End of ECNL vs GA Debate

[Guest]

I'm not sure what the argument is??? The top GA teams nationally produce just as many P5 scholarships as top ECNL teams. Outside of that, better off in ECNL. Feel free to use any major tournament that includes both GA and ECNL teams, like Jeff Cup, if you want to argue which has the better top teams. 2008 Nationals could hang, if not beat any ECNL team. Same could be said for 2007 FCV or 2006 Albion. Graduating class from '22 FC Bay Area Surf is another team that was pretty incredible.

But, and I mean BUT, once you get outside of the top one or two clubs from each division, families should try to commit to ECNL Clubs because the drop off is so steep. I don't think that makes top GA teams any worse than ECNL just because they play a weaker schedule. That's the reason for Jeff Cup and Champions League. College Coaches are at these events scouting and evaluating, not lonely league games against Sporting Delaware and Metro United.

Jumping to ECNL on a bottom end team/club for a patch isn't going to get you anymore looks then playing at a GA club.

[Guest]

What makes a top coach for you, may not be the same for someone else. That holds true at pretty much every level.

True. But most would hold to basic principles and I believe proper technique is a universal truth for all sports

Soccer Nut

[Guest]

Development and winning don't have to be mutually exclusive, nor does 100% overlap on a Venn diagram mean it's because of good coaching. Look at clubs that have most or all of their teams pretty consistently in the top half. Some losses are perfectly fine . As long as games are close you know the teams are competitive and in the right league.

Being on a truly top team won't be worthb8t if you never play. play for fit not win/loss records

Ds team in the younger ages (u8-u12) focused more on technique, skills, soccer IQ and player development. If they won, great and if they didn't then no big deal except for tournaments. Could never understand going to tournaments and look at them as scrimmages. Might as well not go, save the fees, and just schedule more cross over league games or actual scrimmages. Anyway, coach would have them do things like play a player down (team was small anyway), pass 300 times before being allowed to shoot, can't take a shot until 30-50 consecutive passes, shot has to come from a cross, skill before shot and a ton of other stuff. Each of these girls are some of the best skilled for their age (one made it as far as ODP Nationals). The best was always hearing the other team parents cheer about winning against us as we knew winning didn't matter at those ages. Now this team is older and top of its division in its league and attends national events, now that it matters. Each of those girls, still with this team or not, have gone on to achieve better things then any of the ones they had played against save a few. Will this translate into what others consider the product of a top program like top 20 D1 school, YNT or going pro? Maybe, maybe not, as you never know which may want that path or which wants to be a teacher, doctor, lawyer or anything else.

[Guest]

I feel like this thread has now made some major head way with intelligent and common sense folks posting. Much less bashing and more productive debate. Thanks. Carry on.

[Guest]

Ds team in the younger ages (u8-u12) focused more on technique, skills, soccer IQ and player development. If they won, great and if they didn't then no big deal except for tournaments. Could never understand going to tournaments and look at them as scrimmages. Might as well not go, save the fees, and just schedule more cross over league games or actual scrimmages. Anyway, coach would have them do things like play a player down (team was small anyway), pass 300 times before being allowed to shoot, can't take a shot until 30-50 consecutive passes, shot has to come from a cross, skill before shot and a ton of other stuff. Each of these girls are some of the best skilled for their age (one made it as far as ODP Nationals). The best was always hearing the other team parents cheer about winning against us as we knew winning didn't matter at those ages. Now this team is older and top of its division in its league and attends national events, now that it matters. Each of those girls, still with this team or not, have gone on to achieve better things then any of the ones they had played against save a few. Will this translate into what others consider the product of a top program like top 20 D1 school, YNT or going pro? Maybe, maybe not, as you never know which may want that path or which wants to be a teacher, doctor, lawyer or anything else.

It sounds like a great experience, but my kids would have quit the sport if winning games wasn't a priority. Some kids like to compete and see their hard work translate into results.

[Guest]

So how do you know those bottom roster players will ever play an ECNL team?

So if you are on the roster for one tournament and then not on the roster for the next tournament, but back on the roster for following tournament, then in the middle of those three tournaments you aren’t on the team?

So if Christian Pulisic doesn’t play in a USA game he’s not on the national team?

If you are not playing for the NT you are not really on the NT. It is pretty simple math.

[Guest]

Ds team in the younger ages (u8-u12) focused more on technique, skills, soccer IQ and player development. If they won, great and if they didn't then no big deal except for tournaments. Could never understand going to tournaments and look at them as scrimmages. Might as well not go, save the fees, and just schedule more cross over league games or actual scrimmages. Anyway, coach would have them do things like play a player down (team was small anyway), pass 300 times before being allowed to shoot, can't take a shot until 30-50 consecutive passes, shot has to come from a cross, skill before shot and a ton of other stuff. Each of these girls are some of the best skilled for their age (one made it as far as ODP Nationals). The best was always hearing the other team parents cheer about winning against us as we knew winning didn't matter at those ages. Now this team is older and top of its division in its league and attends national events, now that it matters. Each of those girls, still with this team or not, have gone on to achieve better things then any of the ones they had played against save a few. Will this translate into what others consider the product of a top program like top 20 D1 school, YNT or going pro? Maybe, maybe not, as you never know which may want that path or which wants to be a teacher, doctor, lawyer or anything else.

Sorry but pass 300x or 50 consecutive passes before being allowed to shoot at U8-12? This would not be possible even if you were a stacked, top club team playing against low level town recreational teams.

[Guest]

It sounds like a great experience, but my kids would have quit the sport if winning games wasn't a priority. Some kids like to compete and see their hard work translate into results.

A coach can foster a competitive environment without focusing on wins at all costs. Way too many won't give weaker players meaningful PT because they fear losing.

[Guest]

True. But most would hold to basic principles and I believe proper technique is a universal truth for all sports

Soccer Nut

I agree. But you also need mental and fitness. It’s really all 3. However It’s easier to learn and adjust the other two as you age, but technical gets harder as you grow. Example: teaching a 15 year old to use their left foot is a lot harder for the teacher and student and takes tremendous patience, practice.

SN - what do you think colleges want to see technical wise?

[Guest]

I agree. But you also need mental and fitness. It’s really all 3. However It’s easier to learn and adjust the other two as you age, but technical gets harder as you grow. Example: teaching a 15 year old to use their left foot is a lot harder for the teacher and student and takes tremendous patience, practice.

SN - what do you think colleges want to see technical wise?

I have some experience with this as all 3 of my daughters will play or have played in power 5 conference, big east, and now patriot league.

if one wants to play for a top 5 -10 team in college, it is undeniable that technical skill, speed, strength , speed of play (thought or quick decision making- some call it IQ for game and tenacity /grit is the ticket. You’ll find that in lesser divisions, you’ll get some lesser combination of these ingredients. The more you have of these traits the higher the quality of team you will play for. The mix of these ingredients are also position specific as defenders may need more of one than the other and other positions can get away with more of one and less of the other and be successful. But technical no matter the athletic gifts make the game easier. And that’s were every child should start. In my humble opinion

Soccer Nut

[Guest]

I agree. But you also need mental and fitness. It’s really all 3. However It’s easier to learn and adjust the other two as you age, but technical gets harder as you grow. Example: teaching a 15 year old to use their left foot is a lot harder for the teacher and student and takes tremendous patience, practice.

SN - what do you think colleges want to see technical wise?

By technical skill, I simply mean, can you maintain position of the ball on the ground or in the air. Can you get out of tight spaces efficiently and can you pass with both feet. Can you take space with a tight dribble close to your feet. Is your first touch clean and into space. Do you know how to tackle properly by using your body properly. Do you understand the technical knowledge of managing space around you.-Constantly moving and looking for proper angles. Can you pass in the air. Are you able to shoot with both feet using the proper follow through. Technical is so much more than fancy feet! And it simply makes the game easier no matter your athletic ability.


SoccerNut

[Guest]

I have some experience with this as all 3 of my daughters will play or have played in power 5 conference, big east, and now patriot league.

if one wants to play for a top 5 -10 team in college, it is undeniable that technical skill, speed, strength , speed of play (thought or quick decision making- some call it IQ for game and tenacity /grit is the ticket. You’ll find that in lesser divisions, you’ll get some lesser combination of these ingredients. The more you have of these traits the higher the quality of team you will play for. The mix of these ingredients are also position specific as defenders may need more of one than the other and other positions can get away with more of one and less of the other and be successful. But technical no matter the athletic gifts make the game easier. And that’s were every child should start. In my humble opinion

Soccer Nut

I have experience with this as well with a daughter playing P5 and another Patriot league. When you look at the soccer pyramid starting from the top coaches look for the following four things if you want to play top 20. The most important is athletic ability which is speed of play. Then comes Mental & physical toughness. Coaches must first have confidence in you as a player first and foremost to get playing time. You have to be committed and challenge every ball. If a player lacks either than the will not play meaningful minutes. Third is technical ability of first touch, passing and controlling the ball. Lastly, tactical ability which is reading the field of play. Coaches want players who read the play rather than reacting. All four are essential for top of the pyramid teams. With daughters in different leagues you can see the difference with the top group.

[Guest]

I have experience with this as well with a daughter playing P5 and another Patriot league. When you look at the soccer pyramid starting from the top coaches look for the following four things if you want to play top 20. The most important is athletic ability which is speed of play. Then comes Mental & physical toughness. Coaches must first have confidence in you as a player first and foremost to get playing time. You have to be committed and challenge every ball. If a player lacks either than the will not play meaningful minutes. Third is technical ability of first touch, passing and controlling the ball. Lastly, tactical ability which is reading the field of play. Coaches want players who read the play rather than reacting. All four are essential for top of the pyramid teams. With daughters in different leagues you can see the difference with the top group.

Interesting- seems you and SN see the it basics the same but importance of those different.

You believe athletic ability is most important and physical/mental toughness and last technical.
SN believe it’s technical, speed to play and feet and mind working together in sync.

Personally I’ve seen both kinds of players and those at the highest level are all athletic, it’s really hard to compete with top teams ages 14-18 without that. However, I will agree with SN as skill is what separates. athleticism without skill gets beat every single time- great example of that is watching HS soccer. best athlete, fastest track running goes to try soccer. Outruns, fitness wise crushes all. But gets on the ball and it falls apart- every single time.
Which is why skill should be the number 1 focus at younger years. Athleticism is natural and can be easily increased and worked on. However skill if taught well to an already athletic child it will allow their feet to work quicker than their brain.

[Guest]

Interesting- seems you and SN see the it basics the same but importance of those different.

You believe athletic ability is most important and physical/mental toughness and last technical.
SN believe it’s technical, speed to play and feet and mind working together in sync.

Personally I’ve seen both kinds of players and those at the highest level are all athletic, it’s really hard to compete with top teams ages 14-18 without that. However, I will agree with SN as skill is what separates. athleticism without skill gets beat every single time- great example of that is watching HS soccer. best athlete, fastest track running goes to try soccer. Outruns, fitness wise crushes all. But gets on the ball and it falls apart- every single time.
Which is why skill should be the number 1 focus at younger years. Athleticism is natural and can be easily increased and worked on. However skill if taught well to an already athletic child it will allow their feet to work quicker than their brain.

Not the poster and I don't want to put words in their mouth but skill is kind of the given, the baseline. Speed and athleticism is what can set players apart. Athleticism is hige component in US soccer and even more so college soccer. It can help coaches win and keep their jobs. And no athleticism can't be taught. It can be improved on some, but can onlygo so far. Some of it is pure genetics. Can't turn a mule into a Kentucky Derby winner. Coaches need you to step on the field game ready. They're not going to spend much time "developing "

[Guest]

Not the poster and I don't want to put words in their mouth but skill is kind of the given, the baseline. Speed and athleticism is what can set players apart. Athleticism is hige component in US soccer and even more so college soccer. It can help coaches win and keep their jobs. And no athleticism can't be taught. It can be improved on some, but can onlygo so far. Some of it is pure genetics. Can't turn a mule into a Kentucky Derby winner. Coaches need you to step on the field game ready. They're not going to spend much time "developing "

Exactly, I was the OP along with SN. You get it. What you said is a soccer truth/fact. In the top programs colleges coaches will almost take a chance with my number 1 & 2. You can’t teach athleticism and mental and physical fitness. Technical skill by the time you get to college “is what it is” and improvement at that age is about experience. Most top programs now play a variation of a 3-5-2 with a high line. This demands speed, quickness and athleticism. I have seen many technical players immediately get swarmed because their first touch is too slow. The above remark that athleticism without skill gets beat every time is wrong. Your use the example of a track player (non soccer player) to make your point. In reality I am talking about athletic soccer vs technical/skill soccer player.