Do Rankings Hurt Our Daughters' Development?

I've been thinking about this over the years and am honestly still on the fence. On the one hand, I view rankings as entertainment, not to be taken seriously, and would never consider a team's rank or W/L record as key criteria in decision making.

On the other hand, they're indeed watched by many, generally quite accurate, and most coaches know exactly where their teams stand in the rankings.

The question becomes do the rankings impact coaches decisions and put even more focus on winning games vs. player development?

If so, do rankings at early ages, driven ONLY on W/L, actually hurt our kids long-term?

fourfourtwo wrote:I've been thinking about this over the years and am honestly still on the fence. On the one hand, I view rankings as entertainment, not to be taken seriously, and would never consider a team's rank or W/L record as key criteria in decision making.

On the other hand, they're indeed watched by many, generally quite accurate, and most coaches know exactly where their teams stand in the rankings.

The question becomes do the rankings impact coaches decisions and put even more focus on winning games vs. player development?

If so, do rankings at early ages, driven ONLY on W/L, actually hurt our kids long-term?

Um, YES! IMHO

Rankings can change philosophy, values,...well, just about everything. It is up to the individuals involved not to let that happen. I doubt many out there strong enough Double edge sword I guess. Same concept as winning the lottery or losing your family fortune. It can go both ways.

I don’t look at any of the rankings, particularly for the younger groups. I don’t think they should be published for the younger groups because there are too many teams, with too much movement still to come, and too many variables that must be included in the calculations. If I had a vote, the rankings would only appear in the 6 months before a QT. In the 6 months before QT, that is the only time I think the rankings add actual value to our system.

I think, to some degree, the rankings negatively impact the competitive balance between teams in North Texas Youth Soccer. I think teams that are considered “top-3” in any of the rankings that are published are being artificially propped up as a result of these posts. Some posts basically turn into commercials for those “Top 3” teams. Those posts force readers to take note of those squads. Recruiting to those particular teams are aided by these rankings.

With all that said… I don’t think the rankings have any real negative impact (direct or indirect) on kids’ development in North Texas. While the rankings do appeal to parents’ competitiveness, it doesn’t force those parents into action. The parents that do take actions because of the rankings would make similar moves regardless. That particular type of parent would just search out a different source of information instead. If the rankings didn’t exist, something else would move into its place. Some parents simply crave that extra competitiveness for their child. The rankings are a result of that competitiveness from the parents… the competitiveness is not a result of the rankings.

If you are going to ask this question, then IMO, you need to ask the same question about leagues that post their game results on-line and keep standings, and tournaments that have semi-finals and finals that lead to trophies being awarded.

Bigtex has is correct. Parents who make decisions/moves based on what is published on this board would simply find other avenues for making those same decisions if this stuff didn't exist.

Unfortunately, people put too much stock in the exact number next to their team in the ranking, and whether or not their DD's team is ranked above or below another team(s). I have ALWAYS maintained that the primary value of the rankings that I publish is to give people a general idea of the relative strength of teams. If used properly by parents, coaches, and league/TD's, the rankings can provide value by helping guide people to search out leagues/tournaments where there is an appropriate level of competition. This would actually help development, wouldn't it?

Frankly, I think you are giving me waaaaaaaaaayyyyyyyy too much credit to suggest that what I post on a weekly basis has any kind of seismic impact on our DD's development. Most who know me will tell you that my head is big enough already , don't try to inflate it any more...

bwgophers wrote:If you are going to ask this question, then IMO, you need to ask the same question about leagues that post their game results on-line and keep standings, and tournaments that have semi-finals and finals that lead to trophies being awarded.

Bigtex has is correct. Parents who make decisions/moves based on what is published on this board would simply find other avenues for making those same decisions if this stuff didn't exist.

Unfortunately, people put too much stock in the exact number next to their team in the ranking, and whether or not their DD's team is ranked above or below another team(s). I have ALWAYS maintained that the primary value of the rankings that I publish is to give people a general idea of the relative strength of teams. If used properly by parents, coaches, and league/TD's, the rankings can provide value by helping guide people to search out leagues/tournaments where there is an appropriate level of competition. This would actually help development, wouldn't it?

Frankly, I think you are giving me waaaaaaaaaayyyyyyyy too much credit to suggest that what I post on a weekly basis has any kind of seismic impact on our DD's development. Most who know me will tell you that my head is big enough already , don't try to inflate it any more...

'

I wasn't referring to you specifically, more the idea of rankings in general and their impact on coaches, not so much parents. This may be the wrong venue for the question since not many coaches post much other than advertisements. However, it would be interesting to know if parents believe coaches pay attention to the rankings. My experience has been that they do. So are the rankings just a by product of the pressure on paid coaches to win, or do the rankings actually contribute momentum in driving coaches towards focusing more on the W/L than they otherwise would.

I think the coaches focused on win now will always look to recruit first, develop second, and rankings don't impact their behavior other than to guage how they're stacking up against the rest. The DD's under the umbrella of those coaches have to accept the good with the bad. I'm curious how rankings impact coaches who aren't so clearly focused on chasing Ulittle championships every season, and ultimately the resulting impact on the DDs.

fourfourtwo wrote:

bwgophers wrote:If you are going to ask this question, then IMO, you need to ask the same question about leagues that post their game results on-line and keep standings, and tournaments that have semi-finals and finals that lead to trophies being awarded.

Bigtex has is correct. Parents who make decisions/moves based on what is published on this board would simply find other avenues for making those same decisions if this stuff didn't exist.

Unfortunately, people put too much stock in the exact number next to their team in the ranking, and whether or not their DD's team is ranked above or below another team(s). I have ALWAYS maintained that the primary value of the rankings that I publish is to give people a general idea of the relative strength of teams. If used properly by parents, coaches, and league/TD's, the rankings can provide value by helping guide people to search out leagues/tournaments where there is an appropriate level of competition. This would actually help development, wouldn't it?

Frankly, I think you are giving me waaaaaaaaaayyyyyyyy too much credit to suggest that what I post on a weekly basis has any kind of seismic impact on our DD's development. Most who know me will tell you that my head is big enough already , don't try to inflate it any more...

'

I wasn't referring to you specifically, more the idea of rankings in general and their impact on coaches, not so much parents. This may be the wrong venue for the question since not many coaches post much other than advertisements. However, it would be interesting to know if parents believe coaches pay attention to the rankings. My experience has been that they do. So are the rankings just a by product of the pressure on paid coaches to win, or do the rankings actually contribute momentum in driving coaches towards focusing more on the W/L than they otherwise would.

I think the coaches focused on win now will always look to recruit first, develop second, and rankings don't impact their behavior other than to guage how they're stacking up against the rest. The DD's under the umbrella of those coaches have to accept the good with the bad. I'm curious how rankings impact coaches who aren't so clearly focused on chasing Ulittle championships every season, and ultimately the resulting impact on the DDs.

Whether it's "rankings", "standings", tournament "winner", etc...(they are all some form of "ranking" after all,) as long as someone tries to put a quantitative measure on "success", you will have players, parents, and coaches, that are influenced to make decisions based on the quantitative vs. the qualitative. Simple human nature.

If they influence decisions that academy coaches or directors make, then yes. And even if they are just a contributing element to the pressure that parents put on coaches to win-they clearly influence decisions.

Wins and losses should be far down the list of concerns for coaches of 8 y/o kids. Unfortunately-3 losses in a row-you move out of the top 10-and "those" parents start moving their kids.

In some ways, this situation is so hypocritical. There is the almost constant complaining here about the concentration on winning and the lack of concentration on development. Clubs and coaches are hammered unmercifully here about it.

Then we all sit around here and rave and argue about rankings that are to a very great extent, based upon what: wins and losses.

I'm not just talking about the rankings that are created on this board, Gotsoccer, and NationalSoccerRanking.com are other examples, and I was just as guilty of looking a the rankings to see where my dd's team was, and to bitch about why "X" team was ahead of them.

bwgophers wrote:

Whether it's "rankings", "standings", tournament "winner", etc...(they are all some form of "ranking" after all,) as long as someone tries to put a quantitative measure on "success", you will have players, parents, and coaches, that are influenced to make decisions based on the quantitative vs. the qualitative. Simple human nature.

Agreed. Finding innovative ways to forecast and measure things is basically what I do all day. In the corporate world, leaders are very selective about what they measure, and how they choose to measure it. The top organizations are acutely aware of how their metrics drive behavior. Often the hindsight analysis for a performance management program will show unintended consequences, sometimes negative and contrary to the initial goal. I have to wonder if that's happening in our little ntx soccer bubble.

I got to thinking on this again after the outcry when deepthought suggested people post shots on goal (SOG) instead of just final score when relaying game reports. SOG may not be the answer, but surely there is a sensible way to measure/rank teams or coaches to drive behavior towards goals the paying parents care about, i.e. the development and preparation of their individual players.

If ranking and measuring are here to stay, can we be smarter about the things we measure?

fourfourtwo wrote:

bwgophers wrote:

Whether it's "rankings", "standings", tournament "winner", etc...(they are all some form of "ranking" after all,) as long as someone tries to put a quantitative measure on "success", you will have players, parents, and coaches, that are influenced to make decisions based on the quantitative vs. the qualitative. Simple human nature.

Agreed. Finding innovative ways to forecast and measure things is basically what I do all day. In the corporate world, leaders are very selective about what they measure, and how they choose to measure it. The top organizations are acutely aware of how their metrics drive behavior. Often the hindsight analysis for a performance management program will show unintended consequences, sometimes negative and contrary to the initial goal. I have to wonder if that's happening in our little ntx soccer bubble.

I got to thinking on this again after the outcry when deepthought suggested people post shots on goal (SOG) instead of just final score when relaying game reports. SOG may not be the answer, but surely there is a sensible way to measure/rank teams or coaches to drive behavior towards goals the paying parents care about, i.e. the development and preparation of their individual players.

If ranking and measuring are here to stay, can we be smarter about the things we measure?

Then you'll have to fundamentally change the way people gauge "success". Right now, that's done by the instant gratification and easy to interpret metric of W/L.

You would have to convince people that it's in their best interest to looks at things differently, and more long range. i.e. Which coach/club/program places the most kids in ODP, on their H.S. teams, college teams, US WNT Pool, etc... Then you would have to show a direct correlation between that "success" and a metric other than W/L of that coach's/club's teams.

That's a tall order...

bwgophers wrote:

fourfourtwo wrote:

bwgophers wrote:

Whether it's "rankings", "standings", tournament "winner", etc...(they are all some form of "ranking" after all,) as long as someone tries to put a quantitative measure on "success", you will have players, parents, and coaches, that are influenced to make decisions based on the quantitative vs. the qualitative. Simple human nature.

Agreed. Finding innovative ways to forecast and measure things is basically what I do all day. In the corporate world, leaders are very selective about what they measure, and how they choose to measure it. The top organizations are acutely aware of how their metrics drive behavior. Often the hindsight analysis for a performance management program will show unintended consequences, sometimes negative and contrary to the initial goal. I have to wonder if that's happening in our little ntx soccer bubble.

I got to thinking on this again after the outcry when deepthought suggested people post shots on goal (SOG) instead of just final score when relaying game reports. SOG may not be the answer, but surely there is a sensible way to measure/rank teams or coaches to drive behavior towards goals the paying parents care about, i.e. the development and preparation of their individual players.

If ranking and measuring are here to stay, can we be smarter about the things we measure?

Then you'll have to fundamentally change the way people gauge "success". Right now, that's done by the instant gratification and easy to interpret metric of W/L.

You would have to convince people that it's in their best interest to looks at things differently, and more long range. i.e. Which coach/club/program places the most kids in ODP, on their H.S. teams, college teams, US WNT Pool, etc... Then you would have to show a direct correlation between that "success" and a metric other than W/L of that coach's/club's teams.

That's a tall order...

Point taken. It's a challenge for sure, but I'm thinking even a few short-term, development-centered metrics could make a difference if we could devise a simple and (relatively) objective way to capture the data.

fourfourtwo wrote:

bwgophers wrote:

fourfourtwo wrote:

bwgophers wrote:

Whether it's "rankings", "standings", tournament "winner", etc...(they are all some form of "ranking" after all,) as long as someone tries to put a quantitative measure on "success", you will have players, parents, and coaches, that are influenced to make decisions based on the quantitative vs. the qualitative. Simple human nature.

Agreed. Finding innovative ways to forecast and measure things is basically what I do all day. In the corporate world, leaders are very selective about what they measure, and how they choose to measure it. The top organizations are acutely aware of how their metrics drive behavior. Often the hindsight analysis for a performance management program will show unintended consequences, sometimes negative and contrary to the initial goal. I have to wonder if that's happening in our little ntx soccer bubble.

I got to thinking on this again after the outcry when deepthought suggested people post shots on goal (SOG) instead of just final score when relaying game reports. SOG may not be the answer, but surely there is a sensible way to measure/rank teams or coaches to drive behavior towards goals the paying parents care about, i.e. the development and preparation of their individual players.

If ranking and measuring are here to stay, can we be smarter about the things we measure?

Then you'll have to fundamentally change the way people gauge "success". Right now, that's done by the instant gratification and easy to interpret metric of W/L.

You would have to convince people that it's in their best interest to looks at things differently, and more long range. i.e. Which coach/club/program places the most kids in ODP, on their H.S. teams, college teams, US WNT Pool, etc... Then you would have to show a direct correlation between that "success" and a metric other than W/L of that coach's/club's teams.

That's a tall order...

Point taken. It's a challenge for sure, but I'm thinking even a few short-term, development-centered metrics could make a difference if we could devise a simple and (relatively) objective way to capture the data.

Actually, I should revise my statement slightly... not the MOST kids, but the highest % of kids.

...and you hit the nail on the head... how to devise a simple, and more importantly, objective way to capture data other than goals scored/allowed...

ballhead wrote:In some ways, this situation is so hypocritical. There is the almost constant complaining here about the concentration on winning and the lack of concentration on development. Clubs and coaches are hammered unmercifully here about it.

Then we all sit around here and rave and argue about rankings that are to a very great extent, based upon what: wins and losses.

I'm not just talking about the rankings that are created on this board, Gotsoccer, and NationalSoccerRanking.com are other examples, and I was just as guilty of looking a the rankings to see where my dd's team was, and to bitch about why "X" team was ahead of them.

You have hit the nail on the head Mr. BALLHEAD. This whole topic is very hypocritical. The ONLY thing parents care about is WINNING. Many on this site will claim they care about development but there actions speak very loudy to the contrary. The only ranking is for wins and losses. People come on here to decry the ranking when they feel their DD team gets shafted. The only important metric is the WIN/LOSS.

In my several years with my daughter and my many years with my son, I am yet to find a single parent that willingly placed their child on a losing team in a lower league in the name of development. The fact is the best players are on the wining teams in ECNL and LHD1.

If the metric was how many kids make ODP, National team, etc., the result would be the same. Those kids would come from teams that WIN.

Great players do not stay on bottom level teams that fail to win games. It is just a fact.....

Flame away in righteous indignation.

If you compare the players to each other, you can say that some are "great players". If you compare the players to a high technical standard that could be achieved, very few of them are "great".

There is no doubt that most of the strong athletes are in the highest divisions. A more important issue is, how much better would these athletes be at soccer if there was more focus on their individual skills instead of team tactics designed to win games among youth teams that are playing far below their potential skill level.

I heard an academy coach talking to his team after a tournament game last summer and he ended by saying that the important thing was that they would be moving up in the rankings. That is not wrong for them and their goals, perhaps. There are others who are not influenced by the rankings and have different goals for their players.

Guess we can all dream of the day when we see the following post...

Sting '09 Periwinkle - linked 5 one-touch passes 10 different times today
Texans '09 Burnt Umber - linked 5 one-touch passes 7 different times today

bwgophers wrote:Guess we can all dream of the day when we see the following post...

Sting '09 Periwinkle - linked 5 one-touch passes 10 different times today
Texans '09 Burnt Umber - linked 5 one-touch passes 7 different times today

You are making my point perfectly. The point is no one cares about the one touch passes being linked up (although they will claim they do), but they do care about wins. I have no problems with rankings as it shows who the best teams are and should be a guide as to which team has the best players. If you want you daughter to be on the best team and play with the best, look at the rankings. That team is sitting at #1.

The way womens soccer is conducted in the US is perfect. We seek out the best players (those that win) and move them up the ladder. Seems to work well as the USA Womens National Team is ranked #1 in the ENTIRE WORLD.

IF it aint broke, don;t fix it.

BWgophers, Keep up the good ranking......

RunsLikeWind wrote:

bwgophers wrote:Guess we can all dream of the day when we see the following post...

Sting '09 Periwinkle - linked 5 one-touch passes 10 different times today
Texans '09 Burnt Umber - linked 5 one-touch passes 7 different times today

You are making my point perfectly. The point is no one cares about the one touch passes being linked up (although they will claim they do), but they do care about wins. I have no problems with rankings as it shows who the best teams are and should be a guide as to which team has the best players. If you want you daughter to be on the best team and play with the best, look at the rankings. That team is sitting at #1.

The way womens soccer is conducted in the US is perfect. We seek out the best players (those that win) and move them up the ladder. Seems to work well as the USA Womens National Team is ranked #1 in the ENTIRE WORLD.

IF it aint broke, don;t fix it.

BWgophers, Keep up the good ranking......

Don't worry, if people started tracking the # times a team linked 5 one-touch passes in a game, I'd find a way to create a mathematical formula to rank it...

US Womens Soccer may be doing fine nationally, but how many NTX players are rostered? How about in the Pool? The NTX "system" with its emphasis on winning from the earliest of ages may or may not be serving the best interest of the children involved; but it is definitely not producing national team caliber players.

Diamondback00 wrote:US Womens Soccer may be doing fine nationally, but how many NTX players are rostered? How about in the Pool? The NTX "system" with its emphasis on winning from the earliest of ages may or may not be serving the best interest of the children involved; but it is definitely not producing national team caliber players.

You have a good point regarding the player pool and if many NTX players are in there. However, I bet that if you look at the players in the US national team player pool, they all come from Elite Teams that win most of their games. I doubt there are many players in the US National Team player pool that come from losing teams in lower divisions of their local soccer associations.

bwgophers wrote: how to devise a simple, and more importantly, objective way to capture data other than goals scored/allowed...

Has anyone else used the Soccer Meter app for iPhone or iPad? A friend of mine installed it on his iPad and we used it for one game. I think it's interesting, provides objective stats, and relatively simple to use, but takes a great deal of discipline to use it for an entire game. While I am a stats junkie, I found it took a bit of fun out of watching the game. I couldn't watch my son's off-the-ball movement or observe the coaching on the opposite sideline nor could I interact much with the other parents because I was too focused on using the app to ensure I got good statistics.

http://soccermeter.com/wp/ipad-home/

fourfourtwo wrote:

bwgophers wrote:If you are going to ask this question, then IMO, you need to ask the same question about leagues that post their game results on-line and keep standings, and tournaments that have semi-finals and finals that lead to trophies being awarded.

Bigtex has is correct. Parents who make decisions/moves based on what is published on this board would simply find other avenues for making those same decisions if this stuff didn't exist.

Unfortunately, people put too much stock in the exact number next to their team in the ranking, and whether or not their DD's team is ranked above or below another team(s). I have ALWAYS maintained that the primary value of the rankings that I publish is to give people a general idea of the relative strength of teams. If used properly by parents, coaches, and league/TD's, the rankings can provide value by helping guide people to search out leagues/tournaments where there is an appropriate level of competition. This would actually help development, wouldn't it?

Frankly, I think you are giving me waaaaaaaaaayyyyyyyy too much credit to suggest that what I post on a weekly basis has any kind of seismic impact on our DD's development. Most who know me will tell you that my head is big enough already , don't try to inflate it any more...

'

I wasn't referring to you specifically, more the idea of rankings in general and their impact on coaches, not so much parents. This may be the wrong venue for the question since not many coaches post much other than advertisements. However, it would be interesting to know if parents believe coaches pay attention to the rankings. My experience has been that they do. So are the rankings just a by product of the pressure on paid coaches to win, or do the rankings actually contribute momentum in driving coaches towards focusing more on the W/L than they otherwise would.

I think the coaches focused on win now will always look to recruit first, develop second, and rankings don't impact their behavior other than to guage how they're stacking up against the rest. The DD's under the umbrella of those coaches have to accept the good with the bad. I'm curious how rankings impact coaches who aren't so clearly focused on chasing Ulittle championships every season, and ultimately the resulting impact on the DDs.

My guess is in the crazy world of COMPETITIVE North texas youth soccer, "rankings" are probably the least worrisome influence on our kids' development and enjoyment of the game.

Maybe, maybe not. Our system in NTX isn't producing girls with the skill set required to play at the highest level. To me, that suggests something we're doing isn't right; IF the goal is to produce the best soccer players possible. I know there is a lot of talent in NTX. We send many players into the college ranks. My opinion is that we're short-sighted in our obsessive devotion to winning games at the expense of teaching the game and developing the ball skills elite players must have.

Diamondback00 wrote:Maybe, maybe not. Our system in NTX isn't producing girls with the skill set required to play at the highest level. To me, that suggests something we're doing isn't right; IF the goal is to produce the best soccer players possible. I know there is a lot of talent in NTX. We send many players into the college ranks. My opinion is that we're short-sighted in our obsessive devotion to winning games at the expense of teaching the game and developing the ball skills elite players must have.

Diamondback00 wrote:Maybe, maybe not. Our system in NTX isn't producing girls with the skill set required to play at the highest level. To me, that suggests something we're doing isn't right; IF the goal is to produce the best soccer players possible. I know there is a lot of talent in NTX. We send many players into the college ranks. My opinion is that we're short-sighted in our obsessive devotion to winning games at the expense of teaching the game and developing the ball skills elite players must have.

I think we are trying to make the same point - my comment, stated differently, is that I'm less concerned about the competitive influence of rankings or leagues that keep score. In my opinion, the more concerning issues relate to the way kids are developed, the push to 11 v 11 on full size fields, etc. The rest of the world seems to be figuring this out (the latest: English youth football reforms announced last week). What would happen if LHGCL pushed NTX in that direction as well?

http://theyouthradar.com/2012/05/28/fa-reforms-will-change-face-of-youth-football/

Okay, I see your point now. I do agree that rankings aren't the problem. They are symbolic, but don't cause the problem.