Travel Soccer teams around NOVA let's discuss

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:http://www.soccerwire.com/news/clubs/youth-girls/growing-list-of-youth-clubs-reconsider-decline-girls-da-membership/

This just means exactly what it says, and is pretty fair. It would be very difficult to maintain both. This just means that both leagues, hopefully, will remain viable. Choice is good.

The last thing this country needs is another league that claims to be the best of the best of the best of the best. So is Richmond United ECNL going to drive past Loudoun and Washington Spirit on their way to Ohio for a conference match ? None of this is about choice or whats best for the kids, it's about money and greed.

The reason why choice is good is because two leagues are competing for both players and dollars. Will "Richmond United ECNL going to drive past Loudoun and Washington Spirit on their way to Ohio for a conference match ?" Perhaps, in order to remain relevant ECNL realigns conferences to reduce travel.

But by the same token does Washington Spirit need to drive past Matchfit or PDA to play the Boston Breakers? Pick your 7 hour road trip but don't act like GDA solved anything regarding travel. GDA in this region is a travel nightmare with everything along the 95 corridor and we are at the southern most point of the conference. So, again, anti travel guyit really doesn't matter which league wins or loses, neither are for you or your kid.

And keep in mind ECNL has 75 or so clubs with 6 age groups for a total of about 1500 kids per age group and a total of roughly 7500 players.

The GDA on the other hand will have 3 combined age groups U14/15, U16/17, U18/19 with 74 clubs accounting for 1480 kids total per age group and 4400 kids total.

Even if every single kid in the DA came from ECNL DA there would still be 3100 ECNL rostered kids left over. That would be about 620 per age group for ECNL, leaving them to find another 880 kids.

So what everyone is saying is that it is impossible to find 880 more kids?

And remember that based on the combined age groups in DA kids could bounce in and out of DA if you are not good enough to play up and those kids will still want to be in a competitive environment in their off years.

And finally, GDA and ECNL have two different goals.

GDA is a scouting mechanism that utilizes a league structure to train and find "those 20 kids".

ECNL is a college showcase league. And while there are some similarities between ECNL and GDA, and they both appear to be the same thing, in reality they are as similar in form and function as a run of the mill German Shepard is compared to a Timber Wolf.

As long as ECNL can continue to provide showcase events and opportunities to play in showcase events they will serve a consumer need.

Just look at the quality non ECNL girls teams out there currently that still provide an avenue to college. The more kids exposed to a quality environment will produce more quality players. The wider the net is cast the better it is for all.

While I agree completely about the differences in leagues and overall mission, it just doesn't seem to get the message across to the parents. At some point, it's going to have to be the clubs that this approach head-on and communicate in no uncertain way that if you and your child is interested in potentially giving up college and going the professional soccer route, the USDA is for you. If college is absolutely required from a parent and educated teenager, then go for the ECNL team.

College soccer is simply not the right approach when it comes to identifying or much less building soccer super-stars. By nature their missions is short-sighted and there isn't much to development as there is to recruitment.

The USDA from what I've seen is setup to weed out those players that can persevere and are talented. However, what I have seen the USDA system become in this area and I would have to assume the other areas in the country is a region's first team players. Now all parents are looking to see how they can get their son(for now) into clubs that feed into an Academy. Nevermind that 4 practices a week essentially crowds out any other extra-curricular activities, takes over the social life of both parents and players, and is rather costly.

I for one will not be pursuing the USDA route with my son even though he(in my mind anyway) is a talented player and was chosen to be on the NPL team of a club in this area. I cannot make it to four practices a week, would like to him to actually do HS soccer so he can hang with his friends and not have to rely on me for transportation till he is 16, and would never accept that he choose soccer as a profession. I'm not even sure I want him to play college as I've heard what I believe to be horror stories about college players having to choose from a list of majors that the schools are willing to instruct if the players wants to play college ball. What has been troubling in those instances is that the parents are totally onboard not pushing their child towards academics.

I have a 3yo daughter, I hope they'll have figured out the whole ECNL/GDA concerns by the time she starts, or perhaps there will have been 5 different other leagues that will have sprouted.

Your the one I agree with

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:http://www.soccerwire.com/news/clubs/youth-girls/growing-list-of-youth-clubs-reconsider-decline-girls-da-membership/

This just means exactly what it says, and is pretty fair. It would be very difficult to maintain both. This just means that both leagues, hopefully, will remain viable. Choice is good.

The last thing this country needs is another league that claims to be the best of the best of the best of the best. So is Richmond United ECNL going to drive past Loudoun and Washington Spirit on their way to Ohio for a conference match ? None of this is about choice or whats best for the kids, it's about money and greed.

The reason why choice is good is because two leagues are competing for both players and dollars. Will "Richmond United ECNL going to drive past Loudoun and Washington Spirit on their way to Ohio for a conference match ?" Perhaps, in order to remain relevant ECNL realigns conferences to reduce travel.

But by the same token does Washington Spirit need to drive past Matchfit or PDA to play the Boston Breakers? Pick your 7 hour road trip but don't act like GDA solved anything regarding travel. GDA in this region is a travel nightmare with everything along the 95 corridor and we are at the southern most point of the conference. So, again, anti travel guyit really doesn't matter which league wins or loses, neither are for you or your kid.

As someone frequently accused of being "anti-travel guy," I'd just like to note that I haven't posted in this conversation.

As someone with an interest in U.S. player development, I remain skeptical that herding the best teenagers into super-serious academies and denying them other activities, like some sort of Siberian gymnastics camp, will pay off in World Cup glory, but that's another rant.

It's a shit-show in this country. Elite this, elite that. Just because you put the word elite in front of it does not make it true.

We still can't find the best players with the nepotism, politics and pay-to-play.

When soccer in general and MLS and NWSL in particular become far more popular and lucrative I think you will see soccer here follow a developmental model more similar to hockey and baseball with minor leagues as feeder leagues to the majors.

We are still not there, but perhaps another generation or two away but I feel it is coming. College is not a development platform for soccer.

Actually, soccer at the youth level is very lucrative. Get yourself a few licences, start coaching some teams, within a year you will have the knowledge and perhaps a database of parents to hit up to provide their Messi-in-the-making the Elite level training that they will need to reach the zenith of youth soccer.

Gee, I don't know that I agree with that much cynicism. I believe most coaches go into coaching because they love the game and wish to teach it. Very few actually get rich off it and to those that do, at least at one point in time were pretty good teachers.

DOCs may make good money but nothing that other professionals make. Perhaps we are so used to teachers being under paid for so long that we just find it distasteful that someone could make money off of children?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:http://www.soccerwire.com/news/clubs/youth-girls/growing-list-of-youth-clubs-reconsider-decline-girls-da-membership/

This just means exactly what it says, and is pretty fair. It would be very difficult to maintain both. This just means that both leagues, hopefully, will remain viable. Choice is good.

The last thing this country needs is another league that claims to be the best of the best of the best of the best. So is Richmond United ECNL going to drive past Loudoun and Washington Spirit on their way to Ohio for a conference match ? None of this is about choice or whats best for the kids, it's about money and greed.

The reason why choice is good is because two leagues are competing for both players and dollars. Will "Richmond United ECNL going to drive past Loudoun and Washington Spirit on their way to Ohio for a conference match ?" Perhaps, in order to remain relevant ECNL realigns conferences to reduce travel.

But by the same token does Washington Spirit need to drive past Matchfit or PDA to play the Boston Breakers? Pick your 7 hour road trip but don't act like GDA solved anything regarding travel. GDA in this region is a travel nightmare with everything along the 95 corridor and we are at the southern most point of the conference. So, again, anti travel guyit really doesn't matter which league wins or loses, neither are for you or your kid.

As someone frequently accused of being "anti-travel guy," I'd just like to note that I haven't posted in this conversation.

As someone with an interest in U.S. player development, I remain skeptical that herding the best teenagers into super-serious academies and denying them other activities, like some sort of Siberian gymnastics camp, will pay off in World Cup glory, but that's another rant.

It's a shit-show in this country. Elite this, elite that. Just because you put the word elite in front of it does not make it true.

We still can't find the best players with the nepotism, politics and pay-to-play.

When soccer in general and MLS and NWSL in particular become far more popular and lucrative I think you will see soccer here follow a developmental model more similar to hockey and baseball with minor leagues as feeder leagues to the majors.

We are still not there, but perhaps another generation or two away but I feel it is coming. College is not a development platform for soccer.

That is a horrible approach to soccer. We do not need minor leagues, we need Promotion/Relegation where every game means something. Every one needs to be constantly challenged to improve and that promotes development. I think the entire youth system needs to be revamped and these leagues done with. We need open access even at the youth level. Each league should be run at the state level with multiple divisions. For larger states, break further down to a N/S/E/W region. At the older ages, implement a state division where teams are promoted and relegated. From there a state champion is run and they can go on to other tournaments. Want to play against teams from other states, play in tournaments.

On the professional level I don't disagree with promotion relegation, but it isn't how we are wired in this country, sorry. There is no league in North America where promotion relegation is a thing and I dont see that changing. The closest we will have is a farm league system.

Promotion relegation at younger ages is simply stupid. it promotes all the worst in player development and encourages a win now attitude that kids who are simply learning the game should not suffer from. No kid should be picked based on a "what have you done lately model" because a TEAM needs to be successful.

Well the current system and what we are wired for is not working. The closed access only suits those with $$$. The promotion relegation starting around U12 does make sense in order to have equivalent competition. The issue is the mindset of coaches and parents that needs to change about the win now attitude. Players at a young level also need to feel the importance of a meaningful game and not the "hey we tried, you get a trophy".

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:http://www.soccerwire.com/news/clubs/youth-girls/growing-list-of-youth-clubs-reconsider-decline-girls-da-membership/

This just means exactly what it says, and is pretty fair. It would be very difficult to maintain both. This just means that both leagues, hopefully, will remain viable. Choice is good.

The last thing this country needs is another league that claims to be the best of the best of the best of the best. So is Richmond United ECNL going to drive past Loudoun and Washington Spirit on their way to Ohio for a conference match ? None of this is about choice or whats best for the kids, it's about money and greed.

The reason why choice is good is because two leagues are competing for both players and dollars. Will "Richmond United ECNL going to drive past Loudoun and Washington Spirit on their way to Ohio for a conference match ?" Perhaps, in order to remain relevant ECNL realigns conferences to reduce travel.

But by the same token does Washington Spirit need to drive past Matchfit or PDA to play the Boston Breakers? Pick your 7 hour road trip but don't act like GDA solved anything regarding travel. GDA in this region is a travel nightmare with everything along the 95 corridor and we are at the southern most point of the conference. So, again, anti travel guyit really doesn't matter which league wins or loses, neither are for you or your kid.

As someone frequently accused of being "anti-travel guy," I'd just like to note that I haven't posted in this conversation.

As someone with an interest in U.S. player development, I remain skeptical that herding the best teenagers into super-serious academies and denying them other activities, like some sort of Siberian gymnastics camp, will pay off in World Cup glory, but that's another rant.

It's a shit-show in this country. Elite this, elite that. Just because you put the word elite in front of it does not make it true.

We still can't find the best players with the nepotism, politics and pay-to-play.

When soccer in general and MLS and NWSL in particular become far more popular and lucrative I think you will see soccer here follow a developmental model more similar to hockey and baseball with minor leagues as feeder leagues to the majors.

We are still not there, but perhaps another generation or two away but I feel it is coming. College is not a development platform for soccer.

That is a horrible approach to soccer. We do not need minor leagues, we need Promotion/Relegation where every game means something. Every one needs to be constantly challenged to improve and that promotes development. I think the entire youth system needs to be revamped and these leagues done with. We need open access even at the youth level. Each league should be run at the state level with multiple divisions. For larger states, break further down to a N/S/E/W region. At the older ages, implement a state division where teams are promoted and relegated. From there a state champion is run and they can go on to other tournaments. Want to play against teams from other states, play in tournaments.

On the professional level I don't disagree with promotion relegation, but it isn't how we are wired in this country, sorry. There is no league in North America where promotion relegation is a thing and I dont see that changing. The closest we will have is a farm league system.

Promotion relegation at younger ages is simply stupid. it promotes all the worst in player development and encourages a win now attitude that kids who are simply learning the game should not suffer from. No kid should be picked based on a "what have you done lately model" because a TEAM needs to be successful.

It's not about a TEAM but the individual player constantly putting in the work.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:http://www.soccerwire.com/news/clubs/youth-girls/growing-list-of-youth-clubs-reconsider-decline-girls-da-membership/

This just means exactly what it says, and is pretty fair. It would be very difficult to maintain both. This just means that both leagues, hopefully, will remain viable. Choice is good.

The last thing this country needs is another league that claims to be the best of the best of the best of the best. So is Richmond United ECNL going to drive past Loudoun and Washington Spirit on their way to Ohio for a conference match ? None of this is about choice or whats best for the kids, it's about money and greed.

The reason why choice is good is because two leagues are competing for both players and dollars. Will "Richmond United ECNL going to drive past Loudoun and Washington Spirit on their way to Ohio for a conference match ?" Perhaps, in order to remain relevant ECNL realigns conferences to reduce travel.

But by the same token does Washington Spirit need to drive past Matchfit or PDA to play the Boston Breakers? Pick your 7 hour road trip but don't act like GDA solved anything regarding travel. GDA in this region is a travel nightmare with everything along the 95 corridor and we are at the southern most point of the conference. So, again, anti travel guyit really doesn't matter which league wins or loses, neither are for you or your kid.

As someone frequently accused of being "anti-travel guy," I'd just like to note that I haven't posted in this conversation.

As someone with an interest in U.S. player development, I remain skeptical that herding the best teenagers into super-serious academies and denying them other activities, like some sort of Siberian gymnastics camp, will pay off in World Cup glory, but that's another rant.

It's a shit-show in this country. Elite this, elite that. Just because you put the word elite in front of it does not make it true.

We still can't find the best players with the nepotism, politics and pay-to-play.

When soccer in general and MLS and NWSL in particular become far more popular and lucrative I think you will see soccer here follow a developmental model more similar to hockey and baseball with minor leagues as feeder leagues to the majors.

We are still not there, but perhaps another generation or two away but I feel it is coming. College is not a development platform for soccer.

That is a horrible approach to soccer. We do not need minor leagues, we need Promotion/Relegation where every game means something. Every one needs to be constantly challenged to improve and that promotes development. I think the entire youth system needs to be revamped and these leagues done with. We need open access even at the youth level. Each league should be run at the state level with multiple divisions. For larger states, break further down to a N/S/E/W region. At the older ages, implement a state division where teams are promoted and relegated. From there a state champion is run and they can go on to other tournaments. Want to play against teams from other states, play in tournaments.

On the professional level I don't disagree with promotion relegation, but it isn't how we are wired in this country, sorry. There is no league in North America where promotion relegation is a thing and I dont see that changing. The closest we will have is a farm league system.

Promotion relegation at younger ages is simply stupid. it promotes all the worst in player development and encourages a win now attitude that kids who are simply learning the game should not suffer from. No kid should be picked based on a "what have you done lately model" because a TEAM needs to be successful.

It's not about a TEAM but the individual player constantly putting in the work.

The TEAM gets promoted or relegated. Exactly how does the player get promoted/relegated in this scenario?

What coach is going to promote their best player being moved off their team and take on the relegated player?

How does promotion relegation allow a coach to try and implement tactics that may not show immediate success in favor of "winning tactics" that may lean towards nothing but athletic and possibly ugly soccer? Promotion and relegation is only good for the coach.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:http://www.soccerwire.com/news/clubs/youth-girls/growing-list-of-youth-clubs-reconsider-decline-girls-da-membership/

This just means exactly what it says, and is pretty fair. It would be very difficult to maintain both. This just means that both leagues, hopefully, will remain viable. Choice is good.

The last thing this country needs is another league that claims to be the best of the best of the best of the best. So is Richmond United ECNL going to drive past Loudoun and Washington Spirit on their way to Ohio for a conference match ? None of this is about choice or whats best for the kids, it's about money and greed.

The reason why choice is good is because two leagues are competing for both players and dollars. Will "Richmond United ECNL going to drive past Loudoun and Washington Spirit on their way to Ohio for a conference match ?" Perhaps, in order to remain relevant ECNL realigns conferences to reduce travel.

But by the same token does Washington Spirit need to drive past Matchfit or PDA to play the Boston Breakers? Pick your 7 hour road trip but don't act like GDA solved anything regarding travel. GDA in this region is a travel nightmare with everything along the 95 corridor and we are at the southern most point of the conference. So, again, anti travel guyit really doesn't matter which league wins or loses, neither are for you or your kid.

As someone frequently accused of being "anti-travel guy," I'd just like to note that I haven't posted in this conversation.

As someone with an interest in U.S. player development, I remain skeptical that herding the best teenagers into super-serious academies and denying them other activities, like some sort of Siberian gymnastics camp, will pay off in World Cup glory, but that's another rant.

It's a shit-show in this country. Elite this, elite that. Just because you put the word elite in front of it does not make it true.

We still can't find the best players with the nepotism, politics and pay-to-play.

When soccer in general and MLS and NWSL in particular become far more popular and lucrative I think you will see soccer here follow a developmental model more similar to hockey and baseball with minor leagues as feeder leagues to the majors.

We are still not there, but perhaps another generation or two away but I feel it is coming. College is not a development platform for soccer.

That is a horrible approach to soccer. We do not need minor leagues, we need Promotion/Relegation where every game means something. Every one needs to be constantly challenged to improve and that promotes development. I think the entire youth system needs to be revamped and these leagues done with. We need open access even at the youth level. Each league should be run at the state level with multiple divisions. For larger states, break further down to a N/S/E/W region. At the older ages, implement a state division where teams are promoted and relegated. From there a state champion is run and they can go on to other tournaments. Want to play against teams from other states, play in tournaments.

On the professional level I don't disagree with promotion relegation, but it isn't how we are wired in this country, sorry. There is no league in North America where promotion relegation is a thing and I dont see that changing. The closest we will have is a farm league system.

Promotion relegation at younger ages is simply stupid. it promotes all the worst in player development and encourages a win now attitude that kids who are simply learning the game should not suffer from. No kid should be picked based on a "what have you done lately model" because a TEAM needs to be successful.

It's not about a TEAM but the individual player constantly putting in the work.

The TEAM gets promoted or relegated. Exactly how does the player get promoted/relegated in this scenario?

What coach is going to promote their best player being moved off their team and take on the relegated player?

How does promotion relegation allow a coach to try and implement tactics that may not show immediate success in favor of "winning tactics" that may lean towards nothing but athletic and possibly ugly soccer? Promotion and relegation is only good for the coach.

The players work to get better which translates to the team hopefully performing and playing better. The team gets promoted/relegated. The coach implements tactics in practice and tries them out during games. What's the point of implementing a tactic that hasn't been soundly worked on in practice. Practice the way you expect your team to play and the game is the display of that. Promotion/Relegation is good for everyone if the right approach is taken. The mentality of coaches and parents needs to change in this country. The focus should be on developing the player no matter what system the player is in. Pro/Rel is a way of having teams playing against appropriate level competition. Parents and Coaches need to stop looking at youth soccer as a way to brag and really focus on the kids being taught the right way to play. There are many coaches out there doing it correctly by focusing on player development and not wins but because of uneven leagues/divisions you see results of 11-0 which is not good for either team. In many cases it takes away the motivation of the better team because they know that they aren't going to get any competition. This happens in CCL/VPL/NCSL/ODSL, what ever league. What good does it do for a team to finish with 80 goals for and 10 against. Each league, each division has these. If they were all under one system, these teams would have the opportunity to play against each other and get meaningful games every weekend.

[Anonymous]

I heard a rumor that the once-upon-a-time-up-and-coming "Joga SC" is pulling up stakes and moving to Holland. Any truth to that?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

The players work to get better which translates to the team hopefully performing and playing better. The team gets promoted/relegated. The coach implements tactics in practice and tries them out during games. What's the point of implementing a tactic that hasn't been soundly worked on in practice. Practice the way you expect your team to play and the game is the display of that. Promotion/Relegation is good for everyone if the right approach is taken. The mentality of coaches and parents needs to change in this country. The focus should be on developing the player no matter what system the player is in. Pro/Rel is a way of having teams playing against appropriate level competition. Parents and Coaches need to stop looking at youth soccer as a way to brag and really focus on the kids being taught the right way to play. There are many coaches out there doing it correctly by focusing on player development and not wins but because of uneven leagues/divisions you see results of 11-0 which is not good for either team. In many cases it takes away the motivation of the better team because they know that they aren't going to get any competition. This happens in CCL/VPL/NCSL/ODSL, what ever league. What good does it do for a team to finish with 80 goals for and 10 against. Each league, each division has these. If they were all under one system, these teams would have the opportunity to play against each other and get meaningful games every weekend.

I agree with you completely. A lot of people seem to have this notion that every coach of every team in a pro-rel league cares only about winning, and will sacrifice all good soccer practices to do so. These people also seem to believe that if you are in a "club centric" league without pro-rel, every coach of every team, freed from the need to care about winning records, will nurture the fledgling soccer skills of each and every player on his team.

Having had kids in both types of leagues for many years, I can tell you that good coaches who care about soccer will produce good players regardless of the type of league. Mediocre coaches may well welcome the lack of pressure that comes from playing in a CCL type league, but there is no reason to think they will suddenly gain newfound abilities to teach or coach. And a pro-rel set up ensures that the kids and teams can be challenged by opponents who are on their level or better. The CCL-type model may well be more comfortable for clubs and coaches, but it seems like a bad deal for players in the key developmental years--they really do need to be challenged in order to improve.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I heard a rumor that the once-upon-a-time-up-and-coming "Joga SC" is pulling up stakes and moving to Holland. Any truth to that?

Seems that the founder is leaving according to Twitter but no confirmation on the actual program ceasing to operate. Too bad it no longer has teams and it's more of an additional training now. I would think that it would remain active locally. I'm sure the founder is heading over to run the semi-pro team it has created and will keep ties open here to allow for future players to go on trials and experiences. By the way, I don't know any of this as fact, just providing my guess on what I think may be happening.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

The players work to get better which translates to the team hopefully performing and playing better. The team gets promoted/relegated. The coach implements tactics in practice and tries them out during games. What's the point of implementing a tactic that hasn't been soundly worked on in practice. Practice the way you expect your team to play and the game is the display of that. Promotion/Relegation is good for everyone if the right approach is taken. The mentality of coaches and parents needs to change in this country. The focus should be on developing the player no matter what system the player is in. Pro/Rel is a way of having teams playing against appropriate level competition. Parents and Coaches need to stop looking at youth soccer as a way to brag and really focus on the kids being taught the right way to play. There are many coaches out there doing it correctly by focusing on player development and not wins but because of uneven leagues/divisions you see results of 11-0 which is not good for either team. In many cases it takes away the motivation of the better team because they know that they aren't going to get any competition. This happens in CCL/VPL/NCSL/ODSL, what ever league. What good does it do for a team to finish with 80 goals for and 10 against. Each league, each division has these. If they were all under one system, these teams would have the opportunity to play against each other and get meaningful games every weekend.

I agree with you completely. A lot of people seem to have this notion that every coach of every team in a pro-rel league cares only about winning, and will sacrifice all good soccer practices to do so. These people also seem to believe that if you are in a "club centric" league without pro-rel, every coach of every team, freed from the need to care about winning records, will nurture the fledgling soccer skills of each and every player on his team.

Having had kids in both types of leagues for many years, I can tell you that good coaches who care about soccer will produce good players regardless of the type of league. Mediocre coaches may well welcome the lack of pressure that comes from playing in a CCL type league, but there is no reason to think they will suddenly gain newfound abilities to teach or coach. And a pro-rel set up ensures that the kids and teams can be challenged by opponents who are on their level or better. The CCL-type model may well be more comfortable for clubs and coaches, but it seems like a bad deal for players in the key developmental years--they really do need to be challenged in order to improve.

I agree with both as well. My son plays on a team that is on the winning side and it's not fun for anyone. It also gets a bit boring watching the boys score on these teams no matter what they do in order to not run up the score. Unfortunately at this time the team does not have access to a more challenging league. Yes I could take my kid out and put him in another club but this coach is teaching the boys the right way to play while focusing on their individual development. The team atmosphere is great and the boys continue to improve based on the challenge they present each other in practice. Too bad it's not the same in games but maybe if everyone had the opportunity to play against of the same level then we would getter these better match ups. I don't think that the team would be in the top division of a encompassing league but least it would be able to have a balanced competition that would motivate everyone to improve and eventually get to the top. I bet in the end it would be easier to identify the talent that would be better suited for our you state and eventually national teams.

[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:http://www.soccerwire.com/news/clubs/youth-girls/growing-list-of-youth-clubs-reconsider-decline-girls-da-membership/

This just means exactly what it says, and is pretty fair. It would be very difficult to maintain both. This just means that both leagues, hopefully, will remain viable. Choice is good.

The last thing this country needs is another league that claims to be the best of the best of the best of the best. So is Richmond United ECNL going to drive past Loudoun and Washington Spirit on their way to Ohio for a conference match ? None of this is about choice or whats best for the kids, it's about money and greed.

The reason why choice is good is because two leagues are competing for both players and dollars. Will "Richmond United ECNL going to drive past Loudoun and Washington Spirit on their way to Ohio for a conference match ?" Perhaps, in order to remain relevant ECNL realigns conferences to reduce travel.

But by the same token does Washington Spirit need to drive past Matchfit or PDA to play the Boston Breakers? Pick your 7 hour road trip but don't act like GDA solved anything regarding travel. GDA in this region is a travel nightmare with everything along the 95 corridor and we are at the southern most point of the conference. So, again, anti travel guyit really doesn't matter which league wins or loses, neither are for you or your kid.

As someone frequently accused of being "anti-travel guy," I'd just like to note that I haven't posted in this conversation.

As someone with an interest in U.S. player development, I remain skeptical that herding the best teenagers into super-serious academies and denying them other activities, like some sort of Siberian gymnastics camp, will pay off in World Cup glory, but that's another rant.

It's a shit-show in this country. Elite this, elite that. Just because you put the word elite in front of it does not make it true.

We still can't find the best players with the nepotism, politics and pay-to-play.

When soccer in general and MLS and NWSL in particular become far more popular and lucrative I think you will see soccer here follow a developmental model more similar to hockey and baseball with minor leagues as feeder leagues to the majors.

We are still not there, but perhaps another generation or two away but I feel it is coming. College is not a development platform for soccer.

That is a horrible approach to soccer. We do not need minor leagues, we need Promotion/Relegation where every game means something. Every one needs to be constantly challenged to improve and that promotes development. I think the entire youth system needs to be revamped and these leagues done with. We need open access even at the youth level. Each league should be run at the state level with multiple divisions. For larger states, break further down to a N/S/E/W region. At the older ages, implement a state division where teams are promoted and relegated. From there a state champion is run and they can go on to other tournaments. Want to play against teams from other states, play in tournaments.

On the professional level I don't disagree with promotion relegation, but it isn't how we are wired in this country, sorry. There is no league in North America where promotion relegation is a thing and I dont see that changing. The closest we will have is a farm league system.

Promotion relegation at younger ages is simply stupid. it promotes all the worst in player development and encourages a win now attitude that kids who are simply learning the game should not suffer from. No kid should be picked based on a "what have you done lately model" because a TEAM needs to be successful.

It's not about a TEAM but the individual player constantly putting in the work.

The TEAM gets promoted or relegated. Exactly how does the player get promoted/relegated in this scenario?

What coach is going to promote their best player being moved off their team and take on the relegated player?

How does promotion relegation allow a coach to try and implement tactics that may not show immediate success in favor of "winning tactics" that may lean towards nothing but athletic and possibly ugly soccer? Promotion and relegation is only good for the coach.

The players work to get better which translates to the team hopefully performing and playing better. The team gets promoted/relegated. The coach implements tactics in practice and tries them out during games. What's the point of implementing a tactic that hasn't been soundly worked on in practice. Practice the way you expect your team to play and the game is the display of that. Promotion/Relegation is good for everyone if the right approach is taken. The mentality of coaches and parents needs to change in this country. The focus should be on developing the player no matter what system the player is in. Pro/Rel is a way of having teams playing against appropriate level competition. Parents and Coaches need to stop looking at youth soccer as a way to brag and really focus on the kids being taught the right way to play. There are many coaches out there doing it correctly by focusing on player development and not wins but because of uneven leagues/divisions you see results of 11-0 which is not good for either team. In many cases it takes away the motivation of the better team because they know that they aren't going to get any competition. This happens in CCL/VPL/NCSL/ODSL, what ever league. What good does it do for a team to finish with 80 goals for and 10 against. Each league, each division has these. If they were all under one system, these teams would have the opportunity to play against each other and get meaningful games every weekend.

Kids do not develop at the same time. You cannot apply the principles of adult leagues to kids. Adult leagues are meant for teams to compete and win and lose as teams. Player development is not mission or mandate.

I don't know why you don't just have U9s play a full field 11v11 too. I'm really sorry that your CCL team is so awesome that it never loses and that these games are a waste of your time and disrespectful of your child's obvious talent. But if you are stomping other CCL teams, which are their clubs "A Teams" what about Promotion/Relegation do think will at all alter their rosters? What Non-CCL teams in your age group would even believe to be worthy talent to replace the poor CCL performers?

"Parents and Coaches need to stop looking at youth soccer as a way to brag and really focus on the kids being taught the right way to play. There are many coaches out there doing it correctly by focusing on player development and not wins but because of uneven leagues/divisions you see results of 11-0 which is not good for either team. "

What makes you think that winning 11-0 means that the coach is focusing on teaching to play the "right way?" How have eliminated bias of selecting athleticism for short term success over very skillful but small? There are lots of ways a team can get to 11-o that have absolutely nothing to do with "coaching them to play the right way".

If your team is younger that U12 and you have players in dedicated positions your coach is not doing it the right way, but you are likely a successful team.
If the same team has a dedicated keeper since U9 your coach is not concerned with development.
If your keeper is encouraged to punt or on goal kicks to try and kick to clear your coach is not interested in player development and your team likely can't play it from out of the back. See the U20 women's vs North Korea game for some tape on how that looks.
If your keeper regularly gets assists, your coach is doing it wrong.

You may get wins but kids are not developing.

However, it is possible to lose badly while trying to play "the right way".

Playing out of the back is tough to do, tough to learn and tough to stay committed to. It is also really easy for a very fast and aggressive team to annihilate a team that is attempting to learn how to play out of the back.

It is also easy to take advantage of a team when the coach is playing the kids everywhere, including keeper versus kids who are locked into positions that play to their current strengths at young ages. What happens to that great U10 keeper who doesn't hit a growth spurt and does not have the height to continue playing at a high level but has also lost years of field time? What happens to that amazing striker when at their first ODP tryout or College camp and the coach insists that they play a different position, you know, because the coach wants to see how much soccer IQ and overall skill the kid has? Or to even see if the keeper has footskills?

Now I'm not saying this to suggest that this is how your team is but I would encourage you to focus on what you see the opposition is trying to accomplish versus what the outcome of the game is.

My suspicion is that your kid is playing U12 or younger and if that is the case you really need to shut the fuck up about promotion or relegation because there will be kids on lower teams that will give you whiplash when they come out of nowhere and unseat some your A team kids when the game goes full field on you at U13-U15.

[Anonymous]

Kids do not develop at the same time. You cannot apply the principles of adult leagues to kids. Adult leagues are meant for teams to compete and win and lose as teams. Player development is not mission or mandate.

I don't know why you don't just have U9s play a full field 11v11 too. I'm really sorry that your CCL team is so awesome that it never loses and that these games are a waste of your time and disrespectful of your child's obvious talent. But if you are stomping other CCL teams, which are their clubs "A Teams" what about Promotion/Relegation do think will at all alter their rosters? What Non-CCL teams in your age group would even believe to be worthy talent to replace the poor CCL performers? Don't think there is a need to play 11v11. Our team is not CCL, as I mentioned we would not be in a top division in an all encompassing league. I'm not the original poster you are responding to.

"Parents and Coaches need to stop looking at youth soccer as a way to brag and really focus on the kids being taught the right way to play. There are many coaches out there doing it correctly by focusing on player development and not wins but because of uneven leagues/divisions you see results of 11-0 which is not good for either team. "

What makes you think that winning 11-0 means that the coach is focusing on teaching to play the "right way?" How have eliminated bias of selecting athleticism for short term success over very skillful but small? There are lots of ways a team can get to 11-o that have absolutely nothing to do with "coaching them to play the right way". Our team is smaller than everyone we play, most kids play up. They are skillful and small.

If your team is younger that U12 and you have players in dedicated positions your coach is not doing it the right way, but you are likely a successful team. We are and all kids get to play every position.
If the same team has a dedicated keeper since U9 your coach is not concerned with development.
If your keeper is encouraged to punt or on goal kicks to try and kick to clear your coach is not interested in player development and your team likely can't play it from out of the back. See the U20 women's vs North Korea game for some tape on how that looks. [b][/i] They don't punt, and do play out of the back.
If your keeper regularly gets assists, your coach is doing it wrong. No kid on the team can kick it past midfield.

You may get wins but kids are not developing.

However, it is possible to lose badly while trying to play "the right way". Completely agree. The example for our team was that we are winning but we played against many other teams with same style just not as technically skilled as our. Great foundation for future but with promotion/relegation we wouldn't play against these teams. Again looking for better competition not that we want to beat up on anyone.

Playing out of the back is tough to do, tough to learn and tough to stay committed to. It is also really easy for a very fast and aggressive team to annihilate a team that is attempting to learn how to play out of the back. We play out of the back and have no concern with other teams pressuring high. It teaches kids to play under pressure and get out of a tough situation.

It is also easy to take advantage of a team when the coach is playing the kids everywhere, including keeper versus kids who are locked into positions that play to their current strengths at young ages. What happens to that great U10 keeper who doesn't hit a growth spurt and does not have the height to continue playing at a high level but has also lost years of field time? What happens to that amazing striker when at their first ODP tryout or College camp and the coach insists that they play a different position, you know, because the coach wants to see how much soccer IQ and overall skill the kid has? Or to even see if the keeper has footskills? As stated above, kids get to play different positions.

Now I'm not saying this to suggest that this is how your team is but I would encourage you to focus on what you see the opposition is trying to accomplish versus what the outcome of the game is. As I mentioned, they are trying to accomplish the same as ours which is teach a style of play while I assume focusing on their individual skills.

My suspicion is that your kid is playing U12 or younger and if that is the case you really need to shut the fuck up about promotion or relegation because there will be kids on lower teams that will give you whiplash when they come out of nowhere and unseat some your A team kids when the game goes full field on you at U13-U15. [b] I hope they do, it'll require all of those that fell behind, even my own kid, to pick up and work harder. In the long run by everyone pushing everyone to improve, we can see better results at the older levels. Promotion/Relegation is not necessary at U11/U12 but as mentioned before by original poster, by having one encompassing league at U13 and above, it would provide everyone to compete against their equal level competition instead of having these different leagues with the same 2/3 teams always at the top.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Kids do not develop at the same time. You cannot apply the principles of adult leagues to kids. Adult leagues are meant for teams to compete and win and lose as teams. Player development is not mission or mandate.

I don't know why you don't just have U9s play a full field 11v11 too. I'm really sorry that your CCL team is so awesome that it never loses and that these games are a waste of your time and disrespectful of your child's obvious talent. But if you are stomping other CCL teams, which are their clubs "A Teams" what about Promotion/Relegation do think will at all alter their rosters? What Non-CCL teams in your age group would even believe to be worthy talent to replace the poor CCL performers?

Don't think there is a need to play 11v11. Our team is not CCL, as I mentioned we would not be in a top division in an all encompassing league. I'm not the original poster you are responding to.

Parents and Coaches need to stop looking at youth soccer as a way to brag and really focus on the kids being taught the right way to play. There are many coaches out there doing it correctly by focusing on player development and not wins but because of uneven leagues/divisions you see results of 11-0 which is not good for either team. "

What makes you think that winning 11-0 means that the coach is focusing on teaching to play the "right way?" How have eliminated bias of selecting athleticism for short term success over very skillful but small? There are lots of ways a team can get to 11-o that have absolutely nothing to do with "coaching them to play the right way".

[/b] Our team is smaller than everyone we play, most kids play up. They are skillful and small. [/b]

If your team is younger that U12 and you have players in dedicated positions your coach is not doing it the right way, but you are likely a successful team.

[/i] We are and all kids get to play every position.[b]

If the same team has a dedicated keeper since U9 your coach is not concerned with development.
If your keeper is encouraged to punt or on goal kicks to try and kick to clear your coach is not interested in player development and your team likely can't play it from out of the back. See the U20 women's vs North Korea game for some tape on how that looks. [b] They don't punt, and do play out of the back.
If your keeper regularly gets assists, your coach is doing it wrong. No kid on the team can kick it past midfield.

You may get wins but kids are not developing.

However, it is possible to lose badly while trying to play "the right way".

Completely agree. The example for our team was that we are winning but we played against many other teams with same style just not as technically skilled as our. Great foundation for future but with promotion/relegation we wouldn't play against these teams. Again looking for better competition not that we want to beat up on anyone.[/i]

Playing out of the back is tough to do, tough to learn and tough to stay committed to. It is also really easy for a very fast and aggressive team to annihilate a team that is attempting to learn how to play out of the back.

[/b] We play out of the back and have no concern with other teams pressuring high. It teaches kids to play under pressure and get out of a tough situation.[i]

It is also easy to take advantage of a team when the coach is playing the kids everywhere, including keeper versus kids who are locked into positions that play to their current strengths at young ages. What happens to that great U10 keeper who doesn't hit a growth spurt and does not have the height to continue playing at a high level but has also lost years of field time? What happens to that amazing striker when at their first ODP tryout or College camp and the coach insists that they play a different position, you know, because the coach wants to see how much soccer IQ and overall skill the kid has? Or to even see if the keeper has footskills?

[b] As stated above, kids get to play different positions.[/i]

Now I'm not saying this to suggest that this is how your team is but I would encourage you to focus on what you see the opposition is trying to accomplish versus what the outcome of the game is.

[/b] As I mentioned, they are trying to accomplish the same as ours which is teach a style of play while I assume focusing on their individual skills.[i]

My suspicion is that your kid is playing U12 or younger and if that is the case you really need to shut the fuck up about promotion or relegation because there will be kids on lower teams that will give you whiplash when they come out of nowhere and unseat some your A team kids when the game goes full field on you at U13-U15.

[b] I hope they do, it'll require all of those that fell behind, even my own kid, to pick up and work harder. In the long run by everyone pushing everyone to improve, we can see better results at the older levels. Promotion/Relegation is not necessary at U11/U12 but as mentioned before by original poster, by having one encompassing league at U13 and above, it would provide everyone to compete against their equal level competition instead of having these different leagues with the same 2/3 teams always at the top. [/i]

Hopefully that came out better

[Anonymous]

looks like it didn't help much.

[Anonymous]

Why the need to discount that some coaches are actually teaching the game the "right way". Is it not possible.