Ny gda

[Unregistered]

C'mon. I don't know the player but there aren't any D1 players who aren't strong.

Pick your battles, otherwise you just sound crazy.

You sound like Trump, talking about sh_t you have no understanding of, how can you comment about her if you have not seen her play???

[Unregistered]

You sound like Trump, talking about sh_t you have no understanding of, how can you comment about her if you have not seen her play???

Ooooh, didn't know we were going to get some TDS now. Good times.

In the scheme of things, anyone who is at D1 isn't a bad player, not in the ACC (assuming that's who you meant by UVA).

Again, when you swing so far with the negatives your message gets lost. Maybe it's your TDS that talking?

[Unregistered]

Fury has NOT ONE strong player. Best players are OK at best. AT BEST.

That is not correct. They have strong and weak like every other club and league. It is too expensive and there are too many teams to have 2 gda and 2 ecnl teams at every age on LI.

If it was cheaper....sure because you could tap into some of the excluded talent. Right now there are weaker players with cash helping to field these teams. There are probably enough strong players with the cash to participate to field one really strong team from each county at each age

[Unregistered]

C'mon. I don't know the player but there aren't any D1 players who aren't strong.

Pick your battles, otherwise you just sound crazy.

if you think this, then you dont have a kid playing in D1...All the weak players dont suddenly disappear. Title 9 has created demand and the Clubs fill it. There are perhaps 10 consistently top level teams in all of womens college soccer. The rest is borderline unwatchable.

[Unregistered]

Come back when she's a starter at UVA. Every team has it's share of bench warmers.

you can be a very good player and not start for UVA. Go look at their roster. Look at the Club resumes of kids who come off the bench. Heck look at the ones who dont see the field. That is one of the hardest teams to start for in College soccer. No shame in that

[Unregistered]

That is not correct. They have strong and weak like every other club and league. It is too expensive and there are too many teams to have 2 gda and 2 ecnl teams at every age on LI.

If it was cheaper....sure because you could tap into some of the excluded talent. Right now there are weaker players with cash helping to field these teams. There are probably enough strong players with the cash to participate to field one really strong team from each county at each age

Eh, I dunno...my kid's age group is pretty good. Could definitely support 1 GDA & 2 ECNL, which is what it looks like it's going to be soon anyway, so I guess we'll find out.

[Unregistered]

if you think this, then you dont have a kid playing in D1...All the weak players dont suddenly disappear. Title 9 has created demand and the Clubs fill it. There are perhaps 10 consistently top level teams in all of womens college soccer. The rest is borderline unwatchable.

Same for every single league. All this carrying on about this league or that and this club or that. The soccer is not high level across the board with very very few exceptions.

Stop the nonsense. Get your player out on the field and accept that the soccer is what it is. Virtualization NONE of these players, the strong or the weak have any future in soccer.

[Unregistered]

Same for every single league. All this carrying on about this league or that and this club or that. The soccer is not high level across the board with very very few exceptions.

Stop the nonsense. Get your player out on the field and accept that the soccer is what it is. Virtualization NONE of these players, the strong or the weak have any future in soccer.

Why are we paying thousands for pretty good? It is dumb. The excellent players (with money) should battle for spots on these teams and that is it.

[Unregistered]

if you think this, then you dont have a kid playing in D1...All the weak players dont suddenly disappear. Title 9 has created demand and the Clubs fill it. There are perhaps 10 consistently top level teams in all of womens college soccer. The rest is borderline unwatchable.

Yes, I do. I wouldn't call any of them weak.

Depends on your scale.

What I consider "weak" players aren't on D1 rosters.

[Unregistered]

Yes, I do. I wouldn't call any of them weak.

Depends on your scale.

What I consider "weak" players aren't on D1 rosters.

so you must think there are a lot more strong Club players than I do. is the Sacred Heart team full of strong players ? Or U Conn. I think you have to be careful using a Club scale to evaluate players in College. Strong/weak are relative terms. there is no way teams below the top 50 are full of good players.

[Unregistered]

Why are we paying thousands for pretty good? It is dumb. The excellent players (with money) should battle for spots on these teams and that is it.

Ask USSF why they created a large national league when it wasn't needed. The need was there to do something better for the nation's top talent for sure. But thats like <5% of the US. There was no need to start another huge league and drag in thousands of others who, at most, will play a few years in college.

[Unregistered]

so you must think there are a lot more strong Club players than I do. is the Sacred Heart team full of strong players ? Or U Conn. I think you have to be careful using a Club scale to evaluate players in College. Strong/weak are relative terms. there is no way teams below the top 50 are full of good players.

Judging by what I see on many HS teams, or playing in DIII schools, that is what I would call weak.

Again, depends on your interpretation of "weak" and "good". If I'm comparing them to Arsenal, Lyon, etc. in the women's game, then no, I wouldn't consider them "good".

But, to take every player in the country and grade them from 0-100, then yes I would consider them "good".

[Unregistered]

Ask USSF why they created a large national league when it wasn't needed. The need was there to do something better for the nation's top talent for sure. But thats like <5% of the US. There was no need to start another huge league and drag in thousands of others who, at most, will play a few years in college.

There is no mystery as to why this happened. Their intention is to crush the ecnl and run what they think is the top league youth league for affluent girls in the county. All if this nonsense is about that and not about soccer and the players.

Find something that works for your player and know it wont be anything that amazing or special as that does not exist. Do not buy into any of the marketing crap from any of these leagues unless you are a fool.

[Unregistered]

There is no mystery as to why this happened. Their intention is to crush the ecnl and run what they think is the top league youth league for affluent girls in the county. All if this nonsense is about that and not about soccer and the players.

Find something that works for your player and know it wont be anything that amazing or special as that does not exist. Do not buy into any of the marketing crap from any of these leagues unless you are a fool.

So why are girls DA players getting suspended and the boys that do this are not ?

[Unregistered]

Judging by what I see on many HS teams, or playing in DIII schools, that is what I would call weak.

Again, depends on your interpretation of "weak" and "good". If I'm comparing them to Arsenal, Lyon, etc. in the women's game, then no, I wouldn't consider them "good".

But, to take every player in the country and grade them from 0-100, then yes I would consider them "good".

Clearly one you has higher standards then the other. Just agree to disagree.