Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Long Island SC GDa

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

    Originally posted by Unregistered View Post
    Definitely a great deal of dilution, which, in the end, won't help women's soccer. We don't suddenly have another league's worth of "top" players that will pop out of the woodwork. The player pool is pretty finite; same with good coaching. It's just rearranging the deck chairs.
    And the affluent player pool is very finate. When boys das are funded....the pool of interested talent grows larger. Same would happen on the girls side but the gdas are not funded academies and likely will never be. (There are a small few funded gdas).

    Comment


      Originally posted by Unregistered View Post
      And the affluent player pool is very finate. When boys das are funded....the pool of interested talent grows larger. Same would happen on the girls side but the gdas are not funded academies and likely will never be. (There are a small few funded gdas).
      Even on the boys side it's only with the limited number of MLS clubs, so the diversity outside of the the free-to-play clubs is very limited. As you said GDA will have virtually none of that.

      Comment


        Originally posted by Unregistered View Post
        And the affluent player pool is very finate. When boys das are funded....the pool of interested talent grows larger. Same would happen on the girls side but the gdas are not funded academies and likely will never be. (There are a small few funded gdas).
        whilst this funding issue may be true for boys, its not for girls. Im not sure the pool would be much wider because College is still the end game.

        Comment


          Originally posted by Unregistered View Post
          whilst this funding issue may be true for boys, its not for girls. Im not sure the pool would be much wider because College is still the end game.
          Wrong. Girls high level soccer is very pricey just like the boys. (Unless the player is on a funded team). Thousands per year plus travel. Absolutely not an option for most families no matter the gender of their player,

          Comment


            Originally posted by Unregistered View Post
            Wrong. Girls high level soccer is very pricey just like the boys. (Unless the player is on a funded team). Thousands per year plus travel. Absolutely not an option for most families no matter the gender of their player,
            Uhh yes. Well aware of that. Point is making it free is not going to change the quality much IF College is the end game. Kids who play soccer want to go to College. Many of them pay. The notion that there are all sorts of low income soccer players who we can fund to make the game better is fanciful.

            Yes there are some, but nowhere near as many as people pretend because the end game is College. 4 yr pros make 16k. And they just got a raise.

            Comment


              Originally posted by Unregistered View Post
              Uhh yes. Well aware of that. Point is making it free is not going to change the quality much IF College is the end game. Kids who play soccer want to go to College. Many of them pay. The notion that there are all sorts of low income soccer players who we can fund to make the game better is fanciful.

              Yes there are some, but nowhere near as many as people pretend because the end game is College. 4 yr pros make 16k. And they just got a raise.
              What? I am quite sure that if it were free, these teams would not be struggling to find talent for their rosters. Just look at the funded teams in existence. They are the most desired teams by far.

              Comment


                Originally posted by Unregistered View Post
                What? I am quite sure that if it were free, these teams would not be struggling to find talent for their rosters. Just look at the funded teams in existence. They are the most desired teams by far.
                I agree. If LISC competed on price or was free, they would have been considered by many families and thus attracted the necessary talent. You don't need to be low-income to want better value. But being more expensive and poorly managed are not a winning combination.

                Comment


                  Originally posted by Unregistered View Post
                  What? I am quite sure that if it were free, these teams would not be struggling to find talent for their rosters. Just look at the funded teams in existence. They are the most desired teams by far.
                  So which funded GIRLS teams are the most desired? And desired is not enough. The discussion is about attracting NEW high quality players, not diverting the same player to one club or another . In the latter scenario the pool is the same.

                  Show me all the high level players who would not otherwise play, who are at these funded clubs becasue it is free

                  Comment


                    Originally posted by Unregistered View Post
                    I agree. If LISC competed on price or was free, they would have been considered by many families and thus attracted the necessary talent. You don't need to be low-income to want better value. But being more expensive and poorly managed are not a winning combination.
                    Thats not what is being discussed. Would being free attract a whole new demographic to the player pool ? I doubt it. The talent you speak of would be at the expense of other Clubs.

                    Cedar Stars is free, how many new high level players have they attracted on the back of it ?

                    Comment


                      Originally posted by Unregistered View Post
                      Thats not what is being discussed. Would being free attract a whole new demographic to the player pool ? I doubt it. The talent you speak of would be at the expense of other Clubs.

                      Cedar Stars is free, how many new high level players have they attracted on the back of it ?
                      I think it would. Are you saying that the current system of making people travel and pay thousands of dollars a year has all of the best talent? Where are all the kids from the 5 boros? There are probably just as many kids at each age group playing street ball that are better (or have more real potential) than most of the kids on these country-club rosters. Especially on the girl's side where there no real pro path

                      Comment


                        Originally posted by Unregistered View Post
                        Thats not what is being discussed. Would being free attract a whole new demographic to the player pool ? I doubt it. The talent you speak of would be at the expense of other Clubs.

                        Cedar Stars is free, how many new high level players have they attracted on the back of it ?
                        Cedar stars is not free at the younger age groups where it is more forgiving to change teams.

                        Comment


                          Originally posted by Unregistered View Post
                          I think it would. Are you saying that the current system of making people travel and pay thousands of dollars a year has all of the best talent? Where are all the kids from the 5 boros? There are probably just as many kids at each age group playing street ball that are better (or have more real potential) than most of the kids on these country-club rosters. Especially on the girl's side where there no real pro path
                          So you think kids playing street ball would want to integrate and play in the current system. Why? what would be the end goal? This myth that there this huge subculture of girls playing street soccer is just that...a myth.

                          never said these leagues have the best talent. I said that making it free would only marginally change the pool if at all. Its not only cost that keeps players out of Clubs, its demographics, peer groups and social issues.

                          The cost benefit is just not currently worth it becasue the incentive to actually develop better players is not aligned with those who benefit from them.

                          Right now the people who have the potential benefit, parents pay for the end benefit - from College place all the way up to a full ride. In general they know little about development , they jsut know who won. So what is the result . Game heavy schedules where the kids who score most are deemed to be great. We keep score in everything because most parents would not understand development or care.

                          Colleges would benefit from better development, but they are not going to pay for it. The USSF would benefit, but they kinda pay for it thru camps , and NT trips abroad. But they are not investing in the players until they are a certain age and then a select few.

                          The pro clubs, would benefit, but they have not way of ensuring they keep the player they develop so why would they do it?

                          making it free would only work if the womens game became more financially viable and the Clubs could select and have a way of keeping the players they developed. Ie a Pro tract for girls with real economic benefits. Outside of that, i dont think free clubs would increase the overall talent level much for Girls

                          Comment


                            Originally posted by Unregistered View Post
                            So you think kids playing street ball would want to integrate and play in the current system. Why? what would be the end goal? This myth that there this huge subculture of girls playing street soccer is just that...a myth.

                            never said these leagues have the best talent. I said that making it free would only marginally change the pool if at all. Its not only cost that keeps players out of Clubs, its demographics, peer groups and social issues.

                            The cost benefit is just not currently worth it becasue the incentive to actually develop better players is not aligned with those who benefit from them.

                            Right now the people who have the potential benefit, parents pay for the end benefit - from College place all the way up to a full ride. In general they know little about development , they jsut know who won. So what is the result . Game heavy schedules where the kids who score most are deemed to be great. We keep score in everything because most parents would not understand development or care.

                            Colleges would benefit from better development, but they are not going to pay for it. The USSF would benefit, but they kinda pay for it thru camps , and NT trips abroad. But they are not investing in the players until they are a certain age and then a select few.

                            The pro clubs, would benefit, but they have not way of ensuring they keep the player they develop so why would they do it?

                            making it free would only work if the womens game became more financially viable and the Clubs could select and have a way of keeping the players they developed. Ie a Pro tract for girls with real economic benefits. Outside of that, i dont think free clubs would increase the overall talent level much for Girls
                            Well, where low cost soccer exists, the pool of talent interested increases. You are correct to say that it wont happen because no one will fund it.

                            Our superstar female talents are big fish from a small pond. When the boys went fishing in a bigger pond, they caught some new fish.

                            Comment


                              Originally posted by Unregistered View Post
                              Well, where low cost soccer exists, the pool of talent interested increases. You are correct to say that it wont happen because no one will fund it.

                              Our superstar female talents are big fish from a small pond. When the boys went fishing in a bigger pond, they caught some new fish.
                              I completely agree with you. Problem is no one in the USA has any real interest in low cost soccer for girls for the reasons I outlined above. Not in enough areas of the country to make any dent in the current model. So no one has any real incentive to offer it.

                              NYCFC are owned by one of the richest familes/countries in the world. Man City spend money on players like its nothing. Is the GDA free there ? No. Would it make a hge statement in the NY area if it was? Of course. Would they attract more talent to the Club. Probably. And yes it it would be at the expennse of other Clubs unless they too cut prices. Problem is, making it free would totally break the model for many Clubs and make it more elite and more select. fewer people could justify playing GDA at lesser clubs becasue they would be jsut that.

                              And yet NYCFC have not done it. It keeps the cozy status quo that currently exists and everyone makes money.

                              One idea I had was that if player in the GDA makes say 4 NT camps or gets 2 caps - her tuition and travel is free (paid for by the USSF) AND the Club gets to offer a scholarship credit to another low income player. That would at least incent Clubs to develop players.

                              Im sure there are holes in my idea, but something like this has to happen to attempt to align behavior with economics.or nothing will change no matter the league

                              Comment


                                Originally posted by Unregistered View Post
                                They didn't slap a new badge on the same thing, seeing as neither GDA or ECNL will ever be as strong as ECNL in its heyday.

                                Figure most ECNL teams splintered with supposed top players sliding over to GDA and GDA clubs supplementing rosters with ECNL bench warmers and other players from various NE NPL teams...basically kids who weren't strong enough to make ECNL in the first place.

                                Then you have the ECNL side, where most teams have lost top 2-3 players and also added players from various ne NPL teams (see description above).

                                Then of course there are the non ECNL clubs that are now fielding GDA teams, only thing is, none of these clubs were dominant in their previous leagues (I.E.-Massapequa, NYSC, Brentwood) . To be fair, Massapequa, NYSC probably have a few players here and there that may have made a GDA roster somewhere else, but those players are few and far between and certainly not enough to build a strong foundation. The only players Brentwood had were the KK Atletico players that would throw on a Brentwood jersey when they played NPL and most of those kids left for East Meadow.

                                And if you think this is all NYE specific, it's not. Take a gander at the Mass forum, same BS going on at BBA and Stars. Then take a look at the CT forum, same chat about OW, FSA and CFC...
                                Off topic, but the bleeding for KK is continuing. More girls left for EM and I would expect more to as well. If I was EM, I would be targeting all KK teams. Those parents are all on eggs shells waiting to see what happens next.

                                Comment

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