Taka and MLSNext QoP ratings

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You can see which teams are developing players the right way in MLS/Taka's eyes.

Teams that are doing better in the standings than in the QoS Rankings are winning through size, physicality, kickball approach.

Some teams may not be winning but are developing players the "right" way.

I think you are reading too much into the QoP ratings. Maybe if a team performs poorly, but has a few good players, the QoP ratings will be higher, but that doesn't mean that the club is doing a good job of developing kids. There are too many variables regarding why some individual players perform well. Of course, the club will be happy to claim that their great coaching developed the kid.

Not to be a pessimist here (especially because I believe a QoP would indeed be better for development sake), but this would involve a comprehensive assessment throughout the game. Someone will have to watch the whole game and go through all of the player actions and assess whether their actions qualify as "making the correct runs", whether a pass was truly an "assist", whether or the defenders' positioning caused the offense to redirect, etc. This would likely required dedicated staff. This would likely require higher fees for parents. See what I'm getting at?

Taka does this. You receive notice that a game is ready. You see the number of highlights your son was identified on and then then each clip is placed in one of 6 buckets to review: On Ball, Defensive, Aerial, Physical—I forget the others. Coaches and recruiters have access to these so they are able to review and scout as needed. It’s a slick interface.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You can see which teams are developing players the right way in MLS/Taka's eyes.

Teams that are doing better in the standings than in the QoS Rankings are winning through size, physicality, kickball approach.

Some teams may not be winning but are developing players the "right" way.

I think you are reading too much into the QoP ratings. Maybe if a team performs poorly, but has a few good players, the QoP ratings will be higher, but that doesn't mean that the club is doing a good job of developing kids. There are too many variables regarding why some individual players perform well. Of course, the club will be happy to claim that their great coaching developed the kid.

Not to be a pessimist here (especially because I believe a QoP would indeed be better for development sake), but this would involve a comprehensive assessment throughout the game. Someone will have to watch the whole game and go through all of the player actions and assess whether their actions qualify as "making the correct runs", whether a pass was truly an "assist", whether or the defenders' positioning caused the offense to redirect, etc. This would likely required dedicated staff. This would likely require higher fees for parents. See what I'm getting at?

From what the links (goal.com) above say, there are people watching the videos. Apparently some people in Eastern Europe.

Whether watching videos or attending games live, someone has to make observations and assessments. Highly doubt they’ll do this for free. Which means more money out of parents’ pockets

Bur they already are (see cut and paste from article below). Are you saying they will increase their rates?



“Taka is the group responsible for doing all of this. An Irish company who have consulted for Premier League clubs in performance models, they were the perfect match. They applied for MLS's request for proposal a year ago, and brought their technology to the league.

Taka, in short, is an in-depth data platform that "grades" actions of play on a soccer pitch. All of this is done by real humans, remotely. After every game, employees in Eastern Europe scour game film, and score every pass, every dribble, every shot, every tackle. Those "actions" are then evaluated - admittedly subjectively - as either positive or negative. The results are subsequently uploaded to a platform that players and coaches alike can access. The whole process takes about four hours.

Crucially, Taka employs soccer people, not mathematicians. Every summer, the company advertises the job, asking would-be applicants to, effectively, grade a soccer match. They then take the top 15 percent, and put them through their paces to test their game understanding. Those who are deemed to have the right amount of knowledge to break down thousands of individual instances - from first touches to 30-yard screamers - are then brought on.

"If you ask a mathematician to look at a soccer game, they won't understand," CEO Mark Shields said. "They are soccer people. And then the mathematicians are in the sort of modeling process."

And every year, there's widespread interest - yes, even if it means watching hours of occasionally low-quality youth soccer.

"We get loads of people applying because we're talking about a job, basically as a video scout for soccer," he said.”

Again, I’m not skeptical of the benefits nor the efficacy. The question I have is how does Taka get paid? I would guess it’s a paid service and that would mean for us parents it comes with added fees.

It breaks down to $15 a month. Peanuts.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This is a slippery slope from a privacy perspective.

If player stats and vides are posted somewhere without parents awareness or ability to control visibility and/or who can watch their kid or see their stats, that is a problem.

Nobody is talking about this but they should be. Taka can say whatever they want but what legal recourse is there for a players stats not to be published to people who pay Taka?

Let’s patents worry about their own children. But thanks for your input.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This is a slippery slope from a privacy perspective.

If player stats and vides are posted somewhere without parents awareness or ability to control visibility and/or who can watch their kid or see their stats, that is a problem.

Nobody is talking about this but they should be. Taka can say whatever they want but what legal recourse is there for a players stats not to be published to people who pay Taka?

I would check the fine print of whatever a parent signs when they signup for their kids profile. I feel like there was prob some checkbox on some privacy and waiver language.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This is a slippery slope from a privacy perspective.

If player stats and vides are posted somewhere without parents awareness or ability to control visibility and/or who can watch their kid or see their stats, that is a problem.

Nobody is talking about this but they should be. Taka can say whatever they want but what legal recourse is there for a players stats not to be published to people who pay Taka?

You know that it is people like you that cause municipalities to close grass fields when it rains and people to rent fields to cover insurance for free play. How in the world do you bring in attorney’s for youth football?

As stated two pages ago, they simply want parents to stay away from the standings. Plain and simple. Yet, you guys are trying to break down an algorithm.

Google Chris Robinson, current Southampton scout. He has many interviews that talks about the nuance of scouting. It goes way beyond analytics.

Learn the system if you want but the best way to help your child is to watch football and ask questions of coaches and professionals.

Talk to your club if you want your kid isolated from Taka records. It does not have to be this complicated.

[Anonymous]

Talk to me when your kid is in the recurring window.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Talk to me when your kid is in the recurring window.

What’s the recurring window?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Talk to me when your kid is in the recurring window.

What’s the recurring window?

Keeps opening and closing

[Anonymous]

I'm not sure what the big deal is about privacy. The only thing uploaded is public: video of a game played openly for anyone who wants to watch. On one's personal Taka account, one can select what information from their profile to make public (i.e. contact info, etc.).

I paid the $129 for the year's subscription. I view it as a relatively inexpensive valuable tool to help my player review their plays which ended well or ended poorly so they can learn and improve. One interesting decision Taka made was none of a player's negative plays are viewable by scouts/recruiters.

To the questions about not focusing on winning. The QoP rankings from MLS do include goals scored. A play that results in a goal is a high quality play and thus accrues significantly to the team's ranking. If you visit the MLSNext website, the scores of each game are in the drop down for each team.

Overall, I really like this development. It's not THE answer to everything, but my player and I value this additional tool for the current price. Would I pay $1000 per year for it? Probably not, but $129 is fine.

[Anonymous]

Dark horse offers a similar service.