ECNL is US Club Soccer

[Unregistered]

Obviously you do have a comprehension problem . The supposed A teams of rcl are the second teams of clubs who have left the RCl to join the DA or ENCL . Completely different leagues . Would you like me to say it again and slower just so you can understand it clearly ? The top players from certain clubs DO NOT PLAY IN RCL ... you are very welcome .

Shaking my head once again that you missed the point of the quoted post and even proved that by misquoting it again. Let's start slow. The post is about a hypothetical comparison of an RCL A team compared to Eagleclaw. Key word team, not player or top player as you put it. The post makes no mention of how to define top players across RCL and what comprises an RCL A team. The entire point was to compare the strength and physical style of play of an RCL A team to the possession and skill style of play of Eagleclaw. Once again regardless of individuals on the team.

I feel like I am talking to a person who has a singular thought in their head that they want to prove about "top" kids moving out of RCL and every response they give has to include that, even if it is off topic. For example. Hey look at the new Nike shoes. Your response "The top kids have moved out of RCL."

Once again no one is refuting or even trying to explain where top kids have moved into or out of in my post. The post is solely describing a scenario about Eagleclaw teams vs the majority of RCL A teams. Which, yes, we all know the landscape of ECNL/DA/RCL/PSPL and where kids are moving to and from. Off topic once again. And once again this post has nothing to do with where the "top" kids are residing. Please read the post and you will see it is solely describing a hypothetical scenario in response to the rest of the thread where an RCL A team plays an Eagleclaw team. The post very specifically says/implies that the Eagleclaw team would look more skilled and possess, but the RCL A team would blow through them physically. Woah woah woah stop your brain right now. I could see it trying to think about top players not on that RCL A team again.

Let me help you another way. Can you circle the word top in my previous post? Ok so we have established it is not there. Can you circle the word player in my previous post? Ok, so we have established it is not there. Can you circle the word RCL? Ok yes it is there. How is RCL used in context in the post? Does it have anything to do with a generalization of top players and that they have moved out of RCL. Or is it simply saying an RCL A team would play more physically and get more goals in contrast to Eagleclaw's skilled play. I feel like an elementary school teacher asking you to circle subjects and predicates. Sorry for being so condescending. Or am I.....

If you have any experience watching an Eagleclaw team play you would know exactly what I am talking about and we wouldn't be here trying explain this, and you wouldn't feel the need to go off on a top player tangent when you see the word RCL.

Now so you feel better about yourself I will switch topics to what you are trying to say even though I know better. Your statement is both wrong and right at the same time. There is no way you can generalize where top players go across all age brackets, genders, etc. It's obvious you are narrowly focused on what your kid plays and don't have much experience across age groups, genders, clubs, leagues, in/out of state etc. Are you saying that a U8 RCL Girls A team does not have any top players or are you saying a U17 Boys RCL A team does not have any top players? The first one I would disagree and the second I would agree. Since there is no ECNL or DA or even EPD at U8 I would say the Girls U8 RCL A team at a club like crossfire probably does have the top players on the A team playing in RCL Div 1. (Until they hit puberty that is. :) ) Then when kids age up there are other options for boys and girls like ECNL, at that age group the top players move on, which is where your generalization would be correct. Here is another hypothetical for you. Are you saying the top players are even in the club soccer structure at all? What about the kids that can't afford it but are playing in free leagues and with siblings then all of the sudden show up at 16 and are phenoms. Are you saying the top players are even in the state of Washington? Last time I checked Nike only gave one 13 year old girl a sponsorship in the US.

https://www.fatherly.com/news/player...ract-nike-pro/

So is that the only top girl in the country and everyone in every league across the US is not a top player. In this debate I have no dog in the fight about top players, nor do I care to try to be right or wrong about where top players go. But it is fun to debate I guess. The problem with simple minded generalities like your top player comment though is that they are both simultaneously true and false at the same time.

[Unregistered]

Are any ECNL teams attending Starfire Spring Classic or Snohomish Invitational?

[Unregistered]

ok i have to rant about this. Sorry latest poster who decided to continue this type of response. Maybe you didn't mean it this way, maybe you did.

I see moronic parents describing tournaments and kids level of play, as " a joke" or "worthless" quite often on these forums. Personally i would use a different way of describing our community of soccer kids trying their best at a level of competition that suits them and having fun competing with friends. In no way is snohomish a "joke" or rainier challenge or any other tournament for that matter. They all have different purposes and attract different levels of teams for various reasons. Note: I have no affiliation to anything snohomish/rainier related and am describing this method of communication across the board.

Most tournaments or games or leagues or whatever are not a joke for the majority of kids that play in them. In fact they are a great place to play at the level of soccer they desire or can compete at, in a similarly skilled environment. Kids on b,c,d,select teams are not a joke when they play, regardless of what idiots like this post. The kids on those teams typically are having a great time at these tournaments and its a valuable experience in their up bringing. If us parents would just get out of the way of our kids, a fair, fun, competitive tournaments will make our kids better people later in life. If we subscribe to your "it's a joke" mentality, then what are you really saying. You are basically saying all of the kid's play at these tournaments would be a joke. Except yours of course. Sure, you can complain about parking, or bathrooms etc. But the reality is a statement like this is being used to diminish kids that don't play on the top teams and it really shows how much of "a joke" the majority of parents who talk like this really are. Yes i know i am being a hypocrite calling parents who talk like this a joke, maybe they just need guidance at their level of intelligence where they can compete in a "think of". (just not in snohomish) :)

i am always amazed at the ignorant parents with a narrow view of the world and diminished intellectual capacity who keep ranking our kids in play like it's a "joke or not app", or think every game has to be the elitist best of the best of the best to be seen as not a joke. And i hate having to level set this, but no i am not a pissed of parent on a d team who thinks my kid should be on an a team. I am just as proud of my kid on the top team in their age bracket as well as my kid who just enjoys playing rec. I have kids at all levels of play and have been to the majority of tournaments from the "top" to the "joke". The pattern i see at all tournaments in state and out are typically the same. Kids having fun playing soccer with friends and parents being morons.

well said