|
Post by alacrity174 on Dec 16, 2016 9:00:59 GMT -5
I doubt it would happen but I wish the USSF in conjunction with the MLS opts for a two tiered track. The first would be run by the MLS clubs and would focus solely on players for the first team, whilst the second would be a DA Program run for players who would likely not make the MLS first team but would be great college players(scholarship). The first should be fully funded by the MLS teams while the second would be funded by the USSF. All the while doing away with the boys version of ECNL. I honestly see some holes in your wishes here. DA was founded on the premise that it would be the route to the USMNT and due to the lack of professional teams (Even for 2017 MLS season there will only be 22 teams), this would have left huge gaps in inentifying and developing talented players. Now I am not saying the experiment to date has been a huge success, however in making a 2 tiered system as you suggest basically takes away college options for MLS DA players and professional playing options for non MLS DA players. If you want only MLS teams to have DA then fine, but then you have to disband all other academies and go back to RPL/NPL play, we should also look at the new GDA, should this also then do away with ECNL as you have said for doing away with the soon to be boys version. There is a whole bag of snakes here, with money being the biggest part, for the US National teams to become/remain successful then we need a bigger stream of talented players being fed into the system so we have a bigger pool of options, this is a very long term process and we really can't expect results, 2017 will be USSDA 10th season, this really is still a program in it's infancy, I believe it needs tweeks but now isn't the time for wholesale changes, let's take a step back, look at what we think has worked, what we know hasn't and then streamline and simplify what is left. My personal opinion is a state the size of Georgia can accomodate only DA teams if we are serious about it being truley talented players. CA and TX 3 each, possibly 4 just due to the area covered and logistically players beijng able to attend practice etc. We could then see how NPL teams could interact with DA teams, is there an option for cross division tournaments, things like that. ECNL isn't going away either as it is a revenue stream and so far college coaches like it for recruiting, I can only see this continuing on the boys side, so we need a way to embrace it and bring it into the complete soccer fold, rather than the turf war with USYS which is happening now. Sorry got a little longer winded than I wanted.
|
|
|
DA
Dec 15, 2016 8:21:49 GMT -5
Post by alacrity174 on Dec 15, 2016 8:21:49 GMT -5
Don't think you will see this happen, USSF isn't expanding U13/U14 DA right now, especially with the addition of GDA.
|
|
|
Post by alacrity174 on Dec 6, 2016 11:51:20 GMT -5
In a few short months we will have an MLS team right here in town, no need to drive anywhere.
|
|
|
Post by alacrity174 on Dec 5, 2016 12:59:05 GMT -5
My first interaction with Super Y was 6 years ago, back when GA had 3 or 4 teams and we played teams out of VA etc. Although there was a fair bit of travel involved the roster size was big enough that everyone got playing time and it wasn't a disaster if you missed a game or two for vacation etc. You played teams you didn't see very often and got chance to visit areas out of the norm for Georgia teams. I have been to the Finals at IMG a few times and this was a great experience to see some really good teams play and despite what is perceived here in GA other areas do (or at least did), take Super Y seriously.
The recent dilution and addition of so many Atlanta based teams has made it into a lesser summer league with less competitive competition and very little merit other than yes you can play with your buddies but with just about every big club in ATL now having a Super Y team it seems the players are obligated to play for their home club which then limits the buddy teams. In short a good idea which has run its course and is now another money making scheme for someone.
|
|
|
Post by alacrity174 on Dec 5, 2016 12:33:19 GMT -5
Like I said. If you don't like your local team, move your family. Or make your club better. When a kid goes to a distant school they move. They don't spend hours in the car every week going to school. This whole bypassing your local club thing is also driven by other factors besides quality of local club. Big clubs sell a bill of goods. They prey on insecurities. They perpetuate belief that if you don't join them the player will be left behind. The whole system is constructed in a fashion to inhibit grass roots development programs. Exactly what USSF does with their DA approach. Sad really. Like I also said, this is only step 1 of a proposal. What is step 1 of your plan? Love to hear alternative ideas. Don't you see this as a very draconian statement to make? I buy a house depending on things that are important, School district is one of those, which soccer club is in my area isn't one of them and in my mind shouldn't be. As I said before this is a consumer choice along the line of which grocery store I shop at, if I chose to bypass the closet store to get to one I feel is superior then I will. I have played the game, hold USSF Coaching licences and am also a USSF referee so I would hope I am able to asses a club/coaches positives and negatives. You will never achieve 100% satisfaction as a club no matter how well you do. It is human nature for someone to feel aggrieved about something or have one coach who maybe doesn't hit the mark so will lose some perception points with your prospective customers. Personally I have chosen to go with a Coach I trust for my kids and not the club, you can criticize all you want but this is my approach and so far has worked out. Removing choice means you limit accountability, changing a club such as SSA or UFA for example would take a long time and require resources I would prefer to use for important things in my life, I am under no illusion that my kids will play MLS level soccer or pull on the USMNT shirt in a game. My preference is not for these Mega-Clubs, I have seen the level of accountability and responsiveness drop dramatically at one club and made a move based on this, which seems to have worked out well to date, however it was my ability to make this choice which is important and which under your suggestion would be removed, this is akin to the GA Soccer transfer system, what you are basically saying is the club round the corner owns the rights to my child which in my opinion is totally inconsistent with driving change. I'll be honest I haven't put a great deal of thought into how to elicit change, but one of the first things that needs to be addressed is the pay to play format, when a DOC at let's say SSA is making high 6 figures then you can see that the onus isn't on developing players it is purely revenue driven. After all look at the metrics, prior to SSA Cobb FC had RPL teams at almost every age and gender with Cl1/AthA as second level teams, now after 6 years these numbers have declined dramatically, I am using SSA as an example only and not to point fingers at any person individually, a return to smaller clubs at younger levels for development, then possibly a consolidation of perceived talent as the players get older could then lead to players with the appropriate coaching and competition to develop into the Professional level player, College level player or Adult recreational level player. All of which are important to the overall development of Soccer in the USA, especially what should be the biggest group the adults that continue to play after their youth experience is completed, if we don't have that then the game will wither on the vine.
|
|
|
Post by alacrity174 on Dec 3, 2016 18:29:29 GMT -5
Not a fan of this, where is the incentive for clubs to do better, isn't this removing choice from us the consumer also. I know that for my "catchment area", the local club is not good and I wouldn't have my kids play there if the club paid me to do so. You have a choice. You vote out the Board, the DOC, the coaches, and get people in there who know what they are doing. What do you do when your candidate loses an election and you are stuck with what you consider bad policies and terrible choices? Do you move to the next country? Maybe you do. If so, then move your family to a place where there is a better soccer club choice. You would probably take that step if the schools were bad in your area. If you don't take that step, then make your local club better. I am also guessing one of reasons your local club is not good is because the people currently running the club have forced all the players who feel they have options to leave the club. Get all those players back and then things might not look so bad. Like I said, this would be my phase one. It would affect all clubs equally. If I was the Soccer Czar I would build in inceptives for clubs to be better in other ways. There would still be competition. But I understand people won't like this approach. Only my idea about how to reshape the culture. Other people might have better ideas. Fine by me. Still not a fan, soccer isn't the same as politics it's more akin. To grocery stores, if I don't like the publix just down the street I can chose to drive kroger a little further away. With your analogy it would take years to get the change mentioned and my kid would be through the system by then with no benefit. Would you also have everyone go to their immediate local university rather than having the option of going wherever you want to pay for?
|
|
|
Post by alacrity174 on Dec 2, 2016 13:20:35 GMT -5
"...the first of which is to stop the madness of letting players from anyplace play at any club anywhere. My first step would be for USSF to say players must play for a club in their catchment area..." 100% spot on. Imagine clubs focused on their players/families and players/families that help to build up the club. Not a fan of this, where is the incentive for clubs to do better, isn't this removing choice from us the consumer also. I know that for my "catchment area", the local club is not good and I wouldn't have my kids play there if the club paid me to do so.
|
|
|
Post by alacrity174 on Nov 22, 2016 9:02:48 GMT -5
There is no question I do not understand the game the same way he does. Saying that, I do understand wins and losses. I also understand progress and improvement. What I don't see right now is wins in the hex, and I certainly do not see progress and improvement. Losing 2-1 to Mexico is understandable, even while incredibly disappointing. Losing 4-0 and looking clueless to Costa Rica is never OK. Even the top national teams have down periods. There is a possibility the US men's team is simply in one of those (I am not saying we are a top team....). Klinsmann does not seem to be helping any. I am not defending the inept display against Costa Rica, however they are #18th ranked by FIFA and made it to the qtr finals in Brazil so they are not the patsy team people are making them out to be.
|
|
|
Post by alacrity174 on Nov 22, 2016 8:57:49 GMT -5
I understand the knee jerk reaction to bring back Arena but is he really the best option? If the only object is to qualify for the 2018 World Cup then fine, but will the inevitable be we go out in the group stage yet again.
Would we not be better off getting the right person for the job now to lead the players through the remainder of the cycle and hopefully qualify but at least have a start on the work that is desperately needed?
|
|
|
Post by alacrity174 on Nov 16, 2016 12:54:46 GMT -5
Clubs can't just add DA teams, they are regulated by USSF. I hear you. I guess a better way to ask my question is whether anyone knows if clubs with younger DA teams will apply for older teams and likely be accepted? Is it the way things are moving for DA? There is nothing about expanding the DA clubs on the US Soccer website, so my guess would be no there are no current plans to expand. It also doesn't make sense for US Soccer to dilute their pool even further. I think come the end of the DA season there will be a lot of unhappy parents who's kid doesn't make a U13/14 team from all these U12 ones and the furor will begin.
|
|
|
Post by alacrity174 on Nov 16, 2016 10:39:38 GMT -5
www.ussoccerda.com/da-applications-2017-18I know a number of clubs in GA (in addition to CF) have younger DA teams. But, has anyone heard whether these same clubs will start adding older DA teams? If so, what's the sense of it, if it is just another way of referring to the clubs' best teams (replacing RPL with DA)? Clubs can't just add DA teams, they are regulated by USSF.
|
|
|
Post by alacrity174 on Nov 16, 2016 10:38:18 GMT -5
so consider me puzzled. Isn't this thread is about Atlanta United (of the MLS) Development Academy teams? Yes, you are correct. Just keep a log of how many make the first team and how many actually play versus how many go to college. Being a new team in MLS, there won't be any patience to build from within with youth. Most spots will be filled with veterans and retiring players from Europe. Do you have inside info on this? Andrew Carleton & Chris Gosling have both signed with ATL UTD and both are homegrown players. Will they get starting rolls I doubt it as they are both young but they will figure in the team at some stage. All sports teams must have a balance of youth and experience, I don't see ATL UTD being any different.
|
|
|
Post by alacrity174 on Nov 7, 2016 14:48:24 GMT -5
For those who have been around the block and might have/had kids that play(ed) college soccer, curious about your thoughts regarding placement services. On the surface, it sounds good to have a professional help guide and connect you to an appropriate program. Thanks, To be honest in my opinion this should be something your Coach or club helps you with. Not someone who has no clue about your kid and his/her abilities. If the coach can't or won't then the DOC should.
|
|
|
Post by alacrity174 on Nov 4, 2016 16:04:12 GMT -5
Before there was SRPL and Div 1 RPL it was R3PL and SRPL. Basically the same number of teams. Not sure you are fixing a problem to be honest. Before there were also only max of four teams per state - now you have some age groups with 6-8 even 10 - that's too many IMO. Doesn't matter - once we have DA, ECNL, SRPL and Division 1 RPL everything will be so much more watered down. More money - more travel - less competition. how is that a good thing for youth soccer? Who has 10 teams in any RPL DIVISION? Traditionally GA had 4 to 6 in 2 RPL divi onside not much has really changed there. The idea in my opinion is fine too is just this year's application which is flawed mainly due to the new coordinator how made some bad decisions early on and never recovered
|
|
|
Post by alacrity174 on Nov 4, 2016 13:57:01 GMT -5
Supply and demand problem - they've expanded SRPL to add Division 1 RPL and now there are too many teams - ergo games - to play and limited field space because other games are already scheduled. Simple solution - eliminate Division 1 RPL - less teams - less games to reschedule. They already let local teams make up their games locally - but when you travel to one state to play another state's team and then have to make that up - where's the neutral ground then? This problem will remain no matter how many teams are involved but consolidating RPL back to one division only will be a good start. Otherwise it's a total waste of money for too many teams to play RPL only to play half the games other leagues do. Before there was SRPL and Div 1 RPL it was R3PL and SRPL. Basically the same number of teams. Not sure you are fixing a problem to be honest.
|
|
|
Post by alacrity174 on Nov 1, 2016 20:15:19 GMT -5
Not complaining, I'm just making a true statement. Btw, I choose to umpire high school and college baseball where there is good money made. We have plenty of umpires and if you mess up badly, you are "benched" for awhile. In soccer, that practice never happens it seems. Baseball is a totally different officiating experience and really has no comparison to soccer and your true statement in my experience doesn't bear up.to scrutiny. Yes there are some bad referees out there but the only way to get them out is for other people to.step.up.and make it so an assigned can afford not to use them. Look at how many games are cancelled every week due to no referees available. Take the course and come out on a weekend as an R9 then tell me how easy it is.
|
|
|
Post by alacrity174 on Nov 1, 2016 19:22:12 GMT -5
Heard the argument before - it takes very little to become an R9. Then do it and then become an R8 and progress up the ladder. Otherwise leave he qualified referees to do the job and stop complaining
|
|
|
Post by alacrity174 on Nov 1, 2016 15:38:45 GMT -5
alacrity174... the coach isnt a trained medical personal as well but the rules (law) says that its the coach should. Well the coach should do it but in some cases they wont do whats the best interest in health of the player. I know we have a shortage of refs in the state and most of them younger than 18 so hard for them to make that judgement. But I still think refs should be able to make the call. I understand the LOTG. If they did slide tackle and did it with proper technique no way getting red card (unless they have you as a ref). Just saying. Anyways, I see more non calls than I do calls for field players attacking a keeper. More calls for field players vs field players. As I said the ref cannot veto any player returning to the field, it is not in our remit. Regarding he rest I cannot comment on what you have seen but I will say parents have a very jaundiced view of games and what they believe should be called, honestly most are wrong and the players know this as it is discussed on the field amongst them and the refs. I'm not saying you are wrong in every case but from experience most of what comes in from the sideline is laughable. And again the goalie gets no special treatment other than when they have possession of the ball or when jumping to collect it.
|
|
|
Post by alacrity174 on Nov 1, 2016 13:51:08 GMT -5
ridiculous! This is another example of how the refs are not educated enough on protecting the goalkeeper. (or knowing what the protocol is ). I have seen it every weekend. Keeper has hand (sometimes both) on the ball and player attempts to kick the ball out of hands. (sometimes resulting in a goal). Cleats up when striker slides into keeper (even though keeper clearly has 2/3 steps advantage. Not one card or warning. This has to be addressed! The NFL/College/HS all protect the QB. The same is needed for goalkeepers or it will continue to be a problem. As for not proper technique, I didn't witness the play so not sure. In the event of a 1v1 break away, your training teaches you how to best avoid an injury. Maybe the situation called for the keeper to go feet first. I'm not sure. But the bottom line is to get proper training. If this isnt done then its the fault of the parent and Coach. They both have to be on the same page in regards to the safety of the player. Head injury is the scariest of them all and should be over emphasized by the ref. I would rather have my kid sit out the rest of the game and go to the ER to rule out any trauma. No missing around on this. I hope she is ok For anyone who is a ref, is there currently an emphasis on dealing with head trauma in game? I mean, I used to ref but that was like six years ago and I only took an R9 class then anyway. Immediately halting play to deal with a head injury is something that only came to the EPL like last season, so this is fairly new in the soccer world, but that doesn't make it any less of a pertinent issue. Is it the referee's responsibility to check a player who is returning to the match after a blow to the head, or does that fall on the coach to know when/if the player is able to continue playing? Good question, the direction given to referees if there is a "suspected" head injury the game is to be stopped immediately and the coach called on, if there is a trainer then they should evaluate the player and make recommendations, if no trainer the coach is the person who makes the judgement call on if player returns or not. The referee has no discretion in this and cannot bar a player from returning unless there is a blood injury when we have the ability to say no return until the blood is removed (new shirt etc). Here is a link to the GA Soccer Concussion Awareness policy, as you can see the Coach should have taken a course in this and be aware of the actions to be taken. www.georgiasoccer.org/concussion_awareness/
|
|
|
Post by alacrity174 on Nov 1, 2016 13:41:07 GMT -5
ridiculous! This is another example of how the refs are not educated enough on protecting the goalkeeper. (or knowing what the protocol is ). I have seen it every weekend. Keeper has hand (sometimes both) on the ball and player attempts to kick the ball out of hands. (sometimes resulting in a goal). Cleats up when striker slides into keeper (even though keeper clearly has 2/3 steps advantage. Not one card or warning. This has to be addressed! The NFL/College/HS all protect the QB. The same is needed for goalkeepers or it will continue to be a problem. As for not proper technique, I didn't witness the play so not sure. In the event of a 1v1 break away, your training teaches you how to best avoid an injury. Maybe the situation called for the keeper to go feet first. I'm not sure. But the bottom line is to get proper training. If this isnt done then its the fault of the parent and Coach. They both have to be on the same page in regards to the safety of the player. Head injury is the scariest of them all and should be over emphasized by the ref. I would rather have my kid sit out the rest of the game and go to the ER to rule out any trauma. No missing around on this. I hope she is ok Sorry but this is not on the ref in any way. The referee cannot say to a coach that a player cannot return to the field, referees are NOT trained medical personnel, it is incumbent on the coach to follow the correct protocol in place from GA Soccer. In the LOTG the goalie gets no more protection than any other player on the field, and if as you described the keeper came out feet first sliding into an attacker I for one would have no option that to red card the keeper for VC.
|
|
|
Post by alacrity174 on Oct 31, 2016 18:27:01 GMT -5
If you review the original posting, it is clear the offensive play is offside and the flag should have been raised. No other players around. No excuse AR missed it. It is what it is. Hopefully the AR learned from this and won't make this mistake again IMO. With all due respect for you were not there to witness the incident personally then you really can't say definitively he AR was wrong. It is very easy to be judgemental but if you feel that strongly I an provide a list know to a available ref certification classes
|
|
|
Post by alacrity174 on Oct 31, 2016 16:04:30 GMT -5
Sorry Rudy very, very few refs Neglect or miss these type of calls. If this was a younger AR is can see where the confusion has come about, as was explained earlier the clarified rule for Offside from FIFA is now being enforced and this states that the AR should hold the flag until the player becomes active. In the example above it may have been that a 2nd attacker was making a run from onside (I don't know I wasn't there), if this is so then the AR was totally right to hold the flag until it became clear that the original offside player was going to get to the ball first. This whole situation is very ambiguous and without seeing it personally I can't give a qualified answer. Thanks for jumping in. Was I imagining that the AR stops running with the play if an offside flag is about to come up? Actually he AR SHOULD keep.running the line in caseof another incident such as that describe Bovey and when they are sure of the offside raise the flag, when referring acknowledge they should then run back to the original offside spot and point the flag across the field indicaticating where the kick should be taken from
|
|
|
Post by alacrity174 on Oct 31, 2016 13:11:25 GMT -5
Actually seems a little to much like parents whining because their kid doesn't know how to stay onsides. Let the refs do their job as the rules are written. The refs are not there to keep players safe, they are there to enforce the rules. It's things like this where parents continue to question refs that make so many of the younger ones quit. Sorry but my first job as a referee is the safety of the players, it even says that in the LOTG and the now defunct Advice to Referees.
|
|
|
Post by alacrity174 on Oct 31, 2016 13:06:19 GMT -5
Refs often miss or neglect to make calls putting players in danger. This is where coaches, players and parents have issues. Learn the rules and make the call. Luckily neither player was hurt in this instance. Sorry Rudy very, very few refs Neglect or miss these type of calls. If this was a younger AR is can see where the confusion has come about, as was explained earlier the clarified rule for Offside from FIFA is now being enforced and this states that the AR should hold the flag until the player becomes active. In the example above it may have been that a 2nd attacker was making a run from onside (I don't know I wasn't there), if this is so then the AR was totally right to hold the flag until it became clear that the original offside player was going to get to the ball first. This whole situation is very ambiguous and without seeing it personally I can't give a qualified answer.
|
|
|
Post by alacrity174 on Oct 19, 2016 14:44:21 GMT -5
As someone who has one kid on a lower level team who sees the top players from rec make the jump to select at older ages (and they are definitely good players at rec) and then watches those players flounder at select soccer, I will definitely disagree with you. The difference is night and day, and mostly relates to the speed of play and decision making. Your view of it as a ref is interesting, but at least where I live, the difference is huge. As an example this weekend I had a U15 Cl1 game, the boys could control the ball and make passes to mostly where they wanted to go. The speed of play was good and they had a knowledge of team tactics and tried to implement them. The coaches were coaching positioning and formation. Next game was a U14 Cl 4 and it was night and day, passing and receiving of ball was poor, passing was pretty much relegated to kick and hope, there did not seem to be any form of philosophy of how to play and the faster kids on the teams were the "go to" players. Coaches were constantly coaching the player on the ball on what to do and where to try and pass, the pace of the game was frantic as neither team could retain possession past 2 passes. As a ref it is hard to be in the correct position as you honestly have no idea where the ball will go next which consequently puts you out of position for fouls as well, getting close to the play is a no no as more often than not you will be struck by the ball. Basics like throw ins you have to almost accept that most throws should be called as a foul throw but if you did this the game would not move from the touch line as throws were exchanged. This is not a put down of lower level players as mostly they are playing with a smile on their faces and enjoying the experience, where sometimes the higher level teams are stressed with expectations and results, it is an observation of the games I see most weeks.
|
|
|
Post by alacrity174 on Oct 14, 2016 14:22:15 GMT -5
As someone who is at the fields every weekend officiating these games I can honestly say there is very little difference between Classic / Athena lower levels and a lot of Rec teams, that is NOT an elitist statement it is a statement of what I see on the field. You can disagree, that is totally up to you, however the tactical side of the game, the players touches and general skill level is very similar and fouls are almost identical with the single exception of careless v reckless which is more prevalent in Classic/Athena. Well - at the upper end, there's very little difference between the RPL Division 1 and Classic 1/Athena A in most age groups, too. My issue here is the blanket statement and assumption you made that if your child isn't playing DA. ECNL or RPL they may as well be playing Rec ball. Maybe some of the teams you've seen are like that but it's still too much of a broad brush to be accurate across the board. Especially at the older ages - some kids don't want the travel and pressure once they get into high school or they pick up another sport and just love playing soccer for fun. Using Concorde as an example - they could feasibly have these teams in this order: 1st team - Girls DA 2nd team - ECNL 3rd team - SRPL 4th team - RPL Division 1 5th team - Athena A So girls on that Athena A team (5th in the club) may as well be playing rec ball? Hardly. I can't speak for girls DA since it's new, but the bottom of the higher league and the top of the one just below it are usually very competitive with each other. So yes, your statement was perceived as elitist. As for girls on that Concorde Athena A team in my example, they may well want to leave for another club with an Athena A team or higher because face it, from the 3rd team down in any big club, those teams don't get near the attention and resources by the club. Better to be the top Athena A team at a small club than the 5th team playing Athena A at mega club - that doesn't negate the ability of those players - they just don't want to be the 3rd, 4th or 5th team at a club - doesn't mean they're rec players - they're at a big honking club that happens to have DA, ECNL and RPL. You stated that parents want what's best for their player - of course - BUT - unless that parent is qualified to assess abilities of the entire playing pool, it's opinion and perception and for years I've seen parents play the politics and get their kids on teams well above their abilities. I suspect the girls DA tryouts next year will be a zoo. And I'm fairly cynically sure there will be lots of politics or accusations of favoritism during those as well. But the cold hard facts are that not every player is a true elite level player and three Girls DA teams will be hard to field as elite level competitive entities if the true goal of DA is to identify the next level of players headed to National or pro play. The whole system is just getting buried in layers and the cynic in me thinks its is still more about the money than the player. Hi Spectator I think we agree more than we disagree, what it seems you have got hold of is one comment equating Ath/Clas play to Rec, I was trying to play devils advocate a little. If we go back only a few years before DA & ECNL were anywhere close to as popular as they are now and we had SRPL, RPL, Ath/Classic divisions. A team playing Ath C was the 5th level of competition, now this same Ath C team is 7th level of play (Equates to Ath E in old money). My other point is borne out by your example of Con Fire where they have 5 teams the lowest of which is still Athena A, a small club can't live in that ocean, let's say a club the size of DDY they probably have enough players for 2 teams in an age group, the top one will likely be Ath B/C, what I was trying to point out was that this team or the Ath D/E team below it will probably implode with some of the players going to a bigger club or just giving up on the game altogether. I have no problem with competition, actually the more the better but let's have competition for the right reasons and not to line one organization or the others pockets while not really accomplishing anything for the grass roots players. We already have anecdotal evidence (stated within this board and others, where the college coaches have already concentrated their attention to DA/ECNL events, also as you have pointed out there are only a limited number of "elite" players available in any market, personally I don't see that ATL has enough really "elite" players to make up so many teams so we end up with a smaller number of players sprinkled in with above average and some "political appointees" to make up the team numbers. This in my opinion doesn't help anyone, the really talented players should be playing with and against their counterparts, the above average, who are probably on reduced playing time on the elite level team, would be better served playing on the next level down team for more minutes and guest playing on the top team to get experience of top play and so on down the ladder. Again in my opinion this would lead to better overall player development, less time on the bench and a greater soccer experience all round. It would also highlight the players who have a growth spurt development wise and improve rapidly, these are the players who are probably sat on the bench of the higher level team who never get the chance to shine because they don't get the opportunities. Sorry been a bit long winded here, hopefully you can see some merit to my points
|
|
|
Post by alacrity174 on Oct 14, 2016 7:52:51 GMT -5
Simple answer is Testosterone.
|
|
|
Post by alacrity174 on Oct 14, 2016 7:51:45 GMT -5
Ugh, I regularly watch games from Classic I to Classic V, and rec. There is a huge difference between rec and even Classic V. Please don't be elitist. Of course there are good rec teams out there, and some bad lower level Classic/Athena teams. But as a general rule, this is just dead wrong. How is it we can keep adding leagues "above" all the others and still have fairly competitive and talented teams all the way down to Classic V? Simple... increased participation (larger player pool) and dedicated coaching by people who at least know the game, versus volunteer coaches who might not know soccer at all. As someone who is at the fields every weekend officiating these games I can honestly say there is very little difference between Classic / Athena lower levels and a lot of Rec teams, that is NOT an elitist statement it is a statement of what I see on the field. You can disagree, that is totally up to you, however the tactical side of the game, the players touches and general skill level is very similar and fouls are almost identical with the single exception of careless v reckless which is more prevalent in Classic/Athena.
|
|
|
Post by alacrity174 on Oct 13, 2016 13:29:58 GMT -5
Sorry still don't see how head to head competitors can say to clubs it's ok you can have both DA and ECNL for both boys and girls. If this does happen you can wave good bye to smaller clubs as only DA and ECNL clubs will have any decent players, which leaves the rest of the soccer world as basically Rec level, even RPL so we will lose lot of players which in turn means we lose the future supporters of soccer which in turn leads to a decline in the sport all because of money and chest thumping. Totally disagree with your statement there and that's part of the biggest problem in youth soccer today - every parent thinks their kid is the next greatest thing and will chase down the D1 scholarship (ECNL) dream or the USNT/Pro (DA) dream at any cost. And if your kid isn't on DA/ECNL they're just rec players? Hardly. Some RPL teams now can easily beat some ECNL teams just as some Athena A teams can do the same with RPL and ECNL. I think the US has proven that just because you put 11 elite players on the same field doesn't make the best team. We focus on the individual player making the highest level team and not on developing a TEAM along with developing the player. I know more than a handful of girls who have played for a different club and team every year since U13 - and most of the time the player didn't make or break the team but the inconsistency of that revolving door of a roster did. ANd yet their parents still seek out that highest level possible for the player with little regard for any team dynamic. Soccer is not an individual sport despite what some parents act like. Fact is - Metro Atlanta alone doesn't have enough talent to sustain four ECNL clubs and now three DA clubs. Not all of those teams will be competitive - just as not all the ECNL teams (four per age group now) are either. I think you'll get girls from out of state - SC, AL, TN coming to make those teams now more than before. Personally I think they should have spread the DA clubs out more between states to make sure you're really capturing more talent not just taking bodies to fill the roster if the pool runs a tad dry of true elite players. As for small clubs, some will fail, others will not. It will depend on how that club is run and the reputations of their coaches and players. Some kids will opt for high school play over DA - some families will opt out of the heavy travel for ECNL or RPL. Doesn't mean that player is a 'rec' level player. To make a statement that anything below DA/ECNL is rec is a load of hooey. Well that is your opinion however the perception will be and in general is likely to be close to a fact that Classic I / Athena A is now the 5th level of soccer, lower divisions such as III/C will then be the 7th tier. In reality Classic III/ Athena C games skill wise are not much different to Rec anyway. Yes I do know what I am speaking about being a ref and seeing this on various weekends. Do the players enjoy playing, I would say yes which is the most important thing but how can clubs justify the fees etc for Cl III / Ath C and lower. To your point of " every parent thinks their kid is the next greatest thing and will chase down the D1 scholarship (ECNL) dream or the USNT/Pro (DA) dream at any cost", it is natural for every parent to want the best for their children and probably look at them through rose tinted glasses but the majority are realistic enough to know that there are only so many D1 scholarships (especially on the boys side), and the money isn't that good anyway. My main point is the fragmenting of Soccer, which can only have a negative impact and will probably create a much more them and us culture as DA/ECNL are handed to clubs whereas at least RPL was earned. There is also the very valid point of there really are not enough local "elite" players to fill all of these top slots so we will now see players from out of state come in to fill roster spots causing even more bad feeling, which will almost as a self fulfilling prophecy, cause parents to look for other options/sports for their children. I would have preferred a much more cohesive approach where we had cooperation between USSF and US Soccer and the players best interest in mind rather than the federations bank balance.
|
|
|
Post by alacrity174 on Oct 12, 2016 12:36:25 GMT -5
They both can co-exist and think both our great options. Scouts will be looking at both leagues. DA- Real strict on playing any organized soccer other than DA. Some like this structure. ECNL- Proven system, can play HC and other I even think on the boys side this will be a good thing as well. The drop off is huge from U12 to U13- Over 120 players will be looking at other options. ECNL will be a big draw I think. Here’s the Funnel. I think this is correct. Boys DA
U12- 7x Clubs at 26 players = 182 Players (est.) U13- 3x Clubs at 20 players = 60 Players (est.) U14- 3x Clubs at 20 players = 60 Players (est.) U15/16- 2x Clubs at 20 players = 40 players (est.) U18- 2x Clubs at 20 players = 40 players (est.) Girls DA U-14/15 x3 Clubs at 23 players = 69 players (est) U-16/17 x3 Clubs at 23 players = 69 players (est) U-18/19 x3 Clubs at 23 players = 69 players (est) Sorry still don't see how head to head competitors can say to clubs it's ok you can have both DA and ECNL for both boys and girls. If this does happen you can wave good bye to smaller clubs as only DA and ECNL clubs will have any decent players, which leaves the rest of the soccer world as basically Rec level, even RPL so we will lose lot of players which in turn means we lose the future supporters of soccer which in turn leads to a decline in the sport all because of money and chest thumping.
|
|