GDA National Championships and Showcase question

[Unregistered]

That is the case with every league and player. In the end it is all about individual development. A player that might sit on the bench of a winning DA team, not logging enough gametime minutes, may lose confidence and see their overall development stall, but as a starter on NPL team, play the entire game, gain tons of confidence, and develop more, even if that team is losing. In the end, it’s about the player and what’s working for their development. That same player (especially if on the younger side) may then develop to the point where they become a starter on a stronger team down the road should they choose to go.

people say its all about the player, but then make biased scenarios like the one above suggesting they still have an agenda ! You could have made exactly the same point and removed the letters DA and NPL. you could even remove teh word starter.

US sports has all these words and letters that are designed to "imply" status by association. take starter for instance in YOUR example , what difference does it make if a kid starts or not if she is getting meaningful minutes anyways?

The whole basis of youth sports here is built on parents egos and over inflation of ability. that insecurity is then turned against them to ensure they continue to pay exorbitant fees for association with winning.

lets be clear, very few parents are paying on the basis on real individual development. In the US, winning is sold AS individual development.

its why in general, on the womens side, we breed athletic, mentally tough players with limited individual technique. To date, thats been enough to win.

[Unregistered]

You are right that it depends on the age group. The older teams are not strong. While many may be stronger than the teams they are competing against, with the exception of Select, most of the top players have moved to other leagues. Look, I hope you are right, but I strongly suspect you are not. It is very hard to get noticed on an NPL team when there is a team above them. That's the sad truth.

95% of all players looking to play in college have to do their own legwork. Only the unicorns at the very top can sit back and let top programs come to them. The rest have to identify their targets, make the contacts, foster the relationship with the coaches at there targeted colleges, and basically make it happen regardless of what league they are in. Yes, that will that be a bit easier to do on a DA or ECNL team because more coaches are at their showcases, but the legwork still has to be done. If you had equally talented players, one on BBA DA team and one on BBA NPL team, but the NPL player takes a much more proactive role in their recruiting, by going to multiple ID clinics, camps etc and reaching out to multiple coaches at correctly targeted schools, guess who is more likely to get recruited first? The NPL player. So yes, the NPL may have to work a bit harder, they both have to work.

[Unregistered]

people say its all about the player, but then make biased scenarios like the one above suggesting they still have an agenda ! You could have made exactly the same point and removed the letters DA and NPL. you could even remove teh word starter.

US sports has all these words and letters that are designed to "imply" status by association. take starter for instance in YOUR example , what difference does it make if a kid starts or not if she is getting meaningful minutes anyways?

The whole basis of youth sports here is built on parents egos and over inflation of ability. that insecurity is then turned against them to ensure they continue to pay exorbitant fees for association with winning.

lets be clear, very few parents are paying on the basis on real individual development. In the US, winning is sold AS individual development.

its why in general, on the womens side, we breed athletic, mentally tough players with limited individual technique. To date, thats been enough to win.

I am the OP of the post you quoted. I used the leagues I did, because that was the original example the other poster was referencing. As I also said, my example could be applied to any two leagues where one is perceived higher than the other ... NEP to NPL... Championship NEP to Premiership NEP. It’s all the same concept. As kids approach recruiting years, the focus shift of most families goes from look for team success to the individual development of their player being more important. You could say that the order should actually be reversed, and I would probably agree, but in our country, the endgame for most is college, Building a successful US building a successful USNT. End it is when players approach those college years, that parents especially, care less about the team success, and more about their kids personal development in order to get into a college program.

[Unregistered]

I am the OP of the post you quoted. I used the leagues I did, because that was the original example the other poster was referencing. As I also said, my example could be applied to any two leagues where one is perceived higher than the other ... NEP to NPL... Championship NEP to Premiership NEP. It’s all the same concept. As kids approach recruiting years, the focus shift of most families goes from looking for team success to the individual development of their player being more important. You could say that the order should actually be reversed, and I would probably agree, but in our country, the endgame for most is college, NOT building a successful USNT. And it is when players approach those college years, that parents especially, care less about the team success, and more about their kids personal development in order to get into a college program.

Fixed the crazy autocorrects in my post above

[Unregistered]

I think the OP has said many times they never said “top” players. They said STARTERS (players 4-11). That is correct info. I know of at least 2 myself. No one said top players, so stop perpetuating the myth already.

For the other thread, apparently on the same topic: "Hearing serval top players are declining DA spots for NPL spots due to not receiving waivers."

[Unregistered]

You cannot make that blanket statement. Depends on the age group, and generally speaking BBA NPL teams are not weak, and most are getting stronger next year too. As a second team, they most are still stronger than many of first teams they complete agianst. As with ANY team, do your homework, know the basic roster, and the coach, and whether or not it’s a doable travel and money-wise for your family. Stop listening to the agenda driven drivel here.

JB, good to see your keeping the NEFC propaganda strong! How much money did you pay to be included in the New England Soccer Journal?

[Unregistered]

For the other thread, apparently on the same topic: "Hearing serval top players are declining DA spots for NPL spots due to not receiving waivers."

Ok I suppose the it is how you define the word “top.” Top 3 no. Top 6 yes, a few. Top 11, several.

[Unregistered]

Fixed the crazy autocorrects in my post above

the individual development part should start early and continue. in the US , kids are introduced to competitive , result driven play far too early. Its shapes many kids perception of the sport long before they are equipped to compete.

if you actually start early, your odds of achieving that College spot go up.

However, as long as the majority follow the same bad system they do now, it becomes less important

[Unregistered]

the individual development part should start early and continue. in the US , kids are introduced to competitive , result driven play far too early. Its shapes many kids perception of the sport long before they are equipped to compete.

if you actually start early, your odds of achieving that College spot go up.

However, as long as the majority follow the same bad system they do now, it becomes less important

You do realize why it’s that way in the US though right? In other countries where soccer is a huge meal ticket for families, they get into programs at a very young age with the specific goal to develop their kids to play professionally. Now most get chewed up and spit out of that system, but they are going into it with that specific mind set. In this country, that U Littles are put into the game for completely different reasons. Exercise, fun, socialization, or just as one of many sports a kid may try to see if it sticks. At this age, parents don’t really concern themselves much with development, but as a Americans, we like to win!!! And if our kid quits the sport in 3 years, hey at least they won a ton of trophies! Much better to win than lose in those instances. It is only when a good player starts to travel up the youth soccer ladder, that parents begin to see the possible need for better development, and worry less about game results. The end game comes into focus, which for most is college soccer. And as those years approach, the team focus fades a bit for those players/families. This current model is definitely not optimal for developing the strongest USNT’s, but until the entire cultural goal of our players changes from College to Professional aspirations, we will be stuck with this model. I frankly am ok with the trade-off, because of course college should be the focus for 99% of our players. Let the top 1% go to Europe and chase their professional football dreams!

[Unregistered]

You do realize why it’s that way in the US though right? In other countries where soccer is a huge meal ticket for families, they get into programs at a very young age with the specific goal to develop their kids to play professionally. Now most get chewed up and spit out of that system, but they are going into it with that specific mind set. In this country, that U Littles are put into the game for completely different reasons. Exercise, fun, socialization, or just as one of many sports a kid may try to see if it sticks. At this age, parents don’t really concern themselves much with development, but as a Americans, we like to win!!! And if our kid quits the sport in 3 years, hey at least they won a ton of trophies! Much better to win than lose in those instances. It is only when a good player starts to travel up the youth soccer ladder, that parents begin to see the possible need for better development, and worry less about game results. The end game comes into focus, which for most is college soccer. And as those years approach, the team focus fades a bit for those players/families. This current model is definitely not optimal for developing the strongest USNT’s, but until the entire cultural goal of our players changes from College to Professional aspirations, we will be stuck with this model. I frankly am ok with the trade-off, because of course college should be the focus for 99% of our players. Let the top 1% go to Europe and chase their professional football dreams!

Its not optimal for anything. As far as the end goal changing the behaviors I totally disagree. If you told parent that they could increase the odds of that College payoff by doing pretty basic things younger that involved almost no $$ outlay, they would. If you told them that the odds of the kids actually enjoying the game would also increase, they would do it.

The issue is culture, but that is not shaped buy pro end games. the correlation between the kids playing on YNTs now and parents/families who are first or second generation who grew up with the game is massive.

[Unregistered]

Hypothetical, of course...but say the following happens:

* "Pretty good player" gets accepted into Small Club GDA program. Probably destined for a High DIII or DII program.
* Player improves greatly over the course of her improved training
* Small Club GDA doesn't do well in the league, losing half their games and the rest split between wins/ties
* Player exits the program with some small DI offers and high-end DII offers as well.

Would this be considered successful?

If so, why should that player, or any player, care if the team doesn't compete in the standings?

And, yes, this is completely hypothetical. Reason for my ask is I get the impression if players individually succeed in GDA, and the team doesn't, that's all that matters. I suppose that's the case with every league and player, no?

All that matters is what matters to you and your D. If DA is enjoyable and you are content with above outcome, then it's successful. For me, i would say that it was not successful since I feel confident that my D could get that same outcome without DA, and I wouldn't view increased sacrifice as worth it for same outcome

[Unregistered]

Ok I suppose the it is how you define the word “top.” Top 3 no. Top 6 yes, a few. Top 11, several.

That's an interesting take. I am not sure how this poster decides "top 6"?

[Unregistered]

That's an interesting take. I am not sure how this poster decides "top 6"?

Just stop it. How do YOU decide? I’m not the OP, but you clearly feel the need to denegrate the players who have chosen to leave your team. What is your agenda, because you clearly have one. Are you a paid employee that has to save face for the club/USSF, or just a fellow DA parent who is pi**ed that another families decision to leave has weakened your team. You obviously know already that the team will be weaker next year, so all your attacks on these girls only show what kind of person you are... a weak one. Good luck! And I do mean that sincerely.

[Unregistered]

Does Stars get their players removed due to their ECNL choice?

The Stars YNT kids play on the older groups as do quite a few of the other YNT's listed in the U16/U17 age group. And, no Stars team qualified for post season play in the GDA. I think they took a hit in ECNL post season as well.

[Unregistered]

The Stars YNT kids play on the older groups as do quite a few of the other YNT's listed in the U16/U17 age group. And, no Stars team qualified for post season play in the GDA. I think they took a hit in ECNL post season as well.

So YNT players were UNABLE to lead team to qualification. To say "play" is a lie. some hardly ever did. The ones that did were not that impactful - FACT.