|
Post by soccermaxx72 on Apr 17, 2018 12:56:50 GMT -5
Do you think it is better for a player's exposure and training to be on a non competitive ECNL vs a competitive NPL, SRPL Premier level team?
As an example, not picking on the team. Atlanta Fire U13 ECNL seems to lose 80% or more of their games and usually not very competitive but is it that still better to be a player on that team than a player at a club with a wining RPL, or new league that won't be mentioned her team, that is more competitive.
|
|
|
Post by soccerdaddy on Apr 17, 2018 14:29:54 GMT -5
No way, especially at age 12&13. I don’t know about exposure or you mean build a resume for College or what? At the end of the day if the player is not good enough to make the team then who cares if they played in DA or ECNL. Their training comes from good coaches and working hard. Worry about exposure to leagues that have the best competition at the older ages when they want to build their way to College. Can they make a team with a great coach for development? Currently, that’s what I’m looking for my 8 year old. My almost 14 year old is playing DA and love that we play against Atlanta United and also played against New York City FC so it’s intense. However, prior to this we had a small club that helped with his development as well as the 3V3 tournaments and constant indoor to supplement his game time.
|
|
|
Post by soccerdaddy on Apr 17, 2018 14:38:06 GMT -5
I meant to say it doesn’t matter at that age and traveling out of state 33% of games at that age might kill the drive to enjoy playing soccer. Your weekends are taken. Traveling to play is not development. Dedication to working hard and practicing every day to get better will allow you to play anywhere regardless of where the game is. The coach will want you to play for them!!!!
|
|
|
Post by Futsal Gawdess on Apr 17, 2018 15:46:06 GMT -5
Do you think it is better for a player's exposure and training to be on a non competitive ECNL vs a competitive NPL, SRPL Premier level team? As an example, not picking on the team. Atlanta Fire U13 ECNL seems to lose 80% or more of their games and usually not very competitive but is it that still better to be a player on that team than a player at a club with a wining RPL, or new league that won't be mentioned her team, that is more competitive. Making an assumption that you're referring to college when you say exposure. Can't speak to NPL or SRPL, never physically been to any organized opportunity for exposure. However, ECNL seems to always do a good job historically of exposing their players to top schools and YNT coaches and scouts. It's always good exposure when you're on a winning team. More eyeballs and buzz, leads to the right folks taking a look. The age-old question you have to answer is this: Is it better for your kid to be the stud/studdess on a crap team or middle of the pack on a stacked team? I for one tend to prefer the option whereby the coach will unilaterally push, promote and talk up my kid. Schools and scouts talk to coaches, what you don't want is for your coach to believe there are 6/7 better players on the team and prefers to talk them up as opposed to your kid. Also, one of the things I love about ECNL is how you have a system in place that allows you to know the coaches coming to showcases and allows you to reach out and start the conversation to show interest in their schools. I know U13 seems young, but these days, coaches and schools are allowing kids to commit as early at 16. Be realistic about your kids trajectory and plan out where they need to be so they are peaking right at the height of recruitment and at the best location for them. Goodluck
|
|
|
Post by SoccerMom on Apr 17, 2018 16:41:21 GMT -5
Also, one of the things I love about ECNL is how you have a system in place that allows you to know the coaches coming to showcases and allows you to reach out and start the conversation to show interest in their schools. I know U13 seems young, but these days, coaches and schools are allowing kids to commit as early at 16. Be realistic about your kids trajectory and plan out where they need to be so they are peaking right at the height of recruitment and at the best location for them. Goodluck Well that's about to change. Recruiting rules are changing and kids wont be able to commit until their junior year, with the new rules they will make so that they don't talk until later. Coaches are not happy about 8th and 9th graders committing.
|
|
|
Post by oraclesfriend on Apr 17, 2018 17:47:03 GMT -5
Also, one of the things I love about ECNL is how you have a system in place that allows you to know the coaches coming to showcases and allows you to reach out and start the conversation to show interest in their schools. I know U13 seems young, but these days, coaches and schools are allowing kids to commit as early at 16. Be realistic about your kids trajectory and plan out where they need to be so they are peaking right at the height of recruitment and at the best location for them. Goodluck Well that's about to change. Recruiting rules are changing and kids wont be able to commit until their junior year, with the new rules they will make so that they don't talk until later. Coaches are not happy about 8th and 9th graders committing. 8th and 9th graders (or even a 7th grader that committed to UNC) should not be doing that. The coaches are the ones letting it happen. Anson Dorrance talks against it but he has a 2023 commit. I think they should NOT be allowed to commit until junior year. What does an 8th or 9th grader know about college choices?!? Nothing. What is the chance that the coach who recruited you will be there in 5 years? Not that great except at a few schools who have super long term coaches. Even those coaches can have health problems that make them retire (think Pat Summit). I agree that it should stop!!
|
|
|
Post by Soccerhouse on Apr 17, 2018 17:51:31 GMT -5
Well that's about to change. Recruiting rules are changing and kids wont be able to commit until their junior year, with the new rules they will make so that they don't talk until later. Coaches are not happy about 8th and 9th graders committing. 8th and 9th graders (or even a 7th grader that committed to UNC) should not be doing that. The coaches are the ones letting it happen. Anson Dorrance talks against it but he has a 2023 commit. I think they should NOT be allowed to commit until junior year. What does an 8th or 9th grader know about college choices?!? Nothing. What is the chance that the coach who recruited you will be there in 5 years? Not that great except at a few schools who have super long term coaches. Even those coaches can have health problems that make them retire (think Pat Summit). I agree that it should stop!! Does the commitment mean anything? It’s just a verbal right?
|
|
|
Post by oraclesfriend on Apr 17, 2018 17:56:38 GMT -5
Do you think it is better for a player's exposure and training to be on a non competitive ECNL vs a competitive NPL, SRPL Premier level team? As an example, not picking on the team. Atlanta Fire U13 ECNL seems to lose 80% or more of their games and usually not very competitive but is it that still better to be a player on that team than a player at a club with a wining RPL, or new league that won't be mentioned her team, that is more competitive. I think it matters less how many games they win than how the players are developing. Team wins don't mean good player development. You can win games with speed and aggression, that doesn't mean great skill development is necessarily happening. That is harder to know without inside knowledge. Can't look up player development on the internet like you can wins and losses. On the flip side I do think the better level of team you are on (i.e. ECNL/DA) the more seriously other clubs take you when you are looking to change to a better club and level of play. For example, a U13 Tophat ECNL player is more likely to get respect from Concorde for their U14 DA team (or vice versa) than someone coming in from a smaller club even if they are playing RPL. I still think the best place is where your kid will have good training sessions and a good training environment whether that is RPL, SRPL, DA, ECNL, NPL, SCCL or Athena/Classic. Make sure your kid is on a team that makes him/her happy.
|
|
|
Post by oraclesfriend on Apr 17, 2018 17:58:17 GMT -5
8th and 9th graders (or even a 7th grader that committed to UNC) should not be doing that. The coaches are the ones letting it happen. Anson Dorrance talks against it but he has a 2023 commit. I think they should NOT be allowed to commit until junior year. What does an 8th or 9th grader know about college choices?!? Nothing. What is the chance that the coach who recruited you will be there in 5 years? Not that great except at a few schools who have super long term coaches. Even those coaches can have health problems that make them retire (think Pat Summit). I agree that it should stop!! Does the commitment mean anything? It’s just a verbal right? It is a verbal and not technically, but I have heard of backlash when kids change their minds. Not like football. Seems like they really expect you to stick with it.
|
|
|
Post by soccerdaddy on Apr 17, 2018 18:11:12 GMT -5
Yes like DOC’s and coaches at clubs who expect you to stay the following year even when it’s not good for your child or something is not working. So they go tryout and play somewhere else. Those parents are treated like the bad guy and all of a sudden your son or daughter is not a good player. Just repeating what I heard out of Coach’s mouths.
|
|
|
Post by Futsal Gawdess on Apr 17, 2018 22:13:18 GMT -5
8th and 9th graders (or even a 7th grader that committed to UNC) should not be doing that. The coaches are the ones letting it happen. Anson Dorrance talks against it but he has a 2023 commit. I think they should NOT be allowed to commit until junior year. What does an 8th or 9th grader know about college choices?!? Nothing. What is the chance that the coach who recruited you will be there in 5 years? Not that great except at a few schools who have super long term coaches. Even those coaches can have health problems that make them retire (think Pat Summit). I agree that it should stop!! Does the commitment mean anything? It’s just a verbal right? I believe it is more verbal than legal, however, it's a small community and word will get around. Plus it's being pushed by the coaches because what they do is offer those type of scholarships to the top of the top(ex. Top Drawer Elite 25, 50, etc.) Once they have that anchor(s) in place, they can now build around those players by using them to market to others. Hey, National Team Player X is coming to XYZ University, you've played with/against or you've heard about them. Wouldn't you want to come to XYZ University to create something special... You get the gist
|
|
|
Post by soccerfan07 on Apr 19, 2018 16:54:46 GMT -5
8th and 9th graders (or even a 7th grader that committed to UNC) should not be doing that. The coaches are the ones letting it happen. Anson Dorrance talks against it but he has a 2023 commit. I think they should NOT be allowed to commit until junior year. What does an 8th or 9th grader know about college choices?!? Nothing. What is the chance that the coach who recruited you will be there in 5 years? Not that great except at a few schools who have super long term coaches. Even those coaches can have health problems that make them retire (think Pat Summit). I agree that it should stop!! Does the commitment mean anything? It’s just a verbal right? Verbal commitments mean nothing. They are non-binding on the part of the school and the player until they sign their NLI or signs an agreement for financial aid. Neither can happen until February of the student athlete’s senior year (thanks O!) www.ncaa.org/student-athletes/future/recruiting
|
|
|
Post by oraclesfriend on Apr 19, 2018 17:19:55 GMT -5
NLI is February of senior year, I believe. Not junior year. Verbal are not binding of course. Very little in this world is binding when verbal. I did read an article about this some time ago from college coaches speaking about how they expected them to follow through and kids that changed their minds harmed others associated with them. I wondered at that time exactly what...but harming siblings chances? Giving their clubs and coaches that recommended them bad raps?? I have no idea.
Regardless, I generally teach my kids that their commitments are important. They should not commit to anything they don't believe they can follow through on. I won't let them back out of commitments either. I don't think it is right to have 12 or 13 year old kids or even 15 year old kids decide on a college. They don't have the life experience or knowledge of their future plans (career choice plans etc) to decide at that age. If a parent agrees to let a 12 year old girl commit to UNC (has happened this year) to play soccer then they are not really thinking of their child's long term interests. They are motivated by ego or fear. It is an honor to be offered at that age, but why agree to limit your options that young...even if it is non-binding. I think it is a slippery slope.
|
|
|
Post by soccerfan07 on Apr 19, 2018 17:31:00 GMT -5
NLI is February of senior year, I believe. Not junior year. Verbal are not binding of course. Very little in this world is binding when verbal. I did read an article about this some time ago from college coaches speaking about how they expected them to follow through and kids that changed their minds harmed others associated with them. I wondered at that time exactly what...but harming siblings chances? Giving their clubs and coaches that recommended them bad raps?? I have no idea. Regardless, I generally teach my kids that their commitments are important. They should not commit to anything they don't believe they can follow through on. I won't let them back out of commitments either. I don't think it is right to have 12 or 13 year old kids or even 15 year old kids decide on a college. They don't have the life experience or knowledge of their future plans (career choice plans etc) to decide at that age. If a parent agrees to let a 12 year old girl commit to UNC (has happened this year) to play soccer then they are not really thinking of their child's long term interests. They are motivated by ego or fear. It is an honor to be offered at that age, but why agree to limit your options that young...even if it is non-binding. I think it is a slippery slope. Senior year, that’s right!
|
|
|
Post by footy on Apr 19, 2018 17:44:44 GMT -5
Do you think it is better for a player's exposure and training to be on a non competitive ECNL vs a competitive NPL, SRPL Premier level team? While it's great to train with the highest level players possible (presumably ECNL, out of the ones you mentioned?), your kid will only get exposure if he/she plays during the games so be sure to keep roster size and substitution rules in mind.
|
|
|
Post by SoccerMom on Apr 20, 2018 5:55:33 GMT -5
Verbal means more on the girls side than on the boys side. I have heard college coaches say that girls rarely decommit where boys do and that is why they don't commit as early.
Yes its verbal and not binding, but they honor it.
|
|
|
Post by rocko1989 on Apr 20, 2018 9:56:33 GMT -5
Well that's about to change. Recruiting rules are changing and kids wont be able to commit until their junior year, with the new rules they will make so that they don't talk until later. Coaches are not happy about 8th and 9th graders committing. 8th and 9th graders (or even a 7th grader that committed to UNC) should not be doing that. The coaches are the ones letting it happen. Anson Dorrance talks against it but he has a 2023 commit. I think they should NOT be allowed to commit until junior year. What does an 8th or 9th grader know about college choices?!? Nothing. What is the chance that the coach who recruited you will be there in 5 years? Not that great except at a few schools who have super long term coaches. Even those coaches can have health problems that make them retire (think Pat Summit). I agree that it should stop!! Coaches cannot approach players at these young ages. They can answer phone calls from the player, yet cannot make the first approach. At least that is what I have been told. It was true with our son, who was recruited for football. I imagine they must go through a parent to make an offer to a kid this young. While I am sure it is nice, and an ego boost, to be offered a spot at a major school when a kid is so young, why would a family make a commitment at this time? Players need to figure out what they want to be and do as they get older, and seek out a school that has that major. Few of us end up majoring in that thing we wanted to do when we were in middle school. Obviously, not all schools have all majors. I don't understand why a parent would allow/encourage a child to commit to a school when that child is so young. If a coach pressures the family to do so, that is when a parent must take a stand. I would like to think I would tell a coach he/she would simply have to wait (we are certainly not in this spot with our youngest child at the moment). If the child is that strong of a player, the coach will certainly not go away. If the coach does, then so be it.
|
|