Taka and MLSNext QoP ratings

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How are the QoP ratings determined? Seems very subjective. For one team I am familiar with this year, they would be at the bottom of the standings for U13 just based on their win/loss record, but they are the middle of the pack per QoP ratings.

Yes, because the QoP model helps offset teams that maul during the puberty years. Notice it’s only for U13 and U14. By way of example, teams like SYC have 2-3 13 year-old boys between 5’9 and 6’1 feet tall and use their large physical size to impose their will on kids often times a foot smaller. They boot the ball outside the box with impunity. There are at least 6-7 teams in the Mid-Atlantic that use this formula.

And I don’t mean to disparage SYC, that’s their preference.

What QoP really does is flesh out the quality of the coach.

QoP

I would agree that some SYC coaches have that profile preferences and very frustrating. Problem is by the time they get to u15 and foot skills and soccer IQ haven't improve and have been relying on physicality the team results will suffer. Quite obvious when you look at SYC u15 team.

[Anonymous]

This new system is designed to train American parents. Too many talented US players are involved in “win at all costs” programs and do not technically develop during the crucial foundation phase. The clubs cater to the parents. The parents wants W’s and they follow the leaderboard. Change the leaderboard, hopefully we eventually we change player development habits.

Under this new system, leaderboard tracking American parents have to actually learn more about the game to influence the standings. If they want the bragging rights at the water cooler, they need to encourage their child to play a better brand of football.

The amount of people who track standings and wins and losses is the reason why we are not winning the long-term football game as a country. SYC could eventually change, but their style wins IG and sends kids DCU, but those kids will eventually get run around by kids who might not be winning in the early phases but learning how to play under pressure and mastering the ball.

It is not a fix-all solution but a start to fix our football culture for the top talent in our country.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How are the QoP ratings determined? Seems very subjective. For one team I am familiar with this year, they would be at the bottom of the standings for U13 just based on their win/loss record, but they are the middle of the pack per QoP ratings.

Does the team name rhyme with chilaquiles?

Yes, Achilles has a higher rank than Bethesda. If I were a Bethesda parent, I’d probably be a bit annoyed. 😆

Why, when was the last time Bethesda had a player rostered on USMNT or had a player sign with a Bundesliga academy like Achilles did just this year?

Outliers doesn't identify the program

Two players out of thousands who did enough on their own outside the club and used whatever connections they have to achieve their goals isn't representative of an organization.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This new system is designed to train American parents. Too many talented US players are involved in “win at all costs” programs and do not technically develop during the crucial foundation phase. The clubs cater to the parents. The parents wants W’s and they follow the leaderboard. Change the leaderboard, hopefully we eventually we change player development habits.

Under this new system, leaderboard tracking American parents have to actually learn more about the game to influence the standings. If they want the bragging rights at the water cooler, they need to encourage their child to play a better brand of football.

The amount of people who track standings and wins and losses is the reason why we are not winning the long-term football game as a country. SYC could eventually change, but their style wins IG and sends kids DCU, but those kids will eventually get run around by kids who might not be winning in the early phases but learning how to play under pressure and mastering the ball.

It is not a fix-all solution but a start to fix our football culture for the top talent in our country.

Foundation phases are U6-U7, U8-U10
Development phases are U11-U13, U14-U15
Development/Performance U16-U18
Performance U18+

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How are the QoP ratings determined? Seems very subjective. For one team I am familiar with this year, they would be at the bottom of the standings for U13 just based on their win/loss record, but they are the middle of the pack per QoP ratings.

Does the team name rhyme with chilaquiles?

Yes, Achilles has a higher rank than Bethesda. If I were a Bethesda parent, I’d probably be a bit annoyed. 😆

Why, when was the last time Bethesda had a player rostered on USMNT or had a player sign with a Bundesliga academy like Achilles did just this year?

Outliers doesn't identify the program

Two players out of thousands who did enough on their own outside the club and used whatever connections they have to achieve their goals isn't representative of an organization.

Bitter much?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How are the QoP ratings determined? Seems very subjective. For one team I am familiar with this year, they would be at the bottom of the standings for U13 just based on their win/loss record, but they are the middle of the pack per QoP ratings.

Does the team name rhyme with chilaquiles?

Yes, Achilles has a higher rank than Bethesda. If I were a Bethesda parent, I’d probably be a bit annoyed. 😆

Why, when was the last time Bethesda had a player rostered on USMNT or had a player sign with a Bundesliga academy like Achilles did just this year?

Outliers doesn't identify the program

Two players out of thousands who did enough on their own outside the club and used whatever connections they have to achieve their goals isn't representative of an organization.

Bitter much?

Caution ⚠️
Truth may offend

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How are the QoP ratings determined? Seems very subjective. For one team I am familiar with this year, they would be at the bottom of the standings for U13 just based on their win/loss record, but they are the middle of the pack per QoP ratings.

Does the team name rhyme with chilaquiles?

Yes, Achilles has a higher rank than Bethesda. If I were a Bethesda parent, I’d probably be a bit annoyed. 😆

Why, when was the last time Bethesda had a player rostered on USMNT or had a player sign with a Bundesliga academy like Achilles did just this year?

lol many choices here but off the top of my head, Kristian Fletcher (USMNT) and Aaron Heard (actual Bundesliga team).

Cmon, both clubs are good options in the area. Frankly, with DCU being such a crappy option, this area should be glad they have a few other options unlike families in Minnesota or other more isolated places.

Interesting take
My DC is in ncsl world, so no idea on details of other levels

How are the Bethesda and Achilles clubs better options for a good player who wants to get to the highest levels than DCU?

[Anonymous]

I'll be honest and I recognize my ignorance about soccer development when I say this: I don't like the current rankings based on quality of play.

My issue is that QoP is not clearly defined. The MLSN website just says that they use Taka’s analytical formula. What does that mean? how can my player or my team improve on this metric? Without additional information and guidance, this is just a change from a possibly flawed but objective measure of a team's success - the final score, to an also flawed but subjective and unclear measure of a team's success - QoP.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'll be honest and I recognize my ignorance about soccer development when I say this: I don't like the current rankings based on quality of play.

My issue is that QoP is not clearly defined. The MLSN website just says that they use Taka’s analytical formula. What does that mean? how can my player or my team improve on this metric? Without additional information and guidance, this is just a change from a possibly flawed but objective measure of a team's success - the final score, to an also flawed but subjective and unclear measure of a team's success - QoP.

Did you read the USA Today link someone took the time to research and post for you?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'll be honest and I recognize my ignorance about soccer development when I say this: I don't like the current rankings based on quality of play.

My issue is that QoP is not clearly defined. The MLSN website just says that they use Taka’s analytical formula. What does that mean? how can my player or my team improve on this metric? Without additional information and guidance, this is just a change from a possibly flawed but objective measure of a team's success - the final score, to an also flawed but subjective and unclear measure of a team's success - QoP.

Did you read the USA Today link someone took the time to research and post for you?

Yes, the article explains a bit more than what the website does.

My observation from following what Taka posts on Instagram is that the algorithm probably considers the number of players on the team with good individual skills (those that are getting top % plays monthly) and constant movement and linkups which I’m assuming means they are trying to create plays or are constantly strategically playing and using technical skills, as opposed to reacting to what the other team does.

But I wonder if the algo adapts or already reflects the overall skill level of MLSNext players? I see dribbling highlights all the time on Taka. If that is such a significant skill to highlight,
does that mean most players aren’t very good at it?

[Anonymous]

Did you read the USA Today link someone took the time to research and post for you?

I read the link. And I paid for Taka's subscription for my son. It's cool to get his highlights, good and bad, after every game. But other than that I cannot see my player's or team's score for attack, defense, and QoP after every game, like the article says. And it is hard to infer which plays are "positive tactical intentions". So it is difficult to see what my player or my team need to do to improve their QoP, besides a vague "get better".

I think this is a good idea, and maybe it just needs some time to impact the game, but for right now it just feels like the scores are subjective and there are no actionable recommendations about how to get better.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'll be honest and I recognize my ignorance about soccer development when I say this: I don't like the current rankings based on quality of play.

My issue is that QoP is not clearly defined. The MLSN website just says that they use Taka’s analytical formula. What does that mean? how can my player or my team improve on this metric? Without additional information and guidance, this is just a change from a possibly flawed but objective measure of a team's success - the final score, to an also flawed but subjective and unclear measure of a team's success - QoP.

Did you read the USA Today link someone took the time to research and post for you?

Yes, the article explains a bit more than what the website does.

My observation from following what Taka posts on Instagram is that the algorithm probably considers the number of players on the team with good individual skills (those that are getting top % plays monthly) and constant movement and linkups which I’m assuming means they are trying to create plays or are constantly strategically playing and using technical skills, as opposed to reacting to what the other team does.

But I wonder if the algo adapts or already reflects the overall skill level of MLSNext players? I see dribbling highlights all the time on Taka. If that is such a significant skill to highlight,
does that mean most players aren’t very good at it?

Dribbling at the highest levels is measured by the net result at the end of the dribble.
Successful breaking of lines, positive pass or shot on target

Dribbling through 8 players then losing the ball isn't bonus points. Especially going backwards, side to side or in circles

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Did you read the USA Today link someone took the time to research and post for you?

I read the link. And I paid for Taka's subscription for my son. It's cool to get his highlights, good and bad, after every game. But other than that I cannot see my player's or team's score for attack, defense, and QoP after every game, like the article says. And it is hard to infer which plays are "positive tactical intentions". So it is difficult to see what my player or my team need to do to improve their QoP, besides a vague "get better".

I think this is a good idea, and maybe it just needs some time to impact the game, but for right now it just feels like the scores are subjective and there are no actionable recommendations about how to get better.



I agree with this. I’d like to see the stats. I would love to see individual quality of play scores as well. If they are able to pull top % plays, I’m sure they will be able to rate the players on different skills so we can see what needs improvement.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'll be honest and I recognize my ignorance about soccer development when I say this: I don't like the current rankings based on quality of play.

My issue is that QoP is not clearly defined. The MLSN website just says that they use Taka’s analytical formula. What does that mean? how can my player or my team improve on this metric? Without additional information and guidance, this is just a change from a possibly flawed but objective measure of a team's success - the final score, to an also flawed but subjective and unclear measure of a team's success - QoP.

Did you read the USA Today link someone took the time to research and post for you?

Yes, the article explains a bit more than what the website does.

My observation from following what Taka posts on Instagram is that the algorithm probably considers the number of players on the team with good individual skills (those that are getting top % plays monthly) and constant movement and linkups which I’m assuming means they are trying to create plays or are constantly strategically playing and using technical skills, as opposed to reacting to what the other team does.

But I wonder if the algo adapts or already reflects the overall skill level of MLSNext players? I see dribbling highlights all the time on Taka. If that is such a significant skill to highlight,
does that mean most players aren’t very good at it?

Dribbling at the highest levels is measured by the net result at the end of the dribble.
Successful breaking of lines, positive pass or shot on target

Dribbling through 8 players then losing the ball isn't bonus points. Especially going backwards, side to side or in circles

True, the ones Taka highlights end in shot attempt, a complete pass or a goal.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Did you read the USA Today link someone took the time to research and post for you?

I read the link. And I paid for Taka's subscription for my son. It's cool to get his highlights, good and bad, after every game. But other than that I cannot see my player's or team's score for attack, defense, and QoP after every game, like the article says. And it is hard to infer which plays are "positive tactical intentions". So it is difficult to see what my player or my team need to do to improve their QoP, besides a vague "get better".

I think this is a good idea, and maybe it just needs some time to impact the game, but for right now it just feels like the scores are subjective and there are no actionable recommendations about how to get better.



I agree with this. I’d like to see the stats. I would love to see individual quality of play scores as well. If they are able to pull top % plays, I’m sure they will be able to rate the players on different skills so we can see what needs improvement.

If my kid's coach is going off an App to develop their technical skills I'd be very concerned