End of Club soccer as we know it in New England

[Unregistered]

Well I see those two are at again. At least with P not signing in from his "vacation" he won't be able to go full tilt nutty with his 5 paragraph rants with multiple attacking quotes. Or maybe he can't help himself, we'll see and maybe those posts are coming.

Ok, seriously can't we for once keep on topic and debate the topics and ideas being brought up, instead of just talking about who is bringing them up???

Now as for promotion/relegation or no promotion/relegation ... I could probably be swayed either way. But I know I would really prefer a singular line of league hierarchy for all teams instead of the current duplication we have all over the place.

Promo/Relegation is a lottery system where unlucky teams get demolished for no good reason. The difference between the teams that got relegated and those that didn't in R1P was not that great.

Perfect case in point, a couple of years ago an NEFC finished in the relegation zone and lost state cup finals. By all rights they should have been relegated to NERP. They were fortunate in that it was the year several teams decided not to apply for R1P and they got to keep their slot and won the league the next year.

Other teams drop out for a year, win NERP and return. It was a cycle repeated over and over again. When teams are able to keep their squad together they usually earn a spot back.

When players have choices they make another team a little better and destroy the team they came from. It wasn't the promo/relegation that made the super teams, it was just that there were some really good players in those years.

[Unregistered]

Promo/Relegation is a lottery system where unlucky teams get demolished for no good reason. The difference between the teams that got relegated and those that didn't in R1P was not that great.

Perfect case in point, a couple of years ago an NEFC finished in the relegation zone and lost state cup finals. By all rights they should have been relegated to NERP. They were fortunate in that it was the year several teams decided not to apply for R1P and they got to keep their slot and won the league the next year.

Other teams drop out for a year, win NERP and return. It was a cycle repeated over and over again. When teams are able to keep their squad together they usually earn a spot back.

When players have choices they make another team a little better and destroy the team they came from. It wasn't the promo/relegation that made the super teams, it was just that there were some really good players in those years.

Having been around one or two of the so called "super teams", all those years ago. I can say that promotion/relegation worked to consolidate a majority of the talent, by 15yrs old, into the top 4-5 teams. By 14/15 players and parents figured it out. Less likely being in the relegation zone every year, and having to scramble at tryouts, before the relegation games. It did work! They also figured out that, being with so many top players gave the rest more looks from the college coaches. The high level players all consolidated in the top 4-5 made it competitive, more often in the Division, and the others as well. You could see the line between the elite, and everyone else. The competition at training was just as intense as the games. You can disagree, but if we had promo/rel it would consolidate more than it currently does. Right now there are no penalties for mediocre performing "top" teams. I wish all leagues in NE used the system. Imagine the jockeying, and speculation every year, if 2 teams got dropped to the 2nd level, and how that might impact the following year with player movement to stay up.

[Unregistered]

There is an element here that doesn't want their soccer team to be competitive less their child end up on the outside looking in. They just want to wear the uniform rather than play the game.

[Unregistered]

There is an element here that doesn't want their soccer team to be competitive less their child end up on the outside looking in. They just want to wear the uniform rather than play the game.

Why? Because you say so? Because you are convinced of something that isn't true. We've around this block a hundred times. We have roughly the same number of top teams as we did 5-7 years ago. Promo/relegation is at tryouts. Nothing is different at the top and those aren't the teams that would be at risk in a relegation system. Something else is ticking you off and you're cloaking it in this promo/relegation mantra.

[Unregistered]

Whoever called this the re-run channel earlier today was right on the money. Like record skipping to the same 3 notes over and over.

[Unregistered]

There are just a little less than double the number of teams you traditionally had years ago before everyone started side stepping MAPLE and it's promo process. That's a fact.

[Unregistered]

Simple question for everyone else. Yes or no. Does the status quo work? If the answer is yes then there is nothing to discuss. If the answer is no then I would suggest someone put out another idea to make things better.

BTW, the NFL, NBA, and MLB all have a thing called a draft which is promo-relegation on steroids.

Still waiting to put a face on the status quo proponents. Club officials or parents?

[Unregistered]

Still waiting to put a face on the status quo proponents. Club officials or parents?

Parent here - I'm one of the ones fairly happy with status quo.

[Unregistered]

Having been around one or two of the so called "super teams", all those years ago. I can say that promotion/relegation worked to consolidate a majority of the talent, by 15yrs old, into the top 4-5 teams. By 14/15 players and parents figured it out. Less likely being in the relegation zone every year, and having to scramble at tryouts, before the relegation games. It did work! They also figured out that, being with so many top players gave the rest more looks from the college coaches. The high level players all consolidated in the top 4-5 made it competitive, more often in the Division, and the others as well. You could see the line between the elite, and everyone else. The competition at training was just as intense as the games. You can disagree, but if we had promo/rel it would consolidate more than it currently does. Right now there are no penalties for mediocre performing "top" teams. I wish all leagues in NE used the system. Imagine the jockeying, and speculation every year, if 2 teams got dropped to the 2nd level, and how that might impact the following year with player movement to stay up.

How do you conclude it was the promo/relegation that drove the kids to those teams.

There are still 4-5 (fewer I think) teams where most of the top players land by the u15 year. Everyone involved has a pretty good idea who those teams are.

Younger teams still compete against each other, and once they stop, you still know who the top teams are in your track. NPL folks know who the best teams are - you don't need relegation to figure it out. ECNL folks know who the best team is in each age group and their NPL sides know they are B teams. There are a few occasions where teams get to play across groups (showcases, state cup games, etc) where everyone on one of these teams gets a good idea of where they stand.

Sure, it is harder for the TS observers to get an accurate 1-10 ranking of teams, but I have a very good idea of who 1-5 are in D's age group.

All this that you said above is still true...
" They also figured out that, being with so many top players gave the rest more looks from the college coaches. The high level players all consolidated in the top 4-5 made it competitive, more often in the Division, and the others as well. You could see the line between the elite, and everyone else. "

People haven't forgotten this. The best players don't need teams to explode to want to play with other great players. Water seeks its own level.

[Unregistered]

How do you conclude it was the promo/relegation that drove the kids to those teams.

There are still 4-5 (fewer I think) teams where most of the top players land by the u15 year. Everyone involved has a pretty good idea who those teams are.

Younger teams still compete against each other, and once they stop, you still know who the top teams are in your track. NPL folks know who the best teams are - you don't need relegation to figure it out. ECNL folks know who the best team is in each age group and their NPL sides know they are B teams. There are a few occasions where teams get to play across groups (showcases, state cup games, etc) where everyone on one of these teams gets a good idea of where they stand.

Sure, it is harder for the TS observers to get an accurate 1-10 ranking of teams, but I have a very good idea of who 1-5 are in D's age group.

All this that you said above is still true...
" They also figured out that, being with so many top players gave the rest more looks from the college coaches. The high level players all consolidated in the top 4-5 made it competitive, more often in the Division, and the others as well. You could see the line between the elite, and everyone else. "

People haven't forgotten this. The best players don't need teams to explode to want to play with other great players. Water seeks its own level.

Quick ?. If your D was on a team, in the top Division from 8-14 yrs old, and at the end of the U14 year her team was relegated. She is one of the top 3 players on the team. Does she tryout for another team in June or stick with the team? You don't think players would jump ship? I do, and I think they would migrate to the top 4-5 teams. You don't think that the level of the top 4-5/6 teams would improve? Yes I agree that you can figure out the top 4-5 now, and don't need relegation to see it, but it could be better and should be better. I'm not saying get rid of all the other teams. Have at it, but there is no way that the majority of the best players are seeking that level anymore. 10 years ago you would not see a potential D1 playing for a MAPLE 2 team. If you're saying you're ok with it now, because it hasn't gone to far yet, or for the convenience vs. coaching. I get that, but I don't agree that the top 4-5 are as good today, and I do think that P/R would help get back to that level. Instead of 10-12 pretty good teams at the older ages, like we have now. I also think that the constant looming threat of relegation, helped to develop a sense of urgency in HS age players. My opinion todays player doesn't understand the urgency or importance of every game in college.

[Unregistered]

Quick ?. If your D was on a team, in the top Division from 8-14 yrs old, and at the end of the U14 year her team was relegated. She is one of the top 3 players on the team. Does she tryout for another team in June or stick with the team? You don't think players would jump ship? I do, and I think they would migrate to the top 4-5 teams. You don't think that the level of the top 4-5/6 teams would improve? Yes I agree that you can figure out the top 4-5 now, and don't need relegation to see it, but it could be better and should be better. I'm not saying get rid of all the other teams. Have at it, but there is no way that the majority of the best players are seeking that level anymore. 10 years ago you would not see a potential D1 playing for a MAPLE 2 team. If you're saying you're ok with it now, because it hasn't gone to far yet, or for the convenience vs. coaching. I get that, but I don't agree that the top 4-5 are as good today, and I do think that P/R would help get back to that level. Instead of 10-12 pretty good teams at the older ages, like we have now. I also think that the constant looming threat of relegation, helped to develop a sense of urgency in HS age players. My opinion todays player doesn't understand the urgency or importance of every game in college.

Pure stupidity. How many D1 college players do you really think are playing MAPLE Div 2? How many kids do you think would go to bed in a panic every night if there was promo-relegation? What passes for logic around here is astounding.

The whole "watered down" sermon and the bizarrely attached promo-relegation argument are the biggest hoaxes promoted on this site to date.

[Unregistered]

Quick ?. If your D was on a team, in the top Division from 8-14 yrs old, and at the end of the U14 year her team was relegated. She is one of the top 3 players on the team. Does she tryout for another team in June or stick with the team? You don't think players would jump ship? I do, and I think they would migrate to the top 4-5 teams. You don't think that the level of the top 4-5/6 teams would improve? Yes I agree that you can figure out the top 4-5 now, and don't need relegation to see it, but it could be better and should be better. I'm not saying get rid of all the other teams. Have at it, but there is no way that the majority of the best players are seeking that level anymore. 10 years ago you would not see a potential D1 playing for a MAPLE 2 team. If you're saying you're ok with it now, because it hasn't gone to far yet, or for the convenience vs. coaching. I get that, but I don't agree that the top 4-5 are as good today, and I do think that P/R would help get back to that level. Instead of 10-12 pretty good teams at the older ages, like we have now. I also think that the constant looming threat of relegation, helped to develop a sense of urgency in HS age players. My opinion todays player doesn't understand the urgency or importance of every game in college.

There are not 10-12 pretty good teams at any of the older ages.

Look at the State Cup archives:

current u18s: MPS top two last 3 years
current u17s: Stars NPL/NEFC 5 of 6 finalists slots last 3 years
current u16s: MPS/NFC 4 of 6 finalist slots last 3 years

After that the drop off is steep.

As for you hypothetical. If my D was a top 3 player with d1 aspirations, she would not be on a team that had the potential to be relegated, unless it was the only team within a reasonable distance in the top league.

I do recognize the importance of being on one of the top teams and, even without relegation, that is why we moved to one of the top teams.

[Unregistered]

Pure stupidity. How many D1 college players do you really think are playing MAPLE Div 2? How many kids do you think would go to bed in a panic every night if there was promo-relegation? What passes for logic around here is astounding.

The whole "watered down" sermon and the bizarrely attached promo-relegation argument are the biggest hoaxes promoted on this site to date.

Exactly, There is still the same concentration of talent there has always been. Look at the 2014 signing announcements. Every player at d1 school came from one of 4 Mass clubs.

Obvious disclaimer before the attack: I don't care which clubs they are, that isn't the point here. Also not the point, yes kids can get to great fits with other clubs and finally of course it is possible to get to d1 from a different club.

The only reason I point to that list is to support my concentration of talent claim. The best kids will find the best teams to play on.

[Unregistered]

There is an element here that doesn't want their soccer team to be competitive less their child end up on the outside looking in. They just want to wear the uniform rather than play the game.

This is what Galway is for. Problem solved. Bring back relegation.

[Unregistered]

One can understand why people wouldn't like promo-relegation because it IS a rather unpleasant process but the counter reasoning that teams are not diluted now that it no longer impacts the club soccer scene flies in the face logic. Go look up the definition of dilution in any context (finance, chemistry, law, etc) and you will find that they all basically state that whenever you add more of something you are by definition diluting it. It is a law of nature.

We have most certainly added way more teams than we would have had years ago. By my rough count on Gotsoccer we have 83 U14 club teams, 52 U15 club teams, 52 U16 club teams, and 46 U17 club teams active in this state. It is a fact that is more than double the number of teams we would have had years ago. We have in fact diluted club soccer in this state.

The notion that the are still only 4-5 top teams in the state is accurate. That hasn't changed. What isn't accurate is the assumption that those rosters are as strong as they were in the past. The current top teams are not weak at the top of the roster, they are weak at the middle and bottom of their rosters. There are now players on the rosters of those top teams that would not have even been close to making such a team years ago. To put it bluntly, the depth of the current top teams, sucks. The problem is more pronounced at what would have been the bottom of the old MAPLE D1 and in MAPLE D2. Those teams are incredibly diluted now because the players that would peculated up to strengthen them are now spread out over dozens of essentially redundant teams.

The argument that the best players still migrate to the best teams is nothing but pure parental ego speaking. One person choosing what they feel is a "best" team does not constitutes a trend? How was it even determined that their "best" team is in fact the best? That process no longer exists. In its place is nothing more than marketing spin. In the absence of things like promo-relegation and state cups everyone now gets to call their team great, but are they really?

The fact is there nothing forcing players in any particular direction other than marketing hype so there is absolutely no way you have the concentration of talent you once had when there were such forces. Even in this thread, posters are interjecting things like their convenience into the mix of decision making factors when choosing a club. That line of thought absolutely has impacted the quality of teams around now. It stands to reason that when there are dozens of teams to pick from and none really have demonstrated any significant dominance over the others it is normal for personal preferences to become the deciding factor. Everyone basing their club choice on personal preference is not necessarily a bad thing, it just doesn't lead to a heavy concentration talent at any particular club simply because there is no universal consensus of what constitutes the "best" team.

If people want to argue that the status quo is fine for them, that is their prerogative. Different strokes for different folks and all. The idea however, that things have not changed is simply ridiculous. The fact that environment has changed radically over the last 5 years is indisputable. The fact that we have all these new leagues is the proof. The impact of that change has in fact significantly diluted the competitive levels and the idea that we should all accept that is hardly a universal thought. That is just one myopic view on an anonymous forum.