Anonymous wrote:It’s a weird concept that clubs are somehow developing players into something they wouldn’t have been on their own. I mean, do we say that a high school developed their kids that go to top universities? In that case we say the individual worked really hard on their own (and their parents gave them support and resources to excel). It’s the same with soccer. These players do it on their own and would have gotten to the same place no matter which club they play

It's clear that your child has never had a good coach.

IMO, the best coaches in this area have been at the smaller clubs. They're full of coaches that have a passion for soccer and are students of the game. They teach players how to read the game and make good decisions themselves on the field as opposed to those coaches that scream and joystick every game. The best players from those small clubs then move to the bigger clubs where they will have a better shot at playing in college via ECNL.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And these aren't clubs. There's nothing club about this. None play with any sort of identity, none are really connected fully in their communities. They're just businesses that provide access to a platform and they choose players they see fit. The developing is up to the individual player.

We don't even have true clubs at the professional level in this country.

I'm the first to criticize BSC, but I'd argue they have a defined playing style on both the girls and boys side. The boys have far more freedom to play creatively then the girls, but thats a different thread, bottom line is they truly play possession soccer. When it works its awfully frustrating for the uneducated soccer parent to sit through. "Go forward", "No, don't go backwards", "just clear it". "boot it". is what I'm talking about

Very true.

Anonymous wrote:And these aren't clubs. There's nothing club about this. None play with any sort of identity, none are really connected fully in their communities. They're just businesses that provide access to a platform and they choose players they see fit. The developing is up to the individual player.

We don't even have true clubs at the professional level in this country.

I'm the first to criticize BSC, but I'd argue they have a defined playing style on both the girls and boys side. The boys have far more freedom to play creatively then the girls, but thats a different thread, bottom line is they truly play possession soccer. When it works its awfully frustrating for the uneducated soccer parent to sit through. "Go forward", "No, don't go backwards", "just clear it". "boot it". is what I'm talking about

Marketing and expectations vs reality.

It’s a weird concept that clubs are somehow developing players into something they wouldn’t have been on their own. I mean, do we say that a high school developed their kids that go to top universities? In that case we say the individual worked really hard on their own (and their parents gave them support and resources to excel). It’s the same with soccer. These players do it on their own and would have gotten to the same place no matter which club they play

God, this topic is so banal and played out.

And these aren't clubs. There's nothing club about this. None play with any sort of identity, none are really connected fully in their communities. They're just businesses that provide access to a platform and they choose players they see fit. The developing is up to the individual player.

We don't even have true clubs at the professional level in this country.

The first step to a productive discussion would be an objective description and understanding of "development" by all.

ECNL girls programs are more like filters than development environments.

Keep the players who have the natural talent that college coaches are looking for anyway, release those that don't, and recruit more that do.

Rosters need to be bigger than 20 as kids get onto older teams.

Kids leave for other teams all the time for a host of reasons.

All of these clubs have 2nd/3rd/4th teams and they need to fill those rosters too.

Partnerships help fill rosters and make more money

Here's the topic:

In NOVA, there are 6 clubs that are considered to have "elite" girls programs... in alphabetical order:

Arlington
Brave (vienna + braddock road)
NVA (Loudon + Valour + Great falls)
VDA (PWSI + VSA)
Mclean Union (Mclean + SYC... not anymore)
St. James

So here is the question:
Let's say every team has 20 players on it, in theory.

That means that in the NOVA area, the 120 top players in each age group are or should be playing on these teams. That may not be the case, but lets say it is.

So we have the top 120 players all competing against each other. These players are going to be the top 120 players in the area, even if they get crap training... they are talented, dedicated, and doing work on their own even with poor coaching.

So are these players really being developed? or is ECNL coaching a black box where we assume it is, but in fact we're just looking at the most talented players already... so it looks like development, but in fact its just crap coaching with the best players?

If these coaches are so good at developing players and coaching, WHY DO THEY NEED TO RELY ON FEEDER CLUBS AND PARTNER CLUBS FOR PLAYERS

I get that there are individual talented players out there who join ECNL... thats fine. but partner clubs implies you can't develop your own players.

"Academy" is used to sell the pipe dream. Players are on their own to develop themselves - through supplemental training etc.

Lol! Magical is the right word. But that's not how this works! That's not how any of this works!

They do but as kids get older- there interests change, their family might move, their bodies change, etc.,,,

Most of the clubs on this area do develop players and would love for teams to stay exactly the same as they age but that does not happen

Would be a magical thing if clubs playing at the elite level could develop their own players and not have to rely on partners/feeders!