Oakwood

[Unregistered]

Connecticut is not even close to having talent for two ECNL teams. Maybe one team with a very weak bench, at best. Worse, though, is Connecticut's ECNL clubs don't have the quality of coaches needed for an ECNL program (and OW is worse).

Can't help but wonder if our high cost of living contributes to the coaching issue? Coaches make jack shyte, have to take on other gigs, have roommates. It's not an easy state to live in and I know several good coaches who went into other careers that paid the bills. Club fees are already very high so I'm not sure parents would pay for it.

[Unregistered]

Can't help but wonder if our high cost of living contributes to the coaching issue? Coaches make jack shyte, have to take on other gigs, have roommates. It's not an easy state to live in and I know several good coaches who went into other careers that paid the bills. Club fees are already very high so I'm not sure parents would pay for it.

Well, if the coaches make "jack shyte" then we are getting exactly what we pay for.

[Unregistered]

Can't help but wonder if our high cost of living contributes to the coaching issue? Coaches make jack shyte, have to take on other gigs, have roommates. It's not an easy state to live in and I know several good coaches who went into other careers that paid the bills. Club fees are already very high so I'm not sure parents would pay for it.

This isn't a coaching issue. It's a math issue. There are only a finite number of kids that have the athletic chops to play at the highest club level and ultimately in the Division 1 ranks in college.

There are plenty of kids who have a strong intellectual command of the game. They move off of the ball well, understand tactics etc but simply cannot compete athletically. When you think about a top level club game at say U17, one thing that stands out is the speed of play. The next thing would be ability to physically compete. Can a player win the ball in the air, hold off a strong opponent or have the stamina to compete box to box in fast moving game. These physical attributes disqualify many players regardless of technical ability.

There's a reason why many of our young women who move onto the college ranks also excel at track and field.

The combination of technique, pace, tactical awareness and even height are factors on who can compete at top club and eventually D1. Players that lack any of these are better suited for D2 etc. Its just important to remember you can't coach some of these things. CT only

[Unregistered]

lol. FSA already has a bunch of OW players. Someone once said CT is big enough for 1.5 ECNL clubs. That's about right, although not practical :) Anyone who thinks we can support three is high, or a greedy club, or both

You must be a ulittle parent. FSA doesn't have OW's top players across all age groups. FSA's top 9 plus OW top 9 would be solid teams. If that was the case it would be as competitive as CFC in ECNL, if not more competitive in some age groups. They would pull from similar population densities.

[Unregistered]

You must be a ulittle parent. FSA doesn't have OW's top players across all age groups. FSA's top 9 plus OW top 9 would be solid teams. If that was the case it would be as competitive as CFC in ECNL, if not more competitive in some age groups. They would pull from similar population densities.

Didn't most of OWs top players just leave? 😂

[Unregistered]

This isn't a coaching issue. It's a math issue. There are only a finite number of kids that have the athletic chops to play at the highest club level and ultimately in the Division 1 ranks in college.

There are plenty of kids who have a strong intellectual command of the game. They move off of the ball well, understand tactics etc but simply cannot compete athletically. When you think about a top level club game at say U17, one thing that stands out is the speed of play. The next thing would be ability to physically compete. Can a player win the ball in the air, hold off a strong opponent or have the stamina to compete box to box in fast moving game. These physical attributes disqualify many players regardless of technical ability.

There's a reason why many of our young women who move onto the college ranks also excel at track and field.

The combination of technique, pace, tactical awareness and even height are factors on who can compete at top club and eventually D1. Players that lack any of these are better suited for D2 etc. Its just important to remember you can't coach some of these things. CT only

Clearly written by someone has seen this play out. Youth soccer is giant funnel. The funnel gets filled up at u9/u10 when the intro of travel and premium teams. First weeding out comes when the game transitions to 11v11 and contracts every year.

[Unregistered]

Clearly written by someone has seen this play out. Youth soccer is giant funnel. The funnel gets filled up at u9/u10 when the intro of travel and premium teams. First weeding out comes when the game transitions to 11v11 and contracts every year.

Late middle school/going into high school there is an extreme tightening. Players with better skills and a good work ethic work their way into the top leagues. The ones left behind have to decide if they want to keep going but in lower levels, just play for school teams or not at all. During MS lots of kids realize they're more passionate about other sports or interests.

[Unregistered]

Late middle school/going into high school there is an extreme tightening. Players with better skills and a good work ethic work their way into the top leagues. The ones left behind have to decide if they want to keep going but in lower levels, just play for school teams or not at all. During MS lots of kids realize they're more passionate about other sports or interests.

while i agree that genetics plays a huge part, it is about coaching
kids with physical advantages when they are little are allowed by coaches to simply exploit
those advantages for wins- coaches ,in many instances ,dont develop those kids and when puberty hits and those physical advantages become less evident , those kids struggle and disappear

everything matters

[Unregistered]

Clearly written by someone has seen this play out. Youth soccer is giant funnel. The funnel gets filled up at u9/u10 when the intro of travel and premium teams. First weeding out comes when the game transitions to 11v11 and contracts every year.

Not at FSA. Identified at 8 because of size and speed and given a free pass to run and brutalize opponents for the next 10 years on the A teams ..... Never taught a soccer skill along the whole way .... Even when the other teams get bigger and faster kids later (with skills).

[Unregistered]

Not at FSA. Identified at 8 because of size and speed and given a free pass to run and brutalize opponents for the next 10 years on the A teams ..... Never taught a soccer skill along the whole way .... Even when the other teams get bigger and faster kids later (with skills).

That's why they have to resort to playing defend and counter by 17 and 18

Not to harp on the past but that's what made the 2002 and 2001 teams from CFC so strong. They had athletes in every position but also "played". Ball stayed on ground with relentless pressure. Watched FSA basically defend for 85 minutes in some of those games. The score lines aren't always reflective of the result as it's not easy to score with 9 defenders in the box!

That aspect of it is certainly coaching and that tactical understanding has to be taught early. In the case of CFC that was learned from DC when he coached those kids. As far as being able to execute and have that end up in getting results regionally and beyond, that's where you need to have good athletes that are well coached. That's the reason why CFC put 30 kids into Division 1 during those two years. College coaches watched these teams play and saw the level stay consistent even when they subbed 5/6 kids

[Unregistered]

That's why they have to resort to playing defend and counter by 17 and 18

Not to harp on the past but that's what made the 2002 and 2001 teams from CFC so strong. They had athletes in every position but also "played". Ball stayed on ground with relentless pressure. Watched FSA basically defend for 85 minutes in some of those games. The score lines aren't always reflective of the result as it's not easy to score with 9 defenders in the box!

That aspect of it is certainly coaching and that tactical understanding has to be taught early. In the case of CFC that was learned from DC when he coached those kids. As far as being able to execute and have that end up in getting results regionally and beyond, that's where you need to have good athletes that are well coached. That's the reason why CFC put 30 kids into Division 1 during those two years. College coaches watched these teams play and saw the level stay consistent even when they subbed 5/6 kids

Yep, nothing at all to do with the college admissions scandal

[Unregistered]

Yep, nothing at all to do with the college admissions scandal

Sure. They had 5 kids go to Yale this fall. you are right.

[Unregistered]

This isn't a coaching issue. It's a math issue. There are only a finite number of kids that have the athletic chops to play at the highest club level and ultimately in the Division 1 ranks in college.

There are plenty of kids who have a strong intellectual command of the game. They move off of the ball well, understand tactics etc but simply cannot compete athletically. When you think about a top level club game at say U17, one thing that stands out is the speed of play. The next thing would be ability to physically compete. Can a player win the ball in the air, hold off a strong opponent or have the stamina to compete box to box in fast moving game. These physical attributes disqualify many players regardless of technical ability.

There's a reason why many of our young women who move onto the college ranks also excel at track and field.

The combination of technique, pace, tactical awareness and even height are factors on who can compete at top club and eventually D1. Players that lack any of these are better suited for D2 etc. Its just important to remember you can't coach some of these things. CT only

This is unfortunately a very American view of soccer. While size and athleticism can be important it doesn't trump skill and IQ in this sport. It has been proven over and over again on the international professional stage. Of course there's some exceptions but few.

There are some good examples of this at the girls youth international stage as well. A scrawny, small Spanish youth girls team dominated a large, athletic, physical and skillful PDA team (considered the top ECNL team in the country for this age group) in a recent youth International Champions Cup tournament. Recent girls YNT games also haven't experienced the same success as the past (granted some other factors there as well).

[Unregistered]

This is unfortunately a very American view of soccer. While size and athleticism can be important it doesn't trump skill and IQ in this sport. It has been proven over and over again on the international professional stage. Of course there's some exceptions but few.

There are some good examples of this at the girls youth international stage as well. A scrawny, small Spanish youth girls team dominated a large, athletic, physical and skillful PDA team (considered the top ECNL team in the country for this age group) in a recent youth International Champions Cup tournament. Recent girls YNT games also haven't experienced the same success as the past (granted some other factors there as well).

The ECNL player is geared to be competitive in the college setting. The college game for the most part is fast, furious, highly physical, and direct. The PDA's of the world are perfect for churning out such players.....so it is simply the ECNL clubs producing what the colleges want.

[Unregistered]

That's why they have to resort to playing defend and counter by 17 and 18

Not to harp on the past but that's what made the 2002 and 2001 teams from CFC so strong. They had athletes in every position but also "played". Ball stayed on ground with relentless pressure. Watched FSA basically defend for 85 minutes in some of those games. The score lines aren't always reflective of the result as it's not easy to score with 9 defenders in the box!

That aspect of it is certainly coaching and that tactical understanding has to be taught early. In the case of CFC that was learned from DC when he coached those kids. As far as being able to execute and have that end up in getting results regionally and beyond, that's where you need to have good athletes that are well coached. That's the reason why CFC put 30 kids into Division 1 during those two years. College coaches watched these teams play and saw the level stay consistent even when they subbed 5/6 kids

CFC has warts too .... What about all of the other years .... And branches!