Blog Archive

Blog Archive

Tuesday, May 16, 2017

U17 Girls Youth Soccer

This page is focused on Under 17 girls youth soccer, primarily in Region 1 but everyone is invited to share and post.

Teams face increased competition for the top players, (who are increasingly attending college showcases).

More teams consolidate and the best teams--academy soccer, club soccer and high school teams--battle to attract and retain the right player mix.

Stay tuned. This is bound to be good.

2,324 comments:

«Oldest   ‹Older   201 – 400 of 2324   Newer›   Newest»
Anonymous said...

1155 ...Read 203..

Quote..This has nothing to do with Snow.

It has almost everything to do with Snow.The impact of cutting kids who have been in almost every camp for the entire cycle. The message in picking a player who till the last camp and never attended a single one. The lack of a coherent approach. The culture created by selecting kids instead of on age players who had made sacrifices to be there over the 2 years of camps. He blew it. He never created a team.

Anonymous said...

2:03 here.

11:36 - They got beat because our kids were not developed properly. The kids play the game not the coach. Snow wasn't on the field. The kid's make the decisions or lack of decisions. It's not on them either they only did what their club coaches demanded of them. Snow selected the team and that's on him but that's where it stops the team lost to Ghana not Snow and team got man handled by japan not Snow. I agree about the ECNL platform this was their team and it show's why the GDA was formed. My problem is most of the clubs are ECNL clubs so more of the same when it comes to development. I agree about the trend - but there are so many that think nothing is broken and that is the problem.

11:55 I agree 100% we are the best nation when it comes to womens soccer we should be able to field a team that can compete with anyone. Japan is way ahead based on what we showed ( I think they even had a 5-0 win not to long ago vs us)

12:03 That is the problem - they don't do that because up to this point the ECNL kids get doors opened for them and they will be great college players just most of them are not NT level players). Just look at the PK after the player scored she turned for the high five instead of running to grab that ball. You play for the red white and blue not for stats.

4:17 I agree heads should roll but the wrong ones will roll - the club coaches you speak about and i speak about will get a pass and continue doing what they do.

7:02 In a nation as big as ours - i like that he's giving so many kids a look instead of going with the same players for years like the previous NT. he shouldn't have to create a team these players want to play for country and should accept any role asked of them and then execute.

I have said a million times - I see it at every game or tournament my kid plays at regardless of the level of play we are always looking for the 'window' to play the trough ball instead of building and attacking as a team. Very few youth teams play out of the back. To many players kick the ball out of play instead of taking a risk. We play very robotic (cone to cone) no creativity because we remove thinking from the game, to much coaching from the sidelines to win. let them play and let them make mistakes. Unfortunately with most teams going to rosters over 18 we kind of killed that. I like the GDA approach as far as starting games - the coaches just need to let them play and let them make mistakes - you will see who your best players are soccer is a very simple game pass the ball to the same color jersey and put the ball in the back of the net which is only hard when two teams are equal

Anonymous said...

4:17 - I hear ya. And therein lies part of the problem, too. The NTC ages out. It shouldn't (but that won't make a difference now with the GDA, i guess). The mind set needs to look for kids regardless of age. Some kids mature later than others.

Anonymous said...

1104. You miss the point. He is not giving lots of kids a look. He stuck with certain kids the whole cycle and then cut them. That is a waste of everyone's time. Every camp up till the last one cannot be an audition. Year one was for seeing as many kids as possible. Year two was for team building. he was building up till the last camp. As far as tactics there is nothing wrong with playing thru balls. The issue is that is enough to win in the ecnl. It is a diluted product that has zero development responsibility. Its about who wins. It's not the right way to build great international teams. It's fine for college. Also let's be clear. Japan are a class above. We can overreact but it's not going to change.

Anonymous said...

12:03 - agreed. They didn't pick kids years ago because they had accomplished parents or siblings. They picked kids because the kids had talent.

How many stories have we read that this one has a mom who did this and this one has a dad who did this and this one has a brother who did this? How is that even relevant in particular with mom and dad (who played sports when kids weren't semi-pros).

I get the genetics, but we don't pick olympians in other sports based on genetics. They are picked based on performance. You want to look to mom and dad and see if a kid may or may not be tall (even that no guarantee), I get it. But, that is where it ends. Heart, desire and extra work aren't genetically implanted. It has to come from within. Absent those, you will never reach your peak as an athlete despite how much training you receive.

Anonymous said...

3:39 My bad then - I agree you need to look at a large pool to find the right players even then mistakes will be made.

I agree with your post need to give lots of kids looks but disagree about an Audition. Every game and every camp is an Audition. Team building is for the team selected to participate in the event.

Anonymous said...

351.. it cannot be that way. At some point you have to build a team. You can be auditioning till the last camp. Players need to have time to gel and work together.

As far as the genetics, its more a a case that these kids come from sporting families. Its not so much the genes, but the culture that brings to a kid. I think there are some very good players on this team but I think the coach never got the best out of them. He put them on edge and never molded them as a team. No player can play their best when they are on edge all the time. trying to follow instructions as opposed to playing naturally and freely. Either way, you pick the best players and you build a team. You need at least 6 months with the team. You cannot be chopping and changing in the last camp.

Anonymous said...

8:39 - yes there are great kids on all the teams and also great kids that never made it up the ladder, yet. I think that is the argument. Open the training sessions to more kids.

Also, I hear ya re kids being raised in a sports culture, but that should not be used as part of any rubric. If you are raised in a family that supports you in sports, then the support of your family is the rubric to be used.

There are kids that supersede their family tree regarding what they can accomplish. And, I am in a sports family. I don't want my daughter judged by what I or family members did, but by what she can do and what she works to accomplish; otherwise, none of it matters. Sometimes the expectations of that alone can be crushing to a kid.

Anonymous said...

8:39 - don't you think that the totality of the event put some of the kids on edge. It is the World Cup.

Not saying the coach put them on edge as I don't know, but I am deferring to you, don't you think that the kids need to get past that? Won't be less as far as being placed on edge in college if they are playing in high level programs.

Anonymous said...

Congrats to both NWSL teams tonight. What a great game!

NY Flash beat Wash Spirit in PK's after two OT's plus add'l stoppage time in regulation and OT. Flash tied it up with about 1 minute left in OT/stoppage to send it to PK's.

Wow!

Anonymous said...

http://www.topdrawersoccer.com/club-soccer-articles/ecnl-enters-final-calm-year-before-storm_aid39865

Anonymous said...

Interesting. Saw this nugget within the article:

"As for fears that the two leagues wouldn’t have any communication in the ECNL’s final solitary year, those have become reality. Lavers said there’s been no communication between the two entities as U.S. Soccer is setting up its venture. At all.

“We have not had any communication with the Federation or their staff,” Lavers said."

? Not sure what to think of this. Could be a very interesting ECNL season.

Anonymous said...

11:14 - thank you and yes watched the game as well. I guess we have learned something re soccer recently about the importance of PK's; being able to make them and being able to stop them. Certainly this NWSL game and the recent Women's Olympics would support this.

Anonymous said...

1026 I dont think the kids are selected for what parents achieved. I think the point is that talented kids raised in sporting families may be more likely to emerge at this level than talented kids raised outside of them. I do not think there is a systemic bias towards them.

1036 Yes I do. But I also think that the pressure of fighting for a place on the roster took its toll on many kids. This is exacerbated when you take 14/15 year olds who are not as well equipped to handle it. I felt we had issues at outside back for the last 2 games and yet he had no alternatives. @ of his OBs were kids. One played the first 2 games and then was not used in the last one, despite the clear issues there. This suggests a selection miss. I dont agree re College or high level teams. Once the College roster is selected, kids compete for PT etc, BUT most of the players know their role. The issue here is that the roster was not selected until very late. Im not talking about dealing with event pressure. Im talking about dealing with a coach displaying no real commitment or confidence in you. Im talking about a coach showing you that he will take kids to a WC who have NEVER been in a US NT camp in an entire 2yr cycle until the last one. What message does that send to a team? It tells me that camps are essentially meaningless and all that matters is the last one. If that is true, the surely you dont waste 15 on one kid who you dont take :) You cant inspire kids with fear. You need to pick your team and then give them confidence. Not sap it. You told kids NOT to go play in the U-16 ECNL Finals and for what? For some camp? Interesting that a kid who ended up going to the WC actually played for PDA in that game. So I guess being at the camp was not that critical :)

I fear that BJ thinks it reflects well on HIM to have the younger kids there, as if to say he is doing a supreme scouting job and hes is developing new "stars" BUT if these kids are not good enough to play NOW, then to me its a fail.

I stand by my assertion that you need an intense selection phase..one year, maybe even 18 months But after that is over, you need to work with the team as a group without the fear of selection. There is no excuse for having kids in the process for the entire 24 months and then NOT selecting them. That has a massive impact on morale and chemistry.

If he is allowed to develop the next group then something is seriously wrong

Anonymous said...

No kid should be "in the process for 24 months". There should be fluidity in the roster until two-three months before the world cup. They should then be taken into residency to build a "team" mentality. They didn't have one in Jordan. They withered on the vine in the second halves of the 2 critical games. They played as individuals not as a team in the first one. There was no leadership on the field. Snow jumping around like a monkey on the sidelines didn't help, but where were the kids with the most experience? One on the bench and the other on an Island up top. There was too much kum by ah on this team (at least as presented by the USsoccer PR machine)and not enough grit, emotion and determination.

Do we also pick kids based on their ability to best emulate robots on the field? Where was the passion? I saw glimpses from Sanchez, but anyone else showing that the games really mattered? Maybe we are also picking kids with the wrong psychological make up. Give me a little fire when the going gets tough to spark the team's success.

There was no accountability player to player. The only "team" on the field Saturday were the Japanese.

Anonymous said...

859..Amen. Its time we started looking at performance and not reputation or hype. Or the whispers from coach A to coach B. All the PR did was build expectations that these kids were ill equipped to deliver on. I feel they were manipulated, set up to fail and should not be scapegoated. BJ and the rest have some serious explaining to do, but i doubt we will hear it.

Anonymous said...

Tagliaferri not starting was strange, unless she was not fit

Other than that the lineup was fine (I had stated 2 changes and as many as 4) - and I cant kill the coach for his team selections.

It's the coach, right - that selects the final team- or is it the federation?

Would have liked to have seen Godfrey a little bit.

Whiz kid? Well, let's see it.

Anonymous said...

Just curious, 12:53 -

Why would US Soccer need to communicate with ECNL?

Academy system is set up, players (many ECNL) attend the trials and they move on.

ECNL then adjusts, adding teams (some from NPL) where there is a need.

Anonymous said...

Will there be some compettition for players (ECNL vs Academy)?

Sure.

Like there is now between ECNL and NPL.

Some rules - travel distances, etc keep better players with NPL (and sometimes lower division) teams

And moving forward some of the better players will remain in ECNL/NPL/lower rather than play Academy

Anonymous said...

Anyone with NEWSS experience? Good or bad

Anonymous said...

931 .. Can I ask why? Godfrey played for the U16s his year, hardly dominant.

Anonymous said...

1028 ..avoid at all costs .

Anonymous said...

11:09
Can you say why?

Anonymous said...

9:36 - the lack of communication means a rift I think. ECNL and USSF had a very close working relationship, I understood. And, based on the WC selections, I would agree. Now, I guess, not so much. So no composite teams at tourneys; yipee. Teams need to get playing time together for league play.

Anonymous said...

Depends on if you like Long Island, I guess

Or if you would rather sit at home

Anonymous said...

I guess I should have asked for valid reasons/opinions of NEWSS as a college showcase
I'd never pick LI as a destination except for my beach house in the Hamptons...

Anonymous said...

It's a college showcase

If you want an OPINION on whether or not to go, you have to say what the alternative is

Will your daughter's team forego another event to attend this one?

Are there any other logistical problems with attending

By asking what our opinion is of the tournament with no specific guideline you just entice the elitetards to degrade the event from their lofty perch.

Anonymous said...

Hahahahaha - correct 3:25.

Anonymous said...

Took a peek at the WAGS info. Great job girls. Always a tough tourney in the rain. But, to my surprise, hardly any ECNL teams attending at least from what I saw in the upper ages. I saw 1 in U17, 1 in U18 and 1 in U19. No Richmond, McLean (ECNL), Bethesda, etc. Usually they always go since it's in their backyard.

Anonymous said...

NEWSS is usually bad logistics, poor teams and poor fields. The weather may have improved some of the fields.

Anonymous said...

The Mid Altantic conference ECNL is in full swing. I think it likely that the teams thought it was a good weekend for a break.

Anonymous said...

Do the knock out games for U17 WWC start tomorrow? I know US isn't in it (ouch), but the games on paper seem to be really good match ups.

Anonymous said...

http://www.ussoccer.com/stories/2016/10/11/21/05/161011-girls-development-academy-adds-four-additional-clubs-regional-divisions-inaugural-season?sf38605474=1

Anonymous said...

I thought MF was part of DA. I no longer see them on that list.

Anonymous said...

Yeah, I thought so too. What is going on? Are teams backing out?

Anonymous said...

MF have

Anonymous said...

Wow. Why? Just curious.

Anonymous said...

they published a statement

http://www.matchfitacademy.net/home/841922.html

Anonymous said...

Does anyone think there are fewer than 9 players on each ECNL team right now that think they are potentially national level players? I think that's probably about right. I think many kids and their families see a kid get invited to a national camp and think- I'm as good as she is or at least I am almost as good and I can work harder. That's all it takes to field 2 double age group teams. These will be the top 9 players in the club at each age group. I see the DA as largely (no system will have ALL) the best players in an area (1.5 hour radius) covered by a DA. ECNL will remain strong and viable especially in areas without a DA (Cleveland/Pittsuburgh, Richmond, Tennessee, and most of the midwest). ECNL will be weak in N Texas, Florida, and California. The Northeast will have both a strong ECNL and a strong DA. There are too many talented kids in NJ, MD, western PA etc that will spill over to the ECNL and keep it strong in certain regions. I do disagree with the Matchfit position in one regard, they did not oversaturate the area. Since its only 2 teams per age, there is capacity for accepting competitive players even if there are more teams. But I am not sure there are. How many ECNL teams are there now compare to proposed DA?

Anonymous said...

7:12 - thank you. interesting.

Anonymous said...

1129

you are lost. you think 9 kids per team are NT quality? Not even close. I would say maybe 1/2 per team. That would translate to 85/170 kids.

I think you have hit on the biggest single issue. Parents overrate their kids and Clubs profit from that.

Anonymous said...

No actually, I think it'm people that you that are the problem. We are talking youth soccer and kids. You need a bigger pool to check mark kids to keep an eye on that may not be ready yet. You can shut the door or ever limit your player pool.

I do agree that parents control all the cards - My kid is number 1 and if she isn't playing we will move to a team where she will which creates a n open spot for someone else to try.

So what should a parent do if all the teams in the area cost about the same? Not pay and have kids play rec? What is your solution? Parents should stop supporting their kids?

Anonymous said...

716 .. there is a huge gap between not supporting your kids and being an potential National Team player. The DA should have a fraction of the number of teams the ECNL does, not a similar amount. Elite means just that. To suggest that 9/20 kids on every team have the potential to be elite is utter nonsense.

Support your kids by playing at a level that is consistent with their ability, whatever that is. Problem is most think that is elite and it is far from it.

Anonymous said...

Not sure if anyone is watching U17 WWC, still. Saw the JP vs. England rebroadcast w/ daughter. It was no contest. Japan won 3-0. Semi-finals start next week. U20's starts soon after that I believe, too.

Anonymous said...

1129 Please read my [post again I said, " that THINK (emphasis added) they are potentially national level players". This post was to support my position that the GDA will succeed because I believe that there are enough players/families that believe their kid has a shot and understand that The USSF will focus its attention on these players for YNT call-ups.

Further, I think the recent u17 debacle clearly shows that individual talent isn't the ticket into the YNT programming instead it's all about what club a kid plays for, who she knows, which club coaches are serving as age group YNT "assistant coaches (at this age group I know both the Michigan hawks coach and the FC stars coaches -who coach this exact age group in their clubs have served as "assistant coaches" for the U16 YNT. Imagine that which clubs have a disproportionate representation...
Sure the kids in Jordan were decent players were they the best, not even close. So there are a significant (8 maybe) 99s going to Ireland with the U18s. These were players overlooked by good old boy BJ. I think Fox Sports will be televising this tournament too. Wonder how the players passed on will perform.

Anonymous said...

930 ..I think you are wrong on many levels. The players selected are all good players. Something that many seem to overlook to focus on perceived nepotism. Please tell me who the significantly better players are? Every coach is going to pick players HE or SHE believes in. So players that you think are marginally better do not count. If you were watching, The USA were collectively out played. The issue was coaching and cohesion. I dont put any of that on the kids.

For any NT program or Da for that matter to succeed, the USSF needs to allocate / select the players and NOT families on the basis of what they think about there own child. This is the other flaw in your logic. The process should be something like this. EVERY DA player should be recommended by the Club and that recommendation approved by the USSF on the basis of quality. Regional USSF scouts should be checking up on players and Clubs regularly. Instead of making this a tournament platform for showcasing like the ECNL it should be a training and development one. This is why there are far too many DAClubs in this area already. The DA should be by invitation. However the size of the US means more teams to cut travel and this is what kills it. already. If they set up say 3 DA Clubs adn left it there, then we would really get a clear separation between solid Club/College players and p[potential elite players, but this is not going to happen.

GDA is not going to work anytime soon IF you define succeed as produce better players. Its just going to split the player pool and not based on talent. Rather parental perception of talent and who wants to play in HS

Anonymous said...

4 days vs 2.5 days training

Better coaches

Top players seeing better opposition more consistently

YES - DA very good for development of the top player that chooses to enroll.

Anonymous said...

LOL this is a coach or parent from one of the clubs getting players in. Explain the fact that so many players come from a few clubs. I don't know where ALL the better ones are because we don't look for them and then they wouldnt get selected anyway. That's exactly the point. I dont think they were good at all.

But I would argue that these u17 were such great players:Most couldn't handle pressure in tight spaces because they just weren't skillfull enough. They also couldnt pass precisiely enough to offer their receiving teammate enough time and space to continue on. I certainly have seen kids do that much better just in local games. I also think their first touch and ability to bring the ball down out of the air to give them again time and space was sorely lacking. There was zero creativity. The second Japanese goal was terrific. That's weaknesses technical ability not national coaching. I know that Snow didn't teach them to play boot ball because they only did it when they were facing opponents that limited them in time and space by their athleticism (Ghana) and organization(japan) Again-They lapsed into boot ball because their skill let them down under limitation in time and space. They simply weren't good enough soccer players to handle the pressure. I continue to disagree.

Anonymous said...

Again 1037 you miss the point. It absolutely does matter what families think about the level of their child for the DA to succeed. There is a competitive option for kids so the big differentiator at least at the start before the college coaches declare which is preferred, is the USSF id programs and YNT. These families will be making a choice that is not necessarily all positive if they choose to participate in the DA the selling point provided there isn't a big cost differential, will be USSF exposure.

It's not what the idealized vision that you describes that will lead to the success or failure of the GDA it will be the perceived value of the programming by a specific market. That market will at least initially be defined as those families who believe their kids have a shot at YNT camps.

Anonymous said...

you fail to define what success is for the DA. it is finding and producing full NT players. Its not providing an ECNL v2. Families should not be making the choice, professional evaluators should. Boys dont choose to be in Barcelonas Academy. They are selected.

Anonymous said...

1058

So you define these players based on how well they played vs Japan, the best team in the world and vs Ghana at teh World CUp ? You measure the performance they produced under extreme pressure to that of kids you see in local games under very little? until the kids you mention have experienced that speed of play and that level of pressure they have no idea and nor do you. Its easy to sit in the peanut gallery and put it on the kids. Its coaching. Please explain why some of the top coaches at the top programs in the USA are interested in these kids? Please explain why they are highly recruited?

Collectively, as a team , the US was poor, but the players are extremely talented. Some of the best the US has( which is exactly why almost EVERY service that handicaps this stuff saw them as a favorite for this event> Were they all wrong or do you know better. The failure was one of coaching. Not selection. Could you have taken different players? Sure, but i really have yet to hear who these obvious replacements are and under the same coach and system I believe the result would have been the same.

I do not have any links to the team, but I hate to see you putting this on the kids and selection without offering any alternative names. Comparing them to your local players is beyond insulting.

Anonymous said...

please point out the great connection between the players and the coaching staff. I would love to hear your theory on favoritism.

Anonymous said...

Ah that's a good point. I am addressing specifically the people who say the DA will fail because it won't collect most of the "best" kids in an area. There is a belief that the majority of these kids won't give up school soccer and won't want to train 4 days/week. I think it will succeed as I have detailed above because 9 of the best (not the nine best note since not sure anyone would even agree who the 9 best are) players per age group will believe they have a chance at the ring. So my definition of immediate success is attracting most of the top players within a 1.5 hour radius onto the DA teams.

The long term success is as you describe. To be "selected" as a positive outcome means that you have a desirable product into which one is selected. I am commenting on the very beginnings of the league- like next year. You are looking down the road. I agree with your long term vision. There will be tryouts next spring if not earlier and some predict no one will come. I disagree. I also agree that I hope the GDA develops such that kids are selected in and are thrilled to be so invited.

Anonymous said...

Michigan hawks coach and Michigan hawks players. FC Stars Coach and FC Stars players.

Anonymous said...

1:15 - nobody is going to list the "obvious replacements." I think the girls picked are very good, but I was also scratching my head that if he was taking this one, then why did this one not get an invitation to try out?

My daughter's team played against some of these gals a few times. I saw how the girls selected performed (or didn't). And, I saw how maybe others on that team would have been better choices or maybe a gal or two on my daughter's team who kept them in check. That's all.

But, sometimes it's being in the right place at the right time.

US Soccer has been successful for a long time. I am sure they will figure it out.

Anonymous said...

121 ..Who is the stars coach on the U17s? Where are the Stars players. Same with Hawks . Who is the coach? This constant Hawks/Stars rubbish is just that. Rubbish. Someone has to coach a team and he probably has affiliations somewhere. Its a small world. Coaches are going to pick players that they feel comfortable with. This is nothing new and does not automatically mean that the player is not deserving. It just stinks of jealousy when people keep saying this. Tell your coach to get involved, maybe they will select your kids.

Anonymous said...

211 its a team game. Kept them in check has zero bearing on keeping Ghana in check or Japan. I dont believe BJ Snow did a good job, but selection was not his biggest mistake. It was training, tactics and the way he took a group of talented kids and made them less than the sum of the parts. Could he have added one here or subtracted one there. Of course, its by no means an exact thing. But i dont think i heard many people complaining about his team after teh Paraguay game.

Anonymous said...

234 it doesn't take much research to find that out. It's true and everyone knows it.

Anonymous said...

@2:37 - are you seriously comparing the Paraguay game to Ghana and Japan?? Please. Btw a goal scored in that game too, surprisingly. And, like some others, I was in disbelief when they lost to Ghana. I had them getting out of pool play.

But yes, if kids keep a selected kid or two in check (and I mean contain them) in their league/event games, then those same kids (or other supporting kids from the selected kids' team) may be good enough to have kept kids on Ghana and Japan contained too. As discussed, at length above, open the trys to more. Certainly can't hurt.

Anonymous said...

1214..so many holes in your theory. If the players you contain are playing on Club teams, they may be playing different roles and certainly will be surrounded by weaker player than they are on the NT. team A containing star on team B means very little. US is a massive country and selection is always going to be hard. The coach has to devise a plan to see players. BJ Snow clearly felt he had see enough and picked accordingly. I agree that I don't think the selection process is as organized and comprehensve as it could be. I don't think any kid should be in multiple camps early in the process and I think once you have identified a player, you should leave them out of camps until you are ready to select your team. Once selected, the team should be trained tactically in the style that makes sense for them. That group may change a bit thru injury or serious loss of form, but not drastically. I would make year one all about seeing as many players as possible.

Anonymous said...

910

Don't let facts get in the way of a good story. I have researched it any i can't find any. Are there any Stars players on the U17 team ?

Anonymous said...

Uh I think the poster was referring to the 2000 roster. I think the stars and Hawks club coaches for this age group are also u16 YNT coaches at the same age. Beyond the obvious bias toward at the minimum selecting familiar players, I think a player having a coach with whom they have developed an existing relationship running training sesssions and performing evaluations is an undeniable advantage to some players. Not saying they are all undeserving at all. But I really don't think any rational person could deny that kids from those clubs have an advantage on being selected and also an advantage during the camp.

Life's not fair. So deal with it. But the repercussions can be the debacle we saw in Jordan.

Anonymous said...

8:24 - I am agreeing with you in some respect and disagreeing in another. I agree that seeing and containing the player is in a club setting (surrounded by other very good kids too) is different than the NT. However, if the kid/kids containing that kid are doing just that (while she is surrounded by her very good teammates), then why not look at those kids too (surrounded by other high level talent) and see what they can possibly bring to a NT roster.

However, there are some kids that are very good because of their surrounding kids (now the surrounding kids will be different at NT) but, maybe give the supporting act kids a closer look in an environment surrounded by other high level talent.

Bottom line, make the pools/trys bigger.

Anonymous said...

1242 I see no way you can correlate the 2 unless you want to point out the players on the team in Jordan that were there because the Club coach put them there. A significant number of those players are 2000s no ?
On the U16 team there are not many Hawks or Stars. In fact you could argue that having a NE coach involved has helped NE players get looks because he knows them from playing vs them. It is clear that the vast majority of players come from the West Coast anyways

Blatant favoritism is a strong allegation and I see no evidence of it.

Anonymous said...

1130

Without specifics your argument is hard to understand. In theory, these kids are being observed extensively in Club play. If I and to guess, you sound like a PDA U16 parent who is salty that they did not get more representation. It is very hard to look at the performance of some of the established U17players in a WC year in Club play. Some of these players are working on things that the NT guys have told them to and many are trying not to get injured. They also know that Camp performance is all that BJ Snow is looking at . Its a bit like comparing the play of some of the established Full NT players in the NWSL. The WNT in the USA is far bigger than Club play. That is a big part of the issue. The USSF think they are bigger than everyone else. When you tell kids not to play in Club events and schedule camps to overlap, you are re-enforcing the message that Club play is secondary.We can argue whether it should be or not, but the message has been sent. with the USSF and certainly the ECNL now in opposite camps, this is only going to get worse.

Anonymous said...

The u16 pool had been disproportionately hawks and stars. I am guessing socal blues coaches are somehow involved as assistants but I can't confirm that. There were 2 hawks on the 17s and both started and submitted weak performances. No stars on the 17s. But most of the 2000 ECNL players have been to at least one camp. Again just facts. They are disproportionately represented and having your coach there is a clear advantage to assimilation and evaluation during the camps. Can you argue that there is not advantage to having your club coach at the camp advising the coach and performing evaluations? Should have no club associations to be involved in these camps. Too many agendas and biases for this level. Massive overall is clearly indicated.

Anonymous said...

11:49 - saw your comment and just noting that ladies in the NWSL get invites to the camps too that are not WNT players which they should. Why not?

Anonymous said...

830 the point is that several WNT regulars are clearly not being selected on the basis of current form in the NWSL and several could be accused of giving less than 100 pct in NWSL games and yet they are still selected. How many ECNL games did Ashley Sanchez play?

Anonymous said...

Old website no longer working so no way to check, but I know she didn't play in the San Diego event with her team even though there was no conflict with the 17s or 18s for that matter. I don't know about the 20s or FWNT

Anonymous said...

10:53 - are you truly comparing young ladies to the WNT (WC winners/proven champions)? Please. They are likely told to play but don't get hurt; kind of like what coaches say to good players who play high school. There is a bigger rationale behind all of it (marketing, draw to the league, keeping up skills, etc.). Not even apples and apples. Btw - not a PDA parent; however, I do think a few of those gals deserved a look in a camp.

Anonymous said...

very valid comparison. According to you, an NWSL defender who has good game vs Alex Morgan should get a look no?

Anonymous said...

Someimes they do get a closer look and it's more than one game. But yes, if a defender has great games not only against Alex Morgan, but other great scorers in the league such as SInclair, Ohai, Dunn, Little, and other very, very good players, why not? It's just an invite to a camp. See what happens from there.

What will it cost (room and board and a training kit)? So, yes, under these circumstances, why not?

Anonymous said...

10/16 - 11:49 - nope, not a pda parent. And, like the above poster, believe that a couple of those kids deserved a look in a camp as well as kids in my daughter's club/team and a couple of other teams we played.

So, not salty at all. Like the poster above noted, why not bring them in. Why would it hurt? Give them the additional training with like minded players, see what ALL of them have and THEN make your selections. That's all. Maybe their limited selection process worked when soccer didn't have the numbers it has now.

I'm sure they will figure it out. They are US Soccer, they know what they are doing.

Anonymous said...

"Coaches tell players to play (high school) but don't get hurt"

This is rubbish

Injuries find you easier when being cautious.

Anonymous said...

Just chiming in....

The warning is one of concern not foretelling future. Not just about playing cautiously, but also overuse injuries (as sometimes games are scheduled back to back to back), practices are not very well run, fields can be horrible/full of holes and dirt; shin splints abound, practices/games 5-6 days a week, refs that have no idea what they are doing and games getting out of control re studs up slides, etc. These have nothing to do with cautious play.

Now, not saying that NWSL is anywhere near this. Players are professionals. Coaches and teams are professionals. Games aren't overscheduled, etc. Generally sites are good, although wasn't it a Seattle Rein game that was played on a dirt/filled baseball field? But, ladies still get injured in NWSL, too (Lloyd, Heath, Morgan, etc.). It happens, but I can't imagine those paying their salaries (USSF) don't get a little upset.


Anonymous said...

424 Because its impossible. And re PDA several of those kids have already been seen. Coach decided to go in a different direction. There is a reason the ECNL games were scouted by USSF personnel. Just because you were not in camp, does not mean they did not see you.

Anonymous said...

Have US YNTs ever performed so poorly in terms of results? U18s lose today to Eng 2-1. Contrary to public opinion, the current system is not working in terms of producing well rounded International level players.

Anonymous said...

Wow. Didn't know about this loss. Thanks for the update. I hope they figure it out.

Anonymous said...

Here's a you tube link if anyone wants to watch it.
Penn Fusion and FC Revolution player Shea Moyer a starter in the midfield.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pW9JjKNUbFU

Anonymous said...

1024 yes went in another direction. That would be the losing direction. Both the 16s and 17 s are failures and the 18s went down today. The 20s have been horrific but maybe a miracle will happen at the WC with superstars Pugh and Sanchez now in the lineup. Serious selection problem.

Anonymous said...

1008 Failures? That is a strong word. Dont really see hnow that applies to the 16s or 18s and not sure I would call the 17s that either. 17s badly let down by the coaching staff. they are kids. hard to put too much on them. Interesting that you call AS and MP superstars when neither has been on a wining team in major intl event yet. That is a big part of our problem. At Intl level its team > individual. In the USA its the total opposite. We build up stars on the basis of individual things they do and then cannot seem to fit them in to a team. We think that the individual stuff is going to be enough to beat everyone. Newsflash, it isnt. You use Individual talent, but forcing other teams to account for it creating space and time for the OTHER players to exploit. Not by forcing the ball to them with 3 players around them and hoping. Until we stop ONLY writing about who scores, then why will this change? I dont think I have ever read a game recap that said, xx made a beautiful run off the ball taking out 2 defenders and yyy finished the simple chance it created. We glorify the goalscorer, no matter how easy the chance. US soccer will not change until the mentality does.

Anonymous said...

1008 Im not sure who you want to add to these teams ? with the coaching they have, I dont see how they would have a big impact. Japan are in a different class at this age. The Ghana loss is the troubling one.

Anonymous said...

9:07 I wholeheartedly agree with your assessment!

Anonymous said...

http://www.socceramerica.com/article/70807/dicicco-and-dorrance-react-to-usas-u-17-world-cup.html

Anonymous said...

Thank you for the soccerwire story. Interesting to note, while they don't want to blame coaching, their talking points actually do blame the coach for not forcing our girls to play possession ball and/or defend properly. So, I'm not blaming you, but I am thing.

“An open, athletic game, really back and forth,” DiCicco said. “The game that Ghana can’t win is a possession game, because most African teams are not organized enough. They’re athletic and if we controlled possession we would have broken them down, instead, we played the game that they could win. And that troubles me.”

Anonymous said...

Forcing is too strong. I bevel the lack of a plan B in terms of tactics or even on the bench is shocking. When you essentially pick the same player 3x you limit your options. I disagree with most on here. its not that other players are better, its that they are different. I think the roster was comprised of too many players with similar strengths. so the bench just gave you a similar player who was never going to play barring injury. look at the Outside backs. Who was the fast defensive option at O/B ? AT Cm who was the defensive stopper? all the fwds seem to be run in behind types. I did not see the real back to goal possession option. In a fast open game, the inability to control the pace of the game meant we simply got out run and gunned by a fitter faster team.

Anonymous said...

Yes failure
The tournament the 16s played in recently they came in 7th of 8 teams (beating only ...wait for it... Iran where girls have to play completely covered and hooded) and the 17s don't require further explanation. The 20s didn't score a goal in the NTC tournament finishing dead last. I know the roster in N Ireland is the "real" 18s, but they aren't looking good at this point.

Dorrance has an agenda, he signed half the starter kids in his 2018 class..
Diccico closer to reality and he agrees- failure.

As far as who to add? I wouldn't know exactly since they stuck with the same core for 2 years except the 2001 adds at the last minute 2 of whom were part of the "failure". So the exposure to the system to most top kids is minimal. What I did see was FT and SS having way more impact than the starters so I would start with AS/FT and SS across the top. I could name 3 midfielders in the region 1 area who are better at possession than the ones who played boot panic ball due to their terrible touch and poor technique in Jordan and pick some real defenders who actually know how to defend rather than midfielders and forwards "converted to defense". I might start with Emina Ekic as the 10 on this team. She is one of the few who showed real technical and tactical sophistication, but got cut out early in the cycle unless she's been hurt. Penn Fusion 98 kid who had been to multiple 17 camps would be another possibility from R1 either in the attack or as the 10. NEFC 99 striker FC Virginia 99 Striker both more effective in my estimation than the flank forwards he started. Even the striker from Richmond 99 was better than her 01 teammate that was chosen for a potentially higher ceiling. I don't necessarily disagree with that theory, but this is not a late bloomer 01, but one most likely destined to remain small.

PDA u16 as the 8 or 10 got cut out early before things got really rolling for the 00s. She is much better in tight spaces than BP though she was better than the others in general. They brought in a PDA defender to the camp after she did well in the championship. She would have made a much better 6 than the non existent JH. And those are just the kids I know first hand. He even had a chance with some of them, but chose to go in another downward losing direction...

That said the coach wasn't on the field, the kids were. They share in some of the responsibility. At this level they need to be able to make the adjustments necessary to compete and they could not. I agree though that majority the fault lies with the coach in that it was his roster who did not possess the technical ability to manage the high pressure and resulting limitations in time and space. He did not test them adequately to illuminate this weakness. His bad. Although I do think the Japanese outplayed them this year in the NTC despite the 21 scoreline (1 own goal). Make your own interpretation its on Youtube. Yes I think there are other players out there who would have performed more strongly.
No I am not a PDA parent, but another ECNL area parent and no my kid would not have helped them in Jordan Point Conceded

Anonymous said...

Hey, heyyyyyyy

well, on that note - enjoy US-Swiss tonight. I understand some new blood will be in there

Anonymous said...

http://www.fifa.com/u17womensworldcup/news/y=2016/m=10/news=rotation-worth-the-risk-for-japan-s-tinkerman-2845046.html

Anonymous said...

435 . I dont think I agree with much of what you wrote. The premise that you can compare ECNL/NPL players in ECNL/NPL play with the some of best players in the ECNL (statistically) playing Japan/Ghana in WC pressure in a foreign land just does to stack up for me. As far as calling the U116/18 teams failures, when they are supposed to be player development teams identifying players for WCs many years hence. In the case of the 16s, playing mostly older teams on the road. you call losing to mexico u17 on pks after a 1-1 final ( WC team) and Italy U17 team 1-0 (Euro qualifier) failure. Many of these kids playing in a foreign land for the first time? I dont. I actually call it progress.

Anonymous said...

I appreciate your glass half full mentality, but few pundits agree on your assessment that the 17s showed progress. Part of "development" is learning to win when it counts. It's a fallacy that you can't have both success on the field and development. Quite the contrary is the truth. The Mexico team they played was not the A team and no one without an agenda saw those results as any semblance of success. But keep dreaming!

Regarding your pronouncing international competition being so much more challenging. We can't prove it. But one certainly can postulate that another roster would have performed better.

Anonymous said...

12:34 - many probably played internationally before. THey don't normally take kids who haven't had some international experience (want to make sure they are mentally ready for traveling, not home sick, etc.).

Now, I'm not throwing the bath water out with the baby. US soccer has been doing this a long time. I'm sure they will figure it out.

However I do think they need to bring in more potential candidates to camps throughout the look-see process. As an above posted noted (for the newbies from the NWSL [and college] that were invited to the Sr. WNT camps and some had the wonderful opportunity of getting some playing time), what's the harm as it would only cost room/board and training kits, right? Get these fringe kids in there and see what they have with other high level kids. US Soccer could be very pleasantly surprised.

Anonymous said...

Hahahaha...not throwing the baby out with the bath water. Whoops.

Anonymous said...


USWNT coach Jill Ellis on USA exiting Under 17 World Cup in group phase again: "It's continuing to hammer home that between the ages of 9 and 13, it's technique, technique, technique. You can't just rely on push and run. A player that's got to really understand having more technical sophistication. Having said that, I think the players BJ (Snow) selected were some of the best I'd seen in the youth environment."

Interesting .

Anonymous said...

1101

I did not say the U17s showed progress. I said that the U16 and U18 teams were not failures. I pointed to playing older teams and doing well was progress. I also said the the U17 team were let down by the coaching.

Anonymous said...

1101 ..out of curiosity, did you see the Games? Or is your assessment of a game purely based on who won? Your mentality is why we struggle to produce players of real quality. They are good enough to play the limited tactical game we play here and found sorely lacking at the next level. Until we actually try and develop players, we will be forever hoping that relying on one or two coming thru is enough.

The point is the winning is not necessarily development. No one said you cant do both. When the U17s were going 2 years UNBEATEN , was that development? Many of the players being called failure here were part of that 2 year run no? Development requires taking risks and putting players outside comfort zones. Doing that risks losing. I put it to you that if you are not risking losing, then you are not challenging your players and you are probably not developing.

Anonymous said...

1251 .. They did that. And this was the result. I find that people who propose the "bring in more kids" normally think its enough when their kid or kids from their club are included :) Do you know how many players they looked at through the selection process? How many is enough? Its easy to have your POV in hindsight. I dont think the selection process is teh issue. Its the coaching and the fact that we are not consistently producing tactically versatile players. Our system of Club HS is creating players that can do well in that environment. intl soccer is a lot more tactically demanding.

Anonymous said...

Unfortunately, they are judged based on how well they performed when it mattered. A 2 yr unbeaten (not necessarily win) streak is good. But, the whole purpose for the 2 yrs of practices were to at least get into post pool play at the World Cups. And, that didn't happen. Hope they can right the ship. Surely they will.

Japan vs. Korea later today. Thank you for the FIFA article above; very interesting.

Anonymous said...

"When the U17s were going 2 years unbeaten was that development?"

YES, it was.

Or do you think there wasnt any just because we eventually lost?

Anonymous said...

If I could chime in, of course that was development (is development). ALL of this is development including the WWC games as well as games played by the Sr. WNT, right? When you stop learning/developing, then it's time to do something else.

Anonymous said...

What would you think if a select team of 15/16 yr olds in the US were picked to go over to GE and then played (and beat) one of the storied academy #2 teams in the world? And, this GE team is older and competes, successfully, in the Bundeslega (btw - some from the same GE academy were on the GE team at WWC - U17's - in post pool play)?

And what if I told you that these same US kids had that opportunity to play the GE academy "2" team because they were beating the GE academy teams their own age...like by 10 goals?

And all of this occurred while GE's Sr. NT (who had representative girls from this storied GE academy) was successfully winning an Olympic Gold over the summer.

Yeah, 15 & 16 yr olds. And what if I told you that these kids never played together as a team prior to meeting only days before they played games together....not two years; less than a week? Would you say wow these kids picked up international play pretty quickly (obviously they did)? Would you also say, wow, why aren't those kids in camps (some had been)?

So, yes, instead of bringing in 4 kids, bring in 10. If you are inviting one kid from a club/team, invite two so the kids have someone they know. Then, see what happens.

Anonymous said...

1130 so IF you believe that was good development, then why is the poster basically saying the team is loaded with poor technical players? Which is it? What happened? I happen to believe that the FOCUS was winning games that do not matter at the expense of building and developing.The only games where winning really counts are the WC ones.

Anonymous said...

1214 ..Your story is pretty meaningless. I bet the u17 team selected would have gone to GE and done EXACTLY the same thing. So to use that as a selection criteria makes no sense at all

Anonymous said...

Maybe or maybe not. The #2 GE academy team was VERY good. But this select team, unlike the U17's, didn't practice together for years or months or even several camps. They were just very talented.

Anonymous said...

Wow. Good stuff. I think this shows that there are a variety of ways to approach picking a team. What a testament to the level of talent throughout our country with all of these young ladies whether they are or have been in a national camp or not.

As long as they (all of our girls) continue to love the game, and have fun, grow as players and also become good people, we are ahead in the game.

Anonymous said...

Though the U17 WNT did not advance at the World Cup, those that traveled to Jordan remain some of the top players in this age group. The IMG Academy 150 fall update for girls in the Class of 2018 is out today, and Brianna Pinto from the World Cup squad remains No. 1, followed by Naomi Girma, Jaelin Howell, Alexa Spaanstra, and goalkeeper Laurel Ivory.

Michigan Hawks midfielder Emaly Vatne makes the biggest climb in the rankings this fall, and enters the top 25. The Ohio State verbal scored and had an assist in the U16 GNT’s 3-3 draw with the Netherlands in September, and has been a part of every U16 GNT camp in 2016.

Other players climbing the ranks include Crossfire Premier midfielder Sophie Hirst, Michigan Hawks midfielder Natalie Viggiano, and Real Colorado defender Shae Holmes. Hirst was named to the TDS Best XI at the ECNL playoffs in July, attended two U16 GNT camps over the summer, and will follow former Seattle Prep teammate Samantha Hiatt to Boston College in 2018. Viggiano earned honorable mention by TopDrawerSoccer.com at the 2015 ECNL finals, and like Hirst, has attended multiple camps with the U16 GNT. She shares the spotlight on the Hawks U17 ECNL team with Vatne and U17 WNT member No. 4 Alexa Spaanstra. Holmes has attended multiple camps with the U17 and U16 youth national teams, earning a starting spot with the U16s against the Netherlands.

Anonymous said...

So what do you think? Of course top drawer didn't change the top because it relies most heavily on national team call ups to rank kids. It says so in the description. It also relies heavily on early accomplishments.

Anonymous said...

It does? I know NT call ups who are ranked well below kids who have never gotten close to call ups. TDS rely on many things and they certainly do not rely on what they say.

An extensive list of selections to national team camps and other honors including USSF Development Academy (Boys), ECNL (Girls), and U.S. Youth Soccer National League event and season awards, plus U.S. Soccer Training Centers, ODP, id2 and other player identification programs. From there we look at additional signs of top player performance in a club environment, with the help of an extensive network of observers around the country. The priority here is for club, college, national team and other select team coaches on the ground, but especially when we can gain corroborating opinions. The more layers of opinions we can gain accumulate the better, as our role is primarily to aggregate those viewpoints, rather than making our own determination as to a player’s quality.

The TDS method relies on the coaches who are active in campaigning for their own players. Or on kids who go to TDS showcases. If NT callups were the top kicker then the NT kids would all be in the top 50

Anonymous said...

And they aren't? With few exceptions they are.
I agree though that the caoahes who advocate get kids on the list if they have other accolades some of which like id2 invites are also coach dependent. In general the NT callups are very heavily weighted especially in the younger age groups. They then set the stage for subsequent rankings. kids don't usually make big steps down. Some such as this Vatne Michagan Hawks kid whose coach is a U16 YNT coach (just sayin) rocket up on the basis of her NT callups (it says so in the article). That big of a jump is always related to YNT call -ups.

Anonymous said...

735 Ok. But I think the point is still valid. 2 PDA kids. both with very similar paths re YNT exposure. one is still in the top 20. The other has dropped from top 10 to 80 or so. How? Bottom line is there is zero consistency in the rankings and it is unclear exactly what they represent. I will take the view that they represent nothing and yet TDS are constantly quoted by reputable Colleges. Makes little sense to me. U16/17 cycle is coming to an end. By now you should have a good handle on where things stand. Call ups at u14 should be a distant memory and have little weight if any.

Anonymous said...

I agree with you in the fact that they do a relatively poor job.

Anonymous said...

October 26, 2016 at 1:21 PM
Maybe they are keeping tabs on these players and that's what they see. Huge drops?
Remember is NOT what you want to see.

Anonymous said...

121 .. Who is keeping tabs on them TDS? No chance. they would need a massive staff. No one is. Its ALL anecdotes and comments form people with an agenda.

Anonymous said...

In any given event TDS "scouts" only see a few teams play. Sometimes they see the same teams play in successive events and sometimes they never see a team for several years if at all. Yet they name these best of the day and "all event" teams as if they have performed a comprehensive evaluation of the entire field of players during a given event. The top kids as they see it through their myopic eyes move up in the standings.

They did finally move up Shea Moyer from like 47 to 28. But why only 28? Within our own area she is far behind a player who did not see the field during the failed u17 WC campaign. Yet she has been a regular at u18 camps and has been moved up to u20 camps. Seems to me she should be ahead of a u17 player and ahead of another u18 californaian ranked in the top 20 who has been to a couple of YNT camps but without regularity. I am sure there could be further arguments made. Not that I think the USSF is terrific at identifying talent, but at least the invites provide some objectivity to the TDS rankings.

It wouldn't even matter except the college coaches use the "recruiting class rankings" to justify their decisions to their ADs and therefore consider these rankings in offering kids scholarships. The better the player makes the coach's recruiting look the more likely she will get a generous offer. Not of course the only criterion, but if he is looking at 2 ACM that he feels are relatively equal, he will offer the one with a higher ranking first. Then he can extol his prowess as a recruiter to his AD when contract renegotiation rolls around. he can say, He give me an extension because I have 2 top 10 recruiting classes about to come on and we are about to be a powerhouse. If you let me go, some of those top kids will not matriculate. Has some weight for sure.
Since these rankings are taken very seriously by many people with influence over the players' futures, they should be more accurate representations of reality. No one will agree 100% on an individual player, but obvious mistakes as above described should preclude the use of these rankings as anything but entertainment.

Anonymous said...

1051 ..AMEN

Could not agree more. I could point out more ridiculous rankings, but I dont want to appear to drag kids down. The current list could be the worst I have seen in a long time. The text mentions a girl rising from the 100s in to the top 25 becasue she made the most recent u16 camps and scored an Intl goal. The actual list shows her unchanged in the 100s . The very feats they are applauding her for was also achieved by at least 3 of her teammates, many of whom dropped. I can guarantee you that TDS saw none of the games. I guess this quarter update was the Michigan Hawks turn to go up.

Anonymous said...

TDS are not ranking the players. Read the description. they SAY they are simply collating feed back from multiple sources. How they can actually get away with it I dont know, but it does tell you how little anyone cares to make if better and correct obvious errors

Anonymous said...

Make it better? why don't we start we issues that matter!

Anonymous said...

OK, Name some.

Anonymous said...

Impossible for them to rank everybody. It's impossible for any media outlet to do it. It is based on who they saw, info sent in and the such. And, some of the rankings are based on old performances like years ago. I see plenty of gals that have stars that some don't even get a lot of playing time anymore.

And agree with the above poster that the gals on the U17 WC team are still "some" of the best in this age group. As other posters have noted, there are "some" other kids as well. Never going to be a fool-proof system. What is?

Anonymous said...

I would hope that seasoned coaches don't rely on a flawed TDS ranking system for anything. You have to check out the performances in real time and see if the child fits into your system of play and not based on any
flawed ranking.

But, if that is what they do (as above noted by a poster or two), those same coaches will have some 'splaining to do when their butts get kicked by those unranked kids they simply overlooked. Gotta love the underdogs!

Anonymous said...

The good schools don't rely on them, but they all quote them in bios . Lower level schools may

Anonymous said...

Good to know. Appreciate the inside info.

ACC games today were exciting. http://equalizersoccer.com/2016/10/30/acc-tournament-quarterfinals-end-in-dramatic-fashion/

Anonymous said...

Definition "good schools"?
Maybe not the top 10 soccer schools, but since they also almost uniformly include only YNT kids in the scholarship classes (local walk ons excluded - by the way- ultimately sometimes they contribute more than those carrying scholarships). Its absolutely at the minimum a tie breaker among nearly all schools. Valid or not, the soccer community of coaches and ADs place significance on it.

Anonymous said...

They def have some relevance and they really should take more time to make them correct. I dont mean the subjective stuff. But read this

Michigan Hawks midfielder Emaly Vatne makes the biggest climb in the rankings this fall, and enters the top 25. The Ohio State verbal scored and had an assist in the U16 GNT’s 3-3 draw with the Netherlands in September, and has been a part of every U16 GNT camp in 2016.

Then go look at the rankings Emaly Vatne is # 104 DOWN 25 spots

I mean really.

Anonymous said...

I don't think they update the 2018s yet despite their saying they did

Anonymous said...

as a 2018 playing on a top club like Hawks, no kid should be going up 70 spots IF this was really done properly. Further evidence that it really is not.

Anonymous said...

Uh also the Hawks coach of this kid is a u16 GNT assistant ...just sayin...

Anonymous said...

253 . irrelevant really, unless your point is that TDS only spoke to him. If this board was to be believed the Hawks and FC Stars coaches should be able to get anyone in to the teams right. Its strange how no one comments on O'Neill, Rutgers recruits and YNTs. Its much close to home if you want to make a conspiracy theory.

Anonymous said...

CASL has ECNL flights. Trying to keep the ECNL teams away form the rest?
Hmm
Is that different from national league segregation?

Anonymous said...

Carli Lloyd's book discusses the politics in soccer in case anyone didn't think it existed.

Anonymous said...

4:06 of course it is. To play in the National League you need to qualify first and their regular season is played at tournaments - so NL segregation is league play. ECNL segregation are pre-season games for the ECNL teams to play teams in their league. Nothing wrong with either. I don't see it as trying to keep teams away - i see it as a league or pre-season event and if that's where the coaches are then we have a choice complain about it, join them or let it be and concentrate on what's important to our kid's team.

If US Club and USYSA were smart they would hold a joint National event, since we already have a top of the pyramid GDA why fight for scrap - merge and create a true championship for non GDA teams.

But we know that will never happen.

Anonymous said...

407 We really needed Carli Lloyd to confirm that for us. We are also releived

Anonymous said...

Well some people keep fighting that premise. head in the sand if you don't believe kids on the club team of a YNT coach aren't politically advantaged. But whatever.

Anonymous said...

Why do you think there were 3 cleveland international ECNL players at the ireland trip who had been to their first camps that summer? Yep you got it, their coach was an "assistant" for the U18 TNT...

Anonymous said...

There are political "advantages" everywhere you look. Key is to make the most of them. Not every kid has that edge and its rarely the only reason. My comment would be , its not an excuse not to make it, just another obstacle to overcome. Carli Lloyds co authors kid was on that U-18 team as well. Think that helped her?

Anonymous said...

I completely agree. The politics is there for kids to overcome. However, my point has been that it is indeed there- its indisputable as above. Some people argue rather naively or because of some self interest that it isn't there at all.
It also does keep kids out but i think Carli's other points in her book are even more of a problem. The late bloomers are frozen out by the regular camp attendees cliques. Regulars and teammates are circling the wagons. Woe be to the new kid without a "friendly", having to break in to the "team" (again there should be no team for this age group for several years) organized against anyone who might take mine or my ally's spot. The coaches are the adults and should set the tone to strongly manage this problem. But they either don't recognize it or don't want to deal with it.

Anonymous said...

825 ..Out of interest how many kids do you think are there on a favor and how many do you think have "earned" their spots the hard way?

Anonymous said...

There are usually 3-6 kids in a camp that are associated with a YNT "assistant". I am not saying they all are undeserving, but I do think that there are some deserving kids missed. I also think it is very difficult for a late bloomer to break into the established "teams". I think the YNT coaches should be more sensitive to this and realize that they need to take a role in improving team chemistry by calling out clique like behavior on and off the field.

Anonymous said...

what evidence do you have of these cliques and what do you consider a late bloomer ?

Anonymous said...

@1:34 - Lloyd discusses this as well including her experience with the Sr. NT (as the poster noted). Plus, if your kid has even been invited to any id thing, it's there.

Anonymous said...

You understand what is meant by the cliques, right? Protecting spots. Their own or friends on roster. If you make the newbie look bad, you keep your spot. It's Survivor the youth soccer version.

Anonymous said...

Exactly right.
late Bloomer is a kid who was recognized after the initials pools have been vetted. Not at u14 age groups. But by U16 for sure.Woe is the kid who is in her first camp wearing generic Nike wear to all the others accumulation of garb from 4-10 camps previously. Woe further if her coach isn't there with her and/or none of her club teammate buddies are there to unlock the tribe.

Anonymous said...

What evidence do you have of this on YNTs. Im not really sure how the WNT is relevant to it other than culture. Its fine to share these observations, but you need some factual back up and Carli Lloyd is not it. Without real evidence to back it up , you sound like someone with an agenda whose kid ( for whatever reason) had a bad experience.

Anonymous said...

Possible formula for recruiting and the like. I think I saw it on an ECNL tweet that over 85% of the SEC is ECNL Alum and if you look at the rosters the radius is pretty limited to 100 miles. Of D1 programs you pretty much see the same thing outside of the Stronger programs (with some international players getting a good number of scholarships as well). D2 programs also follow the pattern with word of mouth for local players making up a big part of the roster, some ECNL players, Some EDP/NPL. D3 schools are mostly local players who have a good high school resume for both academics and soccer.

Looking at the PIAA playoffs at this point you can see the difference makers popping up and a good number are on rosters of the ECNL teams, there is also a bit of allegiance with the better teams and their club teams for first round teams that did not win. The players that rise up the ranks in TDS ranking are top ECNL players that also contribute to their High School teams success. They can play in the structured environment of the ECNL system as well as be the top player on their high school team (usually a hodge podge of talent).

There is a much better recruiting tracker than TDS on BOTN website. It is a bit less subjective and is updated more frequently, it also serves as a check to TDS.

Anonymous said...

So you think HS contribution is a factor? Respectfully disagree.

Anonymous said...

11:30,

HS is a factor in the Ranking and in the recruiting. Just the simple fact that due diligence dictates that the recruiting College coach reaches out to the HS coach.

Anonymous said...

I guess, like everything, it depends on the player. If DA works, in many cases there will be no HS coach to talk to so not sure its that relevant. As far as rankings go, I have never seen one that takes HS in to account. HS is fun, but pretty irrelevant in assessing a players soccer skills.

Anonymous said...

1058 Can you send a link to the recruiting database you are referring to on BOTN?

Anonymous said...

When 10:58 references the PIAA playoffs, I belief the reference is primarily to the District 1 and District 3 playoffs among the 4A and 3A size schools. These high school programs are not the typical programs that are so often derided on this blog. Many have held national rankings throughout the season. District 1 includes Bucks, Chester, Delaware and Montgomery Counties, which are the same regions from which PF, CFC, FCB, and YMS among others draw from (not to mention PDA). District 3 is Adams, Berks, Cumberland, Dauphin, Franklin, Juniata, Lancaster, Lebanon, Perry and York Counties. PF and CFC also draw from these counties along with PAC, HMMS, LDC, and others. It's interesting when the PF players are pitted against each other on opposing high school teams.

Anonymous said...

1:16 - agree. Our high school doesn't even send in information to any media or if it does, most times not correctly. But, that's high school. So, really unable to track a kid that way. And we have some pretty good soccer players (ECNL and high level USYS) that play. The school barely recognizes them. It's really pretty pathetic.

Anonymous said...

Thanks for that other link info. Isn't that mostly a new england area blog?

Anonymous said...

8:39 - I am not the above poster, but surely you see it happen, right? It happens at club try outs when new kids show up. Kids (& parents) start chirping as spots may be lost. Kids and parents don't share college recruiting information for fear that someone may step in and that their spot.
So, to think it doesn't happen at all levels is kind of naive. I would think it does and be pleasantly surprised when or if it doesn't.

Anonymous said...

109 ..the comment was in specific reference to YNTs and players excluding new attendees. I have not seen any evidence to back it up. Very few kids are assured of their spots to be able to afford such behavior and there are no parents involved. The comment was not in reference to Club soccer. When you take kids out of their comfort zone and put them in a very competitive environment, they will react differently but Im not sure I believe that there is a collective plan to exclude new players. If there is/was I would love to hear actual stories as opposed to speculation.

Anonymous said...

@248

Here is the link
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1IbB3V_l4dzMu1PnuLIjX9bJyT9r9zn2voE_qefyFYko/htmlembed?widget=false#

Anonymous said...

Read Carli's book. If you think a bunch of teenagers would behave better and have less of a clique attitude you are out of touch with teen girl culture. YNT/WNT is not a meritocracy as Carli states in her book. Connections, where you go to school (college commitments included) etc all have huge bearing on success and whether you are an endorsed athlete. Then there is of course style of play fitting in witht he coach's vision which is legitimate and unavoidable.

The culture is very cutthroat among the kids. Smaller and less obvious versions are seen within the top teams and all ID programs. None of us will give you details of our or our kids' experience. However, I will tell you that the female coaches in the area who have been involved in both YNT and WNT programming fully corroborate Carli's and anecdotal information falling from the kids regarding camps. Talk to one of them...if you know who they are...
You are a real pie in the sky dude or your kid has been well positioned. Awesome and congrats. No sour grapes here I assure you. My kids are well positioned in part because they understood all of this.

Anonymous said...

you keep quoting her book. That is her experience. Everyones is not the same. There are many ways to "justify" why you have or have not achieved certain things. To suggest that it comes purely from being well positioned is a gross oversimplification of the dynamics of any representative team. Of course relationships play a part. But so do many other things. Your comment about cutthroat culture is not exactly true in my experience. It is mostly the parents that are cutthroat. I can only make comment based on my childs experiences and she experienced none of what you suggest. I would also say that her "positioning" is a result of hard work on her part and a slice of good luck. The girls she played with and enjoyed camps with were extremely welcoming. The environment itself of 30 or so girls competing for spots is always going to bring out different qualities in kids, but thats the way the USSF have set it up. Its supposed to test kids physically and mentally.

Im sorry some peoples experiences were not positive, but thats the way it goes. I really dont think that just becasue thats how it was for Carl Lloyd means thats how it is for all.

http://www.ussoccer.com/stories/2016/10/27/16/42/161027-wnt-lynn-williams-in-her-own-words-first-camp-first-cap-first-goal

She paints a very different picture

Anonymous said...

10:20,

I am happy that your daughter's experience was a good one. I do however see both sides. For the most part any girl invited to a camp has ability to get to the camp, some arrived there on just merit, but for the outliers, they also had "help" in the way of connectopns. What I mean to say is you have two keepers, there box score in the same league is identical, one trains with their club keeper program and one traines with the club but also trains with a NT alum, who gets the nod on an equal playing field when a decision is made between them for the next level in the USNT program??

Anonymous said...

is that not how life works? you interview for a job and lose out to a person who you find out is friends with the CEO. Its about relationships but talent is important as well. As far as ability to get to camp, Im not sure I agree there all the time. The ones you have to look at are the one and dones They are the ones who are often called in on the back of a fav. But I can assure you that there is nowhere to hide once you get there. So really what are we talking about? Are we really that upset that thru connections a kid got a shot at NT camp? If she is good enough to then stay for a year , then no bad thing. if she is one and done..then no harm no foul. Im not aware of kids who are consistently invited who are relying on favors to get in. Many kids cannot handle the process. Its not all fun and games. Having unfamiliar coaches tear you down in evaluations is no fun Im sure.

Anonymous said...

"having unfamiliar coaches tear you down in evaluations is no fun and games"
well what if he's not unfamiliar and is instead your club coach? Does that seem right to you? The one and dones are not infrequently the opposite of what you say. They get picked up because they did something interesting while someone was watching. They are in a completely unfamiliar environment without support and are nudged out. The coaches can rationalize "not a good fit" and feel that they did their duty as good talent selectors. But i agree would be interesting to do a retrospective. To see the proportion of in because of politics out because not up to standard and in because of ability and out because of no support.

Anonymous said...

please show me these kids who are repeatedly invited who have NOT justified selection? People go on about FC Stars, but several of those kids were one and done. You mention support, but your play gets you support. If you are getting good evals and showing well, they are not going to cut you. All those kids were once in an unfamiliar environment and yet some , whose coaches have zero to do with the program are still there. Why? There are several coaches and a HEAD coach. he or she does not sit there and just do whatever assistant A says. I think you over estimate the role some of these people play. The assistants on the 16 ad !7 teams come form where. Stars, CASL, Hawks - Im sure im missing some. Are those teams overly represented? Im not sure they really are. I also think all these players have no issues finding a College that wants them, so what is the benefit to the players of the Club coach selecting and them if they are not good enough? What am I missing. Its hard not to walk away thinking that its parents who care about this more than the kids do.

Anonymous said...

http://www.socceramerica.com/article/71034/april-heinrichs-on-under-17-world-cup-development.html

Anonymous said...

8:07 - no one will give you actual stories. Read the tea leaves. Either you believe it exists or you don't. And, providing a soundbite from a newbie to the team (and congrats to her well deserved) vs. a book from a seasoned player who has actually sued the federation for some inequities (clearly one who will speak her mind), again, you have to read the tea leaves...or not.

Anonymous said...

given the discussion is about the treatment of newbies and Lloyd has not been one for years .....Yes I know whose opinion I value. Your seasoned player has a massive axe to grind.Not sure I need actual stories for my opinion but lets be honest here, it is easy to give example without naming names. I find it revealing that no one does. I gave you an example of 2 players that refute the argument that the established players create a hostile environment. Maybe they did to Lloyd, but that was a long time ago. Given that she is now a captain and a veteran, if that environment still exists, then shame on her. My child got no such reception. Quite the opposite. YNTs are an emotive subject and I believe that kids who perhaps dont last or get a "fair" shake look for reasons to justify it.

Anonymous said...

I would look at the obvious. US soccer published a statement vs. not US Soccer which do you think was given without consideration of consequences.

Anonymous said...

Agreed. I would hope that carli has helped to improve that situation for others. I don't think most posters are using it as justification for anything other than to show that it's potentially another obstacle and part of the process.

Anonymous said...

My kid had negative experiences related to cliques, no passing, cold shoulder and discouraging coaches at several ID type events including YNT camps and that's all I am going to say.

Anonymous said...

448 you said camps plural. so if she went to more than one , surely she had a fair shake to overcome obstacles. Clearly someone gave her more than one chance

Anonymous said...

You cannot be meek at these camps.

No passing? I assume you mean they wouldn't give her the ball. Tough for the unselfish player to stand out unless she leaves her comfort zone a bit. Just not enough time to see her get the touches where they would notice her positive team play.

Particularly tough for a defender who is not accustomed to attacking. If his/her team is dominating play, she barely gets seen in a game type test.

Anonymous said...

U20 FIFA WC Games begin 11/14 w/USA vs. France, then 11/17 New Zealand and 11/21 Ghana. Let's go USA!!!

Anonymous said...

The Group of Death is an overwrought phrase, but if you’re looking for the most difficult four-team pairing in the tournament, this is it right here. The U.S. is always one of the three or four best teams of the tournament, and that’s the case again this year. Full national team member Mallory Pugh is the best player in the tournament (maybe in the tournament’s 14-year history), and the U.S. is stocked up with club and college stars alike. If the U.S. is a favorite in Group C on paper, it’s a tenuous hold

Hype is a dangerous thing. I guess we have not learned anything from the U17 debacle. Why do we refuse to let things play out before we spout off?

Anonymous said...

I have been reading some recent posts re the Bethesda tourney about teams and their Got Soccer rankings. Why do people still think GS points matter? Some of the top ranked GS teams are not in gold or even silver with US rankings. Hilarious!

Anonymous said...

Got soccer point matter to non ECNL teams and academy teams because it is used for fighting stop worrying about other post. Stay constructive and positive.

Anonymous said...

Many top ECNL teams have little to no ranking at all all on GS. And those teams, don't care!

Anonymous said...

The ones that get left home care - just a little.

The transition is imperfect - and we all have to live with it and move on.

Anonymous said...

1:22 - what does that mean? "It is used for fighting." Haha

Anonymous said...

ECNL may not care about Got Soccer points but for Non- Ecnl teams it does prove valuable when attending showcases. Less concern this year for the ECNL teams as they will pretty much isolate themselves from the others by only competing against other ECNL teams at CASL and others. Last year some non ECNL teams like Quickstrike had a field day against ECNL teams at the U16 showcases.

Anonymous said...

1147 ..its funny right. I bet the U17s had a "field day" vs japan the NTC Invitational. When the games count its worth keeping score. When they dont, who really cares?

Anonymous said...

Got soccer pts. are meaningless because team rosters change all the time. The team coach tells the tournament director where the team should play.

Anonymous said...

NonECNL use it for flighting. If the coach decides to drop or climb brackets that there choice. It just one of many tools nonecnl teams use to structure flighting. It's not perfect but practical when used correctly. It's like top drawer soccer claiming that splash is the best u17 team in the country which we know is not the case. Bothe systems are just tools for measuring where teams are. If got soccer is not part of your system for entering flighting and tournaments then ignore it. No need to make fun of teams that do. We know it's not the holy grail.

Anonymous said...

Interesting. I guess the ECNL teams won't have the composite teams this year at CASL, either, so they will play their full teams unlike what happened last year. And are some NPL teams ECNL teams now, like NEFC? Did Syracuse Development switch to ECNL too? Exciting year to see how all this plays out for sure.

Anonymous said...

Totally wrong last year, the year before , this year the drive behind the ECNL teams is the same "Mix bag of players or composite teams to jeff cup, casl... with the idea of exposure" NOT winning. Exposure!

Anonymous said...

@623 ..I assume you mean FLIGHTING

Anonymous said...

U20 game vs. France was a good game. Entire back line of US courtesy of Penn State (minus keeper courtesy of Rutgers). Good stuff. France was very good. Soccer around the world is getting better and better.

Anonymous said...

Good game as in good to watch or well played game? I ask becasue France out possessed the US and out shot them 17-3. Im not sure I actually buy that its getting better. I do buy that it is getting deeper, so there are more girls now starting to play seriously. They appear hungry to get better. We dont. We are just looking to get a few $$ to get in to a College. many of them are looking to earn a living at the game. We are happy to say woohooo back line from Penn State as the other countries are starting to eat our lunch at youth level.

Sorry, but it make me angry. We had a huge advantage and a mixture of arrogance and apathy has put us here. Where the ECNL and USSF fight over the game as the kids bear the consequences.

Anonymous said...

Shooting the ball and shooting it on net are two separate things. I would much rather see less shots that are quality than a bunch of outside shots that are no where near the net. That is just turning over possession. And a waste of a build up. So outshooting 17-3 (when France only put about 3-4 quality shots, too) is the same game.

Anonymous said...

I find it interesting that the entire back line is from Penn State. I think that is pretty significant. One or two players from one college team is one thing, but an entire back line. It speaks to the depth of some college teams.

Anonymous said...

not at all. In this case it speaks to who was willing to redshirt.

Anonymous said...

256 ..did you watch the game? Some US comments if you didnt

The U.S. U20 Women’s National Team kicked off their 2016 World Cup campaign on Monday with a scoreless draw against France. Right back Maddie Elliston made the play of the game in the second half when she blocked a shot from inside the six-yard box on the best chance of the game for either side.

The USA went into the break trailing in the statistics as France had 61 percent of the possession and five shots to USA’s one. However, the USA seemed comfortable with the game plan through the opening part of the game.

The USA continued to sit back and absorb in the second half. Taylor Otto, Kaleigh Riehl, Ellie Jean, and Elliston held on against the onslaught from France, which finished the game with 17 shots. Pugh was a major reason why the USA earned a point from the opener. The full national team starter played in the midfield through much of the second half and was a tremendous help to the back four.

USA moves on to play New Zealand on Nov. 17 and then closes out group play against Ghana on Nov. 21. If the USA continues to defend with the organization and determination that they showed on Monday, they should be able to secure positive results from the two remaining games in Group C. In the attack, the USA needs to show something more than just individual brilliance if they hope to make some noise in this competition.

so

1. A player who some think is a world calss attacker was helping the back 4 defend the pressure

2. The USA - supposedly the 800 lb Gorilla- is content to sit back and defend

3. There wer som high quality shots for France

As I said, our youth teams are not really giving us any evidence the platforms and culture we have is producing top quality players in volume. Heck we have two kids pulling double duty.

Anonymous said...

http://www.ussoccer.com/stories/2016/11/14/14/21/161114-u20wnt-opens-2016-u20-world-cup-with-0-0-draw-vs-france

So US Soccer said, " It was a physical match in which France had more shots and more ball possession than the Americans, while the U.S. team had perhaps the better scoring chances, but on a steamy night in the capital city of Papua New Guinea, neither side could manufacture a goal."

They thought US had more chances, as did I; in particular Watt's attempted cherry-pick of a bad back pass in France's back late in the game.

Article also states that, "U.S. goalkeeper Casey Murphy also dominated her penalty box. While she was forced to make only four saves as many of France’s shots did not trouble her..." Only supporting the previous poster, not many quality shots from France.

Pugh was good but maybe took on too much as some captains tend to do. France dropped back several too as needed. It was that tight for both teams. And, the humidity really played a factor for both.

Agree with you that Elliston saved the day for US. Great defensive play. As did France's keeper making several dynamite saves/stops (rocket low shot from Pugh) and the one referenced above vs. Watt.

Soccer around the world is improving.

Anonymous said...

i read/hear this a lot ...soccer around the world is improving. The question should be why is the US not doing the same? This is exactly the apathy I refer to. On one hand Im being told we have 2 of the best players in the world and on the other hand im being told I should be happy with a draw and 3 shots? Which is it? I can telly ouy hat other countries are not pouring the same amount of $$ as we are. The Ghan team that manhandled the U17s are not spending months in camp.

Anonymous said...

Check out this article called "What’s the real problem? American soccer and a culture of mastery"
http://www.soccerwire.com/blog-posts/whats-the-real-problem-american-soccer-and-a-culture-of-mastery/

I think this rings true. I feel like the bigger, faster, stronger, very aggressive kids help you win at least up through U14, maybe longer. We are not holding these kids to a high enough standard. We do not demand them to have excellent skills. We just are thankful that they are on our teams.

The smaller, maybe slower kids may see their only hope at making top teams as becoming super technical. Once in a blue moon, one of the these is a true late bloomer and they turn in something something special. The evaluators often select some of these kids because their skills look so much better than the others. But these players are not the answer either.

In order for use to succeed, the fast, strong, aggressive kids must also be the most skilled.

Anonymous said...

To succeed, we must produce better players. Far too much time is spent on the meaningless athletic vs technical debate. Tom produce better players, we have to value all the attributes that make a player better when they are young. The only thing we seem to value is what TEAM wins. There is almost no collective incentive to actually get better as a player. To work hard individually. No one seems to value it much. there great players of every size, some more physical, some less. Some fast some slow. The point is a great player is not one type, but in the US , the way the game is, with the emphasis on winning from day one BUT the lack of a real economically viable pro track and many other more glamorous sports - the best athletes dont tend to play and when/if they do, they are encouraged to be as direct as possible to win. It is not a good culture to breed great player - female or male. The biggest reason the women are ahead of the RoW is because they had a huge head start. Dont let the results fool you. The women are not in that much better state than the men are.

Anonymous said...

Trick is to enjoy all of it - the other nations as well as the US.

Wishing you luck in finding that avenue.

Anonymous said...

Why do parents of ECNL players always make excuses about under performance at showcases. Which ever team shows up to CASL, DISNEY etc... Shows up with the intent to win while showcasing. Now whether you win or loose that outcome does not matter but you always play to win showcase or not. It goes without saying that ECNL PARENTS claim they need not to chase points, true, they are theeee to showcase, true, but to say they are not there to win or they went with a composite team seams like a you problem in which the coach has decided to take certain players. A, B, C teams now composite teams... Lol.. The koolaid is one hell of an elixir.

Anonymous said...

632 ..Your comment is not really accurate. Playing to win is really something that a coach dictates. Playing to win means playing your best players as long as possible. It may mean playing a style that showcases them and not others. It may mean playing a very defensive, risk free style. The point is that showcasing ALL your players is not playing to win. Now are all the kids out there trying their hardest? Sure. but playing to win and showcasing are not at all compatible. That goes for every team. Trying you best individually and playing to win are not the same at all. So next time you read that from any parent , you need to understand what it means.

Anonymous said...

I don't think you understand. For some Ecnl teams, Coaches and clubs . They look at all events differently as for you it seems to me that your objective is always the same "WIN"
Maybe now you can understand why we don't develop as a country.
If I ask you: if it matters that our men's national team lost 2 games? You probably will say "yes" as for me our objective is to qualify !9

Anonymous said...


Let's say your team is at a showcase event, and one of the girls (not normally a starter) is interested in going to school XYZ and the coaches from XYZ are in attendance. The coach starts this girl and she plays the entire first half, something she would not normally do. Or, there are some scouts that show up for the second half of the game to watch some of the lower tier players. The coach play s these players to give them the opportunity to be seen regardless of the score, even though it means leaving a couple of National Team Camp attendees on the bench. Perhaps it's even better if they are down, so the scouts can see how they perform in that situation.

The scouts don't care about the score. Some don't stick around long enough to see an entire game, anyway. They care about seeing how the kids perform in different situations. I've seen goalkeepers make a more positive impacts on scouts after giving up a goal than by doing anything else, by how they handled themselves afterwards. The scouts want to see how they react under various circumstances.

Anonymous said...

8:39 - perfectly put. Saw 6:32's comment. Apparently, after all this time and the many entries with explanation, some still just don't understand.

On another note, great game by US vs. New Zealand at the U20's. Ghana next (who tied with France). Germany and Spain look very strong.

Anonymous said...

Only the last goal had any semblance of team play. The other two were individual brilliance. Still disappointed in this team.

Anonymous said...

not sure why we/you expect otherwise. US media market the heck out of individuals. Team play is not encouraged or celebrated. Its Pugh this Sanchez that like they are the only ones actually playing.

«Oldest ‹Older   201 – 400 of 2324   Newer› Newest»