ECNL the truth of the matter

[Unregistered]

Take a look at the standings for the 4 New England ECNL clubs as the league draws to a close for the year.

U15
Stars 18th of 26 teams Flight A
CFC 14/26 Flight B
Soccerplus 17/26 Flight B
Scorpions 21/26 Flight B

U16
Scorpions 4/26 Flight A
Stars 5/26 Flight B
CFC 22/26 Flight B
Soccerplus 23/26 Flight B

U17
Stars 7/26 Flight A
CFC 25/26 Flight A
Scorpions 17/26 Flight B
Soccerplus 25/26 Flight B

U18
Stars 2/26 Flight A
CFC 22/26 Flight A
Scorpions 23/26 Flight A
Soccerplus 16/26 Flight B

So less than half of the New England teams play in the top flight (7 of 16) and of those only 3 play in the top half of Flight A. At the other end of the spectrum 8 teams play in the bottom half of Flight B.

Stars have the best showing with 3 of their 4 teams in Flight A and the one team in Flight B in the top 5th. Scorpions and CFC have 2 of their 4 teams in Flight A, but Scorpions is the only one with a team in the upper half of Flight A. Both clubs' Flight B teams are in the bottom half. All of Soccerplus teams are in the bottom half of Flight B.

With the exceptions of Stars U18 (2nd in Flight A), Stars U17, (7th in Flight B) and Scorpions U16 (4th in Flight A), New England teams don't look very especially competitive and that is being kind for most.

So can parents of these teams, especially the 8 playing in the bottom of Flight B, really rationalize the travel that they are having to do to play in the ECNL? Or do they feel, as it seems to me, that they are supporting an idea meant to benefit only 3 or 4 teams at the top of the Top Flight. Ya, I understand this is about development, and under that philosophy we're not suppose to be concerned with wins and losses, but it would irk the heck out of me as a parent to be putting in this kind of time and money to see my kid's team not even have some moderate success in the standings. What say you ECNL parents?

[Unregistered]

Now come on BTDT

[Unregistered]

Winning is always good, but the emphasis now shifts towards exposure to D1 coaches. The best teams will always do good i.e. PDA..but getting the coaches eye in the U15 (sophs only) and U16 group is what the focus is. Recruiting coaches will tell you that they don't go to see teams win or lose, they are looking at the players.

[Unregistered]

Take a look at the standings for the 4 New England ECNL clubs as the league draws to a close for the year.

U15
Stars 18th of 26 teams Flight A
CFC 14/26 Flight B
Soccerplus 17/26 Flight B
Scorpions 21/26 Flight B

U16
Scorpions 4/26 Flight A
Stars 5/26 Flight B
CFC 22/26 Flight B
Soccerplus 23/26 Flight B

U17
Stars 7/26 Flight A
CFC 25/26 Flight A
Scorpions 17/26 Flight B
Soccerplus 25/26 Flight B

U18
Stars 2/26 Flight A
CFC 22/26 Flight A
Scorpions 23/26 Flight A
Soccerplus 16/26 Flight B

So less than half of the New England teams play in the top flight (7 of 16) and of those only 3 play in the top half of Flight A. At the other end of the spectrum 8 teams play in the bottom half of Flight B.

Stars have the best showing with 3 of their 4 teams in Flight A and the one team in Flight B in the top 5th. Scorpions and CFC have 2 of their 4 teams in Flight A, but Scorpions is the only one with a team in the upper half of Flight A. Both clubs' Flight B teams are in the bottom half. All of Soccerplus teams are in the bottom half of Flight B.

With the exceptions of Stars U18 (2nd in Flight A), Stars U17, (7th in Flight B) and Scorpions U16 (4th in Flight A), New England teams don't look very especially competitive and that is being kind for most.

So can parents of these teams, especially the 8 playing in the bottom of Flight B, really rationalize the travel that they are having to do to play in the ECNL? Or do they feel, as it seems to me, that they are supporting an idea meant to benefit only 3 or 4 teams at the top of the Top Flight. Ya, I understand this is about development, and under that philosophy we're not suppose to be concerned with wins and losses, but it would irk the heck out of me as a parent to be putting in this kind of time and money to see my kid's team not even have some moderate success in the standings. What say you ECNL parents?

I say this:
1. look at the standings at the end of PDA and perhaps they will differ
2. my kid always traveled a lot before ECNL
3. non ECNL teams(MPS,Aztecs) travel just as much or more
4. my kid got seen, signed, and committed through an ECNL event

[Unregistered]

Take a look at the standings for the 4 New England ECNL clubs as the league draws to a close for the year.

U15
Stars 18th of 26 teams Flight A
CFC 14/26 Flight B
Soccerplus 17/26 Flight B
Scorpions 21/26 Flight B

U16
Scorpions 4/26 Flight A
Stars 5/26 Flight B
CFC 22/26 Flight B
Soccerplus 23/26 Flight B

U17
Stars 7/26 Flight A
CFC 25/26 Flight A
Scorpions 17/26 Flight B
Soccerplus 25/26 Flight B

U18
Stars 2/26 Flight A
CFC 22/26 Flight A
Scorpions 23/26 Flight A
Soccerplus 16/26 Flight B

So less than half of the New England teams play in the top flight (7 of 16) and of those only 3 play in the top half of Flight A. At the other end of the spectrum 8 teams play in the bottom half of Flight B.

Stars have the best showing with 3 of their 4 teams in Flight A and the one team in Flight B in the top 5th. Scorpions and CFC have 2 of their 4 teams in Flight A, but Scorpions is the only one with a team in the upper half of Flight A. Both clubs' Flight B teams are in the bottom half. All of Soccerplus teams are in the bottom half of Flight B.

With the exceptions of Stars U18 (2nd in Flight A), Stars U17, (7th in Flight B) and Scorpions U16 (4th in Flight A), New England teams don't look very especially competitive and that is being kind for most.

So can parents of these teams, especially the 8 playing in the bottom of Flight B, really rationalize the travel that they are having to do to play in the ECNL? Or do they feel, as it seems to me, that they are supporting an idea meant to benefit only 3 or 4 teams at the top of the Top Flight. Ya, I understand this is about development, and under that philosophy we're not suppose to be concerned with wins and losses, but it would irk the heck out of me as a parent to be putting in this kind of time and money to see my kid's team not even have some moderate success in the standings. What say you ECNL parents?

why do you care?

[Unregistered]

The travel is no different than what teams like the MPS Renagades do. They go to many of the same tournament, end up in lower brackets against weaker teams and have a horrible loss/win record.

[Unregistered]

I say this:
1. look at the standings at the end of PDA and perhaps they will differ
2. my kid always traveled a lot before ECNL
3. non ECNL teams(MPS,Aztecs) travel just as much or more
4. my kid got seen, signed, and committed through an ECNL event


5. If my kid is good enough, she will be signed and commited without going through ECNL event.

[Unregistered]

One big factor is being missed. Many of the teams in ECNL are very strong and being in Flight A or B does not make much difference. A prime example is the Stars are in the A Flight in U-15 and lost to the current top team PDA 4-3. They also lost to a low B flight CFC team 5-1 and it's not a knock on Stars but it does show that there is very little if any difference between the two flights. I agree with a previous poster that it's not about wins and losses, it's more about coaches looking for individual players no matter what their team record is.

[Unregistered]

One big factor is being missed. Many of the teams in ECNL are very strong and being in Flight A or B does not make much difference. A prime example is the Stars are in the A Flight in U-15 and lost to the current top team PDA 4-3. They also lost to a low B flight CFC team 5-1 and it's not a knock on Stars but it does show that there is very little if any difference between the two flights. I agree with a previous poster that it's not about wins and losses, it's more about coaches looking for individual players no matter what their team record is.



So the goal in Youth Soccer today is to do anything and everything possible to get the child seen by a College Coach.

[Unregistered]

5. If my kid is good enough, she will be signed and commited without going through ECNL event.

Then why do you care if others choose a different path?

[Unregistered]

- ECNL is a great program if you are U15 - U17 and for sure your player will see the field at least 15 minutes a half. So ask the coach and get this reassurance...realizing it has to be justified. It won't matter if your team is Bracket A or Bracket B if your player is strong. But, will a Bracket B "strong but not special" player get recruited by a top 10 type D1 program if they are losing....probabaly not unless they have strong academics or alumni connections to the program. But really, this wouldn't be different with any premier program. The fact it, today's landscape is about the "in" thing which is ECNL. But, do look at the coach attendance at the Las Vegas showcase...This,along with Disney at xmas, looks like the venue for college coaches to come to see "everyone" else and party a little with their fellow coaches. The question remains tho if this tourney will exist for long because it is put on by an ECNL team. Rumor has it that it might not be around for long. After the Las Vegas Showcase, it is getting pretty hard for non-ECNL teams to find good showcase tournaments. Even the tourney that aren't ECNL, are often put on by an ECNL club and many ECNL teams still attend knocking out spots for other clubs. Therefore, non-ECNL clubs will continue to benefit by participating in the Regional/National USYS league and showing well at the State Cups/Regional Cups. (Coaches attend regionals, but who knows how that will change if ECNL clubs stop going to State Cups.)

- Once a player has their commitment, then it gets tricky. Nothing more embarrassing then your committed college coaches sitting on the sidelines watching to support you and be sure you remain consistent before they sign you in Feb, only to have the coach decide your player won't play because the coach doesn't like the players hair that day or decides to mess with the player with their coaches sitting there... :) . Talk to the coach before tryouts for U18 and see what their philosophy will be in regard to playing time across their rosters. (This is different than USYS non-ECNL teams because of the allowed roster sizes.) So really look at roster sizes at the U18 level and make the decision if it is worth that risk. If all is well, the ECNL still provides the best venue for a U18 team to keep their competition level high and consistent (no one at that point cares if it is a Bracket A or B team, since teams are playing across the brackets now for regional games.) U18 players do get a little bit of the "I'm checked out" mentality cuz academic prep for college gets pretty intense senior year (think AP classes) and a priority.

[Unregistered]

So the goal in Youth Soccer today is to do anything and everything possible to get the child seen by a College Coach.

If you go the ECNL route at U15 and above, it is. Its just another layer on top of youth soccer and having a venue option to play at the next level being college. Just like ODP and id2, the next level being at a regional or national level.

What is the knock on ECNL? Either you want to be part of it or you don't. If you don't, why all the bashing and be satisfied with the level of club ball you choose not what others choose, there are many fine ones. Its the similar bashing that ODP takes and probably the id2 program.

[Unregistered]

- ECNL is a great program if you are U15 - U17 and for sure your player will see the field at least 15 minutes a half. So ask the coach and get this reassurance...realizing it has to be justified. It won't matter if your team is Bracket A or Bracket B if your player is strong. But, will a Bracket B "strong but not special" player get recruited by a top 10 type D1 program if they are losing....probabaly not unless they have strong academics or alumni connections to the program. But really, this wouldn't be different with any premier program. The fact it, today's landscape is about the "in" thing which is ECNL. But, do look at the coach attendance at the Las Vegas showcase...This,along with Disney at xmas, looks like the venue for college coaches to come to see "everyone" else and party a little with their fellow coaches. The question remains tho if this tourney will exist for long because it is put on by an ECNL team. Rumor has it that it might not be around for long. After the Las Vegas Showcase, it is getting pretty hard for non-ECNL teams to find good showcase tournaments. Even the tourney that aren't ECNL, are often put on by an ECNL club and many ECNL teams still attend knocking out spots for other clubs. Therefore, non-ECNL clubs will continue to benefit by participating in the Regional/National USYS league and showing well at the State Cups/Regional Cups. (Coaches attend regionals, but who knows how that will change if ECNL clubs stop going to State Cups.)

- Once a player has their commitment, then it gets tricky. Nothing more embarrassing then your committed college coaches sitting on the sidelines watching to support you and be sure you remain consistent before they sign you in Feb, only to have the coach decide your player won't play because the coach doesn't like the players hair that day or decides to mess with the player with their coaches sitting there... :) . Talk to the coach before tryouts for U18 and see what their philosophy will be in regard to playing time across their rosters. (This is different than USYS non-ECNL teams because of the allowed roster sizes.) So really look at roster sizes at the U18 level and make the decision if it is worth that risk. If all is well, the ECNL still provides the best venue for a U18 team to keep their competition level high and consistent (no one at that point cares if it is a Bracket A or B team, since teams are playing across the brackets now for regional games.) U18 players do get a little bit of the "I'm checked out" mentality cuz academic prep for college gets pretty intense senior year (think AP classes) and a priority. 15 minutes a half.........oh boy.

[Unregistered]

15 minutes a half.........oh boy.

It's better to be seen 15 minutes a half for the three days your at the tournament on the main fields, then to play on the fields 20 minutes away where there aren't any coaches to watch you.

[Unregistered]

If you go the ECNL route at U15 and above, it is. Its just another layer on top of youth soccer and having a venue option to play at the next level being college. Just like ODP and id2, the next level being at a regional or national level.

What is the knock on ECNL? Either you want to be part of it or you don't. If you don't, why all the bashing and be satisfied with the level of club ball you choose not what others choose, there are many fine ones. Its the similar bashing that ODP takes and probably the id2 program.

" another layer on top of Youth Soccer "

Creating more " layers " is a guarantee of better players , better development? Wouldn't it make more sense to try and improve the current leyers?

It isn't like ODP . ODP is not run by the " Elite" clubs themselves.

The " watering down" and spreading thin of the existing pool of youth players by the constant adding of new " layers' , or the League du Jour, only adds to the expense , anxiety level, and unintended consequences experienced by all players playing at each and every level.

I actively Referee all levels of Youth, including ENCL. I really don't see anything " elite " about it, except the parents preception that it is.

[Unregistered]

" another layer on top of Youth Soccer "

Creating more " layers " is a guarantee of better players , better development? Wouldn't it make more sense to try and improve the current leyers?

It isn't like ODP . ODP is not run by the " Elite" clubs themselves.

The " watering down" and spreading thin of the existing pool of youth players by the constant adding of new " layers' , or the League du Jour, only adds to the expense , anxiety level, and unintended consequences experienced by all players playing at each and every level.

I actively Referee all levels of Youth, including ENCL. I really don't see anything " elite " about it, except the parents preception that it is.

What league is ENCL???? and it is spelled "layers" not "leyers". Blew your cover man...

[Unregistered]

What league is ENCL???? and it is spelled "layers" not "leyers". Blew your cover man...

" my cover"

What " cover " is that?

Don't get all upset over a typo.

I still don't see anything " elite" about it.

[Unregistered]

" my cover"

What " cover " is that?

Don't get all upset over a typo.

I still don't see anything " elite" about it.

Watch the games in NEP , the ECNL teams against the non-ECNL teams you will see the "elite" difference in the teams.

[Unregistered]

" my cover"

What " cover " is that?

Don't get all upset over a typo.

I still don't see anything " elite" about it.

It seems that the only people that have comments about this league are people who are not part of it. Like a broken record.

[Unregistered]

It seems that the only people that have comments about this league are people who are not part of it. Like a broken record.

Is being a Referee that offciates the games, along with Regional, ODP and related competitions someone who is " part of it ", or do you need only to be a paying customer in order to offer an educated opinion ?

Say I have a daughter that is getting to the age of perhaps joining. Should I throw out my educated opinion, and just go by the word of the paying customers and the people who are cashing the checks?

[Unregistered]

5. If my kid is good enough, she will be signed and commited without going through ECNL event.

But can they get good enough competing against those who aren't (generally) good enough?

[Unregistered]

Winning is always good, but the emphasis now shifts towards exposure to D1 coaches. The best teams will always do good i.e. PDA..but getting the coaches eye in the U15 (sophs only) and U16 group is what the focus is. Recruiting coaches will tell you that they don't go to see teams win or lose, they are looking at the players.

Are coaches attending the games of teams performing poorly? Sorry my friend there only so many games coaches can attend.

[Unregistered]

It seems that the only people that have comments about this league are people who are not part of it. Like a broken record.

Not true....Only people who can comment are those part of it cuz the subtle nature of the issues can only be known by experience.

[Unregistered]

Are coaches attending the games of teams performing poorly? Sorry my friend there only so many games coaches can attend.

Incorrect...

Coaches will go to events where
+ there are several people who they are interested in
+ there are several people who are interested in them
+ there are teams of the appropriate caliber from areas that typically send kids to their school
+ the time/location is convenient

Once a coach is at an event they will come watch you play if
+ you have expressed an interest in their program and
there is a chance the coach will have a spot for you (ie Dorrance isnt sending people to watch a girl who has never progressed past local ODP)

Unless we are talking about the top 25-50 girls in the country, or a local school, coaches aren't going to waste their time looking at players who aren't already on their radar. Too many players, with too many choices for them to be "cold calling".

[Unregistered]

Are coaches attending the games of teams performing poorly? Sorry my friend there only so many games coaches can attend.

ummm..coaches don't go to randomly see games/teams based on w/l records or matchups. Most times they don't even know the record or standing, but they do know the strength of the club over time and the quality of players produced historically. They got a list of players they look at, those who contacted them. These players probably made informal visits and may have sat down with the coaches. You are right there are only so many matches they can attend, because of the list of players they need to look at. 100-200 players for a year to look at is common. Any team can perform poorly at any time, all coaches know that, so the notion that they are looking at a team performance (good or bad) vs an individual performance is wrong. Even at a individual level, coaches will give a second look (third is a stretch), as players can have off days.

[Unregistered]

Incorrect...

Coaches will go to events where
+ there are several people who they are interested in
+ there are several people who are interested in them
+ there are teams of the appropriate caliber from areas that typically send kids to their school
+ the time/location is convenient

Once a coach is at an event they will come watch you play if
+ you have expressed an interest in their program and
there is a chance the coach will have a spot for you (ie Dorrance isnt sending people to watch a girl who has never progressed past local ODP)

Unless we are talking about the top 25-50 girls in the country, or a local school, coaches aren't going to waste their time looking at players who aren't already on their radar. Too many players, with too many choices for them to be "cold calling".

The fraternity of college coaches are also vast and wide. Many college coaches are also club coaches, therefore, referrals and assessments are a common thing based on the desire of where the player wants to go. Lots of times its just a phone call from coach to coach to get things going, club coaches are the loop hole in the NCAA process.

[Unregistered]

Incorrect...

Coaches will go to events where
+ there are several people who they are interested in
+ there are several people who are interested in them
+ there are teams of the appropriate caliber from areas that typically send kids to their school
+ the time/location is convenient

Once a coach is at an event they will come watch you play if
+ you have expressed an interest in their program and
there is a chance the coach will have a spot for you (ie Dorrance isnt sending people to watch a girl who has never progressed past local ODP)

Unless we are talking about the top 25-50 girls in the country, or a local school, coaches aren't going to waste their time looking at players who aren't already on their radar. Too many players, with too many choices for them to be "cold calling".

Sounds like a stars or scorpion rep trying to sell this crap to us...again.

[Unregistered]

Winning is always good, but the emphasis now shifts towards exposure to D1 coaches. The best teams will always do good i.e. PDA..but getting the coaches eye in the U15 (sophs only) and U16 group is what the focus is. Recruiting coaches will tell you that they don't go to see teams win or lose, they are looking at the players.

OP here. I understand what you are saying. What I would like to know then, has exposure to college coaches been a success for all the teams, even those in the bottom of the second bracket? It's hard to compare apples to organges but based on the women's recruiting web site this is what I've discerned.

Stars have 28 2011s committed, but half(?) would be the non-ECNL Rovers; 11 2012s so far; and 2 2013 (one on the U18 ECNL team and one on the U17 ECNL team if I'm not mistaken, both with high level ODP exposure).

Scorpions have 11 2011 listed, all on the U18 team I think; 13 2012s, but 5 are from the U16 team, again if I'm not mistaken.

Hard to say for sure with CFC, but it would appears 15 from from each U17 and U18 ECNL team. CFC has 21 2011s, 6 of whom appear to be U17s the rest U18s and 9 2012s, one of whom appears to be a U18, but from a non-ECNL team.

Soccerplus, the underdog of the group has only 8 2011s and 4 2012s.

Of course, there is plenty of time for the U17 teams to add to their commitment list, so this will change and give a more accurate look at whether the ECNL is worth it from a college exposure perspective.

[Unregistered]

Hit enter too soon. I was going to add, it doesn't exactly show that it's working for a club like Soccerplus and it doesn't seem to be working for about a fourth to a third of the kids on some of these other teams if they are carrying rosters in the 20 player range. Maybe I should minus out the kids on NT and RT level too as they would undoubtedly be making the same commitments with or without ECNL.

Just trying to sort this whole thing out for future knowledge.

[Unregistered]

Is being a Referee that offciates the games, along with Regional, ODP and related competitions someone who is " part of it ", or do you need only to be a paying customer in order to offer an educated opinion ?

Say I have a daughter that is getting to the age of perhaps joining. Should I throw out my educated opinion, and just go by the word of the paying customers and the people who are cashing the checks?

Do not go by the word of the coaches PLEASE DON'T. It is all about the money.

[Unregistered]

Do not go by the word of the coaches PLEASE DON'T. It is all about the money.

If you don't get a lot of playing time it won't matter...they won't see you play so you better be sure with the limited re-entry.

[Unregistered]

If the coaches don't come, no matter how much you play. they won't see you.

[Unregistered]

if playing time was really the issue ecnl haters claim it is we'd know it. parents would be on t-s whining constantly. no coach wants to get a reputation of not caring for players. the negative is pr from non-ecnl clubs.

[Unregistered]

The nonsense going back and forth is based on the hard ECNL sales job being done consistently. There's no hatred. People are simply responding to the constant sales by one or both of the loacl ECNL Clubs and the constant belittling of those clubs, teams and players that are not in ECNL.

There are a few truths that neither side of the argument can deny:
- Not every player is looking for top college soccer (and that includes many of the top players on ECNL teams as well) but are in fact looking for the right fit of college experience, academics and soccer
- ECNL is not the only way to be recruited into college, regardless of whether its D1, D2 or D3 level a player is seeking
- ECNL will not change the level of college soccer a player is capable of playing at (although it may marginally increase the level of college a marginal player gets into, it won't change that marginal player's college playing time for the better)
- National team and Regional team players will end up at the same level soccer program whether they are on an ECNL team or not on an ECNL team (there are plenty of examples of this locally and nationally)
- Costs are not significantly different in terms of travel for a top team in or out of ECNL
- The competitive level of all teams in ECNL is not the same and the competitive level of all teams outside of ECNL is not the same (in fact competitive levels outside of ECNL can be much better than some teams get inside ECNL)
- College coaches are going to major showcase tournaments in large numbers watching non ECNL players/teams

[Unregistered]

The nonsense going back and forth is based on the hard ECNL sales job being done consistently. There's no hatred. People are simply responding to the constant sales by one or both of the loacl ECNL Clubs and the constant belittling of those clubs, teams and players that are not in ECNL.

There are a few truths that neither side of the argument can deny:
- Not every player is looking for top college soccer (and that includes many of the top players on ECNL teams as well) but are in fact looking for the right fit of college experience, academics and soccer
- ECNL is not the only way to be recruited into college, regardless of whether its D1, D2 or D3 level a player is seeking
- ECNL will not change the level of college soccer a player is capable of playing at (although it may marginally increase the level of college a marginal player gets into, it won't change that marginal player's college playing time for the better)
- National team and Regional team players will end up at the same level soccer program whether they are on an ECNL team or not on an ECNL team (there are plenty of examples of this locally and nationally)
- Costs are not significantly different in terms of travel for a top team in or out of ECNL
- The competitive level of all teams in ECNL is not the same and the competitive level of all teams outside of ECNL is not the same (in fact competitive levels outside of ECNL can be much better than some teams get inside ECNL)
- College coaches are going to major showcase tournaments in large numbers watching non ECNL players/teams

Not sure I agree with all of the points...

The team a players plays on will change the level of college soccer a player in capable of playing. If you buy that the competition is stronger in ECNL then the stronger competition will lead to stronger players.

RT players on weaker teams may lose their edge over their peers if they do not have the opportunity to compete against better players.

Both of these points are magnified by the magnitude of the difference between the two teams being considered. For example a player who's team can't get into NERP will have a harder time getting better than a player whose team that cant win NERP vs a team that can't win R1P.

(I intentionally ommited ECNL since the argument of where in that continuom ECNL falls in not relevant to my point)

[Unregistered]

'Soccerplus, the underdog of the group has only 8 2011s and 4 2012s.'

These numbers are outdated. There are at least 12 2011 commits and 10 2012 commits.

[beentheredonethat]

Not sure I agree with all of the points...

The team a players plays on will change the level of college soccer a player in capable of playing. If you buy that the competition is stronger in ECNL then the stronger competition will lead to stronger players.

RT players on weaker teams may lose their edge over their peers if they do not have the opportunity to compete against better players.

Both of these points are magnified by the magnitude of the difference between the two teams being considered. For example a player who's team can't get into NERP will have a harder time getting better than a player whose team that cant win NERP vs a team that can't win R1P.

(I intentionally ommited ECNL since the argument of where in that continuom ECNL falls in not relevant to my point)

The cold hard truth of the matter is this ECNL debate you are having is similar to a religious or political discussion in that a whole bunch is dictated essentially by faith in certain widely believed "truths". The reality is there is little chance you will successfully challenge any of these "truths" because there actually is a shred of reality behind them and believe or not there is ample evidence both ways to support the arguments. It all comes down to what your gut tells you is right. The thing everyone should probably come to grips with is once you do that gut check there is very little chance anyone is going to convince a person whom has chosen either side to convert once they have made their decision. The real battle is for those who have not made a decision yet and are just starting the process of forming their ideas on how all of this works. Those people are not reading this thread, they are reading about U11 and U12 issues.

[Unregistered]

Not sure I agree with all of the points...

The team a players plays on will change the level of college soccer a player in capable of playing. If you buy that the competition is stronger in ECNL then the stronger competition will lead to stronger players.

IMO this is what is what is killing the women's program in the US - the belief that better competition is the single key to producing better players. If it were so then why as these national leagues popped up, the US women's program is faultering? I'll tell you why. Because competition is only one part of the total equation and yet we've pretty much made it the only part.

RT players on weaker teams may lose their edge over their peers if they do not have the opportunity to compete against better players.

Both of these points are magnified by the magnitude of the difference between the two teams being considered. For example a player who's team can't get into NERP will have a harder time getting better than a player whose team that cant win NERP vs a team that can't win R1P.



To make my point, is it really the competition? Or is the addition of new and better players that often are added to these teams that make these teams appear to be better? If it were strictly the competition, then all those teams jumping in air planes to find better competition would never have to cut players from their teams.

The fact of the matter is that only a very small percentage of players even in the ECNL are truly "elite" players. The rest are a dime a dozen. Good players, don't get me wrong, but they are such cookie cutters of one another they are almost irrelevent. As for the truly "elite" players, they are not getting the type of training they need to actually improve at the same rate the rest of the world seems to be improving. The ECNL is not changing that and the guys in charge are certainly not going to tell you that either. But then who would really care anyway even if they did?

[Unregistered]

'Soccerplus, the underdog of the group has only 8 2011s and 4 2012s.'

These numbers are outdated. There are at least 12 2011 commits and 10 2012 commits.

Lists??? Can they be found on the Soccerplus web site?

In order to evaluate the success of ECNL participation as far as college recruitment goes, we need to see the schools these players will attend and that at some future date, check to see if they actually played.

[Unregistered]

Yes, they are on the SoccerPlus website.

[Unregistered]

Not sure I agree with all of the points...

The team a players plays on will change the level of college soccer a player in capable of playing. If you buy that the competition is stronger in ECNL then the stronger competition will lead to stronger players.

RT players on weaker teams may lose their edge over their peers if they do not have the opportunity to compete against better players.

Both of these points are magnified by the magnitude of the difference between the two teams being considered. For example a player who's team can't get into NERP will have a harder time getting better than a player whose team that cant win NERP vs a team that can't win R1P.

(I intentionally ommited ECNL since the argument of where in that continuom ECNL falls in not relevant to my point)

Not going to totally disagree here, but there are exceptions. Look at RB, cozmitted to BU but her team has never made it to SC RR even. She has the edge you are saying here is not possible.

On the otherhand, any player at age 17, with the exception of RT players like RB, on a team as you describe above is not capable of playing for the top 3-4 teams anyhow. By 16 at the latest the talent has consolidated. Perhaps the top player or two on teams 5-8 can compete at that level, but its unlikely they become a starter or a core player.

Frankly, the difference between NERP and R1PL is significant and the difference between NERP and MAPLE D1 is far more significant. Speed of play is vastly different at each of these levels. In order to step up to D1 college a player needs to do serious tournament play and a serious league playing against the top regional teams and national teams as well as spend serious time training outside of practices in soccer and in fitness and strength.

[Unregistered]

Players don't improve by solely playing against tough competition. There needs to be a mix. If a team only plays against teams that are equal or better than them they will have very little time on the ball, and will never have an opportunity to learn how to flow on offense, possess the ball, or kill a game. These skills and strategies need to be practiced first against lesser competition before it can be successful against better.

The idea one can only improve against top competition is a sales pitch masquerading as fact.

If you want to know why US kids are falling behind, or at best not gaining in comparison to the rest of the world, it is simple. They don't have the ball at their feet enough, and then when they do play games, too often it is a battle of athletic track teams masquerading as soccer players.

More advanced countries value the soccer "brains" of young players. They look for the kids that make the intelligent passes and plays, not just the ones that tackle hard and pump their arms, running fast all over the pitch. Very rarely do I hear a US player, parent or coach praise a player's brain and saavy, yet in almost every conversation with my South American and European friends it is the first attribute they comment upon.

[Unregistered]

Players don't improve by solely playing against tough competition. There needs to be a mix. If a team only plays against teams that are equal or better than them they will have very little time on the ball, and will never have an opportunity to learn how to flow on offense, possess the ball, or kill a game. These skills and strategies need to be practiced first against lesser competition before it can be successful against better.

The idea one can only improve against top competition is a sales pitch masquerading as fact.

If you want to know why US kids are falling behind, or at best not gaining in comparison to the rest of the world, it is simple. They don't have the ball at their feet enough, and then when they do play games, too often it is a battle of athletic track teams masquerading as soccer players.

More advanced countries value the soccer "brains" of young players. They look for the kids that make the intelligent passes and plays, not just the ones that tackle hard and pump their arms, running fast all over the pitch. Very rarely do I hear a US player, parent or coach praise a player's brain and saavy, yet in almost every conversation with my South American and European friends it is the first attribute they comment upon.

Most of the development of a player is going to come from the training environment. That is why every coaching model looks for at least a 3:1 ratio of training sessions to games. What the best teams offer is the type of practice competition to allow a player to improve. If a player isn't challenged during training, then the entire experience is pretty wasted. That is the thing that seems to be lost in this debate. One of the main reasons that the top teams in the state continue to improve as they get older (and why individual team members continue to improve) is because of the qualty of the training experience. That means that everyone is vested in that experience by committing themselves to consistently showing up... ready to work hard.

Sure, playing in the ECNL Group A will assure you of at least 9 (or more) games against outstanding national level competition. And no non-ECNL teams in Massachusetts are afforded that same opportunity, but the guaranty of better external competition isn't the biggest value of playing on an outstanding team. Its the internal competition that allows for consistent improvement.

[Unregistered]

The level of ECNL practice competition is great, but these teams at most practice, what, 3 days a week for 1.5 hours? Does anyone seriously think 3 to 4.5 hours a week practice will produce skilled, knowledgable soccer players?

[Unregistered]

if playing time was really the issue ecnl haters claim it is we'd know it. parents would be on t-s whining constantly. no coach wants to get a reputation of not caring for players. the negative is pr from non-ecnl clubs.

Wrong. There are kids on ECNL teams who don't get a lot of playing time and will stand to get even less when the re-entry rules get stricter. They don't complain because their parents think that their kid's spot on the bench will get them a scholarship. They know their kids can be replaced so they don't rock the boat. That is entirely their choice to make and their kid's decision whether they are comfortable with limited playing time and sitting even more in big games.

[Unregistered]

The level of ECNL practice competition is great, but these teams at most practice, what, 3 days a week for 1.5 hours? Does anyone seriously think 3 to 4.5 hours a week practice will produce skilled, knowledgable soccer players?

I suspect most would agree that type of commitment to training you outline won't get it done if your focus is on developing NT players... but I also think you have to bear in mind the end game here, which for most of these young women is nothing more than collegiate soccer. I guess what I'm saying is that with extraordinarily few exceptions, we're not training players that will go on to have any sort of career beyond the college game.

Well trained club players, whether they come from the ECNL path or not, are doing just fine in the college/amateur ranks and then, as NCAA likes to point out, going pro in something other than soccer.

Now, if you're lamenting the fact that the performance of the women's national team has fallen off over the last few years, that's a whole different subject. To that, I would agree that if the WNT wants to be competitive going forward, then an effective training academy with laser focus on improving the women's game at the highest level needs to be established. As somebody else mentioned, ECNL or no ECNL is not going to change that. We need to be looking at the most successful national team development programs in other countries for examples of what needs to be done here at the NT level.

But to mix that objective up with a discussion of the relative merits of ENCL (when 99% of ECNL players won't ever see the pitch in a national team jersey) seems to me to be missing the point.

[Unregistered]

The level of ECNL practice competition is great, but these teams at most practice, what, 3 days a week for 1.5 hours? Does anyone seriously think 3 to 4.5 hours a week practice will produce skilled, knowledgable soccer players?

Perhaps not, but the player with the drive to be an elite player will take what the learn from practice and bring it home to work on. This is especially true if they are getting their butt kicked in practice, either by a skill they aren't particularly good at, or by a player who, for the moment, is better than them.

The advantage for an good player on a "better" team is that coaches can challenge the player to do more difficult things in practice and the other players will challenge the player to get better.

Almost all players need something to push them to get better, the more push from what motivates them the more they improve.

[Unregistered]

This is a worthwhile discussion that is taking place over on the "ECNL the truth of the matter" thread. It is actually a pretty reasonable discussion of some of the more improtant issues about player development. It might prove helpful to those of you considering team changes next month

Poster A

The nonsense going back and forth is based on the hard ECNL sales job being done consistently. There's no hatred. People are simply responding to the constant sales by one or both of the loacl ECNL Clubs and the constant belittling of those clubs, teams and players that are not in ECNL.

There are a few truths that neither side of the argument can deny:
- Not every player is looking for top college soccer (and that includes many of the top players on ECNL teams as well) but are in fact looking for the right fit of college experience, academics and soccer
- ECNL is not the only way to be recruited into college, regardless of whether its D1, D2 or D3 level a player is seeking
- ECNL will not change the level of college soccer a player is capable of playing at (although it may marginally increase the level of college a marginal player gets into, it won't change that marginal player's college playing time for the better)
- National team and Regional team players will end up at the same level soccer program whether they are on an ECNL team or not on an ECNL team (there are plenty of examples of this locally and nationally)
- Costs are not significantly different in terms of travel for a top team in or out of ECNL
- The competitive level of all teams in ECNL is not the same and the competitive level of all teams outside of ECNL is not the same (in fact competitive levels outside of ECNL can be much better than some teams get inside ECNL)
- College coaches are going to major showcase tournaments in large numbers watching non ECNL players/teams

Poster B

Not sure I agree with all of the points...

The team a players plays on will change the level of college soccer a player in capable of playing. If you buy that the competition is stronger in ECNL then the stronger competition will lead to stronger players.

RT players on weaker teams may lose their edge over their peers if they do not have the opportunity to compete against better players.

Both of these points are magnified by the magnitude of the difference between the two teams being considered. For example a player who's team can't get into NERP will have a harder time getting better than a player whose team that cant win NERP vs a team that can't win R1P.

(I intentionally ommited ECNL since the argument of where in that continuom ECNL falls in not relevant to my point)

Poster A

IMO this is what is what is killing the women's program in the US - the belief that better competition is the single key to producing better players. If it were so then why as these national leagues popped up, the US women's program is faultering? I'll tell you why. Because competition is only one part of the total equation and yet we've pretty much made it the only part.

RT players on weaker teams may lose their edge over their peers if they do not have the opportunity to compete against better players.

To make my point, is it really the competition? Or is the addition of new and better players that often are added to these teams that make these teams appear to be better? If it were strictly the competition, then all those teams jumping in air planes to find better competition would never have to cut players from their teams.

The fact of the matter is that only a very small percentage of players even in the ECNL are truly "elite" players. The rest are a dime a dozen. Good players, don't get me wrong, but they are such cookie cutters of one another they are almost irrelevent. As for the truly "elite" players, they are not getting the type of training they need to actually improve at the same rate the rest of the world seems to be improving. The ECNL is not changing that and the guys in charge are certainly not going to tell you that either. But then who would really care anyway even if they did?

Poster B

Not going to totally disagree here, but there are exceptions. Look at RB, cozmitted to BU but her team has never made it to SC RR even. She has the edge you are saying here is not possible.

On the otherhand, any player at age 17, with the exception of RT players like RB, on a team as you describe above is not capable of playing for the top 3-4 teams anyhow. By 16 at the latest the talent has consolidated. Perhaps the top player or two on teams 5-8 can compete at that level, but its unlikely they become a starter or a core player.

Frankly, the difference between NERP and R1PL is significant and the difference between NERP and MAPLE D1 is far more significant. Speed of play is vastly different at each of these levels. In order to step up to D1 college a player needs to do serious tournament play and a serious league playing against the top regional teams and national teams as well as spend serious time training outside of practices in soccer and in fitness and strength.

Poster A

Players don't improve by solely playing against tough competition. There needs to be a mix. If a team only plays against teams that are equal or better than them they will have very little time on the ball, and will never have an opportunity to learn how to flow on offense, possess the ball, or kill a game. These skills and strategies need to be practiced first against lesser competition before it can be successful against better.

The idea one can only improve against top competition is a sales pitch masquerading as fact.

If you want to know why US kids are falling behind, or at best not gaining in comparison to the rest of the world, it is simple. They don't have the ball at their feet enough, and then when they do play games, too often it is a battle of athletic track teams masquerading as soccer players.

More advanced countries value the soccer "brains" of young players. They look for the kids that make the intelligent passes and plays, not just the ones that tackle hard and pump their arms, running fast all over the pitch. Very rarely do I hear a US player, parent or coach praise a player's brain and saavy, yet in almost every conversation with my South American and European friends it is the first attribute they comment upon.

Poster B

Most of the development of a player is going to come from the training environment. That is why every coaching model looks for at least a 3:1 ratio of training sessions to games. What the best teams offer is the type of practice competition to allow a player to improve. If a player isn't challenged during training, then the entire experience is pretty wasted. That is the thing that seems to be lost in this debate. One of the main reasons that the top teams in the state continue to improve as they get older (and why individual team members continue to improve) is because of the qualty of the training experience. That means that everyone is vested in that experience by committing themselves to consistently showing up... ready to work hard.

Sure, playing in the ECNL Group A will assure you of at least 9 (or more) games against outstanding national level competition. And no non-ECNL teams in Massachusetts are afforded that same opportunity, but the guaranty of better external competition isn't the biggest value of playing on an outstanding team. Its the internal competition that allows for consistent improvement.

Poster A

The level of ECNL practice competition is great, but these teams at most practice, what, 3 days a week for 1.5 hours? Does anyone seriously think 3 to 4.5 hours a week practice will produce skilled, knowledgable soccer players?

Poster B

I suspect most would agree that type of commitment to training you outline won't get it done if your focus is on developing NT players... but I also think you have to bear in mind the end game here, which for most of these young women is nothing more than collegiate soccer. I guess what I'm saying is that with extraordinarily few exceptions, we're not training players that will go on to have any sort of career beyond the college game.

Well trained club players, whether they come from the ECNL path or not, are doing just fine in the college/amateur ranks and then, as NCAA likes to point out, going pro in something other than soccer.

Now, if you're lamenting the fact that the performance of the women's national team has fallen off over the last few years, that's a whole different subject. To that, I would agree that if the WNT wants to be competitive going forward, then an effective training academy with laser focus on improving the women's game at the highest level needs to be established. As somebody else mentioned, ECNL or no ECNL is not going to change that. We need to be looking at the most successful national team development programs in other countries for examples of what needs to be done here at the NT level.

But to mix that objective up with a discussion of the relative merits of ENCL (when 99% of ECNL players won't ever see the pitch in a national team jersey) seems to me to be missing the point.

[Unregistered]

This is a worthwhile discussion that is taking place over on the "ECNL the truth of the matter" thread. It is actually a pretty reasonable discussion of some of the more improtant issues about player development. It might prove helpful to those of you considering team changes next month

Poster A



Poster B



Poster A



Poster B



Poster A



Poster B



Poster A



Poster B

Ummmm, that's where we are at - ECNL the truth of the matter.

[Unregistered]

The level of ECNL practice competition is great, but these teams at most practice, what, 3 days a week for 1.5 hours? Does anyone seriously think 3 to 4.5 hours a week practice will produce skilled, knowledgable soccer players?

So the better option would be a non-ECNL team that practices less and when they do, those fewer sessions will exhibit lesser intensity and quality? The valid point is that the training environment with the top teams, featuring top talent that is committed to the team, is better than the alternatives. It may not be the optimum environment. but it is the best available. Even so called "bench players" on these teams benefit (and improve) from the better training available. Whether that is better than being a stud on a lesser team, getting greater game time, but arguably lesser training... is the issue.

[Unregistered]

Two all-state performers in HS. One playes for a decent club team but not one of the top, but she is that team's "best" player. The other is a slid contributor for an ECNL team but certainly not one of the stars. Who do you think will be better prepared for D1 college?

[Unregistered]

Two all-state performers in HS. One playes for a decent club team but not one of the top, but she is that team's "best" player. The other is a slid contributor for an ECNL team but certainly not one of the stars. Who do you think will be better prepared for D1 college?

All state high school performer!!! You vote for my kid, i"ll vote for yours and we'll get acouple girls in for our conference coaches. What a joke, a few are all-state performers, most are not. Most high school soccer is a joke!

[Unregistered]

All state high school performer!!! You vote for my kid, i"ll vote for yours and we'll get acouple girls in for our conference coaches. What a joke, a few are all-state performers, most are not. Most high school soccer is a joke!

Didn't ask for your take on all-state or high school soccer. User wanted to know who would be better prepared for college. Get off your high horse about hs soccer, it is what it is and we all just deal with it if the kids want to play.

[Unregistered]

I suspect most would agree that type of commitment to training you outline won't get it done if your focus is on developing NT players... but I also think you have to bear in mind the end game here, which for most of these young women is nothing more than collegiate soccer.....But to mix that objective up with a discussion of the relative merits of ENCL (when 99% of ECNL players won't ever see the pitch in a national team jersey) seems to me to be missing the point.

Maybe.... sort of. The disconnect that occurs now is NT and RT selectors anoint players at very young ages. These can be the truly gifted, but in some cases it is those that matured and grew early. Then few players, especially girls, play much more than the requisite minimum. Improvement slows or stops completely. Right at the crucial soccer development years most US players back off. The few that don't, and keep working at their game stand out.

US soccer needs to find a way to widen the bottom of the pyramid right up through the teen years. They need to include more players, and encourage them all to have the ball at their feet as much as 10 times more than currently happens. Less time in the car or plane, and more time playing all types of soccer would correct the latest perceived deficiencies in a couple years, rather than a couple generations as I read recently.

US has the players, facilities, and interest in the sport. What we are lacking is leadership willing to admit the emperor has no clothes.

(Rather than a NT camp for the few selected early, I suggest 6 or 8 regional training centers that bring players in 4 or 5 times a year for 4 or 5 days each. Evaluate and send players back with specific homework. Encourage them all to continue to improve. Monitor and promote those that do. Include South American trained coaches, to insure there is an emphasis on possession and intelligence as these are the attributes missing in US soccer.)

And an ancillary benefit would be skillful, entertaining college soccer for both men and women. Currently the athletic track teams masquerading as soccer squads are not worth watching, as much as I try to support the game and players.

[Unregistered]

Two all-state performers in HS. One playes for a decent club team but not one of the top, but she is that team's "best" player. The other is a slid contributor for an ECNL team but certainly not one of the stars. Who do you think will be better prepared for D1 college?

I can think of quite a few kids that would represent these players, in fact I've used a similar example before. They are pretty much equal in talent and capable of contributing to a college team. The real issue is the kid that doesn't play for an ECNL club just isn't going to have the same exposure to college coaches that the kid that does. I know many will find my words blasphemous, but that is the fact of the matter as it stands for the class of 2011.

[Unregistered]

Two all-state performers in HS. One playes for a decent club team but not one of the top, but she is that team's "best" player. The other is a slid contributor for an ECNL team but certainly not one of the stars. Who do you think will be better prepared for D1 college?

This is clearly a trick question. Please provide height, weight, and 40 yard times and I'll easily be able to discern which player will garner more attention from college coaches. ;)

[Unregistered]

I can think of quite a few kids that would represent these players, in fact I've used a similar example before. They are pretty much equal in talent and capable of contributing to a college team. The real issue is the kid that doesn't play for an ECNL club just isn't going to have the same exposure to college coaches that the kid that does. I know many will find my words blasphemous, but that is the fact of the matter as it stands for the class of 2011.

And more so in the classes that follow as the ECNL grows out of its infancy.

[Unregistered]

Two all-state performers in HS. One playes for a decent club team but not one of the top, but she is that team's "best" player. The other is a slid contributor for an ECNL team but certainly not one of the stars. Who do you think will be better prepared for D1 college?

One of the most underestimated factors in readiness for college play is the ability/willingness/understanding of the level of commitment needed at the next level. If these two players are equal skillwise, the player who is taught how much harder they are going to have to work and is willing to do that work will be more likely to succeed in college play.

[Unregistered]

Two all-state performers in HS. One playes for a decent club team but not one of the top, but she is that team's "best" player. The other is a slid contributor for an ECNL team but certainly not one of the stars. Who do you think will be better prepared for D1 college?

the ECNL kid by a mile.........they have been trained better, been exposed to fast speed of play, and been under big pressure situations

a good deal of all-staters play in attacking roles for hs but would not be in this same role in college for the above reasons

[Unregistered]

[Frankly, the difference between NERP and R1PL is significant and the difference between NERP and MAPLE D1 is far more significant. Speed of play is vastly different at each of these levels. In order to step up to D1 college a player needs to do serious tournament play and a serious league playing against the top regional teams and national teams as well as spend serious time training outside of practices in soccer and in fitness and strength.[/QUOTE]

Would someone on this message board explain a few things: What is NERP? What is ECNL? We are in MAPLE now (I know what that stands for) but are considering options. What is the difference between MAPLE and ECNL or NERP? Previous poster assumes I know this, but I don't.

[Unregistered]

[Frankly, the difference between NERP and R1PL is significant and the difference between NERP and MAPLE D1 is far more significant. Speed of play is vastly different at each of these levels. In order to step up to D1 college a player needs to do serious tournament play and a serious league playing against the top regional teams and national teams as well as spend serious time training outside of practices in soccer and in fitness and strength.

Would someone on this message board explain a few things: What is NERP? What is ECNL? We are in MAPLE now (I know what that stands for) but are considering options. What is the difference between MAPLE and ECNL or NERP? Previous poster assumes I know this, but I don't.[/QUOTE]

There are two organizations that sanction league and tournaments nationally in the US - US Club Soccer and US Youth Soccer Association.

NERP, Region 1 Premier, State Cup are USYSA leagues and tournaments. ECNL is a US Club Soccer league.

ECNL stands for Elite Clubs National Leage - US Club soccer has selected 66 clubs from accross the country to form a single league across the country, with league play, torunaments, etc. If a club is ECNL they are entitled (required?) to field 1 team per age group (u14-18) in the league. (Note ECNL is a girls on organization, boys don't have a comperable US Club organization).

USYSA divides the country in 4 Regions. We are in Region 1 (Maine down to Virginia). Region 1 Premier (R1P) is the top USYSA league in the Region for u14 and up. Teams qualify by winning NERP, Colonial, performing well in R1P the previous year, or by winning state cup and finishing in the top 4 at the followup tournament - regionals. There are also a couple of spots available for the top other teams that apply.

NERP and Colonial are the USYSA league below R1P (u13 and up). Teams that don't make R1P usually apply for NERP (Maine to NJ) or Colonial (NJ - Virginia).

For all R1P, NERP and Colonial, teams must apply every year and every team in a club must apply on their own.

Starting with the 2011-12 season, ECNL clubs will no longer be putting their top teams in USYSA events (though many will be sending very good B teams to those leagues).

End of facts...the rest is my opinion

So the issues this all raises are, where is the best competition - ECNL will have better teams at the top but there will also be more than a few teams not good enough for R1P (though most probably would be good enough for NERP)

Where is the best training - varies by club - there will still be some very good clubs not in ECNL, though most top R1P teams not in ECNL are not in Mass.

Where is the best college exposure. It depends. Finding a college is like finding a mate - everyone is looking for something different. You need to find a club that will get you showcased in front of the schools your daughter will be interested in.

Does the ECNL/USYSA/local travel issue make peope irrational - yes.

[Unregistered]

Thanks! That is very helpful and spells a lot out. Most importantly, though, we have a boy. So if he is already playing MAPLE R1P, what else is out there that we should be considering? I guess you can always go to another team in your division, as they all cannibalize each other already, but is there something beyond or outside of MAPLE for teen boys playing competitive soccer?

[Unregistered]

Thanks! That is very helpful and spells a lot out. Most importantly, though, we have a boy. So if he is already playing MAPLE R1P, what else is out there that we should be considering? I guess you can always go to another team in your division, as they all cannibalize each other already, but is there something beyond or outside of MAPLE for teen boys playing competitive soccer?

The best MAPLE teams usually will play either R1P and NERP in addition to (or perhaps instead of) MAPLE. The highest level of play in the area for teenage boys will generally be found in USSF Development Academy Program clubs (NE Revolution, FC Greater Boston Bolts, Seacoast, Oakwood, South Central).

[Unregistered]

thanks again. This is complicated for the uninitiated, and I appreciate the advice.

[Unregistered]

Two all-state performers in HS. One playes for a decent club team but not one of the top, but she is that team's "best" player. The other is a slid contributor for an ECNL team but certainly not one of the stars. Who do you think will be better prepared for D1 college?

This is the one area where playing for the Aztecs (as opposed to another second tier team) has a huge advantage. The Aztecs routinely invite younger players to participate in their U20 program. Although I personally do not believe that the quality or consistency of the training or competition matches the top end opportunities for a very good ECNL team, it is a very good option for these players and is great preparation for college - especially during the U18/senior season.

[beentheredonethat]

.
Would someone on this message board explain a few things: What is NERP? What is ECNL? We are in MAPLE now (I know what that stands for) but are considering options. What is the difference between MAPLE and ECNL or NERP? Previous poster assumes I know this, but I don't.

There are two organizations that sanction league and tournaments nationally in the US - US Club Soccer and US Youth Soccer Association.

NERP, Region 1 Premier, State Cup are USYSA leagues and tournaments. ECNL is a US Club Soccer league.

ECNL stands for Elite Clubs National Leage - US Club soccer has selected 66 clubs from accross the country to form a single league across the country, with league play, torunaments, etc. If a club is ECNL they are entitled (required?) to field 1 team per age group (u14-18) in the league. (Note ECNL is a girls on organization, boys don't have a comperable US Club organization).

USYSA divides the country in 4 Regions. We are in Region 1 (Maine down to Virginia). Region 1 Premier (R1P) is the top USYSA league in the Region for u14 and up. Teams qualify by winning NERP, Colonial, performing well in R1P the previous year, or by winning state cup and finishing in the top 4 at the followup tournament - regionals. There are also a couple of spots available for the top other teams that apply.

NERP and Colonial are the USYSA league below R1P (u13 and up). Teams that don't make R1P usually apply for NERP (Maine to NJ) or Colonial (NJ - Virginia).

For all R1P, NERP and Colonial, teams must apply every year and every team in a club must apply on their own.

Starting with the 2011-12 season, ECNL clubs will no longer be putting their top teams in USYSA events (though many will be sending very good B teams to those leagues).

End of facts...the rest is my opinion

So the issues this all raises are, where is the best competition - ECNL will have better teams at the top but there will also be more than a few teams not good enough for R1P (though most probably would be good enough for NERP)

Where is the best training - varies by club - there will still be some very good clubs not in ECNL, though most top R1P teams not in ECNL are not in Mass.

Where is the best college exposure. It depends. Finding a college is like finding a mate - everyone is looking for something different. You need to find a club that will get you showcased in front of the schools your daughter will be interested in.

Does the ECNL/USYSA/local travel issue make peope irrational - yes.

This is perhaps one of the most balanced posts I have seen on this topic on this forum. Thank you for it. I particularly like the comment about the college process being akin to finding a mate, which is so true. The only thing I wish you had really tied back to was that there really isn't one "right" answer that fits everyone's individual situation because no matter how you proceed there are advantages and compromises. The real trick is matching those up with your child's personal goals and abilities as well as your resources. I will tell you that the more objective you are in assessing your child's potential and opportunities and matching them up with your resources the happier you all will be with the outcome. The one risk to any of the hype regarding any league or "path" is it tends to create a more is better type mentality which seems to result in a lot of people essentially over reaching for those goals. Understand that when you read pessimistic advice (such as mine) on the subject it tends to come from people who found with hindsight that they should have been more conservative in their assessment of all of the factors involved. I think one of the lessons people should be pulling from these types of threads isn't that one league is better than another but rather that a whole lot of people are getting to the end of the path they chose and are realizing that they were overly optimistic. That is a warning that has little to do with a specific league.

[Unregistered]

One of the most underestimated factors in readiness for college play is the ability/willingness/understanding of the level of commitment needed at the next level. If these two players are equal skillwise, the player who is taught how much harder they are going to have to work and is willing to do that work will be more likely to succeed in college play.

It could be the great player on the second tier team who may be more creative because they are not working with a stacked roster.

[Unregistered]

It could be the great player on the second tier team who may be more creative because they are not working with a stacked roster.

This cuts both ways. It's tough to be creative when your team is pinned back defending all day. Very often kids that are lots better than their teammates try to do too much. They often need to learn to play and excel within a team framework. As they move up the ranks individual play becomes more difficult. It is often small touches, and incisive passes that free others, or allow a team to retain possession under pressure, which to the uneducated often go unappreciated, that make the difference in tight matches. Tough to learn this if a player is the whole show for their team.

[Unregistered]

This cuts both ways. It's tough to be creative when your team is pinned back defending all day. Very often kids that are lots better than their teammates try to do too much. They often need to learn to play and excel within a team framework. As they move up the ranks individual play becomes more difficult. It is often small touches, and incisive passes that free others, or allow a team to retain possession under pressure, which to the uneducated often go unappreciated, that make the difference in tight matches. Tough to learn this if a player is the whole show for their team.

Spot on. And it also happens on teams where the player isn't any better but the coach gives them too much cloat and players get so frustrated cuz seems like everything has to revolve around that player. Team dynamics are gone. This causes this player to never do well on a balanced team.

[Unregistered]

5. If my kid is good enough, she will be signed and commited without going through ECNL event.

r u sure???