|
|
Post by soccergurl on Jan 8, 2020 1:57:52 GMT -5
hear au could have girls team soon tru?
|
|
|
|
Post by GameOfThrow-ins on Jan 8, 2020 6:35:01 GMT -5
I heard the MLS academies were the entities that continue to torpedo breaking out boys 16/17 DA into 2 age groups because they don’t want to pay for another team, yet this girls thing could happen? Makes me ill.
|
|
|
|
Post by fanatic21 on Jan 8, 2020 7:41:31 GMT -5
I heard the MLS academies were the entities that continue to torpedo breaking out boys 16/17 DA into 2 age groups because they don’t want to pay for another team, yet this girls thing could happen? Makes me ill. Considering the primary goal of MLS Academies is to develop players for the 1st team, not sure if it would help them a whole lot to have stand alone U16 (or U18) teams. If a true U16 can't make the U16/U17 team, he probably isn't a strong candidate for the MLS first team. |
|
|
|
Post by Soccerhouse on Jan 8, 2020 8:40:56 GMT -5
Bottom line soccer likes to kick kids to the curb as fast as possible.......
Letting kids mature and so called use their term "develop" is a fallacy similar to the witcher. Very little patience in soccer and finding the next great american player, if your not great at 14, forget about it...
|
|
|
|
Post by mistergrinch on Jan 8, 2020 9:01:26 GMT -5
I heard the MLS academies were the entities that continue to torpedo breaking out boys 16/17 DA into 2 age groups because they don’t want to pay for another team, yet this girls thing could happen? Makes me ill. Considering the primary goal of MLS Academies is to develop players for the 1st team, not sure if it would help them a whole lot to have stand alone U16 (or U18) teams. If a true U16 can't make the U16/U17 team, he probably isn't a strong candidate for the MLS first team. Yeah - because what a kid is at 16 is what they'll be at 20.
See: Bale, Gareth
|
|
|
|
Post by fanatic21 on Jan 8, 2020 9:53:42 GMT -5
Considering the primary goal of MLS Academies is to develop players for the 1st team, not sure if it would help them a whole lot to have stand alone U16 (or U18) teams. If a true U16 can't make the U16/U17 team, he probably isn't a strong candidate for the MLS first team. Yeah - because what a kid is at 16 is what they'll be at 20.
See: Bale, Gareth
I agree that there are definitely late bloomers, and I wasn't saying that I agree with what is likely the philosophy behind not having a U16 age group. Just saying that is likely their reasoning for not having one. |
|
|
|
Post by atlfutboldad on Jan 8, 2020 10:50:38 GMT -5
There are 15 year olds who dominate U16, yet are mediocre players at U17. Then at 16 they're stand out U17's.
This can easily be high school freshmen (young U16's) against mostly juniors (2/3 of U17). You're saying there isnt a huge freaking difference?
It's kinda funny this is a girls thread turned into discussing boys it seems. I think theres more turnover on the boys side?
How commonly do DA players who move to ECNL at U16 and dont want to move back at U17?
|
|
|
|
Post by oraclesfriend on Jan 8, 2020 10:59:34 GMT -5
I heard the MLS academies were the entities that continue to torpedo breaking out boys 16/17 DA into 2 age groups because they don’t want to pay for another team, yet this girls thing could happen? Makes me ill. Not sure why the girls at AU should make you ill (if this is even true). First, AU is just one MLS academy. Second, even if it does happen we don't know that it would be a fully funded program. Are all of the MLS academies that also have girls teams fully funded (i.e. LA Galaxy, San Jose Earthquakes, etc)? I believe even the ones with NWSL teams aren't fully funded (I could be wrong). If they are not then these are two totally separate issues. |
|
|
|
Post by defensewins on Jan 8, 2020 11:09:59 GMT -5
It's kinda funny this is a girls thread turned into discussing boys it seems. I think theres more turnover on the boys side? Exactly!  The first response turned this to a discussion of boys. I think this kind of thing is exactly what the other thread about Boys vs Girls was referring to! |
|
|
|
Post by atv on Jan 8, 2020 12:33:23 GMT -5
I too hate the idea of this. If it operates as a competing club (versus supplemental like ODP, ID2 etc), like the boys program. It would marginalize clubs and programs already in place. If it happens .. it happens but I don’t think there is any incentive for Gold Star girls programs (like TopHat, Concord, GSA, etc) to send girls to AU? Not to mention, what is the value to the AU franchise. Just my opinion.
|
|
|
|
Post by justwatching on Jan 8, 2020 12:50:51 GMT -5
Considering the primary goal of MLS Academies is to develop players for the 1st team, not sure if it would help them a whole lot to have stand alone U16 (or U18) teams. If a true U16 can't make the U16/U17 team, he probably isn't a strong candidate for the MLS first team. Yeah - because what a kid is at 16 is what they'll be at 20.
See: Bale, Gareth
Sorry, for continuing the conversation down the wrong path but you do realize Gareth Bale was the youngest person to represent Wales on their National Team and was a professional at Southampton (2nd youngest ever) at age 16...signed 5 million + euro deal at 17... There is likely a very slim chance that if you are not a serious baller at age 16 that you are "a late bloomer" on the path to be a professional player. But back to AU and girls. I think that is very interesting and would like to hear more if there is any inkling of truth to the possibility. I think AU will need to fund this side of the program and have some really attractive coaches to pull top talent from clubs like Tophat and Concorde without there being a differentiation in the league and exposure they create. For the boys realistic or not there is a dangling carrot of a professional possibility and even more appealing there is FREE soccer. If neither is there for girls why would the top players leave from the "destination clubs" (Tophat and Concorde)? |
|
|
|
Post by atlfutboldad on Jan 8, 2020 14:52:04 GMT -5
With the right incentives and coaches, they would easily pull from Tophat (girls already in DA) and those parents either interested in DA or free travel soccer. The ECNL/NPL/SCCL parents who can afford their level of the game and have kids want to play in HS it will have zero effect on. The girl's game has matured differently than the boys over the past decade, and half of the elite players aren't interested in DA.
There's a reason UFA Girls DA struggles in the league...and I don't think its the fact they don't offer free tuition and travel.
Now if the AU girls team joined ECNL, they could likely pull from any club...but we know that wouldn't happen.
|
|
|
|
Post by mistergrinch on Jan 8, 2020 15:43:50 GMT -5
Yeah - because what a kid is at 16 is what they'll be at 20.
See: Bale, Gareth
Sorry, for continuing the conversation down the wrong path but you do realize Gareth Bale was the youngest person to represent Wales on their National Team and was a professional at Southampton (2nd youngest ever) at age 16...signed 5 million + euro deal at 17... There is likely a very slim chance that if you are not a serious baller at age 16 that you are "a late bloomer" on the path to be a professional player. But back to AU and girls. I think that is very interesting and would like to hear more if there is any inkling of truth to the possibility. I think AU will need to fund this side of the program and have some really attractive coaches to pull top talent from clubs like Tophat and Concorde without there being a differentiation in the league and exposure they create. For the boys realistic or not there is a dangling carrot of a professional possibility and even more appealing there is FREE soccer. If neither is there for girls why would the top players leave from the "destination clubs" (Tophat and Concorde)?
There was a point in his mid-teens (15-16) where he grew and lost his pace... Southampton was debating cutting his scholarship, but a coach convinced them to keep him.
|
|
|
|
Post by oraclesfriend on Jan 8, 2020 17:16:17 GMT -5
With the right incentives and coaches, they would easily pull from Tophat (girls already in DA) and those parents either interested in DA or free travel soccer. The ECNL/NPL/SCCL parents who can afford their level of the game and have kids want to play in HS it will have zero effect on. The girl's game has matured differently than the boys over the past decade, and half of the elite players aren't interested in DA. There's a reason UFA Girls DA struggles in the league...and I don't think its the fact they don't offer free tuition and travel. Now if the AU girls team joined ECNL, they could likely pull from any club...but we know that wouldn't happen. I don't know that I agree with your "half" of the players statement. In many cases I think people aren't willing to switch clubs over it. While girls will often choose teams in part due to social factors more than boys (i.e. playing high school because friends are on the team) I don't agree that it is half of players that want to play high school so badly that they will choose ECNL over DA. High school is very much a regional thing. Some areas of the country care more about it than others. DA is the new league and it is having to deal with some growing pains. One of UFA's struggles is its location. It can be hard to get there from anywhere east or south due to traffic issues more so than the other big 5/6 clubs. The population density around it is not as high as the other major clubs. I agree that the game has matured differently between boys and girls teams and that has a lot to do with the timing of DA for boys versus girls and ECNL for boys vs girls. I don't know whether AU would be more popular as a DA or ECNL club. It would threaten UFA more as a DA club. I don't think UFA is truly struggling in DA either. The older teams are struggling a bit though for the oldest team some of that is due to absences of players out for their national teams and injuries. They have had some injury hits. The U16 team is strong. The U15 is improving and is 1 game result away from being 3rd in their division. The middle of the division is packed tightly together. The U14 has lost a number of 0-1 games including to Tophat and NC Courage. The other reason for the poorer results on the older teams is the fact that UFA lost a lot of really great players to Tophat years ago (and Concorde) before they had anything except NL. I think that will decrease (and already is IMO) as time goes on as they now have a highest league option. |
|
|
|
Post by GameOfThrow-ins on Jan 8, 2020 19:01:49 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by atlfutboldad on Jan 8, 2020 20:33:38 GMT -5
oraclesfriend I didn't mean the struggling comment as an insult to the club or the teams. They're simply not as successful as NTH girls or the UFA boys DA, and are generally bottom half of the bracket. I agree that location is an issue regarding pulling players up to UFA, but doesn't have the problem with the boys, mainly because DA is king on the boy's side. Regarding half...and only speaking for ATL...based on anecdotal evidence taking to many parents, I'll stick to that assertion (probably more than half really). And it's not because HS soccer is all that, it's simply the inflexibility and demands of DA (playing other sports, high school soccer, 4 practices a week, etc). For the boys the professional prospect is very alluring, especially when you're playing for a professional club, enough to deal with the rigidity of the program. There's s lot of money out there. But that will likely never be the case on the girls side, where college IS the goal (even though there's not THAT much money in it) and we have a several high-level pathways to get there...most not as expensive or cumbersome as DA. As for my kid, I'd only suggest to her GDA as a Junior or Senior.
|
|
|
|
Post by oraclesfriend on Jan 8, 2020 21:11:00 GMT -5
oraclesfriend I didn't mean the struggling comment as an insult to the club or the teams. They're simply not as successful as NTH girls or the UFA boys DA, and are generally bottom half of the bracket. I agree that location is an issue regarding pulling players up to UFA, but doesn't have the problem with the boys, mainly because DA is king on the boy's side. Regarding half...and only speaking for ATL...based on anecdotal evidence taking to many parents, I'll stick to that assertion (probably more than half really). And it's not because HS soccer is all that, it's simply the inflexibility and demands of DA (playing other sports, high school soccer, 4 practices a week, etc). For the boys the professional prospect is very alluring, especially when you're playing for a professional club, enough to deal with the rigidity of the program. There's s lot of money out there. But that will likely never be the case on the girls side, where college IS the goal (even though there's not THAT much money in it) and we have a several high-level pathways to get there...most not as expensive or cumbersome as DA. As for my kid, I'd only suggest to her GDA as a Junior or Senior. I think the half is an overstatement but we will just disagree. My experience in speaking with players and parents about their choices has been vastly different from yours. Probably neither of us has a good random sample. The 4 days per week of training can definitely be a turnoff for some girls. Given the academic rigor of high school for many kids I can see how that could be a concern. These kids certainly have a lot of homework and projects and tests, etc. It is hard to say IMO what really is attractive to people in a league though because there are so many other factors at play. As my kids have grown I care more about the coach and the commute than a lot of other factors. The only reason the league enters into it has to do with playing at the D1 level and either ECNL or DA can get you there easier than other leagues though it is possible through all leagues. Regardless I think that an AU girls team whether it was ECNL or DA would pull players from other clubs because they would have strong coaches, great facilities and a central location. I am not certain how I feel about the potential of an AU girls team, but I won't spin my wheels about it unless we get some reliable source saying it is probable. |
|
|
|
Post by SoccerMom on Jan 8, 2020 21:40:11 GMT -5
What I heard the other day was that AUFC will have a girls program, however it will be ECNL and not GDA.
|
|
|
|
Post by Soccerhouse on Jan 8, 2020 21:44:41 GMT -5
What I heard the other day was that AUFC will have a girls program, however it will be ECNL and not GDA. Very very interesting. A fully funded ecnl program? |
|
|
|
Post by SoccerMom on Jan 8, 2020 22:04:11 GMT -5
What I heard the other day was that AUFC will have a girls program, however it will be ECNL and not GDA. Very very interesting. A fully funded ecnl program? I don't know much details, I heard it from another club's DA coach and I haven't asked around to verify info. But its not surprising since Kate Noftsinger used to be the commissioner of ECNL |
|
|
|
Post by welovesoccer on Jan 8, 2020 22:34:11 GMT -5
Wow. Things are about to get even crazier for girls soccer in this town.
|
|
|
|
Post by Futsal Gawdess on Jan 9, 2020 8:40:06 GMT -5
IMO, there won’t be an AU Girls Program as of now. With AU currently weighing a potential bid to acquire/launch an NWSL team, that could definitely change. The major and most glaring reason why it won't happen is where would the girls practice. I know some construction has begun at the training grounds but at the very least they would need 3 additional full fields to add a girls program. That is because the boys currently use all available fields for practice outside of fields 1 & 2 which are exclusively reserved for the first team practices. In regards to the division they’d play, it would be ECNL. One because of the internal knowledge that Skate brings and more importantly because TA had tried to convince UFA to go all in and switch to ECNL in the past. Family friends of his had mentioned that he advised them to send their daughters down the ECNL route versus GDA. Finally, at the recently conducted RDS 4v4 Showcase, Dean who runs the RDS program, as much as said there would not be a girls academy program as of now. He was very savvy in also using that opportunity to say that should AU start a girls academy program, the RDS is where they would begin their initial search. He’s more focused on expanding the AU Training Programs and introduce RDS Camps starting next month…
p.s. The RDS Showcase will now be an annual thing…
|
|
|
|
Post by Futsal Gawdess on Jan 9, 2020 8:52:26 GMT -5
I heard the MLS academies were the entities that continue to torpedo breaking out boys 16/17 DA into 2 age groups because they don’t want to pay for another team, yet this girls thing could happen? Makes me ill. Considering the primary goal of MLS Academies is to develop players for the 1st team, not sure if it would help them a whole lot to have stand alone U16 (or U18) teams. If a true U16 can't make the U16/U17 team, he probably isn't a strong candidate for the MLS first team. IMO, I don't believe AU will juggle two teams at the U16/17 age group any longer. It just doesn't seem like anything the propose or execute works. At this level, you have to play and play often. Sitting and playing scrimmages exclusively with the occasional "real game" isn't productive. You need the continuity of real games and sometimes the challenge of being pushed by bigger, better and more skilled players. I think they will go the same route as others and take the best of both age groups like they did to field the U17x while finally cutting the cord with those who dead-end on the U17da. Take the best true U16s(2004) lads mixed in with the best U17s(2003) lads come together. When I say best, I also mean real true potential of going the Pro ranks also. If you fail, you more than guarantee a D1 Scholarship... |
|
|
|
Post by Soccerhouse on Jan 9, 2020 9:22:23 GMT -5
Considering the primary goal of MLS Academies is to develop players for the 1st team, not sure if it would help them a whole lot to have stand alone U16 (or U18) teams. If a true U16 can't make the U16/U17 team, he probably isn't a strong candidate for the MLS first team. IMO, I don't believe AU will juggle two teams at the U16/17 age group any longer. It just doesn't seem like anything the propose or execute works. At this level, you have to play and play often. Sitting and playing scrimmages exclusively with the occasional "real game" isn't productive. You need the continuity of real games and sometimes the challenge of being pushed by bigger, better and more skilled players. I think they will go the same route as others and take the best of both age groups like they did to field the U17x while finally cutting the cord with those who dead-end on the U17da. Take the best true U16s(2004) lads mixed in with the best U17s(2003) lads come together. When I say best, I also mean real true potential of going the Pro ranks also. If you fail, you more than guarantee a D1 Scholarship... The only way this would be fixed is the DA mandating X% of players need to be from each single year age group. But if your going to do that, you might as well just create a separate age group. I used to believe in the theory that if you weren't good enough to make a combined age group team then you weren't good enough to play DA -- at least that is what I was sold back in the day when it was only the 2 age groups. I no longer buy into this philosophy and taking into consideration playing time as well, many of the combined u17 teams are heaving with the older class each year. Concorde, UFA, AU does the best of the group, but still my guess is more 03s are getting minutes than 04s. I could be wrong, I'm always wrong. I know so many kids that are greatly different players at 16, 17 and 18 years of age then they were at u14 and u15. Many clubs have the same coaches coaching older teams. Coaches develop opinions on players and like us are human. Sometimes it's extremely hard for those kids to be given an 2nd opportunity and more often than not, the kid isn't interested in riding the pine. You have to fail to succeed, there is no question, but kids want to play games. Training schmaning, kids want to play games period. |
|
|
|
Post by greenmonkey on Jan 9, 2020 9:28:45 GMT -5
Very very interesting. A fully funded ecnl program? I don't know much details, I heard it from another club's DA coach and I haven't asked around to verify info. But its not surprising since Kate Noftsinger used to be the commissioner of ECNL One thing to remember as new leagues or in this case new clubs adding new teams into a league is that for the most part all this does is “relocate” existing players onto different teams. Adding DA to TopHat and UFA did nothing to increase the number of girls playing soccer or number of scholarships. The exact same girls who were playing soccer in Atlanta on the top teams/clubs/leagues had not changed. It’s the exact same girls LOL AU adding a team “to the top” of the pyramid simply means that instead of approx 120 girls in an age group playing across 6 top teams (2 DA - 4 ECNL) and 5 Clubs (TH, UFA, CF, GSA, AFU) it will now be 140 girls in an age group over 7 teams and 6 clubs So everyone moves around and over but truly the only girls moving UP if AU adds girls is the 20 girls in the area who weren’t playing DA/ECNL that there is now room for on one of the other 6 teams. Adding AU girls doesn’t magically create 20 more talented players it just gives the next 20 players in ATL a chance to play on a “highest” level team somewhere else |
|
|
|
Post by Soccerhouse on Jan 9, 2020 10:07:03 GMT -5
I agree with the greenmonkey only thing is an AU ran program regardless of coaches they bring it would have the clout to attract players from out of town like they with the boys, could be come a regional team similar to the boys program. |
|
|
|
Post by soccermaxx72 on Jan 9, 2020 10:15:01 GMT -5
I don't know much details, I heard it from another club's DA coach and I haven't asked around to verify info. But its not surprising since Kate Noftsinger used to be the commissioner of ECNL One thing to remember as new leagues or in this case new clubs adding new teams into a league is that for the most part all this does is “relocate” existing players onto different teams. Adding DA to TopHat and UFA did nothing to increase the number of girls playing soccer or number of scholarships. The exact same girls who were playing soccer in Atlanta on the top teams/clubs/leagues had not changed. It’s the exact same girls LOL AU adding a team “to the top” of the pyramid simply means that instead of approx 120 girls in an age group playing across 6 top teams (2 DA - 4 ECNL) and 5 Clubs (TH, UFA, CF, GSA, AFU) it will now be 140 girls in an age group over 7 teams and 6 clubs So everyone moves around and over but truly the only girls moving UP if AU adds girls is the 20 girls in the area who weren’t playing DA/ECNL that there is now room for on one of the other 6 teams. Adding AU girls doesn’t magically create 20 more talented players it just gives the next 20 players in ATL a chance to play on a “highest” level team somewhere else Agree but this is not a bad thing because I personally believe the bottom third of the ECNL rosters are no better than some of the girls on the top NL, NPL and SCCL teams yet those girls have survived because of personal connections, political reasons or simply because of how long they have been at the club. Giving another 15-20 girls an opportunity would be a good thing. |
|
|
|
Post by atlfutboldad on Jan 9, 2020 10:15:10 GMT -5
The downside is that an AU-funded ECNL club would probably be the same as DA IMO, because they likely wouldn't allow scholarship players to play in HS/other sports.
But it would be nice if the ECNL (and really all U15+ club soccer) season ended with a February final, allowing HS kids to be done with the club game and focus on a spring school sport (track, spring soccer in relevant states, field hockey/lacrosse (don't know the HS season of these), etc), without the need to return to the club for summer finals tournament.
|
|
|
|
Post by atlfutboldad on Jan 9, 2020 10:21:15 GMT -5
Agree but this is not a bad thing because I personally believe the bottom third of the ECNL rosters are no better than some of the girls on the top NL, NPL and SCCL teams yet those girls have survived because of personal connections, political reasons or simply because of how long they have been at the club. Giving another 15-20 girls an opportunity would be a good thing. No doubt that there are many NL/NPL/SCCL players who could make ECNL/DA rosters. AFC is generally lighting it up in NPL (and I heard a rumor their 06's bested UFA DA in a friendly). I think the south side is under-represented in the elite league mix and there's likely enough players in the triangle of Roswell/Impact/Ambush to fill an elite team at every age group. So IMO, there's probably room for about 8 "elite" girls club teams in the ATL area without watering things down much. |
|
|
|
Post by mistergrinch on Jan 9, 2020 11:40:00 GMT -5
I agree with the greenmonkey only thing is an AU ran program regardless of coaches they bring it would have the clout to attract players from out of town like they with the boys, could be come a regional team similar to the boys program. Tophat already kinda does that. Even UFA gets some kids from TN and AL. |
|
The first response turned this to a discussion of boys. I think this kind of thing is exactly what the other thread about Boys vs Girls was referring to! 
