Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:From NYTimes article 4 mos ago

MLS in women's soccer
As MLS continues to expand, its footprint in the women's game has also continued to grow. Three NWSL franchises - the Houston Dash, Portland Thorns and Orlando Pride - are owned by MLS ownership groups. A handful of the league's other teams are tenants in stadiums owned by MLS clubs.
MLS has never operated a women's league, though. Garber said MLS is presently focused on its partnership with Apple and getting its near-term plans in order. But he did leave the door open to the idea of an increased presence in the women's soccer space in the long-term.
"We have been thinking very hard about what role MLS should play in women's soccer," he said. "We have been very focused on being as good as we possibly can be, and we're still in a growth phase. So we're laser-focused on doing what we have to do in getting that right. That being said, I see no reason why MLS Next should not have a girls component to it. If we are building the infrastructure to have tens of thousands of kids playing at an elite level, why recreate that and have somebody else incur that expense? We ought to be able to figure out a girls component of that, and whether we do that on our own, or whether we do that with the NWSL, we ought to be able to figure that out."
Garber also left open the possibility of building out a women's counterpart to MLS Next Pro, Major League Soccer's developmental league.
"With MLS Next Pro, we're building a third division in our country," said Garber. "(Soon,) we'll have a hell of a lot more teams than we have today. And as we're going out and building professional soccer at that level, in many, many markets outside of the MLS world, there's no reason to think that at some point that there shouldn't be an MLS Next Pro women's division. Whether we do that on our own or whether we do that with the NWSL is still to be seen. But it makes sense, as we think about 'the MLS way' that is all about efficiency and productivity, and trying to lead, and lead with our resources, we ought to be able to figure out a way to further the growth of the women's game. We have no plans on doing that today, but we ought to be thinking about how to do that tomorrow."

This is a good article too…

https://www.mlssoccer.com/news/mls-partners-girls-academy-largest-all-girls-youth-soccer-organization-usa

That was 5 years ago when GA first came about.

You better believe the GA is trying to recreate DA 2.0. They have had a lot of time to plan.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:From NYTimes article 4 mos ago

MLS in women's soccer
As MLS continues to expand, its footprint in the women's game has also continued to grow. Three NWSL franchises - the Houston Dash, Portland Thorns and Orlando Pride - are owned by MLS ownership groups. A handful of the league's other teams are tenants in stadiums owned by MLS clubs.
MLS has never operated a women's league, though. Garber said MLS is presently focused on its partnership with Apple and getting its near-term plans in order. But he did leave the door open to the idea of an increased presence in the women's soccer space in the long-term.
"We have been thinking very hard about what role MLS should play in women's soccer," he said. "We have been very focused on being as good as we possibly can be, and we're still in a growth phase. So we're laser-focused on doing what we have to do in getting that right. That being said, I see no reason why MLS Next should not have a girls component to it. If we are building the infrastructure to have tens of thousands of kids playing at an elite level, why recreate that and have somebody else incur that expense? We ought to be able to figure out a girls component of that, and whether we do that on our own, or whether we do that with the NWSL, we ought to be able to figure that out."
Garber also left open the possibility of building out a women's counterpart to MLS Next Pro, Major League Soccer's developmental league.
"With MLS Next Pro, we're building a third division in our country," said Garber. "(Soon,) we'll have a hell of a lot more teams than we have today. And as we're going out and building professional soccer at that level, in many, many markets outside of the MLS world, there's no reason to think that at some point that there shouldn't be an MLS Next Pro women's division. Whether we do that on our own or whether we do that with the NWSL is still to be seen. But it makes sense, as we think about 'the MLS way' that is all about efficiency and productivity, and trying to lead, and lead with our resources, we ought to be able to figure out a way to further the growth of the women's game. We have no plans on doing that today, but we ought to be thinking about how to do that tomorrow."

This is a good article too…

https://www.mlssoccer.com/news/mls-partners-girls-academy-largest-all-girls-youth-soccer-organization-usa

Anonymous wrote:From NYTimes article 4 mos ago

MLS in women's soccer
As MLS continues to expand, its footprint in the women's game has also continued to grow. Three NWSL franchises - the Houston Dash, Portland Thorns and Orlando Pride - are owned by MLS ownership groups. A handful of the league's other teams are tenants in stadiums owned by MLS clubs.
MLS has never operated a women's league, though. Garber said MLS is presently focused on its partnership with Apple and getting its near-term plans in order. But he did leave the door open to the idea of an increased presence in the women's soccer space in the long-term.
"We have been thinking very hard about what role MLS should play in women's soccer," he said. "We have been very focused on being as good as we possibly can be, and we're still in a growth phase. So we're laser-focused on doing what we have to do in getting that right. That being said, I see no reason why MLS Next should not have a girls component to it. If we are building the infrastructure to have tens of thousands of kids playing at an elite level, why recreate that and have somebody else incur that expense? We ought to be able to figure out a girls component of that, and whether we do that on our own, or whether we do that with the NWSL, we ought to be able to figure that out."
Garber also left open the possibility of building out a women's counterpart to MLS Next Pro, Major League Soccer's developmental league.
"With MLS Next Pro, we're building a third division in our country," said Garber. "(Soon,) we'll have a hell of a lot more teams than we have today. And as we're going out and building professional soccer at that level, in many, many markets outside of the MLS world, there's no reason to think that at some point that there shouldn't be an MLS Next Pro women's division. Whether we do that on our own or whether we do that with the NWSL is still to be seen. But it makes sense, as we think about 'the MLS way' that is all about efficiency and productivity, and trying to lead, and lead with our resources, we ought to be able to figure out a way to further the growth of the women's game. We have no plans on doing that today, but we ought to be thinking about how to do that tomorrow."

Anonymous wrote:Add SAN Francisco Seals Soccer club to the list

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Nationals shot themselves in the foot.
Now they are just a middle of the pack club in a stacked conference.

Before, their matches against Lou Fusz, NEFC, TopHat, CUP et al used to attract 100+ colleges.

Now they might not even see the ecnl playoffs in some age groups…

Are you arguing that nationals players will get less exposure in ECNL than they did in GA?

I am yes. In GA they usually put multiple teams in GA playoffs and they did well. Let’s say only 300 college coaches at GA instead of the 400 at ECNL. So they got in front of 300 coaches at the highest levels of GA. Now, at ECNL, several teams miss playoffs because they play Hawks, SBV, SLSG, Eclipse so they are not getting the 400 because they dont even make the trip. It is not calculus.

Hence the argument you would rather be a GA playoff team than an ECNL team that does not make the playoffs.

Except it doesn’t work that way. The playoff event is also a showcase, so every team can go even if they don’t qualify for the playoff bracket. Nationals will be there with the 400 scouts no matter where they finish. GA works the same way. If you have been through the process you would realize this. Only pre-HS age parents think you need to be on a winning team to get exposure.

The only person that doesnt know how the playoffs/showcases work might be you. Yes, there are showcases alongside the first rounds of playoofs for the “loser” teams. A-Z tiers. Guess which games the scouts go to? They go to SD Surf vs SLSG playoff game………not FC Wisconsin vs Utah Avalanche Tier W game…………..I have been on both sides of the trade. There aren’t any scouts going to the latter game………….

Oh, and tons of scouts go to the final rounds of playoffs, you know those games that DONT have a showcase attached to them…………

.

We were in a showcase in the key recruiting time. Not playoffs. We had 125 coaches.

We also went to final around of playoffs. Not well attended by scouts.

Hahaha, you're trying to argue that scouts prefer lower level teams than the best in the nation.

Come on, take a step back and think about what you're shoveling.

Notice every time you run into a wall of facts from actual experience, you try to shift the subject with a strawman argument.

“you’re trying to argue scouts prefer lower level teams!” No, we said that scouts don’t care about the level of teams.

“Are you arguing that nationals players will get less exposure in ECNL than they did in GA?” No, we said they will get all the exposure they need in both.

From the way you post I can tell you probably have a U14 or U15 player. You’re a club hopper and are probably driving a longer distance than necessary just to be on an ECNL team that wins more games because you think that matters. You think your daughter is better than she is. The club and coaches let you believe that to keep you paying. You put down other clubs and leagues on an anonymous forum to convince yourself it’s all worth it. In a few years you’ll blame everyone else why your daughter didn’t become a national star.

Nope not even close.

My kid has played at the same local GA club since she was 5. (Always on the top team) Also she starts most games even as a trapped player. We have checked out local ECNL clubs over the years and know that the grass isn't greener.

I'm not sure where you got the negative assessment from. You might want to look inward for that.

Reguarding league events and which games scouts attend. Sorry to be the one that brings you to reality. However the top teams and big games are the ones that have the most scout attendance. Not the random games and clubs.

I think, tho, the PP point was that the scout visits aren't random. They are seeking out particular players who have already made connections to those programs (going to ID camps, sharing highlight videos, etc) to see these players in action. You can both be right, you know.

Not all clubs and leagues are equal. Not all teams are equal. The commitment data is tracked and easily findable on Twitter/X.

Please stop pretending that the level of your DD’s team, club, and league don’t affect college and professional exposure. They 100% do and everybody knows that. It isn’t an argument. Are you the person saying the GA hasn’t weakened by losing most of their best clubs over the past years?

For example, you have a much better chance of getting to the college you want by playing for VAR 08 rather than TSJ or SYC. VAR staff has connections and it’s a good team. Do you think every school goes to see every kid that emails them?

Not every school even attends the GA events. I’m a GA parent but I live in reality.

Yes, at the moment, playing on a top team for certain club will provide opportunity/visibility. But, even then, it still comes back to the player and there are alternative pathways that I've seen players take. The top ECNL club in our area does have NT and D1 alums they can't stop mentioning at every opportunity, but if you start looking at all the commits they have on their websites (they are great at marketing), the large majority of their players end up below D1. And then, when you look around at area top players that played GA or even USYS, instead, you see those players still finding pathways to college, at similar or even the same schools as most of their top club peers. Their clubs -- who also have coaches with connections and college-type events -- aren't as savvy (tho they are trying) with their own marketing, frankly.

I don’t think there is a top girls ecnl club in the area sending more players to division two or division three than division one.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Nationals shot themselves in the foot.
Now they are just a middle of the pack club in a stacked conference.

Before, their matches against Lou Fusz, NEFC, TopHat, CUP et al used to attract 100+ colleges.

Now they might not even see the ecnl playoffs in some age groups…

Are you arguing that nationals players will get less exposure in ECNL than they did in GA?

I am yes. In GA they usually put multiple teams in GA playoffs and they did well. Let’s say only 300 college coaches at GA instead of the 400 at ECNL. So they got in front of 300 coaches at the highest levels of GA. Now, at ECNL, several teams miss playoffs because they play Hawks, SBV, SLSG, Eclipse so they are not getting the 400 because they dont even make the trip. It is not calculus.

Hence the argument you would rather be a GA playoff team than an ECNL team that does not make the playoffs.

Except it doesn’t work that way. The playoff event is also a showcase, so every team can go even if they don’t qualify for the playoff bracket. Nationals will be there with the 400 scouts no matter where they finish. GA works the same way. If you have been through the process you would realize this. Only pre-HS age parents think you need to be on a winning team to get exposure.

The only person that doesnt know how the playoffs/showcases work might be you. Yes, there are showcases alongside the first rounds of playoofs for the “loser” teams. A-Z tiers. Guess which games the scouts go to? They go to SD Surf vs SLSG playoff game………not FC Wisconsin vs Utah Avalanche Tier W game…………..I have been on both sides of the trade. There aren’t any scouts going to the latter game………….

Oh, and tons of scouts go to the final rounds of playoffs, you know those games that DONT have a showcase attached to them…………

.

We were in a showcase in the key recruiting time. Not playoffs. We had 125 coaches.

We also went to final around of playoffs. Not well attended by scouts.

Hahaha, you're trying to argue that scouts prefer lower level teams than the best in the nation.

Come on, take a step back and think about what you're shoveling.

Notice every time you run into a wall of facts from actual experience, you try to shift the subject with a strawman argument.

“you’re trying to argue scouts prefer lower level teams!” No, we said that scouts don’t care about the level of teams.

“Are you arguing that nationals players will get less exposure in ECNL than they did in GA?” No, we said they will get all the exposure they need in both.

From the way you post I can tell you probably have a U14 or U15 player. You’re a club hopper and are probably driving a longer distance than necessary just to be on an ECNL team that wins more games because you think that matters. You think your daughter is better than she is. The club and coaches let you believe that to keep you paying. You put down other clubs and leagues on an anonymous forum to convince yourself it’s all worth it. In a few years you’ll blame everyone else why your daughter didn’t become a national star.

Nope not even close.

My kid has played at the same local GA club since she was 5. (Always on the top team) Also she starts most games even as a trapped player. We have checked out local ECNL clubs over the years and know that the grass isn't greener.

I'm not sure where you got the negative assessment from. You might want to look inward for that.

Reguarding league events and which games scouts attend. Sorry to be the one that brings you to reality. However the top teams and big games are the ones that have the most scout attendance. Not the random games and clubs.

I think, tho, the PP point was that the scout visits aren't random. They are seeking out particular players who have already made connections to those programs (going to ID camps, sharing highlight videos, etc) to see these players in action. You can both be right, you know.

Not all clubs and leagues are equal. Not all teams are equal. The commitment data is tracked and easily findable on Twitter/X.

Please stop pretending that the level of your DD’s team, club, and league don’t affect college and professional exposure. They 100% do and everybody knows that. It isn’t an argument. Are you the person saying the GA hasn’t weakened by losing most of their best clubs over the past years?

For example, you have a much better chance of getting to the college you want by playing for VAR 08 rather than TSJ or SYC. VAR staff has connections and it’s a good team. Do you think every school goes to see every kid that emails them?

Not every school even attends the GA events. I’m a GA parent but I live in reality.

Yes, at the moment, playing on a top team for certain club will provide opportunity/visibility. But, even then, it still comes back to the player and there are alternative pathways that I've seen players take. The top ECNL club in our area does have NT and D1 alums they can't stop mentioning at every opportunity, but if you start looking at all the commits they have on their websites (they are great at marketing), the large majority of their players end up below D1. And then, when you look around at area top players that played GA or even USYS, instead, you see those players still finding pathways to college, at similar or even the same schools as most of their top club peers. Their clubs -- who also have coaches with connections and college-type events -- aren't as savvy (tho they are trying) with their own marketing, frankly.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Nationals shot themselves in the foot.
Now they are just a middle of the pack club in a stacked conference.

Before, their matches against Lou Fusz, NEFC, TopHat, CUP et al used to attract 100+ colleges.

Now they might not even see the ecnl playoffs in some age groups…

Are you arguing that nationals players will get less exposure in ECNL than they did in GA?

I am yes. In GA they usually put multiple teams in GA playoffs and they did well. Let’s say only 300 college coaches at GA instead of the 400 at ECNL. So they got in front of 300 coaches at the highest levels of GA. Now, at ECNL, several teams miss playoffs because they play Hawks, SBV, SLSG, Eclipse so they are not getting the 400 because they dont even make the trip. It is not calculus.

Hence the argument you would rather be a GA playoff team than an ECNL team that does not make the playoffs.

Except it doesn’t work that way. The playoff event is also a showcase, so every team can go even if they don’t qualify for the playoff bracket. Nationals will be there with the 400 scouts no matter where they finish. GA works the same way. If you have been through the process you would realize this. Only pre-HS age parents think you need to be on a winning team to get exposure.

The only person that doesnt know how the playoffs/showcases work might be you. Yes, there are showcases alongside the first rounds of playoofs for the “loser” teams. A-Z tiers. Guess which games the scouts go to? They go to SD Surf vs SLSG playoff game………not FC Wisconsin vs Utah Avalanche Tier W game…………..I have been on both sides of the trade. There aren’t any scouts going to the latter game………….

Oh, and tons of scouts go to the final rounds of playoffs, you know those games that DONT have a showcase attached to them…………

.

We were in a showcase in the key recruiting time. Not playoffs. We had 125 coaches.

We also went to final around of playoffs. Not well attended by scouts.

Hahaha, you're trying to argue that scouts prefer lower level teams than the best in the nation.

Come on, take a step back and think about what you're shoveling.

Notice every time you run into a wall of facts from actual experience, you try to shift the subject with a strawman argument.

“you’re trying to argue scouts prefer lower level teams!” No, we said that scouts don’t care about the level of teams.

“Are you arguing that nationals players will get less exposure in ECNL than they did in GA?” No, we said they will get all the exposure they need in both.

From the way you post I can tell you probably have a U14 or U15 player. You’re a club hopper and are probably driving a longer distance than necessary just to be on an ECNL team that wins more games because you think that matters. You think your daughter is better than she is. The club and coaches let you believe that to keep you paying. You put down other clubs and leagues on an anonymous forum to convince yourself it’s all worth it. In a few years you’ll blame everyone else why your daughter didn’t become a national star.

Nope not even close.

My kid has played at the same local GA club since she was 5. (Always on the top team) Also she starts most games even as a trapped player. We have checked out local ECNL clubs over the years and know that the grass isn't greener.

I'm not sure where you got the negative assessment from. You might want to look inward for that.

Reguarding league events and which games scouts attend. Sorry to be the one that brings you to reality. However the top teams and big games are the ones that have the most scout attendance. Not the random games and clubs.

I think, tho, the PP point was that the scout visits aren't random. They are seeking out particular players who have already made connections to those programs (going to ID camps, sharing highlight videos, etc) to see these players in action. You can both be right, you know.

Not all clubs and leagues are equal. Not all teams are equal. The commitment data is tracked and easily findable on Twitter/X.

Please stop pretending that the level of your DD’s team, club, and league don’t affect college and professional exposure. They 100% do and everybody knows that. It isn’t an argument. Are you the person saying the GA hasn’t weakened by losing most of their best clubs over the past years?

For example, you have a much better chance of getting to the college you want by playing for VAR 08 rather than TSJ or SYC. VAR staff has connections and it’s a good team. Do you think every school goes to see every kid that emails them?

Not every school even attends the GA events. I’m a GA parent but I live in reality.

Yes, at the moment, playing on a top team for certain club will provide opportunity/visibility. But, even then, it still comes back to the player and there are alternative pathways that I've seen players take. The top ECNL club in our area does have NT and D1 alums they can't stop mentioning at every opportunity, but if you start looking at all the commits they have on their websites (they are great at marketing), the large majority of their players end up below D1. And then, when you look around at area top players that played GA or even USYS, instead, you see those players still finding pathways to college, at similar or even the same schools as most of their top club peers. Their clubs -- who also have coaches with connections and college-type events -- aren't as savvy (tho they are trying) with their own marketing, frankly.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Nationals shot themselves in the foot.
Now they are just a middle of the pack club in a stacked conference.

Before, their matches against Lou Fusz, NEFC, TopHat, CUP et al used to attract 100+ colleges.

Now they might not even see the ecnl playoffs in some age groups…

Are you arguing that nationals players will get less exposure in ECNL than they did in GA?

I am yes. In GA they usually put multiple teams in GA playoffs and they did well. Let’s say only 300 college coaches at GA instead of the 400 at ECNL. So they got in front of 300 coaches at the highest levels of GA. Now, at ECNL, several teams miss playoffs because they play Hawks, SBV, SLSG, Eclipse so they are not getting the 400 because they dont even make the trip. It is not calculus.

Hence the argument you would rather be a GA playoff team than an ECNL team that does not make the playoffs.

Except it doesn’t work that way. The playoff event is also a showcase, so every team can go even if they don’t qualify for the playoff bracket. Nationals will be there with the 400 scouts no matter where they finish. GA works the same way. If you have been through the process you would realize this. Only pre-HS age parents think you need to be on a winning team to get exposure.

The only person that doesnt know how the playoffs/showcases work might be you. Yes, there are showcases alongside the first rounds of playoofs for the “loser” teams. A-Z tiers. Guess which games the scouts go to? They go to SD Surf vs SLSG playoff game………not FC Wisconsin vs Utah Avalanche Tier W game…………..I have been on both sides of the trade. There aren’t any scouts going to the latter game………….

Oh, and tons of scouts go to the final rounds of playoffs, you know those games that DONT have a showcase attached to them…………

.

We were in a showcase in the key recruiting time. Not playoffs. We had 125 coaches.

We also went to final around of playoffs. Not well attended by scouts.

Hahaha, you're trying to argue that scouts prefer lower level teams than the best in the nation.

Come on, take a step back and think about what you're shoveling.

Notice every time you run into a wall of facts from actual experience, you try to shift the subject with a strawman argument.

“you’re trying to argue scouts prefer lower level teams!” No, we said that scouts don’t care about the level of teams.

“Are you arguing that nationals players will get less exposure in ECNL than they did in GA?” No, we said they will get all the exposure they need in both.

From the way you post I can tell you probably have a U14 or U15 player. You’re a club hopper and are probably driving a longer distance than necessary just to be on an ECNL team that wins more games because you think that matters. You think your daughter is better than she is. The club and coaches let you believe that to keep you paying. You put down other clubs and leagues on an anonymous forum to convince yourself it’s all worth it. In a few years you’ll blame everyone else why your daughter didn’t become a national star.

Nope not even close.

My kid has played at the same local GA club since she was 5. (Always on the top team) Also she starts most games even as a trapped player. We have checked out local ECNL clubs over the years and know that the grass isn't greener.

I'm not sure where you got the negative assessment from. You might want to look inward for that.

Reguarding league events and which games scouts attend. Sorry to be the one that brings you to reality. However the top teams and big games are the ones that have the most scout attendance. Not the random games and clubs.

I think, tho, the PP point was that the scout visits aren't random. They are seeking out particular players who have already made connections to those programs (going to ID camps, sharing highlight videos, etc) to see these players in action. You can both be right, you know.

Not all clubs and leagues are equal. Not all teams are equal. The commitment data is tracked and easily findable on Twitter/X.

Please stop pretending that the level of your DD’s team, club, and league don’t affect college and professional exposure. They 100% do and everybody knows that. It isn’t an argument. Are you the person saying the GA hasn’t weakened by losing most of their best clubs over the past years?

For example, you have a much better chance of getting to the college you want by playing for VAR 08 rather than TSJ or SYC. VAR staff has connections and it’s a good team. Do you think every school goes to see every kid that emails them?

Not every school even attends the GA events. I’m a GA parent but I live in reality.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Nationals shot themselves in the foot.
Now they are just a middle of the pack club in a stacked conference.

Before, their matches against Lou Fusz, NEFC, TopHat, CUP et al used to attract 100+ colleges.

Now they might not even see the ecnl playoffs in some age groups…

Are you arguing that nationals players will get less exposure in ECNL than they did in GA?

I am yes. In GA they usually put multiple teams in GA playoffs and they did well. Let’s say only 300 college coaches at GA instead of the 400 at ECNL. So they got in front of 300 coaches at the highest levels of GA. Now, at ECNL, several teams miss playoffs because they play Hawks, SBV, SLSG, Eclipse so they are not getting the 400 because they dont even make the trip. It is not calculus.

Hence the argument you would rather be a GA playoff team than an ECNL team that does not make the playoffs.

Except it doesn’t work that way. The playoff event is also a showcase, so every team can go even if they don’t qualify for the playoff bracket. Nationals will be there with the 400 scouts no matter where they finish. GA works the same way. If you have been through the process you would realize this. Only pre-HS age parents think you need to be on a winning team to get exposure.

The only person that doesnt know how the playoffs/showcases work might be you. Yes, there are showcases alongside the first rounds of playoofs for the “loser” teams. A-Z tiers. Guess which games the scouts go to? They go to SD Surf vs SLSG playoff game………not FC Wisconsin vs Utah Avalanche Tier W game…………..I have been on both sides of the trade. There aren’t any scouts going to the latter game………….

Oh, and tons of scouts go to the final rounds of playoffs, you know those games that DONT have a showcase attached to them…………

.

We were in a showcase in the key recruiting time. Not playoffs. We had 125 coaches.

We also went to final around of playoffs. Not well attended by scouts.

Hahaha, you're trying to argue that scouts prefer lower level teams than the best in the nation.

Come on, take a step back and think about what you're shoveling.

Notice every time you run into a wall of facts from actual experience, you try to shift the subject with a strawman argument.

“you’re trying to argue scouts prefer lower level teams!” No, we said that scouts don’t care about the level of teams.

“Are you arguing that nationals players will get less exposure in ECNL than they did in GA?” No, we said they will get all the exposure they need in both.

From the way you post I can tell you probably have a U14 or U15 player. You’re a club hopper and are probably driving a longer distance than necessary just to be on an ECNL team that wins more games because you think that matters. You think your daughter is better than she is. The club and coaches let you believe that to keep you paying. You put down other clubs and leagues on an anonymous forum to convince yourself it’s all worth it. In a few years you’ll blame everyone else why your daughter didn’t become a national star.

Nope not even close.

My kid has played at the same local GA club since she was 5. (Always on the top team) Also she starts most games even as a trapped player. We have checked out local ECNL clubs over the years and know that the grass isn't greener.

I'm not sure where you got the negative assessment from. You might want to look inward for that.

Reguarding league events and which games scouts attend. Sorry to be the one that brings you to reality. However the top teams and big games are the ones that have the most scout attendance. Not the random games and clubs.

I think, tho, the PP point was that the scout visits aren't random. They are seeking out particular players who have already made connections to those programs (going to ID camps, sharing highlight videos, etc) to see these players in action. You can both be right, you know.

Not all clubs and leagues are equal. Not all teams are equal. The commitment data is tracked and easily findable on Twitter/X.

Please stop pretending that the level of your DD’s team, club, and league don’t affect college and professional exposure. They 100% do and everybody knows that. It isn’t an argument. Are you the person saying the GA hasn’t weakened by losing most of their best clubs over the past years?

For example, you have a much better chance of getting to the college you want by playing for VAR 08 rather than TSJ or SYC. VAR staff has connections and it’s a good team. Do you think every school goes to see every kid that emails them?

Not every school even attends the GA events. I’m a GA parent but I live in reality.

The top GA clubs are getting the same visibility as the top ECNL clubs.

The college commitments and professional contracts bring signed say otherwise.

The only clubs with more visibility than other is SD Surf, Solar, Hawks, SLSG.

Idk what point you are trying to make.

You’re saying that all clubs get equal exposure outside of those 5 clubs?

Don’t know how many times can we answer this same question? They all get sufficient exposure. Not equal but more than enough. After a certain level of exposure the additional doesn’t matter.