Anonymous wrote:Everyone is focusing on the ulittles. What about the concept at the older ages? I think teams are more stable as kids get older. It's not completely static, but barring a random, rare exodus from a group of disgruntled parents, players are more likely to remain on the same team.

Personally, this is why I have been using numbers from U15. This is the age that playing to win actually matters.

And to answer a previous question regarding the difference between a CCL and NPL/VPL club playing in NCSL I admit the following two U12 Girls teams as evidence.

Team 1 hails from McLean and was in CCL just one year ago until CCL kicked the club out of the league:
https://youthsoccerrankings.us/team.html?teamId=2405830

NCSL Fall 2018 GU12 Division T
23 Sep 18 DC STODDERT DCST WHITE METROS 5 - 0
16 Sep 18 SA OF COLUMBIA UNITED WHITE 7 - 0
15 Sep 18 TAKOMA PARK SC 5 - 0
09 Sep 18 MARYLAND RUSH 12 - 0
08 Sep 18 FC VIRGINIA FCVA UNITED 0 - 3

The next team hails from FCV and played in NCSL this fall:
https://youthsoccerrankings.us/team.html?teamId=2346379

NCSL Fall 2018 GU12 Division T
10 Nov 18 WINCHESTER YOUTH SC UNITED WIN ORANGE 6 - 1
28 Oct 18 DC STODDERT DCST WHITE METROS 3 - 0
21 Oct 18 SA OF COLUMBIA SAC UNITED BLUE 2 - 0
20 Oct 18 TAKOMA PARK SC 5 - 3
13 Oct 18 SA OF COLUMBIA UNITED WHITE 6 - 0
30 Sep 18 BRADDOCK ROAD YOUTH CLUB ELITE ACADEMY BLACK 10 - 2
22 Sep 18 MARYLAND RUSH NG 13 - 0

Anyone else also think the structure should be lengthened to U21 or U23? I understand it’s “youth sports”, but part of the gist should be that we’re also trying to develop soccer players right? Players don’t just stop developing at U18-19. If they were to continue training they wouldn’t really peak until 28-29.

Everyone is focusing on the ulittles. What about the concept at the older ages? I think teams are more stable as kids get older. It's not completely static, but barring a random, rare exodus from a group of disgruntled parents, players are more likely to remain on the same team.

The interesting part of this discussion is that in youth sports, unlike professionals, there is a lot more movement of kids. You have a team that is top in their division this year and next year half of them move on to play lacrosse or some other sport. But yet you end up with placing that team based on the name of team without any regards to the talent. Every year clubs try to put together the best possible team but are frankly trying to swim up stream. They have to compete with DA/ECNL, other sports, etc. There is no perfect scenario and if you are blowing out teams week to week, then the chances are you aren't going to get all your top players back the following year.

Anonymous wrote:

RantingSoccerDad wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

RantingSoccerDad wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

RantingSoccerDad wrote:Breaking out a new topic so we can discuss without swamping the FCB thread or any other. Enjoy.

Good. I say every single team should face promotion or relegation. There should be no guaranteed placement in any league.

Why?

My argument would be that teams need to find the right level of competition. If they're dominating a league, they should move up. If they're getting crushed, they should move down.

Beats the hell out of TDs insisting they need to drive four hours to find comparable teams when there's a comparable team 15 minutes away.

How does that help the individual player develop? If Pro/Rel was so beneficial to developing players then why does NCSL not use it at the younger ages?

The individual player would be properly challenged instead of scoring cheap goals against overmatched competition.

True story: I saw a U9 game that was ridiculously out of hand. The goalkeeper could barely play a goal kick out of the box, and the other team just swarmed to pounce on it. (This was before the buildout line.) Goal kick, shot, repeat. Goal kick, goal, kickoff, swarm, shot, repeat. The coach did nothing to change it up. The PARENTS were pissed. They were yelling at their kids to drop back, spread out and play some damn soccer. One parent told me later the coach didn't know what he was doing.

But the moral of the story is that those teams shouldn't play again. NCSL should do more tiering than they do.

They don't have to do literal pro/rel. Some leagues in California simply have three divisions. Initially, the coach and club pick the division they think is best. If the results aren't what they expect, they move up or down.

I agree with you, RSD. And if your experience was a couple of years ago, I believe that NCSL does do more tiering at U9 and U10 than it used to. I have a couple of kids in NCSL and know that the coach was asked to rank the recent U9 team on a scale of 1 to 5. There were a couple of blowouts (like 8-0) but nothing compared to my family's first U9 experience (some games were 8-0 in five minutes). Common sense, coach feedback, and a little bit of effort can go a long way to ensuring that most games are competitive. Absolutely no one benefits from those ridiculous games.

The argument against promotion/relegation in the early years is based on the idea that coaches need to focus on development rather than winning, right? I absolutely get that. And while there are natural variations from year to year in every club someone can thoughtfully put together decent schedules just by being familiar with the area. At least they can avoid ridiculous situations where an enormous club's A team destroys a tiny club's B team.

There is a reason scores are not kept at U9. There is no more volatile age than U9 and even worrying about something that can't be prevented is just silly. 15-0 games have always and will always happen at this age, especially in Fall season. U10, it still happens to a large extent. While you can attempt tiering, and yes NCSL does attempt tiers based on club reputation and hopefully coaches recommendations, blowouts are still gonna happen. And that is why, at U10 scores still are not kept. It is just really pointless to get to invested in trying to engineer balanced competition at U9 and U10.

I for one can't wait for my kid's team to be relegated. It's been a painful season.

I think pro/rel would be a plus, just for the fact that it entails the bottom teams get demoted, and the top teams get elevated. You won’t avoid blowouts, it’s too random a sport.

RantingSoccerDad wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

RantingSoccerDad wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

RantingSoccerDad wrote:Breaking out a new topic so we can discuss without swamping the FCB thread or any other. Enjoy.

Good. I say every single team should face promotion or relegation. There should be no guaranteed placement in any league.

Why?

My argument would be that teams need to find the right level of competition. If they're dominating a league, they should move up. If they're getting crushed, they should move down.

Beats the hell out of TDs insisting they need to drive four hours to find comparable teams when there's a comparable team 15 minutes away.

How does that help the individual player develop? If Pro/Rel was so beneficial to developing players then why does NCSL not use it at the younger ages?

The individual player would be properly challenged instead of scoring cheap goals against overmatched competition.

True story: I saw a U9 game that was ridiculously out of hand. The goalkeeper could barely play a goal kick out of the box, and the other team just swarmed to pounce on it. (This was before the buildout line.) Goal kick, shot, repeat. Goal kick, goal, kickoff, swarm, shot, repeat. The coach did nothing to change it up. The PARENTS were pissed. They were yelling at their kids to drop back, spread out and play some damn soccer. One parent told me later the coach didn't know what he was doing.

But the moral of the story is that those teams shouldn't play again. NCSL should do more tiering than they do.

They don't have to do literal pro/rel. Some leagues in California simply have three divisions. Initially, the coach and club pick the division they think is best. If the results aren't what they expect, they move up or down.

I agree with you, RSD. And if your experience was a couple of years ago, I believe that NCSL does do more tiering at U9 and U10 than it used to. I have a couple of kids in NCSL and know that the coach was asked to rank the recent U9 team on a scale of 1 to 5. There were a couple of blowouts (like 8-0) but nothing compared to my family's first U9 experience (some games were 8-0 in five minutes). Common sense, coach feedback, and a little bit of effort can go a long way to ensuring that most games are competitive. Absolutely no one benefits from those ridiculous games.

The argument against promotion/relegation in the early years is based on the idea that coaches need to focus on development rather than winning, right? I absolutely get that. And while there are natural variations from year to year in every club someone can thoughtfully put together decent schedules just by being familiar with the area. At least they can avoid ridiculous situations where an enormous club's A team destroys a tiny club's B team.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The reason the data does not necessarily support that pro/rel works is that team strengths vary so much year to year. Many teams change half their rosters from year to year in this area. There is even an entire thread dedicated to 08 club hoppers.

That is true, but wouldn't you say that certain clubs tend to have consistently strong or weak teams? I also wonder if pro/rel would stabilize the rosters more. Players who leave teams in search of better competition may be inclined to stay. How much of a swing is there really on the better squads?

There will always be separation. Youth Soccer rankings uses an algorithm that essentially predicts what the goal differential will be between teams. This is essentially what their "score" is. So if you take the top ten VA girls U15 clubs and look at what that differential would be it would demonstrate the generally same 2 GA Avg for the 10th team, which is the 10th ranked team in the state.

1. RICHMOND UNITED SC VA ECNL [29] 35.77
10. VIRGINIA DEVELOPMENT ACADEMY [371] 33.15

Will the quality of soccer be better? Yes. Will that change the fact that even if such a league existed that the state's 10th best team will still only win 1-2 games? No.

Anonymous wrote:The reason the data does not necessarily support that pro/rel works is that team strengths vary so much year to year. Many teams change half their rosters from year to year in this area. There is even an entire thread dedicated to 08 club hoppers.

That is true, but wouldn't you say that certain clubs tend to have consistently strong or weak teams? I also wonder if pro/rel would stabilize the rosters more. Players who leave teams in search of better competition may be inclined to stay. How much of a swing is there really on the better squads?

The reason the data does not necessarily support that pro/rel works is that team strengths vary so much year to year. Many teams change half their rosters from year to year in this area. There is even an entire thread dedicated to 08 club hoppers.

I mean Gibraltar vs. Belgium. There is no point to this game, better to watch Gibraltar vs. Malta or whatnot

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nIg3P_PSPHc

The first goal tells the whole story.

I mean Gibraltar vs. Belgium. There is no point to this game, better to watch Gibraltar vs. Malta or whatnot

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nIg3P_PSPHc

The Nations League is trying, I'd say it is a success so far so countries like Gibraltar and St. Kitts & Nevis can play meaningful games instead of Gibraltar vs. Span and St. Kitts vs. Mexico.