Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can someone explain to me why a league adding more clubs is a bad thing?

If the clubs being added are high level there will be competition and maybe different clubs would go to the finals.

If the clubs being added are lower level there won't be added competition and the same dominate clubs will go to the finals.

From a high level recruitment perspective adding more clubs to a league doesn't change anything. The same top clubs get recruited regardless of league.

Adding low level clubs dilutes the talent pool. Ideally, you would encourage the best players to leave low level teams and come together on higher level teams. This encourages them to remain with their current clubs. Just in NOVA, you now have three GA teams. Are there really enough girls choosing GA over ECNL to fill out all of those rosters with even regionally let alone nationally competitive teams?

Yes, but why is diluting the talent pool bad? Bad for who? Isn’t it good for the clubs and the players that get to participate? The top players are still the top players and they will get seen just as much, they’ll just have fewer other top players on their team. What is your concern about having more teams in a league?

Will they?

Won’t matter for the elite ballers cause they should be pros by 17 if the current trends continue. It’s getting down to single digits of USWNT u17 players who are choosing college over pro contracts at this point. GA or ECNL? Who cares? Does your kid features and play for a team that will be at a showcase, next! It’s on them now not the league they played in as MS early HS teenager

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can someone explain to me why a league adding more clubs is a bad thing?

If the clubs being added are high level there will be competition and maybe different clubs would go to the finals.

If the clubs being added are lower level there won't be added competition and the same dominate clubs will go to the finals.

From a high level recruitment perspective adding more clubs to a league doesn't change anything. The same top clubs get recruited regardless of league.

Adding low level clubs dilutes the talent pool. Ideally, you would encourage the best players to leave low level teams and come together on higher level teams. This encourages them to remain with their current clubs. Just in NOVA, you now have three GA teams. Are there really enough girls choosing GA over ECNL to fill out all of those rosters with even regionally let alone nationally competitive teams?

Yes, but why is diluting the talent pool bad? Bad for who? Isn’t it good for the clubs and the players that get to participate? The top players are still the top players and they will get seen just as much, they’ll just have fewer other top players on their team. What is your concern about having more teams in a league?

Because it is supposed to be "elite". These are showcase leagues and if the process is complicated due to dilution it becomes harder to find top talent even in showcases claiming to have top talent.:

https://www.soccerwire.com/soccer-blog/veteran-scout-college-coaches-growing-frustrated-with-ongoing-duel-between-ecnl-and-girls-academy/

"While the GA remains a clear cut No. 2 on the national landscape with plenty of future NCAA Division 1 players and undoubtedly some future professional players in its ranks, there’s no denying the pattern that is taking place, with top GA clubs continuing to join (or re-join) the ECNL.

This has resulted in the GA adding clubs to its own ranks while the ECNL also expands in other ways. According to the hundreds of college coaches I speak to weekly, this process has added thousands of new recruits to an already overcrowded recruiting landscape. For some, it has made the process of scouting and evaluating potential recruits entirely unmanageable."

I see. So it’s bad for college recruiters who will need to be better at finding players instead of just going to one place? I’m ok having bigger leagues that are better for players and clubs with the trade off that it’s worse for college recruiters that only affects a small number

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can someone explain to me why a league adding more clubs is a bad thing?

If the clubs being added are high level there will be competition and maybe different clubs would go to the finals.

If the clubs being added are lower level there won't be added competition and the same dominate clubs will go to the finals.

From a high level recruitment perspective adding more clubs to a league doesn't change anything. The same top clubs get recruited regardless of league.

Adding low level clubs dilutes the talent pool. Ideally, you would encourage the best players to leave low level teams and come together on higher level teams. This encourages them to remain with their current clubs. Just in NOVA, you now have three GA teams. Are there really enough girls choosing GA over ECNL to fill out all of those rosters with even regionally let alone nationally competitive teams?

Yes, but why is diluting the talent pool bad? Bad for who? Isn’t it good for the clubs and the players that get to participate? The top players are still the top players and they will get seen just as much, they’ll just have fewer other top players on their team. What is your concern about having more teams in a league?

Will they?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can someone explain to me why a league adding more clubs is a bad thing?

If the clubs being added are high level there will be competition and maybe different clubs would go to the finals.

If the clubs being added are lower level there won't be added competition and the same dominate clubs will go to the finals.

From a high level recruitment perspective adding more clubs to a league doesn't change anything. The same top clubs get recruited regardless of league.

Adding low level clubs dilutes the talent pool. Ideally, you would encourage the best players to leave low level teams and come together on higher level teams. This encourages them to remain with their current clubs. Just in NOVA, you now have three GA teams. Are there really enough girls choosing GA over ECNL to fill out all of those rosters with even regionally let alone nationally competitive teams?

Yes, but why is diluting the talent pool bad? Bad for who? Isn’t it good for the clubs and the players that get to participate? The top players are still the top players and they will get seen just as much, they’ll just have fewer other top players on their team. What is your concern about having more teams in a league?

Because it is supposed to be "elite". These are showcase leagues and if the process is complicated due to dilution it becomes harder to find top talent even in showcases claiming to have top talent.:

https://www.soccerwire.com/soccer-blog/veteran-scout-college-coaches-growing-frustrated-with-ongoing-duel-between-ecnl-and-girls-academy/

"While the GA remains a clear cut No. 2 on the national landscape with plenty of future NCAA Division 1 players and undoubtedly some future professional players in its ranks, there’s no denying the pattern that is taking place, with top GA clubs continuing to join (or re-join) the ECNL.

This has resulted in the GA adding clubs to its own ranks while the ECNL also expands in other ways. According to the hundreds of college coaches I speak to weekly, this process has added thousands of new recruits to an already overcrowded recruiting landscape. For some, it has made the process of scouting and evaluating potential recruits entirely unmanageable."

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can someone explain to me why a league adding more clubs is a bad thing?

If the clubs being added are high level there will be competition and maybe different clubs would go to the finals.

If the clubs being added are lower level there won't be added competition and the same dominate clubs will go to the finals.

From a high level recruitment perspective adding more clubs to a league doesn't change anything. The same top clubs get recruited regardless of league.

Adding low level clubs dilutes the talent pool. Ideally, you would encourage the best players to leave low level teams and come together on higher level teams. This encourages them to remain with their current clubs. Just in NOVA, you now have three GA teams. Are there really enough girls choosing GA over ECNL to fill out all of those rosters with even regionally let alone nationally competitive teams?

Yes, but why is diluting the talent pool bad? Bad for who? Isn’t it good for the clubs and the players that get to participate? The top players are still the top players and they will get seen just as much, they’ll just have fewer other top players on their team. What is your concern about having more teams in a league?

Anonymous wrote:Can someone explain to me why a league adding more clubs is a bad thing?

If the clubs being added are high level there will be competition and maybe different clubs would go to the finals.

If the clubs being added are lower level there won't be added competition and the same dominate clubs will go to the finals.

From a high level recruitment perspective adding more clubs to a league doesn't change anything. The same top clubs get recruited regardless of league.

Adding low level clubs dilutes the talent pool. Ideally, you would encourage the best players to leave low level teams and come together on higher level teams. This encourages them to remain with their current clubs. Just in NOVA, you now have three GA teams. Are there really enough girls choosing GA over ECNL to fill out all of those rosters with even regionally let alone nationally competitive teams?

When are we going to talk about a GA player signing with the San Diego Wave?

It’s only the beginning!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A tracker is just a tracker.

Read into it however you want. It's interesting that you feel more is worse and gatekeeping is better.

Ouch! A GA parent above. I like the analogy to Ivy league for the GA parent.

This is you...

Anonymous wrote:A tracker is just a tracker.

Read into it however you want. It's interesting that you feel more is worse and gatekeeping is better.

Ouch! A GA parent above. I like the analogy to Ivy league for the GA parent.

Anonymous wrote:Can someone explain to me why a league adding more clubs is a bad thing?

If the clubs being added are high level there will be competition and maybe different clubs would go to the finals.

If the clubs being added are lower level there won't be added competition and the same dominate clubs will go to the finals.

From a high level recruitment perspective adding more clubs to a league doesn't change anything. The same top clubs get recruited regardless of league.

I don't get it either.

If the newly added club isn't in a regional league your kids team plays in you'll never see them unless at a showcase. And even then the league will try to play teams against each other that are similarly ranked to avoid blowouts.

If it was a terrible team that was added to your regional league and you had to drive 4-5 hours to play them then yes that would be annoying. But, it's also something that gets solved by adding more local clubs to create density.

A tracker is just a tracker.

Read into it however you want. It's interesting that you feel more is worse and gatekeeping is better.

What is the intent of the person adding the "tracker"? Is it to say GA/DPL is better than ECNL because it's adding more clubs? Or is it saying ECNL is "elite" with limited membership and only the best are allowed in?

That list looks like there's an "elite" league for girls and then the everything else national leagues. So, are we saying there's an Ivy League and then all the rest?

Can someone explain to me why a league adding more clubs is a bad thing?

If the clubs being added are high level there will be competition and maybe different clubs would go to the finals.

If the clubs being added are lower level there won't be added competition and the same dominate clubs will go to the finals.

From a high level recruitment perspective adding more clubs to a league doesn't change anything. The same top clubs get recruited regardless of league.

Tracker...

1. GA was Promoted by US Soccer
2. GA added Liverpool FC International Academy (CA)
3. GA added SYC
4. GA added Revolution
5. GA added Seattle Celtic
6. GA added Westside Metros FC
7. GA added Oregon Premier
8. GA added South Valley Surf
9. GA added KC Scott Gallagher
10. GA added Coppermine SC
11. GA added Cap City SC
12. GA added Columbus United SC
13. GA added Bayside FC
14. GA added Rhode Island Surf SC

1. DPL added FC Sarasota
2. DPL added Georgia Impact
3. DPL added Inter Connecticut FC
4. DPL added San Antonio FC
5. DPL added Idaho Inferno
6. DPL added Augusta Arsenal
7. DPL added Wasatch SC
8. DPL added Dallas Hornets SC
9. DPL added 956 United
10. DPL added North Coast FC
11. DPL OPEN added Lanier Soccer Academy
12. DPL added NEFC South
13. DPL added Western Washington Surf
14. DPL added San Antonio Athenian SC

1. ECNL added Colorado Rush
2. ECNL added Nationals
3. ECNL added Ukies
4. ECNL added South Shore Select

1. ECRL added Lonestar

Reddit thread talking about new u16 players and the need for Acadamies in the NWSL.

https://www.reddit.com/r/NWSL/comments/1bla80b/san_diego_wave_fc_sign_us_womens_youth_national/