MLS Next Quality of Play scores make no sense

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Nothing like a discussion over a system, process and technology when less the 1% of the participants understand how it all works

Idiots on this thread don't both to go to website to read how it works. Just want to ask dumb questions here so people spoon feed answers, or their kid's scores are low so they come to sh*t on the platform.

[Anonymous]

The MLS Cup at U13 and U14 should also be based on QoP. The teams that qualify for the cup should go to Utah and play 3 games each. Two weeks later, the organizers should publish a list of which teams had the best QoP and who are the top teams.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The MLS Cup at U13 and U14 should also be based on QoP. The teams that qualify for the cup should go to Utah and play 3 games each. Two weeks later, the organizers should publish a list of which teams had the best QoP and who are the top teams.

It is based on QoP already.

And the list is up all season long.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As a coach with experience at a higher level of youth soccer both Europe and the U.S., I can tell you that the MLS NEXT "Quality of Play" system misses the mark on player development.
The biggest issue is that "quality" is entirely subjective. Instead of over-analyzing tactical patterns through a screen, we should be prioritizing individual creativity—which is ultimately the coach’s responsibility to foster. If we want better players, we should be evaluating the coaches themselves during training and matches to see if they are actually teaching and allowing kids to take risks. Rewarding teams that lose simply because they checked certain tactical boxes feels completely disconnected from the competitive nature of the sport.

We also need to fix how we handle the foundational years. In many top European countries, U8–U11 leagues use a "twin game" format: 5v5 on small pitches with no offsides, flying substitutions, dribble ins and multiple balls ready to use. This setup ensures every child gets maximum touches and constant success in 4x20 minute intervals. In the U.S., young players spend half the game standing around waiting for referees or formal substitutions. If we want to develop world-class talent, we need to stop over-engineering the standings and start maximizing time on the ball during the ages it matters most.

A sane response.

Not so sane considering majority of Taka analysis is on Individual plays, not team tactics

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As a coach with experience at a higher level of youth soccer both Europe and the U.S., I can tell you that the MLS NEXT "Quality of Play" system misses the mark on player development.
The biggest issue is that "quality" is entirely subjective. Instead of over-analyzing tactical patterns through a screen, we should be prioritizing individual creativity—which is ultimately the coach’s responsibility to foster. If we want better players, we should be evaluating the coaches themselves during training and matches to see if they are actually teaching and allowing kids to take risks. Rewarding teams that lose simply because they checked certain tactical boxes feels completely disconnected from the competitive nature of the sport.

We also need to fix how we handle the foundational years. In many top European countries, U8–U11 leagues use a "twin game" format: 5v5 on small pitches with no offsides, flying substitutions, dribble ins and multiple balls ready to use. This setup ensures every child gets maximum touches and constant success in 4x20 minute intervals. In the U.S., young players spend half the game standing around waiting for referees or formal substitutions. If we want to develop world-class talent, we need to stop over-engineering the standings and start maximizing time on the ball during the ages it matters most.

A sane response.

Not so sane considering majority of Taka analysis is on Individual plays, not team tactics

🤦‍♂️

Did you actually read the response?

🤡

[Anonymous]

The newly updated QoP scores are up. And some of the QoP numbers seem completely detached from reality:

For example, the U14 Achilles team has a great defensive QoP of 80.6 after allowing 70 goals. This is way better than Philly Union's 75.3 with 16 goals allowed.

When two teams have allowed a similar number of goals, the QoP could be a useful tool to say which team is better depending on style, schedule and other factors. But when a team has allowed 4+ times as many goals as another team, yet the algorithm says they have a better defensive QoP, the most reasonable conclusion is to question the validity of the algorithm,

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The newly updated QoP scores are up. And some of the QoP numbers seem completely detached from reality:

For example, the U14 Achilles team has a great defensive QoP of 80.6 after allowing 70 goals. This is way better than Philly Union's 75.3 with 16 goals allowed.

When two teams have allowed a similar number of goals, the QoP could be a useful tool to say which team is better depending on style, schedule and other factors. But when a team has allowed 4+ times as many goals as another team, yet the algorithm says they have a better defensive QoP, the most reasonable conclusion is to question the validity of the algorithm,

Unless you actually watched Achilles vs Philly Union and you knew that Philly has at least one kid who could squat and deadlift more than 75% of the parents on the DCUM forum and is only playing U14 because he does not have the requisite skill to play up commensurate with his physical features. They also have a 6ft+ center back in the same category. It is extremely difficult for any of the local U14 teams to break down that physical size yet.

On the opposite side, Achilles has a defender who Philly was borderline bullying and targeting because he looks and moves like The Joker in the NBA. If he did not have quality coaching and positioning, the game would have been more of an onslaught than it was in person. Maybe, just maybe, Taka knows this. Idk. My eyes can see it though.

Please, please, please, stop obsessing over Taka and starting learning about development with your eyes. Since our country is so big and the MLS recruiting apparatus is so small, Taka helps to spot outliers for the academies to find players. Everything else is folly and if you have FOMO of missing MLS Next club, grow up.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Taka's quality of play scores lately seem to have little to no correlation with game results. Does anyone actually understand how they calculate their scores?

For example: in the U14 division, Alexandria has 38 points in 19 games, they have 3 losses and 1 tie in their last 4 games and yet they have gone up in QoP to #2 in the division. Baltimore Armour has 45 points in 18 games, they've won their last 7 games and they're 9th in QoP.

Philly Union (16 goals allowed) has a worse defensive QoP than Achilles (70 goals allowed). The team with the fewest goals allowed (Armour, 9 goals in 18 games) is 5th in defensive QoP.

Yeah, you’re American so you won’t understand it. Sorry.

I’m American, I get it, I also think it’s a system of measurement that seems like it’s the brainchild of Louis van Gaal.

“We lost, but we really won, because we play ‘the right way’…”

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is an app called Rankings in the app store that takes more into account the wins. For example, U14 Baltimore Armour is ranked Team #27, Offense #56 and Defense #16 in the nation. #1 in the state. Alexandria #50, SYC #28 amd Bethesda #77.

I get the argument for Quality of Play. It makes sense. Nothing beats watching a team play beautifully with ball possession, creating space, building up, and winning just comes naturally as a result. Just look at Belgium and how they crushed us in the friendly game. We looked like a third division team from the Bundesliga. Yes, unfortunately or fortunately we need Quality of Play (lots of it in youth) in our country if we expect to develop world class players.

Rankings app is useless for MLSNext teams during U13 & U14. They don't take into consideration QOP and it doesn't take into account strength of schedule.

Rankings app is useless for anything under u14. U13 is the first year the data really begins to come together.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The newly updated QoP scores are up. And some of the QoP numbers seem completely detached from reality:

For example, the U14 Achilles team has a great defensive QoP of 80.6 after allowing 70 goals. This is way better than Philly Union's 75.3 with 16 goals allowed.

When two teams have allowed a similar number of goals, the QoP could be a useful tool to say which team is better depending on style, schedule and other factors. But when a team has allowed 4+ times as many goals as another team, yet the algorithm says they have a better defensive QoP, the most reasonable conclusion is to question the validity of the algorithm,

Unless you actually watched Achilles vs Philly Union and you knew that Philly has at least one kid who could squat and deadlift more than 75% of the parents on the DCUM forum and is only playing U14 because he does not have the requisite skill to play up commensurate with his physical features. They also have a 6ft+ center back in the same category. It is extremely difficult for any of the local U14 teams to break down that physical size yet.

On the opposite side, Achilles has a defender who Philly was borderline bullying and targeting because he looks and moves like The Joker in the NBA. If he did not have quality coaching and positioning, the game would have been more of an onslaught than it was in person. Maybe, just maybe, Taka knows this. Idk. My eyes can see it though.

Please, please, please, stop obsessing over Taka and starting learning about development with your eyes. Since our country is so big and the MLS recruiting apparatus is so small, Taka helps to spot outliers for the academies to find players. Everything else is folly and if you have FOMO of missing MLS Next club, grow up.

How does one learn development with their eyes?
It's like saying, watch the flight attendant and you'll learn how to fly a plane

Also, Philly Union had two kids that overwhelmed an entire team?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
Rankings app is useless for anything under u14. U13 is the first year the data really begins to come together.

The rankings app seems very accurate for U13 and U14. It gives a range of outcomes with predicted probabilities and an estimated score for any given game. It is not perfect, there is a lot of variability in soccer and at this age. But it seems very useful for what it is intended to do: rank teams in terms of winning probabilities and predict the score of any given game. You can argue that rankings and scores are not important, but you cannot argue that the app is a useful tool to predict those outcomes.

QoP is much less useful to predict the winner or score of a game. Maybe QoP measures development, however you want to define that, and maybe that's a good thing. But it's difficult to estimate the score of a game based on the QoP of two teams.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Rankings app is useless for anything under u14. U13 is the first year the data really begins to come together.

The rankings app seems very accurate for U13 and U14. It gives a range of outcomes with predicted probabilities and an estimated score for any given game. It is not perfect, there is a lot of variability in soccer and at this age. But it seems very useful for what it is intended to do: rank teams in terms of winning probabilities and predict the score of any given game. You can argue that rankings and scores are not important, but you cannot argue that the app is a useful tool to predict those outcomes.

QoP is much less useful to predict the winner or score of a game. Maybe QoP measures development, however you want to define that, and maybe that's a good thing. But it's difficult to estimate the score of a game based on the QoP of two teams.

Rankings app is strictly for parents and coaches egos with zero 0 soccer value

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As a coach with experience at a higher level of youth soccer both Europe and the U.S., I can tell you that the MLS NEXT "Quality of Play" system misses the mark on player development.
The biggest issue is that "quality" is entirely subjective. Instead of over-analyzing tactical patterns through a screen, we should be prioritizing individual creativity—which is ultimately the coach’s responsibility to foster. If we want better players, we should be evaluating the coaches themselves during training and matches to see if they are actually teaching and allowing kids to take risks. Rewarding teams that lose simply because they checked certain tactical boxes feels completely disconnected from the competitive nature of the sport.

We also need to fix how we handle the foundational years. In many top European countries, U8–U11 leagues use a "twin game" format: 5v5 on small pitches with no offsides, flying substitutions, dribble ins and multiple balls ready to use. This setup ensures every child gets maximum touches and constant success in 4x20 minute intervals. In the U.S., young players spend half the game standing around waiting for referees or formal substitutions. If we want to develop world-class talent, we need to stop over-engineering the standings and start maximizing time on the ball during the ages it matters most.

A sane response.

Not so sane considering majority of Taka analysis is on Individual plays, not team tactics

Lay of the gin.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Rankings app is useless for anything under u14. U13 is the first year the data really begins to come together.

The rankings app seems very accurate for U13 and U14. It gives a range of outcomes with predicted probabilities and an estimated score for any given game. It is not perfect, there is a lot of variability in soccer and at this age. But it seems very useful for what it is intended to do: rank teams in terms of winning probabilities and predict the score of any given game. You can argue that rankings and scores are not important, but you cannot argue that the app is a useful tool to predict those outcomes.

QoP is much less useful to predict the winner or score of a game. Maybe QoP measures development, however you want to define that, and maybe that's a good thing. But it's difficult to estimate the score of a game based on the QoP of two teams.

Rankings app is strictly for parents and coaches egos with zero 0 soccer value

This. The app uses a zero sum game model for a one V one contest and applies it to a non-zero sum game in 7v7 to 11v11 contests where the rosters are fluid.

There is a false surety that’s created. And when you get those false “gut” confirmations “the rankings app said it would be 1-0 and we tied, the rankings app is pretty good” when in reality for a game that is low margin over 90m, that is a huge miss.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The newly updated QoP scores are up. And some of the QoP numbers seem completely detached from reality:

For example, the U14 Achilles team has a great defensive QoP of 80.6 after allowing 70 goals. This is way better than Philly Union's 75.3 with 16 goals allowed.

When two teams have allowed a similar number of goals, the QoP could be a useful tool to say which team is better depending on style, schedule and other factors. But when a team has allowed 4+ times as many goals as another team, yet the algorithm says they have a better defensive QoP, the most reasonable conclusion is to question the validity of the algorithm,

70 goals?! Um, OK.