Reply to New Additions to Leagues Check Up (ECNL & GA)

Forum Index » Soccer

Reply to "New Additions to Leagues Check Up (ECNL & GA)"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]Once again, I dont really have a dog in the fight but there seem to be three things that could significantly impact ECNL at this point.

1.  If GA formed actual Academies like what MLS now Homegrown has done. If there were 10-12 true Academy programs in main metro areas, that would siphon off significant talent since most of those rosters on the boys side get into the 30 range

2. If GA stayed BY and then gave a bit of a choice to kids based on their birthdates. Yes some Q3/4 GA kids might migrate to ECNL as well but it potentially impacts the Q1/2 ECNL kids more.

3. If GA actually imposed more of a development curriculum as standard for anyone with a badge.  The critics of ECNL suggest they simply recruit away the top kids and never actually develop them. If this is true, and GA could actually develop kids they may, over time, start to catch up to the ECNL kids.

I guess you could add a number

4. MLSN continues to help leverage ECNL girls to GA with the boys system.

There might be more but this is the basic list I came up with.

To me the interesting thing is the money aspect of all of this. It was only a year or two ago that GA needed a decent sized loan from USSF but there is no transparency into ECNL finances. They could be in trouble as well and you wouldnt know until it was too late, sort of like the DA, which seemed like a combination of funding and really poor management from the governing body.[/quote]

Can you elaborate on #3? Are you saying that girls Academy programs don’t recruit or add players? ECNL only does this? Where are the players coming from, if not other ECNL programs? Are you saying that girls academy and small town clubs develop all of these players and then ECNL recruits them away? Does the league encourage this or is it just certain clubs? do most ECNL clubs not have teams younger than 13?

This is a serious post. I see this brought up all the time and I don’t understand it.[/quote]

The criticism of ECNL, right or wrong, suggests that many clubs aggregate top talent from surrounding clubs that actually develop them at the younger ages. The top talent is drawn to the badge and playing with other top talent. Once at the top clubs the focus is more on strategy vs skill development.

In my area, the U12 teams (pre badge) are usually solid but not the top teams in the area. For the u13 (badge) virtually all of these teams have 50%+ new kids if not more.

Again there may be great development clubs in ECNL as well. I am just suggesting the GA could gain an advantage of truly developing the kids through U19. There are a couple of GA clubs, that I know well, that struggle at the younger ages but then perform very well at the high school ages. This suggests more of a development approach as they dont really recruit in new kids that much from original U13 teams.

Please dont take this as gospel just some anecdotal musings.[/quote]

But GA (at least where I'm at) does the exact same thing as you listed as an issue with ECNL. I guess more anecdotal musings.[/quote]

I guess that is the point where GA could differentiate by becoming a true “academy” in the European sense vs the American marketing sense.

In my area, the badges (both ECNL and GA) do very little skill development, e.g. cone drills, volley drills, juggling skill, weak foot development, long ball training, etc. They also do very little film study or speed and agility work.  The clubs expect kids to do this as supplemental work outside of club.  Maybe some clubs do all of this but true academies should have this as part of the club curriculum, in my opinion. [/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