
Posted on 6/12/13 at 2:37 pm to poochie
The only way I could be for it is if the limit is a number that everyone would agree is a ridiculous number.
150 live game pitches across 3 calendar days seems reasonably ridiculous (if that makes any sense).
150 live game pitches across 3 calendar days seems reasonably ridiculous (if that makes any sense).
Posted on 6/12/13 at 2:37 pm to ell_13
the for article is alot better and better argued but I'm against this.
Posted on 6/12/13 at 2:40 pm to catholictigerfan
quote:
the for article is alot better and better argued but I'm against this.
Why?
Posted on 6/12/13 at 2:41 pm to catholictigerfan
I am against it. Right now, coaches, at least the good ones, work with pitchers to figure out what their limits are and how they bounce back, etc. There is a lot of 'feel' to it, but there has to be, because everyone is different.
If you put pitch count limits on guys, then you'll have coaches strictly working by the limits whether or not it's in the best interest of the kid.
If you put pitch count limits on guys, then you'll have coaches strictly working by the limits whether or not it's in the best interest of the kid.
Posted on 6/12/13 at 2:41 pm to barry
quote:
but it has some be something extreme like 130-140 pitches.
I definitely don't think there should be a pitch count in one game. The kid from Southern that threw 230-240 pitches against us a few years back wasn't really putting any extra stress on his arm. He couldn't have broken glass on a frozen day.
If there is any type of restriction it should be a certain number of days before a pitcher that has thrown X number of pitches can pitch again. With that being said, I don't really agree with it anyway. A pitching coach and a coach should know whether or not a kid can pitch again.
Posted on 6/12/13 at 2:42 pm to AstroTiger
quote:
The only way I could be for it is if the limit is a number that everyone would agree is a ridiculous number.
150 live game pitches across 3 calendar days seems reasonably ridiculous (if that makes any sense).
Agree with this, because everybody is different and their bodies will recover at different rates. So it is hard to have a standard for everyone.
This post was edited on 6/12/13 at 3:11 pm
Page 1 of 4
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News