Wednesday, July 20, 2016

U17G - U16 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.

1,553 comments:

«Oldest   ‹Older   1201 – 1400 of 1553   Newer›   Newest»
Anonymous said...

he brought 5. The kid with the 16s has had several camps with 17s.

http://www.topdrawersoccer.com/club-soccer-articles/us-u17-wnt-player-pool_aid39144

http://www.topdrawersoccer.com/club-soccer-articles/u17-wnt-roster-for-friendlies-vs-brazil_aid39525

5 GK. 3 with several camps and 2 with none.

Anonymous said...

Guys I love all this talk - just saying it means nothing. With over 1 million registered players do you really think anyone one ever get it right?

The coach picks the team he thinks is the best in his/her opinion and plays with them. Failure does not fall on the kids it's always the coach and I agree if the coach can't win then they should be axed, sacked, fired what ever we want to call it. They play with the emotions of the kids and if they don't understand talent then GET OUT. USWNT team's that don't qualify for a major regardless of the age should never happen when you have so much talent to pick from. It just shows that person picking is clueless.

My creds, I am a naturalized euro who has played the game and has been around the game his entire life. It's a very simple game you just need players that understand it - not LaCross, Basketball, Field Hockey or Track stars. Kids that understand the game and can be creative not robotic. But in order to be creative they need to watch other players that are creative and that we don't have in the NWSL we are getting some in the MLS but need better coaching.

The youth coaches are to blame. I'm okay with playing to win that's how it should be done but I'm not okay with playing with a short bench that only creates fear to be creative because mistakes=bench time if you are not what the coach thinks is a impact player and that kills the sport's creative players because we think that Speed, Strength, Aggression & Size trump soccer IQ.

My 2 cents

Anonymous said...

not sure I agree with the comment on speed strength and aggression trumping IQ. I dont think the coaches think that. I just feel that in the absence of IQ, SSA and S win the day. that is true the world over, BUT elsewhere the culture actually produces players with IQ as well. Creativity is not created by coaches in my opinion. It is a kids feel for the game and that comes from within often. its built by free pay, watching others etc. I agree that a fear of failure can stifle it, but im not sure its there to begin with. Kids are shuttled into soccer early whether they want o or not. Elsewhere in the world, girls play because they want to. They usually have a keen interest in the sport already. Its not readily available for all thru town rec teams.

US needs to grow the culture of the game and then you will see more higher IQ players and i believe they will be selected. Now, coaches select what gives them the best chance to win Club and HHS games and that is usually athleticism. by the way, a high IQ player needs to be able to compete athletically and that is not easy in the US when teams have athletes. They close space fast and make it so that decision making has to be not just good, but very quick. It makes the bar for a high IQ player pretty high.

Anonymous said...

2 more cents sorry.

It’s a lot of individual function work and coaching, it’s all about focusing on the individual which we never did in the past.

"That focus on individual training is ramping up all across the country, an initiative coaches hope will begin to switch the focus from the traditional American concept of the athlete and perhaps to something a bit more global in scope. Because when it comes to fostering young domestic skill players at the highest levels, the US still has ground to cover."

It’s just not in our culture right now.

Anonymous said...

Sorry 8:16 didn't see your post - I agree with you about culture.
There are creative players out there that understand for example not playing the ball back into pressure but maybe they lack some of that Athletic presence so they are not viewed as an impact player by the coach so they play it simple (which is okay) so they don't make mistakes.

Anonymous said...

Creativity in the women's (and girls') game is freaking super rare. I think for 2 reasons. Most girls don't have the quickness, balance and coordination needed to pull of the uber fine and precise movements required to produce magic on the field. As an aside the surface must be similarly regular for the ball to move predictably and make the movements possible. There are some creative players and they tend to move like 14 year old boys whose voices have just begun to break. You usually can spot these rarities immediately because they stand out among the leggy gazelles (characterized by fast straight ahead movements) as if a spot light is shining on them.

These are not necessarily players that run directly at defenses -ala Pugh and Sanchez. These are players who do the unexpected- play the unexpected ball, make an unexpected move- much to the delight and success of their teams and supporters. The see the game differently than most and they have the tools in the box to create wow moments of success.

The second reason has already been mentioned; they don't watch enough high level men's soccer. With youtube videos of Neymar's and other's like him moves and goals, there is plenty of opportunity for them beyond watching games, but how many take advantage of the readily available media?

Beyond that they are rare, even if located, I don't think our existing regime, would embrace a truly creative player within the youth program. These artists would likely be seen as a disruptive force because the leadership wouldn't know what to do with them. Remember an important metric for national midfielders is time on the ball per possession- the quicker they play it the better they are perceived. That's fine for certain circumstances, but when your team needs to break down a bunker (uh yeah Sweden) you need a magician to pull the defense out of shape and open up holes for exploitation. We didn't have that player who was good enough and we lost. The leadership should now be scouring the country for players able to break down a bunker- but are they?

Anonymous said...

853 you tube gives a very individual perspective on the ball, as does TV. Tog et the full picture you need to go to a game and watch a player. Off the ball is as important as off it. Creativity includes type of run, positioning, activity etc etc..Its no just ON the ball stuff like dribbling.

826 Individual training is not the answer to me. In fact it makes it worse. I find many girls are doing this already and they learn a move, but they cannot place its relevance in the context of a game. i think you need more small sided collective , low pressure stuff. Less win/lose scenario based training. Unfortunately, the US environment is full of W/L this game matters situations that leave little room for working on your game.Instead of doing it in the Club break, kids are playing HS. A lot of the training i see makes the feet quicker in isolation, but does not make the brain quicker in pattern recognition or other key areas.

Anonymous said...

953 I disagree to some extent. I do not think creativity is defined by off the ball movement. To me that is more soccer IQ and sometimes familiarity. I have seen very creative players fooling everyone including his own team with his ideas. Plays an amazing ball that stops dead on the ps only to have the striker's run truncated by some idea he had to hold instead of continue. The kind of creativity I believe is lacking is demonstrated on the ball. It does however require players surrounding that creative player to have sufficient soccer IQ to expect a back heel on an overlapped run they make for example.

Anonymous said...

9:53 I think that's what we have today a structured practice teaching tactics which in turn creates a very "robotic" player. The creative player more times than not will look bad because they will see the play and make the pass but the team/coach doesn't and it turns into a give away - which is a"bad" thing. Today's coaching would much rather have a kid that will run through a wall because they think they can teach them the small sided structured tactical offense - which they can but then we have a very robotic easy to predict team and you will have more countries doing what sweden did - make us break them down which we currently can't.

10:04 - I agree soccer IQ comes in all shapes and sizes and these players while stick out when given the opportunity more times than not they give the ball away because the team is not on the same page.

Also I think we have creative players in the womens game they just get lost because we prefer other tools over the mind. Imagine if we developed these creative minds instead of trying to take that away.

Anonymous said...

1246 its not an either or tho. the USA should be able to have both

Anonymous said...

7:25 - thank you for the list. Just noting that all GK's still in the system (U18, U17 and U16). And I guess that is the discussion as well, using kids for other teams as well. Why not try out more?


Anonymous said...

Relative stasis of YNT rosters is commonplace. When they do "try" an new kid, she is being judged against an existing "team" (I think its absolutely stupid to even suggest a "team" in no WC years). She will be put into an unfamiliar situation with kids who are looking to protect the status quo. They should move (nearly) entirely new rosters into and out of the system on a regular basis for non WC year age groups.

Anonymous said...

@ 1:21 - agreed.

Anonymous said...

Re: the creative player

Dont we often se this type player unwilling to work on her strength/speed/etc?

In love with the creative aspect alone, so to speak.

Anonymous said...

1131 Exactly. I feel that people talk like its either or. A creative player without the rest is just as flawed.

Anonymous said...

@September-30,8:53am

I can't believe you weren't stoned to death by these people for that brilliantly said paragraph (:👍

Anonymous said...

We're still blaming the students. When are we gonna hold the teachers accountable? If you teach them to be "Robotic" you get "Robot's".

Let's be honest here, teacher makes extra $ on skilled training. Why give the students this all at once. (Big business people)

Anonymous said...

@7:04am

My guess is your kid isn't that "creative player?" Which is fine. Just don't assist in bashing or labeling the kid & their family for trying to move on to teams that have & understand "Creative players".

And I'll correct you. A creative player without the rest isn't "just as flawed". Just ask any college coach. Any player can run fast & kick a ball at the net, not every player can bleak down a defensive line to assist in other's scoring, or taking a shot under pressure. At some point what you do for the club & coach isn't gonna matter.

Little Mia is gonna have to play without dad & Mom's influence on coach to compete at the next level.

So continue to drink the sweet punch, I must remind you of time running out. Or simply have Mia train harder & learn the game.


Anonymous said...

Games underway; no surprise about US beating Paraguay. Expect same w/ Ghana. Great job girls! It's the game vs. Japan that is the one to watch (depending on who plays for Japan & US as they may just play and not really show anything just to finish pool play and into post pool play). The post pool play in the World Cup should have some great games.

Also, good game last night w/ Spirit vs. Red Stars (won in 2nd ot by Spirit). Looking forward to Sunday's game Portland vs. Flash. Congrats to all teams for getting post season play.

Thank you Fox Sports for coverage re U17 World Cup and NWSL.

Anonymous said...

130..Any kid can run fast...I stopped reading after that. What complete rubbish

Anonymous said...

@5:29 ....Im sure you did, truth stings a little.

Anonymous said...

926 What are you talking about? Assuming a creative player isn't working on her strength and speed is ridiculous. In fact most creative players are very quick because that quickness is necessary to "sell" the defenders that she is doing something else right before she breaks their ankles. In fact mist creative players work exceptionally hard outside of formal trainings because that confidence and familiarity on the ball has taken many many hours with a ball to squire. They also spend hours watching soccer to build their soccer iq. Yes another result of their unusual passion is working to improve every aspect of their game including strength and balance to improve ball winning ability and ability to shrug off thug defenders.

You really sound like an increasingly desperate parent of an "athlete" who is not a soccer player. You probably think the creative player is a "ball hog" too because she isn't hoofing it up to your super stud athlete. No worries: There are plenty of midmajors and lower power 5s who will take her readily on their teams. College soccer is commonly pretty unsophisticated.

Anonymous said...

the sad joke about blogs, is that every comment is assumed to be biased. No one is allowed to be an objective lover of the game with an opinion. lets just say I have no dog in the fight. I am around the game a lot and see a lot of players from rec to pro. The only country that I see with this constant athlete vs creative debate is the USA. Everywhere else, they just look for good soccer players. Good can come in many different forms, but every player has a dominant skill set. Some are a bit more creative, some are a bit more athletic , but its degrees, not extremes. Any player, creative, athletic or otherwise that does not work on improving their weaknesses, will never be elite.

Anonymous said...

If you (@622) are also @926 you are a hypocrite. That 926 comment was pretty troll like. The point above yours says the same thing. Why assume a creative player is not athletic? Why also assume an athletic player has no technique? The point about other countries is interesting though probably best applied to the boys there. An athletic player with no technique will not get far. But there are slow creative players with outstanding technique who see the game in unusual ways and solve problems with unexpected solutions and who are successful. Cesc Fabregas comes to mind there. Similarly there are relatively weak players who do the same who are also successful Andres Iniesta and Oscar come to mind in that mold.

If Christian Pulisic hadn't had soccer parents to find situations that would nurture the unusual player he was/is and to shield and protect him from hose who would have tossed him away for being smaller and weaker than many others, he might have been lost as a youngster. I remember criticism of him when he played up on the classics DA some years ago. People constantly complaining about how often he was pushed off the ball. Short sighted and unsophisticated- obviously.

Anonymous said...

im not 926, but you are also missing the point, Fabregas is not slow u the absolute sense. He may be slower than say Martial, but he is not slow. Iniesta and Oscar are not weak. They may be weaker than Matic, but they are not weak. The player you mention highlight the point. They are stronger in some areas, but they are good all around players. Fabregas is not playing as much because Conte wants more strength and dynamism in midfield. Most elite soccer players are well rounded. Good at most things that pertain to their role and excellent at the things that make them stand out. A fast bad player is just that, a bad player. A skilled player can have no impact on a game. Creative, to me, means create opportunities- individual and for the team. Elite players use their gifts to do that. Pace is a gift. learning to use it is key. Being creative is also a gift, but the player has to learn how to use it. Its not that hard. and rarely does a player with one gift excel. Even if that is individual ball skill.

Anonymous said...

Fabregas is always commented upon regarding his relative slowness. Invests and Oscar for their relative strength. but whatever. I bow to your clearly greater insight and knowledge.

Anonymous said...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kZrcs-APRvg

a while ago, but he is not slow

Anonymous said...

Portland vs. Flash on FS2. Great game!

Anonymous said...

Dude there is a ton of commentary describing Fabregas' lack of speed as his minor weakness. Your arguing that he isn't Relatively slow is crazy. Give it up. The point originally made by some troll was that creative players don't work on their speed and strength which is of course troll fodder as any such sweeping statement is. Your point is all players have weaknesses but they are still good enough at their weak points to compete because they have some remarkable other points that make up for their relative weaknesses. So where is the disagreement. Again Fanregas' weakness is his speed. Is he fast enough to compete yes but he is again relatively slow for an EPL midfielder.

Anonymous said...

Iniesta....one of top 3 players on FCB, after Messi
Not counting the departing Xavi...
Fabregas left for a reason...

Anonymous said...

The crux of this argument is the perception ( usually of parents of less athletic kids) that somehow the athletic kid has been touched by some magic stick and does not work to be one. And therefore the child who spends time trainers learning ball rolls and rainbow flicks is somehow more "worthy" of attention. I hear it all the time ...oh that kid is "just" athletic. It is a comment that I only really here in America. Every where else a player is either good enough to compete effectively, or not. I dont beleive foot speed , in isolation, is of any real relevance in the mens game at the top level, which is why I dont really consider Cesc slow, but lets say he is and leave it at that.

The ONLY reason speed is an issue in the womens game is because the overall quality is just not there yet. Tactically and technically it is evolving but not to the point where you HAVE to have more of the total package to be effective. Girls can go a long way on athleticism alone. That is what annoys the parents of less athletic kids. In time, as the game develops, that too will change. We are seeing it already. The sprinter will have to become a much more rounded player to go further. But as of know, they can probably go further in the game than they really should

Anonymous said...

Agreed 8:08
Girls soccer is very relient on the long ball (ECNL classic) but as we develop the technical side and work on the possession side of the game, the "fast" players must adapt

Anonymous said...

808 Ah we are now on the same page. I completely agree that the technical failures of the overall pool of players at the YNT/WNT level allows for athleticism to rule the (current) day. My question is then, are those technical and athletic enough players who would raise the level of women's soccer out there in the giant country of America and just not being seen or (gasp) chosen? Or do they not yet exist?

Anonymous said...

1059 ill add to the controversy. They do exist, but when they do - take Pugh- they are often only put in roles that exploit the athletic side. I think she has great potential, but on the NT is seems to me that all she is being asked to do is run at people. They are out there and I dont think that the YNT fails to select them. In fact I think they at times go too far the other way. Bear in mind that to date, the YNT has not been about development. Its been about IDing players and winning games, especially in the WC cycles. I also think that there is a real lack of willingness to learn the game. far too much emphasis is placed on winning asap. And kids that win are told how great they ALREADY are. Where is the incentive to get better? You also get teams that are deep, well organized that play in a way that exploits the lack of others depth and ability to win games. man marking, pressing etc. Kids win games and again think THEY are great. Play HS , read the papers, ALL this ALL that there is very little negative feedback to players that are far from complete. Unless the player themselves is driven to work on the weakness, this environment is not ideal.

Usually the player has a parent with a soccer background or comes from a family where the game was part of growing up. Or lucks in to a great coach who cares about the individual development .

They do exist, but there are far fewer that there should be and I think as summarized above , until the system actual requires it, we will stay that way.

Anonymous said...

http://premiercup.bsctournament.com/tournament-info/accepted-teams-girls-2016/u17-girls/

Anonymous said...

@ 12:21 - interesting post. You can't possibly think that the transition from high school to elite level club soccer is the same. HS is about achieving something with your classmates. It's about coming back after graduation for homecoming or reunion day and reminiscing. I think any kid who plays both (high level club soccer and h.s.) knows the difference.

HS gives kids a chance to get in shape, get touches on the ball, and possibly work on some techincal skills. That's it. Not everyone on the HS team plays soccer outside of school. It's for fun.

Club should be fun too, but the level of intensity and soccer iq are much different.

Good discussion though.

Anonymous said...

Watched the rebroadcast of GE vs. CA with my daughter.

Deanne Rose (CA) who played on the Sr. CA Nat'l Team in the Olympics is awesome. GE has some nice players too.

The knock out stage play for the teams should be fun to watch.

Anonymous said...

Spaanstra is scheduled to start again at wide forward. She played the whole game against Paraguay if I remember correctly. So the experiments seem to have largely ceased. That said, she was underwhelming and the weakest of the attacking players including Kiara Pickett the right back who was outstanding. Also oddly Sophie Smith subbed in at ACM for Tagliaferri. Haven't seen that one.

Anonymous said...

Kind of surprised he isn't using more substitutes now to experiment before the tougher games begin (Japan and after).

Anonymous said...

1126 i understand your point, but being elite requires sacrifices. HS is not going to develop an Elite player. My point is if you want to play with friends, then i think most of the time you are reducing your chances of improving, especially if you are an athletic type. You can dominate HS with just that. My point was more that. HS does not really challenge a really athletic player. The player would be better of doing real technical work and forgoing it. But the system does not demand it.

Anonymous said...

I agree with your last statement 931.Do you think conversely that a smaller technical player can benefit from the physical HS experience? or is HS too much of a dangerous situation for this player and the benefit not worth the risk?

Anonymous said...

I agree with you about development, but as you pointed out and I agree, HS isn't about development. It's about competing for your school to bring them a title, if possible. Schools like that stuff. It's what bonds a class forever. Next year, it will all be different.
The kid who wants to develop is doing work outside of high school (and club), too. Anyone who wants to excel isn't relying on high school ball to get them there; unless you are in a soccer school/academy.

Anonymous said...

9:55 - I'm not 9:31, but if I could chime in; I have seen smaller, technical players do wonderfully in hs. But, yes, they do get knocked around (but do so in club as well). However, they need to have a few good players to understand what they are trying to accomplish. Otherwise, it's a wasted effort and may just frustrate them in the end. Bright side is, only a month and a half left of it.

Anonymous said...

955 I dont like labeling players. They all have to do what they think will help them get better IF that is their goal. I dont think that is the goal of many players. Most want to play with friends and have fun. They dont really understand the real effort needed to be elite. There are more than enough places in College such that its not a requirement . In time , it may be. Bringing you school a title is nice, but a little worthless now. recruiting is done outside of HS. I know HS stars who struggle to make any impact in Club soccer. The top end of the game is going to get to point where quality rules, and to be elite you are going to have to work really hard. HS will not really offer that. I mean work hard on your weaknesses ..not beat up on inferior players :)

Anonymous said...

Peeked in on the US vs. Ghana game. Only a 1 goal game (US). And Ghana is getting a bunch of shots; quality ones. Wow!

Anonymous said...

Spoke too soon....level 1-1 US vs. Ghana. Wow again.

Anonymous said...

Ghana is playing very well, very organized and really good second balls. Quite impressive.

Anonymous said...

US getting man handled in the counter attacks. Not organized in the back.

Anonymous said...

not a huge shock. I dont feel the USSF challenge the players enough. There is real competition WITHIN the USA . Instead they seek easy wins vs inferior nations that are willing to travel to the USA. As I keep saying. REAL athletes will trouble them as will teams with REAL soccer IQ ...

Anonymous said...

920 |USA Dont have that luxury. They are not a top athletic team and not a top technical team. They dont have the very best athletes on that team and technically they are ok, but not great. They should beat Ghana, but it wont be easy

Anonymous said...

Well, Ghana is now winning 2-1.

Anonymous said...

Yikes, almost 3-1. US may not get out of group play if they loose this.

Smith is actually playing well.

Anonymous said...

Oh heck with work. It's only 2 mins left. I gotta watch. :) Very exciting.

Anonymous said...

+4 stoppage time added.

Anonymous said...

Wow....i am in shock. Ghana wins.

Anonymous said...

Hopefully, they get it together and beat Japan. Go USA! When does the U-20 WC start?

Anonymous said...

im not. If the US is in a track meet, they dont have the horses OR the real technical know how to handle it. If they match up with say Japan, they can sit back and counter. The can win that game with the breaks. I reckon I could pick a team from the rest that would give BJ Snows group a really hard time. Athletes are really hard to play against unless you are really really good technically and tactically. When you play weaker teams at home more often that not, you tend to get a false sense of security . When the media hype is massive , you think you are better than you are. When you are doing 20 second media spots and your every move is being tweeted, its hard to stay grounded. These kids are good, but they need help, not hype.

Anonymous said...

I agree they are good but not great. Japan beat Ghana 5-0 because they are at a different level. I do see them bunkering against japan and hoping for a counter. Does that make them Cowards?

Anonymous said...

I was surprised at the lack of tactical knowledge. Looked like a lack of communication in the back, including from the keeper. Haven't they ever played teams that high press? Didn't looked prepared for it.

Also, kind of surprised that they were celebrating instead of kicking in a ball laying in front of the goal. Soccer basics play until you hear a whistle. And this is the national team. Shame.

Hope they can recover for a big game against Japan. Let's go girls! You can do this!

Anonymous said...

11:15 - i would not call Brazil weak, but US didn't win either game against them.

Anonymous said...

113 I would. Lets see how they do in this event. But lets say you are right of the 20 or so games played as prep for this, how many are against challenging opposition? Almost EVERY GAME should be. Play boys, play older girls, mix and match the teams in Camp. I cannot help but think that this group came in on a long unbeaten streak, but vs who? I also believe that some of these kids are not battle tested.

Japan are a different proposition. i dont think US will bunker but they will be playing a team that has qualified and wants possession of the ball. The us can score off a mistake in possession and will be more athletic. They wont be more skilled, but its a better match up. They will have to win, or this will be a really sad indictment on BJ Snow and his methods/ ability in selecting and producing a team. He has had a few chances now and i really dont think he has gotten the best out of this group yet.

Anonymous said...

He went with athletic individuality. And they weren't athletic enough or individually good enough to win. He should be fired for a losing approach to this team in player selection and tactics.

Anonymous said...

2:01 - I agree with you. They should play better competition when gearing up. I get using weaker competition to work on moving players, getting some confidence, etc. But, I'm not a fan of touting it when you beat a lesser skilled team. You did exactly what you should have done. I prefer the challenge of tough competition and so do real competitors. THAT is what makes you better.

Frankly, I am surprised they don't play some college teams?

Maybe they will bring more kids in for future trys. Why not?

I'm not loosing hope on these ladies. Go USA!!!

Anonymous said...

You play the game to win however you can at the levels we are talking about. The problem with the WNT game is that now the rest of the world is playing and investing so winning will be more difficult. It is easier for them (the rest of the world) to field a team that can defend and counter, the better nations can create and attack. Ghana did what they had to do defend and pray for a play that they can finish vs a better opponent. As long as we continue to pick players that don't understand the game but can run through a wall and juggle one million times we will drop many more games like this since we will never be able to breakdown a defense playing 1v1. The club coaches think they can make a player out of anyone until that stops and they actually start working with the kids that get it nothing will change. I hope that the GDA gives the right kids an opportunity to develop.

Anonymous said...

I hope so too.

Don't you think some of the progress throughout the world is the US bringing in a lot of international kids for the US college soccer /academic education? Years ago, the amount of international students/players at top programs were not as great as it is currently.

Anonymous said...

http://equalizersoccer.com/2016/10/04/uswnt-u-17-womens-world-cup-loss-ghana-danger-not-advancing/

Anonymous said...

"US record at the FIFA U-17 Women's World Cup:
2008: Runners-up
2010: Did not qualify
2012: Group-stage exit."

Equalizer Soccer

With this record, is it Snow or overall US philosophy at U17? Just throwing it out there for discussion...

Anonymous said...

10:17 I agree - I think the UEFA u19 event has a lot of scouting and will only get more. The younger kids will have even less of a chance to get some money to decrease the tuition a bit in the coming years.

But sticking to our u17 WNT - 2014 - Did not qualify.
4 World Cups
2 DNQ
1 group Stage exit
1 runner up 8 years ago.

This is just showing our lack of dominance at the youth level. I don't think it's Snow or the Philosophy - I think it's our Elite Youth Clubs getting a bye. They should be thrown under the bus as they are the ones developing or should I say not developing our youth but they still get their pay day for doing nothing.

Anonymous said...

922..Ghana dominated the game. At one stage they had outshot ythe US 17-3. This was no counter smash and grab

1114..Snow is a huge part of this. He is the philosophy at U17. No one else.

318.. This is the end product of competition based platforms (ECNL, NPL etc) that focus on team development to win games as opposed to player development to create better, more versatile players. They do what creates $$ and that is winning games by any means. No one is really incentivized to develop players.

Anonymous said...

Girls in Ghana mature faster, do they not?

Good game.

Anonymous said...

For the poster above, 11/14 US U20 WNT meets France for it's first pool play game in their upcoming World Cup competition.

Anonymous said...

Haha 10:21
Love it

Anonymous said...

@10:21 & 5:57

Same person we are sure of this. You are a complete IDIOT!

We communicate soccer, and you Troll. Very sad.

Anonymous said...

I think they could possibly pull out a win against Japan. However, Japan will punish loose first touches and errant passes. The difference between the Japanese team that beat Ghana and the one who lost to the USA (in NTC 2/16) is that Japan now finishes a higher percentage of its chances. I think I read that Japan switched up its lineups in the first 2 games getting players rest. I would think it would be high on eliminating the USA from the knockouts so it won't see them again. Guessing they will put the A team out.

USA should switch out Spaanstra and put in Smith. Leave Tagliaferri in all game at ACM. Pinto at 8 and tell her to win and take care of the ball. Howell at 6 to play simple (as she does) and keep possession. The forwards need more movement off the ball and heads up combinations in the attacking third to penetrate an organized defense. Individual heroics might work against a lesser physical team, but be assured japan has an answer in store.

Unfortunately, I am sure we will regress into dribble down the flank and cross into the box (to their credit they are trying to generally pick out a runner) simple game. Need outside backs that can and will also defend. We got killed by Mustafah because we didn't put out an answer to stop her. Should have been man marking her with a second defender to close immediately if she managed to come up with the ball. Switching sides for our young left footed "back" Weisner when Pickett failed to manage her was not intelligent. Weisner is an attacking or midfield player only recently turned into an attack minded outside back at the NT level. Someone needs to teach her how to defend before she is our answer to great wide forwards.

Cannot let Japan have too much of the ball or go home.

Anonymous said...

It is quite evident Mr Snow has some quality on the bench not getting proper time

Expect a lineup switch in at least 2 spots, though I would consider as many as 4.

Anonymous said...

941 ..US strategy is flawed. pick a few outside backs who can actually defend. not wingers. Pick some kids who may be of use when facing athletes - shocking concept I know. The sheer arrogance of assuming you will ALWAYS face either A bunkering team OR B japan is alarming. This roster is full of similar player with very little variety/Plan B.

No matter what the result vs Japan, Snow should be fired for saying - we had difficulty vs their direct style. Japan give you fits and they are a patient build up team, so what style are you prepared for?Please tell us? 2 yrs, numerous camps and million of dollars spent to hear a coach say he was unprepared for direct soccer?

The problem with your analysis is you ASSUME that the team you saw earlier @ NTC cared about winning those games. Maybe they actually were preparing for this event. Something the US clearly has done badly. The US has several Mustafahs on teams around the country. And we were not prepared to face that? Why? btw you are basically calling a fast physical wide player great.

1139 .. please tell us who these better options are? As I see it he has his best XI out there and they got badly outplayed by a team that has spent a fraction of what he has.

Anonymous said...

I am confused. I am 941 are you arguing with me? I don't see the disagreement? I think I said they need outside backs that can defend and that Weisner is a converted player (as are pretty much all of their outside backs)
I think I said Snow should be fired
Mustafah was more than just an average fast physical wide player perhaps we do disagree there.
I do assume that kids on the field are trying to impress the coaches and win games. I do also assume that both teams were preparing for the WC and that there might be some evaluation and experimentation going on.

You are really oddly acting like I have said some outrageous things when in fact we are largely in agreement.

Anonymous said...

Anyone think there will be any line up changes for tomorrow's game? I predict smith starts instead of spaanstra at wide forward and Spaanstra moved to outside back. Weisner off

Anonymous said...

Wow. A bunch of upsets yesterday in college.

Anonymous said...

Some teams and college coaches aren't making WAGS due to the hurricane, evacuations, etc. Best wishes to all our soccer peers affected by this weather event. Safety first.

Anonymous said...

WAGS Girls U16

SHOWCASE I
2 PREMIER SC STRIKERS
1 BRYC ELITE ACADEMY 01/02

Anonymous said...

So BJ remains committed to youth. Unless injured, I thought Taglaiferri was a 2 cycle player to gain experience for big games like this? Replaced today by Caniff .

Hope it works, but an amazing decision in my opinion

Anonymous said...

11:58 I am a little down on this game we are up 1-0 but i'm not happy about it. We scored on a goalie assist play talk about direct! Would Hope Solo call our girl's cowards? I am worried for the future of our game. We have the number 1 WNT in the world and I am watching Japan control the ball and the game and our girl's more worried about defending. Remember some of these girls will eventually grow into the 1st team. With a player pool like we have and the ECNL hype machine great coaching that we have we are playing a counter game what the F?

Anonymous said...

1:02 back again - what the hell was that we were dominated in the 2nd half. From HS to Club to College to our NT it's the same style of play we just have better athletes as you go up the pyramid at the end of the day no creativity. This has nothing to do with Snow.

Our club coaches are not teaching the kids the game they are teaching them how to play with cones.

Anonymous said...

Epic fail on many levels. US 17's out again. No communication in the back. At times parked the bus in the first half, but when having to get back in, girls were not organized. While offense scores, defense wins games. You have to start in the back to open up the top.

Anonymous said...

3:31 Agreed - I'm 1:02 and 2:03 - you need the back 4 then a quality #6 to play out of the back and under control. Once you have that the attack will flow much smoother.

The #6 to me is the most important field player even more than the #10.

Anonymous said...

I am also looking at GK re this. While she made some good saves, had the communication and organization been much better most of those would have never even been shots or would have been directed as an easier potential save. The better tactical keepers today are able to move the pieces as the play develops. None of that took place.

Anonymous said...

Agreed 4:12 this is what makes Hope Solo so effective. That is her bread and butter as well as good reflexes.

Will be interesting how this all plays out. I had them at least getting out of pool play. U20's start soon. GO USA!

Anonymous said...

3:41 & 4:12 agree. Until the US starts to look for players like that, it will be the same result over and over. While watching Groundhog Day is funny the first couple of times, it gets old. And, then, you stop watching completely.

Anonymous said...

DIdn't Japan not play all of its starters too resting them getting ready for post pool play?

Anonymous said...

Shame about US. The knock out stage looks very interesting. Japan vs. England. That should be very good. Several good matchups.

Anonymous said...

I am STUNNED you want to give BJ a pass. He is responsible for a large part of this. 2 YEARS to build a team and they go in to a big game with no plan. The get beaten by a direct team, beaten by a tactical team. What else is left? Do you folks really think that we had the best players there? You take kids ...why? Most of them never looked like taking the sweats off. Criticize the keeper ? She was the best player the US had. Some of the US players are hyped well beyond ability and it really showed. JPN wanted the ball, the US did not. JON created chances thru movement, passing and skill, the US did not. JPN did not panic, the US did. JPN had kids who understood time , space and movement , the US did not.
As i have said many time on this board. The ECNl et al are simply tournament platforms. The Clubs can buy in to that OR they can try and create real player. almost NONE of them choose to develop. Thye want to win games and boy does it show. The 20 or so kids that went to this re good kids and have potential to be good players, but we don't need the massive hype, the build up, the pages of bios about how great they are. Lets judge that after the vent is over.They have been let down in so many ways by adults who have no idea what they are doing.

The sad part is I cannot see where the change is going to come from

USWNT - Fail at the Olympics
USU17 - Fail at te WC
US U20 - Not looking good

The trend is not good.

Anonymous said...

Who was giving Snow a pass? He picked the talent (or didn't) and played (or didn't play) them correctly. And, he did (or didn't) develop them correctly. I don't think anyone will give the coach a pass. But, the picked/trained girls have to execute. And they didn't either. Not a good US showing for sure.

Anonymous said...

They have to start bringing in kids that are technically and tactically savvy. You need both. One isn't good enough any more. And, maybe forego the thinking that "this one should be good because her parents are this." At this age, pick a kid because a kid has something; not because she could have something; that's U12 way of thinking.

Anonymous said...

If you don't believe that Jaelin Howell is there because her dad has a super bowl ring you are delusional. She looked big and slow against the Japanese and hardly touched the ball. Half the kids are there because of their club coach is an age group "assistant" or their regional NTC program is run by a full time ussoccer "technical director or coach (Colorado connection). Even though they don't have nearly the top 20 age appropriate kids in Jordan, they still have such a huge pool in the USA from which to choose that a mix of top 100 players in the USA should be able to make it out of the group. Especially after all the opportunity in training and events that this "team" enjoyed. That's a systemic epic fail. Heads should roll, but will they?

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.

«Oldest ‹Older   1201 – 1400 of 1553   Newer› Newest»