'04 LH QT Predictions

soccatome wrote:So you must not be very good at math Zizou, if I have 75 kids to choose from in the top bracket vs. 30 (assuming no players leave for other clubs ((prob)) a long shot. I would assume you are dead wrong. Either way, I am not taking away from any kid or any family that has made the commitment to end up in D1. Congrats! Sting did WELL!!

All clubs hold open ECNL try outs and kids from different clubs show up to them. Sting definitely has a larger 04 pool of kids to develop into ECNL players, but when it comes down to it, they will select whoever shows up that is the best fit for the coach at the time of ECNL try outs. I haven't seen a lot of loyalty to players based on being in the club for a certain amount of time. There are advantages to being a known entity within the club, but that can also be a disadvantage. Regardless, there will be so much change before ECNL rolls around that it doesn't matter at this point.

ledger wrote:

soccatome wrote:So you must not be very good at math Zizou, if I have 75 kids to choose from in the top bracket vs. 30 (assuming no players leave for other clubs ((prob)) a long shot. I would assume you are dead wrong. Either way, I am not taking away from any kid or any family that has made the commitment to end up in D1. Congrats! Sting did WELL!!

All clubs hold open ECNL try outs and kids from different clubs show up to them.  Sting definitely has a larger 04 pool of kids to develop into ECNL players, but when it comes down to it, they will select whoever shows up that is the best fit for the coach at the time of ECNL try outs.  I haven't seen a lot of loyalty to players based on being in the club for a certain amount of time.  There are advantages to being a known entity within the club, but that can also be a disadvantage. Regardless, there will be so much change before ECNL rolls around that it doesn't matter at this point.  

This is very true.

Congrats to all the 04s that made D1.

MustangGT wrote:

bwgophers wrote:

MustangGT wrote:I feel the new format does an ok job with top 10 but it fails miserably sorting out bottom 20.

Lfs white is one case but GSSC and Sting West both are easily top 20 teams but have no way to fix it now. Too much of new system is based on initial seeding and less on results.

Don't know that I'd say it "fails miserably", but it doesn't leave much room for error in Week 1.  I'm still more of a fan of the "old" format though, but I would make one key change to that format...

Instead of using the system of forming the week 2 brackets directly from the week 1 brackets and bracket placement (ignoring points), I would re-seed week 2 based on week 1 points.  It makes the process a little more dependent on performance, and less susceptible to seeding errors carrying over from week 1 and affecting week 2 outcomes.

Just MHO...

Right well isn't the goal to get the top 20 teams together? How does a team give up no goals and and not making top 20?

Even more so, how does a team take a single 1-0 loss to a top 3 team unbeaten by any other in 10 months and not get into top 20?

I'm not with either team just stating the obvious that if this new system was to minimize controversy or make final call more even it has missed the mark.

Mustang, for you to say that GSSC and Sting West are "easily" top 20 teams is a gross overstatement and implies that some teams that got in could "easily" be replaced by those two. Wonder who those might be? For you to suggest that they are top 20 means that two others that qualified on this first weekend aren't. Personally, I don't accept that logic. Borderline or hopeful, or in the case of Sting West, doubtful are probably better descriptions.

Furthermore, is it possible that top 3 team is no longer a legitimate top 3 team due to key player defections, etc. Not to take anything away from them, and have no doubt they will get themselves right back in the hunt, but using a 1-0 loss to them at the present time as a basis for your argument is weak.

jm23jm wrote:  

 

Congrats to all the 04s that made D1.  [/quote]Indeed...

slrsoccer wrote:Think some folks are being a bit harsh on Feet White team.   However, there arw two sides to this coin and I'm not sure either one helps.

IMHO Feet white is solidly in that 16-23 team range.  The problem with these teams is that they NEVER have a chance of beating a top 7-8 team.  Yes, teams in this range can keep a game close every so often (even steal a point) but I would question what the girls on that team would gain by having to play that style week in and week out.  With the way LH has the season set up, teams from 15-20 will have to go 5 months playing like Feet White did today.  Is this really good for them?  The second half of the season these teams will be able to open it up a bit more and really play.

We have to give credit where credit is due and the little bit  I saw today warrants giving the Feet White girls that credit.  What I saw was a frustrated top team that could not put the ball in the net.

All that being said (sorry for the long winded post), Feet was never going to come out on top in that game, just like many others that were able to keep it close in QT.  So parents that are upset that "we missed D1 by just a shade" might want to understand that it might be for the betterment of the girls that they get to go out and play soccer with a chance to win week in and week out in D3.

I think they will be better for it in the long run.

I say baloney to the highlighted comments above. Your generalization doesn't apply in at least one case and I suspect there are others. You are completely discounting a teams ability to develop, by the coach and as individual players, when you say they never have a chance of beating a top 7-8 team. I can tell you, that our little team, wherever you might think they should be ranked, is one that won't go 5 months playing like you are suggesting. That's not how we roll. Recent history shows that we don't keep them close just every so often. If you want to single out the specific team you named, cool, but you probably shouldn't generalize with your little "these teams" reference.

Wow...so many things to comment on!!! Which one to pick? Ummm..I think I will go with "score goals" topic and move into ECNL.

Yes...LHGCL got exactly what they wanted for D1. Teams that could win. Nowhere does it say that LH is about development. So, if your team has a couple really fast physical forwards, and you can pack the back and boot it up everytime you can take a swing at it, you will do fine - probably make D1!.
I did see a couple teams that are learning possession style soccer, and at U-11 that's a huge undertaking mentally and physically. These teams would get control in the back, transition into and through the midfield with nice passing, ball control, switch/transition the field, etc. But then, they would either make a minor mistake on a pass, or take too long to make a decision, and would get muscled off the ball/lose a 50/50...which was promptly sent 30+ yards back downfield with no direction or purpose to the cheers of parents saying "nice kick!". Maybe a fast, physical forward got onto it, maybe not....but the process would start all over again. It takes a long time to learn possession soccer, and the advantage at this age goes to the boot-it stlye team...for the next couple years anyway.

Now...that leads into the ECNL discussion. The midfielders and the defenders on the "boot it forward" team that is gaining all this early success, making D1, winning lots of games, etc....won't make ECNL (the forward might). The team's results do not help on individual tryouts. The ECNL player has to be able to play smart, and be possession oriented. Spending the last couple years, and the next few years playing long ball clearances ends up with a player not getting developed in game situations, and creates a non-ECNL player because they don't think.

It's not necessarily the coaches fault. They want to teach proper soccer. But...they also have a reputation that is built on winning. Winning trumps development in NTX soccer...if you don't believe that...well...then you are one of the parents on these teams rosters...
Many times you will see coaches try to teach possession in practice, but when the W-L record is on the line...its pack the back and boot it. They have this vision in their heads that they can teach it only in practice, the girls will get it, and then they can all of a sudden start doing it in games. What happens more often, is they recruit players from the possession style teams to be their center-mids and the like. (entice them with a D1 spot), and send their original players packing. So....the possession style team really doesn't advance up to the top eschelons...but the players do one by one...
So where are most of your ECNL players of the future? That remains to be seen...but its more determined by development than by win/loss record at this age.

10sDad wrote:Wow...so many things to comment on!!!  Which one to pick?  Ummm..I think I will go with "score goals" topic and move into ECNL.

Yes...LHGCL got exactly what they wanted for D1.  Teams that could win.  Nowhere does it say that LH is about development.  So, if your team has a couple really fast physical forwards, and you can pack the back and boot it up everytime you can take a swing at it, you will do fine - probably make D1!.  
I did see a couple teams that are learning possession style soccer, and at U-11 that's a  huge undertaking mentally and physically.  These teams would get control in the back, transition into and through the midfield with nice passing, ball control, switch/transition the field, etc.  But then, they would either make a minor mistake on a pass, or take too long to make a decision, and would get muscled off the ball/lose a 50/50...which was promptly sent 30+ yards back downfield with no direction or purpose to the cheers of parents saying "nice kick!".  Maybe a fast, physical forward got onto it, maybe not....but the process would start all over again.  It takes a long time to learn possession soccer, and the advantage at this age goes to the boot-it stlye team...for the next couple years anyway.

Now...that leads into the ECNL discussion.  The midfielders and the defenders on the "boot it forward" team that is gaining all this early success, making D1, winning lots of games, etc....won't make ECNL (the forward might).  The team's results do not help on individual tryouts.  The ECNL player has to be able to play smart, and be possession oriented.  Spending the last couple years, and the next few years playing long ball clearances ends up with a player not getting developed in game situations, and creates a non-ECNL player because they don't think.    

It's not necessarily the coaches fault.  They want to teach proper soccer.  But...they also have a reputation that is built on winning.  Winning trumps development in NTX soccer...if you don't believe that...well...then you are one of the parents on these teams rosters...
Many times you will see coaches try to teach possession in practice, but when the W-L record is on the line...its pack the back and boot it.  They have this vision in their heads that they can teach it only in practice, the girls will get it, and then they can all of a sudden start doing it in games.  What happens more often, is they recruit players from the possession style teams to be their center-mids and the like.  (entice them with a D1 spot), and send their original players packing.  So....the possession style team really doesn't advance up to the top eschelons...but the players do one by one...
So where are most of your ECNL players of the future?  That remains to be seen...but its more determined by development than by win/loss record at this age.

  

10sDad wrote:Wow...so many things to comment on!!!  Which one to pick?  Ummm..I think I will go with "score goals" topic and move into ECNL.

Yes...LHGCL got exactly what they wanted for D1.  Teams that could win.  Nowhere does it say that LH is about development.  So, if your team has a couple really fast physical forwards, and you can pack the back and boot it up everytime you can take a swing at it, you will do fine - probably make D1!.  
I did see a couple teams that are learning possession style soccer, and at U-11 that's a  huge undertaking mentally and physically.  These teams would get control in the back, transition into and through the midfield with nice passing, ball control, switch/transition the field, etc.  But then, they would either make a minor mistake on a pass, or take too long to make a decision, and would get muscled off the ball/lose a 50/50...which was promptly sent 30+ yards back downfield with no direction or purpose to the cheers of parents saying "nice kick!".  Maybe a fast, physical forward got onto it, maybe not....but the process would start all over again.  It takes a long time to learn possession soccer, and the advantage at this age goes to the boot-it stlye team...for the next couple years anyway.

Now...that leads into the ECNL discussion.  The midfielders and the defenders on the "boot it forward" team that is gaining all this early success, making D1, winning lots of games, etc....won't make ECNL (the forward might).  The team's results do not help on individual tryouts.  The ECNL player has to be able to play smart, and be possession oriented.  Spending the last couple years, and the next few years playing long ball clearances ends up with a player not getting developed in game situations, and creates a non-ECNL player because they don't think.    

It's not necessarily the coaches fault.  They want to teach proper soccer.  But...they also have a reputation that is built on winning.  Winning trumps development in NTX soccer...if you don't believe that...well...then you are one of the parents on these teams rosters...
Many times you will see coaches try to teach possession in practice, but when the W-L record is on the line...its pack the back and boot it.  They have this vision in their heads that they can teach it only in practice, the girls will get it, and then they can all of a sudden start doing it in games.  What happens more often, is they recruit players from the possession style teams to be their center-mids and the like.  (entice them with a D1 spot), and send their original players packing.  So....the possession style team really doesn't advance up to the top eschelons...but the players do one by one...
So where are most of your ECNL players of the future?  That remains to be seen...but its more determined by development than by win/loss record at this age.

  

$occerF@n wrote:

10sDad wrote:Wow...so many things to comment on!!!  Which one to pick?  Ummm..I think I will go with "score goals" topic and move into ECNL.

Yes...LHGCL got exactly what they wanted for D1.  Teams that could win.  Nowhere does it say that LH is about development.  So, if your team has a couple really fast physical forwards, and you can pack the back and boot it up everytime you can take a swing at it, you will do fine - probably make D1!.  
I did see a couple teams that are learning possession style soccer, and at U-11 that's a  huge undertaking mentally and physically.  These teams would get control in the back, transition into and through the midfield with nice passing, ball control, switch/transition the field, etc.  But then, they would either make a minor mistake on a pass, or take too long to make a decision, and would get muscled off the ball/lose a 50/50...which was promptly sent 30+ yards back downfield with no direction or purpose to the cheers of parents saying "nice kick!".  Maybe a fast, physical forward got onto it, maybe not....but the process would start all over again.  It takes a long time to learn possession soccer, and the advantage at this age goes to the boot-it stlye team...for the next couple years anyway.

Now...that leads into the ECNL discussion.  The midfielders and the defenders on the "boot it forward" team that is gaining all this early success, making D1, winning lots of games, etc....won't make ECNL (the forward might).  The team's results do not help on individual tryouts.  The ECNL player has to be able to play smart, and be possession oriented.  Spending the last couple years, and the next few years playing long ball clearances ends up with a player not getting developed in game situations, and creates a non-ECNL player because they don't think.    

It's not necessarily the coaches fault.  They want to teach proper soccer.  But...they also have a reputation that is built on winning.  Winning trumps development in NTX soccer...if you don't believe that...well...then you are one of the parents on these teams rosters...
Many times you will see coaches try to teach possession in practice, but when the W-L record is on the line...its pack the back and boot it.  They have this vision in their heads that they can teach it only in practice, the girls will get it, and then they can all of a sudden start doing it in games.  What happens more often, is they recruit players from the possession style teams to be their center-mids and the like.  (entice them with a D1 spot), and send their original players packing.  So....the possession style team really doesn't advance up to the top eschelons...but the players do one by one...
So where are most of your ECNL players of the future?  That remains to be seen...but its more determined by development than by win/loss record at this age.

  

Agreed.  Possession style teams take time to develop and LH is not necessarily the place that this type of correct playing will get your team the prize.  In a few years it will become evident the players that took the time out to truly develop their skill at ball possession.  Looking forward to seeing the ones that will stand out in the crowd.

10sDad wrote:Wow...so many things to comment on!!!  Which one to pick?  Ummm..I think I will go with "score goals" topic and move into ECNL.

Yes...LHGCL got exactly what they wanted for D1.  Teams that could win.  Nowhere does it say that LH is about development.  So, if your team has a couple really fast physical forwards, and you can pack the back and boot it up everytime you can take a swing at it, you will do fine - probably make D1!.  
I did see a couple teams that are learning possession style soccer, and at U-11 that's a  huge undertaking mentally and physically.  These teams would get control in the back, transition into and through the midfield with nice passing, ball control, switch/transition the field, etc.  But then, they would either make a minor mistake on a pass, or take too long to make a decision, and would get muscled off the ball/lose a 50/50...which was promptly sent 30+ yards back downfield with no direction or purpose to the cheers of parents saying "nice kick!".  Maybe a fast, physical forward got onto it, maybe not....but the process would start all over again.  It takes a long time to learn possession soccer, and the advantage at this age goes to the boot-it stlye team...for the next couple years anyway.

Now...that leads into the ECNL discussion.  The midfielders and the defenders on the "boot it forward" team that is gaining all this early success, making D1, winning lots of games, etc....won't make ECNL (the forward might).  The team's results do not help on individual tryouts.  The ECNL player has to be able to play smart, and be possession oriented.  Spending the last couple years, and the next few years playing long ball clearances ends up with a player not getting developed in game situations, and creates a non-ECNL player because they don't think.    

It's not necessarily the coaches fault.  They want to teach proper soccer.  But...they also have a reputation that is built on winning.  Winning trumps development in NTX soccer...if you don't believe that...well...then you are one of the parents on these teams rosters...
Many times you will see coaches try to teach possession in practice, but when the W-L record is on the line...its pack the back and boot it.  They have this vision in their heads that they can teach it only in practice, the girls will get it, and then they can all of a sudden start doing it in games.  What happens more often, is they recruit players from the possession style teams to be their center-mids and the like.  (entice them with a D1 spot), and send their original players packing.  So....the possession style team really doesn't advance up to the top eschelons...but the players do one by one...
So where are most of your ECNL players of the future?  That remains to be seen...but its more determined by development than by win/loss record at this age.

After a long thread of nonsense about scoring goals and excuses on why a certain team(s) didn't make or should have made D1, we finally a well-written post......Excellent and spot on. Glad my DD and her team try as much as possible to play a possession-style game. And you're right, it doesn't work all the time when there are errant passes or give-aways. However, booting the ball 20 or 30 yards down the field on every attack will only get you a few wins in the next year or so, but the worse effect is a lack of individual player development (maybe not now, but over the next year or so as other teams develop a solid pass and catch game). Better off learning possession-style now before it becomes too late.

Sorry to burst your bubbles folks, but all of the not-so-fast, not-so-big, not-so-agile, kids who have a really nice first touch and know how to play great possession soccer...  aren't playing ECNL.

Go watch a couple of ECNL games and tell me all of those type of kids you see out there...

There are kids who will start out in D3, or even PPL/APL who will make ECNL, so yes, there is hope for your kid if they aren't on a D1 team at U11...  but... they are in the overwhelming minority, and the majority of the kids you will find on the ECNL rosters at U14, are on teams that will finish in the top 10 of D1 at U11.

Skill can differentiate you, but athleticism is a pre-requisite...

bwgophers wrote:Sorry to burst your bubbles folks, but all of the not-so-fast, not-so-big, not-so-agile, kids who have a really nice first touch and know how to play great possession soccer...  aren't playing ECNL.

Go watch a couple of ECNL games and tell me all of those type of kids you see out there...

There are kids who will start out in D3, or even PPL/APL who will make ECNL, so yes, there is hope for your kid if they aren't on a D1 team at U11...  but... they are in the overwhelming minority, and the majority of the kids you will find on the ECNL rosters at U14, are on teams that will finish in the top 10 of D1 at U11.

Skill can differentiate you, but athleticism is a pre-requisite...

So in TODAY'S NTX....you are stating that Abby Wambach would be a stud, but Mia Hamm would struggle due to her small stature (unless she was on a team with Abby at U-11). Which makes perfect sense, and is reflective of what I am seeing - so no real argument as to what may indeed be the truth. But...maybe that explains why that even though we have powerhouse ECNL teams, National Champions, etc..(you know..teams that win a a lot)...we have so few NTX players on the national team?

Having been through this before, I have to agree with BW on athleticism and skill (not necessarily size at this age). Some kids are just naturally athletic-we can all see that. Much to my dismay in some cases, the girls that were good and the teams that were good four years ago are still really good. All this talk about skill and hard work leveling the playing field in a few years assumes that the girls that excel now won't keep training and learning at a similar pace. Other activities will take good players away from soccer, but for those top teams and top players that stick around, it's been my experience they just get better.  Oh, who says some of these top 04 teams are not playing possession AND winning? I can think of a few.

bwgophers wrote:Sorry to burst your bubbles folks, but all of the not-so-fast, not-so-big, not-so-agile, kids who have a really nice first touch and know how to play great possession soccer...  aren't playing ECNL.

I always appreciate your comments Gophers. You bring reason to a forum usually barren of such. I think that while there is no substitute for ahtletic ability, a player on a team that isn't developing mentally will have to be a top % player phyically to over come that deficit. No doubt all ECNL players are going to be strong, and quick, but they need to understand the game as well.

At 10, for many girls it is still too early to tell where they will be physically in 3 years. Some of the early bloomers will stall out while others will come out of nowhere. But the factor that can be affected now is the mental ability of the player. So if a player is falling behind there she will have a challenge to overcome her deficit.

bwgophers wrote:Speaking of predictions...

So whether you look at FBR or LHGCL seeding, 18 out of the top 20 made it into DI.
FBR had Kicks at 20...LHGCL had em at 22
FBR had DT Red at 21...LHGCL got it right at 20.
Neither predicted Sting North getting in.
But, good stuff, the new system appeared to work, that's all I'm saying.

10sDad wrote:

bwgophers wrote:Sorry to burst your bubbles folks, but all of the not-so-fast, not-so-big, not-so-agile, kids who have a really nice first touch and know how to play great possession soccer...  aren't playing ECNL.

Go watch a couple of ECNL games and tell me all of those type of kids you see out there...

There are kids who will start out in D3, or even PPL/APL who will make ECNL, so yes, there is hope for your kid if they aren't on a D1 team at U11...  but... they are in the overwhelming minority, and the majority of the kids you will find on the ECNL rosters at U14, are on teams that will finish in the top 10 of D1 at U11.

Skill can differentiate you, but athleticism is a pre-requisite...

So in TODAY'S NTX....you are stating that Abby Wambach would be a stud, but Mia Hamm would struggle due to her small stature (unless she was on a team with Abby at U-11).  Which makes perfect sense, and is reflective of what I am seeing - so no real argument as to what may indeed be the truth.  But...maybe that explains why that even though we have powerhouse ECNL teams, National Champions, etc..(you know..teams that win a a lot)...we have so few NTX players on the national team?  

You're kidding, right???  BOTH Mia and Abby would have been studs.  Mia was (and probably still is) a PHENOMENAL athlete who had an almost unrivaled combination of speed and agility, and even she would tell you that at her younger age, she relied on that more than anything.

Athleticism is a combination of speed/agility/coordination, and while size isn't quite as important as the other 3, if you add size into that package... WATCH OUT!

Keep telling yourself that athleticism isn't the most important factor in a kid playing ECNL, or getting a D1 scholly, or playing in the USWNT system...

They are 10 yrs old....ECNL talk is ludicrous right now.
Bodies are gonna change in the next couple of years...
Some are going to get longer and faster, others are gonna get wider and less agile.
Worry about ENCL when they are 12 or 13. Shouldn't even be on the radar now.
I agree with BWG for the most part in that a majority of the ECNL players were on top10 teams at U11 but I can give you a list of at least 10 girls that were NOT
DI at U11 that are dominate players and probably future ECNL players....but who knows with any certainty

.

bwgophers wrote:Sorry to burst your bubbles folks, but all of the not-so-fast, not-so-big, not-so-agile, kids who have a really nice first touch and know how to play great possession soccer...  aren't playing ECNL.

Go watch a couple of ECNL games and tell me all of those type of kids you see out there...

There are kids who will start out in D3, or even PPL/APL who will make ECNL, so yes, there is hope for your kid if they aren't on a D1 team at U11...  but... they are in the overwhelming minority, and the majority of the kids you will find on the ECNL rosters at U14, are on teams that will finish in the top 10 of D1 at U11.

Skill can differentiate you, but athleticism is a pre-requisite...

"Now that's a hard mf'n fact of life, but that's a fact of life your a$$ is gonna have to get realistic about." Marcellus Wallace

Athleticism is always the #1 trump card no matter what the sport is and that will carry you further than anything. However if the athlete does not have the want or the drive to succeed and improve in their sport and become a student of the game then all the athletic ability in the world is not going to matter. Of course we are talking about 10 yr olds right now so who knows what is going to happen a few summers from now and of all these girls playing right now who will still be around playing soccer for ECNL tryouts. Remember that you cannot fight genetics and once the girls hit puberty drastic things can happen to a girls speed and agility. I heard a quote that I thought was funny when it comes to girl athletes and that is that you can't fight "fat ass itus".

bwgophers wrote:

10sDad wrote:

bwgophers wrote:Sorry to burst your bubbles folks, but all of the not-so-fast, not-so-big, not-so-agile, kids who have a really nice first touch and know how to play great possession soccer...  aren't playing ECNL.

Go watch a couple of ECNL games and tell me all of those type of kids you see out there...

There are kids who will start out in D3, or even PPL/APL who will make ECNL, so yes, there is hope for your kid if they aren't on a D1 team at U11...  but... they are in the overwhelming minority, and the majority of the kids you will find on the ECNL rosters at U14, are on teams that will finish in the top 10 of D1 at U11.

Skill can differentiate you, but athleticism is a pre-requisite...

So in TODAY'S NTX....you are stating that Abby Wambach would be a stud, but Mia Hamm would struggle due to her small stature (unless she was on a team with Abby at U-11).  Which makes perfect sense, and is reflective of what I am seeing - so no real argument as to what may indeed be the truth.  But...maybe that explains why that even though we have powerhouse ECNL teams, National Champions, etc..(you know..teams that win a a lot)...we have so few NTX players on the national team?  

You're kidding, right???  BOTH Mia and Abby would have been studs.  Mia was (and probably still is) a PHENOMENAL athlete who had an almost unrivaled combination of speed and agility, and even she would tell you that at her younger age, she relied on that more than anything.

Athleticism is a combination of speed/agility/coordination, and while size isn't quite as important as the other 3, if you add size into that package... WATCH OUT!

Keep telling yourself that athleticism isn't the most important factor in a kid playing ECNL, or getting a D1 scholly, or playing in the USWNT system...

Mia spent her freshman, sophmore and junior years in NTX...what club team did she play for? Wichita Falls Express? ummm....no...even if she did, they don't have a team to put around her, so she would have wallowed in obscurity. And she did so until she moved to Virginia, and then onto UNC. If ECNL was around then...would she even be on a team? (she scored no goals her freshman year in HS ball)
NTX can produce a forward here and there, and some defenders....but its incapable of producing midfielders due to the style of play that is encouraged. Unless their dad was a pro or something.
What I am saying is that if you believe the folks that say if you are not in D1 now, you will never be in ECNL, then its already over. If you believe that 10 years old is only a starting point, and a lot of things can/will happen in the next few years and work toward a goal - you might just achieve it. Alex Morgan didn't start playing soccer until age 14. Nothing is pre-determined by what team your dd is on at 10 folks. Development matters. Soccer skill is the great equalizer....did anyone notice how much smaller Messi and Lamm were in comparison to their teams? Both were captains, both were quarterbacks, both were the "brains" behind their respective teams....and they were the smallest ones on the pitch...by far.

Cobra_Kai wrote:

bwgophers wrote:Sorry to burst your bubbles folks, but all of the not-so-fast, not-so-big, not-so-agile, kids who have a really nice first touch and know how to play great possession soccer...  aren't playing ECNL.

Go watch a couple of ECNL games and tell me all of those type of kids you see out there...

There are kids who will start out in D3, or even PPL/APL who will make ECNL, so yes, there is hope for your kid if they aren't on a D1 team at U11...  but... they are in the overwhelming minority, and the majority of the kids you will find on the ECNL rosters at U14, are on teams that will finish in the top 10 of D1 at U11.

Skill can differentiate you, but athleticism is a pre-requisite...

"Now that's a hard mf'n fact of life, but that's a fact of life your a$$ is gonna have to get realistic about."  Marcellus Wallace

"...I'm gonna ask you again....WHAT DOES MARCELLUS WALLACE LOOK LIKE?"

10sDad wrote:

bwgophers wrote:

10sDad wrote:

bwgophers wrote:Sorry to burst your bubbles folks, but all of the not-so-fast, not-so-big, not-so-agile, kids who have a really nice first touch and know how to play great possession soccer...  aren't playing ECNL.

Go watch a couple of ECNL games and tell me all of those type of kids you see out there...

There are kids who will start out in D3, or even PPL/APL who will make ECNL, so yes, there is hope for your kid if they aren't on a D1 team at U11...  but... they are in the overwhelming minority, and the majority of the kids you will find on the ECNL rosters at U14, are on teams that will finish in the top 10 of D1 at U11.

Skill can differentiate you, but athleticism is a pre-requisite...

So in TODAY'S NTX....you are stating that Abby Wambach would be a stud, but Mia Hamm would struggle due to her small stature (unless she was on a team with Abby at U-11).  Which makes perfect sense, and is reflective of what I am seeing - so no real argument as to what may indeed be the truth.  But...maybe that explains why that even though we have powerhouse ECNL teams, National Champions, etc..(you know..teams that win a a lot)...we have so few NTX players on the national team?  

You're kidding, right???  BOTH Mia and Abby would have been studs.  Mia was (and probably still is) a PHENOMENAL athlete who had an almost unrivaled combination of speed and agility, and even she would tell you that at her younger age, she relied on that more than anything.

Athleticism is a combination of speed/agility/coordination, and while size isn't quite as important as the other 3, if you add size into that package... WATCH OUT!

Keep telling yourself that athleticism isn't the most important factor in a kid playing ECNL, or getting a D1 scholly, or playing in the USWNT system...

Mia spent her freshman, sophmore and junior years in NTX...what club team did she play for?  Wichita Falls Express?  ummm....no...even if she did, they don't have a team to put around her, so she would have wallowed in obscurity.  And she did so until she moved to Virginia, and then onto UNC.  If ECNL was around then...would she even be on a team?  (she scored no goals her freshman year in HS ball)
NTX can produce a forward here and there, and some defenders....but its incapable of producing midfielders due to the style of play that is encouraged.  Unless their dad was a pro or something.
What I am saying is that if you believe the folks that say if you are not in D1 now, you will never be in ECNL, then its already over.  If you believe that 10 years old is only a starting point, and a lot of things can/will happen in the next few years and work toward a goal - you might just achieve it.  Alex Morgan didn't start playing soccer until age 14.  Nothing is pre-determined by what team your dd is on at 10 folks.  Development matters.  Soccer skill is the great equalizer....did anyone notice how much smaller Messi and Lamm were in comparison to their teams?  Both were captains, both were quarterbacks, both were the "brains" behind their respective teams....and they were the smallest ones on the pitch...by far.

...and like Mia... Morgan, Messi, and Lamm are all first and foremost... freakishly fast and athletic.

If you are making a case diminishing athleticism, you should omit 2014 WC from your argument. Germany looked like the biggest, strongest, most athletic team to me.

you guys are simplifying my point and missing the context.  You should be in politics.  
My point is that NTX focuses too heavily on muscle and physical play, and not enough on skill and tactics.  Abby is the quintessential NTX player (even though she is not from here).  But...because NTX focuses so much on big, brute athletes (Abby type), the smaller stature athletes (Mia type) get weeded out early as the Abby types just push them off the ball because they do not have a possession-style system to work the give/go's, the formational shifts, the tiki-taka, etc., etc.  It is all about who can get there first with the most beastness in NTX.  If Mia and Abby played on the same team in NTX today, her coach would play Mia as a center-mid and instruct her to send the ball up to Abby every opportunity she had.
Yes...it can win games.  Heck..it wins championships in youth soccer.  And yes, you need a big brute or two on your team in certain positions at the higher level.  But the pure size/strength player, although wildly successful at U-11 will become "that" player that was a "beast at U-11 and could have gone far if she didn't switch to another sport" excuse...when in reality, she wasn't gettting developed as a soccer player and was losing her dominance as time went on and skill started to matter.  Happens to boys all the time...its called "football".

Cobra_Kai wrote:If you are making a case diminishing athleticism, you should omit 2014 WC from your argument.  Germany looked like the biggest, strongest, most athletic team to me.

The biggest, strongest, and most athletic team was either the US or one of the African teams. Germany won because they completed pass after pass after pass. They had multiple players that completed more than 90% of their passes. They possessed the ball and played smart. Probably their best player is 5'-6" or so and about 165 lbs. Big fast and strong is great but you still need to know how to play.