Metro United

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
A stat line shows just one measure of success. There are many other factors to the game to also be considered. Success at one aspect of the game does make up for other possible weaknesses. A 3-1 loss is a stat line that demonstrates other weaknesses.

It is a team game. If one wants to believe scoring one goal for happened solely based on one playup then by that same logic it could be safe to consider that three goals against could also be attributed to that one playup. It works both ways.

Perhaps the better way to look at it is that the 04 team is strong enough to allow a playup to have a level of success versus believing the success to be the playups and only the playups success. When a team loses it is in poor taste beat ones chest about scoring one goal and doing so demonstrates selfishness.


Overall run of play was fairly even, but LISC presents a unique challenge. Their scoring is heavily dependent on the athleticism of one player (#7), and when she is having a good day she can dominate a game with unicorn levels of size, pace, and ball striking. She finished in the top-ten in goal scoring for all of the DA last year, and scored two against MU on Saturday. Yes, the 1-3 loss demonstrates an "other weakness", but MU will not be the only team to demonstrate that particular weakness in handling her this year.

They had a good game against FCV too. All the LISC teams in multiple age groups competed well this weekend. It's a bit overstating to say they just had one single good player and that's the difference.

Otherwise, we'd be saying 04 team just doesn't have a very good forward.

Did you actually watch either of the '04 FCV-LISC or '04 MU-LISC games this weekend or are you just comparing scorelines? At the '04 level, that one player has a disproportionate impact on the scoreline and can turn an evenly fought match into what looks like a blowout with just a few individual flashes of brilliance. With her off the field LISC is a completely different team, and one that MU has historically matched up well against. My guess is you simply haven't seen her play.

I didn't see the FCV game (obviously). They beat us last year with exactly the same score, 3-1. So what happened there?

Um... She sat out the first 48 minutes and LISC was losing 0-1. Then she subbed in and scored 3 goals in the final 32 minutes. Final score 3-1.

Game report shows her scoring in minute 1 and minute 79?

How did she score from the bench? And how did she assume another players name?

Wasn't talking about this year's game. Her 32-minute hattrick was last year, in response to the poster's question "so what happended there"...

Net result was the same. Tell us now how a playup made a difference.

The only difference maker is on the other team.

Exactly. And as a result, it will impact who they play in showcases and in the Da cup. When we go, because we are at the bottom of the conference, we play bottom of the conference. Have you ever watched two top DA teams play each other? It's a whole other level. It's good soccer. Being a difference maker is also what makes you recruitable as a player.

Don't get too down on yourself. Your DD at FCV may not be the bottom of the conference. It's only one game in. On the Metro side, these girls, whether play ups or not, are being challenged. That is far better than riding the bench or fighting for playing time.

Huh? I think you meant to reply to someone else about something else. I'm not talking about winning at all costs or choosing to ride the bench to be on a winning team. I'm talking about the value of creating strong teams with the available player pool and with giving players time.

Easy example: the 06 roster has plenty of room for a talented 07. She could be a difference maker there and she would get challenged. In fact, the 05 team, which is MU's best, needed a goal or 2. The 05 on the 04 team could be a difference maker on that team, still be very challenged, and that team could become a play off team that now plays against better. It could easily be in the player's interest to get back into a rhythm of scoring a lot of goals.

That's what most clubs do and it's objectively good development.

Ok. I get what you are saying. Fair enough. Would it have hurt the 04s to miss those 2 players?

I don't think it would have hurt the 04s. I'm presenting another way of thinking about all this. That's all.

Sure. Were you at any of the MU games? Anything you can share about the games beyond the stat sheet to prove it?

Yeah, I would say the 05s had plenty of opportunities to score but they didnt have someone to finish it off. So in my mind, the score doesn't reflect the level of play. And the goal that went in, I think the goal keeper coach can teach the 05 keeper how to save a shot like that. The goalie is good. I'm saying though this is an instructional moment. That's more than enough.

My comments are constructive and not intended as a beat down on any player. And after having watched many games, last year too.

Would you say MU was the better team but just didn’t take their chances?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
A stat line shows just one measure of success. There are many other factors to the game to also be considered. Success at one aspect of the game does make up for other possible weaknesses. A 3-1 loss is a stat line that demonstrates other weaknesses.

It is a team game. If one wants to believe scoring one goal for happened solely based on one playup then by that same logic it could be safe to consider that three goals against could also be attributed to that one playup. It works both ways.

Perhaps the better way to look at it is that the 04 team is strong enough to allow a playup to have a level of success versus believing the success to be the playups and only the playups success. When a team loses it is in poor taste beat ones chest about scoring one goal and doing so demonstrates selfishness.


Overall run of play was fairly even, but LISC presents a unique challenge. Their scoring is heavily dependent on the athleticism of one player (#7), and when she is having a good day she can dominate a game with unicorn levels of size, pace, and ball striking. She finished in the top-ten in goal scoring for all of the DA last year, and scored two against MU on Saturday. Yes, the 1-3 loss demonstrates an "other weakness", but MU will not be the only team to demonstrate that particular weakness in handling her this year.

They had a good game against FCV too. All the LISC teams in multiple age groups competed well this weekend. It's a bit overstating to say they just had one single good player and that's the difference.

Otherwise, we'd be saying 04 team just doesn't have a very good forward.

Did you actually watch either of the '04 FCV-LISC or '04 MU-LISC games this weekend or are you just comparing scorelines? At the '04 level, that one player has a disproportionate impact on the scoreline and can turn an evenly fought match into what looks like a blowout with just a few individual flashes of brilliance. With her off the field LISC is a completely different team, and one that MU has historically matched up well against. My guess is you simply haven't seen her play.

I didn't see the FCV game (obviously). They beat us last year with exactly the same score, 3-1. So what happened there?

Um... She sat out the first 48 minutes and LISC was losing 0-1. Then she subbed in and scored 3 goals in the final 32 minutes. Final score 3-1.

Game report shows her scoring in minute 1 and minute 79?

How did she score from the bench? And how did she assume another players name?

Wasn't talking about this year's game. Her 32-minute hattrick was last year, in response to the poster's question "so what happended there"...

Net result was the same. Tell us now how a playup made a difference.

The only difference maker is on the other team.

Exactly. And as a result, it will impact who they play in showcases and in the Da cup. When we go, because we are at the bottom of the conference, we play bottom of the conference. Have you ever watched two top DA teams play each other? It's a whole other level. It's good soccer. Being a difference maker is also what makes you recruitable as a player.

Don't get too down on yourself. Your DD at FCV may not be the bottom of the conference. It's only one game in. On the Metro side, these girls, whether play ups or not, are being challenged. That is far better than riding the bench or fighting for playing time.

Huh? I think you meant to reply to someone else about something else. I'm not talking about winning at all costs or choosing to ride the bench to be on a winning team. I'm talking about the value of creating strong teams with the available player pool and with giving players time.

Easy example: the 06 roster has plenty of room for a talented 07. She could be a difference maker there and she would get challenged. In fact, the 05 team, which is MU's best, needed a goal or 2. The 05 on the 04 team could be a difference maker on that team, still be very challenged, and that team could become a play off team that now plays against better. It could easily be in the player's interest to get back into a rhythm of scoring a lot of goals.

That's what most clubs do and it's objectively good development.

Ok. I get what you are saying. Fair enough. Would it have hurt the 04s to miss those 2 players?

I don't think it would have hurt the 04s. I'm presenting another way of thinking about all this. That's all.

Sure. Were you at any of the MU games? Anything you can share about the games beyond the stat sheet to prove it?

Yeah, I would say the 05s had plenty of opportunities to score but they didnt have someone to finish it off. So in my mind, the score doesn't reflect the level of play. And the goal that went in, I think the goal keeper coach can teach the 05 keeper how to save a shot like that. The goalie is good. I'm saying though this is an instructional moment. That's more than enough.

My comments are constructive and not intended as a beat down on any player. And after having watched many games, last year too.

Would you say MU was the better team but just didn’t take their chances?

Yes. They’re always the better team even though they lose 90% of their games. They develop better than everyone else even though there is no evidence of that. They are always armed with justifications for losing games, losing players, roster sizes, play ups, partner clubs etc. Save your time discussing. MU is doing everything right at all times - just accept it and move on.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
A stat line shows just one measure of success. There are many other factors to the game to also be considered. Success at one aspect of the game does make up for other possible weaknesses. A 3-1 loss is a stat line that demonstrates other weaknesses.

It is a team game. If one wants to believe scoring one goal for happened solely based on one playup then by that same logic it could be safe to consider that three goals against could also be attributed to that one playup. It works both ways.

Perhaps the better way to look at it is that the 04 team is strong enough to allow a playup to have a level of success versus believing the success to be the playups and only the playups success. When a team loses it is in poor taste beat ones chest about scoring one goal and doing so demonstrates selfishness.


Overall run of play was fairly even, but LISC presents a unique challenge. Their scoring is heavily dependent on the athleticism of one player (#7), and when she is having a good day she can dominate a game with unicorn levels of size, pace, and ball striking. She finished in the top-ten in goal scoring for all of the DA last year, and scored two against MU on Saturday. Yes, the 1-3 loss demonstrates an "other weakness", but MU will not be the only team to demonstrate that particular weakness in handling her this year.

They had a good game against FCV too. All the LISC teams in multiple age groups competed well this weekend. It's a bit overstating to say they just had one single good player and that's the difference.

Otherwise, we'd be saying 04 team just doesn't have a very good forward.

Did you actually watch either of the '04 FCV-LISC or '04 MU-LISC games this weekend or are you just comparing scorelines? At the '04 level, that one player has a disproportionate impact on the scoreline and can turn an evenly fought match into what looks like a blowout with just a few individual flashes of brilliance. With her off the field LISC is a completely different team, and one that MU has historically matched up well against. My guess is you simply haven't seen her play.

I didn't see the FCV game (obviously). They beat us last year with exactly the same score, 3-1. So what happened there?

Um... She sat out the first 48 minutes and LISC was losing 0-1. Then she subbed in and scored 3 goals in the final 32 minutes. Final score 3-1.

Game report shows her scoring in minute 1 and minute 79?

How did she score from the bench? And how did she assume another players name?

Wasn't talking about this year's game. Her 32-minute hattrick was last year, in response to the poster's question "so what happended there"...

Net result was the same. Tell us now how a playup made a difference.

The only difference maker is on the other team.

Exactly. And as a result, it will impact who they play in showcases and in the Da cup. When we go, because we are at the bottom of the conference, we play bottom of the conference. Have you ever watched two top DA teams play each other? It's a whole other level. It's good soccer. Being a difference maker is also what makes you recruitable as a player.

Don't get too down on yourself. Your DD at FCV may not be the bottom of the conference. It's only one game in. On the Metro side, these girls, whether play ups or not, are being challenged. That is far better than riding the bench or fighting for playing time.

Huh? I think you meant to reply to someone else about something else. I'm not talking about winning at all costs or choosing to ride the bench to be on a winning team. I'm talking about the value of creating strong teams with the available player pool and with giving players time.

Easy example: the 06 roster has plenty of room for a talented 07. She could be a difference maker there and she would get challenged. In fact, the 05 team, which is MU's best, needed a goal or 2. The 05 on the 04 team could be a difference maker on that team, still be very challenged, and that team could become a play off team that now plays against better. It could easily be in the player's interest to get back into a rhythm of scoring a lot of goals.

That's what most clubs do and it's objectively good development.

Ok. I get what you are saying. Fair enough. Would it have hurt the 04s to miss those 2 players?

I don't think it would have hurt the 04s. I'm presenting another way of thinking about all this. That's all.

Sure. Were you at any of the MU games? Anything you can share about the games beyond the stat sheet to prove it?

Yeah, I would say the 05s had plenty of opportunities to score but they didnt have someone to finish it off. So in my mind, the score doesn't reflect the level of play. And the goal that went in, I think the goal keeper coach can teach the 05 keeper how to save a shot like that. The goalie is good. I'm saying though this is an instructional moment. That's more than enough.

My comments are constructive and not intended as a beat down on any player. And after having watched many games, last year too.

Would you say MU was the better team but just didn’t take their chances?

Yes. They’re always the better team even though they lose 90% of their games. They develop better than everyone else even though there is no evidence of that. They are always armed with justifications for losing games, losing players, roster sizes, play ups, partner clubs etc. Save your time discussing. MU is doing everything right at all times - just accept it and move on.

The 05 team is a good team. I could see them dominating a game and losing. Best team doesn’t always win. The rest of MU is a circus I realize.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
A stat line shows just one measure of success. There are many other factors to the game to also be considered. Success at one aspect of the game does make up for other possible weaknesses. A 3-1 loss is a stat line that demonstrates other weaknesses.

It is a team game. If one wants to believe scoring one goal for happened solely based on one playup then by that same logic it could be safe to consider that three goals against could also be attributed to that one playup. It works both ways.

Perhaps the better way to look at it is that the 04 team is strong enough to allow a playup to have a level of success versus believing the success to be the playups and only the playups success. When a team loses it is in poor taste beat ones chest about scoring one goal and doing so demonstrates selfishness.


Overall run of play was fairly even, but LISC presents a unique challenge. Their scoring is heavily dependent on the athleticism of one player (#7), and when she is having a good day she can dominate a game with unicorn levels of size, pace, and ball striking. She finished in the top-ten in goal scoring for all of the DA last year, and scored two against MU on Saturday. Yes, the 1-3 loss demonstrates an "other weakness", but MU will not be the only team to demonstrate that particular weakness in handling her this year.

They had a good game against FCV too. All the LISC teams in multiple age groups competed well this weekend. It's a bit overstating to say they just had one single good player and that's the difference.

Otherwise, we'd be saying 04 team just doesn't have a very good forward.

Did you actually watch either of the '04 FCV-LISC or '04 MU-LISC games this weekend or are you just comparing scorelines? At the '04 level, that one player has a disproportionate impact on the scoreline and can turn an evenly fought match into what looks like a blowout with just a few individual flashes of brilliance. With her off the field LISC is a completely different team, and one that MU has historically matched up well against. My guess is you simply haven't seen her play.

I didn't see the FCV game (obviously). They beat us last year with exactly the same score, 3-1. So what happened there?

Um... She sat out the first 48 minutes and LISC was losing 0-1. Then she subbed in and scored 3 goals in the final 32 minutes. Final score 3-1.

Game report shows her scoring in minute 1 and minute 79?

How did she score from the bench? And how did she assume another players name?

Wasn't talking about this year's game. Her 32-minute hattrick was last year, in response to the poster's question "so what happended there"...

Net result was the same. Tell us now how a playup made a difference.

The only difference maker is on the other team.

Exactly. And as a result, it will impact who they play in showcases and in the Da cup. When we go, because we are at the bottom of the conference, we play bottom of the conference. Have you ever watched two top DA teams play each other? It's a whole other level. It's good soccer. Being a difference maker is also what makes you recruitable as a player.

Don't get too down on yourself. Your DD at FCV may not be the bottom of the conference. It's only one game in. On the Metro side, these girls, whether play ups or not, are being challenged. That is far better than riding the bench or fighting for playing time.

This is why MU gets trashed. Same nonsense. Best development around only we have no way of proving it other than posting it on here. Everything is part of the plan.

I think the best measure of MU’s ability to develop players is how hard FCV and other surrounding elite clubs tend to recruit their better players near the end of the year. I’ve seen it happen for two years now and expect it will be the case again at the end of the year

lol. More of the same delusion.

Delusion? How do you explain the former MU players playing on these teams then? Or the parents and coaches reaching out to MU players?

I think it’s you who is deluded.

Why so emotional?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
A stat line shows just one measure of success. There are many other factors to the game to also be considered. Success at one aspect of the game does make up for other possible weaknesses. A 3-1 loss is a stat line that demonstrates other weaknesses.

It is a team game. If one wants to believe scoring one goal for happened solely based on one playup then by that same logic it could be safe to consider that three goals against could also be attributed to that one playup. It works both ways.

Perhaps the better way to look at it is that the 04 team is strong enough to allow a playup to have a level of success versus believing the success to be the playups and only the playups success. When a team loses it is in poor taste beat ones chest about scoring one goal and doing so demonstrates selfishness.


Overall run of play was fairly even, but LISC presents a unique challenge. Their scoring is heavily dependent on the athleticism of one player (#7), and when she is having a good day she can dominate a game with unicorn levels of size, pace, and ball striking. She finished in the top-ten in goal scoring for all of the DA last year, and scored two against MU on Saturday. Yes, the 1-3 loss demonstrates an "other weakness", but MU will not be the only team to demonstrate that particular weakness in handling her this year.

They had a good game against FCV too. All the LISC teams in multiple age groups competed well this weekend. It's a bit overstating to say they just had one single good player and that's the difference.

Otherwise, we'd be saying 04 team just doesn't have a very good forward.

Did you actually watch either of the '04 FCV-LISC or '04 MU-LISC games this weekend or are you just comparing scorelines? At the '04 level, that one player has a disproportionate impact on the scoreline and can turn an evenly fought match into what looks like a blowout with just a few individual flashes of brilliance. With her off the field LISC is a completely different team, and one that MU has historically matched up well against. My guess is you simply haven't seen her play.

I didn't see the FCV game (obviously). They beat us last year with exactly the same score, 3-1. So what happened there?

Um... She sat out the first 48 minutes and LISC was losing 0-1. Then she subbed in and scored 3 goals in the final 32 minutes. Final score 3-1.

Game report shows her scoring in minute 1 and minute 79?

How did she score from the bench? And how did she assume another players name?

Wasn't talking about this year's game. Her 32-minute hattrick was last year, in response to the poster's question "so what happended there"...

Net result was the same. Tell us now how a playup made a difference.

The only difference maker is on the other team.

Exactly. And as a result, it will impact who they play in showcases and in the Da cup. When we go, because we are at the bottom of the conference, we play bottom of the conference. Have you ever watched two top DA teams play each other? It's a whole other level. It's good soccer. Being a difference maker is also what makes you recruitable as a player.

Don't get too down on yourself. Your DD at FCV may not be the bottom of the conference. It's only one game in. On the Metro side, these girls, whether play ups or not, are being challenged. That is far better than riding the bench or fighting for playing time.

This is why MU gets trashed. Same nonsense. Best development around only we have no way of proving it other than posting it on here. Everything is part of the plan.

I think the best measure of MU’s ability to develop players is how hard FCV and other surrounding elite clubs tend to recruit their better players near the end of the year. I’ve seen it happen for two years now and expect it will be the case again at the end of the year

lol. More of the same delusion.

Delusion? How do you explain the former MU players playing on these teams then? Or the parents and coaches reaching out to MU players?

I think it’s you who is deluded.

Why so emotional?

No emotion. Just facts.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
A stat line shows just one measure of success. There are many other factors to the game to also be considered. Success at one aspect of the game does make up for other possible weaknesses. A 3-1 loss is a stat line that demonstrates other weaknesses.

It is a team game. If one wants to believe scoring one goal for happened solely based on one playup then by that same logic it could be safe to consider that three goals against could also be attributed to that one playup. It works both ways.

Perhaps the better way to look at it is that the 04 team is strong enough to allow a playup to have a level of success versus believing the success to be the playups and only the playups success. When a team loses it is in poor taste beat ones chest about scoring one goal and doing so demonstrates selfishness.


Overall run of play was fairly even, but LISC presents a unique challenge. Their scoring is heavily dependent on the athleticism of one player (#7), and when she is having a good day she can dominate a game with unicorn levels of size, pace, and ball striking. She finished in the top-ten in goal scoring for all of the DA last year, and scored two against MU on Saturday. Yes, the 1-3 loss demonstrates an "other weakness", but MU will not be the only team to demonstrate that particular weakness in handling her this year.

They had a good game against FCV too. All the LISC teams in multiple age groups competed well this weekend. It's a bit overstating to say they just had one single good player and that's the difference.

Otherwise, we'd be saying 04 team just doesn't have a very good forward.

Did you actually watch either of the '04 FCV-LISC or '04 MU-LISC games this weekend or are you just comparing scorelines? At the '04 level, that one player has a disproportionate impact on the scoreline and can turn an evenly fought match into what looks like a blowout with just a few individual flashes of brilliance. With her off the field LISC is a completely different team, and one that MU has historically matched up well against. My guess is you simply haven't seen her play.

I didn't see the FCV game (obviously). They beat us last year with exactly the same score, 3-1. So what happened there?

Um... She sat out the first 48 minutes and LISC was losing 0-1. Then she subbed in and scored 3 goals in the final 32 minutes. Final score 3-1.

Game report shows her scoring in minute 1 and minute 79?

How did she score from the bench? And how did she assume another players name?

Wasn't talking about this year's game. Her 32-minute hattrick was last year, in response to the poster's question "so what happended there"...

Net result was the same. Tell us now how a playup made a difference.

The only difference maker is on the other team.

Exactly. And as a result, it will impact who they play in showcases and in the Da cup. When we go, because we are at the bottom of the conference, we play bottom of the conference. Have you ever watched two top DA teams play each other? It's a whole other level. It's good soccer. Being a difference maker is also what makes you recruitable as a player.

Don't get too down on yourself. Your DD at FCV may not be the bottom of the conference. It's only one game in. On the Metro side, these girls, whether play ups or not, are being challenged. That is far better than riding the bench or fighting for playing time.

This is why MU gets trashed. Same nonsense. Best development around only we have no way of proving it other than posting it on here. Everything is part of the plan.

I think the best measure of MU’s ability to develop players is how hard FCV and other surrounding elite clubs tend to recruit their better players near the end of the year. I’ve seen it happen for two years now and expect it will be the case again at the end of the year

+1

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
A stat line shows just one measure of success. There are many other factors to the game to also be considered. Success at one aspect of the game does make up for other possible weaknesses. A 3-1 loss is a stat line that demonstrates other weaknesses.

It is a team game. If one wants to believe scoring one goal for happened solely based on one playup then by that same logic it could be safe to consider that three goals against could also be attributed to that one playup. It works both ways.

Perhaps the better way to look at it is that the 04 team is strong enough to allow a playup to have a level of success versus believing the success to be the playups and only the playups success. When a team loses it is in poor taste beat ones chest about scoring one goal and doing so demonstrates selfishness.


Overall run of play was fairly even, but LISC presents a unique challenge. Their scoring is heavily dependent on the athleticism of one player (#7), and when she is having a good day she can dominate a game with unicorn levels of size, pace, and ball striking. She finished in the top-ten in goal scoring for all of the DA last year, and scored two against MU on Saturday. Yes, the 1-3 loss demonstrates an "other weakness", but MU will not be the only team to demonstrate that particular weakness in handling her this year.

They had a good game against FCV too. All the LISC teams in multiple age groups competed well this weekend. It's a bit overstating to say they just had one single good player and that's the difference.

Otherwise, we'd be saying 04 team just doesn't have a very good forward.

Did you actually watch either of the '04 FCV-LISC or '04 MU-LISC games this weekend or are you just comparing scorelines? At the '04 level, that one player has a disproportionate impact on the scoreline and can turn an evenly fought match into what looks like a blowout with just a few individual flashes of brilliance. With her off the field LISC is a completely different team, and one that MU has historically matched up well against. My guess is you simply haven't seen her play.

I didn't see the FCV game (obviously). They beat us last year with exactly the same score, 3-1. So what happened there?

Um... She sat out the first 48 minutes and LISC was losing 0-1. Then she subbed in and scored 3 goals in the final 32 minutes. Final score 3-1.

Game report shows her scoring in minute 1 and minute 79?

How did she score from the bench? And how did she assume another players name?

Wasn't talking about this year's game. Her 32-minute hattrick was last year, in response to the poster's question "so what happended there"...

Net result was the same. Tell us now how a playup made a difference.

The only difference maker is on the other team.

Exactly. And as a result, it will impact who they play in showcases and in the Da cup. When we go, because we are at the bottom of the conference, we play bottom of the conference. Have you ever watched two top DA teams play each other? It's a whole other level. It's good soccer. Being a difference maker is also what makes you recruitable as a player.

Don't get too down on yourself. Your DD at FCV may not be the bottom of the conference. It's only one game in. On the Metro side, these girls, whether play ups or not, are being challenged. That is far better than riding the bench or fighting for playing time.

Huh? I think you meant to reply to someone else about something else. I'm not talking about winning at all costs or choosing to ride the bench to be on a winning team. I'm talking about the value of creating strong teams with the available player pool and with giving players time.

Easy example: the 06 roster has plenty of room for a talented 07. She could be a difference maker there and she would get challenged. In fact, the 05 team, which is MU's best, needed a goal or 2. The 05 on the 04 team could be a difference maker on that team, still be very challenged, and that team could become a play off team that now plays against better. It could easily be in the player's interest to get back into a rhythm of scoring a lot of goals.

That's what most clubs do and it's objectively good development.

Ok. I get what you are saying. Fair enough. Would it have hurt the 04s to miss those 2 players?

I don't think it would have hurt the 04s. I'm presenting another way of thinking about all this. That's all.

Sure. Were you at any of the MU games? Anything you can share about the games beyond the stat sheet to prove it?

Yeah, I would say the 05s had plenty of opportunities to score but they didnt have someone to finish it off. So in my mind, the score doesn't reflect the level of play. And the goal that went in, I think the goal keeper coach can teach the 05 keeper how to save a shot like that. The goalie is good. I'm saying though this is an instructional moment. That's more than enough.

My comments are constructive and not intended as a beat down on any player. And after having watched many games, last year too.

Would you say MU was the better team but just didn’t take their chances?

Yes. They’re always the better team even though they lose 90% of their games. They develop better than everyone else even though there is no evidence of that. They are always armed with justifications for losing games, losing players, roster sizes, play ups, partner clubs etc. Save your time discussing. MU is doing everything right at all times - just accept it and move on.

The 05 team is a good team. I could see them dominating a game and losing. Best team doesn’t always win. The rest of MU is a circus I realize.

My only thing with calling the rest a circus is some of it is controllable. Like the 04 team hasn't been given a fair chance yet to be successful. Two years of massive, bloated rosters is one example.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
A stat line shows just one measure of success. There are many other factors to the game to also be considered. Success at one aspect of the game does make up for other possible weaknesses. A 3-1 loss is a stat line that demonstrates other weaknesses.

It is a team game. If one wants to believe scoring one goal for happened solely based on one playup then by that same logic it could be safe to consider that three goals against could also be attributed to that one playup. It works both ways.

Perhaps the better way to look at it is that the 04 team is strong enough to allow a playup to have a level of success versus believing the success to be the playups and only the playups success. When a team loses it is in poor taste beat ones chest about scoring one goal and doing so demonstrates selfishness.


Overall run of play was fairly even, but LISC presents a unique challenge. Their scoring is heavily dependent on the athleticism of one player (#7), and when she is having a good day she can dominate a game with unicorn levels of size, pace, and ball striking. She finished in the top-ten in goal scoring for all of the DA last year, and scored two against MU on Saturday. Yes, the 1-3 loss demonstrates an "other weakness", but MU will not be the only team to demonstrate that particular weakness in handling her this year.

They had a good game against FCV too. All the LISC teams in multiple age groups competed well this weekend. It's a bit overstating to say they just had one single good player and that's the difference.

Otherwise, we'd be saying 04 team just doesn't have a very good forward.

Did you actually watch either of the '04 FCV-LISC or '04 MU-LISC games this weekend or are you just comparing scorelines? At the '04 level, that one player has a disproportionate impact on the scoreline and can turn an evenly fought match into what looks like a blowout with just a few individual flashes of brilliance. With her off the field LISC is a completely different team, and one that MU has historically matched up well against. My guess is you simply haven't seen her play.

I didn't see the FCV game (obviously). They beat us last year with exactly the same score, 3-1. So what happened there?

Um... She sat out the first 48 minutes and LISC was losing 0-1. Then she subbed in and scored 3 goals in the final 32 minutes. Final score 3-1.

Game report shows her scoring in minute 1 and minute 79?

How did she score from the bench? And how did she assume another players name?

Wasn't talking about this year's game. Her 32-minute hattrick was last year, in response to the poster's question "so what happended there"...

Net result was the same. Tell us now how a playup made a difference.

The only difference maker is on the other team.

Exactly. And as a result, it will impact who they play in showcases and in the Da cup. When we go, because we are at the bottom of the conference, we play bottom of the conference. Have you ever watched two top DA teams play each other? It's a whole other level. It's good soccer. Being a difference maker is also what makes you recruitable as a player.

Don't get too down on yourself. Your DD at FCV may not be the bottom of the conference. It's only one game in. On the Metro side, these girls, whether play ups or not, are being challenged. That is far better than riding the bench or fighting for playing time.

This is why MU gets trashed. Same nonsense. Best development around only we have no way of proving it other than posting it on here. Everything is part of the plan.

I think the best measure of MU’s ability to develop players is how hard FCV and other surrounding elite clubs tend to recruit their better players near the end of the year. I’ve seen it happen for two years now and expect it will be the case again at the end of the year

+1

+100

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
A stat line shows just one measure of success. There are many other factors to the game to also be considered. Success at one aspect of the game does make up for other possible weaknesses. A 3-1 loss is a stat line that demonstrates other weaknesses.

It is a team game. If one wants to believe scoring one goal for happened solely based on one playup then by that same logic it could be safe to consider that three goals against could also be attributed to that one playup. It works both ways.

Perhaps the better way to look at it is that the 04 team is strong enough to allow a playup to have a level of success versus believing the success to be the playups and only the playups success. When a team loses it is in poor taste beat ones chest about scoring one goal and doing so demonstrates selfishness.


Overall run of play was fairly even, but LISC presents a unique challenge. Their scoring is heavily dependent on the athleticism of one player (#7), and when she is having a good day she can dominate a game with unicorn levels of size, pace, and ball striking. She finished in the top-ten in goal scoring for all of the DA last year, and scored two against MU on Saturday. Yes, the 1-3 loss demonstrates an "other weakness", but MU will not be the only team to demonstrate that particular weakness in handling her this year.

They had a good game against FCV too. All the LISC teams in multiple age groups competed well this weekend. It's a bit overstating to say they just had one single good player and that's the difference.

Otherwise, we'd be saying 04 team just doesn't have a very good forward.

Did you actually watch either of the '04 FCV-LISC or '04 MU-LISC games this weekend or are you just comparing scorelines? At the '04 level, that one player has a disproportionate impact on the scoreline and can turn an evenly fought match into what looks like a blowout with just a few individual flashes of brilliance. With her off the field LISC is a completely different team, and one that MU has historically matched up well against. My guess is you simply haven't seen her play.

I didn't see the FCV game (obviously). They beat us last year with exactly the same score, 3-1. So what happened there?

Um... She sat out the first 48 minutes and LISC was losing 0-1. Then she subbed in and scored 3 goals in the final 32 minutes. Final score 3-1.

Game report shows her scoring in minute 1 and minute 79?

How did she score from the bench? And how did she assume another players name?

Wasn't talking about this year's game. Her 32-minute hattrick was last year, in response to the poster's question "so what happended there"...

Net result was the same. Tell us now how a playup made a difference.

The only difference maker is on the other team.

Exactly. And as a result, it will impact who they play in showcases and in the Da cup. When we go, because we are at the bottom of the conference, we play bottom of the conference. Have you ever watched two top DA teams play each other? It's a whole other level. It's good soccer. Being a difference maker is also what makes you recruitable as a player.

Don't get too down on yourself. Your DD at FCV may not be the bottom of the conference. It's only one game in. On the Metro side, these girls, whether play ups or not, are being challenged. That is far better than riding the bench or fighting for playing time.

This is why MU gets trashed. Same nonsense. Best development around only we have no way of proving it other than posting it on here. Everything is part of the plan.

I think the best measure of MU’s ability to develop players is how hard FCV and other surrounding elite clubs tend to recruit their better players near the end of the year. I’ve seen it happen for two years now and expect it will be the case again at the end of the year

+1

+100

Or do those players leave because they want to play for a real club with a real staff that will help them get to the next level instead of being on a team with kids 2-3 years younger than they are since they don’t have enough players?

[Anonymous]

Why did my post get deleted saying which players left MU for FCV? It's the facts. 1 to the U16s, 3 to the U17s, and 3 to the U19s. Is someone trying to cover this up?

[Anonymous]

We can all agree. MU develops players. FCV recruits them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
A stat line shows just one measure of success. There are many other factors to the game to also be considered. Success at one aspect of the game does make up for other possible weaknesses. A 3-1 loss is a stat line that demonstrates other weaknesses.

It is a team game. If one wants to believe scoring one goal for happened solely based on one playup then by that same logic it could be safe to consider that three goals against could also be attributed to that one playup. It works both ways.

Perhaps the better way to look at it is that the 04 team is strong enough to allow a playup to have a level of success versus believing the success to be the playups and only the playups success. When a team loses it is in poor taste beat ones chest about scoring one goal and doing so demonstrates selfishness.


Overall run of play was fairly even, but LISC presents a unique challenge. Their scoring is heavily dependent on the athleticism of one player (#7), and when she is having a good day she can dominate a game with unicorn levels of size, pace, and ball striking. She finished in the top-ten in goal scoring for all of the DA last year, and scored two against MU on Saturday. Yes, the 1-3 loss demonstrates an "other weakness", but MU will not be the only team to demonstrate that particular weakness in handling her this year.

They had a good game against FCV too. All the LISC teams in multiple age groups competed well this weekend. It's a bit overstating to say they just had one single good player and that's the difference.

Otherwise, we'd be saying 04 team just doesn't have a very good forward.

Did you actually watch either of the '04 FCV-LISC or '04 MU-LISC games this weekend or are you just comparing scorelines? At the '04 level, that one player has a disproportionate impact on the scoreline and can turn an evenly fought match into what looks like a blowout with just a few individual flashes of brilliance. With her off the field LISC is a completely different team, and one that MU has historically matched up well against. My guess is you simply haven't seen her play.

I didn't see the FCV game (obviously). They beat us last year with exactly the same score, 3-1. So what happened there?

Um... She sat out the first 48 minutes and LISC was losing 0-1. Then she subbed in and scored 3 goals in the final 32 minutes. Final score 3-1.

Game report shows her scoring in minute 1 and minute 79?

How did she score from the bench? And how did she assume another players name?

Wasn't talking about this year's game. Her 32-minute hattrick was last year, in response to the poster's question "so what happended there"...

Net result was the same. Tell us now how a playup made a difference.

The only difference maker is on the other team.

Exactly. And as a result, it will impact who they play in showcases and in the Da cup. When we go, because we are at the bottom of the conference, we play bottom of the conference. Have you ever watched two top DA teams play each other? It's a whole other level. It's good soccer. Being a difference maker is also what makes you recruitable as a player.

Don't get too down on yourself. Your DD at FCV may not be the bottom of the conference. It's only one game in. On the Metro side, these girls, whether play ups or not, are being challenged. That is far better than riding the bench or fighting for playing time.

This is why MU gets trashed. Same nonsense. Best development around only we have no way of proving it other than posting it on here. Everything is part of the plan.

I think the best measure of MU’s ability to develop players is how hard FCV and other surrounding elite clubs tend to recruit their better players near the end of the year. I’ve seen it happen for two years now and expect it will be the case again at the end of the year

+1

+100

Or do those players leave because they want to play for a real club with a real staff that will help them get to the next level instead of being on a team with kids 2-3 years younger than they are since they don’t have enough players?

No one can deny that's a factor. And it's fine to lose sometimes, but players get tired of teams that lose all the time, with no end in sight.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:We can all agree. MU develops players. FCV recruits them.

Hahahahahaha.

Funny. I guess that is why MU dominates on the pitch! All those players they have developed into stars!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We can all agree. MU develops players. FCV recruits them.

Hahahahahaha.

Funny. I guess that is why MU dominates on the pitch! All those players they have developed into stars!

Nah, they just go elsewhere, as noted above. FCV has gotten several over the past few years.

[Anonymous]

MU has just as real a staff as any of these other options. What they don’t have in some age groups is the same number of players at the needed level. Yet. There’s no evidence to suggest that players don’t develop there; the opposite is actually true with all the recruiting done by other clubs to get the upper third Spirit/MU players.