MicPaPa
GOLD
No matter what their name is, Carlsbad will always be known for having the pettiest and nastiest sidelines.
DMCV Sharks Girls Director
- Thread starter silverback
- Start date
You guys are being too harsh on DMCV, they were voted best Kids Sports League in North County. Take a look at their facebook page:
"Nine consecutive years! The @dmcvsharks have been awarded the Best Kids Sports League by the Best of North County Readers Poll! Great job Sharks!! @bestofnorthcountysd"
Someone should let ECNL know.
"Nine consecutive years! The @dmcvsharks have been awarded the Best Kids Sports League by the Best of North County Readers Poll! Great job Sharks!! @bestofnorthcountysd"
Someone should let ECNL know.
Attachments
Thought I'd do a necro-bump of the old MW thread to see how things have changed 2.5 years since he left Albion and took over Sharks as the DOC.
G2011s are currently ranked 7th out of 8 teams in Sonoran ECNL
G2010s are currently ranked 5th out of 8 teams in Sonoran ECNL
G2009s are currently ranked 6th out of 8 teams in Sonoran ECNL
G2008s are currently ranked 7th out of 8 teams in Sonoran ECNL
G2007s are currently ranked 3rd out of 8 teams in Sonoran ECNL
G06/05s are currently ranked 8th out of 8 teams in Sonoran ECNL
G2011 Surf beat Sharks 8-0 11/5
G2010 Surf beat Sharks 11-0 11/5
G2009 Sharks beat Surf 3-1 11/5
G2008 Surf beat Sharks 4-0 11/5
G2007 Surf beat Sharks 5-0 11/5
G06/05 Surf beat Sharks 6-0 11/5
The numbers speak for themselves. Marginally better than before MW took over but unfortunately trending down.
SoulTrain
BRONZE
Not a lot of change given the hype and $$$ spent on the MW hire. Sharks girls ECNL teams haven't improved and their girls ECRL teams would probably get relegated to Flight 1 if they were in Socal NPL leagues. But the ECNL/ECRL name sells and girls continue to leave smaller (and competing larger) clubs in the name of National Showcases and promises that a college coach will pop up in your email.
Problem is the talent level at Sharks isn't deep (they have a couple strong players at each age group) and without that, they continually get smoked by the top half of ECNL and ECRL. Until MW can find a way to put a group together that is talented top to bottom (the 07 team has a chance when they merge with younger 06's next year) they will continue to stay near the cellar of almost every age group. Will be tough when you are the league girls come to when they are not getting enough playing time at Surf, City, Albion, SDSC Surf and even Express/City San Marcos/Legends (their ECRL teams will take just about anyone willing to hand over the $3k reg fees + national travel costs).
Sharks are doing a lot better than they did prior to Whittaker taking over. They are the 2nd best option in San Diego at the moment. The 2007 team is doing great, champions league playoff position. 2008 just needs a few more players but have a strong defense. 2009 just needs to play consistently but they are a very good team - beating Surf too. 2010 lost a few players but still doing pretty good and will only improve with time. 2011s is going to get there in the next year or so as they transition.
I have no vested interest in Sharks but they have definitely gotten a lot better. They went from worst San Diego option to 2nd best.
RandomSoccerFan
PREMIER
No insight into Sharks. But wouldn't Surf show a similar record against literally anyone? It's the #1 rated girls club in the nation, let alone CA, with top teams at pretty much any age group. Rankings in ECNL for Sharks do show some weaker years, and some mid-pack years - hard to say if they are improving or not, probably need more metrics like # of people in club, etc.
Maybe, I just picked the most recent games they played.
However, I also listed current rankings in Sonoran which is cumulative of all games played so far this season.
Either way results aren't ideal.
RandomSoccerFan
PREMIER
If their goal as a club was to be a true competitor to Surf, those results alone would show they have quite a ways to go. Some years are OK for ECNL, some years are near the bottom, as listed. If there is no movement year over year over year, seems like it would be hard to keep people over time (both coaches and players).
They were near bottom or the very bottom in every age group before Whittaker took over, so this is a huge improvement. I'm looking at improvement since he arrived, not chasing Surf. It's gonna take more than 2 years at a club to beat out the number 1 team. Sharks is number 2 in San Diego and that's with only 2 years and with Surf in his backyard taking the best talent.
Slammers has 2 ECNL teams and can't beat out Surf. Koge lost to Surf in every age group...maybe 1 tie in there. It's not fair to use
Surf as a metric of improvement.
I think the 06 Slammers FC and SURF teams have tied the last 2 times they've played. Tying in the consolation round of the ECNL Finals last year in Virginia, too. Keep in mind, the Slammers are splitting up their talent by having 2 teams. Keep in mind also the number of ECNL teams in close proximity in LA and Orange County. 4 or 5 ECNL clubs practice at the Great Park in Irvine, so the talent pool is diluted.
Code
GOLD
Fair perspective. Next, mayby Carlsbad7 can tell us all about how the City G2010GA team did against SURF RL team in Blues Cup a couple months ago?
I was using Slammers to show how tough it is to compete against Surf. Slammers is one of the best clubs in the country and at times Slammers still struggles against Surf. Sharks 2009 beat Surf 2009 by 3-1. That, in itself, is quite impressive progress for Sharks.
This conversation is silly. From what I can see, the program is more competitive than it was before MW came in. Prior to that, Sharks were at or near the bottom of the table in every age group post DA folding. That's success in my book. I don't think anyone thought the arrival of MW would result in going from worst to first.
I think MW has done a great job under tough competition. You got Surf offering full rides and one of the all-time great youth coaches as Doc. Plus, Covid was horrible for most clubs that didn't have their own fields. My pal told me Surf never stopped training. My dd was blocked from any field for over a year. I took her to a local park in Aliso Viejo and we got a big warning from city worker, "If you don't leave, I'm calling the Sherrif." Let's give it some time Carlsbad.......
It's been 2.5 years + I put the current numbers up + they're marginally better than before.
How much time does it take?
What's the expectation? I would throw out the last two years and give everyone fresh start. Withall the travel leagues and the Pac 12 jumping on the travel sport, I would place my bets on local. City has Oceanside and Carlsbad. Del Mar has Del Mar and little South. Surf has all of SD and OC and IE. Top players will make that drive to be coached by a legend.
How much time does what take? What is your expectation? While there may be marginal improvements, they're improvements, and the club is probably demonstrating to ECNL that they're making an effort to raise the bar. Don't forget that without MW's move to Sharks, they probably would have been kicked out of the league by now. That's a big win for the club in and of itself.
I agree with what is the expectation question. My DD is trapped ‘06 in the ECNL, meaning, she is a 2025 and will play with the ‘07’s her last year. Once recruiting time hits, the game goes from a team game to an individual game for most. Most are focused on their college dreams or picking up social activities they missed earlier the last couple years if committed early.
My DD’s team plays good soccer, competes with anyone when they have their full roster, but we have kids miss games and practice for homecoming, camps, convenience, vacation, etc. Some kids take it seriously after they commit, others do not. Some are getting ready and focused on getting to campus fit and ready to compete, and some are coasting after the IG Sweatshirt Pic.
My DD’s club has made it clear the focus is getting the kids committed the last two years, keeping them healthy, and making sure the kids who are not committed are getting opportunities in showcases…the club wants the team competitive and to win, but recruiting takes the top spot.
The expectations change at U17, and for me, I would look at the end result, are kids getting committed, v. W’s and L’s the last couple of years. I do agree, you need to be competitive, top half of the table, not getting crushed by 5 or 7 goals in showcases as you are building up to U17, because college coaches will wonder if this kid is good and talented, why are they on this team with poor results, especially in an area so dense like So Cal, with so many teams.
My DD’s ‘06 team has 17 of 23 players committed - 16 of 20 2024’s and 1 of 3 2025’s. All across D1,D2, D3. Ivy, P5, WCC, Big West, Mountain West, Big Sky…Parents are pretty happy and all anyone is really focused on is staying healthy and the kids playing well, far less emphasis on winning, no more crazy sideline antics, except for super hard fouls. It’s calmed down a lot.
I would judge Sharks or any club by how good they are placing kids at the end of the programming, not results in u12, u13. Isn’t that why everyone is doing this, for their kids to get to the next level?
My DD’s team plays good soccer, competes with anyone when they have their full roster, but we have kids miss games and practice for homecoming, camps, convenience, vacation, etc. Some kids take it seriously after they commit, others do not. Some are getting ready and focused on getting to campus fit and ready to compete, and some are coasting after the IG Sweatshirt Pic.
My DD’s club has made it clear the focus is getting the kids committed the last two years, keeping them healthy, and making sure the kids who are not committed are getting opportunities in showcases…the club wants the team competitive and to win, but recruiting takes the top spot.
The expectations change at U17, and for me, I would look at the end result, are kids getting committed, v. W’s and L’s the last couple of years. I do agree, you need to be competitive, top half of the table, not getting crushed by 5 or 7 goals in showcases as you are building up to U17, because college coaches will wonder if this kid is good and talented, why are they on this team with poor results, especially in an area so dense like So Cal, with so many teams.
My DD’s ‘06 team has 17 of 23 players committed - 16 of 20 2024’s and 1 of 3 2025’s. All across D1,D2, D3. Ivy, P5, WCC, Big West, Mountain West, Big Sky…Parents are pretty happy and all anyone is really focused on is staying healthy and the kids playing well, far less emphasis on winning, no more crazy sideline antics, except for super hard fouls. It’s calmed down a lot.
I would judge Sharks or any club by how good they are placing kids at the end of the programming, not results in u12, u13. Isn’t that why everyone is doing this, for their kids to get to the next level?
SoulTrain
BRONZE
I don't have a vested interest in either club but City SC GA is stronger at almost every level than Sharks. And their girls are much more highly recruited than Sharks (look at the 05/06 signing day offers for seniors). I would put Sharks as being the 4th best option in SD, behind Surf, City, and Rebels. But it's always dependent what you want out of a program and what sacrifices you want to make as to the best fit for your kid. Plenty of SD talent making the drive up to OC to play for Blues, Slammers, etc.
MW has only been there for 2 years and can't affect the 05/06. Why don't we judge MW's recruitment ability based on their 07 team commitments and beyond?
If you have a direct competition against 07-2010, I wonder how City would do against Sharks?
As for Rebels - they're behind Sharks in every age group except 2 and one of it is the 05/06.