|
Post by atlutd17 on Apr 22, 2019 14:48:38 GMT -5
From 1991 to 2008 (before DA/ECNL), the USWNT won: 2 World Cups (1991, 1999) 3 Olympic Gold medals (1996, 2004, 2008) 6 CONCACAF Gold Cup Championships (1991, 1993, 1994, 2000, 2002, 2006) From 2009 to 2019: 1 World Cup (2015) 1 Olympic Gold medal (2012) 2 CONCACAF Gold Cup Championships (2014, 2018)
We have not gotten better nor have we produced better players against the rest of the World in last decade. Coaching and training methods may have improved but the player relative improvement isn't there. Most college teams are barely watchable, but players should be better developed by then. Instead, the rest of the World is catching up, more and more coaches recruit from overseas, and while we're too busy trying to build super club teams under DA/ECNL to corner local markets, the massive growth of competition/leagues in South America, Mexico and Europe from the grassroots is quite telling... PS I used the USWNT as opposed to USMNT bc the MNT recent results are better known, more published and far more painful reflecting DA.
|
|
|
Post by mightydawg on Apr 22, 2019 17:13:16 GMT -5
Part of the USWNT's dominance is that America was on the front lines of providing sporting opportunities for women, thanks in large part to Title IX. We had a tremendous head start. When soccer dominant countries starting paying attention to women's sports, the countries that are good at soccer became good at women's soccer. This is not much of a surprise.
|
|
|
Post by Futsal Gawdess on Apr 22, 2019 21:28:45 GMT -5
So true mightydawg. Also one of the biggest drawbacks for women's soccer is the lack of a truly successful professional league. I'm sure we could open up a forum on the issues, causalities or the nuances of running a business model that will make it successful, etc. But as other countries get their leagues up and running or improve what they already have, they will surpass us. At one point we were the dominant women's' program in the world. Yet we don't seem to be able to hang on an actively successful league. The NWSL has a minimum of $15k and I believe a maximum of $45k. The ones that cross over the $100K threshold, are the Nat'l Team players who do so with the help of the US Soccer Federation (endorsements too). Really, how do you financially pursue your passion on $45k/year and have a family etc...FG
|
|
|
Post by atlfutboldad on Apr 22, 2019 21:47:40 GMT -5
Its a young womens game.
|
|
|
Post by Futsal Gawdess on Apr 23, 2019 6:07:04 GMT -5
Statistically, you are correct. However, I wouldn't bet against Captain Carli Lloyd, and I think the tweet below sums it up...FG
|
|
|
Post by mistergrinch on Apr 23, 2019 8:02:20 GMT -5
Why are you comparing a 17 year span to a 10 year span? Because it makes your statistics look more impressive? If you want to compare 2009-2019, compare the previous 10 years.. also make sure that the world cups and olympics actually fall into your time slices.
The argument loses some of its luster when you go back only 10 years.
1999-2008 1 world cup 2 gold medals 3 concacaf championships
vs 1, 1 and 2...
|
|
|
Post by Soccerhouse on Apr 23, 2019 9:28:34 GMT -5
As others have said, US was light years beyond the rest of the country. There might be correlation there with ECNL and its relationship with US soccer, but I don't think there is a negative association.
ECNL did wonders for the girls game, the issue with ecnl was the exclusionary tactics in certain areas, ie - the south for example. Also, I think the player pool is so drastically different than the early 90s - much larger and diverse -- which makes for player selection much more challenging. In the old days, the joke was you had to go to UNC to make the national team.
I also think Lloyd has slowed down - she will still add much value to the squad and is a major asset to come of the bench or play minutes in a 3rd game of the world cup when the team as already advanced or won the group.
|
|
|
Post by 30024 on Apr 23, 2019 11:20:14 GMT -5
Just my two cents but I may be dead wrong.
Poor and lower income athletes are being priced out of the market in the name of profit.
Think about it: if Athena A/Classic 1 were still the top of their respective food chains, and there was no DA or ECNL, the clubs would STILL have the same coaches, and the kids would not stop playing soccer just because ECNL went away. Coaching doesn't improve just because its called ECNL. I know many coaches who have an ECNL team AND a lower team.
You still have the same kids going to the same fields doing the same thing yet every few years clubs create a "new PATHWAY TO EXCELLENCE", give it an alphabet name, and charge ever-increasing fees.
If we woke up tomorrow and all DA/ECNL/NPL/RPL were gone, the top players would continue as Athena A/Class 1, the next tier would be B/2, etc., etc. You would still have the same group of kids in Atlanta competing against each other, the tier would still be competing against each other, etc.
In 5 years there will be a "super-duper new and improved" league. But it won't be. It will still be the same kids just with a different logo on their arm, and paying even more money.
Unless you can cut a deal with your club on fees, then it makes no sense for a boy in Atlanta to have parents fork over $10,000 a year in ECNL fees after taking into account airfare/hotel, etc. Why have a kid in Atlanta fly all the way to San Diego/Houston/Seattle for a showcase when statistically speaking, the vast majority of kids are going to attend college somewhere near where they live.
|
|
|
Post by atlfutboldad on Apr 23, 2019 11:46:32 GMT -5
Its a young women's game (NWSL), because you cannot do much with 15K (or too much with 45K), that's like a full time minimum wage salary, for a season that lasts 6 months. You can't live on it for a year. Best option is to get a good job in whatever city you play in that will allow you to work from your apartment and is flexible with practice/game schedule for half a year. Eventually that gets old (as does keeping up with athlete's physical requirements), so after a few years I would expect most to bail out to continue with their lives (that happens with the NFL regularly even).
The reason Carli, Abby (former), Megan, Alex, and most of the USWNT who are older still, because they can afford to due to supplementation of their salary from endorsements and the national team (I think they get paid 25K a game or something?). And Carli is definitely slowing down.
So yeah, NWSL is a young woman's game. Until its worth it to keep going it will remain that way.
|
|
|
Post by atlutd17 on Apr 23, 2019 13:21:19 GMT -5
Just my two cents but I may be dead wrong. Poor and lower income athletes are being priced out of the market in the name of profit. Think about it: if Athena A/Classic 1 were still the top of their respective food chains, and there was no DA or ECNL, the clubs would STILL have the same coaches, and the kids would not stop playing soccer just because ECNL went away. Coaching doesn't improve just because its called ECNL. I know many coaches who have an ECNL team AND a lower team. You still have the same kids going to the same fields doing the same thing yet every few years clubs create a "new PATHWAY TO EXCELLENCE", give it an alphabet name, and charge ever-increasing fees. If we woke up tomorrow and all DA/ECNL/NPL/RPL were gone, the top players would continue as Athena A/Class 1, the next tier would be B/2, etc., etc. You would still have the same group of kids in Atlanta competing against each other, the tier would still be competing against each other, etc. In 5 years there will be a "super-duper new and improved" league. But it won't be. It will still be the same kids just with a different logo on their arm, and paying even more money. Unless you can cut a deal with your club on fees, then it makes no sense for a boy in Atlanta to have parents fork over $10,000 a year in ECNL fees after taking into account airfare/hotel, etc. Why have a kid in Atlanta fly all the way to San Diego/Houston/Seattle for a showcase when statistically speaking, the vast majority of kids are going to attend college somewhere near where they live. I will go a step further to say the competition was better back then because it was not diluted between DA and ECNL and the real NL. Same goes for lower but still very good levels as we now have Piemont NL, NPL, and SCCL. Diluted to the point of ridiculous. And absolutely yes, the diluted competition has at some level hurt the development of the players. And that's on USSF.
|
|
|
Post by mistergrinch on Apr 25, 2019 8:43:29 GMT -5
I will go a step further to say the competition was better back then because it was not diluted between DA and ECNL and the real NL. Same goes for lower but still very good levels as we now have Piemont NL, NPL, and SCCL. Diluted to the point of ridiculous. And absolutely yes, the diluted competition has at some level hurt the development of the players. And that's on USSF. ..and I'll go a step further and say the competition wasn't better. It was more spread out/regional, and everyone still played for their HS. The best players didn't see much of the other best players until things like ODP or college. I have friends who played for major D1 programs in the 90s who will admit that my 9yo gets better technical training than they did before college.
The fact is.. we were better than everyone else, because we HAD a women's game. Lots of other places really didn't.
|
|
|
Post by atlutd17 on Apr 25, 2019 9:33:37 GMT -5
I will go a step further to say the competition was better back then because it was not diluted between DA and ECNL and the real NL. Same goes for lower but still very good levels as we now have Piemont NL, NPL, and SCCL. Diluted to the point of ridiculous. And absolutely yes, the diluted competition has at some level hurt the development of the players. And that's on USSF. ..and I'll go a step further and say the competition wasn't better. It was more spread out/regional, and everyone still played for their HS. The best players didn't see much of the other best players until things like ODP or college. I have friends who played for major D1 programs in the 90s who will admit that my 9yo gets better technical training than they did before college.
The fact is.. we were better than everyone else, because we HAD a women's game. Lots of other places really didn't.
YES and NO: 1. "It was more spread out/regional, and everyone still played for their HS. The best players didn't see much of the other best players until things like ODP or college." Hold on now: While true, everyone played HS including players later to join the WNT, the USYSA National Championship Series and RPL in general were as good as they come and the National Championships where the best played the best was REAL unlike today. Only exception was, from time to time there were club teams missing their WNT players on duty. In contrast, today, many but certainly not all the best players are in DA. Many are spread in ECNL and a good number also in NL. All these players were under ONE competition both regionally and nationally until about 10 years ago. 2. "I have friends who played for major D1 programs in the 90s who will admit that my 9yo gets better technical training than they did before college." True but there were exceptions. In addition, college soccer is still pretty bad with very little improvement in both genders for reasons discussed over and over at virtually every course or convention. Last, overall point was not about training, but creating the most competitive match environment possible to the masses under one umbrella without exclusions or guarantees.
|
|