Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Losing team in a top league is a loser move, sorry disagree.

This is one of the dumbest, yet oft repeated, idea.

No one cares about wins and losses in ECNL girls. It simply does not matter like you think it does. BRYC (BRAVE) 05/06 girls were a terrrrrrrrible team, got beat by basically everybody. Guess what? Most of the kids found spots in College. Because individually they had things to offer. They had several go to decent D1 schools, and some nice academic D3. Arlington 06 was a consistently mid-table team, and yet that recruiting class is insane - especially when you add the trapped players. I’m not sure how they did it, because when we played Arlington they were good but not great.

Wins and losses matter very little. If your kid is getting minutes on an ECNL team, college coaches will be there at the showcases. Yes, if you are on a top team you get seen by more of them, but don’t overvalue the wins for recruiting purposes.

This is correct. College coaches don’t recruit based on how good or bad a team’s record is.

Absent maybe 100 players in the country in any given graduation class coaches are looking for;

1. A kid who really wants to come to the coach’s college;
2. A kid who, in the view of the coach, can play at the needed level immediately, or on a very good college team, within a year.
3. A kid who has the academic ability to do okay at the college. And, intends to pursue a degree program offered by the college (at least in a general sense). Grades usually are not an issue with soccer girls. But, majors can be. Certainly it helps the coach know if you want to be there.

College coaches are all certain they can pick out talent. You do not have to be on an ECNL team. But, it is a huge help in getting seen. And, that is the sole purpose of ECNL. Getting seen for recruiting. There is no reason at all to play all over the country if you are not interested in getting seen for recruiting. And, there barely is a reason even with that goal.

And, by the way, other than keepers, college coaches are recruiting talented players. They are not recruiting specific players. We saw that one with my kid. Every college coach who recruited her saw her as a forward or maybe right mid. Positions she had never played in club from u9 to u18. They all loved her speed. Turned out that she ended up as a defensive center mid. You grab playing time where you can get it. Do not get welded to a particular position.

The job of a player (and parents) in the recruiting process is to assess colleges that can work. Athletically, academically, socially and financially.
That’s not simple. And, women soccer college coaches do not have big travel budgets for recruiting.

The goal is to get the coach to a game to see you play once or twice. Whether your team wins or loses does not matter at all. It is literally all about “how you play the game”.

Yes teams have quite a few kids at the beginning of the year. Rest assured injuries will take out 2-4. Loss of kids to recruiting or academic requirements (testing etc) will take out another 2-4 per game. And, frankly, lack of interest in paying for travel once the college decisions are made.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:All of them? It’s the spring, tis the season of bloated rosters, promises being made, lies being spread, and testing the waters elsewhere. Unless you’re a fracturing failing team like Pipeline or FCV your roster is looking a little different every day

Just looked at the local ECNL rosters for our area and it looks like NVA 06/07 only roster 18. sooo.

The posted was asking about U14...why give the roster size of some other random team? There are lots of ECNL roster out there with 18 or less players.

Why would they even say 'only 18' as though it's a bad thing, too? Having a full stacked bench of kids who hardly ever play is not a sign of a great team.

You’re saying teams with 18 players have kids that barely play?

This isn't rec where players get 50% playing time. Coaches reputations/jobs are on the line. Would the coach prefer player #1 or #18 getting minutes?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:All of them? It’s the spring, tis the season of bloated rosters, promises being made, lies being spread, and testing the waters elsewhere. Unless you’re a fracturing failing team like Pipeline or FCV your roster is looking a little different every day

Just looked at the local ECNL rosters for our area and it looks like NVA 06/07 only roster 18. sooo.

The posted was asking about U14...why give the roster size of some other random team? There are lots of ECNL roster out there with 18 or less players.

Why would they even say 'only 18' as though it's a bad thing, too? Having a full stacked bench of kids who hardly ever play is not a sign of a great team.

You’re saying teams with 18 players have kids that barely play?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Losing team in a top league is a loser move, sorry disagree.

This is one of the dumbest, yet oft repeated, idea.

No one cares about wins and losses in ECNL girls. It simply does not matter like you think it does. BRYC (BRAVE) 05/06 girls were a terrrrrrrrible team, got beat by basically everybody. Guess what? Most of the kids found spots in College. Because individually they had things to offer. They had several go to decent D1 schools, and some nice academic D3. Arlington 06 was a consistently mid-table team, and yet that recruiting class is insane - especially when you add the trapped players. I’m not sure how they did it, because when we played Arlington they were good but not great.

Wins and losses matter very little. If your kid is getting minutes on an ECNL team, college coaches will be there at the showcases. Yes, if you are on a top team you get seen by more of them, but don’t overvalue the wins for recruiting purposes.

Anonymous wrote:Losing team in a top league is a loser move, sorry disagree.

Anonymous wrote:They stay on the roster and get less playing time

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:All of them? It’s the spring, tis the season of bloated rosters, promises being made, lies being spread, and testing the waters elsewhere. Unless you’re a fracturing failing team like Pipeline or FCV your roster is looking a little different every day

Just looked at the local ECNL rosters for our area and it looks like NVA 06/07 only roster 18. sooo.

The posted was asking about U14...why give the roster size of some other random team? There are lots of ECNL roster out there with 18 or less players.

Why would they even say 'only 18' as though it's a bad thing, too? Having a full stacked bench of kids who hardly ever play is not a sign of a great team.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:All of them? It’s the spring, tis the season of bloated rosters, promises being made, lies being spread, and testing the waters elsewhere. Unless you’re a fracturing failing team like Pipeline or FCV your roster is looking a little different every day

Just looked at the local ECNL rosters for our area and it looks like NVA 06/07 only roster 18. sooo.

The posted was asking about U14...why give the roster size of some other random team? There are lots of ECNL roster out there with 18 or less players.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have a question for you all, I am a coach for a non-ecnl girls team.

Some ecnl programs make it very clear that they are looking for the best players available. For example if a roster is complete, and a better player comes along enough to start, they will take that player and bump someone off playing time.

What happens to the player, do they just languish on the roster and not play? Let's say the bumped off player is just way too good to be playing in RL, do they just not play at all or what happens? How is this communicated to the parents? Is the player dropped or do they just keep them on the roster

When comparing NL vs RL rosters there isn't much difference in the #17/18/19 player of an NL roster vs the #1/2/3 on an RL roster, so saying the player is "too good to be playing RL" I'd assume they're probably in the middle of the pack, maybe a fringe starter on the NL roster or they're not actually too good to be playing RL. Either way, their playing time will be cut or have to be earned back - if that player was playing 45/50 mins of a game, they might play 30/35 mins now.

The player won't be dropped mid season, they'll just get less playing time if they don't earn it back. Coaches do what coaches do for playing time and typically those conversations only happen if the player/parent initiates those conversations and they'll usually get the response of "fielding the best 11 and/or give feedback on what improvements the player needs to make to get more playing time."

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:All of them? It’s the spring, tis the season of bloated rosters, promises being made, lies being spread, and testing the waters elsewhere. Unless you’re a fracturing failing team like Pipeline or FCV your roster is looking a little different every day

Just looked at the local ECNL rosters for our area and it looks like NVA 06/07 only roster 18. sooo.