Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I can't find a copy of the Madison roster but I believe they had 3 D1 commits and 2 D3 commits. Of the 3 D1 commits, only one is going to a good soccer program (a very good soccer program). Of the D3 commits, one of them might have gone to a good D1 program but she went for academics. So, saying "many" are high-level players who have signed for D1 schools is another RSD exaggeration. Also, most of the players on that squad do not play for high level travel teams, just the few on the McLean 01 team and the VYS 99 team.

What these facts show is that it doesn't take much talent for a HS team to be successful. You just need three or four talented field players and a somewhat competent goalie, and you can prettily easily win your district and have a solid chance to qualify for the state playoffs.

But make no mistake, it is not high level soccer, nor can it be when the vast majority of the players on a team are not high level players, and don't have the time to develop as a team.

If you are a female soccer player, volleyball player basketball player etc and you decide to go to a school and not take advantage of the academics you are making a huge mistake. You have to pick a school base don academics, most of your top schools are really good in women's sports for this reason.

What is next after college? 99.9% of them don't play at a higher level.

That’s pretty much all sports male and female.

Anonymous wrote:I can't find a copy of the Madison roster but I believe they had 3 D1 commits and 2 D3 commits. Of the 3 D1 commits, only one is going to a good soccer program (a very good soccer program). Of the D3 commits, one of them might have gone to a good D1 program but she went for academics. So, saying "many" are high-level players who have signed for D1 schools is another RSD exaggeration. Also, most of the players on that squad do not play for high level travel teams, just the few on the McLean 01 team and the VYS 99 team.

What these facts show is that it doesn't take much talent for a HS team to be successful. You just need three or four talented field players and a somewhat competent goalie, and you can prettily easily win your district and have a solid chance to qualify for the state playoffs.

But make no mistake, it is not high level soccer, nor can it be when the vast majority of the players on a team are not high level players, and don't have the time to develop as a team.

If you are a female soccer player, volleyball player basketball player etc and you decide to go to a school and not take advantage of the academics you are making a huge mistake. You have to pick a school base don academics, most of your top schools are really good in women's sports for this reason.

What is next after college? 99.9% of them don't play at a higher level.

I can't find a copy of the Madison roster but I believe they had 3 D1 commits and 2 D3 commits. Of the 3 D1 commits, only one is going to a good soccer program (a very good soccer program). Of the D3 commits, one of them might have gone to a good D1 program but she went for academics. So, saying "many" are high-level players who have signed for D1 schools is another RSD exaggeration. Also, most of the players on that squad do not play for high level travel teams, just the few on the McLean 01 team and the VYS 99 team.

What these facts show is that it doesn't take much talent for a HS team to be successful. You just need three or four talented field players and a somewhat competent goalie, and you can prettily easily win your district and have a solid chance to qualify for the state playoffs.

But make no mistake, it is not high level soccer, nor can it be when the vast majority of the players on a team are not high level players, and don't have the time to develop as a team.

RantingSoccerDad wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

RantingSoccerDad wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Goalkeepers are always in high demand. It is one of the few positions that require height (CB the other) which immediately limits the pool of players. Then it is hard to find players with the desire and skill to play at a high level. A great GK willl make an average team excellent and has a huge impact on the ability to win games. Name a great international team and you will almost always find a great GK on that team.

GK's are generally the most well rounded athletes on the team.

On the girls teams, there is a real lack of quality GKs. Even on the higher level teams.

Madison HS, a state title contender the last couple of seasons, converted a volleyball player to play keeper.

Yeah, it's a shortage.

With due respect to high school soccer, the level of play at high schools is not high or elite, at least on the boys side.

Many of the players on that team are high-level travel players who have signed at D1 schools.

(This was, though, a girls teams. See previous quote.)

I can see that with ECNL players, but now with DA that female highschool landscape is really going to change.

It takes all 7 or 9 or 11...In competitive soccer you can't put a weighting on a specific position. The game is much too fluid, but if I had to pick, it would be the holding/attacking midfielder.

They say QBs are the most important in football until they realize it all starts with the Oline.

Nor on the girls' side.

RantingSoccerDad wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Goalkeepers are always in high demand. It is one of the few positions that require height (CB the other) which immediately limits the pool of players. Then it is hard to find players with the desire and skill to play at a high level. A great GK willl make an average team excellent and has a huge impact on the ability to win games. Name a great international team and you will almost always find a great GK on that team.

GK's are generally the most well rounded athletes on the team.

On the girls teams, there is a real lack of quality GKs. Even on the higher level teams.

Madison HS, a state title contender the last couple of seasons, converted a volleyball player to play keeper.

Yeah, it's a shortage.

With due respect to high school soccer, the level of play at high schools is not high or elite, at least on the boys side.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Goalkeepers are always in high demand. It is one of the few positions that require height (CB the other) which immediately limits the pool of players. Then it is hard to find players with the desire and skill to play at a high level. A great GK willl make an average team excellent and has a huge impact on the ability to win games. Name a great international team and you will almost always find a great GK on that team.

GK's are generally the most well rounded athletes on the team.

On the girls teams, there is a real lack of quality GKs. Even on the higher level teams.

Anonymous wrote:I’ll take a player at any position if they are technical and hard workers

I kind of have a thing for players who know what they are doing. I've seen too many "hard workers" who just do random stuff with no tactical thought or they are out of sync with the game and the rest of the team.

Don't get me wrong; hard work is great. But it's not enough. I've seen many a spastic one toucher who doesn't have any sense of strategy.

I prefer a technical player who not only works hard, but works smart.

I’ll take a player at any position if they are technical and hard workers

Anonymous wrote:Goalkeepers are always in high demand. It is one of the few positions that require height (CB the other) which immediately limits the pool of players. Then it is hard to find players with the desire and skill to play at a high level. A great GK willl make an average team excellent and has a huge impact on the ability to win games. Name a great international team and you will almost always find a great GK on that team.

GK's are generally the most well rounded athletes on the team.

I think when I posted about the lack of a good forward, I was answering a different question. I actually agree wholeheartedly with all the PPs that spoke about how critical outside backs are. They are huge difference makers, and the lack of a good outside back is felt on both sides of the field.

When I said forward, what I meant was that a good forward is rare on many teams. A good forward is that player that if you do give them the right ball, they will score reliably a fair amount of the time. I see a lot of teams where the forward can be given chance after chance, but fail to convert. A scoring problem is a common one.

Whereas when you add that special player who scores goals, it changes the balance. It's just a rare player that has the speed, technical ability and power and accuracy in a shot to be a goal scorer.

However, I would take a reliable defender at any position over a striker or midfielder, if forced to choose. And no position contributes more to the tone of the game than the 2 outside backs. But as someone said, it does take a stellar athlete.

Anonymous wrote:At elite level, it is left back. Left footers are rare, plus this position requires athleticism, good decision making, defensive skills, passing and crossing ability, speed, stamina, ability to handle 1v1s, etc. It is difficult to find all of these qualities in one player.

I agree with everything you said. Behind that, a great right outside back is also a key playmaker.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:quality defenders and if they can use their left foot and play the left side they are golden.

A left side mid with a left foot is probably the best thing but if you have both on the left side who can use their left foot you can really stretch the field while most teams use the right side of the field 80% of the time.

I agree 100% The only problem is most left footed players are not in demand and get overlooked. You hardly ever see two left footed kids on a top team, maybe on lower teams it happens. A lot of coaches just see a kid that is weaker with the right foot.

Blows my mind. Lefties are creative as hell, and they can really unbalance a defense because the norm is preparing for, expecting, and coaching players to defend righties.

Anonymous wrote:quality defenders and if they can use their left foot and play the left side they are golden.

A left side mid with a left foot is probably the best thing but if you have both on the left side who can use their left foot you can really stretch the field while most teams use the right side of the field 80% of the time.

I agree 100% The only problem is most left footed players are not in demand and get overlooked. You hardly ever see two left footed kids on a top team, maybe on lower teams it happens. A lot of coaches just see a kid that is weaker with the right foot.