Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Don’t forget that mslN is also using AI to determine games for younger ages. No more scores. Sounds like a disaster.

ECNL dad has entered the building.

we have ecnl hats, ga visors, whats mlsn shtick?! Mlsn goodr shades?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Don’t forget that mslN is also using AI to determine games for younger ages. No more scores. Sounds like a disaster.

ECNL dad has entered the building.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Don’t forget that mslN is also using AI to determine games for younger ages. No more scores. Sounds like a disaster.

+1 I appreciate the innovation but at the end of the day kids playing 25 minute games are going to struggle when reality hits. Feels like the the pendulum has swung too far in the name of innovation.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Don’t forget that mslN is also using AI to determine games for younger ages. No more scores. Sounds like a disaster.

+1 I appreciate the innovation but at the end of the day kids playing 25 minute games are going to struggle when reality hits. Feels like the the pendulum has swung too far in the name of innovation.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Don’t forget that mslN is also using AI to determine games for younger ages. No more scores. Sounds like a disaster.

+1 I appreciate the innovation but at the end of the day kids playing 25 minute games are going to struggle when reality hits. Feels like the the pendulum has swung too far in the name of innovation.

Anonymous wrote:Don’t forget that mslN is also using AI to determine games for younger ages. No more scores. Sounds like a disaster.

Anonymous wrote:Has anyone’s coaches mentioned these new standards at their beginning of the year meetings and how they’re going to implement it? I’m assuming no?

Anonymous wrote:Is homegrown MLSN or MLSN2? Would these rules apply to both? I'm getting confused by the naming conventions. My son is on a U13 MLSN2 team.

Anonymous wrote:Parents of players who’ve had Taka assess their play, what have you learned about the player that was different? Do you think their Taka highlights is an accurate representation of their abilities? Etc.?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Don’t forget that mslN is also using AI to determine games for younger ages. No more scores. Sounds like a disaster.

It seems to be a success from the coaches - both club and neutral - that I’ve talked to in person. The only naysayers or skeptics are parents whose players aren’t being highlighted and can’t coast on just being part of teams that win.

I was talking to basketball parent about it and they thought it made so much sense and was wishing they had it for youth basketball too.

Sounds like participation awards

You should be embarrassed. It’s much harder to play well than to win, especially at younger ages.

Think about it. Nearly 50% of teams win. But how many play good soccer? That’s why “quality” is a better goal to shoot for if you’re serious about development. Sadly, too many parents prefer the win at 12 years old.

Nope, not saying that. AI determining winners and losers is absurd. Someone programmed it so there is an inherent bias already on what it good and bad. Teams will figure out how to game the AI and defeat the entire purpose. Learning how to come back after losing is one of the most important life skills anyone can have. Also, tournaments aren’t using this horrible idea so you would be the “best team based on AI” and not win a single tournament? Seems like a very confusing message for kids. Also, if MLSN is so premier, why do we need to change from what has worked for 100s of years?

When you say AI, I assume you meant Taka.

“Taka is the group responsible for doing all of this. An Irish company who have consulted for Premier League clubs in performance models, they were the perfect match. They applied for MLS's request for proposal a year ago, and brought their technology to the league.

Taka, in short, is an in-depth data platform that "grades" actions of play on a soccer pitch. All of this is done by real humans, remotely. After every game, employees in Eastern Europe scour game film, and score every pass, every dribble, every shot, every tackle. Those "actions" are then evaluated - admittedly subjectively - as either positive or negative. The results are subsequently uploaded to a platform that players and coaches alike can access. The whole process takes about four hours.

Crucially, Taka employs soccer people, not mathematicians. Every summer, the company advertises the job, asking would-be applicants to, effectively, grade a soccer match. They then take the top 15 percent, and put them through their paces to test their game understanding. Those who are deemed to have the right amount of knowledge to break down thousands of individual instances - from first touches to 30-yard screamers - are then brought on.

"If you ask a mathematician to look at a soccer game, they won't understand," CEO Mark Shields said. "They are soccer people. And then the mathematicians are in the sort of modeling process."

And every year, there's widespread interest - yes, even if it means watching hours of occasionally low-quality youth soccer.

"We get loads of people applying because we're talking about a job, basically as a video scout for soccer," he said.”

Thanks for clarifying what Taka is.

In short, Taka is foreign work from home boxing/gymnastic judges picking a winner. Sounds like a real big improvement over goals scored.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Don’t forget that mslN is also using AI to determine games for younger ages. No more scores. Sounds like a disaster.

It seems to be a success from the coaches - both club and neutral - that I’ve talked to in person. The only naysayers or skeptics are parents whose players aren’t being highlighted and can’t coast on just being part of teams that win.

I was talking to basketball parent about it and they thought it made so much sense and was wishing they had it for youth basketball too.

Sounds like participation awards

You should be embarrassed. It’s much harder to play well than to win, especially at younger ages.

Think about it. Nearly 50% of teams win. But how many play good soccer? That’s why “quality” is a better goal to shoot for if you’re serious about development. Sadly, too many parents prefer the win at 12 years old.

Nope, not saying that. AI determining winners and losers is absurd. Someone programmed it so there is an inherent bias already on what it good and bad. Teams will figure out how to game the AI and defeat the entire purpose. Learning how to come back after losing is one of the most important life skills anyone can have. Also, tournaments aren’t using this horrible idea so you would be the “best team based on AI” and not win a single tournament? Seems like a very confusing message for kids. Also, if MLSN is so premier, why do we need to change from what has worked for 100s of years?

Anonymous wrote:Don’t forget that mslN is also using AI to determine games for younger ages. No more scores. Sounds like a disaster.