No offense but why was PDA South let in ECNL?

[Guest]

They do develop players, though. They train and teach kids how to play and they offer teams on which they can do this. They cannot guarantee an outcome, though. They cant guarantee that the player stays motivated and they cant guarantee which team they will be placed on 3 or 4 years into the future. Some people think that development only counts of the player stays always on the top team and becomes a D1 schlarship athlete, which is unrealistic. Development means the player stays in the game and improves, not that they will forever be on the "A" team or getting offers.

[Guest]

They do develop players, though. They train and teach kids how to play and they offer teams on which they can do this. They cannot guarantee an outcome, though. They cant guarantee that the player stays motivated and they cant guarantee which team they will be placed on 3 or 4 years into the future. Some people think that development only counts of the player stays always on the top team and becomes a D1 schlarship athlete, which is unrealistic. Development means the player stays in the game and improves, not that they will forever be on the "A" team or getting offers.

^ there's that too

[Guest]

Because clubs like PDA claim they are a development academy but in reality they are a recruiting academy. The players actually trained there from a young age do not succeed and no longer play there or a dropped to the lowest level teams. Nothing wrong with it- they should just change their name to represent what they really are.

Please. Then ECNL should take the Elite out of its name too. It's marketing. They are businesses. And players to develop its just not all will be good players in the end. Some are limited genetically, others are motivated enough to do the extra work to rise above the average players. A coach or club can't teach that, it comes from within.

[Guest]

They do develop players, though. They train and teach kids how to play and they offer teams on which they can do this. They cannot guarantee an outcome, though. They cant guarantee that the player stays motivated and they cant guarantee which team they will be placed on 3 or 4 years into the future. Some people think that development only counts of the player stays always on the top team and becomes a D1 schlarship athlete, which is unrealistic. Development means the player stays in the game and improves, not that they will forever be on the "A" team or getting offers.

This is fair. But then explain how at age 8 a kid is on the blue team and a super star. Then by 12-13 completely dropped from blue to white to south to ECRL or completely out. These are kids that work extremely hard, do all extra training, make every practice and give it their all. Why would they not be able to develop that kid they invested in for so long? Does it mean the kid was only good as a younger youth player but just isn't good enough anymore or does it mean that the coach and club didn't properly develop that player to get to that point? If it were 1 or 2 fine---but its entire teams. I think that begs the question. If you talented at 8 and then all of sudden after being at the same club for 5 years you just are not as good as those from the outside doesn't that point to one thing only?

[Guest]

This is fair. But then explain how at age 8 a kid is on the blue team and a super star. Then by 12-13 completely dropped from blue to white to south to ECRL or completely out. These are kids that work extremely hard, do all extra training, make every practice and give it their all. Why would they not be able to develop that kid they invested in for so long? Does it mean the kid was only good as a younger youth player but just isn't good enough anymore or does it mean that the coach and club didn't properly develop that player to get to that point? If it were 1 or 2 fine---but its entire teams. I think that begs the question. If you talented at 8 and then all of sudden after being at the same club for 5 years you just are not as good as those from the outside doesn't that point to one thing only?

Random thoughts:

You're exaggerating that it is entire teams, it isn't.

Yes some so called young studs do turn out to be average later on. Often they're super athletic or bigger, not necessarily more skilled that others. Over time others pass them by.

Players change teams for better fit, more PT, cost, not interested in the college track etc. Players also drop out of soccer altogether for many reasons. Don't assume everyone who has left was cut.

Puberty can be tough on some kids, especially some girls. Big butts, hips or boobs slow them down.

Some kids just won't be as good as others out there. It doesn't matter how hard they work. Some kids don't put in the work, goof off at practice and don't improve at the same rates as others.

Crazy but yeah other clubs develop players too. Go figure. Why shouldn't those kids be given a chance just because they didn't pick "-the right club" at age 8?

Why should a team be obligated to keep their ulittle players? Loyalty? Hilarious. It's a business. Winning records keep new customers coming in the door. It's harsh but it's how works. Don't like it play town soccer.

Loosing a spot on team is never pleasant but it's also part of life. Suck it up butter cup.