Dap 2011-2012

[Unregistered]

First weekend complete, thoughts?

[Unregistered]

I'll go first.

Cosmos and Met Oval are terrible.

[Unregistered]

So you watched both teams play?Can
You please tell us why you came to
this conclusion.

[Unregistered]

As a club, the Cosmos are very very good. Although I did not see the U18 Bolts game, I did see some of the U16 game and the Cosmos seemed to control the ball better in the backfield. The Bolts had some good opportunities, but failed to convert.....including a 1 on 1 with the goalie. The Cosmos had two very good opportunities, one which was cleared by the Bolts defense and the other by the goalie.

The NE Revs seemed to handle the U16 Cosmos; 2-0. When comparing the Revs to the Bolts, I am going to give the nod to the Revs at the U16 level. The Revs have some new players that will contribute very well to the offense. More so, more than half of this team was born in 1996 and will be back next year. The Revs U16 team will be the best in this bunch.

The PreAcademy Cosmos U15 are an excellent team and should contribute well to next years U16 DAP. According the standings they beat the Bolts PreAcademy team 5-1.

For anyone to conclude that the Cosmos are not a strong club only indicates the ignorance of the poster. On the whole, this is one of the better clubs in the region. Keep in mind that Fall results are affected by a host of variables including injuries during High School ball, and on-going High School tournaments.

At the end of the year, we will see just how 'bad' a club that the Cosmos are.

[Unregistered]

As a club, the Cosmos are very very good. Although I did not see the U18 Bolts game, I did see some of the U16 game and the Cosmos seemed to control the ball better in the backfield. The Bolts had some good opportunities, but failed to convert.....including a 1 on 1 with the goalie. The Cosmos had two very good opportunities, one which was cleared by the Bolts defense and the other by the goalie.

The NE Revs seemed to handle the U16 Cosmos; 2-0. When comparing the Revs to the Bolts, I am going to give the nod to the Revs at the U16 level. The Revs have some new players that will contribute very well to the offense. More so, more than half of this team was born in 1996 and will be back next year. The Revs U16 team will be the best in this bunch.

The PreAcademy Cosmos U15 are an excellent team and should contribute well to next years U16 DAP. According the standings they beat the Bolts PreAcademy team 5-1.

For anyone to conclude that the Cosmos are not a strong club only indicates the ignorance of the poster. On the whole, this is one of the better clubs in the region. Keep in mind that Fall results are affected by a host of variables including injuries during High School ball, and on-going High School tournaments.

At the end of the year, we will see just how 'bad' a club that the Cosmos are.

It either indicates the ignorance of the poster or their blindness to clubs other than the Bolts as being better than the Bolts. This has been an ongoing theme of pro-Bolts posters over the past few years and it will continue.

[Unregistered]

It either indicates the ignorance of the poster or their blindness to clubs other than the Bolts as being better than the Bolts. This has been an ongoing theme of pro-Bolts posters over the past few years and it will continue.

Really? There aren't pro Revs posters on this forum blind to other clubs other than their own? There aren't pro NEFC posters on this forum blind to other clubs other than their own? there aren't pro Blazers posters blind to other clubs other than their own? Their aren't MPS posters on this forum blind to other clubs other than their own? There aren't Stars posters on this forum blind to other clubs other than their own? There aren't Scorpions posters on this forum blind to clubs other than their own?

If you're going to be upset about a group of parents promoting their own club, then please make sure you call them out as well. Your points would have much more credibility if you didn't shamelessy continue your tirade of hate against one particular club.

[Unregistered]

As a club, the Cosmos are very very good. Although I did not see the U18 Bolts game, I did see some of the U16 game and the Cosmos seemed to control the ball better in the backfield. The Bolts had some good opportunities, but failed to convert.....including a 1 on 1 with the goalie. The Cosmos had two very good opportunities, one which was cleared by the Bolts defense and the other by the goalie.

The NE Revs seemed to handle the U16 Cosmos; 2-0. When comparing the Revs to the Bolts, I am going to give the nod to the Revs at the U16 level. The Revs have some new players that will contribute very well to the offense. More so, more than half of this team was born in 1996 and will be back next year. The Revs U16 team will be the best in this bunch.

The PreAcademy Cosmos U15 are an excellent team and should contribute well to next years U16 DAP. According the standings they beat the Bolts PreAcademy team 5-1.

For anyone to conclude that the Cosmos are not a strong club only indicates the ignorance of the poster. On the whole, this is one of the better clubs in the region. Keep in mind that Fall results are affected by a host of variables including injuries during High School ball, and on-going High School tournaments.

At the end of the year, we will see just how 'bad' a club that the Cosmos are.

REPLY: we heard that Cosmos do not allow their players to play "up" from birth year ie all 96 birth years are on 96 pre-academy team, including 2 impressive central midfielders one of whom is an NT player (and the other should be), and huge talented defense. They are a powerhouse team who came into the Sat game vs 96 Bolts highly polished from many weeks training. Bolts beat Albertson next day, having beaten PDA and Met Oval last week.

[Unregistered]

REPLY: we heard that Cosmos do not allow their players to play "up" from birth year ie all 96 birth years are on 96 pre-academy team, including 2 impressive central midfielders one of whom is an NT player (and the other should be), and huge talented defense. They are a powerhouse team who came into the Sat game vs 96 Bolts highly polished from many weeks training. Bolts beat Albertson next day, having beaten PDA and Met Oval last week.

Agreed. The Cosmos 1996 team is an impressive team. Your statement about not playing up explains why the 1996 Bolts got beat in similar fashioin in both years. They were essentially playing the same team.

[Unregistered]

The results for the Bolts U/18 team over the weekend was impressive. Has their been a big turnover in players from last year? Seems like they have lots of firepower.

[Unregistered]

Agreed. The Cosmos 1996 team is an impressive team. Your statement about not playing up explains why the 1996 Bolts got beat in similar fashioin in both years. They were essentially playing the same team.

It has also been said that the 96 pre academy could beat the academy in a match.

[Unregistered]

REPLY: we heard that Cosmos do not allow their players to play "up" from birth year ie all 96 birth years are on 96 pre-academy team, including 2 impressive central midfielders one of whom is an NT player (and the other should be), and huge talented defense. They are a powerhouse team who came into the Sat game vs 96 Bolts highly polished from many weeks training. Bolts beat Albertson next day, having beaten PDA and Met Oval last week.

Actually, US Soccer DAP STRONGLY discourages this. If a player's development would be better served by playing up, then US Soccer wants them playing up. They do not want players helb back solely for the purpose of making a younger team stronger to win state cups, tournaments, etc.

By the way, the Cosmos used to be BW Gottschee, and the Gottschee club have now sued the Cosmos because they were due payments as part of the merger that weren't made.

[Unregistered]

Actually, US Soccer DAP STRONGLY discourages this. If a player's development would be better served by playing up, then US Soccer wants them playing up. They do not want players helb back solely for the purpose of making a younger team stronger to win state cups, tournaments, etc.

By the way, the Cosmos used to be BW Gottschee, and the Gottschee club have now sued the Cosmos because they were due payments as part of the merger that weren't made.

First, the U15 Preacademy Cosmo team is a freaking good team.
Second, the Cosmos organization has been trying to be accepted to the MLS for a few years now. The youth soccer program has been a component of the process.
Third, it is of interest to see the legal and financial issues wtih Gottschee, as the Cosmos organization has had similar issues with their west coast failed merger with LAFC. This merger lasted less than a year or two, but enough time for the Cosmos West to take away a number of very talented players. LAFC, although still a decent club, is a skeleton of what it used to be.

[Unregistered]

First, the U15 Preacademy Cosmo team is a freaking good team.
Second, the Cosmos organization has been trying to be accepted to the MLS for a few years now. The youth soccer program has been a component of the process.
Third, it is of interest to see the legal and financial issues wtih Gottschee, as the Cosmos organization has had similar issues with their west coast failed merger with LAFC. This merger lasted less than a year or two, but enough time for the Cosmos West to take away a number of very talented players. LAFC, although still a decent club, is a skeleton of what it used to be.

Bill Archer at BigSoccer is all over this. http://www.bigsoccer.com/soccer/bill...ism-in-europe/