Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^^^I made the comment about a select/classic player being able to make it to ECNL/DA eventually if they begin travel soccer at u13/u14. A player can be a stand out in select/classic but to make the jump from that level of play to ECNL/DA at u13/u14 is difficult. The speed of play, technical ability and physical play is much different than NCSL, EDP lower divisions, CCL and classic/select, A strong select/classic player can make certain elite teams and move up to ECNL/DA within a seaosn or two. It takes that long to get use to the level of play.

Again, this goes back to the idea that you don;t need to play travekl at u9/u10 but can make an elite travel team if you begin travel at u13/u14.

It's really an empirical question as to how different these teams are at U9, U10, U11, and U12. I'd love to see a tournament (maybe there is one?) where the top classic/select teams play A and B travel teams to see the point at which travel is much different from Classic.

That point at its most generous is U11. But pretty much by U10 the typical select player/team is just to far behind the A/B travel team player. And the reality for a select program is many kids in the program are there not by choice. They are there because they did not make travel at U9. So depending on the club, at least in the clubs eyes these are kids 50-80 already.

Now, yes, there are the unicorns that choose Select because they don't see the value in travel. And these may very well be quality players, but beating up on select level players twice a week in practice will do little for their development. There is an ongoing discussion about promotion relegation and the goal differentials in leagues is astounding. So when a travel team in any particular league, or any particular division is allowing 30-40+ goals a season while scoring 1-3 goals? I'm sorry but a select team is just not going to be competitive into a U10 season with any average travel team.

By U10? That's it? No chance to catch up after that. No way. I've seen many, many players make travel that hadn't played it before.

Noooooo, that wasn't the question, or at least the question I was answering. What I was answering was the bolded above. And by U10, a "Classic/Select" team would no longer be competitive with a travel A/B team. Yes, a select player can make a travel team at U10 and much older, but a select team would have very little chance of success against a A/B travel team.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^^^I made the comment about a select/classic player being able to make it to ECNL/DA eventually if they begin travel soccer at u13/u14. A player can be a stand out in select/classic but to make the jump from that level of play to ECNL/DA at u13/u14 is difficult. The speed of play, technical ability and physical play is much different than NCSL, EDP lower divisions, CCL and classic/select, A strong select/classic player can make certain elite teams and move up to ECNL/DA within a seaosn or two. It takes that long to get use to the level of play.

Again, this goes back to the idea that you don;t need to play travekl at u9/u10 but can make an elite travel team if you begin travel at u13/u14.

It's really an empirical question as to how different these teams are at U9, U10, U11, and U12. I'd love to see a tournament (maybe there is one?) where the top classic/select teams play A and B travel teams to see the point at which travel is much different from Classic.

That point at its most generous is U11. But pretty much by U10 the typical select player/team is just to far behind the A/B travel team player. And the reality for a select program is many kids in the program are there not by choice. They are there because they did not make travel at U9. So depending on the club, at least in the clubs eyes these are kids 50-80 already.

Now, yes, there are the unicorns that choose Select because they don't see the value in travel. And these may very well be quality players, but beating up on select level players twice a week in practice will do little for their development. There is an ongoing discussion about promotion relegation and the goal differentials in leagues is astounding. So when a travel team in any particular league, or any particular division is allowing 30-40+ goals a season while scoring 1-3 goals? I'm sorry but a select team is just not going to be competitive into a U10 season with any average travel team.

By U10? That's it? No chance to catch up after that. No way. I've seen many, many players make travel that hadn't played it before.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^^^I made the comment about a select/classic player being able to make it to ECNL/DA eventually if they begin travel soccer at u13/u14. A player can be a stand out in select/classic but to make the jump from that level of play to ECNL/DA at u13/u14 is difficult. The speed of play, technical ability and physical play is much different than NCSL, EDP lower divisions, CCL and classic/select, A strong select/classic player can make certain elite teams and move up to ECNL/DA within a seaosn or two. It takes that long to get use to the level of play.

Again, this goes back to the idea that you don;t need to play travekl at u9/u10 but can make an elite travel team if you begin travel at u13/u14.

It's really an empirical question as to how different these teams are at U9, U10, U11, and U12. I'd love to see a tournament (maybe there is one?) where the top classic/select teams play A and B travel teams to see the point at which travel is much different from Classic.

That point at its most generous is U11. But pretty much by U10 the typical select player/team is just to far behind the A/B travel team player. And the reality for a select program is many kids in the program are there not by choice. They are there because they did not make travel at U9. So depending on the club, at least in the clubs eyes these are kids 50-80 already.

Now, yes, there are the unicorns that choose Select because they don't see the value in travel. And these may very well be quality players, but beating up on select level players twice a week in practice will do little for their development. There is an ongoing discussion about promotion relegation and the goal differentials in leagues is astounding. So when a travel team in any particular league, or any particular division is allowing 30-40+ goals a season while scoring 1-3 goals? I'm sorry but a select team is just not going to be competitive into a U10 season with any average travel team.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^^^I made the comment about a select/classic player being able to make it to ECNL/DA eventually if they begin travel soccer at u13/u14. A player can be a stand out in select/classic but to make the jump from that level of play to ECNL/DA at u13/u14 is difficult. The speed of play, technical ability and physical play is much different than NCSL, EDP lower divisions, CCL and classic/select, A strong select/classic player can make certain elite teams and move up to ECNL/DA within a seaosn or two. It takes that long to get use to the level of play.

Again, this goes back to the idea that you don;t need to play travekl at u9/u10 but can make an elite travel team if you begin travel at u13/u14.

It's really an empirical question as to how different these teams are at U9, U10, U11, and U12. I'd love to see a tournament (maybe there is one?) where the top classic/select teams play A and B travel teams to see the point at which travel is much different from Classic.

Anonymous wrote:^^^I made the comment about a select/classic player being able to make it to ECNL/DA eventually if they begin travel soccer at u13/u14. A player can be a stand out in select/classic but to make the jump from that level of play to ECNL/DA at u13/u14 is difficult. The speed of play, technical ability and physical play is much different than NCSL, EDP lower divisions, CCL and classic/select, A strong select/classic player can make certain elite teams and move up to ECNL/DA within a seaosn or two. It takes that long to get use to the level of play.

Again, this goes back to the idea that you don;t need to play travekl at u9/u10 but can make an elite travel team if you begin travel at u13/u14.

RantingSoccerDad wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

RantingSoccerDad wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Aren’t you a journalist?? Go to the games and ask the parents. Easiest data set you can obtain if you are really interested. I’ve already stated no rec players on our squad, why would I lie about it?? Better for the kids of parents like me to have competing players think rec makes for an easy path, that’s less real competition for their starting spot.

I'm not sure parents would be thrilled to have a stranger turn up to their games and start asking them where their kids were playing at U9.

I'm frankly wondering how you got the info about your own club. Did you ask every single parent on all the DA or ECNL teams? Even the families that maybe couldn't afford to shell out $3,000 on their U9s?

If you are a parent on a team and don’t know the other kids backgrounds by mid year, it’s odd. On our team they all came from B or higher travel teams. I don’t know what to tell you, RSD. People are free to believe whatever they’d like.

Does your club not recruit (or simply attain) players from other clubs coming into the DA program?

You say they all came from B or higher travel teams. But were they playing at that level at U9?

Again -- I don't doubt that the overwhelming majority were playing a decent level of travel at U9. But I'm not assuming anything. And plenty of parents on this board have attested that they've seen plenty of U9 A-teamers burn out (as have I) and are replaced by players at a lower level. Whether that "lower level" is sometimes rec league, I don't know. I've seen players go from U9 rec to decent travel teams but not DA or ECNL, but I have a limited sample size.

And I'm curious to know whether DA scouts are looking for people who are priced out of travel. Or are clubs' financial aid programs so robust that they're catching everyone at U9?

All interesting questions. But I'm not convinced we have answers.

Anonymous wrote:You seem to deal in a lot of “if you don’t x, then you must x” type comments. Conjecture isn’t data.

RantingSoccerDad wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Aren’t you a journalist?? Go to the games and ask the parents. Easiest data set you can obtain if you are really interested. I’ve already stated no rec players on our squad, why would I lie about it?? Better for the kids of parents like me to have competing players think rec makes for an easy path, that’s less real competition for their starting spot.

I'm not sure parents would be thrilled to have a stranger turn up to their games and start asking them where their kids were playing at U9.

I'm frankly wondering how you got the info about your own club. Did you ask every single parent on all the DA or ECNL teams? Even the families that maybe couldn't afford to shell out $3,000 on their U9s?

RantingSoccerDad wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why does this joker keep spitting out $3,000 for a C or D level team? C and D level teams aren't $3,000 (maybe except Barca).

You must be part of the "pay to play" lobby

Yes, this has been pointed out several times. Only Barca charges $3k+ for c/d level soccer (any level is the same cost).

The funniest thing is the contradictions in the argument; don't pay the ~$2k for C level teams but spend countless $$ on rec and personal training during the year over the course of several years, which can easily surpass the $2k per year. There's not much cost savings going that route. An argument can be made that it may be more effective for skills training, but it will be necessarily less effective for speed of play/game situation training, which can only happen with competent, skilled competition. So it's a wash, and that is making the assumption that the person paying the $2k isn't doing their own personal skills training in addition to the C level team play, which if they are serious about the sport probably isn't right.

The point is not that one absolutely can't skip travel from U9-U12 and make a U13 team, even an elite team, it's just that it's very, very hard to do it. If it were easy, these ECNL and DA rosters would be filled with rec players who follow this path. They're not. That's where the data comes in, not anecdotes of "I've seen...." and "I know a friends daughter who did..." Just go out and gather the data from the top teams at U13+ to show how many are rec players vs former travel. It isn't that difficult.

The proof is in the pudding. It's a nice idea that someone is trying to promote, but there is no data to back it up.

You bring up an interesting point. Is there actual, true data on the subject? Have clubs collected data of any kind as to where their players come from? Especially on their top teams, like how many came from rec, other clubs, promotion from within the club?

Or are we all just talking based on anecdotal experience?

I’m the PP and my DC is on a DA team and not a single player came from this kind of rec background described by the rec poster. All players are from B or higher travel teams from u9-12. I’m familiar with players and parents in other age groups and don’t know a single player from a rec background as has been painted within this thread. I encourage other DA or ECNL members to share their experience as well.

My DD plays in a DA club where not her team but within the club, I know of 3 players who made it who came from a rec type program.

The contention was that this is common, for rec players to directly make the elite team at u13-15, not to make a travel team at a DA club. All these players started in a rec type program prior to u9.

No moving the goal posts. How many players on ECNL and DA teams are walk ons from pure rec backgrounds. None on any DA or ECNL teams from my DC or the players and families I’m familiar with.

I haven't heard any poster argue that. I've read arguments that it's possible and that there are alternatives. No one has argued that this is common. Most parents who think their kid has even an ounce of talent run to travel programs as soon as possible to make sure their little darlings aren't left behind. And that's true of not only soccer, but every sport I know of.

Read through the thread, there were comments such as “making a DA or ECNL team isn’t that hard” for rec players. If that statement is true, then the data should show many rec players on DA and ECNL teams. There’s no evidence that it does. There are exceptions to every rule, but to say the path from rec to elite soccer is “not hard” is a long stretch.

You guys can trade anecdotes all you want. If you have actual data, please contact me, because I'd like to inquire about accessing it.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why does this joker keep spitting out $3,000 for a C or D level team? C and D level teams aren't $3,000 (maybe except Barca).

You must be part of the "pay to play" lobby

Yes, this has been pointed out several times. Only Barca charges $3k+ for c/d level soccer (any level is the same cost).

The funniest thing is the contradictions in the argument; don't pay the ~$2k for C level teams but spend countless $$ on rec and personal training during the year over the course of several years, which can easily surpass the $2k per year. There's not much cost savings going that route. An argument can be made that it may be more effective for skills training, but it will be necessarily less effective for speed of play/game situation training, which can only happen with competent, skilled competition. So it's a wash, and that is making the assumption that the person paying the $2k isn't doing their own personal skills training in addition to the C level team play, which if they are serious about the sport probably isn't right.

The point is not that one absolutely can't skip travel from U9-U12 and make a U13 team, even an elite team, it's just that it's very, very hard to do it. If it were easy, these ECNL and DA rosters would be filled with rec players who follow this path. They're not. That's where the data comes in, not anecdotes of "I've seen...." and "I know a friends daughter who did..." Just go out and gather the data from the top teams at U13+ to show how many are rec players vs former travel. It isn't that difficult.

The proof is in the pudding. It's a nice idea that someone is trying to promote, but there is no data to back it up.

You bring up an interesting point. Is there actual, true data on the subject? Have clubs collected data of any kind as to where their players come from? Especially on their top teams, like how many came from rec, other clubs, promotion from within the club?

Or are we all just talking based on anecdotal experience?

I’m the PP and my DC is on a DA team and not a single player came from this kind of rec background described by the rec poster. All players are from B or higher travel teams from u9-12. I’m familiar with players and parents in other age groups and don’t know a single player from a rec background as has been painted within this thread. I encourage other DA or ECNL members to share their experience as well.

My DD plays in a DA club where not her team but within the club, I know of 3 players who made it who came from a rec type program.

The contention was that this is common, for rec players to directly make the elite team at u13-15, not to make a travel team at a DA club. All these players started in a rec type program prior to u9.

No moving the goal posts. How many players on ECNL and DA teams are walk ons from pure rec backgrounds. None on any DA or ECNL teams from my DC or the players and families I’m familiar with.

I haven't heard any poster argue that. I've read arguments that it's possible and that there are alternatives. No one has argued that this is common. Most parents who think their kid has even an ounce of talent run to travel programs as soon as possible to make sure their little darlings aren't left behind. And that's true of not only soccer, but every sport I know of.