Originally posted by Unregistered
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Is college soccer more similar to Club or HS
Collapse
X
-
Unregistered
-
Unregistered
Originally posted by Unregistered View PostMakes me wonder why are we making the kids play possession "build from the back" soccer in middle school and HS (if they do DA) if by the time they get to college it all goes out the window?
- Quote
Comment
-
Unregistered
Simple answer is it depends what School you go to. its a vicious cycle created by how we develop players and what parents seem to want to pay for - WINS.
Intelligent soccer requires intelligent well rounded players. The USA does not produce them because parents do not have the patience or foresight to accept that losing may be part of development. Clubs get paid for doing what parents want. just look at the GDA/ECNL fiasco if you doubt that.
The most successful College program is a gloried kick and rush team - UNC.
The fastest way to being competitive is to play physical soccer because athletes and a very rigid game plan is easy to implement quickly. With almost unlimited subs, you can enforce your discipline by subbing out kids who dont comply and rolling another athlete out there.
US soccer on College is set up to be this way through bad rules, bad refs and games crammed into a short season.
Having said all that , there are teams who try and play - Wake Forest, Duke, Stanford, UCLA, USC, FSU, Penn State etc. Almost all the programs that do have established coaches who are not coaching in fear. Funny things is when one is upset/beaten by a team playing the anti-soccer mentioned here, its more incentive to join the dark side.
its much easier in soccer to stop the other team from playing and hope, than it is to go out an dictate a game playing positive attractive soccer.
- Quote
Comment
-
Unregistered
Originally posted by Unregistered View PostSimple answer is it depends what School you go to. its a vicious cycle created by how we develop players and what parents seem to want to pay for - WINS.
Intelligent soccer requires intelligent well rounded players. The USA does not produce them because parents do not have the patience or foresight to accept that losing may be part of development. Clubs get paid for doing what parents want. just look at the GDA/ECNL fiasco if you doubt that.
The most successful College program is a gloried kick and rush team - UNC.
The fastest way to being competitive is to play physical soccer because athletes and a very rigid game plan is easy to implement quickly. With almost unlimited subs, you can enforce your discipline by subbing out kids who dont comply and rolling another athlete out there.
US soccer on College is set up to be this way through bad rules, bad refs and games crammed into a short season.
Having said all that , there are teams who try and play - Wake Forest, Duke, Stanford, UCLA, USC, FSU, Penn State etc. Almost all the programs that do have established coaches who are not coaching in fear. Funny things is when one is upset/beaten by a team playing the anti-soccer mentioned here, its more incentive to join the dark side.
its much easier in soccer to stop the other team from playing and hope, than it is to go out an dictate a game playing positive attractive soccer.
- Quote
Comment
-
Unregistered
Originally posted by Unregistered View PostGarbage question. Go watch the 20 games on every night on cable. We watch pac 10 games. Building, testing, assessing, recycling, possessing... high school soccer is garbage
- Quote
Comment
-
Unregistered
Originally posted by Unregistered View PostVery few college programs play good soccer. QU was referenced earlier and actually they keep it on the ground and play relative to other programs.
As far a physicality goes, D2 is typically the most like a roller derby. They don’t have much money and with the exception of a few of them most schools are light academically.
D3 at the upper end is pretty decent soccer. Middlebury, Amherst, Williams and MIT are loaded with kids who had decent D1 prospect but choose these schools for obvious reasons
Any D1 roster is filled with kids that would be the best player at their respective Hs in CT. How it looks on the field is typically up to the coach. CCSU for example has a ton of super athletes. They have an FSA coach so probably not attempting to look like Barcelona
- Quote
Comment
-
Unregistered
Originally posted by Unregistered View Postthat coach sounds like 99% of parents at club and HS games
I can't handle the morons yelling "play forward" with the team nursing a 1 goal lead with 5 minutes left
- Quote
Comment
-
Unregistered
Originally posted by Unregistered View PostYes, far better to play backward and lose the ball near your own 18 on a bad touch. LMAO. There is a time to play and a time to be direct. The smart player knows which is which.
- Quote
Comment
-
Unregistered
Originally posted by Unregistered View PostYeah, so not sure what this has to do with my point? Obviously the context matters, but a back pass out of pressure to retain possession beats hoofing it down field (play it forward!), does it not? I'm talking about a team with players who can control the ball. Not your kids team, I get it.
- Quote
Comment
-
Unregistered
Originally posted by Unregistered View PostNot the poster. Some top programs do play nice quality soccer. It's just a very small percentage unfortunately.
So many posters fail to understand that in College, most of the teams are at least organized and fit.
Because you can dominate some GDA/ECNL/NPL team after you have recruited their better players to your super club does nto mean you can do it in College with a weaker relative supporting cast
- Quote
Comment
-
Unregistered
Originally posted by Unregistered View PostBecause we produce a small percentage of kids capable of actually playing that way when faced with speed, strength, physicality and organized defenses. College is the first time many have EVER faced a significantly better team.
So many posters fail to understand that in College, most of the teams are at least organized and fit.
Because you can dominate some GDA/ECNL/NPL team after you have recruited their better players to your super club does nto mean you can do it in College with a weaker relative supporting cast
“Have ever faced a significantly better team”.....
Better team, or better athletes? Huge difference.
“at least organized and fit”.....
Fit? You must be kidding. Have you seen what some of these division I girls look like? Overweight and NOT fit! You can get away with this when you can sub so much!
“Because you can dominate”.....
Rambling. The top under 18 club team in CT could likely beat and outplay any non Division I team in CT.
- Quote
Comment
-
Unregistered
Originally posted by Unregistered View PostHere’s where I disagree with your statements:
“Have ever faced a significantly better team”.....
Better team, or better athletes? Huge difference.
“at least organized and fit”.....
Fit? You must be kidding. Have you seen what some of these division I girls look like? Overweight and NOT fit! You can get away with this when you can sub so much!
“Because you can dominate”.....
Rambling. The top under 18 club team in CT could likely beat and outplay any non Division I team in CT.
I agree except for the last part. D1 teams are all working with a strength and conditioning coach. Go watch Yale. Decent level program. They have some strong athletic beasts. Seniors in high school would struggle with that
- Quote
Comment
Comment