Girls Academy League NW

[Unregistered]

Didn’t California Thorns get admitted to Ecnl? Is the Oregon Thorns next?

California Thorns was the old De Anza Club. De Anza was the ECNL side that use to do very well in ECNL. Thorns was created for the GDA by the De Anza folks trying to enter both leagues. Didnt work and everyone went to Thorns or Quakes.

Quakes, Portland Thorns and Reign started from scratch and poached all their players from neighboring clubs. This was only a few years ago. It is not like we are talking 10 years of history or something.

[Unregistered]

Dude....cant you read. The Frontier Conference is the 6th and Final League that GAL is adding this year.

ECNL....lol. If you only knew.

https://www.soccerwire.com/news/girl...er-conference/

You’re treating soccerwire speculation as authoritative? Come on. And yeah, I’m pretty sure I have a good understanding of the ECNL situation.

GA said just Tues they are planning on a NW GA conference in a presentation by one of
the people running the league. Reign said in writing to all players and families they would be either GA or ECNL and would decide once they heard from ECNL, and that they haven’t yet heard from ECNL. That’s also consistent with what Lavers and ECNL have said publicly. There has been no mention by anyone of just playing Reign’s top teams in PSPL. Any change from that would be a huge change from everything Reign and GA and have said.

[Unregistered]

Of course GAL would like a NW Division. You just need teams to have one. Other than Reign, GAL NW Division would be no better than RCL 1 with more travel and way higher costs. They already have that with PSPL.

"A bird in hand is better than two in the bush". Reign kids can sign up for ECNL right now with another local team. Some have, some are waiting. Please dont tell me the club is pinning their hopes on making it into ECNL?

[Unregistered]

Of course GAL would like a NW Division. You just need teams to have one. Other than Reign, GAL NW Division would be no better than RCL 1 with more travel and way higher costs. They already have that with PSPL.

"A bird in hand is better than two in the bush". Reign kids can sign up for ECNL right now with another local team. Some have, some are waiting. Please dont tell me the club is pinning their hopes on making it into ECNL?

PSPL is fine for their reserve teams, but wouldn’t be enough for what they want their top teams to be, and I don’t see them running the club for solely reserve-level teams. We’re waiting for now and hoping they pull something workable together, whether GA or ECNL or something else (and understand full well some have decided for various reasons to move and that we could end up doing so as well). If all they have is PSPL I think they should close up shop, build some bridges with local clubs, and provide some kind of u19 and u23 reserve teams for their pro team and elite training and play opportunities for the top tier of the local ECNL teams. Fully funded u19 and u23 teams serving truly elite players in a league of 20-30 similar teams (similar to what MLS is doing) would serve a niche that exists and isn’t served in the current market, but it would probably take a couple years and support from ECNL and its clubs to pull something like that together. PSPL isn’t a real option for building an elite level program because both PSPL and RCL are heavily diluted, but PSPL is a bit worse and doesn’t have anything as good as the USYS regional leagues.

Commitments being made now aren’t worth much, so if Reign is able to come up with a plan over the next week or so they should be able to put together competitive teams and build from there. ECNL roster commitments aren’t binding either way until some time in July or August. If GA comes together kids on composite teams, and some on the 23 player or so rosters ECNL clubs are carrying, may prefer playing leagues and showcases against top teams from GA clubs around the country to playing in a b team league that doesn’t get much visibility. Once people can play soccer again there will be a bunch more movement, just as there is every year in the months after tryouts even when people have been playing and have had a real chance to check out the options.

[Unregistered]

PSPL is fine for their reserve teams, but wouldn’t be enough for what they want their top teams to be, and I don’t see them running the club for solely reserve-level teams. We’re waiting for now and hoping they pull something workable together, whether GA or ECNL or something else (and understand full well some have decided for various reasons to move and that we could end up doing so as well). If all they have is PSPL I think they should close up shop, build some bridges with local clubs, and provide some kind of u19 and u23 reserve teams for their pro team and elite training and play opportunities for the top tier of the local ECNL teams. Fully funded u19 and u23 teams serving truly elite players in a league of 20-30 similar teams (similar to what MLS is doing) would serve a niche that exists and isn’t served in the current market, but it would probably take a couple years and support from ECNL and its clubs to pull something like that together. PSPL isn’t a real option for building an elite level program because both PSPL and RCL are heavily diluted, but PSPL is a bit worse and doesn’t have anything as good as the USYS regional leagues.

Commitments being made now aren’t worth much, so if Reign is able to come up with a plan over the next week or so they should be able to put together competitive teams and build from there. ECNL roster commitments aren’t binding either way until some time in July or August. If GA comes together kids on composite teams, and some on the 23 player or so rosters ECNL clubs are carrying, may prefer playing leagues and showcases against top teams from GA clubs around the country to playing in a b team league that doesn’t get much visibility. Once people can play soccer again there will be a bunch more movement, just as there is every year in the months after tryouts even when people have been playing and have had a real chance to check out the options.

Except for the fact that kids have to sign contracts now to be accepted at their club of choice.

[Unregistered]

Except for the fact that kids have to sign contracts now to be accepted at their club of choice.

Until the ECNL roster submission date for the new playing year (in July or August) the only penalty for terminating that contract is the $150 or whatever deposit and whatever if anything you’ve paid for virtual training in the meantime. There’s always movement after tryouts and over the summer even after deposits are paid, and sometimes during the season if the club is reasonable (as most usually are). I realize XF sometimes has kids sign loyalty oaths and tries to shame them on social media for breaking them, but those aren’t enforceable and haven’t always worked in the past.

[Unregistered]

PSPL is fine for their reserve teams, but wouldn’t be enough for what they want their top teams to be, and I don’t see them running the club for solely reserve-level teams. We’re waiting for now and hoping they pull something workable together, whether GA or ECNL or something else (and understand full well some have decided for various reasons to move and that we could end up doing so as well). If all they have is PSPL I think they should close up shop, build some bridges with local clubs, and provide some kind of u19 and u23 reserve teams for their pro team and elite training and play opportunities for the top tier of the local ECNL teams. Fully funded u19 and u23 teams serving truly elite players in a league of 20-30 similar teams (similar to what MLS is doing) would serve a niche that exists and isn’t served in the current market, but it would probably take a couple years and support from ECNL and its clubs to pull something like that together. PSPL isn’t a real option for building an elite level program because both PSPL and RCL are heavily diluted, but PSPL is a bit worse and doesn’t have anything as good as the USYS regional leagues.

Commitments being made now aren’t worth much, so if Reign is able to come up with a plan over the next week or so they should be able to put together competitive teams and build from there. ECNL roster commitments aren’t binding either way until some time in July or August. If GA comes together kids on composite teams, and some on the 23 player or so rosters ECNL clubs are carrying, may prefer playing leagues and showcases against top teams from GA clubs around the country to playing in a b team league that doesn’t get much visibility. Once people can play soccer again there will be a bunch more movement, just as there is every year in the months after tryouts even when people have been playing and have had a real chance to check out the options.

The problem with "building bridges with local clubs" is that most local clubs don't recognize a professional academy as an opportunity; they view it instead as competition. Even if said academy is operating under a different business model, and competing in a different league altogether, the local clubs don't view Reign as an opportunity for their girls.

About the only way some youth clubs might "accept" Reign's presence and treat Reign as something other than an enemy, is if Reign were compensating them. I'm not talking about public credit, but cold hard cash. But right now, there's nothing it in for clubs if their top players leave; so much of a club's currency and reputation is based on on-the-field results.

I suspect that if Reign is admitted to ECNL, it will have to adjust its recruiting practices somewhat. Which isn't entirely unfair; if they are playing in league X, they should follow that league's rules. (WYS demanding that Reign abide by its recruiting restrictions when Reign wasn't competing in any WYS-sanctioned leagues, on the other hand, was ridiculous).

[Unregistered]

The problem with "building bridges with local clubs" is that most local clubs don't recognize a professional academy as an opportunity; they view it instead as competition. Even if said academy is operating under a different business model, and competing in a different league altogether, the local clubs don't view Reign as an opportunity for their girls.

About the only way some youth clubs might "accept" Reign's presence and treat Reign as something other than an enemy, is if Reign were compensating them. I'm not talking about public credit, but cold hard cash. But right now, there's nothing it in for clubs if their top players leave; so much of a club's currency and reputation is based on on-the-field results.

I suspect that if Reign is admitted to ECNL, it will have to adjust its recruiting practices somewhat. Which isn't entirely unfair; if they are playing in league X, they should follow that league's rules. (WYS demanding that Reign abide by its recruiting restrictions when Reign wasn't competing in any WYS-sanctioned leagues, on the other hand, was ridiculous).

Agreed they’d need to live by ECNL rules in ECNL, and that a price of admission could be allowing others clubs to act like vultures for a couple weeks and recruit back whoever of “their” players they can. I don’t think XF or WPFC had any real complaints that Reign didn’t follow ECNL or DA recruiting rules previously, although there’s always speculation when a kid switches clubs one way or the other.

If Reign Academy were focused on u19 and u23 only and providing PDP-like programming to regional ECNL clubs the relationship could be more like that between Sounders and the local clubs (which then local clubs pay for and support) because it wouldn’t compete directly with their core offerings. Still think that would make a lot more sense for them than PSPL only, but plenty of time to sit back and try to stay sane in all this home-bound craziness and see how GA and ECNL shake out before writing anyone a check.

[Unregistered]

The problem with "building bridges with local clubs" is that most local clubs don't recognize a professional academy as an opportunity; they view it instead as competition. Even if said academy is operating under a different business model, and competing in a different league altogether, the local clubs don't view Reign as an opportunity for their girls.

About the only way some youth clubs might "accept" Reign's presence and treat Reign as something other than an enemy, is if Reign were compensating them. I'm not talking about public credit, but cold hard cash. But right now, there's nothing it in for clubs if their top players leave; so much of a club's currency and reputation is based on on-the-field results.

I suspect that if Reign is admitted to ECNL, it will have to adjust its recruiting practices somewhat. Which isn't entirely unfair; if they are playing in league X, they should follow that league's rules. (WYS demanding that Reign abide by its recruiting restrictions when Reign wasn't competing in any WYS-sanctioned leagues, on the other hand, was ridiculous).

If Reign had read the tea leaves earlier and made an appeal to ECNL with a plan to subsidize its ECNL teams (like XF), the interest in Reign would have been totally different and the Reign would have had a reasonable chance to poach interest from families at existing ECNL teams with great (virtual) resumes. Still wouldn't have been a fun experience for existing Reign families. As it is, Reign and their families have been in and will be in limbo now that roster spots for ECNL are pretty much locked up.

[Unregistered]

If Reign had read the tea leaves earlier and made an appeal to ECNL with a plan to subsidize its ECNL teams (like XF), the interest in Reign would have been totally different and the Reign would have had a reasonable chance to poach interest from families at existing ECNL teams with great (virtual) resumes. Still wouldn't have been a fun experience for existing Reign families. As it is, Reign and their families have been in and will be in limbo now that roster spots for ECNL are pretty much locked up.

So many people who pretend to know everything on this board. Impact players are never locked out of a roster.

[Unregistered]

Agreed they’d need to live by ECNL rules in ECNL, and that a price of admission could be allowing others clubs to act like vultures for a couple weeks and recruit back whoever of “their” players they can. I don’t think XF or WPFC had any real complaints that Reign didn’t follow ECNL or DA recruiting rules previously, although there’s always speculation when a kid switches clubs one way or the other.

If Reign Academy were focused on u19 and u23 only and providing PDP-like programming to regional ECNL clubs the relationship could be more like that between Sounders and the local clubs (which then local clubs pay for and support) because it wouldn’t compete directly with their core offerings. Still think that would make a lot more sense for them than PSPL only, but plenty of time to sit back and try to stay sane in all this home-bound craziness and see how GA and ECNL shake out before writing anyone a check.

What does "allowing other clubs to act like vulture" mean in this context? The season is currently shut down; nobody is under contract. Is anything preventing the ECNL teams from contacting Reign players and making offers? Or are you suggesting that Reign should be required to a) make their rosters and contact info known to rival coaches, and/or b) allow other clubs "first crack", and be prevented from making offers to returning players while other clubs have a go?

There is a reason that many pro academies, and US Soccer, are skeptical of the club scene in the first place--the "win at all cost" ethic that dominates competitive youth leagues like ECNL, often encourages a training curriculum that emphasizes direct play over possession-based play. A good possession team will beat a good direct team, but a bad direct team will often beat a bad possession team--and the NCAA has very few teams that play a possession style. Some of this is due to the short college season, but a lot is due to the player pool; unless you have a lot of kids who can retain possession while being marked by a bigger, stronger, faster player--possession style doesn't win many games. So we have a bit of a chicken and an egg problem: college coaches, other than guys like Anson Dorrance, can't get enough good possession players, so they recruit speed and size. And local clubs, for the same reason, develop speed and size--and ECNL, optimized for college recruiting, frequently delivers it. This is good enough for the NCAA, but not good enough for pro leagues (limited as they are for women's soccer), and soon won't be good enough for international soccer.

So there is a good reason that "start at U19" might be viewed as a non-starter by Reign: if they aren't getting prospects until they are grown women, and they all come with rotten touch, it's too late. While I think that pro academy programs shouldn't be starting until U15 or so (that's when Sounders starts), for the academy to be effective as a training program, it needs to be developing players while they are younger. Which means either a) a supplemental program, which some clubs aren't comfortable with (player might be learning two different things from different coaches, injury risk, etc) or b) operating academy teams for kids, which means "competing" (for players) with clubs, and not just that, competing for the top kids that clubs heavily covet.

I don't know the solution to the problem. I think on the boys' side, the MLS and USL academies will have a positive impact, and BECNL will be decidedly second-tier. But NWSL teams can't afford to run free academies, and there's no transfer market for women. He who pays the piper calls the tunes, and right now the piper is being paid by the NCAA and Title IX. So everyone is dancing to the bootball boogie.

C'est la vie.

[Unregistered]

So many people who pretend to know everything on this board. Impact players are never locked out of a roster.

Right, especially in a league that allows 30 player rosters, allows transfers through at least June, doesn’t require meaningful commitments til July, and in which half the 02’s and 03’s will be put in a not particularly desirable composite division (b teams playing b teams on remote showcase fields with relatively low interest from coaches) and the 04’s will be thinking about whether that’s where they’ll end up next year.

[Unregistered]

If Reign had read the tea leaves earlier and made an appeal to ECNL with a plan to subsidize its ECNL teams (like XF), the interest in Reign would have been totally different and the Reign would have had a reasonable chance to poach interest from families at existing ECNL teams with great (virtual) resumes. Still wouldn't have been a fun experience for existing Reign families. As it is, Reign and their families have been in and will be in limbo now that roster spots for ECNL are pretty much locked up.

Snort.

All Washington ECNL teams have B teams in RCL, and any girl on any such team can be demoted at any time.

Your contract is with the club, and not for a specific team. Even if your daughter gets busted down to the C team, you are on the hook for a year of dues, and must pay it in full before you will be allowed to transfer. You could quit and say "sue me", but until the debt is paid, your daughter's card will be pulled, and she won't be able to even play rec ball, unless with a non-affiliated league.

Parents' bill of rights....

[Unregistered]

What does "allowing other clubs to act like vulture" mean in this context? The season is currently shut down; nobody is under contract. Is anything preventing the ECNL teams from contacting Reign players and making offers? Or are you suggesting that Reign should be required to a) make their rosters and contact info known to rival coaches, and/or b) allow other clubs "first crack", and be prevented from making offers to returning players while other clubs have a go?

There is a reason that many pro academies, and US Soccer, are skeptical of the club scene in the first place--the "win at all cost" ethic that dominates competitive youth leagues like ECNL, often encourages a training curriculum that emphasizes direct play over possession-based play. A good possession team will beat a good direct team, but a bad direct team will often beat a bad possession team--and the NCAA has very few teams that play a possession style. Some of this is due to the short college season, but a lot is due to the player pool; unless you have a lot of kids who can retain possession while being marked by a bigger, stronger, faster player--possession style doesn't win many games. So we have a bit of a chicken and an egg problem: college coaches, other than guys like Anson Dorrance, can't get enough good possession players, so they recruit speed and size. And local clubs, for the same reason, develop speed and size--and ECNL, optimized for college recruiting, frequently delivers it. This is good enough for the NCAA, but not good enough for pro leagues (limited as they are for women's soccer), and soon won't be good enough for international soccer.

So there is a good reason that "start at U19" might be viewed as a non-starter by Reign: if they aren't getting prospects until they are grown women, and they all come with rotten touch, it's too late. While I think that pro academy programs shouldn't be starting until U15 or so (that's when Sounders starts), for the academy to be effective as a training program, it needs to be developing players while they are younger. Which means either a) a supplemental program, which some clubs aren't comfortable with (player might be learning two different things from different coaches, injury risk, etc) or b) operating academy teams for kids, which means "competing" (for players) with clubs, and not just that, competing for the top kids that clubs heavily covet.

I don't know the solution to the problem. I think on the boys' side, the MLS and USL academies will have a positive impact, and BECNL will be decidedly second-tier. But NWSL teams can't afford to run free academies, and there's no transfer market for women. He who pays the piper calls the tunes, and right now the piper is being paid by the NCAA and Title IX. So everyone is dancing to the bootball boogie.

C'est la vie.

You try to act like you know what you are talking about and you are correct about most clubs and college soccer. Where you lose me is when you think the MLS and USL Academies are any different. You think the Sounders have trained a bunch of great touch little guys? That is funny, their model, just like every other academy in America is take early mature kids who are dominant at age 14-15. I can list each of them if you'd like.

This MLS academy league you are dreaming of will never happen. Many of the MLS clubs want nothing to do with Academy programs. They don't sign kids from them and it's a waste of resources for them. About half care and are investing in Academy, the others will use this pandemic as a reason to drop it.

The last real big problem for American families is that if that league ever started it will only be 15 and 17. So parents are going to have to send their 14 year old kids with three years to prove they are Pro's and can sign with a USL team for fast food wages. Granted, this is how the rest of the world works, I am just not sure we are ready for it yet.

[Unregistered]

Snort.

All Washington ECNL teams have B teams in RCL, and any girl on any such team can be demoted at any time.

Your contract is with the club, and not for a specific team. Even if your daughter gets busted down to the C team, you are on the hook for a year of dues, and must pay it in full before you will be allowed to transfer. You could quit and say "sue me", but until the debt is paid, your daughter's card will be pulled, and she won't be able to even play rec ball, unless with a non-affiliated league.

Parents' bill of rights....

The ECNL rules are worth a read for those considering their options. https://www.eliteclubsnationalleague...source-center/

Highlights:

1. Clubs can roster up to 30 and the freeze date for adding isn’t until right before playoffs spring. Clubs always have and always will add players who can make an impact at any time over the course of the season.

2. The rules say May and June is supposed to be open season for moving clubs — ECNL clubs can recruit players from one another, and players can shop around.

3. Rosters are submitted to the ECNL by the end of August and players then get ECNL cards for the coming playing year.

4. Once a player is carded with an ECNL club they cannot transfer to another club without permission. If the player’s old club won’t sign off the league commissioner considers various factors, the first of which is the number of games played with the old club, and another of which is whether the old club has interfered with the player’s right to consider their options. No ECNL games til after the HS season, so that effectively means there’s no basis for denying a transfer until January.

Even for RCL or US Club new cards aren’t available til August, so clubs can’t hold any card worth holding to try to block a transfer before then. If a player decides to move between now and August the old club has no real recourse, so long as you are current on your bills for the services you’ve used. The upshot of all this is that everyone allowing the clubs to force decisions in a couple days rather than waiting to make a decision in more normal circumstances and on a reasonable timeframe is getting played.