ECRL vs GA

[Unregistered]

I wouldn't...I've seen quite a few Williams' games, it's pretty bad.

Have you seen Cornell or Dartmouth? Pretty darn awful too.

And as previously mentioned, I was comparing the Williams *recruiting class* to Cornell and Dartmouth, not the teams. Have already acknowledged that most D1 teams will be ahead of D3 teams because D1 teams train and compete more than D3 teams...so by the time D1 players are sophomores, juniors and seniors, those D1 teams have trained and played far more than D3 teams.

[Unregistered]

An Ivy prospect with good skills will have other top universities as academic options and possibly soccer as well. There's some solid D3 programs and great academic schools like U Chicago, MIT, Johns Hopkins etc. If an Ivy level player steps down a notch academically they could get some very good merit $. While Ivies are very generous with financial assistance, many middle to upper income soccer families are shut out because there's no merit or athletic money.

[Unregistered]

Its not everyones reality. You have just distilled it to that. Playing at a top level D1 is difficult for ANYONE, irrespective of major. Most of the kids will NEVER get that opportunity. Highly rated D3? not sure what that means. Youth sports in this country (especially for girls) have realized that the more "bests" and "highly rated" outcomes we can convince parents exist, the more money we can make. Its participation awards everywhere in sports. the top soccer schools are not in D3 and they would get smoked by the top D1 soccer options. Duke,UCLA,USC,UVa, Stanford all have excellent academic reputations. However, getting ON the field for those teams consistently is a pipe dream for most. Its ok to accept your choices without trying to convince others of them by using words like best or highly rated when it comes to soccer. College is not only about soccer. Its all good. Most of these Youth leagues are about networking. Being part of the machine and paying your entry fee. Not designed to find the best players or prospects. We already know who most of those are pretty early.

Such a great perspective. Parents need to cling onto something, so they have that element of parental control. I hate to break it to you, 10+ yrs into what ever your career is, no one cares where you went to school. You can also go to a highly rated school and still be an idiot post graduation. People need to stop trying to justify their decisions and creating narratives to convince themselves and others. Just focus on doing what’s best for your kid that will give them the best overall experience. At a recent sporting event they were giving out medals for the top 6 and my kid even said, why? The more we baby our kids, the less prepared they will be for this crazy world.

[Unregistered]

Such a great perspective. Parents need to cling onto something, so they have that element of parental control. I hate to break it to you, 10+ yrs into what ever your career is, no one cares where you went to school. You can also go to a highly rated school and still be an idiot post graduation. People need to stop trying to justify their decisions and creating narratives to convince themselves and others. Just focus on doing what’s best for your kid that will give them the best overall experience. At a recent sporting event they were giving out medals for the top 6 and my kid even said, why? The more we baby our kids, the less prepared they will be for this crazy world.

I don't think the issue is people trying to justify their decisions, it's the other people making assumptions and deriding those decisions that is the issue. "Your D sucks and had to play at a D3 school because she wasn't good enough to play D1" is simply an incorrect narrative in most situations. This puts people whose kids have chosen that path on the defensive and wanting to explain the real circumstance that others will most certainly face. This defensive reflex is quite normal (who wouldn't want to defend their child's decision when faced with a true misrepresentation of their circumstance?).

[Unregistered]

I don't think the issue is people trying to justify their decisions, it's the other people making assumptions and deriding those decisions that is the issue. "Your D sucks and had to play at a D3 school because she wasn't good enough to play D1" is simply an incorrect narrative in most situations. This puts people whose kids have chosen that path on the defensive and wanting to explain the real circumstance that others will most certainly face. This defensive reflex is quite normal (who wouldn't want to defend their child's decision when faced with a true misrepresentation of their circumstance?).

I get that, but you must realize that MOST kids who can start for an ECNL,GA, or another "elite" Club could find a D1 school they could play at. The problem is many cannot find one they would want to attend academically,socially, athletically or whatever else. D1 as a term in isolation is as dumb as D3 in isolation because the number after the D is pretty irrelevant in most cases. I honestly dont care about anyones personal choices. Who are we to judge? If i were a parent of a kid who was good enough to start at UCLA, whilst I would know that is a whole different level to almost all of D1, I could care less if people think their kid could play there or not. I would not feel the need to come here to defend that.

Parents need to own their choices, move on from them if they are not working out and accept that whilst thier kids may share some outward similarities to others because of how youth soccer for girls works ( similar family demographics, income, etc), their wants, desires and experiences will be unique.

Youth sports is all about trying to make you believe otherwise. If i play for Club X, I can aspire to the same list of commits they post. Err false. Club X has little to do with that most of the time

[Unregistered]

I get that, but you must realize that MOST kids who can start for an ECNL,GA, or another "elite" Club could find a D1 school they could play at. The problem is many cannot find one they would want to attend academically,socially, athletically or whatever else. D1 as a term in isolation is as dumb as D3 in isolation because the number after the D is pretty irrelevant in most cases. I honestly dont care about anyones personal choices. Who are we to judge? If i were a parent of a kid who was good enough to start at UCLA, whilst I would know that is a whole different level to almost all of D1, I could care less if people think their kid could play there or not. I would not feel the need to come here to defend that.

Parents need to own their choices, move on from them if they are not working out and accept that whilst thier kids may share some outward similarities to others because of how youth soccer for girls works ( similar family demographics, income, etc), their wants, desires and experiences will be unique.

Youth sports is all about trying to make you believe otherwise. If i play for Club X, I can aspire to the same list of commits they post. Err false. Club X has little to do with that most of the time

And parents need to be more honest with their kids, and themselves. it’s ok if you aren’t good enough or don’t end up being good enough, it doesn’t mean you suck, it just means that someone may be better than you at something. I know that’s not fun and hard to swallow but sometimes it’s a fact of life. The best thing to do is to help your child and put them in the best position to succeed at what ever level that is. Stop worrying about keeping up with the jones’. Everyone has a right to celebrate no matter how big or small the accomplishment is but be honest and let’s not pretend that certain accomplishments aren’t more significant that others.

[Unregistered]

And parents need to be more honest with their kids, and themselves. it’s ok if you aren’t good enough or don’t end up being good enough, it doesn’t mean you suck, it just means that someone may be better than you at something. I know that’s not fun and hard to swallow but sometimes it’s a fact of life. The best thing to do is to help your child and put them in the best position to succeed at what ever level that is. Stop worrying about keeping up with the jones’. Everyone has a right to celebrate no matter how big or small the accomplishment is but be honest and let’s not pretend that certain accomplishments aren’t more significant that others.

Many players/families get used to being the top dog at their local clubs or general area. They face a very new reality when competing for roster spots and then competing for PT. Some rise to the challenge and succeed. Some are in over their heads because they were way too cocky and vastly over estimated their fit.

[Unregistered]

And parents need to be more honest with their kids, and themselves. it’s ok if you aren’t good enough or don’t end up being good enough, it doesn’t mean you suck, it just means that someone may be better than you at something. I know that’s not fun and hard to swallow but sometimes it’s a fact of life. The best thing to do is to help your child and put them in the best position to succeed at what ever level that is. Stop worrying about keeping up with the jones’. Everyone has a right to celebrate no matter how big or small the accomplishment is but be honest and let’s not pretend that certain accomplishments aren’t more significant that others.

But again: So much of this isn't about "being good enough" at soccer or not. A player might be "good enough" to play at Fairfield or UConn but at some point decides they would rather go to MIT or Carnegie Mellon for the academic excellence or Bryn Mawr for the student environment. Is there a minimum talent level needed to have these choices? Yes. But you can't conclude that just because someone decided to go to MIT instead of Fairfield that they weren't a "good enough" soccer player to go to Fairfield.

[Unregistered]

But again: So much of this isn't about "being good enough" at soccer or not. A player might be "good enough" to play at Fairfield or UConn but at some point decides they would rather go to MIT or Carnegie Mellon for the academic excellence or Bryn Mawr for the student environment. Is there a minimum talent level needed to have these choices? Yes. But you can't conclude that just because someone decided to go to MIT instead of Fairfield that they weren't a "good enough" soccer player to go to Fairfield.

First, why does it matter? Second, what does good enough for Fairfield mean? Fairfield are not what I would call good. Parents want it both ways. The show percentages of kids who make D1 rosters as evidence of how hard it is to then justify that any D1 player is good. Its all relative. If Fairfield is your definition of good, and MIT your definition of good academics, then you comparison is flawed. match the elite academic names (in your mind) with the equivalent soccer programs. Compare those. Much fairer.

[Unregistered]

But again: So much of this isn't about "being good enough" at soccer or not. A player might be "good enough" to play at Fairfield or UConn but at some point decides they would rather go to MIT or Carnegie Mellon for the academic excellence or Bryn Mawr for the student environment. Is there a minimum talent level needed to have these choices? Yes. But you can't conclude that just because someone decided to go to MIT instead of Fairfield that they weren't a "good enough" soccer player to go to Fairfield.

OK but let's be honest, your analogy is a needle in a haystack situation...and to be fair, the bulk of the kids playing for MIT actually aren't good enough to play at Fairfield or UConn, and that's fine, actually more than fine-they're at MIT.

[Unregistered]

OK but let's be honest, your analogy is a needle in a haystack situation...and to be fair, the bulk of the kids playing for MIT actually aren't good enough to play at Fairfield or UConn, and that's fine, actually more than fine-they're at MIT.

I have absolutely no idea, personally, if that's a needle in a haystack or not. Maybe you do. Personally, my kid may end up going to an excellent D3 school and will be forgoing opportunities to go D1 because the schools who fit for her (academically, geographically, socially) either are terrible soccer schools, or aren't interested in here.

Must run in the family, because I passed on D1 (non scholarship) and went to a D2 school where we won a National championship. My brother passed up an Ivy school to go to D3. Another brother likely would've got some D1 opportunities, but he wanted to play both hockey and soccer and he wasn't D1 hockey material. So, he also went D3

Again, no idea how common it is, but it's 100% opposite so far in our family....

[Unregistered]

First, why does it matter? Second, what does good enough for Fairfield mean? Fairfield are not what I would call good. Parents want it both ways. The show percentages of kids who make D1 rosters as evidence of how hard it is to then justify that any D1 player is good. Its all relative. If Fairfield is your definition of good, and MIT your definition of good academics, then you comparison is flawed. match the elite academic names (in your mind) with the equivalent soccer programs. Compare those. Much fairer.

It doesn't matter, but we are talking about it, so rather than not reply, I am posting a response.

"Good enough for Fairfield" means that the player's combination of soccer skill and athleticism is high enough that they would not be a liability on the field for the Fairfield soccer team. Am pretty sure no one is sitting her saying players are choosing between playing soccer at Stanford vs. Williams. The conversation was around the recruiting classes at top D3 soccer programs vs. recruiting classes at D1 programs outside the Top 50.

Not sure what you mean by "Parents want it both ways".

I used MIT as my definition of good academics, and I used Bryn Mawr as an example of a student choosing a school for something other than academics or athletics (eg. all-girls liberal arts school instead of large state school). That is the entire point; that the decision of what college a player ends up choosing has many different factors other than the quality/competitive level of the soccer program, and that a player who is "good enough" to play at a mid-level D1 school might choose a different path for any one or more of those different factors. So the overall point being that you can't look at D3 schools as a measure of "oh, they weren't good enough to play D1".

[Unregistered]

OK but let's be honest, your analogy is a needle in a haystack situation...and to be fair, the bulk of the kids playing for MIT actually aren't good enough to play at Fairfield or UConn, and that's fine, actually more than fine-they're at MIT.

There are plenty of ECNL and strong NPL players currently on the MIT roster. Am fairly sure they would do fine at Fairfield or UConn as part of a freshman recruiting class.

[Unregistered]

OK but let's be honest, your analogy is a needle in a haystack situation...and to be fair, the bulk of the kids playing for MIT actually aren't good enough to play at Fairfield or UConn, and that's fine, actually more than fine-they're at MIT.

I will agree that the MIT players probably wouldn't stand a shot at a Top 50 D1 soccer program. But there recruiting class is probably on-par with the Fairfields and UConns of the world. Am basing this on the kids I know who were recruited by those particular schools' soccer programs.

[Unregistered]

There are plenty of ECNL and strong NPL players currently on the MIT roster. Am fairly sure they would do fine at Fairfield or UConn as part of a freshman recruiting class.

I wouldn't say strong but 7 ECNL, 2 DA and 2 other for the freshmen class.