Travel Soccer teams around NOVA let's discuss

[Anonymous]

^^^ Something else to think about. We select too early. This area sets kids on teams (A, B, C, etc. ) and keeps them there like Civil Servants from the youngest of ages. There is very little roster mixing or switching from then on. They hype up 10 years old as the next greatest thing. If your kid is going to tryout for any elite team, DA team, etc. you must put the current team and rank (A team, C team, etc.). This is used to weed out before the kid is even seen. This often results in a kid not even getting an invite at 10-11 to tryout. That kid then rides on his reputation all the way up the system and then we wonder why the 'best' we have is never good enough.

This article by a German study just came out about the very poor correlation between early athletic success and adult athletic success. It was in last week's Soccer Wire.

"Junior success is a poor indicator of long-term senior success,” said Dr. Arne Güllich, who is the Head of Department of Sport Science and Director of the Institute of Applied Sport Science at Kaiserslautern University of Technology. “Their success at the age of 10 had a zero correlation with their success as a senior. Same was true with their success at 11-14, 15-18. We have a zero correlation.”

“That means, those who were better at a young age were not those who were better at an older age,” Güllich said. “This also applies to different types of sports – CGS sports (where performances are measured in centimetres, grams and seconds), games sports, combat sports, artistic composition sports. The results are all the same across all different types of sports.”

Professor Güllich gave an example from the German football TDP (talent development programme) system to show that the most successful seniors were not selected particularly early.

“Of those who were recruited at an age of under 11 or under 13, at the age of under 19, only 9 percent are left. On the other hand, those who made it to the national A team of Germany, those we see in the World Cup for example, were being built up gradually across all age stages,” he said.

“The population of senior top athletes emerges in the course of repeated selection, de-selection, and replacements across all age stages rather than developing from those early selected,” he added.

In fact, what stood out from his research was that world-class athletes did not just focus on their sport from a young age, but played more than one sport.

His research has shown that German Olympic medalists played two or three other sports at a high level before focusing on their main sport at 20.

“The world-class athlete differs from those who made it only to national class, not by having engaged in more sports specific training in their main sport, this was indifferent, or they even trained less at a young age at their later main sport, but consistently, they engaged in more activity in other sports,” said Professor Güllich.

He also found that early specialisation may lead to success at a youth level, but not necessarily at a world level.

“Consistently, those who were recruited into the system earlier, started specialising significantly earlier. As a result, looking at where they got to in the long term, those recruited earlier were more successful at a youth age, but they were under-represented in terms of senior world class (top ten worldwide),” said Professor Güllich

“There were athletes who did not exceed initial D squad (regional junior squad), they were first recruited into the system at 15 years. The C squad (the national junior squad) were first recruited at the age of 17. Those who made it to senior world class (A squad) were first recruited at 19 years. So the more successful at the senior level, the later was the recruitment into the talent development system.”

Example from the German football TDP system

“Of those who were recruited at an age of under 11 or under 13, at the age of under 19, only 9% are left. On the other hand, those who made it to the national A team of Germany, those we see in the World Cup for example, were being built up gradually across all age stages.”

[Anonymous]

^^agree we lock out kids way too young. Some are just getting started and coming into their own---but they aren't given a chance. All of this early specialization and rankings drives many kids out of the sport too soon. Develop all of your players is the key. You never know what you have in that bunch. One thing is for certain--the player remembers how they were treated and who supported them as a young kid---just as they do the people that were complete assholes.

[Anonymous]

A lot of that reason is 'resting on laurels'. The chip and egos develop and you do a child a disservice by lauding him constantly at such a young age. The ones with grit that put their nose to the grindstone start coming out of the woodwork later on.

Some of the best players came out of the desire to prove everyone else wrong. Hell---when a player like Michael Jordan is still ribbing his HS coach 30 years later---you know that burned the hell out of him as a kid getting cut.

We are society of instant gratification. This is why nobody looks at long-term player development.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Our DS has the goal to play in college and we are definitely having trouble keeping up with the various leagues. In addition to BRYC, do we think there will be any other DMV teams joining Boys ECNL? I assume DA will still be top dog and ECNL will take some time to get established, but it has attracted some top teams. How do you think ECNL be viewed in the hierarchy? How would you rank DA, ECNL, National League, Region 1, EDP, CCL, etc. as destinations for competitive players shooting for Div. 1 college soccer? Where will the most competitive players want to play? Do all these leagues provide more top-level options for the high concentration of strong DMV players or is the competition getting diluted? We still remember when NCSL Division 1 was where it was at and how quickly competition shifted to CCL.....

The ENPL will have a long hill to climb to compete against a pretty established Boys DA.

In regards to ECNL? It will become the defacto B league for as long as it hangs on. It will take a few years for the GDA to become established so those young ladies currently established in ECNL and are currently involved in the recruitment process I would see little reason for them to change teams.

I believe that the viability of ECNL will on a number of factors:

1. ECNL will actually have to expand. This will be needed to reduce travel and the costs associated with travel. Why this is important is the fact that there will be a level of talent drain from ECNL to GDA. ECNL has an excellent structure but it cannot ask parents to spend 5k a season for lower competition, even if it is only slightly lower. ECNL will have to align their conferences more regionally to strike a balance.

2. Coaches. ECNL can easily survive if their clubs can attract and maintain high quality coaches. The reality is, we have lots and lots of talented players and the more players that are exposed to quality coaching and competition the better it is for everyone. We need more players playing and being coached a t high level, not less. I support both league being viable and healthy.

3. ECNL needs to stay true to their mission, "a pathway to college". Allowing kids to play high school and other sports while maintaining a solid league structure and commitment to quality can allow ECNL to carve out a valuable niche. The reality is U.S. Soccer wants an Academy and Professional path. They would rather NWSL develop their elite players over Colleges. Colleges do not develop and many kids often ride the pine so to speak their first few seasons. Basically there are two differing objectives and if the ECNL can prove to still be a viable pathway to college then they will do just fine.

NP, but this strikes me as a very good summary overall. I'm not as optimistic about ECNL/EPNL's ability to remain viable as you are though, due to one of the factors you mention: ECNL/EPNL will cost an awful lot, and require a lot of travel, for a second tier league.

I'm curious about your take on the PP's question about how National League will fit in with the ECNL/EPNL hierarchy? One thing I've very much disliked about ECNL is that they allow their players to play in State Cup and other non-ECNL competitions. I think it would be better for kids and soccer in the country as a whole if that were forbidden (as it is in the DA) so that more kids, especially those who are not rich, have an opportunity to participate in competitions that have the potential to bring them to the attention of college coaches and national team staff.

Also, I'd love to hear what, if anything, people have heard about the messaging from CCL on all this.

I think ENPL will have to be similar to what I outlined for ECNL. ENPL will be a B league, the difference is ECNL was established and has a proven track record. GDA will take a while to get rolling so to speak buying ECNL some time.

ENPL on the other hand does not have the luxury of an established brand or time. ENPL must differentiate itself in the marketplace in such a way as to both not overstate their prominence but to also take advantages of areas of weakness that the DA currently has. Both ECNL and ENPL can cut costs by being more regional. Limiting the number of overnight trips for games can cut costs significantly. Limiting the national showcases in favor of more conference based showcases could also help reduce travel and costs. National events can still happen but there is little reason for a kid in VA to showcase in Arizona when 9 out of 10 players will go to college within 300-400 miles of home. And when you consider the likely expansion necessary to reduce costs there would be enough teams to represent in a "conference showcase".

iD2 could be used and mimic a ODP model for kids who would benefit from higher level scouting and participate on Regional/Conference based "allstar teams" for extra exposure. The burden of cost is then up to those selected individuals to then go to Arizona without 17-22 other kids having to travel to a showcase that they don't need.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:^^^ Something else to think about. We select too early. This area sets kids on teams (A, B, C, etc. ) and keeps them there like Civil Servants from the youngest of ages. There is very little roster mixing or switching from then on. They hype up 10 years old as the next greatest thing. If your kid is going to tryout for any elite team, DA team, etc. you must put the current team and rank (A team, C team, etc.). This is used to weed out before the kid is even seen. This often results in a kid not even getting an invite at 10-11 to tryout. That kid then rides on his reputation all the way up the system and then we wonder why the 'best' we have is never good enough.

This article by a German study just came out about the very poor correlation between early athletic success and adult athletic success. It was in last week's Soccer Wire.

"Junior success is a poor indicator of long-term senior success,” said Dr. Arne Güllich, who is the Head of Department of Sport Science and Director of the Institute of Applied Sport Science at Kaiserslautern University of Technology. “Their success at the age of 10 had a zero correlation with their success as a senior. Same was true with their success at 11-14, 15-18. We have a zero correlation.”

“That means, those who were better at a young age were not those who were better at an older age,” Güllich said. “This also applies to different types of sports – CGS sports (where performances are measured in centimetres, grams and seconds), games sports, combat sports, artistic composition sports. The results are all the same across all different types of sports.”

Professor Güllich gave an example from the German football TDP (talent development programme) system to show that the most successful seniors were not selected particularly early.

“Of those who were recruited at an age of under 11 or under 13, at the age of under 19, only 9 percent are left. On the other hand, those who made it to the national A team of Germany, those we see in the World Cup for example, were being built up gradually across all age stages,” he said.

“The population of senior top athletes emerges in the course of repeated selection, de-selection, and replacements across all age stages rather than developing from those early selected,” he added.

In fact, what stood out from his research was that world-class athletes did not just focus on their sport from a young age, but played more than one sport.

His research has shown that German Olympic medalists played two or three other sports at a high level before focusing on their main sport at 20.

“The world-class athlete differs from those who made it only to national class, not by having engaged in more sports specific training in their main sport, this was indifferent, or they even trained less at a young age at their later main sport, but consistently, they engaged in more activity in other sports,” said Professor Güllich.

He also found that early specialisation may lead to success at a youth level, but not necessarily at a world level.

“Consistently, those who were recruited into the system earlier, started specialising significantly earlier. As a result, looking at where they got to in the long term, those recruited earlier were more successful at a youth age, but they were under-represented in terms of senior world class (top ten worldwide),” said Professor Güllich

“There were athletes who did not exceed initial D squad (regional junior squad), they were first recruited into the system at 15 years. The C squad (the national junior squad) were first recruited at the age of 17. Those who made it to senior world class (A squad) were first recruited at 19 years. So the more successful at the senior level, the later was the recruitment into the talent development system.”

Example from the German football TDP system

“Of those who were recruited at an age of under 11 or under 13, at the age of under 19, only 9% are left. On the other hand, those who made it to the national A team of Germany, those we see in the World Cup for example, were being built up gradually across all age stages.”

This is why I am a proponent of ECNL/ENPL and the DA's coexisting. We need more kids remaining in the game receiving the highest training possible. It is ok if ECNL/ENPL is "second fiddle" as long as there remains a commitment to development and training.

[Anonymous]

In regards to the hierarchy of the National league with ENPL, I think that is a bit more murky. Basically they are both really competing for the same piece of the pie. I would give the edge to ENPL to be a better marketing machine and to utilize their ECNL success and experience to create both an experience and an identity for the players/parents to subscribe to. Mindshare is what will win this particular turf battle.

[Anonymous]

^^by calling it 2nd fiddle--you are the problem too.

All this area is doing is diluting things and creating more dubious ways to rank shit.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:^^by calling it 2nd fiddle--you are the problem too.

All this area is doing is diluting things and creating more dubious ways to rank shit.

No, not at all. The DA exists as a scouting platform for players with National Team/Professional potential. It was not created by U.S. Soccer to develop players for college rosters. That most of the players highest level achieved will be college is not a ranking but a simple outcome of its stated mission.

ECNL was all to happy to develop with playing in college as the stated outcome.

Two different missions. ECNL offers a prospective college bound player the opportunity to explore other athletic (high school sports) and social endeavors that the DA would limit or outright restrict participation. It might play second fiddle in talent but not in meeting the players needs. There will certainly be DA capable players that will freely choose ECNL for many of the stated reasons. Does that make it "second fiddle" if that's all you need from it? A high quality league that exposes your player to colleges while also providing the flexibility to be a multisport athlete?

You are allowing your ego to make the ranking yourself.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:^^^ Something else to think about. We select too early. This area sets kids on teams (A, B, C, etc. ) and keeps them there like Civil Servants from the youngest of ages. There is very little roster mixing or switching from then on. They hype up 10 years old as the next greatest thing. If your kid is going to tryout for any elite team, DA team, etc. you must put the current team and rank (A team, C team, etc.). This is used to weed out before the kid is even seen. This often results in a kid not even getting an invite at 10-11 to tryout. That kid then rides on his reputation all the way up the system and then we wonder why the 'best' we have is never good enough.

This article by a German study just came out about the very poor correlation between early athletic success and adult athletic success. It was in last week's Soccer Wire.

"Junior success is a poor indicator of long-term senior success,” said Dr. Arne Güllich, who is the Head of Department of Sport Science and Director of the Institute of Applied Sport Science at Kaiserslautern University of Technology. “Their success at the age of 10 had a zero correlation with their success as a senior. Same was true with their success at 11-14, 15-18. We have a zero correlation.”

“That means, those who were better at a young age were not those who were better at an older age,” Güllich said. “This also applies to different types of sports – CGS sports (where performances are measured in centimetres, grams and seconds), games sports, combat sports, artistic composition sports. The results are all the same across all different types of sports.”

Professor Güllich gave an example from the German football TDP (talent development programme) system to show that the most successful seniors were not selected particularly early.

“Of those who were recruited at an age of under 11 or under 13, at the age of under 19, only 9 percent are left. On the other hand, those who made it to the national A team of Germany, those we see in the World Cup for example, were being built up gradually across all age stages,” he said.

“The population of senior top athletes emerges in the course of repeated selection, de-selection, and replacements across all age stages rather than developing from those early selected,” he added.

In fact, what stood out from his research was that world-class athletes did not just focus on their sport from a young age, but played more than one sport.

His research has shown that German Olympic medalists played two or three other sports at a high level before focusing on their main sport at 20.

“The world-class athlete differs from those who made it only to national class, not by having engaged in more sports specific training in their main sport, this was indifferent, or they even trained less at a young age at their later main sport, but consistently, they engaged in more activity in other sports,” said Professor Güllich.

He also found that early specialisation may lead to success at a youth level, but not necessarily at a world level.

“Consistently, those who were recruited into the system earlier, started specialising significantly earlier. As a result, looking at where they got to in the long term, those recruited earlier were more successful at a youth age, but they were under-represented in terms of senior world class (top ten worldwide),” said Professor Güllich

“There were athletes who did not exceed initial D squad (regional junior squad), they were first recruited into the system at 15 years. The C squad (the national junior squad) were first recruited at the age of 17. Those who made it to senior world class (A squad) were first recruited at 19 years. So the more successful at the senior level, the later was the recruitment into the talent development system.”

Example from the German football TDP system

“Of those who were recruited at an age of under 11 or under 13, at the age of under 19, only 9% are left. On the other hand, those who made it to the national A team of Germany, those we see in the World Cup for example, were being built up gradually across all age stages.”

Link?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:A couple of little notes here

Some of the top teams competing in National league have joined the boys ECNL. There are several YOuth National Team players on these squads. Top Colleges will attend tge showcases. There will be many multi sport exceptional athletes on show.

In comparison to Boys DA it may be a little step behind but not by much, clubs like Baltimore Celtic regularly scrimmage D.C. United and the scores are always marginal either way. Our local mls club does not do a fantastic job with DA and the surrounding clubs who also have DA at younger age groups only run to u14 and u15. For players looking to go to college who cannot make a D.C. United squad of 20 at their age will look to ECNL as the next best option. National league will now be as diluted as ever.

Hmm. Not sure about all of this. Baltimore Celtic is an anomaly, and I doubt the typical club in ENPL will have its level of success. Celtic is indeed currently a strong club for boys in the older age groups, has had some national team players in the recent past, plus some now who are being heavily recruited for college. But its best teams and players (other than those who came from Fewster recently) joined the club because of the Steven Nichols split from the Bays a few years ago. That happened, and Celtic continues to have a strong pool, because of unique Baltimore-related factors, including the presence of schools like McDonogh that offer sports scholarships and have a strong soccer tradition. Not to mention the Celtic coaches that are or were affiliated with McDonogh. Not sure if Celtic will stay as strong for coming years with Nichols and other top coaches having left Celtic for Baltimore Armour, but maybe they will because of the private school factor in that area. In any case, few teams outside the DA are as strong as Celtic's best ones.

Agree that DC United's academy is underwhelming in a lot of ways due to its lack of funding and organization, but it still does pretty well with getting players into the pipeline. And it's not the only game in town. Bethesda and Baltimore Armour have strong teams in many DA age groups, and Bethesda has had excellent college commitments and national team placements the last few years. I expect Armour to as well--they have had a really strong start for a younger academy. Reports have suggested a full DA may be coming to NoVa too, so the landscaping will be changing yet again in that case.

Until everything has shaken out a few years down the road, if my son was talented and cared about recruitment or potential national team selection, I'd stick with DA or a non-DA club (like Celtic) with a strong multi-year history of good placement. No clue what I would do on the girls' side.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^^by calling it 2nd fiddle--you are the problem too.

All this area is doing is diluting things and creating more dubious ways to rank shit.

No, not at all. The DA exists as a scouting platform for players with National Team/Professional potential. It was not created by U.S. Soccer to develop players for college rosters. That most of the players highest level achieved will be college is not a ranking but a simple outcome of its stated mission.

ECNL was all to happy to develop with playing in college as the stated outcome.

Two different missions. ECNL offers a prospective college bound player the opportunity to explore other athletic (high school sports) and social endeavors that the DA would limit or outright restrict participation. It might play second fiddle in talent but not in meeting the players needs. There will certainly be DA capable players that will freely choose ECNL for many of the stated reasons. Does that make it "second fiddle" if that's all you need from it? A high quality league that exposes your player to colleges while also providing the flexibility to be a multisport athlete?

You are allowing your ego to make the ranking yourself.

If the DA is the only scouting platform for future professionals then this country is screwed. The DA clubs are not doing a very good job at development so why pretend they are ? Why only scout from that league when we know 90% of their U12-U15 age groups won't still be considered elite at U19 ?

[Anonymous]

^^yes. The problem is DA does not scout. Due to location and driving demands it also shuts a huge amount of players in the DMV.

It mostly has "invitation only" tryouts by kids pre-selected by home club coaches--some truly shitty--who are in the system. Can you say "biased"?

Some of our best players have zero desire to play in the MLS. It's not that lucrative and kids growing up watching Real Madrid and Barca--have zero MLS heroes. My young boys can name some truly obscure FIFA players--in fact due to the Panini sticker books can name full rosters of Foreign National teams.

Their one USMNT hero bypassed the MLS for Europe.

That said--why DA? If you aren't good enough to make the big $ overseas and you don't want to make mediocre $ for a short MLS career-- a very smart kid is better off leveraging his talent to a college where he can get a top-notch engineering degree or the like.

This is why some of the best players in the Nation don't do DA.

Completely left out of this conversation are the many US kids that don't ha e the resources ($, rides to games/practices and parent commitment) to even play travel soccer.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:^^yes. The problem is DA does not scout. Due to location and driving demands it also shuts a huge amount of players in the DMV.

It mostly has "invitation only" tryouts by kids pre-selected by home club coaches--some truly shitty--who are in the system. Can you say "biased"?

Some of our best players have zero desire to play in the MLS. It's not that lucrative and kids growing up watching Real Madrid and Barca--have zero MLS heroes. My young boys can name some truly obscure FIFA players--in fact due to the Panini sticker books can name full rosters of Foreign National teams.

Their one USMNT hero bypassed the MLS for Europe.

That said--why DA? If you aren't good enough to make the big $ overseas and you don't want to make mediocre $ for a short MLS career-- a very smart kid is better off leveraging his talent to a college where he can get a top-notch engineering degree or the like.

This is why some of the best players in the Nation don't do DA.

Completely left out of this conversation are the many US kids that don't ha e the resources ($, rides to games/practices and parent commitment) to even play travel soccer.

So take your kids to a dadgum D.C. United game every once in a while. Let them see live soccer.

The mean salary in MLS now is over $300,000. The median is $117,000. That'll grow considerably over the next few years.

And if they aren't sure-fire pros at age 18, then go to college with some scholarship money. Upon graduation, they can try to break into MLS or use that degree to do ... something. I don't know -- the soccer players at my school weren't the brightest bulbs. Not going to see a lot of them in engineering classes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^^by calling it 2nd fiddle--you are the problem too.

All this area is doing is diluting things and creating more dubious ways to rank shit.

No, not at all. The DA exists as a scouting platform for players with National Team/Professional potential. It was not created by U.S. Soccer to develop players for college rosters. That most of the players highest level achieved will be college is not a ranking but a simple outcome of its stated mission.

ECNL was all to happy to develop with playing in college as the stated outcome.

Two different missions. ECNL offers a prospective college bound player the opportunity to explore other athletic (high school sports) and social endeavors that the DA would limit or outright restrict participation. It might play second fiddle in talent but not in meeting the players needs. There will certainly be DA capable players that will freely choose ECNL for many of the stated reasons. Does that make it "second fiddle" if that's all you need from it? A high quality league that exposes your player to colleges while also providing the flexibility to be a multisport athlete?

You are allowing your ego to make the ranking yourself.

If the DA is the only scouting platform for future professionals then this country is screwed. The DA clubs are not doing a very good job at development so why pretend they are ? Why only scout from that league when we know 90% of their U12-U15 age groups won't still be considered elite at U19 ?

Scouting/Development. But that misses the point. The point is, the ultimate goal for the DA is not every players ultimate goal or a realistic objective. But, the desired DA path is to have players head in more of a profesional playing environment. This means that at the older ages it is not for everyone and ECNL and ENPL still have a role and can provide value.

[Anonymous]

And the DA training at U12-14 as it has been housed out to local clubs is questionable.

I think a player putting in many of those hours on individual skills at that age is going to be a better return on development. I would look to a decent level club with good training that doesn't take up 5-6 days of the player's schedule so they can run their own drills/skills and work with somebody on their personal weakness areas.

Further, as the article quoted above states--multiple sports is valuable to an athlete's development.