DAP started to get serious?

[Unregistered]

summation

I just want to make sure that I understand....
The Revs are free and have better facilities. I get this and can accept it that the Kraft family has significantly more money than all of Wellesley put together.

...but the Revs are not supposed to score high on development.....since they don't develop anything??? Right, they take developed players and get them to play 'nice'.
...but their 'better' style of play is only a half a point over the Bolts.

If it wasn't for the Kraft money and the already in place facilities.....the Bolts and Revs would be exactly tied.

so who has the better coaches? The Bolts have better player development and a half point less on playing style with significant fewer resources.....

Seems like a wash to me.....except that the Revs are free.

[Unregistered]

I just want to make sure that I understand....
The Revs are free and have better facilities. I get this and can accept it that the Kraft family has significantly more money than all of Wellesley put together.

...but the Revs are not supposed to score high on development.....since they don't develop anything??? Right, they take developed players and get them to play 'nice'.
...but their 'better' style of play is only a half a point over the Bolts.

If it wasn't for the Kraft money and the already in place facilities.....the Bolts and Revs would be exactly tied.

so who has the better coaches? The Bolts have better player development and a half point less on playing style with significant fewer resources.....

Seems like a wash to me.....except that the Revs are free.

Lots of Kraft money going to the Revs? (Think PATS!!!!)

I'd argue that the Bolts get much more funding from their wealthy donor players.

[Unregistered]

Yes, but that is one criteria out of several in the player development rating- so it's hard to determine how a DAP club did specifically in that one specific criteria.

Thanks for the reply. Was just wondering because any team that shows they develop and therefore retain their U15/U16 players into U18/U18, well that is something that would tell me that they are on-track with their mission. I think that should be weighted highly in these "grades." There will always be the odd player coming in at U17/18 but if they really pick from among the best U15/16 players and the training is excellent, they should retain a large percentage of players over the years. Particularly given how many tell me that this type of training at early ages is critical.

Though I think the DAP is a great idea and opportunity for the right kids (just playing against better competition makes you better, even before talkin gabout coaching and such), I have been disquieted by the low yields of returnees in the early years. Hopefully that is over.

[Unregistered]

I just want to make sure that I understand....
The Revs are free and have better facilities. I get this and can accept it that the Kraft family has significantly more money than all of Wellesley put together.

...but the Revs are not supposed to score high on development.....since they don't develop anything??? Right, they take developed players and get them to play 'nice'.
...but their 'better' style of play is only a half a point over the Bolts.

If it wasn't for the Kraft money and the already in place facilities.....the Bolts and Revs would be exactly tied.

so who has the better coaches? The Bolts have better player development and a half point less on playing style with significant fewer resources.....

Seems like a wash to me.....except that the Revs are free.

Except that REVS ARE FREE should be weighted 100%. Game set match Revs. let's see should I pay $7,000 to $10,000 or play for free....?

[Unregistered]

Except that REVS ARE FREE should be weighted 100%. Game set match Revs. let's see should I pay $7,000 to $10,000 or play for free....?

This was an evaluation of the programs themselves, not a cost analysis. It wad a report card on the academy programs. The price tag is a different discussion.

From what I can see, the Revs do come out slightly ahead. That combined with the huge draw of being free should bring in the best players and make them the more successful program. On the other hand, if you have the money, the Bolts are still a good program as well.

[Unregistered]

What about the fact that the Revs Zone 1and Early Zone 2 Curriculum is listed as "incomplete" whereas the Bolts and Seacoast are complete. This is described as "Based on the clubs programming in Zone 1 and Early Zone 2, including providing players with developmentally focused competitive and training environments consistent with U.S. Soccer standards for player development."

[Unregistered]

What about the fact that the Revs Zone 1and Early Zone 2 Curriculum is listed as "incomplete" whereas the Bolts and Seacoast are complete. This is described as "Based on the clubs programming in Zone 1 and Early Zone 2, including providing players with developmentally focused competitive and training environments consistent with U.S. Soccer standards for player development."

That may have something to do with Revs not having a program that leads into the DAP and so are not developing their own players to come into the U15/U16 age group but taking them from other clubs that have been developing from the U10 age groups.

[Unregistered]

Maybe Bolts rank higher on development because their players are not as talented as the Revs' players, so there's more to develop?

[Unregistered]

Maybe Bolts rank higher on development because their players are not as talented as the Revs' players, so there's more to develop?

Very funny. The Revs do not have a feeder program for their academy and the Bolts do. The Bolts start developing their players at U10, the Revs start recruiting their players at U15/U16. Pretty simple.

[Unregistered]

Maybe Bolts rank higher on development because their players are not as talented as the Revs' players, so there's more to develop?

so....you are saying that the Bolts coaches are better since the Revs 16 were one place ahead of the Bolts while the Bolts 18s were one ahead of the Revs. Let me summarize:
The development and play style leave the two clubs tied. However, as far as you are concerned, the Bolts players are weaker at the start. Therefore, the coaching and training with the Bolts must bring them equal with the Revs.
Now add into the equation that fact that the Facilities are superior for the Revs (according to the evaluation), I suppose that the Bolts start two clicks below the Revs, but successfully develop and establish themselves as equal.

Thanks.....I get it now.
By the way, although the Bolts are not free, the yearly cost for playing in the Bolts DAP is the lowest of all the teams in the club.....

[Unregistered]

so....you are saying that the Bolts coaches are better since the Revs 16 were one place ahead of the Bolts while the Bolts 18s were one ahead of the Revs. Let me summarize:
The development and play style leave the two clubs tied. However, as far as you are concerned, the Bolts players are weaker at the start. Therefore, the coaching and training with the Bolts must bring them equal with the Revs.
Now add into the equation that fact that the Facilities are superior for the Revs (according to the evaluation), I suppose that the Bolts start two clicks below the Revs, but successfully develop and establish themselves as equal.

Thanks.....I get it now.
By the way, although the Bolts are not free, the yearly cost for playing in the Bolts DAP is the lowest of all the teams in the club.....

I wouldn't publicize your last point too widely.....

[Unregistered]

So how many years do you think it will take the Revs to get up to speed in this department? Since all of the coaches involved with DAP have prior coaching experience, don't you think if they were hired to develop players in DAP, it would be nice if their ?player development" chops didn't, in effect, need years to develop?

Rev's had a pretty good year last year in regards to developing players. One pro player and two players to USMNT residency.

[Unregistered]

Nice try.

Revs got 3 stars for playing style (which is a huge reflection of the coaches) while Bolts got 2.5 stars.
Revs got 4 stars for facilities, Bolts got 3
Revs got 3.5 stars for training environment, Bolts got 3

This is pretty significant and not a "wash" as some have said.

BTW, training environment does not equate with "facilities" in any way as some seem to think.

From the USSF site:

"Training Environment: Based on the quality of the training sessions conducted by the club and quality of the training log kept by the coaches."

[Unregistered]

Sorry buddy. What are the goals of DAP in MA??? Clearly not pro or NT and college results abysmal, so please advise. People about to commit to 10 months would like to know.

What are your goals? To eliminate DAP alltogether?

[Unregistered]

not a wash

This is certainly and interesting topic and the evaluation process is a nice way to give the clubs a report card. It is funny, however, that the Revs parents are jumping on this as the definitive finding to show that they are so much better than the Bolts......cheaper yes....better....'not a wash'.

The evaluators are, I assume, USSF soccer, an organization that many say need to be revamped as they are not producing enough quality players. How many times have we read on these threads how the DAP is not producing what it is supposed to be producing? Going to a 10 month season in the Northeast division will not change this. The 10 month season has already been a fact elsewhere in the country.

The first three components of the evaluation reflect training. Player development, play style, and training environment (quality of training sessions). The first is most important since it is what most say is lacking. Since the style of play varies across the world, I am not sure that any one organization's opinion on this would be considered the 'Gold Standard'.

Training environment or the quality of training sessions is a good one. Unless, the evaluators resided with the team for 1-2 weeks of sessions, I don't know how you can get a good sense of the quality. if, however, they did, then great.

Player development is the best indicator of how successful a club is doing. Unfortunately, for many of the DAP clubs (and non DAP clubs) it is not clear how much development goes on as compared to recruitment of players from other clubs.

Nevertheless, giving clubs a report card is a great idea to allow clubs to reflect on what they can do to become better and ?? address the needs of youth soccer.

So......do the Revs provide better training than the Bolts?? It is 'not a wash'. With regard to actual play, the two clubs are very very comparable (unless the Revs start to work a lot harder at recruiting players away from the Bolts). The other components of the report card are strictly relating to resources i.e. money and cost of the program. In this regard, the Revs have the upper hand....probably the only positive contribution toward soccer that the Kraft family has provided.

It was good to see that W/L records were not a big component of the evaluation. For these two clubs, between the two teams, it is 'not a wash'. They were fairly equal when considering both teams. The Revs need to consider starting PreAcademy teams. I think this will be a big boom for them. However, before they do this they should try to maintain a stable coaching environment. It will be good to see what the Revs teams can do without their 23 goal scorer.