It’s almost college season

[Unregistered]

its not silly at all. its accurate. you want to answer a totally different question. one about the financial viability of a pro career. College and out parents funded Club path does not develop great soccer players anymore relative to the other tracks out there in other countries.

you also want to twist the post. It says she did not have to do that to be successful, not that she was never told that. Ill type it again

SHE DID NOT HAVE TO DO THAT

ie to be a top top Collee player, she was not challenged enough to have to do something pretty basic.

It’s accurate why? Because an 18 year old says it is? Because you say so? Without a shred of facts to back up your statement. Again, and I’ll say it slowly for you so you understand. There are different levels of college programs, even within D1. There are the 4-5 programs that are above everyone else. Stanford. UCLA. PSU. FSU. Then the next 20. Good programs. Good level. Good coaching. Then 25-60. Decent level. Then everyone else. Most good club teams would fall somewhere in the top 25 if they went to college intact. So I wouldn’t necessarily blame it on the system. There is still quality. It’s more spread out over here due to the opportunities available and size of the country. They don’t have 350 teams in France. Or even 25 of quality. And while you will probably say it should be narrower here, more players playing that filter into the national pool is one of the reasons why we have had success. Again, pro isn’t a viable path on the women’s side. Most people also don’t care about the national team. It is a goal for very few. And despite all of that, the US Women remain #1 in the world. And have been at or near that for 20 years. That’s a good run of dominance. Your comment smacks of someone who’s loves to criticize, even in the face of irrefutable facts. LOL.

[Unregistered]

It’s accurate why? Because an 18 year old says it is? Because you say so? Without a shred of facts to back up your statement. Again, and I’ll say it slowly for you so you understand. There are different levels of college programs, even within D1. There are the 4-5 programs that are above everyone else. Stanford. UCLA. PSU. FSU. Then the next 20. Good programs. Good level. Good coaching. Then 25-60. Decent level. Then everyone else. Most good club teams would fall somewhere in the top 25 if they went to college intact. So I wouldn’t necessarily blame it on the system. There is still quality. It’s more spread out over here due to the opportunities available and size of the country. They don’t have 350 teams in France. Or even 25 of quality. And while you will probably say it should be narrower here, more players playing that filter into the national pool is one of the reasons why we have had success. Again, pro isn’t a viable path on the women’s side. Most people also don’t care about the national team. It is a goal for very few. And despite all of that, the US Women remain #1 in the world. And have been at or near that for 20 years. That’s a good run of dominance. Your comment smacks of someone who’s loves to criticize, even in the face of irrefutable facts. LOL.

The facts are SHE SAID it herself. what more facts do you need. She did not say every player in america is the same. She said it about herself. The debate was not whether pro was a viable path or not. In Mexico. England, France, Spain and other countries their best players ARE being cultivated in a pro environment now. I dont care whether you think its financially viable or not, its irrelevant to the the development of the game for those players and the impact at international level.

"Most people dont care about the national team" *** does that have to do with the argument? are you saying that we are losing a large percentage of our best players because they dont want to play for the full NT? I read this a lot on TS. Its more accurate to say most players are nowhere near good enough to even consider playing for the full NT. what does dont care mean? its not even a consideration on talent alone.

You keep writing about somehting that has nothing to do with reality. ll ddumb it down for you ..AGAIN. Ill just lift a quote above

College is GREAT. A wonderful opportunity for our kids, But its not an optimized developmental platform for our very best kids. Obviously the GDA is not either.

Try and discuss the actual topic. You have given me ZERO facts other than those that back up MY argument. 20 years ago, College WAS the best incubator of talent in the world. The USA RECENT form and results across more than just full NT suggest that it no longer is.

Feel free to believe whatever you want.

[Unregistered]

When a player like Ashley Lawrence tells you that it was only when she got to PSG that she had to think about what her options were with the ball BEFORE she received it, it tells you about the level of College soccer. She was able to be a STAR without really using her mind. Just her physical gifts. Says a lot.

Obviously a player who could have been much better. Her coaches should have made her aware of that beginning about age 11-12 and she should have been practicing it shortly thereafter. Obviously a second-tier player who only shines because potential first-tier players don't have the cash to play youth soccer.

[Unregistered]

I wonder if you polled NWSL players if they would say the same thing?

I would never say the coaches and programs at FBS colleges are poor developers of talent, and yet I watch Hard Knocks and most of the rookies are ill prepared for the NFL. Each level of competition brings new challenges and some players can ride to the challenge and others can’t.

I will say though that at my daughters u12 preseason camp, the coach was continually stressing the need to know what to do with the ball before the players received it.

[Unregistered]

I wonder if you polled NWSL players if they would say the same thing?

I would never say the coaches and programs at FBS colleges are poor developers of talent, and yet I watch Hard Knocks and most of the rookies are ill prepared for the NFL. Each level of competition brings new challenges and some players can ride to the challenge and others can’t.

I will say though that at my daughters u12 preseason camp, the coach was continually stressing the need to know what to do with the ball before the players received it.

No one said College was poor. The comment was RELATIVE to the tracks that other countries BEST players are mostly on. Problem with TS is that what is actually being said is often misinterpreted.

1. Im talking about the very best players
2. not a debate on the economics of pro woso
3. same issue exists for ouyr men. at 18 kids going to College, RoW best have been in pro environments for years

nothing im saying is controversial or really debatable, but some on TS still want to argue.

College is great and serves a higher purpose for almost everyone. In terms of soccer, its not the optimal for the very best players. Sure US women have been able to overcome that with sheer volume, but the training gap will make that harder and harder.

[Unregistered]

This is a silly comment for a couple of reasons. 1). You cant make money being a pro women’s soccer player. 2) Sure college coaches vary, but they don’t get handed the jobs without having some knowledge of the game. I’m fairly certain that most are decent and that there is zero chance Ashley was never told that until she got to PSG. Hahaha. That is actually a pretty basic concept. More likely she wasn’t listening.

Ashley sounds like a real F'ing idiot. Just saying. Club coaches preach knowing what your options are starting with U-little.

[Unregistered]

Ashley sounds like a real F'ing idiot. Just saying. Club coaches preach knowing what your options are starting with U-little.

By U12, town travel coaches are introducing the concept of knowing where the ball is going next before you get the ball.

[Unregistered]

Ashley sounds like a real F'ing idiot. Just saying. Club coaches preach knowing what your options are starting with U-little.

another great TS take. it does not matter what you think she sounds like. she was very successful in the US College game. the fact that you and others continue to miss the point is pretty staggering. It says a lot about HOW the game CAN be played here at the top level and the things some very highly rated players are able to get away with.

your focus on u littles etc is totally irrelevant. the comment not about how the game is taught. its about the practicalities of how it can played at the HIGHEST level by one of the more successful college players in the last 5 years.

[Unregistered]

another great TS take. it does not matter what you think she sounds like. she was very successful in the US College game. the fact that you and others continue to miss the point is pretty staggering. It says a lot about HOW the game CAN be played here at the top level and the things some very highly rated players are able to get away with.

your focus on u littles etc is totally irrelevant. the comment not about how the game is taught. its about the practicalities of how it can played at the HIGHEST level by one of the more successful college players in the last 5 years.

So, a "very successful" player in the "US College game" doesn't know to check her shoulders and figure out where the ball will go before she receives it.

So, why is she so very successful? Athleticism? Hip checking power? Bootability?

If "one of the more successful college players in the last 5 years" isn't intelligently planning what to do with the ball before she receives it, what does this say about the state of US soccer? We need to find a way to attract top-tier athletes to our sport.

[Unregistered]

So, a "very successful" player in the "US College game" doesn't know to check her shoulders and figure out where the ball will go before she receives it.

So, why is she so very successful? Athleticism? Hip checking power? Bootability?

If "one of the more successful college players in the last 5 years" isn't intelligently planning what to do with the ball before she receives it, what does this say about the state of US soccer? We need to find a way to attract top-tier athletes to our sport.

did not NEED to do it to play here at a high level. HAD to do it to play in France. Better? Worse? i dont know. Certainly different. I would say we need to remove this all consuming desire to buy in to game result driven training at early ages, to give players better and broader instruction. if winning that u9 game leads to kids getting ice cream, and Jane can win without following the fundamentals. Why should she bother to do so ?

[Unregistered]

did not NEED to do it to play here at a high level. HAD to do it to play in France. Better? Worse? i dont know. Certainly different. I would say we need to remove this all consuming desire to buy in to game result driven training at early ages, to give players better and broader instruction. if winning that u9 game leads to kids getting ice cream, and Jane can win without following the fundamentals. Why should she bother to do so ?

She didn't bother, and that's the problem: second-rate soccer players shining because potential top-tier players can't afford to play.

[Unregistered]

She didn't bother, and that's the problem: second-rate soccer players shining because potential top-tier players can't afford to play.

Potential top tier? Why would they be different than the second rate ones we have now?
Because they wouldn't have to pay?

[Unregistered]

Potential top tier? Why would they be different than the second rate ones we have now?
Because they wouldn't have to pay?

There are kids out there who just have such capabilities as part of their makeup but who won't play soccer because of the cost.

When our system stops being only for the upper middle class, when the lower classes can access soccer more easily, only then will our sport get the broad array of top players we are currently missing.

[Unregistered]

There are kids out there who just have such capabilities as part of their makeup but who won't play soccer because of the cost.

When our system stops being only for the upper middle class, when the lower classes can access soccer more easily, only then will our sport get the broad array of top players we are currently missing.

Posters here dont think we need it. we are top of the world already. 20 years and counting

[Unregistered]

I have to say that I watched the UCLA- Penn State women play the other night.
UCLA with 4 yellow cards very aggressive physically, almost to the point that it was over the line. There easily could have been a few more for them. Jumping on top of players for headers and knocking them out of the game.

Penn State played somewhat physical, but much more composed . It appeared that UCLA was close to the category of playing thuggish. Players going full steam and slamming into Penn Sate players, and the Referee didn't even control that from the get go. I believe they knocked the Penn State keeper out of the game, and there wasn't even a caution.

If UCLA is regarded as top level women's soccer, I just don't see the beauty in their game. Plenty of poor touches, overly physical play, so many line drive passes, and the 100 MPH pace that just doesn't look pleasing to the eye. But they got the result, a 2-1 victory, so I guess that's what is important.