DA vs ECNL vs everything else

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Discuss ECNL flight.

How is it possible that BRYC U15 #1 in their ECNL bracket and McLean is #4? Shouldn't all those stud players be on FCV and WS rosters? WS could use them with their DA record. That BRYC team ECNL record is 11-2-1.

Please explain what is happening here because those players are still just middle schoolers with recruiting ahead of them. How in the world can that be possible?

Hopefully this is an honest question and not a rhetorical one.
IMO, BRYC is one of those clubs whose location makes getting to a DA club just a bit too far for most of their families. On top of that, whenever you have success as a team, there is alot more attraction to stay and continue it. And like it or not, many families at U13, U14, U15 rate team competitiveness very highly. To some extent, there has been some luck involved in this team coming together... it doesn't appear that BRYC's development is so superior that all their teams are doing this well. And certainly, the ability to retain for this team is not going to be indicative across the board at every ECNL club.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Lord have mercy. Youre talking Loudoun 07 on a ECNL vs DA forum.

3 years ago, some Loudoun 04 and 05 parents probabley thought just like you. Go ask them now what they think.

If all else fails, follow the trail. It's a clue.

A team will get destroyed if they lose their top 5-6 kids. I've seen it with less.

Example:

On most national level teams (roster size of 18)

#1- 6 are studs (Always included the midfielder).
#7-14 are above average to average.
#15-18 are average to below.

You lose #1-6 ,
you must move up #7-18
and add #19-21 from the 2nd team.

Your new team is now

#1-12 are above average to average (mostly average by number)
#13-18 are average to below average

It's very hard to compete on a national level with teams that have a roster full of stud players.

The only way counter that is to recruit 6 stud players you lost. Which will never happen in NOVA because the talent is tied up somewhere.

The only argument to this is that Loudoun will retain their talent now that they have ECNL.

However, its not happening with the 05 age group. What makes anyone thinks it will happen with the 06 and beyond age groups. If anything, ECNL becomes weaker in NOVA as the years go on...which causes more flight.

Now you are avoiding the discussion.

That is such a dumb argument. It's about player development not recruiting. Every sport is littered with stories of the best players being passed over initially and developing late.

In 2000, a kid got passed over 5 times by every NFL team in the draft until #199 in the 6th round. Whoops. Now Tom Brady is undisputedly the best QB to ever play the game. With your argument, that would never ever have happened. NFL teams should have known in 2000 who Brady would become. No way they could have thought he was #199.

Michael Jordan could not make his HS basketball team. Now he is top 3 NBA players ever. In your ergument that would never ever happen. His HS coach should have known what player he would become.

How did Alex Morgan not make the top club at 12 and 13? Answer that.

It would not surprise me at all if the best next soccer player comes out of the ECNL.

You live in a fantasy world if you think it's all about recruiting and replacing studs.

Avoiding what discussion? Are you doubting what I'm saying? If so, it because you have witnessed it yet. Some people have to see it to believe it. Your a visual person obvioisly.

Touching story about late bloomers though. However, late bloomers are the exception, not the rule. My child was one. I get it.

I'm not selling DA over ECNL like some think. I'm telling you my opinion based on trends. Take it or leave it. It's not gospel. If it was trending the other way I would take note and say it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Lord have mercy. Youre talking Loudoun 07 on a ECNL vs DA forum.

3 years ago, some Loudoun 04 and 05 parents probabley thought just like you. Go ask them now what they think.

If all else fails, follow the trail. It's a clue.

A team will get destroyed if they lose their top 5-6 kids. I've seen it with less.

Example:

On most national level teams (roster size of 18)

#1- 6 are studs (Always included the midfielder).
#7-14 are above average to average.
#15-18 are average to below.

You lose #1-6 ,
you must move up #7-18
and add #19-21 from the 2nd team.

Your new team is now

#1-12 are above average to average (mostly average by number)
#13-18 are average to below average

It's very hard to compete on a national level with teams that have a roster full of stud players.

The only way counter that is to recruit 6 stud players you lost. Which will never happen in NOVA because the talent is tied up somewhere.

The only argument to this is that Loudoun will retain their talent now that they have ECNL.

However, its not happening with the 05 age group. What makes anyone thinks it will happen with the 06 and beyond age groups. If anything, ECNL becomes weaker in NOVA as the years go on...which causes more flight.

Now you are avoiding the discussion.

That is such a dumb argument. It's about player development not recruiting. Every sport is littered with stories of the best players being passed over initially and developing late.

In 2000, a kid got passed over 5 times by every NFL team in the draft until #199 in the 6th round. Whoops. Now Tom Brady is undisputedly the best QB to ever play the game. With your argument, that would never ever have happened. NFL teams should have known in 2000 who Brady would become. No way they could have thought he was #199.

Michael Jordan could not make his HS basketball team. Now he is top 3 NBA players ever. In your ergument that would never ever happen. His HS coach should have known what player he would become.

How did Alex Morgan not make the top club at 12 and 13? Answer that.

It would not surprise me at all if the best next soccer player comes out of the ECNL.

You live in a fantasy world if you think it's all about recruiting and replacing studs.

Avoiding what discussion? Are you doubting what I'm saying? If so, it because you haven't witnessed it yet. Some people have to see it to believe it. Youre a visual person obvioisly.

Touching story about late bloomers though. However, late bloomers are the exception, not the rule. My child was one. I get it.

I'm not selling DA over ECNL like some think. I'm telling you my opinion based on trends. Take it or leave it. It's not gospel. If it was trending the other way I would take note and say it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
How did Alex Morgan not make the top club at 12 and 13? Answer that.

She didn't try. Her first year in club soccer was at age 14.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Avoiding what discussion? Are you doubting what I'm saying? If so, it because you have witnessed it yet. Some people have to see it to believe it. Your a visual person obvioisly.

Touching story about late bloomers though. However, late bloomers are the exception, not the rule. My child was one. I get it.

I'm not selling DA over ECNL like some think. I'm telling you my opinion based on trends. Take it or leave it. It's not gospel. If it was trending the other way I would take note and say it.

I don't doubt what you are saying at all. In the short term, if a team loses #1-#6, without replacement at similar skill level, they're not going to be as competitive. That's a no-brainer.
What people are saying is that over the course of one or two years, that dropoff can erase, or deepen depending on the relative development of the new #1-#18. However, if a club continues to lose #1-$6 every year, there is no recovery from that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Lord have mercy. Youre talking Loudoun 07 on a ECNL vs DA forum.

3 years ago, some Loudoun 04 and 05 parents probabley thought just like you. Go ask them now what they think.

If all else fails, follow the trail. It's a clue.

A team will get destroyed if they lose their top 5-6 kids. I've seen it with less.

Example:

On most national level teams (roster size of 18)

#1- 6 are studs (Always included the midfielder).
#7-14 are above average to average.
#15-18 are average to below.

You lose #1-6 ,
you must move up #7-18
and add #19-21 from the 2nd team.

Your new team is now

#1-12 are above average to average (mostly average by number)
#13-18 are average to below average

It's very hard to compete on a national level with teams that have a roster full of stud players.

The only way counter that is to recruit 6 stud players you lost. Which will never happen in NOVA because the talent is tied up somewhere.

The only argument to this is that Loudoun will retain their talent now that they have ECNL.

However, its not happening with the 05 age group. What makes anyone thinks it will happen with the 06 and beyond age groups. If anything, ECNL becomes weaker in NOVA as the years go on...which causes more flight.

Now you are avoiding the discussion.

That is such a dumb argument. It's about player development not recruiting. Every sport is littered with stories of the best players being passed over initially and developing late.

In 2000, a kid got passed over 5 times by every NFL team in the draft until #199 in the 6th round. Whoops. Now Tom Brady is undisputedly the best QB to ever play the game. With your argument, that would never ever have happened. NFL teams should have known in 2000 who Brady would become. No way they could have thought he was #199.

Michael Jordan could not make his HS basketball team. Now he is top 3 NBA players ever. In your ergument that would never ever happen. His HS coach should have known what player he would become.

How did Alex Morgan not make the top club at 12 and 13? Answer that.

It would not surprise me at all if the best next soccer player comes out of the ECNL.

You live in a fantasy world if you think it's all about recruiting and replacing studs.

Football and soccer are totally differently sports. In soccer the only position you can play at the highest level at the age of 40 is the keeper, and it rarely happens. There are late boomers in soccer but the best of the best nowadays already became the starts in Europe league before they hit 20.

Ok let's ignore all other sports and pretend the idea of late development only matters in soccer. I don't agree at all but that's cool for argument sake...

We are not talking 20 years old here, we are talking 12, 13, 14 years olds in this discussion. Kids deciding DA vs ECNL. I agree by 20 it's clear on talent level.

Alex Morgan is a soccer player. If she failed to make DA today as a 12 or 13 year old - what would happen? Would it be possible she would join ECNL?

Is it possible that ECNL in that case could provide a platform for a kid like her that is a late developer or not? Who here thinks this scenario is not possible?

DA and ECNL are not the only options. For late boomers, an elite travel team may do the same. Also, not making a DA team one year doesn't prevent you from trying next year.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Avoiding what discussion? Are you doubting what I'm saying? If so, it because you have witnessed it yet. Some people have to see it to believe it. Your a visual person obvioisly.

Touching story about late bloomers though. However, late bloomers are the exception, not the rule. My child was one. I get it.

I'm not selling DA over ECNL like some think. I'm telling you my opinion based on trends. Take it or leave it. It's not gospel. If it was trending the other way I would take note and say it.

I don't doubt what you are saying at all. In the short term, if a team loses #1-#6, without replacement at similar skill level, they're not going to be as competitive. That's a no-brainer.
What people are saying is that over the course of one or two years, that dropoff can erase, or deepen depending on the relative development of the new #1-#18. However, if a club continues to lose #1-$6 every year, there is no recovery from that.

Well hot dang. We agree

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
How did Alex Morgan not make the top club at 12 and 13? Answer that.

She didn't try. Her first year in club soccer was at age 14.

Look again. https://www.socceramerica.com/publications/article/44474/becoming-alex-morgan-rising-star-reflects-on-yout.html

SOCCER AMERICA: Your youth soccer background is really different from what most athletes are doing today, in which they start playing club soccer as early as 8 or 9 years old. You played AYSO until you were in high school, right?

ALEX MORGAN: Yeah. I started to transition into the club scene after the AYSO season when I was 12 or 13. I tried out for a club but I wasn’t on the team. I was able to go to practice with them but the coach was just messing with me, so it was a bad first year of club. The next year, I found my team, Cypress Elite, when I was 14. That was my first club team.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Discuss ECNL flight.

How is it possible that BRYC U15 #1 in their ECNL bracket and McLean is #4? Shouldn't all those stud players be on FCV and WS rosters? WS could use them with their DA record. That BRYC team ECNL record is 11-2-1.

Please explain what is happening here because those players are still just middle schoolers with recruiting ahead of them. How in the world can that be possible?

Because ECNL is substantially weaker in 2018 than in 2017.

Good 2018 ECNL team equals a average 2017 ECNL team.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Lord have mercy. Youre talking Loudoun 07 on a ECNL vs DA forum.

3 years ago, some Loudoun 04 and 05 parents probabley thought just like you. Go ask them now what they think.

If all else fails, follow the trail. It's a clue.

A team will get destroyed if they lose their top 5-6 kids. I've seen it with less.

Example:

On most national level teams (roster size of 18)

#1- 6 are studs (Always included the midfielder).
#7-14 are above average to average.
#15-18 are average to below.

You lose #1-6 ,
you must move up #7-18
and add #19-21 from the 2nd team.

Your new team is now

#1-12 are above average to average (mostly average by number)
#13-18 are average to below average

It's very hard to compete on a national level with teams that have a roster full of stud players.

The only way counter that is to recruit 6 stud players you lost. Which will never happen in NOVA because the talent is tied up somewhere.

The only argument to this is that Loudoun will retain their talent now that they have ECNL.

However, its not happening with the 05 age group. What makes anyone thinks it will happen with the 06 and beyond age groups. If anything, ECNL becomes weaker in NOVA as the years go on...which causes more flight.

Now you are avoiding the discussion.

That is such a dumb argument. It's about player development not recruiting. Every sport is littered with stories of the best players being passed over initially and developing late.

In 2000, a kid got passed over 5 times by every NFL team in the draft until #199 in the 6th round. Whoops. Now Tom Brady is undisputedly the best QB to ever play the game. With your argument, that would never ever have happened. NFL teams should have known in 2000 who Brady would become. No way they could have thought he was #199.

Michael Jordan could not make his HS basketball team. Now he is top 3 NBA players ever. In your ergument that would never ever happen. His HS coach should have known what player he would become.

How did Alex Morgan not make the top club at 12 and 13? Answer that.

It would not surprise me at all if the best next soccer player comes out of the ECNL.

You live in a fantasy world if you think it's all about recruiting and replacing studs.

Avoiding what discussion? Are you doubting what I'm saying? If so, it because you have witnessed it yet. Some people have to see it to believe it. Your a visual person obvioisly.

Touching story about late bloomers though. However, late bloomers are the exception, not the rule. My child was one. I get it.

I'm not selling DA over ECNL like some think. I'm telling you my opinion based on trends. Take it or leave it. It's not gospel. If it was trending the other way I would take note and say it.

You are avoiding the discussion that many athletes are late bloomers. You are just dismissive and say "touching story". So I assume from that you don't believe the Tom Brady, Michael Jordan or Alex Morgan stories. They must be mysteries of the universe to you. That is my point, many of the best players will develop late. It matters little how they rank at 13 years old. You are obviously a day trader looking at what to do based on trends. But we can agree to disagree.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Discuss ECNL flight.

How is it possible that BRYC U15 #1 in their ECNL bracket and McLean is #4? Shouldn't all those stud players be on FCV and WS rosters? WS could use them with their DA record. That BRYC team ECNL record is 11-2-1.

Please explain what is happening here because those players are still just middle schoolers with recruiting ahead of them. How in the world can that be possible?

Because ECNL is substantially weaker in 2018 than in 2017.

Good 2018 ECNL team equals a average 2017 ECNL team.

U15 - 8th graders but mostly 9th graders after age group change. They will stay put and get recruited before ECNL fully collapses.

9th and 10th grader get recruited. Don't forget

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Avoiding what discussion? Are you doubting what I'm saying? If so, it because you have witnessed it yet. Some people have to see it to believe it. Your a visual person obvioisly.

Touching story about late bloomers though. However, late bloomers are the exception, not the rule. My child was one. I get it.

I'm not selling DA over ECNL like some think. I'm telling you my opinion based on trends. Take it or leave it. It's not gospel. If it was trending the other way I would take note and say it.

I don't doubt what you are saying at all. In the short term, if a team loses #1-#6, without replacement at similar skill level, they're not going to be as competitive. That's a no-brainer.
What people are saying is that over the course of one or two years, that dropoff can erase, or deepen depending on the relative development of the new #1-#18. However, if a club continues to lose #1-$6 every year, there is no recovery from that.

Well hot dang. We agree

So if Loudoun loses their top 1-6 to FCV and Spirit every year for each age group - then where should your kid be right now? Who cares what the jersey says. In that case Loudoun is developing all of the future stars. Go to Loudoun, build up until your kids until they are #1-6 and switch. FCV and WS will dump their own every year in this scenario.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Lord have mercy. Youre talking Loudoun 07 on a ECNL vs DA forum.

3 years ago, some Loudoun 04 and 05 parents probabley thought just like you. Go ask them now what they think.

If all else fails, follow the trail. It's a clue.

A team will get destroyed if they lose their top 5-6 kids. I've seen it with less.

Example:

On most national level teams (roster size of 18)

#1- 6 are studs (Always included the midfielder).
#7-14 are above average to average.
#15-18 are average to below.

You lose #1-6 ,
you must move up #7-18
and add #19-21 from the 2nd team.

Your new team is now

#1-12 are above average to average (mostly average by number)
#13-18 are average to below average

It's very hard to compete on a national level with teams that have a roster full of stud players.

The only way counter that is to recruit 6 stud players you lost. Which will never happen in NOVA because the talent is tied up somewhere.

The only argument to this is that Loudoun will retain their talent now that they have ECNL.

However, its not happening with the 05 age group. What makes anyone thinks it will happen with the 06 and beyond age groups. If anything, ECNL becomes weaker in NOVA as the years go on...which causes more flight.

Now you are avoiding the discussion.

That is such a dumb argument. It's about player development not recruiting. Every sport is littered with stories of the best players being passed over initially and developing late.

In 2000, a kid got passed over 5 times by every NFL team in the draft until #199 in the 6th round. Whoops. Now Tom Brady is undisputedly the best QB to ever play the game. With your argument, that would never ever have happened. NFL teams should have known in 2000 who Brady would become. No way they could have thought he was #199.

Michael Jordan could not make his HS basketball team. Now he is top 3 NBA players ever. In your ergument that would never ever happen. His HS coach should have known what player he would become.

How did Alex Morgan not make the top club at 12 and 13? Answer that.

It would not surprise me at all if the best next soccer player comes out of the ECNL.

You live in a fantasy world if you think it's all about recruiting and replacing studs.

Avoiding what discussion? Are you doubting what I'm saying? If so, it because you have witnessed it yet. Some people have to see it to believe it. Your a visual person obvioisly.

Touching story about late bloomers though. However, late bloomers are the exception, not the rule. My child was one. I get it.

I'm not selling DA over ECNL like some think. I'm telling you my opinion based on trends. Take it or leave it. It's not gospel. If it was trending the other way I would take note and say it.

You are avoiding the discussion that many athletes are late bloomers. You are just dismissive and say "touching story". So I assume from that you don't believe the Tom Brady, Michael Jordan or Alex Morgan stories. They must be mysteries of the universe to you. That is my point, many of the best players will develop late. It matters little how they rank at 13 years old. You are obviously a day trader looking at what to do based on trends. But we can agree to disagree.

What does late bloomers have to do with talent fleeing Loudoun. Once the late bloomers develop they will leave as well. It's true, i saw it trending on Twitter while checking my Bitcoin stock.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Avoiding what discussion? Are you doubting what I'm saying? If so, it because you have witnessed it yet. Some people have to see it to believe it. Your a visual person obvioisly.

Touching story about late bloomers though. However, late bloomers are the exception, not the rule. My child was one. I get it.

I'm not selling DA over ECNL like some think. I'm telling you my opinion based on trends. Take it or leave it. It's not gospel. If it was trending the other way I would take note and say it.

I don't doubt what you are saying at all. In the short term, if a team loses #1-#6, without replacement at similar skill level, they're not going to be as competitive. That's a no-brainer.
What people are saying is that over the course of one or two years, that dropoff can erase, or deepen depending on the relative development of the new #1-#18. However, if a club continues to lose #1-$6 every year, there is no recovery from that.

Well hot dang. We agree

These DA parents realize it cannot be both scenarios.

If you argue DA team will take top 3-4 at U14 and move on -> ECNL teams have a huge pool left to develop and some stars will form. D1 will still come knocking. ECNL thrives

If you argue DA teams will do this every year and "crush" ECNL -> where do you think the smart parents will put their kids to develop? ECNL becomes the development field. ECNL thrives

That is why both platforms will survive and do well.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Avoiding what discussion? Are you doubting what I'm saying? If so, it because you have witnessed it yet. Some people have to see it to believe it. Your a visual person obvioisly.

Touching story about late bloomers though. However, late bloomers are the exception, not the rule. My child was one. I get it.

I'm not selling DA over ECNL like some think. I'm telling you my opinion based on trends. Take it or leave it. It's not gospel. If it was trending the other way I would take note and say it.

I don't doubt what you are saying at all. In the short term, if a team loses #1-#6, without replacement at similar skill level, they're not going to be as competitive. That's a no-brainer.
What people are saying is that over the course of one or two years, that dropoff can erase, or deepen depending on the relative development of the new #1-#18. However, if a club continues to lose #1-$6 every year, there is no recovery from that.

Well hot dang. We agree

So if Loudoun loses their top 1-6 to FCV and Spirit every year for each age group - then where should your kid be right now? Who cares what the jersey says. In that case Loudoun is developing all of the future stars. Go to Loudoun, build up until your kids until they are #1-6 and switch. FCV and WS will dump their own every year in this scenario.

Loudoun doesnt develop stars. They have a huge player pool. There are stars inside the pool.