The evolution of LH/ECNL

Gunners wrote:

4-3-3 wrote:Time will tell. National Premier League looks to be a pathway for top players who haven't chosen ECNL for whatever reason. The competitive dynamic in one age group doesn't necessarily carry over to another.

Which begs the question, "Why would a "top player" chose not to play ECNL?"

They play on a team with a great coach, a group of families they enjoy and are as talented as any ECNL team.

4-3-3 wrote:

Gunners wrote:

4-3-3 wrote:Time will tell. National Premier League looks to be a pathway for top players who haven't chosen ECNL for whatever reason. The competitive dynamic in one age group doesn't necessarily carry over to another.

Which begs the question, "Why would a "top player" chose not to play ECNL?"

They play on a team with a great coach, a group of families they enjoy and are as talented as any ECNL team.

For which age group do you believe the above statement to be true?

Lefty wrote:

4-3-3 wrote:

Gunners wrote:

4-3-3 wrote:Time will tell. National Premier League looks to be a pathway for top players who haven't chosen ECNL for whatever reason. The competitive dynamic in one age group doesn't necessarily carry over to another.

Which begs the question, "Why would a "top player" chose not to play ECNL?"

They play on a team with a great coach, a group of families they enjoy and are as talented as any ECNL team.

For which age group do you believe the above statement to be true?

Certainly true for the 99 age group. With the exception of Solar ECNL of course.
Although ECNL teams will have more depth than the LH teams.

Lefty wrote:

4-3-3 wrote:

Gunners wrote:

4-3-3 wrote:Time will tell. National Premier League looks to be a pathway for top players who haven't chosen ECNL for whatever reason. The competitive dynamic in one age group doesn't necessarily carry over to another.

Which begs the question, "Why would a "top player" chose not to play ECNL?"

They play on a team with a great coach, a group of families they enjoy and are as talented as any ECNL team.

For which age group do you believe the above statement to be true?

True for Pulpaneck teams in the 98G and 00G age groups. Might change next year with the move to Solar.

Gunners wrote:

4-3-3 wrote:Time will tell. National Premier League looks to be a pathway for top players who haven't chosen ECNL for whatever reason. The competitive dynamic in one age group doesn't necessarily carry over to another.

Which begs the question, "Why would a "top player" chose not to play ECNL?"

$$$$$$$$$ and lack of $$$$$$$

Gunners wrote:

4-3-3 wrote:Time will tell. National Premier League looks to be a pathway for top players who haven't chosen ECNL for whatever reason. The competitive dynamic in one age group doesn't necessarily carry over to another.

Which begs the question, "Why would a "top player" chose not to play ECNL?"

I'm not saying my DD is a "top player" but for us (u14), we didn't have enough flyer points nor the correct "polish" on our SUV at tryouts. We settled for u16 D1.
it's good play in that Div every game.

Tiki-taka wrote:

Gunners wrote:

4-3-3 wrote:Time will tell. National Premier League looks to be a pathway for top players who haven't chosen ECNL for whatever reason. The competitive dynamic in one age group doesn't necessarily carry over to another.

Which begs the question, "Why would a "top player" chose not to play ECNL?"

$$$$$$$$$ and lack of $$$$$$$

For the caliber player I'm talking about, they aren't going to pay for ECNL if they chose to do it. I'm not talking about my dd but there are several on her team who will get attention from scouts even if they were playing in Arlington. And from the looks of it, will be just as expensive for premier league if a team is good enough to contest nationals.

Gunners wrote:

4-3-3 wrote:Time will tell. National Premier League looks to be a pathway for top players who haven't chosen ECNL for whatever reason. The competitive dynamic in one age group doesn't necessarily carry over to another.

Which begs the question, "Why would a "top player" chose not to play ECNL?"

Coach?
Friends?
Comfort?

Why would someone who doesn't start on ECNL not play in LH?

dfeetersarethebomb wrote:

Why would someone who doesn't start on ECNL not play in LH?

Finally a question that hasn't been asked very often. There is a lot of discussion on here about how Ecnl is the only (best) place for college exposure and the top competition and not sure that anyone can debate that point but the other side of the discussion is that lots of Ecnl players are not getting very many minutes on the field which makes getting exposed to all of these college coaches pretty difficult. I am convinced that the top players should all be playing Ecnl but not so sure that the bottom half of the roster is doing much more than funding the Ecnl experience for the top half of the roster.

enjoy your 25% or 50% scholarship! My kid plays for the fun and the girls she has been with for the last 4 years. The are pretty good but not great, but they have fun and are completing against comparable competition.

Pinnochio wrote:

dfeetersarethebomb wrote:

Why would someone who doesn't start on ECNL not play in LH?

Finally a question that hasn't been asked very often. There is a lot of discussion on here about how Ecnl is the only (best) place for college exposure and the top competition and not sure that anyone can debate that point but the other side of the discussion is that lots of Ecnl players are not getting very many minutes on the field which makes getting exposed to all of these college coaches pretty difficult. I am convinced that the top players should all be playing Ecnl but not so sure that the bottom half of the roster is doing much more than funding the Ecnl experience for the top half of the roster.

Can't this comment be said about teams at every level?  What evidence do you have (see: none) that kids on the bottom of ECNL rosters are playing less than the bottom of the roster kids in LHCGL?  Last I checked LHCGL coaches were playing to win just as hard as ECLN coaches.

Gunners wrote:

Pinnochio wrote:

dfeetersarethebomb wrote:

Why would someone who doesn't start on ECNL not play in LH?

Finally a question that hasn't been asked very often. There is a lot of discussion on here about how Ecnl is the only (best) place for college exposure and the top competition and not sure that anyone can debate that point but the other side of the discussion is that lots of Ecnl players are not getting very many minutes on the field which makes getting exposed to all of these college coaches pretty difficult. I am convinced that the top players should all be playing Ecnl but not so sure that the bottom half of the roster is doing much more than funding the Ecnl experience for the top half of the roster.

Can't this comment be said about teams at every level?  What evidence do you have (see: none) that kids on the bottom of ECNL rosters are playing less than the bottom of the roster kids in LHCGL?  Last I checked LHCGL coaches were playing to win just as hard as ECLN coaches.

Elephant in the room....ECNL substitution rules.

4-3-3 wrote:

Gunners wrote:

Pinnochio wrote:

dfeetersarethebomb wrote:

Why would someone who doesn't start on ECNL not play in LH?

Finally a question that hasn't been asked very often. There is a lot of discussion on here about how Ecnl is the only (best) place for college exposure and the top competition and not sure that anyone can debate that point but the other side of the discussion is that lots of Ecnl players are not getting very many minutes on the field which makes getting exposed to all of these college coaches pretty difficult. I am convinced that the top players should all be playing Ecnl but not so sure that the bottom half of the roster is doing much more than funding the Ecnl experience for the top half of the roster.

Can't this comment be said about teams at every level?  What evidence do you have (see: none) that kids on the bottom of ECNL rosters are playing less than the bottom of the roster kids in LHCGL?  Last I checked LHCGL coaches were playing to win just as hard as ECLN coaches.

Elephant in the room....ECNL substitution rules.

The contention that no re-entry per half is somehow keeping coaches from playing kids they would have other wise played is laughable.  It's not that hard to sub kids in at the halfway point in the first half and leave them in to start the second half for whatever amount of time the coach thinks they should play.

Elephant in the room...good Lord.

Gunners wrote:

4-3-3 wrote:

Gunners wrote:

Pinnochio wrote:

dfeetersarethebomb wrote:

Why would someone who doesn't start on ECNL not play in LH?

Finally a question that hasn't been asked very often. There is a lot of discussion on here about how Ecnl is the only (best) place for college exposure and the top competition and not sure that anyone can debate that point but the other side of the discussion is that lots of Ecnl players are not getting very many minutes on the field which makes getting exposed to all of these college coaches pretty difficult. I am convinced that the top players should all be playing Ecnl but not so sure that the bottom half of the roster is doing much more than funding the Ecnl experience for the top half of the roster.

Can't this comment be said about teams at every level?  What evidence do you have (see: none) that kids on the bottom of ECNL rosters are playing less than the bottom of the roster kids in LHCGL?  Last I checked LHCGL coaches were playing to win just as hard as ECLN coaches.

Elephant in the room....ECNL substitution rules.

The contention that no-reentry per half is somehow keeping coaches from playing kids they would have other wise played is laughable.  It's not that hard to sub kids in at the halfway point in the first half and leave them in to start the second half for whatever amount of time the coach thinks they should play.

Elephant in the room...good Lord.

You're right, the sub rules are not a problem at all. If you can't manage with 7 substitutions per half, you've got some real problems.  No elephant there.

I will say that up until this year, the U-18 sub rules sucked, as they didn't allow re-entry during the match.  Once you were out, you were out for good.  That was changed this year so that all age groups have the same rules.

Gunners wrote:

Pinnochio wrote:

dfeetersarethebomb wrote:

Why would someone who doesn't start on ECNL not play in LH?

Finally a question that hasn't been asked very often. There is a lot of discussion on here about how Ecnl is the only (best) place for college exposure and the top competition and not sure that anyone can debate that point but the other side of the discussion is that lots of Ecnl players are not getting very many minutes on the field which makes getting exposed to all of these college coaches pretty difficult. I am convinced that the top players should all be playing Ecnl but not so sure that the bottom half of the roster is doing much more than funding the Ecnl experience for the top half of the roster.

Can't this comment be said about teams at every level?  What evidence do you have (see: none) that kids on the bottom of ECNL rosters are playing less than the bottom of the roster kids in LHCGL?  Last I checked LHCGL coaches were playing to win just as hard as ECLN coaches.

Yes I suppose that is true but there is plenty of evidence (see: lots) that kids on the bottom of Ecnl rosters are playing significantly less than players on the top of the Lake highlands rosters and those are the kids that keep being discussed here when it comes to finding the best competition and college exposure. The game fields can be surrounded by college scouts but playing 10 minutes at the end of first half and 10 minutes at the beginning of the second half doesn't really catch the eye of a scout. I buy the better-development argument because the practices for Ecnl teams has to be more competitive and I also understand that Ecnl clubs have the ability to bring college scouts out to their practices so that even the bottom of the roster get a small chance to impress the scouts. Overall college exposure isn't even a debate in my opinion but I also understand why a player who plays 30% or less in Ecnl might prefer the opportunity to play more in Lake highlands.

ballhead wrote:
You're right, the sub rules are not a problem at all. If you can't manage with 7 substitutions per half, you've got some real problems.  No elephant there.

I suppose the definition of managing those 7 subs varies depending on which sub you are talking about. Is it the sub that play 25 minutes per half and rotates throughout the field as changes are made? Or is it the sub that plays briefly at the end of each half? Or the sub that doesn't even play at all? Or maybe its the sub that doesn't make the game day or travel roster because the team can only roster 18 per game but carry 22 on the roster?

I'll ask you the same question gunners...where is your evidence sub rules have no impact on coaches' decisions on playing time?

I haven't done it in over a year, but I went out and looked at the ECNL results where they showed the players participating in each game. Some teams had rostered players going multiple games without setting foot on the field. Of course I dont know the story behind it or the injury situation, but I figured it means you're paying bills for the true prospects if you're anywhere near the bottom of an ECNL roster. I don't care how bad you are in LH, if you're not hurt or being disciplined, the LH coaches arent having players go multiple games in a row with 0 minutes. If they are, I'd love to know who.

Pinnochio wrote:

ballhead wrote:
You're right, the sub rules are not a problem at all. If you can't manage with 7 substitutions per half, you've got some real problems.  No elephant there.

I suppose the definition of managing those 7 subs varies depending on which sub you are talking about.  Is it the sub that play 25 minutes per half and rotates throughout the field as changes are made? Or is it the sub that plays briefly at the end of each half? Or the sub that doesn't even play at all? Or maybe its the sub that doesn't make the game day or travel roster because the team can only roster 18 per game but carry 22 on the roster?

How much do the sub rules affect those players you've mentioned (i.e. player that plays briefly at the end of each half, or doesn't play at all, or or doesn't make the game day roster)?

The truth is, our team never had more than 18 healthy players available at any time.  As they got older, it was usually much less.  I can safely say that we never had a single player sit because they were more than 18 players on game day.  I can remember several where we had only 13 or 14 players, with a couple of them hobbling around.

My dd played through LHGCL, and then the ECNL when it arrived.  Really didn't see much difference in how players were utilized until the U-18 rule went in to effect.  At that point, things were definitely impacted, as the starters tended to stay until well into the second half.  

I never thought those rules made any sense, and had a number of discussions with the Commissioner about them.  Glad those rules were abandoned this year.

My guess is that the sub rules affect those players more than you are aware of and the sub rules are actually preferred by the Ecnl coaches because they can use those rules as the excuse when parents complain. Playing time is always a concern for those not in the starting lineup no matter what league you are playing in. Ecnl further limits playing time because a bench player no longer gets the benefit of the doubt and has their shifts artificially shortened for no reason other than an unnecessary rule.  Without the rule a bench player comes into the game earlier and gets a chance to work thru any mistakes but the rule results in the coach waiting as long as possible before inserting that player because the coach can't run the risk of exposing the sub any longer than necessary. If the sub rule has zero impact on playing time, then why don't all leagues and age groups use the same rule? This rule gives the power coaches even more control and authority which is what its all about, right?

Glad to hear it has worked out for your daughter and her team but I am certain that is not the case across the board.

Guesses and speculation vs facts and experience.

I give up.

Ilik2wach wrote:

Lefty wrote:

4-3-3 wrote:

Gunners wrote:

4-3-3 wrote:Time will tell. National Premier League looks to be a pathway for top players who haven't chosen ECNL for whatever reason. The competitive dynamic in one age group doesn't necessarily carry over to another.

Which begs the question, "Why would a "top player" chose not to play ECNL?"

They play on a team with a great coach, a group of families they enjoy and are as talented as any ECNL team.

For which age group do you believe the above statement to be true?

True for Pulpaneck teams in the 98G and 00G age groups. Might change next year with the move to Solar.

When the 98s first joined the ECNL, Pulp did indeed have the best team in the age group.  (I made that argument against ECNL at the time.)  It's no longer true.  They were knocked out of the DIGC last spring by a fellow LH team; this year, his 98s have as many wins as draws in league play.  The latest tie came after surrendering three goals to Texas Spirit Saturday.  

They're still the best LH team, but they're increasingly playing at the level of their competition.

Pinnochio wrote:My guess is that the sub rules affect those players more than you are aware of and the sub rules are actually preferred by the Ecnl coaches because they can use those rules as the excuse when parents complain. Playing time is always a concern for those not in the starting lineup no matter what league you are playing in. Ecnl further limits playing time because a bench player no longer gets the benefit of the doubt and has their shifts artificially shortened for no reason other than an unnecessary rule.  Without the rule a bench player comes into the game earlier and gets a chance to work thru any mistakes but the rule results in the coach waiting as long as possible before inserting that player because the coach can't run the risk of exposing the sub any longer than necessary. If the sub rule has zero impact on playing time, then why don't all leagues and age groups use the same rule? This rule gives the power coaches even more control and authority which is what its all about, right?

Glad to hear it has worked out for your daughter and her team but I am certain that is not the case across the board.

It sounds like you've made the decision that the ECNL is not for your dd, and that's certainly fine.  The sub rules just seem like a pretty benign reason to use to come to that conclusion.

You say: If the sub rule has zero impact on playing time, then why don't all leagues and age groups use the same rule? Help me out here.  If there are two ways of accomplishing something, both with approximately equal results, why would you expect everyone to do it one way or the other?  I just don't understand the logic you're using here.  

You also say: This rule gives the power coaches even more control and authority which is what its all about, right?  The coach has all the control and authority (within the rules) over subbing in any case.  I can't imagine that a coach felt any more empowered due to the limited substitution rules.  If anything those rules limit his "power" to freely substitute players.

I always find the whole ECNL/Non-ECNL argument here so tiring.  There are so many red herrings used in the arguments against the ECNL.  The cost, the time commitment, the sub rules, and so on.  My experience is that those things were virtually a wash between the LHGCL/Premier League days.  

If I were considering the ECNL for my dd today, and I felt she was up to the task, my areas of concern would be the same as when considering any other league:  

• The "fit" between my dd and the coach, as well as the rest of the team.  
  
• What is the size of the roster.
  
• Where does my dd fit in the pecking order on the team?  Top, middle, bottom of the roster.
  
• Are the coach and I on the same page with the expectations for my dd, and if so, is my dd okay with those expectations?
  

These decisions are very personal between the player and the parent, and there is no "one size fits all."  Whatever works for one may be completely out of the question for another.  

It all worked out great for my dd, she's now playing DI college soccer and having a blast.  We spent a lot of money on club soccer, but it was, in my opinion, money much better spent than at the mall, or doing what some of her classmates ended up doing.

The ECNL isn't for all players, nor is the LHGCL or any other league for that matter.  Focusing on finding the right fit for our dd's is job one for us as parents, no matter what level that is.

I hope it works out as well for you whatever you choose (or have chosen). /rant off

I don't think those questions/concerns from parents qualify as red herrings. They are entirely relevant to the discussion.

That said, I can appreciate the thoughtful and balanced response. Thanks for taking the time to write it.

4-3-3 wrote:I don't think those questions/concerns from parents qualify as red herrings. They are entirely relevant to the discussion.

That said, I can appreciate the thoughtful and balanced response. Thanks for taking the time to write it.

It certainly isn't the questions that I find to be red herrings.  They are legitimate questions and concerns.

Its the amount of misinformation that gets posted here by those that have limited knowledge of the actual facts.  It often seems to be little more than a justification for the fact that their player isn't on an ECNL team, whatever the reason may be.

Ballhead wrote:"....The ECNL isn't for all players, nor is the LHGCL or any other league for that matter.  Focusing on finding the right fit for our dd's is job one for us as parents, no matter what level that is.
......"

Nailed it.

I agree with the fact that some of the posters are either wishing their DD was encl or just negative on the whole ENCL concept, but some of the ENCL parents do themselves no favors by beleiving 1) there DD is going to a D1 college full ride 2) every other form of soccer is not worth paying for or playing 3) all the best athlets are on the ENCL roster.

So let the kids play and enjoy it. If they have the drive and are gifted enough and can pay, then enjoy encl. If they are but love the game, then play at the level you can compete and have fun. I played sports all through highschool, and I know many bench warmers that really enjoyed there experience and limited time they did recieve.

How many of you parents actually played at a very high level at your DD age??????????????? My guess is much less then half. So lighten up and let them have funn