Independent Associations Responsibility to Ensure Decent Coaching?

Here's a question that perhaps many of you have never contemplated if your daughter has only ever known academy/select soccer. As you probably know, there are various soccer entities out there that operate outside of the NTX Soccer umbrella. These include all indoor soccer venues, Plano Sports Authority, and several others I assume. Should independent agencies/businesses such as these have any responsibility in ascertaining that the coaches that enter their leagues are teaching the very basics of "good" soccer?

If your daughter joins a club as an academy or select player, it's nearly a certainty that the coaches are going to be versed in general soccer skills and tactics. Might some rely on a strategy with which others do not agree? Based on regular feedback on this forum, that answer is obvious. But even if your daughter joins one of the numerous local recreational organizations, there are some requirements in place to make sure a coach is not entirely clueless; e.g. low level G, F, and E licensing. At the very least, a new-to-soccer coach at U5 must be exposed to the idea that it's mostly about touches on the ball and not just kicking with blatant disregard.

But what if there was a coach in, say, PSA teaching his third grade players that the one and only way to play the game is to toe punch 100% of all balls in the direction of the opponent. The harder the better. Don't dribble; that's asking for trouble. Kick the ball as hard as you can anytime you're near it.

Would this be okay? The parents don't know any better; it's just girls on a fielding chasing a ball. Isn't that what soccer is about? They do win their fair share of games... for now. This "strategy" can be highly effective at the younger ages. And yes, the other competent coaches have presented the issue ad nauseum to those in charge. Some even refuse to play the team because there are so few positives to be gained as they attempt to teach their own teams ball control and deliberate play. It doesn't help that the head coach, assistant, and pretty much all of the parents are psychotic individuals that scream the entire match and regularly threaten opposing parents and coaches.

Do we dismiss this as the free-market system and say entities like PSA have no responsibilities beyond providing fields and referees, and the parents should be able to recognize bad soccer when they see it?

your veiw of academy soccer is too high. If you can get a group of paying parents you can be an academy or select coach.

go99 wrote:your veiw of academy soccer is too high. If you can get a group of paying parents you can be an academy or select coach.

Agree with GO.. come out and watch enough academy games/coaches and you will see the same.. Nothing I love hearing more than an academy coach yelling "Big Kick.. tackle her" haha They are out there. Those are the worst, sloppy games.. become a game of kick and chase.. every ball is a toe poke or a dead on sprint after a ball...

This isn't rare. If the coach is doing it wrong, the board for the league can remove that individual immediately if they choose. The board can refuse to roster that individual as a coach for the next season. If a couple of parents are a real issue, the league doesn't have to roster their kids next season.

If the league's board wants to do something about it, they certainly can.

As long as safety isn't a concern, refusing to play another team never made sense to me. Our kids need to learn how to combat a multitude of different playing styles in order to improve. Refusing to play against certain types of teams because of their style of play doesn't benefit your kid.

Solution seems pretty simple to me. If the league is unresponsive to your concerns, then simply have all of the "competent coaches" take their teams, and more importantly, their money, elsewhere.

bwgophers wrote:Solution seems pretty simple to me. If the league is unresponsive to your concerns, then simply have all of the "competent coaches" take their teams, and more importantly, their money, elsewhere.

I disagree that this is the simple solution. Yes, it would remove the issue of one's own team having to play against incompetent coaches and severely untrained teams. There is, however, the larger issue of a bunch of children who don't know any better being essentially cheated by the person they trust. Many of these girls certainly have what it takes physically to be good players. But in no time at all - and worse,during the formative years - they'll find themselves falling further and further behind because they have not been trained in the most basic of skills. Your suggesting seems to be "walk away and let those that remain suffer at the hands of stupidity".

bigtex75081 wrote:This isn't rare. If the coach is doing it wrong, the board for the league can remove that individual immediately if they choose. The board can refuse to roster that individual as a coach for the next season. If a couple of parents are a real issue, the league doesn't have to roster their kids next season.

If the league's board wants to do something about it, they certainly can.

As long as safety isn't a concern, refusing to play another team never made sense to me. Our kids need to learn how to combat a multitude of different playing styles in order to improve. Refusing to play against certain types of teams because of their style of play doesn't benefit your kid.

I'm not writing about a style. And I'm not primarily writing to defend a coach's decision to not play a team that engages in poor soccer. I'm writing about a coach that clearly has put no effort into even learning the game and is surely going to ruin it for his kids. Imagine your son signing up for a football league with a good coach. You go to watch a game, and the other team does one play on offensive every single time: Hike the ball to the RB and run straight up the middle. After 40-50 times of watching that, you would obviously realize that the coach of that team is entirely clueless... especially if other coaches are saying the same thing when their teams matchup. Whose responsibility (if anyone's) is it to tell the coach "Listen, I know you may mean well... but there's a lot more to football than what you're teaching those kids". And then hold him accountable to learning the basics of the sport. The kids don't know any better. Obviously, the parents don't either.

Valjoux13 wrote:

bwgophers wrote:Solution seems pretty simple to me. If the league is unresponsive to your concerns, then simply have all of the "competent coaches" take their teams, and more importantly, their money, elsewhere.

I disagree that this is the simple solution. Yes, it would remove the issue of one's own team having to play against incompetent coaches and severely untrained teams. There is, however, the larger issue of a bunch of children who don't know any better being essentially cheated by the person they trust. Many of these girls certainly have what it takes physically to be good players. But in no time at all - and worse,during the formative years - they'll find themselves falling further and further behind because they have not been trained in the most basic of skills. Your suggesting seems to be "walk away and let those that remain suffer at the hands of stupidity".

Um.....Yup, that's exactly what I'm saying. If the league is unresponsive to your concerns, that's exactly what you should do. "You can't fix stupid."

The coach is breaking no rules... It is up to the parents paying for this coach to say something. If what they are doing is working then good luck trying to change their strategy. Play them and beat them then recruit what players you feel have potential and eventually he will not have a team at all.

Welcome to NTX soccer... we don't play for fun we play to WIN!!
"You refuse to play a team you are scared to lose"

Exactly. It is a free-market system. All parents should look at teams, check out their talent, check out the coaching style and the overall play of the team before signing up. Do the parents know soccer, know a little bit about soccer, join a team because it practices close to their house, have a friend on the team? All of these factor into a decision. But no one can change the way a coach runs a team. Just beat them with sound soccer, recruit away any talented players you can, and eventually, no matter how soccer-educated/experienced the parents are, they will see that the team is not well-coached, their DD is not learning good soccer and the team will fold.

Leave it be. The socialists seem to be getting their hands on everything else but academy soccer needs to be left alone.

bwgophers wrote:

Valjoux13 wrote:

bwgophers wrote:Solution seems pretty simple to me. If the league is unresponsive to your concerns, then simply have all of the "competent coaches" take their teams, and more importantly, their money, elsewhere.

I disagree that this is the simple solution. Yes, it would remove the issue of one's own team having to play against incompetent coaches and severely untrained teams. There is, however, the larger issue of a bunch of children who don't know any better being essentially cheated by the person they trust. Many of these girls certainly have what it takes physically to be good players. But in no time at all - and worse,during the formative years - they'll find themselves falling further and further behind because they have not been trained in the most basic of skills. Your suggesting seems to be "walk away and let those that remain suffer at the hands of stupidity".

Um.....Yup, that's exactly what I'm saying. If the league is unresponsive to your concerns, that's exactly what you should do. "You can't fix stupid."

I agree you cannot fix stupid, but you can fix ignorance. On the rec. side I think most of the coaches are out there doing their best and many of them probably learning the game themselves along the way. I know that was the way it was for me years ago when I first got talked into coaching. The leagues I have been in (PSA, MSA and ASA) provide fundamental coaching training and I think for the most part do a pretty good job with the basics. Now obviously not every coach attends or puts in place what is taught. But I think most parents on those poorly coached teams- in a short time period- see a difference in play and skill level when playing a well coached team and that difference educates them and they seek new teams. I also realize it would probably be difficult for these organizations to remove coaches, because it seems to me they are having a hard time getting coaches to coach in the first place. I get several emails each season from two of these organizations asking for help meeting coaching needs.

Now in the case of poor coaching that still produces “winning” results (i.e. kick ball). That to me is a different story and is a problem at Rec., Academy and Select levels. Again I think many parents on poorly coached teams- can see the difference in the style/skills of well coached teams and I would hope these parents would be able to project the impact of their dd not having these skills. That said- I have been shocked at how many parents seem to care only about winning (win at all cost)- especially at the younger ages. I use to wonder why so many Academy coaches (that I know understand and appreciate the fundamental/skills) seem to quickly throw those principals out the window for a win. But I have learned that in most cases it is not the coach- it is the parents pushing them for results (i.e. give the consumer what they want). And in that case I say for those parents-you cannot fix stupid. To me it is comparable to a parent sending their dd to a private school where the primary concern is making sure she will get straight A’s vs. sending them to a private school where they know they will get a good education. Of course no one would do that and everyone understands the future ramifications- so why do we do this in sports?

On the other hand I am a little surprised that there is not more policing of this inside the Clubs or amongst the coaches themselves. I believe these clubs should have more of an interest in mind than just meeting the demands of an uneducated consumer- I believe there is some responsibility to educate them. Perhaps maybe we can at least have the parents sign a warning waiver like- kickball coaching can cause serious and long-term developmental shortfalls and quitting kickball coaching now will greatly reduce serious risk to your dds development. Just my 2 cents.

Hang on - if I have a kid who enjoys her team and they are very competitive with respect to 'W's in the academy realm, why should she not be allowed to play? There are countless U11-18 teams that just kick the ball - go to UTD and watch almost any game. Also, why would a club want to police this if the bulk of their teams are of that variety and pay for the teams that are their top tier?

Regarding the impact of the sport - you need to start at the top, not the bottom. The clubs at the bottom won't change - the top has tried to enforce various ideas on development, but, the current setup doesn't allow for it (it's called capitalism).

As I said in the post it is a problem in Select too- so not sure how we disagree there. I never said she should not be able to play or the coach should not be able to coach- I just think it is a poor developmental choice and if development is not the focus not sure why rec. would not be a better option. But hey it is your money. Maybe my thoughts on Clubs policing itself is being taught to their consumers is too idealistic (like to see it go beyond the $).

And I just used kick ball as an example- the culture of win now creates other choices that I do not believe are in the best interest of youth development. For example, no one will be able to convenience me that regularly rotating your players through the various positions is not the best developmental strategy for almost every kid (at least through U8 in my opinion). Yet many teams/coaches I see have already pigeonholing these kids into position for the most part (and I mean at U6). I cannot see how this makes them a better and more well rounded player in the future, so then what would be the reason to do it- let me think…….

You have to think the majority of the kids playing rec soccer from ages 4-8 are just glad someone has their kid out there running around. There are probably very few kids with soccer potential that are on and happy with being on a 100% rec level toe poke team. By the time most kids with some potential are 6 or 7, the've been out to an academy practice and have some exposure to somewhat competent soccer coaching. Last year I had 08 girls being recruiting off my rec team. It starts that early now.

I think this thread is really about nothing with a poster that has nothing to do..............

Five 0 wrote:I think this thread is really about nothing with a poster that has nothing to do..............

The irony, of course, being that your response is useless to the topic of the thread... thereby revealing you as a poster that has nothing to do other than post about nothing. Perhaps you'll need to spend a few minutes thinking about that one.

Blank77 wrote:You have to think the majority of the kids playing rec soccer from ages 4-8 are just glad someone has their kid out there running around. There are probably very few kids with soccer potential that are on and happy with being on a 100% rec level toe poke team. By the time most kids with some potential are 6 or 7, the've been out to an academy practice and have some exposure to somewhat competent soccer coaching. Last year I had 08 girls being recruiting off my rec team. It starts that early now.

As crazy as it sounds, you're probably right. The gap between rec and select seems to grow larger and larger on the surface, but I would argue that the pool is now WAY too large. How many of these kids should even be playing "select" soccer? Only a handful will ever be true elite athletes in all of Texas. Some of the best local girls will one day get college scholarships, but most of them will be just enough to cover their textbooks at schools that were far from their first choices. Most will burn out by age 14-15, find other interests, or play just for fun (with that last possibility being the ideal scenario in my book).

But for many a soccer parent, select soccer is very expensive child care and forced activity for their daughters. That's their call. Nevertheless, the clubs and coaches are laughing all the way to the bank.

I am surprised in this thread to hear so many proclaim that there are plenty of "select" coaches teaching nothing more than kickball play as I described in the opening post. What a waste.

Valjoux13 wrote:

Blank77 wrote:You have to think the majority of the kids playing rec soccer from ages 4-8 are just glad someone has their kid out there running around. There are probably very few kids with soccer potential that are on and happy with being on a 100% rec level toe poke team. By the time most kids with some potential are 6 or 7, the've been out to an academy practice and have some exposure to somewhat competent soccer coaching. Last year I had 08 girls being recruiting off my rec team. It starts that early now.

As crazy as it sounds, you're probably right. The gap between rec and select seems to grow larger and larger on the surface, but I would argue that the pool is now WAY too large. How many of these kids should even be playing "select" soccer? Only a handful will ever be true elite athletes in all of Texas. Some of the best local girls will one day get college scholarships, but most of them will be just enough to cover their textbooks at schools that were far from their first choices. Most will burn out by age 14-15, find other interests, or play just for fun (with that last possibility being the ideal scenario in my book).

But for many a soccer parent, select soccer is very expensive child care and forced activity for their daughters. That's their call. Nevertheless, the clubs and coaches are laughing all the way to the bank.

I am surprised in this thread to hear so many proclaim that there are plenty of "select" coaches teaching nothing more than kickball play as I described in the opening post. What a waste.

I think we just need to update our terminology. There is lots of rec soccer and rec soccer players playing in what was once considered select leagues. I'm not saying there aren't good players and good coaches on the lower levels, but if your DD/BB isn't "selected" to be on a team with a good chance not to play in PPL, you are paying for "formed team" rec soccer. I'd offer up that LHGCL is select competitive and PPL/APL is select rec soccer, with the idea that the top selrec teams being borderline competitive and vice versa.

Agreed. What's mind-numbing, however, is that selectcompetitive costs the same as selectrec more often than not. Selectrec is like parents shelling out big money to send their kids to private school, but the teachers are about equal to their public school counterparts, the students generally all earn B- to C- grades on their report cards, and they eventually score in the 1500 range on the SAT. At least the students all get to wear the nice uniforms to school, right?

I think the comment about PPL select/rec and LHGCL is select/competitive is fairly closed minded. LH all goes down to 1 qualifying tournament in July--lets say 105 degree heat. These girls are 10 and believe it or not can have a bad tournament or a really good tournament (these will probably fall off). There are a few in PPL this year that that happened to. You are then in PPl for a year. It doesn't mean that you are a rec team--riduculous! I don't have a PPL DD but a LH one so I am not particulary biased. There is no comparison between rec soccer and PPL. Lucky for the teams that had a good tournament and won't fall off for a couple of years. I am basically referring to teams 11-30. teams in the top 10 are definitely at a higher level.

sideline fan wrote:I think the comment about PPL select/rec and LHGCL is select/competitive is fairly closed minded. LH all goes down to 1 qualifying tournament in July--lets say 105 degree heat. These girls are 10 and believe it or not can have a bad tournament or a really good tournament (these will probably fall off). There are a few in PPL this year that that happened to. You are then in PPl for a year. It doesn't mean that you are a rec team--riduculous! I don't have a PPL DD but a LH one so I am not particulary biased. There is no comparison between rec soccer and PPL. Lucky for the teams that had a good tournament and won't fall off for a couple of years. I am basically referring to teams 11-30. teams in the top 10 are definitely at a higher level.

You are saying I am close minded, but then say PPL and Rec is no comparison. That is comical. PPL D2 is a rec league. The coaching may be better, but the level of teams past the top 60 (30 LHGCL, 19 PPL D1, APL) is rec level. I also guarantee there are 5-10 true rec teams playing in local associations that would be more than competitive in D2 and several that would compete in the 19 team D1. I have PPL kids and LH kids, not just a LH player, so I have seen plenty PPL D1 and D2 games.

You can check history, very few teams that don't qualify going into u11 ever make a dent. The idea that there is this lucky or unlucky weekend is incorrect and top quality teams are floating around PPL is a pipe dream. You are who you are, at least by year 2, 100% of the time. Look at FC Dallas 01. Dominant 01 PPL D1 team last year, in LHGCL D2 they are winless/tieless after 14 games with 1 goal every 4 games. Not even competitive. I am sure the top 5 teams in D3 would have at least scored 5 goals or wiggled out a tie by now. There record spells it out pretty clearly the gap between LHGCL and selrec soccer.

Blank77 wrote:

sideline fan wrote:I think the comment about PPL select/rec and LHGCL is select/competitive is fairly closed minded. LH all goes down to 1 qualifying tournament in July--lets say 105 degree heat. These girls are 10 and believe it or not can have a bad tournament or a really good tournament (these will probably fall off). There are a few in PPL this year that that happened to. You are then in PPl for a year. It doesn't mean that you are a rec team--riduculous! I don't have a PPL DD but a LH one so I am not particulary biased. There is no comparison between rec soccer and PPL. Lucky for the teams that had a good tournament and won't fall off for a couple of years. I am basically referring to teams 11-30. teams in the top 10 are definitely at a higher level.

You are saying I am close minded, but then say PPL and Rec is no comparison. That is comical. PPL D2 is a rec league. The coaching may be better, but the level of teams past the top 60 (30 LHGCL, 19 PPL D1, APL) is rec level. I also guarantee there are 5-10 true rec teams playing in local associations that would be more than competitive in D2 and several that would compete in the 19 team D1. I have PPL kids and LH kids, not just a LH player, so I have seen plenty PPL D1 and D2 games.

You can check history, very few teams that don't qualify going into u11 ever make a dent. The idea that there is this lucky or unlucky weekend is incorrect and top quality teams are floating around PPL is a pipe dream. You are who you are, at least by year 2, 100% of the time. Look at FC Dallas 01. Dominant 01 PPL D1 team last year, in LHGCL D2 they are winless/tieless after 14 games with 1 goal every 4 games. Not even competitive. I am sure the top 5 teams in D3 would have at least scored 5 goals or wiggled out a tie by now. There record spells it out pretty clearly the gap between LHGCL and selrec soccer.

I would have to agree more with Blank's assessment above than SideLine's. As a coach of an 01 team in the top division of PSA, I write based on distinct and lengthy experience on the matter. Here are some things to consider:

* Many of the players on top PSA teams also play on PPL teams. It's usually very difficult to spot those select players on game days. I don't even point them out to my girls.

* My team is 100% recreational in that none are rostered to select teams. These "rec" players defeat the teams loaded with PPL select players more often than not. We do, however, have a few girls that briefly played select soccer (one season) on an LH D3 team. They are generally equal in skills to the rest of the team that never did. The only exception is a single player on our team that was previously on a LH D1 team. She plays at an entirely different level than nearly all the others.

* Admittedly, my 01 team has taken a different route than most would expect of a rec team. They practice year around, futsal in the off-season, and work their tails off. But our team is not the exception. There are multiple teams like ours in PSA, PYSA-rec, and I assume at other venues.

* One of my rec players guest-played with a LH D3 team in a tournament this past winter. She was as good or better than anyone on the team and matched up well with a mid-ranked LH D1 team. My point is that while there may be some exceptional PPL players out there that could rival their LH counterparts individually, you would be hard-pressed to find an entire PPL team that could do so.

* From what I've observed, the big cut-off is between PPL 1 and PPL 2. I would contend that the majority of PPL 2 teams are what would be categorized as "select-rec".

Valjoux13 wrote:Here's a question that perhaps many of you have never contemplated if your daughter has only ever known academy/select soccer. As you probably know, there are various soccer entities out there that operate outside of the NTX Soccer umbrella. These include all indoor soccer venues, Plano Sports Authority, and several others I assume. Should independent agencies/businesses such as these have any responsibility in ascertaining that the coaches that enter their leagues are teaching the very basics of "good" soccer?

If your daughter joins a club as an academy or select player, it's nearly a certainty that the coaches are going to be versed in general soccer skills and tactics. Might some rely on a strategy with which others do not agree? Based on regular feedback on this forum, that answer is obvious. But even if your daughter joins one of the numerous local recreational organizations, there are some requirements in place to make sure a coach is not entirely clueless; e.g. low level G, F, and E licensing. At the very least, a new-to-soccer coach at U5 must be exposed to the idea that it's mostly about touches on the ball and not just kicking with blatant disregard.

But what if there was a coach in, say, PSA teaching his third grade players that the one and only way to play the game is to toe punch 100% of all balls in the direction of the opponent. The harder the better. Don't dribble; that's asking for trouble. Kick the ball as hard as you can anytime you're near it.

Would this be okay? The parents don't know any better; it's just girls on a fielding chasing a ball. Isn't that what soccer is about? They do win their fair share of games... for now. This "strategy" can be highly effective at the younger ages. And yes, the other competent coaches have presented the issue ad nauseum to those in charge. Some even refuse to play the team because there are so few positives to be gained as they attempt to teach their own teams ball control and deliberate play. It doesn't help that the head coach, assistant, and pretty much all of the parents are psychotic individuals that scream the entire match and regularly threaten opposing parents and coaches.

Do we dismiss this as the free-market system and say entities like PSA have no responsibilities beyond providing fields and referees, and the parents should be able to recognize bad soccer when they see it?

Yes. Yes. Yes. PSA's business is to provide a structured environment, for which, its customers (clubs, teams, coaches and players), can participate and compete in the game of soccer. If I am correct, I believe what you are suggesting (that a business monitor and request specific behavior from its customers), assumes a fairly inelastic demand curve for that industry. For me, personally, I don't want the kid at the Burger King telling me, per their corporate policy, i should order the medium combo, instead the large. I'll take my greasy stained shirt and big butt across the street. Would the medium combo be better for me? Absolutely. Is advising me on how to consume their product the way to compete for and retain clients? No.

The reason the NTX soccer is so successful, is bc it is so highly competitive. The more fields, teams and coaches make each more accountable. NTX soccer is some of the best played in the country. However, lots of choices, means consumers may have to research choice is best for their DD.

For those who don't have the time and inclination to make decisions, may I recommend Austin, Tx. Team choices there are severely restricted and basically controlled & dominated by one club. After a skills assessment period, you are TOLD where your DD will play in their system, but your dd can be re-evaluated next year. They order for you and their are no unhappy customers, or no soccer for you! If you look at the results of STX teams vs NTX, most would agree that better soccer is played here. If there still is any doubt, look at and/or play on the fields down there.

In NTX, the clubs have to compete, and retain the best coaches and players or fine something else to do--- like peddle consulting services to city soccer leagues.

JustaSport wrote:I would have to agree more with Blank's assessment above than SideLine's. As a coach of an 01 team in the top division of PSA, I write based on distinct and lengthy experience on the matter. Here are some things to consider:

* Many of the players on top PSA teams also play on PPL teams. It's usually very difficult to spot those select players on game days. I don't even point them out to my girls.

* My team is 100% recreational in that none are rostered to select teams. These "rec" players defeat the teams loaded with PPL select players more often than not. We do, however, have a few girls that briefly played select soccer (one season) on an LH D3 team. They are generally equal in skills to the rest of the team that never did. The only exception is a single player on our team that was previously on a LH D1 team. She plays at an entirely different level than nearly all the others.

* Admittedly, my 01 team has taken a different route than most would expect of a rec team. They practice year around, futsal in the off-season, and work their tails off. But our team is not the exception. There are multiple teams like ours in PSA, PYSA-rec, and I assume at other venues.

* One of my rec players guest-played with a LH D3 team in a tournament this past winter. She was as good or better than anyone on the team and matched up well with a mid-ranked LH D1 team. My point is that while there may be some exceptional PPL players out there that could rival their LH counterparts individually, you would be hard-pressed to find an entire PPL team that could do so.

* From what I've observed, the big cut-off is between PPL 1 and PPL 2. I would contend that the majority of PPL 2 teams are what would be categorized as "select-rec".

PSA really isn't rec. Too a certain point, it is selrec, as you can select your rec players and even sprinkle in some select players as it is NOT NTSSA. True Associations, PYSA, FSA, GTFO, WTF, JFC, GLASA, with rare exceptions do not allow any preform and have a biased draft to place players. Historically, PSA has always had very good age level teams in their top divisions.

JustaSport wrote:

Blank77 wrote:

sideline fan wrote:I think the comment about PPL select/rec and LHGCL is select/competitive is fairly closed minded. LH all goes down to 1 qualifying tournament in July--lets say 105 degree heat. These girls are 10 and believe it or not can have a bad tournament or a really good tournament (these will probably fall off). There are a few in PPL this year that that happened to. You are then in PPl for a year. It doesn't mean that you are a rec team--riduculous! I don't have a PPL DD but a LH one so I am not particulary biased. There is no comparison between rec soccer and PPL. Lucky for the teams that had a good tournament and won't fall off for a couple of years. I am basically referring to teams 11-30. teams in the top 10 are definitely at a higher level.

You are saying I am close minded, but then say PPL and Rec is no comparison. That is comical. PPL D2 is a rec league. The coaching may be better, but the level of teams past the top 60 (30 LHGCL, 19 PPL D1, APL) is rec level. I also guarantee there are 5-10 true rec teams playing in local associations that would be more than competitive in D2 and several that would compete in the 19 team D1. I have PPL kids and LH kids, not just a LH player, so I have seen plenty PPL D1 and D2 games.

You can check history, very few teams that don't qualify going into u11 ever make a dent. The idea that there is this lucky or unlucky weekend is incorrect and top quality teams are floating around PPL is a pipe dream. You are who you are, at least by year 2, 100% of the time. Look at FC Dallas 01. Dominant 01 PPL D1 team last year, in LHGCL D2 they are winless/tieless after 14 games with 1 goal every 4 games. Not even competitive. I am sure the top 5 teams in D3 would have at least scored 5 goals or wiggled out a tie by now. There record spells it out pretty clearly the gap between LHGCL and selrec soccer.

I would have to agree more with Blank's assessment above than SideLine's. As a coach of an 01 team in the top division of PSA, I write based on distinct and lengthy experience on the matter. Here are some things to consider:

* Many of the players on top PSA teams also play on PPL teams. It's usually very difficult to spot those select players on game days. I don't even point them out to my girls.

* My team is 100% recreational in that none are rostered to select teams. These "rec" players defeat the teams loaded with PPL select players more often than not. We do, however, have a few girls that briefly played select soccer (one season) on an LH D3 team. They are generally equal in skills to the rest of the team that never did. The only exception is a single player on our team that was previously on a LH D1 team. She plays at an entirely different level than nearly all the others.

* Admittedly, my 01 team has taken a different route than most would expect of a rec team. They practice year around, futsal in the off-season, and work their tails off. But our team is not the exception. There are multiple teams like ours in PSA, PYSA-rec, and I assume at other venues.

* One of my rec players guest-played with a LH D3 team in a tournament this past winter. She was as good or better than anyone on the team and matched up well with a mid-ranked LH D1 team. My point is that while there may be some exceptional PPL players out there that could rival their LH counterparts individually, you would be hard-pressed to find an entire PPL team that could do so.

* From what I've observed, the big cut-off is between PPL 1 and PPL 2. I would contend that the majority of PPL 2 teams are what would be categorized as "select-rec".

Topic: Independent Associations Responsibility to Ensure Decent Coaching?
We are now comparing Rec Soccer to PPL to LH? Has a rec team beaten a LH recently?... What am I missing?