Announcement

**Unregistered** · 07-16-2018, 06:23 PM

Originally posted by Unregistered View Post

Ranking source is youthsoccerrankings.us, which seems to be comprehensive, covers the entire country (unlike LPR, which is higher quality but limited scope), and isn't based mainly on participation in the sponsor's own tournament offerings (cough gotsoccer cough).

A "nationally relevant" team is any team ranked in the top 100 for their age group. A low standard, I know, but we gotta grade on the curve.

08B:
Seattle United Copa (8)
Crossfire Premier A (24)
WFPC Black (45)
Westside Timbers Copa Red (79)
(Note: Eastside Red might rank but doesn't appear to have participated in enough events to be included. Also note that OYSA, at least, doesn't publish scores for this age group, so that might affect things).

07B:
No Oregon or Washington teams were in the top 100.

06B::
3RCS Black (15)
Seattle Celtic Green (59)
Crossfire Premier DA (95)
CWS Navy (97)
(Note: DA for this age group last year did not publish match results).

05B:
WPFC (15)
PacNW (71)

04B:
Crossfire Premier (30)
Crossfire Yakima (46)

03B:
Seattle United Copa (6)
PacNW Maroon( 44)
Washington Rush (63)
NWU (78)

02B:
Central WA SA Sounders Navy Cuevas (35)
Eastside Timbers Red (62)
South Tacoma United Chelsea (82)

01B:
Seattle Sounders Academy (5, and DA champions)
WFPC Black (30)
Westside Timbers Copa Red (47)
United SC Aguilitas (91)

00B:
FC Portland Navy (12)
WPFC Black (15)
Seattle United Copa (17)
Eastside FC Red (64)

99B:
Crossfire Preimer (12)
Seattle United Copa (21)
WFPC Black (41)
Wenatchee Valley United (45)
Seattle Sounders Academy (84) (not sure I buy this--Sounders no doubt have rougher competition in the USSDA league than the RPL teams above them in these rankings. Timbers Academy doesn't even show up, but I'm certain they are likewise better than local club teams)

08G:
WFPC Black (21)
Crossfire Premier A (24)

07G:
Seattle United Cpa (31)
Crossfire Premier A (32)
WFPC Black (40)

06G:
Eastside FC Reign pre-academy (42)
WPFC Black A (78)
Seattle United Copa (88)

05G:
Crossfire United (48)
Crossfire Premier ECNL (77)
(none of the local GDA teams showed up at this age group, so this comparison isn't possible)

04G:
PacNW ECNL (47)
Reign Academy (57)
Crossfire United (70; for some reason CU has two entries).
Crossfire Premier (82)
WPFC ECNL (93)

03G:
Crossfire United(3)
PacNW ECNL (57)
Reign Academy (54)
WPFC ECNL (63)
Crossfire Premier ECNL (89)
(GPS is at #133--which sounds too low for a team going to USYS nationals)

02G:
Crossfire United (32)
PacNW Maroon A (55)
PacNW ECNL (72)
Spokane SC Rave (84)
Crossfire Premier ECNL (96)
(FC Portland ECNL barely misses the cut, coming in at 103).

01G:
WFPC ECNL (12)
Crossfire Premier DA (28)
PacNW Maroon (42)
Crossfire United (58)
Spokane Shadow Sounders Rave (63)
Eastside FC Reign (99)
(Thorns do poorly at this age group, coming in at 228)

00G:
Greater Seattle Surf A (25)
ISC Gunners A (56)
Washington Rush (76)

99G:
Crossfire Premier (6)
Eastaide FC Reign (14)
PacNW SC Maroon A (22)
PacNW ECNL (55)
Thorns Academy (84)
Rogue Valley Timbers Red (100)

Moral of the story: Quality of Oregon clubs seems to be inversely proportional to distance from THPRD. But we knew that already. :)

Source? youthsoccerrankings.us

Akin to http://weeklyworldnews.com/

Thanks for the laugh.

**Unregistered** · 07-16-2018, 06:26 PM

This ranking system is flawed.

It doesn't even take into consideration how weighted the scale should be if the teams played each other.

Team A has a higher rating but it doesn't have anything to do with the match ups around each other.

You can play in a isolated league and hide from anyone you feel is competition while posting ranking systems.

CU lost to a lot of teams they were supposed to beat per ranking at Crossfire but found themselves on par with mid level in state teams.

**Unregistered** · 07-16-2018, 07:06 PM

Originally posted by Unregistered View Post

This ranking system is flawed.

It doesn't even take into consideration how weighted the scale should be if the teams played each other.

Team A has a higher rating but it doesn't have anything to do with the match ups around each other.

You can play in a isolated league and hide from anyone you feel is competition while posting ranking systems.

CU lost to a lot of teams they were supposed to beat per ranking at Crossfire but found themselves on par with mid level in state teams.

Dear god, at least look at the methodology before you make comments. Not a single comment you made is correct. Sigh.

**Unregistered** · 07-16-2018, 07:25 PM

Originally posted by Unregistered View Post

Source? youthsoccerrankings.us

Akin to http://weeklyworldnews.com/

Thanks for the laugh.

YSR isn't perfect, but they do their best with incomplete information and are reasonable comprehensive. I'd take them with a bit of salt, but for flighting tourneys (the main legit use of such rankings), they aren't bad.

Comparing them to a fake-news peddling propaganda website is a bit out of line, though.

**Unregistered** · 07-16-2018, 08:32 PM

Originally posted by Unregistered View Post

Ranking source is youthsoccerrankings.us, which seems to be comprehensive, covers the entire country (unlike LPR, which is higher quality but limited scope), and isn't based mainly on participation in the sponsor's own tournament offerings (cough gotsoccer cough).

A "nationally relevant" team is any team ranked in the top 100 for their age group. A low standard, I know, but we gotta grade on the curve.

08B:
Seattle United Copa (8)
Crossfire Premier A (24)
WFPC Black (45)
Westside Timbers Copa Red (79)
(Note: Eastside Red might rank but doesn't appear to have participated in enough events to be included. Also note that OYSA, at least, doesn't publish scores for this age group, so that might affect things).

07B:
No Oregon or Washington teams were in the top 100.

06B::
3RCS Black (15)
Seattle Celtic Green (59)
Crossfire Premier DA (95)
CWS Navy (97)
(Note: DA for this age group last year did not publish match results).

05B:
WPFC (15)
PacNW (71)

04B:
Crossfire Premier (30)
Crossfire Yakima (46)

03B:
Seattle United Copa (6)
PacNW Maroon( 44)
Washington Rush (63)
NWU (78)

02B:
Central WA SA Sounders Navy Cuevas (35)
Eastside Timbers Red (62)
South Tacoma United Chelsea (82)

01B:
Seattle Sounders Academy (5, and DA champions)
WFPC Black (30)
Westside Timbers Copa Red (47)
United SC Aguilitas (91)

00B:
FC Portland Navy (12)
WPFC Black (15)
Seattle United Copa (17)
Eastside FC Red (64)

99B:
Crossfire Preimer (12)
Seattle United Copa (21)
WFPC Black (41)
Wenatchee Valley United (45)
Seattle Sounders Academy (84) (not sure I buy this--Sounders no doubt have rougher competition in the USSDA league than the RPL teams above them in these rankings. Timbers Academy doesn't even show up, but I'm certain they are likewise better than local club teams)

08G:
WFPC Black (21)
Crossfire Premier A (24)

07G:
Seattle United Cpa (31)
Crossfire Premier A (32)
WFPC Black (40)

06G:
Eastside FC Reign pre-academy (42)
WPFC Black A (78)
Seattle United Copa (88)

05G:
Crossfire United (48)
Crossfire Premier ECNL (77)
(none of the local GDA teams showed up at this age group, so this comparison isn't possible)

04G:
PacNW ECNL (47)
Reign Academy (57)
Crossfire United (70; for some reason CU has two entries).
Crossfire Premier (82)
WPFC ECNL (93)

03G:
Crossfire United(3)
PacNW ECNL (57)
Reign Academy (54)
WPFC ECNL (63)
Crossfire Premier ECNL (89)
(GPS is at #133--which sounds too low for a team going to USYS nationals)

02G:
Crossfire United (32)
PacNW Maroon A (55)
PacNW ECNL (72)
Spokane SC Rave (84)
Crossfire Premier ECNL (96)
(FC Portland ECNL barely misses the cut, coming in at 103).

01G:
WFPC ECNL (12)
Crossfire Premier DA (28)
PacNW Maroon (42)
Crossfire United (58)
Spokane Shadow Sounders Rave (63)
Eastside FC Reign (99)
(Thorns do poorly at this age group, coming in at 228)

00G:
Greater Seattle Surf A (25)
ISC Gunners A (56)
Washington Rush (76)

99G:
Crossfire Premier (6)
Eastaide FC Reign (14)
PacNW SC Maroon A (22)
PacNW ECNL (55)
Thorns Academy (84)
Rogue Valley Timbers Red (100)

Moral of the story: Quality of Oregon clubs seems to be inversely proportional to distance from THPRD. But we knew that already. :)

A little too high for GPS 03's. Pretty accurate to see that WashT 02's girls aren't on the list.

**Unregistered** · 07-16-2018, 08:34 PM

Originally posted by Unregistered View Post

This ranking system is flawed.

It doesn't even take into consideration how weighted the scale should be if the teams played each other.

Team A has a higher rating but it doesn't have anything to do with the match ups around each other.

You can play in a isolated league and hide from anyone you feel is competition while posting ranking systems.

CU lost to a lot of teams they were supposed to beat per ranking at Crossfire but found themselves on par with mid level in state teams.

You really have no clue, do you? Everything you said is 100% wrong. Probably a GPS 03 parent.

**Unregistered** · 07-18-2018, 04:31 PM

Originally posted by Unregistered View Post

This ranking system is flawed.

It doesn't even take into consideration how weighted the scale should be if the teams played each other.

Team A has a higher rating but it doesn't have anything to do with the match ups around each other.

You can play in a isolated league and hide from anyone you feel is competition while posting ranking systems.

CU lost to a lot of teams they were supposed to beat per ranking at Crossfire but found themselves on par with mid level in state teams.

When Little 'Fact-Based' Timmy doesn't like the metrics he gets really analytical. One can tell from his posts that his strong management experience makes him a natural leader in forums like this. We need more people like Little Timmy in our state and national government!

**Unregistered** · 07-18-2018, 05:29 PM

Originally posted by Unregistered View Post

YSR isn't perfect, but they do their best with incomplete information and are reasonable comprehensive. I'd take them with a bit of salt, but for flighting tourneys (the main legit use of such rankings), they aren't bad.

Comparing them to a fake-news peddling propaganda website is a bit out of line, though.

Not really, weekly world news is very similar, it's completely devoid of fact and entirely based on an active & creative imagination that preys on your absurd delusions.

**Unregistered** · 07-18-2018, 05:34 PM

Originally posted by Unregistered View Post

This ranking system is flawed.

It doesn't even take into consideration how weighted the scale should be if the teams played each other.

Team A has a higher rating but it doesn't have anything to do with the match ups around each other.

You can play in a isolated league and hide from anyone you feel is competition while posting ranking systems.

CU lost to a lot of teams they were supposed to beat per ranking at Crossfire but found themselves on par with mid level in state teams.

Agree.

Just because CU Ecnl plays in a watered down league to inflate their ratings doesn't mean they even beat teams in state which they can't.

**Unregistered** · 07-18-2018, 10:09 PM

Originally posted by Unregistered View Post

Agree.

Just because CU Ecnl plays in a watered down league to inflate their ratings doesn't mean they even beat teams in state which they can't.

The ranking doesn�t care what league you�re in and since ECNL teams do actually play outside tournaments they have data points in common. Not the case for GDA, they took their ball and ran away. Zero points of reference outside their own league.

**Unregistered** · 07-18-2018, 10:20 PM

Originally posted by Unregistered View Post

The ranking doesn�t care what league you�re in and since ECNL teams do actually play outside tournaments they have data points in common. Not the case for GDA, they took their ball and ran away. Zero points of reference outside their own league.

That�s because they only play other DA teams.. because DA is the top tier. Why would they waste their time in something like Crossfire Challenge which is just a low brow fundraiser for Crossfire Premiere.

**Unregistered** · 07-18-2018, 10:24 PM

Originally posted by Unregistered View Post

That�s because they only play other DA teams.. because DA is the top tier. Why would they waste their time in something like Crossfire Challenge which is just a low brow fundraiser for Crossfire Premiere.

Because tournament funds go towards paying for the top Crossfire Premiere teams..the DA and GDA teams. Everyone that participated was supporting the top tier Crossfire Premiere Development Academy teams.

**Unregistered** · 07-18-2018, 10:32 PM

Originally posted by Unregistered View Post

Because tournament funds go towards paying for the top Crossfire Premiere teams..the DA and GDA teams. Everyone that participated was supporting the top tier Crossfire Premiere Development Academy teams.

Shh, don't tell. Next year all the local ECNL clubs (except for maybe CU, who have to pay respects to Bernie James, it's part of the contract) will boycott the event--and it will essentially become NWCL, but better organized.

**Unregistered** · 07-18-2018, 10:36 PM

Originally posted by Unregistered View Post

Dear god, at least look at the methodology before you make comments. Not a single comment you made is correct. Sigh.

What am I missing in understanding the methodology?

Here are my comments:

1. There are times when lower-ranked teams/non-ranked teams beat higher-ranked teams. The predictive power doesn't explain what happens with these "upsets."

2. ""Coverage" for fraction of all games when both teams are ranked." When a team isn't on this list and they play and beat a ranked team, this is saying that the coverage factor is non-exisitent.

Announcement

Which local teams are nationally relevant?

Which local teams are nationally relevant?

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment