Girls' Academy has also been approved to become a U.S. Soccer member!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What I'm reading is that a league adding more clubs doesn't really matter. Also the concept of "dilution" only affects mega clubs ability to collect talent.

The only person potentially affected is a guy that runs a recruiterment business and writes opeds about how inconvenienced thay are by going to more than one showcase.

GA and ECNL clubs are supposed to be mega clubs with the ability to collect talent. That's the whole point of having regional and national leagues

Ahh so all the DPL, ECRL, etc players won't go to the newly minted GA teams?

Is this you're arguement?

Are enough of them good enough to fill out all of the new GA and ECNL roster spaces?

I don't know.

If only there was something clubs could to to make them better. Maybe we could call it development.

How was Spain a small country in Europe able to beat the USWNT in the last women's world cup?

The truth is that there's sooo much more potential talent in America than is currently being tapped into.

Instead if trying to block others out you should be encouraging growth in the sport.

The talent in Spain is distilled not watered down like here. Just adding every Tom, Dick and Harry club into GA is not tapping into unseen talent and it isn't creating an environment where the best go against the best every week. Why do you think clubs like Nationals left? They left because their players were rarely challenged in GA week in and week out.

[Anonymous]

To a degree the volume the GA is adding seems overwhelming, but you do have to look at it from a business perspective too.

I think the GA has conceded it has lost the quality battle, so it becomes more of a business approach which appears to be the strategy.
+ Add clubs in geographic gaps
+ Ensure you end with a net positive of clubs
+ Allows for league fees, registration fees, player fees & events to continue to increase the bottom line

Overall the GA:
+ 15 Clubs (one is a second spot)
- 6 clubs (Nationals & Lonestar represent 2 each due to 2 spots)

Right now the GA is net positive 9 clubs, so in a healthy financial position for next year.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can someone explain to me why a league adding more clubs is a bad thing?

If the clubs being added are high level there will be competition and maybe different clubs would go to the finals.

If the clubs being added are lower level there won't be added competition and the same dominate clubs will go to the finals.

From a high level recruitment perspective adding more clubs to a league doesn't change anything. The same top clubs get recruited regardless of league.

Adding low level clubs dilutes the talent pool. Ideally, you would encourage the best players to leave low level teams and come together on higher level teams. This encourages them to remain with their current clubs. Just in NOVA, you now have three GA teams. Are there really enough girls choosing GA over ECNL to fill out all of those rosters with even regionally let alone nationally competitive teams?

Yes, but why is diluting the talent pool bad? Bad for who? Isn’t it good for the clubs and the players that get to participate? The top players are still the top players and they will get seen just as much, they’ll just have fewer other top players on their team. What is your concern about having more teams in a league?

Because it is supposed to be "elite". These are showcase leagues and if the process is complicated due to dilution it becomes harder to find top talent even in showcases claiming to have top talent.:

https://www.soccerwire.com/soccer-blog/veteran-scout-college-coaches-growing-frustrated-with-ongoing-duel-between-ecnl-and-girls-academy/

"While the GA remains a clear cut No. 2 on the national landscape with plenty of future NCAA Division 1 players and undoubtedly some future professional players in its ranks, there’s no denying the pattern that is taking place, with top GA clubs continuing to join (or re-join) the ECNL.

This has resulted in the GA adding clubs to its own ranks while the ECNL also expands in other ways. According to the hundreds of college coaches I speak to weekly, this process has added thousands of new recruits to an already overcrowded recruiting landscape. For some, it has made the process of scouting and evaluating potential recruits entirely unmanageable."

I see. So it’s bad for college recruiters who will need to be better at finding players instead of just going to one place? I’m ok having bigger leagues that are better for players and clubs with the trade off that it’s worse for college recruiters that only affects a small number

It's not good for top players if they aren't being challenged on a weekly basis. The never expanding leagues is simply watering down the product and competition for all involved.

It is good for the bubble kid until they spent thousands of dollars to still not stand out.

Having proper tiers is good for the sport and good for the players. A well structured pyramid is needed more than the current state of flattening the access to these leagues while still calling them "elite". It is serving nobody's needs. Not the player, the colleges or our culture of soccer.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:To a degree the volume the GA is adding seems overwhelming, but you do have to look at it from a business perspective too.

I think the GA has conceded it has lost the quality battle, so it becomes more of a business approach which appears to be the strategy.
+ Add clubs in geographic gaps
+ Ensure you end with a net positive of clubs
+ Allows for league fees, registration fees, player fees & events to continue to increase the bottom line

Overall the GA:
+ 15 Clubs (one is a second spot)
- 6 clubs (Nationals & Lonestar represent 2 each due to 2 spots)

Right now the GA is net positive 9 clubs, so in a healthy financial position for next year.

That's a lot of effort to ensure being a second tier league. They are really just competing with ECNL R at this point.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:To a degree the volume the GA is adding seems overwhelming, but you do have to look at it from a business perspective too.

I think the GA has conceded it has lost the quality battle, so it becomes more of a business approach which appears to be the strategy.
+ Add clubs in geographic gaps
+ Ensure you end with a net positive of clubs
+ Allows for league fees, registration fees, player fees & events to continue to increase the bottom line

Overall the GA:
+ 15 Clubs (one is a second spot)
- 6 clubs (Nationals & Lonestar represent 2 each due to 2 spots)

Right now the GA is net positive 9 clubs, so in a healthy financial position for next year.

DPL is also trying to hype something. Rumor is multiple NE clubs all at once.

https://www.instagram.com/dp_league/reel/C4-0AaRr8EU/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:To a degree the volume the GA is adding seems overwhelming, but you do have to look at it from a business perspective too.

I think the GA has conceded it has lost the quality battle, so it becomes more of a business approach which appears to be the strategy.
+ Add clubs in geographic gaps
+ Ensure you end with a net positive of clubs
+ Allows for league fees, registration fees, player fees & events to continue to increase the bottom line

Overall the GA:
+ 15 Clubs (one is a second spot)
- 6 clubs (Nationals & Lonestar represent 2 each due to 2 spots)

Right now the GA is net positive 9 clubs, so in a healthy financial position for next year.

That's a lot of effort to ensure being a second tier league. They are really just competing with ECNL R at this point.

I agree, their top 3-4 clubs are fantastic but I think sometimes looking at league wide decisions beyond soccer, and more about business which seems to be the GA model now, gives some different views about why they are adding clubs like they are.

I might be completely off, but just a different look.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What I'm reading is that a league adding more clubs doesn't really matter. Also the concept of "dilution" only affects mega clubs ability to collect talent.

The only person potentially affected is a guy that runs a recruiterment business and writes opeds about how inconvenienced thay are by going to more than one showcase.

GA and ECNL clubs are supposed to be mega clubs with the ability to collect talent. That's the whole point of having regional and national leagues

Ahh so all the DPL, ECRL, etc players won't go to the newly minted GA teams?

Is this you're arguement?

Are enough of them good enough to fill out all of the new GA and ECNL roster spaces?

I don't know.

If only there was something clubs could to to make them better. Maybe we could call it development.

How was Spain a small country in Europe able to beat the USWNT in the last women's world cup?

The truth is that there's sooo much more potential talent in America than is currently being tapped into.

Instead if trying to block others out you should be encouraging growth in the sport.

The talent in Spain is distilled not watered down like here. Just adding every Tom, Dick and Harry club into GA is not tapping into unseen talent and it isn't creating an environment where the best go against the best every week. Why do you think clubs like Nationals left? They left because their players were rarely challenged in GA week in and week out.

That's not it at all. Truth is the US does not care about soccer in any real sense. More care than before but we are a vast country and the level of caring just is not there. There are tons of LAX, Softball, and basketball girls that would be great at soccer but have no interest. Same on mens side. Only a few really are interested.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:To a degree the volume the GA is adding seems overwhelming, but you do have to look at it from a business perspective too.

I think the GA has conceded it has lost the quality battle, so it becomes more of a business approach which appears to be the strategy.
+ Add clubs in geographic gaps
+ Ensure you end with a net positive of clubs
+ Allows for league fees, registration fees, player fees & events to continue to increase the bottom line

Overall the GA:
+ 15 Clubs (one is a second spot)
- 6 clubs (Nationals & Lonestar represent 2 each due to 2 spots)

Right now the GA is net positive 9 clubs, so in a healthy financial position for next year.

That's a lot of effort to ensure being a second tier league. They are really just competing with ECNL R at this point.

I agree, their top 3-4 clubs are fantastic but I think sometimes looking at league wide decisions beyond soccer, and more about business which seems to be the GA model now, gives some different views about why they are adding clubs like they are.

I might be completely off, but just a different look.

So what you're saying is that the top 3-4 GA clubs are getting maximum exposure in GA to scouts.

And looking at ECNLs track record this year the top GA teams are also being schmoozed up by ECNL to try and join their league.

And And US Soccer is strongly hinting that they're planning something like NWSL Next which would most likely go through GA.

What's not to like for a top GA club?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:To a degree the volume the GA is adding seems overwhelming, but you do have to look at it from a business perspective too.

I think the GA has conceded it has lost the quality battle, so it becomes more of a business approach which appears to be the strategy.
+ Add clubs in geographic gaps
+ Ensure you end with a net positive of clubs
+ Allows for league fees, registration fees, player fees & events to continue to increase the bottom line

Overall the GA:
+ 15 Clubs (one is a second spot)
- 6 clubs (Nationals & Lonestar represent 2 each due to 2 spots)

Right now the GA is net positive 9 clubs, so in a healthy financial position for next year.

That's a lot of effort to ensure being a second tier league. They are really just competing with ECNL R at this point.

I agree, their top 3-4 clubs are fantastic but I think sometimes looking at league wide decisions beyond soccer, and more about business which seems to be the GA model now, gives some different views about why they are adding clubs like they are.

I might be completely off, but just a different look.

So what you're saying is that the top 3-4 GA clubs are getting maximum exposure in GA to scouts.

And looking at ECNLs track record this year the top GA teams are also being schmoozed up by ECNL to try and join their league.

And And US Soccer is strongly hinting that they're planning something like NWSL Next which would most likely go through GA.

What's not to like for a top GA club?

I'm saying that next years top three GA clubs were this years 5-10 GA clubs. The top three GA clubs went to ECNL. GA is now just watered down to the point that college coaches will struggle to trust the product of GA in terms of evaluation versus ECNL.

You keep insinuating that GA is somehow in line to be NWSLNext but until that is announced it isn't a thing.

Also, if these are known plans then why are the top clubs still leaving GA? These are smart clubs with a long history of navigating these constant changes. If a future NWSLNext is imminent then why are these top clubs leaving?

You're telling me that Rhode Island Surf SC is privy to information that Nationals are not? Are you telling me that GA's adding clubs like Rhode Island Surf SC is what NWSL is looking at to develop professional players and to anchor a academy system?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:To a degree the volume the GA is adding seems overwhelming, but you do have to look at it from a business perspective too.

I think the GA has conceded it has lost the quality battle, so it becomes more of a business approach which appears to be the strategy.
+ Add clubs in geographic gaps
+ Ensure you end with a net positive of clubs
+ Allows for league fees, registration fees, player fees & events to continue to increase the bottom line

Overall the GA:
+ 15 Clubs (one is a second spot)
- 6 clubs (Nationals & Lonestar represent 2 each due to 2 spots)

Right now the GA is net positive 9 clubs, so in a healthy financial position for next year.

That's a lot of effort to ensure being a second tier league. They are really just competing with ECNL R at this point.

I agree, their top 3-4 clubs are fantastic but I think sometimes looking at league wide decisions beyond soccer, and more about business which seems to be the GA model now, gives some different views about why they are adding clubs like they are.

I might be completely off, but just a different look.

So what you're saying is that the top 3-4 GA clubs are getting maximum exposure in GA to scouts.

And looking at ECNLs track record this year the top GA teams are also being schmoozed up by ECNL to try and join their league.

And And US Soccer is strongly hinting that they're planning something like NWSL Next which would most likely go through GA.

What's not to like for a top GA club?

What's not to like for a top GA club? Why not ask the four Top GA clubs that left?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:To a degree the volume the GA is adding seems overwhelming, but you do have to look at it from a business perspective too.

I think the GA has conceded it has lost the quality battle, so it becomes more of a business approach which appears to be the strategy.
+ Add clubs in geographic gaps
+ Ensure you end with a net positive of clubs
+ Allows for league fees, registration fees, player fees & events to continue to increase the bottom line

Overall the GA:
+ 15 Clubs (one is a second spot)
- 6 clubs (Nationals & Lonestar represent 2 each due to 2 spots)

Right now the GA is net positive 9 clubs, so in a healthy financial position for next year.

That's a lot of effort to ensure being a second tier league. They are really just competing with ECNL R at this point.

I agree, their top 3-4 clubs are fantastic but I think sometimes looking at league wide decisions beyond soccer, and more about business which seems to be the GA model now, gives some different views about why they are adding clubs like they are.

I might be completely off, but just a different look.

So what you're saying is that the top 3-4 GA clubs are getting maximum exposure in GA to scouts.

And looking at ECNLs track record this year the top GA teams are also being schmoozed up by ECNL to try and join their league.

And And US Soccer is strongly hinting that they're planning something like NWSL Next which would most likely go through GA.

What's not to like for a top GA club?

I'm saying that next years top three GA clubs were this years 5-10 GA clubs. The top three GA clubs went to ECNL. GA is now just watered down to the point that college coaches will struggle to trust the product of GA in terms of evaluation versus ECNL.

You keep insinuating that GA is somehow in line to be NWSLNext but until that is announced it isn't a thing.

Also, if these are known plans then why are the top clubs still leaving GA? These are smart clubs with a long history of navigating these constant changes. If a future NWSLNext is imminent then why are these top clubs leaving?

You're telling me that Rhode Island Surf SC is privy to information that Nationals are not? Are you telling me that GA's adding clubs like Rhode Island Surf SC is what NWSL is looking at to develop professional players and to anchor a academy system?

Hahaha keep up your nonsense.

GA is building a huge pipeline of talent and ECNL is building walls so others can't play against their talent.

Regarding NWSL Next it will likely be a league within a league with only certain GA clubs participating within specific geographies.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:To a degree the volume the GA is adding seems overwhelming, but you do have to look at it from a business perspective too.

I think the GA has conceded it has lost the quality battle, so it becomes more of a business approach which appears to be the strategy.
+ Add clubs in geographic gaps
+ Ensure you end with a net positive of clubs
+ Allows for league fees, registration fees, player fees & events to continue to increase the bottom line

Overall the GA:
+ 15 Clubs (one is a second spot)
- 6 clubs (Nationals & Lonestar represent 2 each due to 2 spots)

Right now the GA is net positive 9 clubs, so in a healthy financial position for next year.

That's a lot of effort to ensure being a second tier league. They are really just competing with ECNL R at this point.

I agree, their top 3-4 clubs are fantastic but I think sometimes looking at league wide decisions beyond soccer, and more about business which seems to be the GA model now, gives some different views about why they are adding clubs like they are.

I might be completely off, but just a different look.

So what you're saying is that the top 3-4 GA clubs are getting maximum exposure in GA to scouts.

And looking at ECNLs track record this year the top GA teams are also being schmoozed up by ECNL to try and join their league.

And And US Soccer is strongly hinting that they're planning something like NWSL Next which would most likely go through GA.

What's not to like for a top GA club?

I'm saying that next years top three GA clubs were this years 5-10 GA clubs. The top three GA clubs went to ECNL. GA is now just watered down to the point that college coaches will struggle to trust the product of GA in terms of evaluation versus ECNL.

You keep insinuating that GA is somehow in line to be NWSLNext but until that is announced it isn't a thing.

Also, if these are known plans then why are the top clubs still leaving GA? These are smart clubs with a long history of navigating these constant changes. If a future NWSLNext is imminent then why are these top clubs leaving?

You're telling me that Rhode Island Surf SC is privy to information that Nationals are not? Are you telling me that GA's adding clubs like Rhode Island Surf SC is what NWSL is looking at to develop professional players and to anchor a academy system?

Hahaha keep up your nonsense.

GA is building a huge pipeline of talent and ECNL is building walls so others can't play against their talent.

Regarding NWSL Next it will likely be a league within a league with only certain GA clubs participating within specific geographies.

Having lots of clubs does not mean quality. Certainly you understand that. If you don't know the difference between Colorado Rush and Rhode Island Surf you are simply delusional.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can someone explain to me why a league adding more clubs is a bad thing?

If the clubs being added are high level there will be competition and maybe different clubs would go to the finals.

If the clubs being added are lower level there won't be added competition and the same dominate clubs will go to the finals.

From a high level recruitment perspective adding more clubs to a league doesn't change anything. The same top clubs get recruited regardless of league.

Adding low level clubs dilutes the talent pool. Ideally, you would encourage the best players to leave low level teams and come together on higher level teams. This encourages them to remain with their current clubs. Just in NOVA, you now have three GA teams. Are there really enough girls choosing GA over ECNL to fill out all of those rosters with even regionally let alone nationally competitive teams?

Yes, but why is diluting the talent pool bad? Bad for who? Isn’t it good for the clubs and the players that get to participate? The top players are still the top players and they will get seen just as much, they’ll just have fewer other top players on their team. What is your concern about having more teams in a league?

Because it is supposed to be "elite". These are showcase leagues and if the process is complicated due to dilution it becomes harder to find top talent even in showcases claiming to have top talent.:

https://www.soccerwire.com/soccer-blog/veteran-scout-college-coaches-growing-frustrated-with-ongoing-duel-between-ecnl-and-girls-academy/

"While the GA remains a clear cut No. 2 on the national landscape with plenty of future NCAA Division 1 players and undoubtedly some future professional players in its ranks, there’s no denying the pattern that is taking place, with top GA clubs continuing to join (or re-join) the ECNL.

This has resulted in the GA adding clubs to its own ranks while the ECNL also expands in other ways. According to the hundreds of college coaches I speak to weekly, this process has added thousands of new recruits to an already overcrowded recruiting landscape. For some, it has made the process of scouting and evaluating potential recruits entirely unmanageable."

I see. So it’s bad for college recruiters who will need to be better at finding players instead of just going to one place? I’m ok having bigger leagues that are better for players and clubs with the trade off that it’s worse for college recruiters that only affects a small number

It's not good for top players if they aren't being challenged on a weekly basis. The never expanding leagues is simply watering down the product and competition for all involved.

It is good for the bubble kid until they spent thousands of dollars to still not stand out.

Having proper tiers is good for the sport and good for the players. A well structured pyramid is needed more than the current state of flattening the access to these leagues while still calling them "elite". It is serving nobody's needs. Not the player, the colleges or our culture of soccer.

Who are you to decide what's good for the bubble kid and how their parents should spend their money? Maybe they are a late developer and keeping them from the national platform is just missing out on a future great player. Or maybe the player just enjoys traveling to events and is happy to spend thousands of dollars on something they enjoy even if there is no pot of gold at the end.

If a player isn't being challenged on a weekly basis they could join a different team, play up an age, guest play, whatever. These unchallenged players might all gravitate to the same club or team and form a super team. Or maybe they don't have the desire to drive 60+ minutes to practice every day and are happy to have a team that plays in the same league that is close by.

More choices is good for players. The tiering and better teams and clubs will sort itself organically, much better than some know it all deciding which clubs, which locations, and which teams should be part of which tier.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can someone explain to me why a league adding more clubs is a bad thing?

If the clubs being added are high level there will be competition and maybe different clubs would go to the finals.

If the clubs being added are lower level there won't be added competition and the same dominate clubs will go to the finals.

From a high level recruitment perspective adding more clubs to a league doesn't change anything. The same top clubs get recruited regardless of league.

Adding low level clubs dilutes the talent pool. Ideally, you would encourage the best players to leave low level teams and come together on higher level teams. This encourages them to remain with their current clubs. Just in NOVA, you now have three GA teams. Are there really enough girls choosing GA over ECNL to fill out all of those rosters with even regionally let alone nationally competitive teams?

Yes, but why is diluting the talent pool bad? Bad for who? Isn’t it good for the clubs and the players that get to participate? The top players are still the top players and they will get seen just as much, they’ll just have fewer other top players on their team. What is your concern about having more teams in a league?

Because it is supposed to be "elite". These are showcase leagues and if the process is complicated due to dilution it becomes harder to find top talent even in showcases claiming to have top talent.:

https://www.soccerwire.com/soccer-blog/veteran-scout-college-coaches-growing-frustrated-with-ongoing-duel-between-ecnl-and-girls-academy/

"While the GA remains a clear cut No. 2 on the national landscape with plenty of future NCAA Division 1 players and undoubtedly some future professional players in its ranks, there’s no denying the pattern that is taking place, with top GA clubs continuing to join (or re-join) the ECNL.

This has resulted in the GA adding clubs to its own ranks while the ECNL also expands in other ways. According to the hundreds of college coaches I speak to weekly, this process has added thousands of new recruits to an already overcrowded recruiting landscape. For some, it has made the process of scouting and evaluating potential recruits entirely unmanageable."

I see. So it’s bad for college recruiters who will need to be better at finding players instead of just going to one place? I’m ok having bigger leagues that are better for players and clubs with the trade off that it’s worse for college recruiters that only affects a small number

It's not good for top players if they aren't being challenged on a weekly basis. The never expanding leagues is simply watering down the product and competition for all involved.

It is good for the bubble kid until they spent thousands of dollars to still not stand out.

Having proper tiers is good for the sport and good for the players. A well structured pyramid is needed more than the current state of flattening the access to these leagues while still calling them "elite". It is serving nobody's needs. Not the player, the colleges or our culture of soccer.

Who are you to decide what's good for the bubble kid and how their parents should spend their money? Maybe they are a late developer and keeping them from the national platform is just missing out on a future great player. Or maybe the player just enjoys traveling to events and is happy to spend thousands of dollars on something they enjoy even if there is no pot of gold at the end.

If a player isn't being challenged on a weekly basis they could join a different team, play up an age, guest play, whatever. These unchallenged players might all gravitate to the same club or team and form a super team. Or maybe they don't have the desire to drive 60+ minutes to practice every day and are happy to have a team that plays in the same league that is close by.

More choices is good for players. The tiering and better teams and clubs will sort itself organically, much better than some know it all deciding which clubs, which locations, and which teams should be part of which tier.

There are now 4 ECNL and 3 GA options in Northern Virginia. There are no bubble players with 140 roster spots who are making the national team later.

These leagues are supposed to be the best of the best that the area has to offer. Steel sharpens steel. Top players simply fail to develop when they have to play with kids who turn the ball over at too high a rate for what the league should allow.

There are still places for those "bubble" players to enjoy playing soccer and to develop but their spot in these leagues should be earned not gifted because GA is expanding so aggressively without a thought of depth of talent.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can someone explain to me why a league adding more clubs is a bad thing?

If the clubs being added are high level there will be competition and maybe different clubs would go to the finals.

If the clubs being added are lower level there won't be added competition and the same dominate clubs will go to the finals.

From a high level recruitment perspective adding more clubs to a league doesn't change anything. The same top clubs get recruited regardless of league.

Adding low level clubs dilutes the talent pool. Ideally, you would encourage the best players to leave low level teams and come together on higher level teams. This encourages them to remain with their current clubs. Just in NOVA, you now have three GA teams. Are there really enough girls choosing GA over ECNL to fill out all of those rosters with even regionally let alone nationally competitive teams?

Yes, but why is diluting the talent pool bad? Bad for who? Isn’t it good for the clubs and the players that get to participate? The top players are still the top players and they will get seen just as much, they’ll just have fewer other top players on their team. What is your concern about having more teams in a league?

Because it is supposed to be "elite". These are showcase leagues and if the process is complicated due to dilution it becomes harder to find top talent even in showcases claiming to have top talent.:

https://www.soccerwire.com/soccer-blog/veteran-scout-college-coaches-growing-frustrated-with-ongoing-duel-between-ecnl-and-girls-academy/

"While the GA remains a clear cut No. 2 on the national landscape with plenty of future NCAA Division 1 players and undoubtedly some future professional players in its ranks, there’s no denying the pattern that is taking place, with top GA clubs continuing to join (or re-join) the ECNL.

This has resulted in the GA adding clubs to its own ranks while the ECNL also expands in other ways. According to the hundreds of college coaches I speak to weekly, this process has added thousands of new recruits to an already overcrowded recruiting landscape. For some, it has made the process of scouting and evaluating potential recruits entirely unmanageable."

I see. So it’s bad for college recruiters who will need to be better at finding players instead of just going to one place? I’m ok having bigger leagues that are better for players and clubs with the trade off that it’s worse for college recruiters that only affects a small number

It's not good for top players if they aren't being challenged on a weekly basis. The never expanding leagues is simply watering down the product and competition for all involved.

It is good for the bubble kid until they spent thousands of dollars to still not stand out.

Having proper tiers is good for the sport and good for the players. A well structured pyramid is needed more than the current state of flattening the access to these leagues while still calling them "elite". It is serving nobody's needs. Not the player, the colleges or our culture of soccer.

Who are you to decide what's good for the bubble kid and how their parents should spend their money? Maybe they are a late developer and keeping them from the national platform is just missing out on a future great player. Or maybe the player just enjoys traveling to events and is happy to spend thousands of dollars on something they enjoy even if there is no pot of gold at the end.

If a player isn't being challenged on a weekly basis they could join a different team, play up an age, guest play, whatever. These unchallenged players might all gravitate to the same club or team and form a super team. Or maybe they don't have the desire to drive 60+ minutes to practice every day and are happy to have a team that plays in the same league that is close by.

More choices is good for players. The tiering and better teams and clubs will sort itself organically, much better than some know it all deciding which clubs, which locations, and which teams should be part of which tier.

There are now 4 ECNL and 3 GA options in Northern Virginia. There are no bubble players with 140 roster spots who are making the national team later.

These leagues are supposed to be the best of the best that the area has to offer. Steel sharpens steel. Top players simply fail to develop when they have to play with kids who turn the ball over at too high a rate for what the league should allow.

There are still places for those "bubble" players to enjoy playing soccer and to develop but their spot in these leagues should be earned not gifted because GA is expanding so aggressively without a thought of depth of talent.

It's so interesting that typically ECNL parents state the stupid "steel sharpens steel" quote.

But at the same time they love when clubs collect talent for wins and not play those players up.

Which is it? Are you playing for wins by collecting a bunch of players that should be playing up. Or, are you trying to do the most for player development by playing talented players up in environments where they will actually be challenged.