Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Paul Riley, DA, ECNL, and High School

Collapse
X
  •  
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    #16
    Originally posted by Unregistered View Post
    I think the current arrangement where existing private clubs play in DA is short-term and untenable. Eventually, only academies associated with NWSL clubs will be in the DA. It might take some more rough years to get there, but I think that’s the direction.

    The issue will be separating college from pro league as the “pinnacle” of women’s soccer in the minds of players/parents. Right now, getting into a top D1 program is seen as that pinnacle, but most in USSF realize it is not optimal to be competitive in the current pro/international environment. I think access to NT will be the only card USSF can play to convince players/parents to pursue a different path.
    Access to the NT comes from internal drive and talent more then anything else. No cards played will produce NT players.

    Comment


      #17
      Originally posted by Unregistered View Post
      Two things struck me:

      1) he favors practices over games. I’d be really interested in what his practices are like since I’ve heard more coaches say that learning happens more in games where you are testing yourself against a real opponent.

      2) I like the idea of a spring college season, but I think 15 games per season is too much. I don’t even think the weather in the northern states would allow that. With school breaks and exam periods I think an 8 game per regular season with a few more thrown in for playoffs is more realistic. I wonder if Riley would change his tune on practices vs. games in that scenario.
      Everyone makes a big deal over the 4:1 ratio and so many clubs do not follow it. Even more ironic .... look at an actual pro schedule between thanksgiving and March and you will see no shortage of games each week .... sometimes 3 in a week:

      https://www.mancity.com/fixtures/fir...m?results=true

      Comment


        #18
        Originally posted by Unregistered View Post
        I think the current arrangement where existing private clubs play in DA is short-term and untenable. Eventually, only academies associated with NWSL clubs will be in the DA. It might take some more rough years to get there, but I think that’s the direction.

        The issue will be separating college from pro league as the “pinnacle” of women’s soccer in the minds of players/parents. Right now, getting into a top D1 program is seen as that pinnacle, but most in USSF realize it is not optimal to be competitive in the current pro/international environment. I think access to NT will be the only card USSF can play to convince players/parents to pursue a different path.
        A top D1 program will always be the pinnacle for women's soccer in 99.9999% of the players. And it should be. There is no career in women's soccer.

        Comment


          #19
          Originally posted by Unregistered View Post
          very few coaches say it because it plays against what parents are paying for ...games and bragging rights. Getting better are anything is about the hours spent practicing. that not glamorous. No flights and fancy uniforms are needed. No awards, no fancy merchandising.

          Very few people in the womens soccer industry in the USA care about really developing better players. No one gets paid to do it. Once you get to the pro, national teams, those in charge start to lament that fact because guess what, the player they get to draft or select are not very good !!

          PR is no different. he has made a lot of money in the current system.
          Not to mention its cheaper and easier for clubs to supplement practices over additional games ... i have little doubt they play so few games because it saves them a buck or two (not because it is better). Anyone can beat the cones, but can you unite and do what you have trained against a common opponent? Furthermore, how many teams have a majority of small games and scrimmaging for most of their practices ..... much like games but not at true game speed.

          Comment


            #20
            Originally posted by Unregistered View Post
            A top D1 program will always be the pinnacle for women's soccer in 99.9999% of the players. And it should be. There is no career in women's soccer.
            Listen, there isn't much of a career in MLS for the masses unless you aspire to poor pay and anonymity.

            Comment


              #21
              Originally posted by Unregistered View Post
              Everyone makes a big deal over the 4:1 ratio and so many clubs do not follow it. Even more ironic .... look at an actual pro schedule between thanksgiving and March and you will see no shortage of games each week .... sometimes 3 in a week:

              https://www.mancity.com/fixtures/fir...m?results=true
              Such a ridiculous comparison.

              First, fixture congestion is a huge problem for players in England. Big complaint from players when they first arrive vs. other European leagues. There is talk of trying to alleviate it.

              Second, you are looking at a club that is always in multiple competitions. Take a peek at Huddersfield and see how they look.

              Third, they also practice almost every day of the week, so even if they are doubling up games that week their ration isn't out of whack.

              Fourth, I would hope Manchester City isn't developing players. That ship sailed long ago.

              Comment


                #22
                Originally posted by Unregistered View Post
                Such a ridiculous comparison.

                First, fixture congestion is a huge problem for players in England. Big complaint from players when they first arrive vs. other European leagues. There is talk of trying to alleviate it.

                Second, you are looking at a club that is always in multiple competitions. Take a peek at Huddersfield and see how they look.

                Third, they also practice almost every day of the week, so even if they are doubling up games that week their ration isn't out of whack.

                Fourth, I would hope Manchester City isn't developing players. That ship sailed long ago.
                Is it? I think this time of year is crazy for the pro teams, but illustrates my point with a little exaggeration .... i think 1 game/ week with several weekends with less is not enough play and practice is great but no substitute for games. If it was, everyone would do it because it costs nothing. They should balance it with 3 games every 2 weeks ... play single game weekends for close opponent and double up and further road trips.

                Comment


                  #23
                  Originally posted by Unregistered View Post
                  Is it? I think this time of year is crazy for the pro teams, but illustrates my point with a little exaggeration .... i think 1 game/ week with several weekends with less is not enough play and practice is great but no substitute for games. If it was, everyone would do it because it costs nothing. They should balance it with 3 games every 2 weeks ... play single game weekends for close opponent and double up and further road trips.
                  woah! That makes way too much sense! That isn't allowed on TS.

                  Comment


                    #24
                    Originally posted by Unregistered View Post
                    Is it? I think this time of year is crazy for the pro teams, but illustrates my point with a little exaggeration .... i think 1 game/ week with several weekends with less is not enough play and practice is great but no substitute for games. If it was, everyone would do it because it costs nothing. They should balance it with 3 games every 2 weeks ... play single game weekends for close opponent and double up and further road trips.
                    It goes against everything that is out there today: wrong ratio of learning vs. applying and the fitness issues of playing back-to-back games goes.

                    Say you have a roster of 18 players. Nobody can play all game. So, except for a few, you have two games where you play 2/3 of the game. Much better to take in a 90-minute training session.

                    Couple in the back-to-back games with no rest in between and you have overuse concerns.

                    You can't use the MCity example without acknowledging no player would play back-to-back games. Heck, even with two in a week there is a heavy rotation. Can't have it both ways with you try the Citizens example.

                    Comment


                      #25
                      Originally posted by Unregistered View Post
                      ... You can't use the MCity example without acknowledging no player would play back-to-back games. ....
                      How, do they have a 50-man roster? So, kids can practice 4x per week and play once but they can never go 3:2 or 4:2 occasionally? OK, where are the data for this when we see men going 5-7 days per week for 2 or 3 months often with 3 games in a week (mostly 2)??

                      Comment


                        #26
                        Originally posted by Unregistered View Post
                        How, do they have a 50-man roster? So, kids can practice 4x per week and play once but they can never go 3:2 or 4:2 occasionally? OK, where are the data for this when we see men going 5-7 days per week for 2 or 3 months often with 3 games in a week (mostly 2)??
                        One more thing ..... since you are so for the academy trainin methodology, i guess you are against residency programs or do you suggest 3:1 or 4:1 for them as well? The reason our teenagers lose traction to players in foreign academies is because when they get identified, their parents dont have to pay for their kids to play 3 or 4 times per week .... and never touch a ball outside that .... those kids play a heck of a lot more soccer and no one is dying.

                        Comment


                          #27
                          Originally posted by Unregistered View Post
                          One more thing ..... since you are so for the academy trainin methodology, i guess you are against residency programs or do you suggest 3:1 or 4:1 for them as well? The reason our teenagers lose traction to players in foreign academies is because when they get identified, their parents dont have to pay for their kids to play 3 or 4 times per week .... and never touch a ball outside that .... those kids play a heck of a lot more soccer and no one is dying.
                          Most young international players commit at 16 and school goes out the window. That's when a widening gap between the US and the rest of the world starts to get bigger and bigger. Their players are playing/practicing ALL THE TIME, not 4-5 times/week for a few hours a day in DA and then on to college.

                          Comment


                            #28
                            Originally posted by Unregistered View Post
                            Most young international players commit at 16 and school goes out the window. That's when a widening gap between the US and the rest of the world starts to get bigger and bigger. Their players are playing/practicing ALL THE TIME, not 4-5 times/week for a few hours a day in DA and then on to college.
                            My point was .... how can this be? according to the other guy they will all hurth their little selves with overuse injuries.

                            Comment


                              #29
                              Originally posted by Unregistered View Post
                              My point was .... how can this be? according to the other guy they will all hurth their little selves with overuse injuries.
                              yeah, well, when you have professional coaches, fitness trainers, nutritionists, on staff doctors etc it can be greatly reduced. You won't get that with most US clubs. DA clubs are supposed to have it but it's by and large ignored.

                              Comment


                                #30
                                Originally posted by Unregistered View Post
                                How, do they have a 50-man roster? So, kids can practice 4x per week and play once but they can never go 3:2 or 4:2 occasionally? OK, where are the data for this when we see men going 5-7 days per week for 2 or 3 months often with 3 games in a week (mostly 2)??
                                Well, first, there are no back-to-back games. Doesn't happen. Maybe you have a second game in 2-3 days. And, yes, most players will not play in both (except for defenders and goalies for the most part).

                                Sticking with your ManCity example (I see you use the term "Men", which indicates someone who has physically developed...)

                                Days between games since the start of December:

                                3, 4, 4*, 3, 3*, 4, 4, 4. 4, 3*, 3, 3*, 5*, 6, 3* (* designates non-league games where squads are rotated). Yes, big clubs have large rosters for this reason. It's also why some clubs can't compete through this time period and have to give one up for the other.

                                Now, let's look at another club, BHA, who won't compete in UCL and won't be long in either domestic cups from the start of the season to today:

                                8, 8, 6, 3*, 3, 16, 5, 7, 7, 15, 7, 7, 7, 14, 8, 3, 5, 8, 6, 4, 3, 5, 3*, 7, 7. (* Note, while these are domestic cups, BHA won't have the squad depth of a City so you will see more players playing games in a tighter window)

                                https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28060035

                                "Competitive soccer matches result in substantial declines in neuromuscular function, physical performance, and subjective measures of fatigue. These impairments may last up to 72 hours post-match and should be considered when devising training schedules".


                                So, can they? Sure. Will there be a guarantee of problems? Of course not. But, like it or not (and I'm not a part of them), DA follows a scientific approach to playing and the effects on kids.

                                I get kids will play and have fun and have been doing it for decades without problems they are aware of. But, doesn't mean scientific advances shouldn't be adhered to.

                                Comment

                                Previously entered content was automatically saved. Restore or Discard.
                                Auto-Saved
                                x
                                Insert: Thumbnail Small Medium Large Fullsize Remove  
                                x
                                Working...
                                X