ECNL moving to school year part 2

[Anonymous]

Anyone that talks about “athleticism” as a key factor in being on the A team and therefore being “better” knows next to nothing about the sport. It’s the American football / basketball mentality being applied to soccer. It’s one of the reasons our national teams suck and we don’t produce any elite talents.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Anyone that talks about “athleticism” as a key factor in being on the A team and therefore being “better” knows next to nothing about the sport. It’s the American football / basketball mentality being applied to soccer. It’s one of the reasons our national teams suck and we don’t produce any elite talents.

On the girls side it's what college coaches look for. Partially because aggression and power is a shortcut to wins and Partially because posession soccer takes too long and too much resourses to develop.

It's not that people dont agree with you. But if you were a first year college coach and your job depended on wins what would you do? Hint, the quickest way to short term wins is aggression and athleticism. Also the rules (infinite subs) encourages this type of behavior.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Anyone that talks about “athleticism” as a key factor in being on the A team and therefore being “better” knows next to nothing about the sport. It’s the American football / basketball mentality being applied to soccer. It’s one of the reasons our national teams suck and we don’t produce any elite talents.

On the girls side it's what college coaches look for.[u] Partially because aggression and power is a shortcut to wins and Partially because posession soccer takes too long and too much resourses to develop.

It's not that people dont agree with you. But if you were a first year college coach and your job depended on wins what would you do? Hint, the quickest way to short term wins is aggression and athleticism. Also the rules (infinite subs) encourages this type of behavior.

I agree with the above poster. We just had the women's NCAA championship match that featured Stanford (highly skilled) vs Florida State (highly athletic). Florida State won 1-0 off the prowess of a very athletic front line. While you may be angry that your player is of a normal or small size or despite all their hard work, they are being beaten out by taller, faster and stronger kids is understandable. It is a hard reality of soccer and most sports in general. Sure, there are extreme exceptions, but at the highest levels that a majority of these players will ever reach, athleticism seems to matter a lot. For every person who cites 'Messi' as an example a small player who really dominates the sport, I could give you 10 examples of players who are more athletic and also play at the pro level. We have a very dedicated family who raising a phenomenal goal keeper, she has real skill in the position. (And American goalkeepers are considered to be some of the best in the world partially based on their size and strength.) But both parents are under 5'7" and 5'5" ...despite how much training they will put this kid though, in the end athleticism will never pit that kid in the same circle as keepers who are about 6' foot tall.

Also, parents of younger athletes in smaller clubs seem to adopt this attitude. But that attitude changers once you get to a bigger club at the older age groups, most highly skilled players just become plain ineffective against much larger & physically stronger players.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Anyone that talks about “athleticism” as a key factor in being on the A team and therefore being “better” knows next to nothing about the sport. It’s the American football / basketball mentality being applied to soccer. It’s one of the reasons our national teams suck and we don’t produce any elite talents.

On the girls side it's what college coaches look for.[u] Partially because aggression and power is a shortcut to wins and Partially because posession soccer takes too long and too much resourses to develop.

It's not that people dont agree with you. But if you were a first year college coach and your job depended on wins what would you do? Hint, the quickest way to short term wins is aggression and athleticism. Also the rules (infinite subs) encourages this type of behavior.

I agree with the above poster. We just had the women's NCAA championship match that featured Stanford (highly skilled) vs Florida State (highly athletic). Florida State won 1-0 off the prowess of a very athletic front line. While you may be angry that your player is of a normal or small size or despite all their hard work, they are being beaten out by taller, faster and stronger kids is understandable. It is a hard reality of soccer and most sports in general. Sure, there are extreme exceptions, but at the highest levels that a majority of these players will ever reach, athleticism seems to matter a lot. For every person who cites 'Messi' as an example a small player who really dominates the sport, I could give you 10 examples of players who are more athletic and also play at the pro level. We have a very dedicated family who raising a phenomenal goal keeper, she has real skill in the position. (And American goalkeepers are considered to be some of the best in the world partially based on their size and strength.) But both parents are under 5'7" and 5'5" ...despite how much training they will put this kid though, in the end athleticism will never pit that kid in the same circle as keepers who are about 6' foot tall.

Also, parents of younger athletes in smaller clubs seem to adopt this attitude. But that attitude changers once you get to a bigger club at the older age groups, most highly skilled players just become plain ineffective against much larger & physically stronger players.

This also dips into the world of the RAE believers. When players are young (pre 11v11) sure being the oldest and good coaches can translate into wins. However once you get to 11v11 it means less and less. For girls simply being aggressive will open doors. Also at the highest levels you start running into the freaks of nature that are 1-2 years younger but still dominate on the field. When this happens guess who gets picked first by college coaches? Its hard to explain this type of thing to youngers parents because if they didnt play at a high level its not what they're seeing on the field. They see the benefits of privates with the coach or expensive club camps on shooting or defense or whatever. Which btw is just a mechanism clubs use to identify parents with $$$ that pay.

Not trying to be negative but if youngers parents literally sat down and watched a college game it would likely change their approach and provide perspective.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Anyone that talks about “athleticism” as a key factor in being on the A team and therefore being “better” knows next to nothing about the sport. It’s the American football / basketball mentality being applied to soccer. It’s one of the reasons our national teams suck and we don’t produce any elite talents.

On the girls side it's what college coaches look for.[u] Partially because aggression and power is a shortcut to wins and Partially because posession soccer takes too long and too much resourses to develop.

It's not that people dont agree with you. But if you were a first year college coach and your job depended on wins what would you do? Hint, the quickest way to short term wins is aggression and athleticism. Also the rules (infinite subs) encourages this type of behavior.

I agree with the above poster. We just had the women's NCAA championship match that featured Stanford (highly skilled) vs Florida State (highly athletic). Florida State won 1-0 off the prowess of a very athletic front line. While you may be angry that your player is of a normal or small size or despite all their hard work, they are being beaten out by taller, faster and stronger kids is understandable. It is a hard reality of soccer and most sports in general. Sure, there are extreme exceptions, but at the highest levels that a majority of these players will ever reach, athleticism seems to matter a lot. For every person who cites 'Messi' as an example a small player who really dominates the sport, I could give you 10 examples of players who are more athletic and also play at the pro level. We have a very dedicated family who raising a phenomenal goal keeper, she has real skill in the position. (And American goalkeepers are considered to be some of the best in the world partially based on their size and strength.) But both parents are under 5'7" and 5'5" ...despite how much training they will put this kid though, in the end athleticism will never pit that kid in the same circle as keepers who are about 6' foot tall.

Also, parents of younger athletes in smaller clubs seem to adopt this attitude. But that attitude changers once you get to a bigger club at the older age groups, most highly skilled players just become plain ineffective against much larger & physically stronger players.

I hate it that short-skilled players constantly get short shrift no matter. The ones that compete at high levels, they also are SUPER athletic. What makes messi so amazing is it seems like he slows everything down but it's all at full speed.

[Anonymous]

All professional athletes - especially in leagues like Premiere and La Liga, but even MLS - are athletically gifted. However, when that athleticism surfaces can vary greatly pre or post puberty.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Anyone that talks about “athleticism” as a key factor in being on the A team and therefore being “better” knows next to nothing about the sport. It’s the American football / basketball mentality being applied to soccer. It’s one of the reasons our national teams suck and we don’t produce any elite talents.

Say this again for the slow ones in the back!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Anyone that talks about “athleticism” as a key factor in being on the A team and therefore being “better” knows next to nothing about the sport. It’s the American football / basketball mentality being applied to soccer. It’s one of the reasons our national teams suck and we don’t produce any elite talents.

On the girls side it's what college coaches look for.[u] Partially because aggression and power is a shortcut to wins and Partially because posession soccer takes too long and too much resourses to develop.

It's not that people dont agree with you. But if you were a first year college coach and your job depended on wins what would you do? Hint, the quickest way to short term wins is aggression and athleticism. Also the rules (infinite subs) encourages this type of behavior.

I agree with the above poster. We just had the women's NCAA championship match that featured Stanford (highly skilled) vs Florida State (highly athletic). Florida State won 1-0 off the prowess of a very athletic front line. While you may be angry that your player is of a normal or small size or despite all their hard work, they are being beaten out by taller, faster and stronger kids is understandable. It is a hard reality of soccer and most sports in general. Sure, there are extreme exceptions, but at the highest levels that a majority of these players will ever reach, athleticism seems to matter a lot. For every person who cites 'Messi' as an example a small player who really dominates the sport, I could give you 10 examples of players who are more athletic and also play at the pro level. We have a very dedicated family who raising a phenomenal goal keeper, she has real skill in the position. (And American goalkeepers are considered to be some of the best in the world partially based on their size and strength.) But both parents are under 5'7" and 5'5" ...despite how much training they will put this kid though, in the end athleticism will never pit that kid in the same circle as keepers who are about 6' foot tall.

Also, parents of younger athletes in smaller clubs seem to adopt this attitude. But that attitude changers once you get to a bigger club at the older age groups, most highly skilled players just become plain ineffective against much larger & physically stronger players.

Two points here.

First, the capability of being athletic is different for different kids at different ages. A kid that super athletic at age 12 may not be super athletic at age 18. Different kids mature at different stages of life and are not capable of developing more speed during certain stages. For example, a kid in his PHV stage of development may get slower if he trains too much speed. A kid in late PHV or right after PHV is primed to gain lots of speed. You can’t really judge athleticism for kids until they reach 18 or 19.

Second, the best men’s players in the world today are not all super athletic. The USMNT is just as athletic or more athletic than most of the top national teams in the world. Still, they suck.

Argentina won the WC last time and did not have the most athletic team. Spain is likely to be the favorite this time and they don’t have an athletic team.

Different roles require different levels of athleticism. Wingers and fullbacks need to be fast. But the players in the middle do not. In fact, the players in the middle need skill and brains - skills and brains to keep the ball in congested areas, dribble in these areas, and make killer passes in these areas. Being “athletic” in these areas doesn’t really help.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Anyone that talks about “athleticism” as a key factor in being on the A team and therefore being “better” knows next to nothing about the sport. It’s the American football / basketball mentality being applied to soccer. It’s one of the reasons our national teams suck and we don’t produce any elite talents.

On the girls side it's what college coaches look for.[u] Partially because aggression and power is a shortcut to wins and Partially because posession soccer takes too long and too much resourses to develop.

It's not that people dont agree with you. But if you were a first year college coach and your job depended on wins what would you do? Hint, the quickest way to short term wins is aggression and athleticism. Also the rules (infinite subs) encourages this type of behavior.

I agree with the above poster. We just had the women's NCAA championship match that featured Stanford (highly skilled) vs Florida State (highly athletic). Florida State won 1-0 off the prowess of a very athletic front line. While you may be angry that your player is of a normal or small size or despite all their hard work, they are being beaten out by taller, faster and stronger kids is understandable. It is a hard reality of soccer and most sports in general. Sure, there are extreme exceptions, but at the highest levels that a majority of these players will ever reach, athleticism seems to matter a lot. For every person who cites 'Messi' as an example a small player who really dominates the sport, I could give you 10 examples of players who are more athletic and also play at the pro level. We have a very dedicated family who raising a phenomenal goal keeper, she has real skill in the position. (And American goalkeepers are considered to be some of the best in the world partially based on their size and strength.) But both parents are under 5'7" and 5'5" ...despite how much training they will put this kid though, in the end athleticism will never pit that kid in the same circle as keepers who are about 6' foot tall.

Also, parents of younger athletes in smaller clubs seem to adopt this attitude. But that attitude changers once you get to a bigger club at the older age groups, most highly skilled players just become plain ineffective against much larger & physically stronger players.

I hate it that short-skilled players constantly get short shrift no matter. The ones that compete at high levels, they also are SUPER athletic. What makes messi so amazing is it seems like he slows everything down but it's all at full speed.

Messi is special because his technical skills are the best in the world. The ball sticks to his feet.

In soccer, the best measure of a player’s skill level is how much he slows down when he has the ball at his feet relative to sprinting. If you can dribble with close control at a pace that is only 10-20% slower than when you sprint, your technical skills are elite. If you are super pacy but the ball control is mediocre, your speed is irrelevant.

[Anonymous]

It’s time to finally put this thread to rest. We know everything we wanted.

ECNL/GA and majority leagues switching to 8/1. MLSN tier 1 staying BY.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It’s time to finally put this thread to rest. We know everything we wanted.

ECNL/GA and majority leagues switching to 8/1. MLSN tier 1 staying BY.

What I wonder was how close was GA to staying BY?

Also if NWSL follows the MLS path what are the chances that we'll see a top level girls BY league sometime in the future?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Anyone that talks about “athleticism” as a key factor in being on the A team and therefore being “better” knows next to nothing about the sport. It’s the American football / basketball mentality being applied to soccer. It’s one of the reasons our national teams suck and we don’t produce any elite talents.

On the girls side it's what college coaches look for. Partially because aggression and power is a shortcut to wins and Partially because posession soccer takes too long and too much resourses to develop.

It's not that people dont agree with you. But if you were a first year college coach and your job depended on wins what would you do? Hint, the quickest way to short term wins is aggression and athleticism. Also the rules (infinite subs) encourages this type of behavior.

The secret that no one talks about is 99% of college soccer coaches’ jobs are not dependent on winning. The colleges just do not care about the record of their soccer teams. It’s nice if they win but they are okay with a coach who has a losing record for 10 years.

Also college soccer is not a high level of soccer. It is basically the same as the ECNL feeder league. College take most all the ECNL player plus GA and others leagues.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Anyone that talks about “athleticism” as a key factor in being on the A team and therefore being “better” knows next to nothing about the sport. It’s the American football / basketball mentality being applied to soccer. It’s one of the reasons our national teams suck and we don’t produce any elite talents.

On the girls side it's what college coaches look for.[u] Partially because aggression and power is a shortcut to wins and Partially because posession soccer takes too long and too much resourses to develop.

It's not that people dont agree with you. But if you were a first year college coach and your job depended on wins what would you do? Hint, the quickest way to short term wins is aggression and athleticism. Also the rules (infinite subs) encourages this type of behavior.

I agree with the above poster. We just had the women's NCAA championship match that featured Stanford (highly skilled) vs Florida State (highly athletic). Florida State won 1-0 off the prowess of a very athletic front line. While you may be angry that your player is of a normal or small size or despite all their hard work, they are being beaten out by taller, faster and stronger kids is understandable. It is a hard reality of soccer and most sports in general. Sure, there are extreme exceptions, but at the highest levels that a majority of these players will ever reach, athleticism seems to matter a lot. For every person who cites 'Messi' as an example a small player who really dominates the sport, I could give you 10 examples of players who are more athletic and also play at the pro level. We have a very dedicated family who raising a phenomenal goal keeper, she has real skill in the position. (And American goalkeepers are considered to be some of the best in the world partially based on their size and strength.) But both parents are under 5'7" and 5'5" ...despite how much training they will put this kid though, in the end athleticism will never pit that kid in the same circle as keepers who are about 6' foot tall.

Also, parents of younger athletes in smaller clubs seem to adopt this attitude. But that attitude changers once you get to a bigger club at the older age groups, most highly skilled players just become plain ineffective against much larger & physically stronger players.

Two points here.

First, the capability of being athletic is different for different kids at different ages. A kid that super athletic at age 12 may not be super athletic at age 18. Different kids mature at different stages of life and are not capable of developing more speed during certain stages. For example, a kid in his PHV stage of development may get slower if he trains too much speed. A kid in late PHV or right after PHV is primed to gain lots of speed. You can’t really judge athleticism for kids until they reach 18 or 19.

Second, the best men’s players in the world today are not all super athletic. The USMNT is just as athletic or more athletic than most of the top national teams in the world. Still, they suck.

Argentina won the WC last time and did not have the most athletic team. Spain is likely to be the favorite this time and they don’t have an athletic team.

Different roles require different levels of athleticism. Wingers and fullbacks need to be fast. But the players in the middle do not. In fact, the players in the middle need skill and brains - skills and brains to keep the ball in congested areas, dribble in these areas, and make killer passes in these areas. Being “athletic” in these areas doesn’t really help.

You don’t think Spain’s national team is athletic?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Can someone explain the US club announcement about NPL, RL, ECNL?

I thought they are already all
Connected and you can work your way up the latter.

I’m not understanding what’s different?

They are currently part of the same overarching “club” system (US Soccer).

Currently to be in RL, your local club must be able to field “competitive” teams for boys and girls for all ages. And yes definitely some exceptions but that is the general rule. RL is considered the 2nd tier behind ECNL.

NPL is considered the 3rd tier but there are certainly some teams within a club that are really good. Just the club as a whole isn’t at the RL level.

The announcement indicates there will now be a pathway for the best NPL teams (not the whole club) to play against RL teams in the playoffs.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Anyone that talks about “athleticism” as a key factor in being on the A team and therefore being “better” knows next to nothing about the sport. It’s the American football / basketball mentality being applied to soccer. It’s one of the reasons our national teams suck and we don’t produce any elite talents.

On the girls side it's what college coaches look for. Partially because aggression and power is a shortcut to wins and Partially because posession soccer takes too long and too much resourses to develop.

It's not that people dont agree with you. But if you were a first year college coach and your job depended on wins what would you do? Hint, the quickest way to short term wins is aggression and athleticism. Also the rules (infinite subs) encourages this type of behavior.

The secret that no one talks about is 99% of college soccer coaches’ jobs are not dependent on winning. The colleges just do not care about the record of their soccer teams. It’s nice if they win but they are okay with a coach who has a losing record for 10 years.

Also college soccer is not a high level of soccer. It is basically the same as the ECNL feeder league. College take most all the ECNL player plus GA and others leagues.

You are either tolling or clueless