Not great National Team versus strong Regional Team

[Guest]

For whichever club you’re talking about do the ECRL teams play the ECNL teams ever? I’ve heard typically they play 1-2 times per year. How do the games go if they do?

They scrimmage and sometimes play in tournaments against each other. When same year scrimmages each other it’s 5-8 goal difference. Typically they make national play a year or 2 up against regional. 1 year up is still a win for national but closer. 2 years up is a toss up

its true the top 4 national players are great but even the bottom 4 are usually better than top 4 regional players so that’s why same year is so lopsided

[Guest]

Why are you so extreme? All I said is that some coaches might interpret not-caring about losing as a bad thing. And tons of people on these forums have noted that coaches look at things like body language, behavior after mistakes, how they interact with teammates, etc. Why is this any different?

Glad your kid is a superstar and getting recognition despite being on a perennially-losing team. And happy that coaches appear to be able to look behind the attitude. Wonder how much more interest she might have gotten if she showed more caring about losing.

And, why are you so extreme and pushing an agenda? I never said my kid was a superstar. I never said she didn't want to win. I never even said she was the best player on her team. What my point has been is that results don't matter as much as playing well, and playing against better competition and against better players. I've specifically never mentioned her individual awards as they are irrelevant.

Two scenarios:

1) Lose in a close game against much better competition. Player has to mark an NT player (who bypasses college completely and goes straight to pros) and does very well against them. Player is not happy to lose, is even pissed she had a chance to tie it late, but also has satisfaction she completed and held her own against better competition.
2) Win against middling competition where she wasn't challenged much all game.


College coach will take that first scenario every single time. If you think differently, I can't help you.

[Guest]

And, why are you so extreme and pushing an agenda? I never said my kid was a superstar. I never said she didn't want to win. I never even said she was the best player on her team. What my point has been is that results don't matter as much as playing well, and playing against better competition and against better players. I've specifically never mentioned her individual awards as they are irrelevant.

Two scenarios:

1) Lose in a close game against much better competition. Player has to mark an NT player (who bypasses college completely and goes straight to pros) and does very well against them. Player is not happy to lose, is even pissed she had a chance to tie it late, but also has satisfaction she completed and held her own against better competition.
2) Win against middling competition where she wasn't challenged much all game.


College coach will take that first scenario every single time. If you think differently, I can't help you.

What agenda am I pushing? I made a comment and you had a cow about it. All I'm doing is responding to your rants and kid-brags.

And those two scenarios have zero to do with this thread. The thread was created to discuss a team underperforming to the point of being a perennial loser. No one is talking about close games against better competition except you.

[Guest]

What agenda am I pushing? I made a comment and you had a cow about it. All I'm doing is responding to your rants and kid-brags.

And those two scenarios have zero to do with this thread. The thread was created to discuss a team underperforming to the point of being a perennial loser. No one is talking about close games against better competition except you.

This entire thread is a fake premise started by a regional parent that wants people to think girls actually choose regional over national

[Guest]

They scrimmage and sometimes play in tournaments against each other. When same year scrimmages each other it’s 5-8 goal difference. Typically they make national play a year or 2 up against regional. 1 year up is still a win for national but closer. 2 years up is a toss up

its true the top 4 national players are great but even the bottom 4 are usually better than top 4 regional players so that’s why same year is so lopsided

Wow, that's a big disparity. What club is this? I'm the poster who commented about D's ECRL vs ECNL team not in MA, and their scrimmages are much closer than that (I think the most the ECNL team ever won by was by 4, and even that was rare).

[Guest]

This entire thread is a fake premise started by a regional parent that wants people to think girls actually choose regional over national

Then why are you here? To brag about your kid?

[Guest]

What agenda am I pushing? I made a comment and you had a cow about it. All I'm doing is responding to your rants and kid-brags.

And those two scenarios have zero to do with this thread. The thread was created to discuss a team underperforming to the point of being a perennial loser. No one is talking about close games against better competition except you.

Umm no. All I did was suggest that playing well personally against better competition meant more than a W/L... which is absolutely relevant to the first post. There is a faction of TS that thinks it's all about winning little kid's soccer games. Because I think that it's irrelevant I suggested that to the OP. Then people had their cow.

Again, I never bragged about her. I certainly could a lot more if it matters, but I won't. OP was looking for some advice, and I gave some and provided a real-life example as to why.

[Guest]

Then why are you here? To brag about your kid?

To point out how silly this thread is

[Guest]

To point out how silly this thread is

Seems really important for you to do, huh?

[Guest]

I find this to be the most intriguing of all the currently trending TS posts.

So this is what I gather about op.
1. D is on Stars White
2. D is NOT a starter
3. D's team loses A LOT
4. D wants to move to regional league because that's a more winning team
4. D is U17+ because she's attending showcases

My advice to Op is :
Move to regional where she will be a starter and she will get more attention from coaches because she's not on the bench.

If d < U17 then she can develop on the regional team and move up to National in a year or so.

As parents, we need to accept that not all our kids are "elite"

[Guest]

Seems really important for you to do, huh?

No, just like pointing out when people are full of s**t

[Guest]

I find this to be the most intriguing of all the currently trending TS posts.

So this is what I gather about op.
1. D is on Stars White
2. D is NOT a starter
3. D's team loses A LOT
4. D wants to move to regional league because that's a more winning team
4. D is U17+ because she's attending showcases

My advice to Op is :
Move to regional where she will be a starter and she will get more attention from coaches because she's not on the bench.

If d < U17 then she can develop on the regional team and move up to National in a year or so.

As parents, we need to accept that not all our kids are "elite"

Fwiw, showcases start at U15.

[Guest]

No, just like pointing out when people are full of s**t

Oh the irony! lol!

[Guest]

Fwiw, showcases start at U15.

Is that new? My D was at Showcases down to U13. They were obviously lightly attended by Coaches but there were always a few milling about. Old data, however so maybe that changed?

[Guest]

Is that new? My D was at Showcases down to U13. They were obviously lightly attended by Coaches but there were always a few milling about. Old data, however so maybe that changed?

Usually at U13 they are still tournaments (not showcases). There are a few showcases out there for U13-U14, but not nearly as many as fewer and fewer colleges are interested in watching players that young.