Reply to ECNL moving to school year not calendar

Forum Index » Soccer

Reply to "ECNL moving to school year not calendar "

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]All this begs the question, is staying BY for MLSN/GA worth all the trouble and potential downsides?[/quote]

What potential downsides? 🤣 [/quote]No downsides if they just pull a DA and close up shop without warning.[/quote]
DA didnt really "close up shop without warning". At least on the girls side everyone knew free soccer doesnt work if someone or some kind of action wasnt footing the bill. US Soccer wanted out and MLS wanted in. Which is why MLS Next exists today as a direct replacement of boys DA. Girls DA is a little more complicated because it never should have existed in the first place. Im sure US Soccer approached NWSL to take the girls side over and they simply said no. Which is when a bunch of clubs went back to ECNL and everyone else grouped together and created GA. If you read through the early GA documentation the intent was always to have NWSL take over GA and create Acadamies just like MLS did with the boys. When this didn't happen GA pivoted and copied ECNL. From a business perspective ECNL could have had it all if they would have just let all the DA clubs in. But they chose to only let certain clubs in. And now GA exists as their biggest competitor. [/quote]
What i like about today vs 5 years ago is that because of the ranking app ECNLs mistake of only letting certain clubs in when DA blew up is easy to see. Before the ranking app there were ranking sites that were literally pay to play marketing and they'd print whatever they were paid to say. This still exists but nobody cares anymore if what's being written doesnt sync with the ranking app its garbage. I cant stress how bad it was when recruiters would contact clubs based on articles written by websites that were 100% paid for by leagues.

I see this same type of thing happening for players with stats as AI becomes better able to identify skills. As an example right now with forwards its easy to see who can finish. But, how do you identify mids and defenders? Eventually this will all be assessed by AI and coaches/docs will lose their power to pick favorites.[/quote]

The rankings app is awful. It is MARGINALLY better than GotSport / USARank.[/quote]
Give me a break.

Before the ranking app who was the best club was determined by who paid which site the most $$$.

For better or worse the ranking app provides a consistent and cearly defined way to rank teams. That isnt influenced by $$$. [/quote]

You didn’t really respond to the PP. 🧐

You just made an unsubstantiated loosely related secondary claim about paying for rankings. Neither GotSport, nor USARank are paid rankings…so where is this coming from?

Soccer Rankings app is about as accurate as GotSport and USARank, none are very good, and they all pull from the same data sources. [/quote]

Anyone that puts GotSport or USA rank in the same galaxy as soccer rankings knows absolutely nothing about data analytics.

Only saving grace is that it is Monday morning so they are back at their job at the CBO😂[/quote]

Spit my coffee out on this one. Ranking app is garbage. And it’s not data analytics [/quote]

Ranking app is far and away better than any alternative. Is it completely accurate, of course not, but by last count it predicted wins at a greater than 80% rate. The algorithm is actually pretty impressive. It is explained at the link pp posted.

Instead of mocking what you dont understand (iT’s NoT dAtA aAlYtIcs) take time to educate yourself. it will help you in the real world when your anonymity doesnt shields you from ridicule……….[/quote]

Not responding on this after this.

If you read this, it supports everything that I posted above:
https://usasportstatistics.net/
With one breath you complain about USARank and GotSport rewarding match volume, but Soccer Ranking is pretty explicit that more = higher and better results too.

It is a bastardized ELO.

ELO is not data analytics, and neither is Soccer Ranking. It is statistics, but not DA. They aren’t Opta…and they aren’t collecting that sort of data.

Football is extremely hard to produce predictive outcomes. Some of the best ELOs produce and accuracy better than random picking, but double 55% accuracy at best.

This is why professional gamblers actually ushered in the data revolution of football. Systems like ELO aren’t great.

Perfect example is ELOs are based on zero sum outcomes…footy isn’t zero sum. That

Other variables that make ratings extremely difficult in soccer are too numerous, but I’ll list a few: roster / health, home / away / crowds, referee calls, weather, etc. All of these variables have a multiplied effect when it comes to youth teams.

Totally can agree to disagree about the idea of the marginal difference between Soccer Ranking and GS/USAR, but to believe that there is value in the Soccer Ranking beyond feeling good about your kid’s team (which they rent a seat on) is absolutely absurd. And to believe that there is predictive power in the ranking is equally absurd. Why don’t you start a youth sports gambling website if you believe it?

[/quote]

You don’t have to respond but what you suggest is that, if you took the number 1-20 teams in any given age group and played them against 101-120 that those games would be toss ups.  I would adamantly disagree with that. If you would agree that 1-20 would win more then that is the very definition of predictive value.

When I have time I will back test ECNL playoffs in a given age group and see how the results play out. My gut is the outcomes will favor the higher ranked team more than 55% of the time. [/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics