# National playoff draws



## turftoe9

Does anyone have the information on when the draws are to be done? Also will there be a link to where we can watch the draws?


----------



## soccergal99

June 14th


----------



## 4DaLuvoftheGM

http://www.ussoccerda.com/20180614-news-group-pairings-announced-2018-girls-da-playoffs

What happen to Weston FC U15? Why they drop out of the playoffs?


----------



## SocalPapa

My predictions:

U15:
A: Blues (in a slight upset)
B: Quakes (but Albion with a chance at the big upset)
C: Top Hat and Surf will tie in points and it will come down to tie breakers
D: Solar (sorry Legends, this draw is not fair for you)
E: FC Dallas (and it won't be close)
F: PDA wins (as the other 3 teams beat each other up)
G: Dallas Texans (easily)
H: Beach all the way

U16/17:
A: TopHat (in a surprisingly easy pool for them)
B: Cincinnati (eeks out the big upset)
C: PDA or Real Colorado - pick 'em
D: Penn Fusion
E: FC Dallas (and this won't be close either)
F: Crossfire (but Solar has a chance at the upset; sadly a TOUGH draw again for poor Legends)
G: Nationals (but Real So Cal might have a good showing)
H:  LAFC Slammers (with only Midwest United putting up any sort of a fight)


----------



## Mystery Train

SocalPapa said:


> My predictions:
> 
> U15:
> A: Blues (in a slight upset)
> B: Quakes (but Albion with a chance at the big upset)
> C: Top Hat and Surf will tie in points and it will come down to tie breakers
> D: Solar (sorry Legends, this draw is not fair for you)
> E: FC Dallas (and it won't be close)
> F: PDA wins (as the other 3 teams beat each other up)
> G: Dallas Texans (easily)
> H: Beach all the way
> 
> U16/17:
> A: TopHat (in a surprisingly easy pool for them)
> B: Cincinnati (eeks out the big upset)
> C: PDA or Real Colorado - pick 'em
> D: Penn Fusion
> E: FC Dallas (and this won't be close either)
> F: Crossfire (but Solar has a chance at the upset; sadly a TOUGH draw again for poor Legends)
> G: Nationals (but Real So Cal might have a good showing)
> H:  LAFC Slammers (with only Midwest United putting up any sort of a fight)


Interesting...I checked the list of players on the DA link that are being advertised as being there, and I noticed #5 from Blues' U17 ECNL team on the list.  Do you have any intel, @SocalPapa?  Can ECNL players "guest" at a DA event?  Or does this mean she's moving to the DA team?  Or is the whole team moving over?


----------



## MakeAPlay

Mystery Train said:


> Interesting...I checked the list of players on the DA link that are being advertised as being there, and I noticed #5 from Blues' U17 ECNL team on the list.  Do you have any intel, @SocalPapa?  Can ECNL players "guest" at a DA event?  Or does this mean she's moving to the DA team?  Or is the whole team moving over?


This is where you realize that this isn’t about development.  The team that has the best collection of players usually wins.  Blues likes to win.


----------



## LadiesMan217

MakeAPlay said:


> This is where you realize that this isn’t about development.  The team that has the best collection of players usually wins.  Blues likes to win.


I agree. This is Blues. She is a Development Player LMFAO.


----------



## SocalPapa

Mystery Train said:


> Interesting...I checked the list of players on the DA link that are being advertised as being there, and I noticed #5 from Blues' U17 ECNL team on the list.  Do you have any intel, @SocalPapa?  Can ECNL players "guest" at a DA event?  Or does this mean she's moving to the DA team?  Or is the whole team moving over?


Haven't heard anything about that.  And note my predictions are just for fun and are based in large part on the DA RPI analysis I posted on another thread.  They could be wildly off if rosters change for the playoffs.


----------



## LadiesMan217

SocalPapa said:


> Haven't heard anything about that.  And note my predictions are just for fun and are based in large part on the DA RPI analysis I posted on another thread.  They could be wildly off if rosters change for the playoffs.


Rosters won't change for playoff teams.


----------



## Arnie3

Developmental Players or DP's are not eligible to play in the Playoffs.  They must have been converted to Full-time players.   Exception would be for goalkeepers with the approval of US Soccer.


----------



## LadiesMan217

Arnie3 said:


> Developmental Players or DP's are not eligible to play in the Playoffs.  They must have been converted to Full-time players.   Exception would be for goalkeepers with the approval of US Soccer.


Correct. The player in question is playing for a non-playoff team during the 'playoffs'.


----------



## MakeAPlay

Why would anyone care if an age eligible player played in the DA playoffs?  Isn’t this supposed to be the highest level of youth soccer?  Or is it all just marketing and the reality is that the true impact players are playing where their parents put them?  I say let the kid play.  If every team wants to build a super team for the playoffs so be it.  There really are only enough elite players per age group in SoCal to fill two teams.


----------



## Soccer43

Well, that would require coaches and administrators to be more interested in actual development and the players best interests rather than their own egos and  having power.   I see so many examples of coaches that forget these are kids and their job is to support them not to control and manipulate them and their parents.


----------



## Lambchop

MakeAPlay said:


> Why would anyone care if an age eligible player played in the DA playoffs?  Isn’t this supposed to be the highest level of youth soccer?  Or is it all just marketing and the reality is that the true impact players are playing where their parents put them?  I say let the kid play.  If every team wants to build a super team for the playoffs so be it.  There really are only enough elite players per age group in SoCal to fill two teams.


So the Blues team brings in an ECNL player just for the showcase, who may or may not be moving to a DA team,  then she will be taking playing time away from another player who as been with the team from the start. Where is the development for that player or others who have worked hard all year. Oh right, it is about winning.


----------



## MWN

Lambchop said:


> So the Blues team brings in an ECNL player just for the showcase, who may or may not be moving to a DA team,  then she will be taking playing time away from another player who as been with the team from the start. Where is the development for that player or others who have worked hard all year. Oh right, it is about winning.


The U.S. Soccer Development Academy (League) has the singular goal of getting the top US talent on the same fields so that the US National Youth teams can more easily identify talent that will be invited to the National Youth team camps.  Having an ECNL player supplant a DA player is precisely the goal.  If a DA player cannot beat out that ECNL player then so-be-it (from the USSDA's perspective).

All other benefits that players receive are purely ancillary, such as, enhanced college scholarship opportunity, assisting reserve players in development and getting playing time, etc.

This has never been about the players, its about the Federation, which is why the Federation rules allows club a number of non-DA player slots for league and playoff/showcase games.


----------



## Josep

Lambchop said:


> So the Blues team brings in an ECNL player just for the showcase, who may or may not be moving to a DA team,  then she will be taking playing time away from another player who as been with the team from the start. Where is the development for that player or others who have worked hard all year. Oh right, it is about winning.



Anyone in DA knows that the contract doesn’t guarantee playing time. Your starting spot or time can be taken any second. And since we are on the verge of next season already, this discussion may have already happened with whatever player affected. 

The development was 38 games and practice four times a week for a 11 months.   The whining here is incredible. People’s outrage over things that don’t even impact them is quite comical.  

DA has always been survival of the fittest.  And if you want to know why Blues didn’t or isn’t getting Pilot, it’s because they have not had their best players in DA.  On some teams yes, but not all.  

Top league. Top competition.  Top players on the field in the top event.  

And for every player who has minutes taken from them, has taken minutes from another.  It’s the cycle of soccer life.  

I haven’t heard any bitching all season long in DA by players or their parents about the equity of playing time.  We all know what we signed up for.


----------



## Fact

Lambchop said:


> So the Blues team brings in an ECNL player just for the showcase, who may or may not be moving to a DA team,  then she will be taking playing time away from another player who as been with the team from the start. Where is the development for that player or others who have worked hard all year. Oh right, it is about winning.


How is this different than any other team borrowing a player for a tournament?  At least this player is within their club. Get over it Lampchop, life is not fair so stop picking on the Blues.


----------



## Josep

Does Lambchop even have a kid in DA, or is this just an opportunity to attack Blues?


----------



## Copa Del Mar

SocalPapa said:


> My predictions:
> 
> U15:
> A: Blues (in a slight upset)
> B: Quakes (but Albion with a chance at the big upset)
> C: Top Hat and Surf will tie in points and it will come down to tie breakers
> D: Solar (sorry Legends, this draw is not fair for you)
> E: FC Dallas (and it won't be close)
> F: PDA wins (as the other 3 teams beat each other up)
> G: Dallas Texans (easily)
> H: Beach all the way
> 
> U16/17:
> A: TopHat (in a surprisingly easy pool for them)
> B: Cincinnati (eeks out the big upset)
> C: PDA or Real Colorado - pick 'em
> D: Penn Fusion
> E: FC Dallas (and this won't be close either)
> F: Crossfire (but Solar has a chance at the upset; sadly a TOUGH draw again for poor Legends)
> G: Nationals (but Real So Cal might have a good showing)
> H:  LAFC Slammers (with only Midwest United putting up any sort of a fight)



Wrong on 16/17 B winner


----------



## SocalPapa

SocalPapa said:


> My predictions:
> 
> U15:
> A: Blues (in a slight upset)
> B: Quakes (but Albion with a chance at the big upset)
> C: Top Hat and Surf will tie in points and it will come down to tie breakers
> D: Solar (sorry Legends, this draw is not fair for you)
> E: FC Dallas (and it won't be close)
> F: PDA wins (as the other 3 teams beat each other up)
> G: Dallas Texans (easily)
> H: Beach all the way


Off to a decent start.  Each of my U15 predicted pool winners won their first matches (including both Top Hat and Surf in group C).


----------



## Lambchop

Fact said:


> How is this different than any other team borrowing a player for a tournament?  At least this player is within their club. Get over it Lampchop, life is not fair so stop picking on the Blues.


Yes I do have a player in DA.  Ok, so according to the poster,  this is a showcase, it is not a league game, it is not a tournament,  it is not playoffs, it is a showcase to allow the players to be seen by college coaches.  If as everyone agrees, that US soccer scouts and college coaches, scout all year, then the ECNL player has already had three or four showcases to be seen.  So why take away a players chance,  on the team they have been playing on all year, to be seen by college coaches. By the way, I could care less which club it is. Unless they are in the "playoffs"  and they want this player to help them win. Which wouldn't be a surprise to anyone.


----------



## glen_dandy

SocalPapa said:


> Off to a decent start.  Each of my U15 predicted pool winners won their first matches (including both Top Hat and Surf in group C).


For U16/17, all teams from Pot 1 defeated the Pot 4 team in their bracket.  There were two ties in the Pot 2 vs Pot 3 games, and two instances of Pot 3 teams defeating a Pot 2 team.  Among these, Legends lost as a Pot 2 team, and RSC won as a Pot 3 team.  So all eight 1 vs 4 games (and half the 2 vs 3 games) went all chalk.  We'll see if the Pot 1 teams can keep this up on Tuesday.


----------



## Fact

Lambchop said:


> Yes I do have a player in DA.  Ok, so according to the poster,  this is a showcase, it is not a league game, it is not a tournament,  it is not playoffs, it is a showcase to allow the players to be seen by college coaches.  If as everyone agrees, that US soccer scouts and college coaches, scout all year, then the ECNL player has already had three or four showcases to be seen.  So why take away a players chance,  on the team they have been playing on all year, to be seen by college coaches. By the way, I could care less which club it is. Unless they are in the "playoffs"  and they want this player to help them win. Which wouldn't be a surprise to anyone.


I hate to break it to you Lambchop but life is not fair. If you do not like this policy go find another club.


----------



## Mystery Train

Lambchop said:


> Yes I do have a player in DA.  Ok, so according to the poster,  this is a showcase, it is not a league game, it is not a tournament,  it is not playoffs, it is a showcase to allow the players to be seen by college coaches.  If as everyone agrees, that US soccer scouts and college coaches, scout all year, then the ECNL player has already had three or four showcases to be seen.  So why take away a players chance,  on the team they have been playing on all year, to be seen by college coaches. By the way, I could care less which club it is. Unless they are in the "playoffs"  and they want this player to help them win. Which wouldn't be a surprise to anyone.


So I went and took a look at the game reports to check this out and see if this was more widespread than just a couple of players (there were actually 2 Blues ECNL players mentioned by name in this link, but I only saw the one when I posted the question).  Turns out that neither of the two Blues players played nor were rostered with Blues for at least the first game.  

I decided to hunt around just out of curiosity and see which clubs played their regular line-ups for the showcase and which brought in a bunch of non-rostered players.  I only checked out about 4-5 SoCal clubs, and it looked like most of them played their usual regular season DA line-ups with usually just one or two DP players (often youngers or players from their DPL teams).  

However, I noticed that LA Premier had 5 girls from their 2000 DA team playing DOWN in the showcase for the 01/02 team.  I didn't bother to look up the rules.  At first I thought it must be a typo or maybe they are trying out that "bio-banding" thing.  But after reading more game reports, I'm assuming this must be ok by the showcase rules, because I also found a 2000 player who played for Surf and one from another club from the east.  Ok.  But _*5*_??  Half their team were playing down nearly two age groups?  What about that 02 DPL team, LA Premier??  If you were short players for the tourney, didn't a few more of those '02 or '01 DPL players earn the right to play?  Isn't that how this was supposed to work?  If I had a kid who suffered through the DPL sales pitch and stuck through the year and then didn't get a chance to play in the showcase because you brought half your older team down . . . well, I'd be pissed.  Then again, maybe USSDA told LAPFC to do this so they didn't get totally embarrassed.  After all, with half their 2000 DA roster playing 01/02's, they've been able to keep their goal differential to a respectable -4.   

Maybe I'm missing something.  It seems like maybe the logic was since there is no "showcase" event for the oldest age group, the powers that be were ok letting some of those players play in front of college coaches by playing down, but that sure seems weird.


----------



## Dummy

Mystery Train said:


> So I went and took a look at the game reports to check this out and see if this was more widespread than just a couple of players (there were actually 2 Blues ECNL players mentioned by name in this link, but I only saw the one when I posted the question).  Turns out that neither of the two Blues players played nor were rostered with Blues for at least the first game.
> 
> I decided to hunt around just out of curiosity and see which clubs played their regular line-ups for the showcase and which brought in a bunch of non-rostered players.  I only checked out about 4-5 SoCal clubs, and it looked like most of them played their usual regular season DA line-ups with usually just one or two DP players (often youngers or players from their DPL teams).
> 
> However, I noticed that LA Premier had 5 girls from their 2000 DA team playing DOWN in the showcase for the 01/02 team.  I didn't bother to look up the rules.  At first I thought it must be a typo or maybe they are trying out that "bio-banding" thing.  But after reading more game reports, I'm assuming this must be ok by the showcase rules, because I also found a 2000 player who played for Surf and one from another club from the east.  Ok.  But _*5*_??  Half their team were playing down nearly two age groups?  What about that 02 DPL team, LA Premier??  If you were short players for the tourney, didn't a few more of those '02 or '01 DPL players earn the right to play?  Isn't that how this was supposed to work?  If I had a kid who suffered through the DPL sales pitch and stuck through the year and then didn't get a chance to play in the showcase because you brought half your older team down . . . well, I'd be pissed.  Then again, maybe USSDA told LAPFC to do this so they didn't get totally embarrassed.  After all, with half their 2000 DA roster playing 01/02's, they've been able to keep their goal differential to a respectable -4.
> 
> Maybe I'm missing something.  It seems like maybe the logic was since there is no "showcase" event for the oldest age group, the powers that be were ok letting some of those players play in front of college coaches by playing down, but that sure seems weird.


Interesting.  I checked the results from their showcase, and LA Premier ‘01 and ‘02 DPL teams appear to have lost players and to have struggled against ordinary competition.

http://home.gotsoccer.com/rankings/team.aspx?TeamID=1214309

http://events.gotsport.com/events/schedule.aspx?eventid=65206&FieldID=0&applicationID=4691089&action=Go

Maybe the ‘01/‘02 DA team would have had to forfeit without the ‘00s?  To be fair, the ‘00s will be merging with the ‘01s very soon.


----------



## LadiesMan217

Mystery Train said:


> So I went and took a look at the game reports to check this out and see if this was more widespread than just a couple of players (there were actually 2 Blues ECNL players mentioned by name in this link, but I only saw the one when I posted the question).  Turns out that neither of the two Blues players played nor were rostered with Blues for at least the first game.
> 
> I decided to hunt around just out of curiosity and see which clubs played their regular line-ups for the showcase and which brought in a bunch of non-rostered players.  I only checked out about 4-5 SoCal clubs, and it looked like most of them played their usual regular season DA line-ups with usually just one or two DP players (often youngers or players from their DPL teams).
> 
> However, I noticed that LA Premier had 5 girls from their 2000 DA team playing DOWN in the showcase for the 01/02 team.  I didn't bother to look up the rules.  At first I thought it must be a typo or maybe they are trying out that "bio-banding" thing.  But after reading more game reports, I'm assuming this must be ok by the showcase rules, because I also found a 2000 player who played for Surf and one from another club from the east.  Ok.  But _*5*_??  Half their team were playing down nearly two age groups?  What about that 02 DPL team, LA Premier??  If you were short players for the tourney, didn't a few more of those '02 or '01 DPL players earn the right to play?  Isn't that how this was supposed to work?  If I had a kid who suffered through the DPL sales pitch and stuck through the year and then didn't get a chance to play in the showcase because you brought half your older team down . . . well, I'd be pissed.  Then again, maybe USSDA told LAPFC to do this so they didn't get totally embarrassed.  After all, with half their 2000 DA roster playing 01/02's, they've been able to keep their goal differential to a respectable -4.
> 
> Maybe I'm missing something.  It seems like maybe the logic was since there is no "showcase" event for the oldest age group, the powers that be were ok letting some of those players play in front of college coaches by playing down, but that sure seems weird.


This showcase is U16/U17 not 2001/2002.


----------



## Mystery Train

LadiesMan217 said:


> This showcase is U16/U17 not 2001/2002.


Isn't it the same thing?  If you were born in 2000, you'd be 18 now, right?


----------



## LadiesMan217

Mystery Train said:


> Isn't it the same thing?  If you were born in 2000, you'd be 18 now, right?


If born before 6/23/2000 yes. If they were born before that date the team will be disqualified.


----------



## Mystery Train

LadiesMan217 said:


> If born before 6/23/2000 yes. If they were born before that date the team will be disqualified.


Got it.  Makes sense.


----------



## Soccer43

disqualified from what?  a showcase? that's kind of funny  - maybe LAPFC thinks they can just add whatever players are needed to fill a roster.  Doesn't sound right to have 2000's playing against '01's and '02's.    My understanding is U17 means you were under 17 years old at the beginning of that calender year - thus born in 2001 or 2002.


----------



## LadiesMan217

Soccer43 said:


> disqualified from what?  a showcase? that's kind of funny  - maybe LAPFC thinks they can just add whatever players are needed to fill a roster.  Doesn't sound right to have 2000's playing against '01's and '02's.    My understanding is U17 means you were under 17 years old at the beginning of that calender year - thus born in 2001 or 2002.


LAPFC was not the only club...


----------



## MakeAPlay

Soccer43 said:


> disqualified from what?  a showcase? that's kind of funny  - maybe LAPFC thinks they can just add whatever players are needed to fill a roster.  Doesn't sound right to have 2000's playing against '01's and '02's.    My understanding is U17 means you were under 17 years old at the beginning of that calender year - thus born in 2001 or 2002.


It used to be a mixed age group all the time and in college there are 5 or 6 birth years playing together.  My rule of thumb was basically who cares what the other guys are doing just focus on your player and it will all work itself out.


----------



## casper

US soccer allowed 00s that will be Seniors in HS next year to play in the showcase event for the 01/02 age group. Multiple teams across the board did this as the 00/01 teams will be merging after this event and it was a way to get some 00s a look from colleges otherwise they wouldn't have been on display. As far as wins and losses go nobody really cares in a showcase, the playoffs that's a different scenario and those teams are intact with just 01s and 02s.  So far like the other college DA showcases this one is loaded with college coaches. If you were a DA 01/02 parent you probably already knew this added rule allowing 00s in the showcase part of the event.  There is a lot of false speculation on these boards about the DA, clubs, and teams.   People complain all the time about diluting the talent and yet the combine age groups helps control that and yet people complain about the combine age groups.  Having a very young 02 playing and training with 01s and 00s isn't a negative as long as she is smart it only makes her better.  If ECNL and DA are going to coexist allow it to happen and in a few years one may rise above the other or not but complaining about every little thing or making a big deal because this club is all in or this club isn't does nothing.  If you are a DA parent and you didn't like DA that's fine but if you are an ECNL parent and you don't like DA that's ridiculous just like if you are a DA parent and don't like ECNL without ever experiencing it you shouldn't have an opinion based on hearsay.  I have experienced both and both are good overall, my daughter prefers DA but had she chose ECNL that would have been fine too. For those of you who have younger dd's and have a choice to play either DA or ECNL go to both and get a feel for the coach and the team for yourself and dd.


----------



## Simisoccerfan

A lot of coaches out today at DA.  Every single field I saw was packed with coaches.


----------



## SocalPapa

glen_dandy said:


> For U16/17, all teams from Pot 1 defeated the Pot 4 team in their bracket.  There were two ties in the Pot 2 vs Pot 3 games, and two instances of Pot 3 teams defeating a Pot 2 team.  Among these, Legends lost as a Pot 2 team, and RSC won as a Pot 3 team.  So all eight 1 vs 4 games (and half the 2 vs 3 games) went all chalk.  We'll see if the Pot 1 teams can keep this up on Tuesday.


My U16/17 Predictions are on track too...

 A: TopHat (in a surprisingly easy pool for them)...a 2-0 win for TopHat (other 2 teams tied so TopHat with the early lead)
B: Cincinnati (eeks out the big upset)...Cincinnati as the 4th wild card tied #10 seed Breakers; the RPI showed Cincinnati had some strength and they did just enough to have a chance
C: PDA or Real Colorado - pick 'em...PDA and Real Colorado both won, each with a goal differential of 2, pick 'em indeed
D: Penn Fusion...Penn won uneventfully
E: FC Dallas (and this won't be close either)...FC Dallas won 4-2 (tied for most goals in the first round of games)
F: Crossfire (but Solar has a chance at the upset; sadly a TOUGH draw again for poor Legends)...Crossfire and Solar both won.  Solar's win was an "upset" as they were the 3rd wildcard and Legends was the 9th overall seed).  This result confirms what my RPI showed - Legends had a bad draw despite its higher playoff seeding.  
G: Nationals (but Real So Cal might have a good showing)...Nationals and Real So Cal both won.  Real So Cal won as the Pot 3 team (beat the #12 seed as a #18 seed).  The RPI predicted this "upset" as well.
H: LAFC Slammers (with only Midwest United putting up any sort of a fight)...LAFC won 2-0 and Midwest won 2-1


----------



## SocalPapa

Update on my U15 predictions after the 2nd round of games:

A: Blues (in a slight upset)...Eclipse (6 seed) and Blues (11 seed) have both taken care of business.  We'll see if my predicted Blues upset comes to fruition in the 3rd game.  Eclipse looking strong though.
B: Quakes (but Albion with a chance at the big upset)...I was slightly overly-enthusiastic about Albion.  They weren't strong enough to overcome Quakes in their first game, but they did score a big 2-0 victory over Penn Fusion.  Pretty good given that Albion is the #30 overall seed and Penn is the #10 seed (and Penn had beaten the #24 seed 6-1 in their first playoff game).  The RPI saw this strength.
C: Top Hat and Surf will tie in points and it will come down to tie breakers...kind of uncanny how close this prediction is playing out so far.  Top Hat and Surf have each won each of their first two games by the same exact goal differential.  Wednesday should be very exciting.
D: Solar (sorry Legends, this draw is not fair for you)...Solar and Legends each with two wins so far so Legends still has a chance to win the pool here.  It would be a very good win if they do. 
E: FC Dallas (and it won't be close)...This indeed will not be close.  The POT2 team Dallas plays in the 3rd game lost its first two games.  FC Dallas has already beaten the tougher (yet lower seeded) teams.
F: PDA wins (as the other 3 teams beat each other up)...My first failed prediction it seems.  SC del Sol, as the Pot 3 team upset PDA.  Great win for them.  Still a chance (albeit a small one) that PDA wins on tie breakers after the 3rd game.  (At the same time I noted on another thread: "PDA's U15 team may be a #1 seed in the playoffs, but with a #11 in RPI they are not quite the favorite they appear to be."  So the RPI revealed PDA's vulnerability.) 
G: Dallas Texans (easily)...not as easy as I predicted as the Texans tied the Slammers in their second game.  The Texans (the Pot 2 team) still lead the pool on points and win the pool if they win their third game.
H: Beach all the way...Beach makes me look good by earning two wins.  The Pot 2 team Beach plays tomorrow already has a loss.  So still on pace to be Beach all the way.

All in all I'm pretty happy with the predictive nature of the RPI so far.


----------



## Fact

Simisoccerfan said:


> A lot of coaches out today at DA.  Every single field I saw was packed with coaches.


Still trying too hard.


----------



## Fact

casper said:


> US soccer allowed 00s that will be Seniors in HS next year to play in the showcase event for the 01/02 age group. Multiple teams across the board did this as the 00/01 teams will be merging after this event and it was a way to get some 00s a look from colleges otherwise they wouldn't have been on display. As far as wins and losses go nobody really cares in a showcase, the playoffs that's a different scenario and those teams are intact with just 01s and 02s.  So far like the other college DA showcases this one is loaded with college coaches. If you were a DA 01/02 parent you probably already knew this added rule allowing 00s in the showcase part of the event.  There is a lot of false speculation on these boards about the DA, clubs, and teams.   People complain all the time about diluting the talent and yet the combine age groups helps control that and yet people complain about the combine age groups.  Having a very young 02 playing and training with 01s and 00s isn't a negative as long as she is smart it only makes her better.  If ECNL and DA are going to coexist allow it to happen and in a few years one may rise above the other or not but complaining about every little thing or making a big deal because this club is all in or this club isn't does nothing.  If you are a DA parent and you didn't like DA that's fine but if you are an ECNL parent and you don't like DA that's ridiculous just like if you are a DA parent and don't like ECNL without ever experiencing it you shouldn't have an opinion based on hearsay.  I have experienced both and both are good overall, my daughter prefers DA but had she chose ECNL that would have been fine too. For those of you who have younger dd's and have a choice to play either DA or ECNL go to both and get a feel for the coach and the team for yourself and dd.


It's nice to have you chime in. Last I recall your dd was out with a serious injury??? Sounds like she recovered well! 

Whether I agree with you or not, you always have something relevant to say that makes me think twice. Come around more often.  There are some Pansies on this site that can learn a lot from you.


----------



## fotos4u2

Mystery Train said:


> However, I noticed that LA Premier had 5 girls from their 2000 DA team playing DOWN in the showcase for the 01/02 team.  I didn't bother to look up the rules.  At first I thought it must be a typo or maybe they are trying out that "bio-banding" thing.  But after reading more game reports, I'm assuming this must be ok by the showcase rules, because I also found a 2000 player who played for Surf and one from another club from the east.  Ok.  But _*5*_??  Half their team were playing down nearly two age groups?  What about that 02 DPL team, LA Premier??  If you were short players for the tourney, didn't a few more of those '02 or '01 DPL players earn the right to play?  Isn't that how this was supposed to work?  If I had a kid who suffered through the DPL sales pitch and stuck through the year and then didn't get a chance to play in the showcase because you brought half your older team down . . . well, I'd be pissed.  Then again, maybe USSDA told LAPFC to do this so they didn't get totally embarrassed.  After all, with half their 2000 DA roster playing 01/02's, they've been able to keep their goal differential to a respectable -4.


There's been rumors going around that the 2001 DA team has lost quite a few players and the 2001 DPL are also rumored to be in Ireland right now so I guess it makes sense that they'd use the 2000s who didn't graduate this year since that will be next season's 2000/2001 DA team.


----------



## Simisoccerfan

fotos4u2 said:


> There's been rumors going around that the 2001 DA team has lost quite a few players and the 2001 DPL are also rumored to be in Ireland right now so I guess it makes sense that they'd use the 2000s who didn't graduate this year since that will be next season's 2000/2001 DA team.


We both know one player that has switched DA’s from this team.


----------



## Simisoccerfan

Fact said:


> Still trying too hard.


Well I am the one handing out brochures and logging coaches for the team so just sharing the facts.


----------



## glen_dandy

SocalPapa said:


> My U16/17 Predictions are on track too...
> 
> A: TopHat (in a surprisingly easy pool for them)...a 2-0 win for TopHat (other 2 teams tied so TopHat with the early lead)
> B: Cincinnati (eeks out the big upset)...Cincinnati as the 4th wild card tied #10 seed Breakers; the RPI showed Cincinnati had some strength and they did just enough to have a chance
> C: PDA or Real Colorado - pick 'em...PDA and Real Colorado both won, each with a goal differential of 2, pick 'em indeed
> D: Penn Fusion...Penn won uneventfully
> E: FC Dallas (and this won't be close either)...FC Dallas won 4-2 (tied for most goals in the first round of games)
> F: Crossfire (but Solar has a chance at the upset; sadly a TOUGH draw again for poor Legends)...Crossfire and Solar both won.  Solar's win was an "upset" as they were the 3rd wildcard and Legends was the 9th overall seed).  This result confirms what my RPI showed - Legends had a bad draw despite its higher playoff seeding.
> G: Nationals (but Real So Cal might have a good showing)...Nationals and Real So Cal both won.  Real So Cal won as the Pot 3 team (beat the #12 seed as a #18 seed).  The RPI predicted this "upset" as well.
> H: LAFC Slammers (with only Midwest United putting up any sort of a fight)...LAFC won 2-0 and Midwest won 2-1


Heading into Thursday for U16/17, when the Pot 1 teams will play the Pot 2 teams:

Win or lose Penn Fusion (Pot 1 Group D) and Crossfire (Pot 1 Group F) are likely to advance based on nearly insurmountable goal differentials (GD is the 1st tie breaker after points; head to head is not used at all).  
Winner of the Pot 1 vs Pot 2 game advances for groups A, B, C, E, and H.  Concorde (Group E) is the only Pot 2 team that would advance with a tie.  
All four teams remain in contention in Group G, with the Pot 1 team (Nationals) advancing with a tie (and Real loss or tie) or win (and Real win of equal or lesser goal differential, loss, or tie).  All four teams could conceivably end up with four points, so Charlotte can jump from 4th to 1st if they crush Real and Nationals lose a close one to NY Fury.


----------



## glen_dandy

glen_dandy said:


> Heading into Thursday for U16/17, when the Pot 1 teams will play the Pot 2 teams:
> 
> Win or lose Penn Fusion (Pot 1 Group D) and Crossfire (Pot 1 Group F) are likely to advance based on nearly insurmountable goal differentials (GD is the 1st tie breaker after points; head to head is not used at all).
> Winner of the Pot 1 vs Pot 2 game advances for groups A, B, C, E, and H.  Concorde (Group E) is the only Pot 2 team that would advance with a tie.
> All four teams remain in contention in Group G, with the Pot 1 team (Nationals) advancing with a tie (and Real loss or tie) or win (and Real win of equal or lesser goal differential, loss, or tie).  All four teams could conceivably end up with four points, so Charlotte can jump from 4th to 1st if they crush Real and Nationals lose a close one to NY Fury.


My apologies, head to head is essentially the fourth factor to determine placement:
1. Points
2. GD
3. Goals scored
4. Head to head (phrased in the rules as "greatest number of points obtained in the Playoff games between the teams concerned")
5. Fair play
6. Penalty shootout


----------



## Simisoccerfan

I just got home from the DA showcase and I thought it was an excellent event in all aspects.  Good weather, excellent fields, good refs, good competition, a ton of coaches, free water and parking, and good breakfast burritos!  Now it is a waiting game to see what the next few days bring.


----------



## Arnie3

It has been a great event so far.  We had around 50 coaches out for our game today.

Here is the final 8 for the U-15 group

Three SoCal teams and One NorCal team representing California


----------



## Soccer43

Simisoccerfan said:


> I just got home from the DA showcase and I thought it was an excellent event in all aspects.  Good weather, excellent fields, good refs, good competition, a ton of coaches, free water and parking, and good breakfast burritos!  Now it is a waiting game to see what the next few days bring.


of course you did - you have become a broken record....


----------



## Simisoccerfan

Soccer43 said:


> of course you did - you have become a broken record....


And your an ass as always.  This is a DA forum to share info about the National event and saying it was a great event is an opinion likely shared by all of that were present.  If you have a different take based on being there than share it otherwise go be a hater somewhere else.  I know you love ECNL.  I would have too if my daughter had ever tried out and made an ECNL team. Instead we stayed with our smaller club too long until there was no nearby ECNL teams left.


----------



## Soccer43

wrong, never said I was an ECNL lover - things are not necessarily that simple....


----------



## Soccer43

don't need a cheerleader for the DA -  makes for a more interesting forum to have more discussions with more depth to them.


----------



## Simisoccerfan

Soccer43 said:


> wrong, never said I was an ECNL lover - things are not necessarily that simple....


  Okay. But recognize the hypocrisy in yourself in calling me a broken record.


----------



## Simisoccerfan

Soccer43 said:


> don't need a cheerleader for the DA -  makes for a more interesting forum to have more discussions with more depth to them.


 I could give you more depth about the event. Tell what you want to know.  How about we played the Michigan Hawks today who is returning to ECNL and I thought they were the weakest team we have played in a while.


----------



## Fact

Simisoccerfan said:


> I could give you more depth about the event. Tell what you want to know.  How about we played the Michigan Hawks today who is returning to ECNL and I thought they were the weakest team we have played in a while.


Probably because their committed players did not make the trip?


----------



## Fact

Simisoccerfan said:


> I could give you more depth about the event. Tell what you want to know.  How about we played the Michigan Hawks today who is returning to ECNL and I thought they were the weakest team we have played in a while.


It is great to have coaches at your games but with your team going  into their senior year I bet few if any of them where not top DI coaches. Plus where they much better or even different than the coaches in Seattle?


----------



## Soccer43

Don't engage in discussions with people that have drunk the koolaid and can't see beyond or before that - no point to it.  My focus is on the player not the league or the club.  There are plenty of screwed up coaches, clubs, leagues etc


----------



## Fact

Soccer43 said:


> wrong, never said I was an ECNL lover - things are not necessarily that simple....





Simisoccerfan said:


> Okay. But recognize the hypocrisy in yourself in calling me a broken record.


I am neither for or against either league but you are a broken record. First it was how great DPL is and now that a lot of girls aged out and your moved up to DA you cheerleader without substance.   BTW how is your club’s DPL team doing?


----------



## Soccer43

having a good experience that helps your DD reach her goal/dream depends on many factors, very little depends on whether it is DA, ECNL. etc.


----------



## Simisoccerfan

Fact said:


> It is great to have coaches at your games but with your team going  into their senior year I bet few if any of them where not top DI coaches. Plus where they much better or even different than the coaches in Seattle?


I could send you our list of coaches.  What’s your email address?  I wasn’t in Seattle so I can’t speak to what they had.  I bet they had a good turnout too.


----------



## Soccer43

when we have a system that evaluates players in an objective way without favoritism and politics, when the players' best interests and development is primary, and when coaches egos, money grabs, and power trips don't cause harm to kids then I am all for that.


----------



## Simisoccerfan

Soccer43 said:


> having a good experience that helps your DD reach her goal/dream depends on many factors, very little depends on whether it is DA, ECNL. etc.


I actually agree with that statement.  I said the event was great and gave some resasons why.   I did not say it was great because it was DA.  The reasons I gave could happen at any event that could provide those things.


----------



## Fact

Simisoccerfan said:


> I could send you our list of coaches.  What’s your email address?  I wasn’t in Seattle so I can’t speak to what they had.  I bet they had a good turnout too.


Nopansies@gmail.com
Or you can just post it here.


----------



## push_up

Soccer43 said:


> when we have a system that evaluates players in an objective way without favoritism and politics, when the players' best interests and development is primary, and when coaches egos, money grabs, and power trips don't cause harm to kids then I am all for that.


Instead, we have to read the kool-aid drinkers blather.


----------



## Fact

Simisoccerfan said:


> I actually agree with that statement.  I said the event was great and gave some resasons why.   I did not say it was great because it was DA.  The reasons I gave could happen at any event that could provide those things.


Yes free water ranks in my top 10’of what makes a tournament great.


----------



## Simisoccerfan

Fact said:


> I am neither for or against either league but you are a broken record. First it was how great DPL is and now that a lot of girls aged out and your moved up to DA you cheerleader without substance.   BTW how is your club’s DPL team doing?


Don’t know other than they did not do well at National Cup.  We have been gone for a while.


----------



## Simisoccerfan

Fact said:


> Yes free water ranks in my top 10’of what makes a tournament great.


Where are you kids playing again?


----------



## Fact

Simisoccerfan said:


> Don’t know other than they did not do well at National Cup.  We have been gone for a while.


Yes so your statement that they are weak and going back to ECNL is dribble.


----------



## Simisoccerfan

push_up said:


> Instead, we have to read the kool-aid drinkers blather.


Well then I suggest you spend your time on another thread that is not about the DA.


----------



## Simisoccerfan

Fact said:


> Yes so your statement that they are weak and going back to ECNL is dribble.


Hey I waited on the sidelines all week for you but you did not have the balls to show up?  That’s the definition of a pansy.


----------



## Fact

Simisoccerfan said:


> Where are you kids playing again?


I could make a comment but I choose to take the high road and not comment on kids abilities. However, I do still have nieces and nephews still in this mess so push on unless you have something relevant to say.


----------



## Fact

Simisoccerfan said:


> Hey I waited on the sidelines all week for you but you did not have the balls to show up?  That’s the definition of a pansy.


You never told me what you were wearing genius.


----------



## Simisoccerfan

Fact said:


> I could make a comment but I choose to take the high road and not comment on kids abilities. However, I do still have nieces and nephews still in this mess so push on unless you have something relevant to say.


 Well I commend you on showing restraint.


----------



## Fact

Simisoccerfan said:


> I could give you more depth about the event. Tell what you want to know.  How about we played the Michigan Hawks today who is returning to ECNL and I thought they were the weakest team we have played in a while.


FYI Hawks only had 12 girls rostered for your game. There’s your explanation as to why they did not fair so well.  If you had spent 1 minute looking at the stats instead of bragging and drinking your kool aide you would have discovered this. BTW their U18/19 team beat Surf.


----------



## Simisoccerfan

Fact said:


> FYI Hawks only had 12 girls rostered for your game. There’s your explanation as to why they did not fair so well.  If you had spent 1 minute looking at the stats instead of bragging and drinking your kool aide you would have discovered this. BTW their U18/19 team beat Surf.


I was at the game you idiot. I know how many players they had.


----------



## Fact

Simisoccerfan said:


> I was at the game you idiot. I know how many players they had.


Great so you can count to 12. Stop bragging.


----------



## HaveFun

Arnie3 said:


> It has been a great event so far.  We had around 50 coaches out for our game today.
> 
> Here is the final 8 for the U-15 group
> 
> Three SoCal teams and One NorCal team representing California
> 
> View attachment 2850


Wow, With the AZ team in there, half of the teams in the quarter finals are from the Southwest division.
That's great.


----------



## Simisoccerfan

Fact said:


> Great so you can count to 12. Stop bragging.


I have decided to make a decision that I should have long ago.  That is to make you disappear.  Good bye


----------



## GoWest

HaveFun said:


> Wow, With the AZ team in there, half of the teams in the quarter finals are from the Southwest division.
> That's great.


Agree. As expected....different patch.....generally same results for SoCal teams. I think I saw a u18/19 final four game is exactly the same as the final four game played this time a year ago when both clubs were ECNL. The more things change, the more they stay the same.

Best of everything to your DD's playing for the trophy


----------



## texanincali

Isn't there a ECNL/DA debate thread?  Can you guys take your petty crap to that thread instead of ruining this one which is to discuss the DA Playoffs?


----------



## Simisoccerfan

texanincali said:


> Isn't there a ECNL/DA debate thread?  Can you guys take your petty crap to that thread instead of ruining this one which is to discuss the DA Playoffs?


I agree. Sorry for those posts.  I have ignored him so I don’t ever engage with him again.


----------



## Fact

Simisoccerfan said:


> I have decided to make a decision that I should have long ago.  That is to make you disappear.  Good bye


It is about time Pansy.


----------



## Fact

texanincali said:


> Isn't there a ECNL/DA debate thread?  Can you guys take your petty crap to that thread instead of ruining this one which is to discuss the DA Playoffs?


I am not debating leagues. I thought I was commenting on the DA games. Some of Simi’s comments are really dumb. DA was having a showcase not a tournament that any coach should care about winning.  Not all teams bring their best players to showcases, especially their committed players. Plus looking at the game report, the Michigan Hawks only list 12 players for the game against Simi’s kid yet he has the nerve to make sarcastic remarked that the team the is “all in for ECNL” was the weakest team he saw.  Give me a break the jerk trying way too hard for whatever league his kid is in.


----------



## MarkM

Fact said:


> I am not debating leagues. I thought I was commenting on the DA games. Some of Simi’s comments are really dumb. DA was having a showcase not a tournament that any coach should care about winning.  Not all teams bring their best players to showcases, especially their committed players. Plus looking at the game report, the Michigan Hawks only list 12 players for the game against Simi’s kid yet he has the nerve to make sarcastic remarked that the team the is “all in for ECNL” was the weakest team he saw.  Give me a break the jerk trying way too hard for whatever league his kid is in.


What club/team does your kid play for again?


----------



## LadiesMan217

MarkM said:


> What club/team does your kid play for again?


Mark M. I think I saw your DD playing DA Sunday on field 15? Is that your DD?


----------



## MarkM

LadiesMan217 said:


> Mark M. I think I saw your DD playing DA Sunday on field 15? Is that your DD?


No game on Sunday - I don't think she ever played on field 15 either.  But if the girl was good, I'll take credit for her nonetheless.


----------



## Soccer43

any scores for the late 16/17 games this afternoon?  Just curious as some of the brackets were tight for who goes on to qtrs


----------



## Kicker4Life

Fact said:


> ...DA was having a showcase not a tournament....


Just a point of information....There is a DA Playoff going on at the U15 and up Age Groups as well as a Showcaes for the u14’s +.


----------



## Soccer43

yes, but Simi's DD was playing in the Showcase


----------



## Fact

Kicker4Life said:


> Just a point of information....There is a DA Playoff going on at the U15 and up Age Groups as well as a Showcaes for the u14’s +.





Soccer43 said:


> yes, but Simi's DD was playing in the Showcase


Yes sorry I should have been more clear. There are DA Playoff games going on. But Simi's kid and the Hawks were only playing in the showcase where the motive of the coaches should be to showcase the kids that are not committed.  That could be and probably was the reason for the Hawks not showing well according to Simi.


----------



## Dummy

Fact said:


> Yes sorry I should have been more clear. There are DA Playoff games going on. But Simi's kid and the Hawks were only playing in the showcase where the motive of the coaches should be to showcase the kids that are not committed.  That could be and probably was the reason for the Hawks not showing well according to Simi.


Another factor may be that the teams in the playoffs are much stronger teams than the teams in the showcase?  If their previous opponents were playoff teams and they are now playing other showcase teams, their showcase opponents might truly be weaker than their playoff opponents.


----------



## Simisoccerfan

Dummy said:


> Another factor may be that the teams in the playoffs are much stronger teams than the teams in the showcase?  If their previous opponents were playoff teams and they are now playing other showcase teams, their showcase opponents might truly be weaker than their playoff opponents.


I would tend to agree with you since it is the top teams that made the playoffs.  In the Showcase they tried to match you up with teams that you had not played but finished close to you in the standings to make the games competitive.  The problem is that I don't believe the various conferences are all equal in strength.   Other issues include committed girls that might not travel and there has been roster movement between clubs in anticipation of the new season.  These issues also affect the Playoff teams.  Still, there is not a huge difference between the playoff teams and the showcase teams.  In season we tied the top team once and got blown out by the 2nd team from the bottom.  The main difference I saw is that on the top teams the talent level does not drop off as you get into the bench.  So they can perform with more consistency over the long season.


----------



## Soccer43

sorry but to say there is not a huge difference between playoff teams and showcase teams is ignorant.  Just because a team may not play with consistency on a given day doesn't mean there isn't a difference.  Throughout the league season there are clearly dominate teams and teams that quite frankly suck.  That is the way it is in DA and ECNL.


----------



## Simisoccerfan

Soccer43 said:


> sorry but to say there is not a huge difference between playoff teams and showcase teams is ignorant.  Just because a team may not play with consistency on a given day doesn't mean there isn't a difference.  Throughout the league season there are clearly dominate teams and teams that quite frankly suck.  That is the way it is in DA and ECNL.


Which team does your kid play for?


----------



## push_up

Simisoccerfan said:


> Which team does your kid play for?


Koolaid drunk poster.  Someone should take his login away until morning


----------



## Arnie3

Congrats to Legends & Surf for advancing to Kansas City!!

Legends defeated Eclipse today 3-0 and Surf defeated San Jose Quakes 2-1 in Quarter-Final games

Legends will play Dallas Texans  and Surf will play FC Dallas in the semi-finals on Monday, July 9


----------

