ECNL the truth of the matter

[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.