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

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ricketts played for Michigan Jags which is a GA club at one point, I think after that she played for a USLW team.

Regardless there's been plenty of contributions to NWSL from GA and ECNL. First pick this year played in GA prior to UNC and now at Utah. More known locally, Ellie Wheeler played at FCV and then went on to PSU and now at KC Current.

She also played for Michigan Hawks which is ECNL.

Who were girls development academy when she played for them.

I wish more people knew the history of clubs. If they did they'd know that the youth sports landscape can change overnight.

And ECNL before DA, like most.

[Anonymous]

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.

When the best 2 or 3 teams in a league trounce the diluted teams 10-0 and only have 2 or 3 competitive matches per season it affects the league and is not healthy for the best teams nor the diluted teams.

Ideally most teams in a league should be within at least 3 or 4 goals of parity for player development.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

I never said anything about wins. If wins were that important then the Nationals would have stayed in GA. But the truth was, as a club they were bored in GA. The last GA loss the 2010 Nationals experienced was in 2022 in a Champions league game. Their only other loss was to a ECNL team. So tell me how are they getting better as players if they regularly win league games 5-1, 8-0, or 3-0?

There should be no more than 4 "elite" options in Northern Virginia and three is probably the sweet spot.

Ultimately it doesn't matter, as more top players will gravitate to ECNL over time anyways and the top players who play in GA will grow to be bored at the lack of depth of talent.

GA is wisely migrating to be a second tier league which is a useful option as I believe kids should play and they should be able to play at the highest level possible for their skill set. I'm all for a place for bubble players to have a well run national platform to grow and develop. The problem is for the leagues and the customers to accept a true pyramid and having seven clubs in the area all claiming to be the same thing isn't helping to define that pyramid.

IF NWSL comes in and somehow flips the pyramid, so be it, but it still must be a pyramid.

So which organization gets to make the determination that there should be just 3 or 4 "elite" options in NoVA? And also decide which locations and clubs should be included? There is no organization with the authority to dictate this. That's not how it works in this country for any youth sport. Clubs and leagues are all just businesses, and like any business, driven by market demand. If there is enough demand more will enter the market. Some will succeed, some will fail, some will combine together out of necessity, all of which we're seeing this year.

The perfect pyramid world you fantasize about is just that, a fantasy. Some of us live in the real world.

NWSL Next will take care of all of this.

100% correct!

I wish I could see the faces all the ECNL nimbys that starting to realize what GA is doing.

How will NWSL Next and GA impact what ECNL does for college recruiting when ECNL has 75% of the market?

They can't. This is all dumb talk. If GA says we are the path to the pros they will get a few takers. Not a lot. They also have to say with a straight face they are the path to college which they are to a limited extent. But what do they have to beat out ECNL? What can they say? When the 80 girls across the whole country that could go pro move to GA -- why would anyone else follow?

Keep telling yourself that.

NWSL Next is coming...

It definitely is. The GA just produced a teenager for San Diego wave. How many teenage pros has ECNL produced?

The GA produced her? She was a 2008 that has been playing U19 for years, which would imply she could not be challenged without playing up 3-4 age groups inside the GA. She is a special player, but praise should go squarely to HER and her CLUB.

[Anonymous]

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.

When the best 2 or 3 teams in a league trounce the diluted teams 10-0 and only have 2 or 3 competitive matches per season it affects the league and is not healthy for the best teams nor the diluted teams.

Ideally most teams in a league should be within at least 3 or 4 goals of parity for player development.

At least for Nationals there's no record of then trouncing any team 10-0. They beat up on their second team pretty bad in a couple of cases but every age group but one has a tie or loss and though there are a few 6/7-0 games most are pretty close. Not sure about the other teams flipping.

[Anonymous]

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.

When the best 2 or 3 teams in a league trounce the diluted teams 10-0 and only have 2 or 3 competitive matches per season it affects the league and is not healthy for the best teams nor the diluted teams.

Ideally most teams in a league should be within at least 3 or 4 goals of parity for player development.

At least for Nationals there's no record of then trouncing any team 10-0. They beat up on their second team pretty bad in a couple of cases but every age group but one has a tie or loss and though there are a few 6/7-0 games most are pretty close. Not sure about the other teams flipping.

Here is a sampling of Nationals vs conference teams:
2010 Nationals:
10/22/23 8-0 against Sockers

2009 Nationals:
05/14 11-0 vs SC Wave

2008 Nationals:
09/24/23 9-0 vs Nationals Gray

2007 Nationals:
11/04/23 6-0 vs Michigan jags
10/22/23 6-0 vs Sockers
10/21/23 6-0 vs FC United
9/24/23 8-0 vs Nationals Gray

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

I never said anything about wins. If wins were that important then the Nationals would have stayed in GA. But the truth was, as a club they were bored in GA. The last GA loss the 2010 Nationals experienced was in 2022 in a Champions league game. Their only other loss was to a ECNL team. So tell me how are they getting better as players if they regularly win league games 5-1, 8-0, or 3-0?

There should be no more than 4 "elite" options in Northern Virginia and three is probably the sweet spot.

Ultimately it doesn't matter, as more top players will gravitate to ECNL over time anyways and the top players who play in GA will grow to be bored at the lack of depth of talent.

GA is wisely migrating to be a second tier league which is a useful option as I believe kids should play and they should be able to play at the highest level possible for their skill set. I'm all for a place for bubble players to have a well run national platform to grow and develop. The problem is for the leagues and the customers to accept a true pyramid and having seven clubs in the area all claiming to be the same thing isn't helping to define that pyramid.

IF NWSL comes in and somehow flips the pyramid, so be it, but it still must be a pyramid.

So which organization gets to make the determination that there should be just 3 or 4 "elite" options in NoVA? And also decide which locations and clubs should be included? There is no organization with the authority to dictate this. That's not how it works in this country for any youth sport. Clubs and leagues are all just businesses, and like any business, driven by market demand. If there is enough demand more will enter the market. Some will succeed, some will fail, some will combine together out of necessity, all of which we're seeing this year.

The perfect pyramid world you fantasize about is just that, a fantasy. Some of us live in the real world.

NWSL Next will take care of all of this.

100% correct!

I wish I could see the faces all the ECNL nimbys that starting to realize what GA is doing.

How will NWSL Next and GA impact what ECNL does for college recruiting when ECNL has 75% of the market?

They can't. This is all dumb talk. If GA says we are the path to the pros they will get a few takers. Not a lot. They also have to say with a straight face they are the path to college which they are to a limited extent. But what do they have to beat out ECNL? What can they say? When the 80 girls across the whole country that could go pro move to GA -- why would anyone else follow?

Keep telling yourself that.

NWSL Next is coming...

It definitely is. The GA just produced a teenager for San Diego wave. How many teenage pros has ECNL produced?

The GA produced her? She was a 2008 that has been playing U19 for years, which would imply she could not be challenged without playing up 3-4 age groups inside the GA. She is a special player, but praise should go squarely to HER and her CLUB.

Praise should go to HER. Her club should feel fortunate that she came to them k stead of another one nearby where she would have ended up just as good

[Anonymous]

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.

When the best 2 or 3 teams in a league trounce the diluted teams 10-0 and only have 2 or 3 competitive matches per season it affects the league and is not healthy for the best teams nor the diluted teams.

Ideally most teams in a league should be within at least 3 or 4 goals of parity for player development.

At least for Nationals there's no record of then trouncing any team 10-0. They beat up on their second team pretty bad in a couple of cases but every age group but one has a tie or loss and though there are a few 6/7-0 games most are pretty close. Not sure about the other teams flipping.

If you are trying to downplay the level of Nationals and its significant loss to the league you might be more delusional than most.

They just won 2 championships and overall GA club championship again. Them leaving is a HUGE loss, the only other club that would cause the same impact would be Tophat.

[Anonymous]

No impact, losses were planned have you seen Tha Tracker, replaced ten fold. Right clubs will stay in GA and Nationals boys will never get MLSN. Focus on what’s really happening here. Soccenomics dad needs to dig a little deeper to move me.

[Anonymous]

Losing Nationals, Co. Rush, Ukies, Lonestar, Southshore is “no impact”

Passssss me some of whatever you are smoking 😂

Numbers wise absolutely they have been replaced, but with clubs not even in the same galaxy level wise.

[Anonymous]

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.

When the best 2 or 3 teams in a league trounce the diluted teams 10-0 and only have 2 or 3 competitive matches per season it affects the league and is not healthy for the best teams nor the diluted teams.

Ideally most teams in a league should be within at least 3 or 4 goals of parity for player development.

At least for Nationals there's no record of then trouncing any team 10-0. They beat up on their second team pretty bad in a couple of cases but every age group but one has a tie or loss and though there are a few 6/7-0 games most are pretty close. Not sure about the other teams flipping.

Here is a sampling of Nationals vs conference teams:
2010 Nationals:
10/22/23 8-0 against Sockers

2009 Nationals:
05/14 11-0 vs SC Wave

2008 Nationals:
09/24/23 9-0 vs Nationals Gray

2007 Nationals:
11/04/23 6-0 vs Michigan jags
10/22/23 6-0 vs Sockers
10/21/23 6-0 vs FC United
9/24/23 8-0 vs Nationals Gray

Since we are cherry picking lets look at the other side. I stand by my point. While Nationals are a great club and arguably the best in the in their region. But they are not whooping up on other clubs 10 -0 in their region day in and day out. Not even close.
Call it for what it is. They are a great club and it’s a big loss for the GA, but it’s not like they there’s no one for them to compete with them. Clearly there is. Will they have a tougher time in their region in ECNL. Maybe or maybe not, time will tell.


2010 Nationals:
11/04/23 0-0 Michigan Jaguars 0-0 (tie)
02/25/24 Indy Prieier 2-2 (tie)
03/16/24 1-0 Nationals Grey 1-0 (win but not lopsided)

2009 Nationals:
10/1/23 2-3 FC United (loss)
11/04/23 1-1 Michigan Jaguars (tie)
02/25/24 2-0 Indy Primeir (win but not lopsided)
03/16/24 4-2 Nationals Grey ( win but not lopsided)

2008 Nationals:
10/1/23 1-0 FC United (win not lop sided)
10/21/23 2-0 FC United (win but not lop sided)
10/22/23 3-3 Sockers (tie)
11/04/23 2-0 Michigan Jaguars (win but not lopsided)

2007 Nationals:
3/16/24 0-3 Nationals Gray (loss, maybe mixed players?)
10/01/23 4-4 FC United (tie)

2006 Nationals
09/30/23 1-0 Sockers (close win)
10/01/23 1-0 FC United (close win)
10/21/23 3-1 FC United (win but not lopsided)
10/22/23 0-1 Sockers (loss)
11/04/23 0-4 Michigan Jaguars (lopsided loss)
03/17/24 5-0 Nationals Grey ( lopsided win against their 2nd team)

[Anonymous]

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.

When the best 2 or 3 teams in a league trounce the diluted teams 10-0 and only have 2 or 3 competitive matches per season it affects the league and is not healthy for the best teams nor the diluted teams.

Ideally most teams in a league should be within at least 3 or 4 goals of parity for player development.

At least for Nationals there's no record of then trouncing any team 10-0. They beat up on their second team pretty bad in a couple of cases but every age group but one has a tie or loss and though there are a few 6/7-0 games most are pretty close. Not sure about the other teams flipping.

Here is a sampling of Nationals vs conference teams:
2010 Nationals:
10/22/23 8-0 against Sockers

2009 Nationals:
05/14 11-0 vs SC Wave

2008 Nationals:
09/24/23 9-0 vs Nationals Gray

2007 Nationals:
11/04/23 6-0 vs Michigan jags
10/22/23 6-0 vs Sockers
10/21/23 6-0 vs FC United
9/24/23 8-0 vs Nationals Gray

Since we are cherry picking lets look at the other side. I stand by my point. While Nationals are a great club and arguably the best in the in their region. But they are not whooping up on other clubs 10 -0 in their region day in and day out. Not even close.
Call it for what it is. They are a great club and it’s a big loss for the GA, but it’s not like they there’s no one for them to compete with them. Clearly there is. Will they have a tougher time in their region in ECNL. Maybe or maybe not, time will tell.


2010 Nationals:
11/04/23 0-0 Michigan Jaguars 0-0 (tie)
02/25/24 Indy Prieier 2-2 (tie)
03/16/24 1-0 Nationals Grey 1-0 (win but not lopsided)

2009 Nationals:
10/1/23 2-3 FC United (loss)
11/04/23 1-1 Michigan Jaguars (tie)
02/25/24 2-0 Indy Primeir (win but not lopsided)
03/16/24 4-2 Nationals Grey ( win but not lopsided)

2008 Nationals:
10/1/23 1-0 FC United (win not lop sided)
10/21/23 2-0 FC United (win but not lop sided)
10/22/23 3-3 Sockers (tie)
11/04/23 2-0 Michigan Jaguars (win but not lopsided)

2007 Nationals:
3/16/24 0-3 Nationals Gray (loss, maybe mixed players?)
10/01/23 4-4 FC United (tie)

2006 Nationals
09/30/23 1-0 Sockers (close win)
10/01/23 1-0 FC United (close win)
10/21/23 3-1 FC United (win but not lopsided)
10/22/23 0-1 Sockers (loss)
11/04/23 0-4 Michigan Jaguars (lopsided loss)
03/17/24 5-0 Nationals Grey ( lopsided win against their 2nd team)

Did GA add any club of the same quality as the Nationals?

[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.

When the best 2 or 3 teams in a league trounce the diluted teams 10-0 and only have 2 or 3 competitive matches per season it affects the league and is not healthy for the best teams nor the diluted teams.

Ideally most teams in a league should be within at least 3 or 4 goals of parity for player development.

At least for Nationals there's no record of then trouncing any team 10-0. They beat up on their second team pretty bad in a couple of cases but every age group but one has a tie or loss and though there are a few 6/7-0 games most are pretty close. Not sure about the other teams flipping.

Here is a sampling of Nationals vs conference teams:
2010 Nationals:
10/22/23 8-0 against Sockers

2009 Nationals:
05/14 11-0 vs SC Wave

2008 Nationals:
09/24/23 9-0 vs Nationals Gray

2007 Nationals:
11/04/23 6-0 vs Michigan jags
10/22/23 6-0 vs Sockers
10/21/23 6-0 vs FC United
9/24/23 8-0 vs Nationals Gray

Since we are cherry picking lets look at the other side. I stand by my point. While Nationals are a great club and arguably the best in the in their region. But they are not whooping up on other clubs 10 -0 in their region day in and day out. Not even close.
Call it for what it is. They are a great club and it’s a big loss for the GA, but it’s not like they there’s no one for them to compete with them. Clearly there is. Will they have a tougher time in their region in ECNL. Maybe or maybe not, time will tell.


2010 Nationals:
11/04/23 0-0 Michigan Jaguars 0-0 (tie)
02/25/24 Indy Prieier 2-2 (tie)
03/16/24 1-0 Nationals Grey 1-0 (win but not lopsided)

2009 Nationals:
10/1/23 2-3 FC United (loss)
11/04/23 1-1 Michigan Jaguars (tie)
02/25/24 2-0 Indy Primeir (win but not lopsided)
03/16/24 4-2 Nationals Grey ( win but not lopsided)

2008 Nationals:
10/1/23 1-0 FC United (win not lop sided)
10/21/23 2-0 FC United (win but not lop sided)
10/22/23 3-3 Sockers (tie)
11/04/23 2-0 Michigan Jaguars (win but not lopsided)

2007 Nationals:
3/16/24 0-3 Nationals Gray (loss, maybe mixed players?)
10/01/23 4-4 FC United (tie)

2006 Nationals
09/30/23 1-0 Sockers (close win)
10/01/23 1-0 FC United (close win)
10/21/23 3-1 FC United (win but not lopsided)
10/22/23 0-1 Sockers (loss)
11/04/23 0-4 Michigan Jaguars (lopsided loss)
03/17/24 5-0 Nationals Grey ( lopsided win against their 2nd team)

Did GA add any club of the same quality as the Nationals?

No but they will once nwsl and ga create a youth academy league. A SYC mom and dad told me!

[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.

When the best 2 or 3 teams in a league trounce the diluted teams 10-0 and only have 2 or 3 competitive matches per season it affects the league and is not healthy for the best teams nor the diluted teams.

Ideally most teams in a league should be within at least 3 or 4 goals of parity for player development.

At least for Nationals there's no record of then trouncing any team 10-0. They beat up on their second team pretty bad in a couple of cases but every age group but one has a tie or loss and though there are a few 6/7-0 games most are pretty close. Not sure about the other teams flipping.

Here is a sampling of Nationals vs conference teams:
2010 Nationals:
10/22/23 8-0 against Sockers

2009 Nationals:
05/14 11-0 vs SC Wave

2008 Nationals:
09/24/23 9-0 vs Nationals Gray

2007 Nationals:
11/04/23 6-0 vs Michigan jags
10/22/23 6-0 vs Sockers
10/21/23 6-0 vs FC United
9/24/23 8-0 vs Nationals Gray

Since we are cherry picking lets look at the other side. I stand by my point. While Nationals are a great club and arguably the best in the in their region. But they are not whooping up on other clubs 10 -0 in their region day in and day out. Not even close.
Call it for what it is. They are a great club and it’s a big loss for the GA, but it’s not like they there’s no one for them to compete with them. Clearly there is. Will they have a tougher time in their region in ECNL. Maybe or maybe not, time will tell.


2010 Nationals:
11/04/23 0-0 Michigan Jaguars 0-0 (tie)
02/25/24 Indy Prieier 2-2 (tie)
03/16/24 1-0 Nationals Grey 1-0 (win but not lopsided)

2009 Nationals:
10/1/23 2-3 FC United (loss)
11/04/23 1-1 Michigan Jaguars (tie)
02/25/24 2-0 Indy Primeir (win but not lopsided)
03/16/24 4-2 Nationals Grey ( win but not lopsided)

2008 Nationals:
10/1/23 1-0 FC United (win not lop sided)
10/21/23 2-0 FC United (win but not lop sided)
10/22/23 3-3 Sockers (tie)
11/04/23 2-0 Michigan Jaguars (win but not lopsided)

2007 Nationals:
3/16/24 0-3 Nationals Gray (loss, maybe mixed players?)
10/01/23 4-4 FC United (tie)

2006 Nationals
09/30/23 1-0 Sockers (close win)
10/01/23 1-0 FC United (close win)
10/21/23 3-1 FC United (win but not lopsided)
10/22/23 0-1 Sockers (loss)
11/04/23 0-4 Michigan Jaguars (lopsided loss)
03/17/24 5-0 Nationals Grey ( lopsided win against their 2nd team)

Did GA add any club of the same quality as the Nationals?

No but they will once nwsl and ga create a youth academy league. A SYC mom and dad told me!

Exactly, GA bleeding top clubs is actually a sign of strength.

[Anonymous]

Which NOVA ECNL team compares to Nationals?

From what I can tell by looking at the ranking app Nationals will just be another club in ECNL that beats our local teams.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Which NOVA ECNL team compares to Nationals?

From what I can tell by looking at the ranking app Nationals will just be another club in ECNL that beats our local teams.

Which NOVA TEAM compares to Nationals?

None, and that's the point and why it is a big loss for GA.