Odp

[Unregistered]

You are 100% correct that making the ODP team should not be a pre-requisite to making the Academy team. I would hope that most people agree with that. The Academy wants the best, regardless. That said, I do see it as a feather in your cap when it comes time to selecting the Academy team. If you have made the state ODP team and you are up against a fairly equal non ODP player, the slot will likely go to the ODP player. All I'm saying is that if you chose not to do ODP for whatever reason, and then expect to make the Academy team, you better go out there and knock their socks off during the Academy selection.

I agree that other than the high cost and tremendous time commitment and inconvenience there's little downside to doing ODP. Nothing demonstrates commitment like spending weekends in December standing around in Salem. I also agree that the ODP players will get the edge over non ODP players in the DA selection process. That's the problem. A player that has the advantages (although I think training advantages are grossly overstated) of ODP participation such as familiarity with the coaches and other players should really standout. The player who comes in cold but competes evenly or slightly better, is probably a player with a higher upside. That is what the DA is supposed to be about. The way the program is set up now the Timbers are too invested in the success of their pre-DA ODP programs to avoid selection bias. The reason is simple. What's the point of the earlier age programs if they don't lead to the academy? They have to justify the program and that's by demonstrating success in making the DA team. It's will get worse, not better unless there is more separation.

[Unregistered]

I agree that other than the high cost and tremendous time commitment and inconvenience there's little downside to doing ODP. Nothing demonstrates commitment like spending weekends in December standing around in Salem. I also agree that the ODP players will get the edge over non ODP players in the DA selection process. That's the problem. A player that has the advantages (although I think training advantages are grossly overstated) of ODP participation such as familiarity with the coaches and other players should really standout. The player who comes in cold but competes evenly or slightly better, is probably a player with a higher upside. That is what the DA is supposed to be about. The way the program is set up now the Timbers are too invested in the success of their pre-DA ODP programs to avoid selection bias. The reason is simple. What's the point of the earlier age programs if they don't lead to the academy? They have to justify the program and that's by demonstrating success in making the DA team. It's will get worse, not better unless there is more separation.

I'm not sure there really is as bad of a problem as you suggest. I feel very confident that at least half of the state ODP team are the best players in the Timbers territory for most of the pre-academy ages (I say that from the boys side, I have no idea about girls) If 10 or 12 kids from the ODP state team make the academy, I think that is not only reasonable, it justifies and demonstrates some success of the pre-academy age groups. Now if only ODP kids make up the academy team, that would suggest bias. But I also doubt the Timbers are going to let that star player get away just because he did not do ODP. I do feel that the cost and time of ODP is overwhelming, but I also felt that the training sessions were good.

BTW, I also don't think that a non ODP player that tries out evenly with a ODP player somehow has higher upside. I completely understand why the Timbers would go with the known player, particularly if they have shown good attitude and work ethic to go with it.

[Unregistered]

I'm not sure there really is as bad of a problem as you suggest. I feel very confident that at least half of the state ODP team are the best players in the Timbers territory for most of the pre-academy ages (I say that from the boys side, I have no idea about girls) If 10 or 12 kids from the ODP state team make the academy, I think that is not only reasonable, it justifies and demonstrates some success of the pre-academy age groups. Now if only ODP kids make up the academy team, that would suggest bias. But I also doubt the Timbers are going to let that star player get away just because he did not do ODP. I do feel that the cost and time of ODP is overwhelming, but I also felt that the training sessions were good.

BTW, I also don't think that a non ODP player that tries out evenly with a ODP player somehow has higher upside. I completely understand why the Timbers would go with the known player, particularly if they have shown good attitude and work ethic to go with it.

Your comment supports the point of the earlier post. If at a tryout two players are equal, but one has had all the alleged advantages of ODP over the other, but is not better, you can draw two inferences: (1) the non-ODP player would be better if he had the advantages the ODP player had, or (2) the ODP experience makes no difference. There's not much point in ODP if it doesn't offer improvement/advantage. That supports the conclusion that the player who hasn't had the extra training has higher upside -- he's already as good without it. Going with the known player is often the easy way out (good attitude and work ethic is so subjective that it's a cover for almost anything) and that's why it's something to guard against.

[Unregistered]

You're funny

Your daughter is just one player. ONE....and she surely is NOT one of the top players. Who are you kidding ?

Like you know who the poster is and even if you did are remotely qualified to make that judgment......just hilarious!

[Unregistered]

Your comment supports the point of the earlier post. If at a tryout two players are equal, but one has had all the alleged advantages of ODP over the other, but is not better, you can draw two inferences: (1) the non-ODP player would be better if he had the advantages the ODP player had, or (2) the ODP experience makes no difference. There's not much point in ODP if it doesn't offer improvement/advantage. That supports the conclusion that the player who hasn't had the extra training has higher upside -- he's already as good without it. Going with the known player is often the easy way out (good attitude and work ethic is so subjective that it's a cover for almost anything) and that's why it's something to guard against.

If 2 kids are equal, we are splitting hairs here. 1 kid might have done ODP, but the non-ODP kid may have had years of personal training or better club coaching or whatever. My point is that you cannot pinpoint this down to the two inferences you describe. There are too many other variables. Good attitude and work ethic is subjective, but so is talent. I still feel, if Timbers staff member has inside knowledge that a particular ODP kid showed week after week, commitment, good attitude, hard work, etc... that kid is going to get the benefit of the doubt against an equal counterpart where these qualities are unknown. I personally believe that ODP did benefit my son. That said, I am not convinced it was worth the time and money that we all put into it. Who knows... had I invested all that money into personal training maybe my kid would have been better off.

Still, I appreciate the discussion. Anyone that opens my eyes to things we parents should potentially guard against has my respect.

[Unregistered]

All points are well taken! I do believe that my son has benefited greatly from two years of Odp. However, I do feel next year, it's time to take a break--for both son and parent :) I feel he has proven to himself and coaches of his ability. They know of his work ethic and positive attitude. I don't feel he needs to do this year after year. As another poster stated, we will save the money and use it towards private training. The year after? Maybe he would like to do Odp again.