New Additions to Leagues Check Up (ECNL & GA)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:ECNL vs GA

https://x.com/ImYouthSoccer/status/1932893096829669500

I see you like to quote the ECNL coach that's worried about his job.

don't you see you providing facts refuting what this person posted?

Iamsoccerdork is an ECNLcoach that posts cherry picked datapoints. Likely because they see all the GA growth and are worried about their job.

seems like that site is correct about the acc.
https://x.com/ImYouthSoccer/status/1932890580511830330

The facts:
-ECNL (girls) was established in 2007
-GA was established in 2020

It will take some time, but GA is rapidly trending in the right direction for ACC placement.

lol.cry more.this is so crazy. sure, the GA name started in 2020 literally months after the DA went bankrupt. the GA is pretty much the DA. it has been around longer than that buckooo.

How many of the current ECNL clubs were DA Theres a giant gaping hole in the cherry picked datapoints.

Wait until MLSN requires GA for girls next season.

I never thought about that. I bet a large percentage of the current college commitments played for a DA club that switched to ECNL.

Interesting

Didn't most of those those DA teams moved from ECNL to DA (and then back to ECNL) ?

[Anonymous]

More ECNL players quit? Because more ECNL made the teams? Great stat. Next you are going to say more NFL players get hurt because more NFL players play NFL. Wow, the insight. How about we get back to talent. Let’s see how MA ECNL does against MA GA. Colleges recruit from the best talent and none of you, not one has shown how top MA GA has beat any MA ECNL teams, at least not an anything more than an aberration. But let’s see how the preseason tournaments go. That will tell you whether GA is better than ECNL, at least in the MA. Shouldn’t that be how we determine these things. Head to head?. I am confident enough to wait. You? Let’s come back in 2 months and compare and let this nonsense rest until then. Unless you don’t think the results will determine…. Of course you don’t. That goes against the non factual narrative you are pushing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:More ECNL players quit? Because more ECNL made the teams? Great stat. Next you are going to say more NFL players get hurt because more NFL players play NFL. Wow, the insight. How about we get back to talent. Let’s see how MA ECNL does against MA GA. Colleges recruit from the best talent and none of you, not one has shown how top MA GA has beat any MA ECNL teams, at least not an anything more than an aberration. But let’s see how the preseason tournaments go. That will tell you whether GA is better than ECNL, at least in the MA. Shouldn’t that be how we determine these things. Head to head?. I am confident enough to wait. You? Let’s come back in 2 months and compare and let this nonsense rest until then. Unless you don’t think the results will determine…. Of course you don’t. That goes against the non factual narrative you are pushing.

Nice rant at 1:44am.... you sound crazy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:More ECNL players quit? Because more ECNL made the teams? Great stat. Next you are going to say more NFL players get hurt because more NFL players play NFL. Wow, the insight. How about we get back to talent. Let’s see how MA ECNL does against MA GA. Colleges recruit from the best talent and none of you, not one has shown how top MA GA has beat any MA ECNL teams, at least not an anything more than an aberration. But let’s see how the preseason tournaments go. That will tell you whether GA is better than ECNL, at least in the MA. Shouldn’t that be how we determine these things. Head to head?. I am confident enough to wait. You? Let’s come back in 2 months and compare and let this nonsense rest until then. Unless you don’t think the results will determine…. Of course you don’t. That goes against the non factual narrative you are pushing.

Nice rant at 1:44am.... you sound crazy.

Doesn't seem to like cherry picked data when its not pro ECNL.

[Anonymous]

I have no dog in this fight, my DD is probably EDP/ECRL/Aspire level at best, but the "more ECNL players quit" canard is clearly specious statistically unless it is done as a proportion of players with D1 commits, e.g., 1 of every 10 commits from ECNL quit vs. 1 of every 50 overall. If we're just talking in absolute number terms, of course if most college players come from ECNL, most college players who quit will also come from ECNL.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I have no dog in this fight, my DD is probably EDP/ECRL/Aspire level at best, but the "more ECNL players quit" canard is clearly specious statistically unless it is done as a proportion of players with D1 commits, e.g., 1 of every 10 commits from ECNL quit vs. 1 of every 50 overall. If we're just talking in absolute number terms, of course if most college players come from ECNL, most college players who quit will also come from ECNL.

Would another word for that be cherry picked data. Just like the kind of things that iamsoccer likes to post about ECNL?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have no dog in this fight, my DD is probably EDP/ECRL/Aspire level at best, but the "more ECNL players quit" canard is clearly specious statistically unless it is done as a proportion of players with D1 commits, e.g., 1 of every 10 commits from ECNL quit vs. 1 of every 50 overall. If we're just talking in absolute number terms, of course if most college players come from ECNL, most college players who quit will also come from ECNL.

Would another word for that be cherry picked data. Just like the kind of things that iamsoccer likes to post about ECNL?

Perhaps. But I've only seen complaints that those posts are cherry-picked, and not an analysis of why the examples aren't representative. So I don't know whether (or not) those complaints about iamsoccer's posts are valid.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have no dog in this fight, my DD is probably EDP/ECRL/Aspire level at best, but the "more ECNL players quit" canard is clearly specious statistically unless it is done as a proportion of players with D1 commits, e.g., 1 of every 10 commits from ECNL quit vs. 1 of every 50 overall. If we're just talking in absolute number terms, of course if most college players come from ECNL, most college players who quit will also come from ECNL.

Would another word for that be cherry picked data. Just like the kind of things that iamsoccer likes to post about ECNL?

Perhaps. But I've only seen complaints that those posts are cherry-picked, and not an analysis of why the examples aren't representative. So I don't know whether (or not) those complaints about iamsoccer's posts are valid.

Here's the truth...

10% of the girls clubs get 90+% of the D1 college recruits. These clubs could join almost any league and the numbers wouldn't change. You could take iamsoccerdorks "analytics" and apply them to 2017-2021 (before DA blew up) and they would show DA as the big league.

And none of it matters because NVA clubs arent part of the DA or ECNL group of 10% that get players into big schools.

What's being shown is ECNL propaganda by an ECNL coach who is worried about GA so theyre trying to scare parents with FOMO.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:ECNL vs GA

https://x.com/ImYouthSoccer/status/1932893096829669500

I see you like to quote the ECNL coach that's worried about his job.

don't you see you providing facts refuting what this person posted?

Iamsoccerdork is an ECNLcoach that posts cherry picked datapoints. Likely because they see all the GA growth and are worried about their job.

Just because you don't like the stats, doesn't make them untrue. If you have other "cherry picked" stats to refute it, please share. I'll wait....

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have no dog in this fight, my DD is probably EDP/ECRL/Aspire level at best, but the "more ECNL players quit" canard is clearly specious statistically unless it is done as a proportion of players with D1 commits, e.g., 1 of every 10 commits from ECNL quit vs. 1 of every 50 overall. If we're just talking in absolute number terms, of course if most college players come from ECNL, most college players who quit will also come from ECNL.

Would another word for that be cherry picked data. Just like the kind of things that iamsoccer likes to post about ECNL?

Perhaps. But I've only seen complaints that those posts are cherry-picked, and not an analysis of why the examples aren't representative. So I don't know whether (or not) those complaints about iamsoccer's posts are valid.

Here's the truth...

10% of the girls clubs get 90+% of the D1 college recruits. These clubs could join almost any league and the numbers wouldn't change. You could take iamsoccerdorks "analytics" and apply them to 2017-2021 (before DA blew up) and they would show DA as the big league.

And none of it matters because NVA clubs arent part of the DA or ECNL group of 10% that get players into big schools.

What's being shown is ECNL propaganda by an ECNL coach who is worried about GA so theyre trying to scare parents with FOMO.

NVA or NOVA?

Your math also isn’t mathing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Someone please tell the ECNL coach "iamsoccerdork" that more girls ECNL players quit playing in their first year of college than any other league.

When 90% of the kids playing college came from the ECNL, of course they will have more that quit than any other league. That's simple math and doesn't prove any point you think you're trying to make.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Someone please tell the ECNL coach "iamsoccerdork" that more girls ECNL players quit playing in their first year of college than any other league.

When 90% of the kids playing college came from the ECNL, of course they will have more that quit than any other league. That's simple math and doesn't prove any point you think you're trying to make.

Well at least we agree that more girls ECNL players quit playing college soccer in their first year than any other league.

[Anonymous]

Why don't we just be honest about what's going on here. Statistics show that, right now, ECNL is better for girls for college recruiting. A bunch of clubs have left ECNL for MLSN to help the boys side. So they have to join GA since ECNL wants clubs to be all-in on both sides.

They hope that this will create enough momentum to push GA up to or past ECNL on the girls side, but no one knows what will happen over the next few years.

The decision was made for the boys, but folks in the clubs want to try to shine up GA so it's not as obvious that they favored the boys over the girls. So the folks promoting GA really are trying hard to make fetch happen, so to speak.

We will see whether they can create enough momentum to create a real shift. But the GA teams will need to be competitive deeper into the leagues for that to happen.

My DD is too young for this to matter now, so I can wait to see how the cookie crumbles, if she even develops to a point where it's relevant.

[Anonymous]

The stats youre referring are cherry picked and lagging.

[Anonymous]

All stats are lagging but it’s pretty clear historically (that is, since the demise of DA, so 5 years) ECNL players have placed into colleges deeper into the league and deeper into team rosters. No doubt the top GA teams have fared well too but not as deeply into the league. That may well change this year and going forward but we won’t know until it happens and right now there’s some dilution — between ECNL and GA, c 250 teams nationwide at the “top” level.