Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What is this alliance is really just a testing of the waters? What if nothing happens? That seems most likely to me.

The deal that GA needs is with NWSL not MLS Next. A deal with MLS Next is just dumb.

Where is the NWSL deal? I agree if NSWL made GA its farm clubs then GA would be making progress.

MLS Next knows how to provide a bridge from youth to pro.

Sure NWSL can choose to swim upstream and figure everything out themselves. But this is a HUGE waste of time if MLS Next is willing to provide feedback and assistance.

Sorry -- feedback and assistance? These are for profit businesses. What is in it for MLS Next? Nothing I think.

Seems like MLS Next is trying to convince someone else, GA, into staying birth year so they aren't on a complete island. And to try to compete with ECNL's bundling of boys and girls soccer without having to make any real commitment or spend any money.

The MLS Next business model is to run academies for about say $750k to $1.5 million for four age categories to offer free soccer to 100 boys and sell a player or two to Europe every other year or so to recover costs. They also want to offer the label of MLS Next to clubs so their academies can scout the better teams, have reasonable local competition to play against and to block other leagues from getting top teams/players. In total, they don't want to run a charity for free soccer and they don't want competition.

GA could copy this if European countries are willing to pay a million or so for each girl that is locked into a reduced wage deal and girls are willing to get a few free years of soccer at the cost of being locked into a low paying contract if they go pro. Might work in say 10 years or so, but not ready for pre time yet.

Your numbers are ridiculous.

Nobody believes what you say.

Would be about $10,000 per player per year. DC United academy only has a staff of about 10 and gets a transfer fee every year or so. You think they are spending more? Akinmboni, $1.5m Nyeman, $400k and Paredes the rare big win $7m. What are your numbers?

The point is that MLS has a solid business model covering the bulk of their academy costs through player sales. Something that would be difficult for NWSL to do and for them to have a reason to use GA as a sort of 2nd tier to their a hypothetical NWSL academies.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What is this alliance is really just a testing of the waters? What if nothing happens? That seems most likely to me.

The deal that GA needs is with NWSL not MLS Next. A deal with MLS Next is just dumb.

Where is the NWSL deal? I agree if NSWL made GA its farm clubs then GA would be making progress.

MLS Next knows how to provide a bridge from youth to pro.

Sure NWSL can choose to swim upstream and figure everything out themselves. But this is a HUGE waste of time if MLS Next is willing to provide feedback and assistance.

Sorry -- feedback and assistance? These are for profit businesses. What is in it for MLS Next? Nothing I think.

Seems like MLS Next is trying to convince someone else, GA, into staying birth year so they aren't on a complete island. And to try to compete with ECNL's bundling of boys and girls soccer without having to make any real commitment or spend any money.

The MLS Next business model is to run academies for about say $750k to $1.5 million for four age categories to offer free soccer to 100 boys and sell a player or two to Europe every other year or so to recover costs. They also want to offer the label of MLS Next to clubs so their academies can scout the better teams, have reasonable local competition to play against and to block other leagues from getting top teams/players. In total, they don't want to run a charity for free soccer and they don't want competition.

GA could copy this if European countries are willing to pay a million or so for each girl that is locked into a reduced wage deal and girls are willing to get a few free years of soccer at the cost of being locked into a low paying contract if they go pro. Might work in say 10 years or so, but not ready for pre time yet.

Your numbers are ridiculous.

Nobody believes what you say.

Would be about $10,000 per player per year. DC United academy only has a staff of about 10 and gets a transfer fee every year or so. You think they are spending more? Akinmboni, $1.5m Nyeman, $400k and Paredes the rare big win $7m. What are your numbers?

The point is that MLS has a solid business model covering the bulk of their academy costs through player sales. Something that would be difficult for NWSL to do and for them to have a reason to use GA as a sort of 2nd tier to their a hypothetical NWSL academies.

Players will flow to whatever youth league NWSL (or any pro league) officially endorses.

Let me know when that happens!

This is exactly what happened with MLS Next.

The girl dad's have no clue.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What is this alliance is really just a testing of the waters? What if nothing happens? That seems most likely to me.

The deal that GA needs is with NWSL not MLS Next. A deal with MLS Next is just dumb.

Where is the NWSL deal? I agree if NSWL made GA its farm clubs then GA would be making progress.

MLS Next knows how to provide a bridge from youth to pro.

Sure NWSL can choose to swim upstream and figure everything out themselves. But this is a HUGE waste of time if MLS Next is willing to provide feedback and assistance.

Sorry -- feedback and assistance? These are for profit businesses. What is in it for MLS Next? Nothing I think.

Seems like MLS Next is trying to convince someone else, GA, into staying birth year so they aren't on a complete island. And to try to compete with ECNL's bundling of boys and girls soccer without having to make any real commitment or spend any money.

The MLS Next business model is to run academies for about say $750k to $1.5 million for four age categories to offer free soccer to 100 boys and sell a player or two to Europe every other year or so to recover costs. They also want to offer the label of MLS Next to clubs so their academies can scout the better teams, have reasonable local competition to play against and to block other leagues from getting top teams/players. In total, they don't want to run a charity for free soccer and they don't want competition.

GA could copy this if European countries are willing to pay a million or so for each girl that is locked into a reduced wage deal and girls are willing to get a few free years of soccer at the cost of being locked into a low paying contract if they go pro. Might work in say 10 years or so, but not ready for pre time yet.

Your numbers are ridiculous.

Nobody believes what you say.

Would be about $10,000 per player per year. DC United academy only has a staff of about 10 and gets a transfer fee every year or so. You think they are spending more? Akinmboni, $1.5m Nyeman, $400k and Paredes the rare big win $7m. What are your numbers?

The point is that MLS has a solid business model covering the bulk of their academy costs through player sales. Something that would be difficult for NWSL to do and for them to have a reason to use GA as a sort of 2nd tier to their a hypothetical NWSL academies.

Players will flow to whatever youth league NWSL (or any pro league) officially endorses.

Let me know when that happens!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What is this alliance is really just a testing of the waters? What if nothing happens? That seems most likely to me.

The deal that GA needs is with NWSL not MLS Next. A deal with MLS Next is just dumb.

Where is the NWSL deal? I agree if NSWL made GA its farm clubs then GA would be making progress.

MLS Next knows how to provide a bridge from youth to pro.

Sure NWSL can choose to swim upstream and figure everything out themselves. But this is a HUGE waste of time if MLS Next is willing to provide feedback and assistance.

Sorry -- feedback and assistance? These are for profit businesses. What is in it for MLS Next? Nothing I think.

Seems like MLS Next is trying to convince someone else, GA, into staying birth year so they aren't on a complete island. And to try to compete with ECNL's bundling of boys and girls soccer without having to make any real commitment or spend any money.

The MLS Next business model is to run academies for about say $750k to $1.5 million for four age categories to offer free soccer to 100 boys and sell a player or two to Europe every other year or so to recover costs. They also want to offer the label of MLS Next to clubs so their academies can scout the better teams, have reasonable local competition to play against and to block other leagues from getting top teams/players. In total, they don't want to run a charity for free soccer and they don't want competition.

GA could copy this if European countries are willing to pay a million or so for each girl that is locked into a reduced wage deal and girls are willing to get a few free years of soccer at the cost of being locked into a low paying contract if they go pro. Might work in say 10 years or so, but not ready for pre time yet.

Your numbers are ridiculous.

Nobody believes what you say.

Would be about $10,000 per player per year. DC United academy only has a staff of about 10 and gets a transfer fee every year or so. You think they are spending more? Akinmboni, $1.5m Nyeman, $400k and Paredes the rare big win $7m. What are your numbers?

The point is that MLS has a solid business model covering the bulk of their academy costs through player sales. Something that would be difficult for NWSL to do and for them to have a reason to use GA as a sort of 2nd tier to their a hypothetical NWSL academies.

Players will flow to whatever youth league NWSL (or any pro league) officially endorses.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:ECNL coming for top 5 clubs left in GA

GA coming for the top 5 ECNL clubs that want MLS Next.

No --- no club will give up ECNL on the girl's side for MLS Next. Not now at least and not this year. They way things change --- who knows but not for a while.

I can see several ECNL clubs willing to trade ECNL for GA and MLSN.

You upgrade the boys and give a platform for the girls that's roughly a 1to1 with ECNL. Meaning you likely won't lose any players because ECNL and GA are pretty much the same thing from an events perspective. From a club perspective you'd make more $$$.

I'm sure XYZ girls ECNL switch over club will think that they can run GA + will find out that the top clubs are better than expected.

Boys ECNL and MLSNext are closer in levels than Girls ECNL and GA. Why do all of you continue to discard girl sports? You think all of these clubs would just let their girls programs crumble so they can go to MLS next for their boys?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What is this alliance is really just a testing of the waters? What if nothing happens? That seems most likely to me.

The deal that GA needs is with NWSL not MLS Next. A deal with MLS Next is just dumb.

Where is the NWSL deal? I agree if NSWL made GA its farm clubs then GA would be making progress.

MLS Next knows how to provide a bridge from youth to pro.

Sure NWSL can choose to swim upstream and figure everything out themselves. But this is a HUGE waste of time if MLS Next is willing to provide feedback and assistance.

Sorry -- feedback and assistance? These are for profit businesses. What is in it for MLS Next? Nothing I think.

Seems like MLS Next is trying to convince someone else, GA, into staying birth year so they aren't on a complete island. And to try to compete with ECNL's bundling of boys and girls soccer without having to make any real commitment or spend any money.

The MLS Next business model is to run academies for about say $750k to $1.5 million for four age categories to offer free soccer to 100 boys and sell a player or two to Europe every other year or so to recover costs. They also want to offer the label of MLS Next to clubs so their academies can scout the better teams, have reasonable local competition to play against and to block other leagues from getting top teams/players. In total, they don't want to run a charity for free soccer and they don't want competition.

GA could copy this if European countries are willing to pay a million or so for each girl that is locked into a reduced wage deal and girls are willing to get a few free years of soccer at the cost of being locked into a low paying contract if they go pro. Might work in say 10 years or so, but not ready for pre time yet.

Your numbers are ridiculous.

Nobody believes what you say.

Would be about $10,000 per player per year. DC United academy only has a staff of about 10 and gets a transfer fee every year or so. You think they are spending more? Akinmboni, $1.5m Nyeman, $400k and Paredes the rare big win $7m. What are your numbers?

The point is that MLS has a solid business model covering the bulk of their academy costs through player sales. Something that would be difficult for NWSL to do and for them to have a reason to use GA as a sort of 2nd tier to their a hypothetical NWSL academies.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:ECNL coming for top 5 clubs left in GA

GA coming for the top 5 ECNL clubs that want MLS Next.

No --- no club will give up ECNL on the girl's side for MLS Next. Not now at least and not this year. They way things change --- who knows but not for a while.

I can see several ECNL clubs willing to trade ECNL for GA and MLSN.

You upgrade the boys and give a platform for the girls that's roughly a 1to1 with ECNL. Meaning you likely won't lose any players because ECNL and GA are pretty much the same thing from an events perspective. From a club perspective you'd make more $$$.

I'm sure XYZ girls ECNL switch over club will think that they can run GA + will find out that the top clubs are better than expected.

Boys ECNL and MLSNext are closer in levels than Girls ECNL and GA. Why do all of you continue to discard girl sports? You think all of these clubs would just let their girls programs crumble so they can go to MLS next for their boys?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What is this alliance is really just a testing of the waters? What if nothing happens? That seems most likely to me.

The deal that GA needs is with NWSL not MLS Next. A deal with MLS Next is just dumb.

Where is the NWSL deal? I agree if NSWL made GA its farm clubs then GA would be making progress.

MLS Next knows how to provide a bridge from youth to pro.

Sure NWSL can choose to swim upstream and figure everything out themselves. But this is a HUGE waste of time if MLS Next is willing to provide feedback and assistance.

Sorry -- feedback and assistance? These are for profit businesses. What is in it for MLS Next? Nothing I think.

Seems like MLS Next is trying to convince someone else, GA, into staying birth year so they aren't on a complete island. And to try to compete with ECNL's bundling of boys and girls soccer without having to make any real commitment or spend any money.

The MLS Next business model is to run academies for about say $750k to $1.5 million for four age categories to offer free soccer to 100 boys and sell a player or two to Europe every other year or so to recover costs. They also want to offer the label of MLS Next to clubs so their academies can scout the better teams, have reasonable local competition to play against and to block other leagues from getting top teams/players. In total, they don't want to run a charity for free soccer and they don't want competition.

GA could copy this if European countries are willing to pay a million or so for each girl that is locked into a reduced wage deal and girls are willing to get a few free years of soccer at the cost of being locked into a low paying contract if they go pro. Might work in say 10 years or so, but not ready for pre time yet.

Your numbers are ridiculous.

Nobody believes what you say.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:ECNL coming for top 5 clubs left in GA

GA coming for the top 5 ECNL clubs that want MLS Next.

No --- no club will give up ECNL on the girl's side for MLS Next. Not now at least and not this year. They way things change --- who knows but not for a while.

I can see several ECNL clubs willing to trade ECNL for GA and MLSN.

You upgrade the boys and give a platform for the girls that's roughly a 1to1 with ECNL. Meaning you likely won't lose any players because ECNL and GA are pretty much the same thing from an events perspective. From a club perspective you'd make more $$$.

I'm sure XYZ girls ECNL switch over club will think that they can run GA + will find out that the top clubs are better than expected.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:ECNL coming for top 5 clubs left in GA

GA coming for the top 5 ECNL clubs that want MLS Next.

No --- no club will give up ECNL on the girl's side for MLS Next. Not now at least and not this year. They way things change --- who knows but not for a while.

Anonymous wrote:MLSN is currently granting clubs full membership and announcing new clubs. Not a single ECNL has been mentioned…….

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What is this alliance is really just a testing of the waters? What if nothing happens? That seems most likely to me.

The deal that GA needs is with NWSL not MLS Next. A deal with MLS Next is just dumb.

Where is the NWSL deal? I agree if NSWL made GA its farm clubs then GA would be making progress.

MLS Next knows how to provide a bridge from youth to pro.

Sure NWSL can choose to swim upstream and figure everything out themselves. But this is a HUGE waste of time if MLS Next is willing to provide feedback and assistance.

Sorry -- feedback and assistance? These are for profit businesses. What is in it for MLS Next? Nothing I think.

Seems like MLS Next is trying to convince someone else, GA, into staying birth year so they aren't on a complete island. And to try to compete with ECNL's bundling of boys and girls soccer without having to make any real commitment or spend any money.

The MLS Next business model is to run academies for about say $750k to $1.5 million for four age categories to offer free soccer to 100 boys and sell a player or two to Europe every other year or so to recover costs. They also want to offer the label of MLS Next to clubs so their academies can scout the better teams, have reasonable local competition to play against and to block other leagues from getting top teams/players. In total, they don't want to run a charity for free soccer and they don't want competition.

GA could copy this if European countries are willing to pay a million or so for each girl that is locked into a reduced wage deal and girls are willing to get a few free years of soccer at the cost of being locked into a low paying contract if they go pro. Might work in say 10 years or so, but not ready for pre time yet.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What is this alliance is really just a testing of the waters? What if nothing happens? That seems most likely to me.

The deal that GA needs is with NWSL not MLS Next. A deal with MLS Next is just dumb.

Where is the NWSL deal? I agree if NSWL made GA its farm clubs then GA would be making progress.

MLS Next knows how to provide a bridge from youth to pro.

Sure NWSL can choose to swim upstream and figure everything out themselves. But this is a HUGE waste of time if MLS Next is willing to provide feedback and assistance.

Sorry -- feedback and assistance? These are for profit businesses. What is in it for MLS Next? Nothing I think.