My bad on the salary in NWSL. However, you are totally missing that a full ride scholarship includes books room and board. It is close to $100,000 at top schools. You also are wrong on the “very few full rides”. If you are good enough to play pro at 18, you WILL get a full ride to most of the schools you want to go to. There are way more full rides at 18 than girls being invited to play pro at 18.
How’s the 2023-24 season going?
- Thread starter CharlieMurfee
- Start date
Maybe you're right.
Scholarship details aren't something parents always talk about.
If it was a full ride then yes playing in college makes sense. However if it's a 6k scholorship at a 60k per year private school then no college soccer doesn't make sense.
My sense is that there's very few full ride players and lots of partial scholorship players.
I would never suggest to the public that getting a full ride to college is common. I was just making a relative comparison to going pro. My view comes from my experience at Surf and the scholarships given there. Mel from Surf goes to the Wave at 16. For every “Mel” at Surf, there are 100 full ride scholarships given to Surf Players (over a period of years). Out of those 100 full rides, some will play pro but they need to develop as players in every way, strength, size, brain and vision. However context here is so important. Surf or (fill in the blank) competes at the highest national level, recruits national level players, etc. Therefore one can get a distorted sense of normal. Full rides are not normal, going pro early is rare.
rainbow_unicorn
PREMIER
Legends. Top tier teams playing in Slammers Memorial have to play a year up to get appropriate competition.
If your referring to 2010 neither
soccerdadlight
BRONZE
Or Club America Cup 2024 which replaces Manchester City Cup RIP https://surfcupsports.com/2024/01/16/club-america-cup/
Last edited:
Oh no!!! no more Man City Cup
RobbieNorwood
BRONZE
Any takers on this?
Are there any current 2010 ECNL coaches girls actually like playing for?
Orangeteam
SILVER ELITE
Doubt you'll get a top to bottom list, at least one that solid across the board input.
Most clubs collect talent.
San Juan and MVLA have two good, and very likable coaches at the 2010 age group and they do create a draw for the clubs.
Some of the clubs on this list attract talent different reasons.
I know several kids who target SD Surf because of the higher than normal recruit rate into the USYNT. MVLA has a good style of play and if you can hang with it it's worth it's worth moving there and staying..
San Juan is in Sacramento and really in the middle of no where, but they are the most competetive club in the area year over year so they draw is usually being able to play with others.
Sure, the starters and regulars like their coaches. Everyone else is getting wronged, misunderstood and treated unfairly.
Last edited:
here is my rant.
Probably some good coaches scattered throughout. For example, in San Diego area Surf recruits, but does little to develop on the girls side. (probably the same throughout the other clubs). But, then again do any clubs really focus on development? I think a few coaches do...most don't and clubs do not.
The problem is that the parents place their daughters on Surf or SoCal Blues, because they believe that is the best team, and she must be on the best team in order to be good. That is a product of parents having never played the sport and not being able to identify bad/good coaching....and because Surf/Blues will pull in all the talent, good players at other clubs are left wihout any competition on their team. Now, those other players have to join that surf/blues team, have a huge gap in playing level on their team, or play a year up. If a club could keep some good players together and win, I have no doubt that parents would believe that team is now better than surf/blues and their daughter must play there.
Other clubs have their own issues. In general, I view the problem with soccer in the usa (not as a problem with pay to play like everyone complains, but play to win). too much emphasis on winning, because that is how you recruit kids. For example, playing kids in set positions when they are age 7...benching players at young age groups...etc..makes no sense to me. There are 13 year olds that have only played one position their whole life. Would be great to see a club create a development program and have all the coaches train the same concepts...and work on those concepts throughout the age groups...and focus on development instead of winning (can still play competitively..just a different focus). But that will never happen...because that is not how you recruit kids, clubs encourage coaches to play to win bc that brings in more kids, and parents/coaches believe they are good coaches if they win games.
No clubs here have any identity or system...its just scattered coaching styles and play to win.
SurfSupDude
SILVER
There are also 13 year olds who have only played one position in baseball, football, or basketball all their lives. Is that a problem? Or is soccer different in some way?
Not sure, I don't coach those sports.
But yes, baseball and soccer are very different.
SurfSupDude
SILVER
Basketball? Does someone need to play both center and point guard?
(American) Football? Does someone need to play both QB and kicker? Or…WR and RB? Or OL and DL?
To be sure, I understand what you are saying and broadly agree that’s it’s best/ideal for kids to play and learn multiple positions in soccer. But is it really awful if a kid absolutely loves GK and just wants to do that? Or winger? Or CB?
Does Messi really need to use both feet to make it?
I played baseball and almost made it Pro, no joke. Soccer is like baseball, meaning there are multiple spots for certain types of talent and size does not matter, like soccer, unless you're a GK. I played 2nd base, shortstop, catcher and pitcher. In soccer, certain players can play winger, striker, defense and mid, all 10 spots on the pitch. If you lock in one spot, then it's harder chance to find a spot. I also played basketball in college. It's not even close for the short guys. PG or SG. If your Magic, you can play all the positions.
Not saying a kid has to play multiple positions if they love GK, but it is generally going to help them to play other positions so they understand the game better…and work on their weaknesses. Generally the reason stuck in one position isn’t due to the child wanting to play center defense..but because that is what wins games today.
You are fixating on a minor issue.The question was in regards to development. My problem is playing to win at young ages…and the lack of a development program in the clubs.
I will say this. In basketball, every position shoots the ball and is part of the attack. In baseball, everyone hits. In soccer, especially in girls who get comfortable, you will see coaches put players in set positions to win where many rarely shoot. Many times it's the defenders with the best shooting potential too with their size and strength. They have just been polished and are now comfortable staying back. Skilled, athletic girls can play anywhere, but it takes hundreds of games to really get polished at a position even in youth.
I'm guilty myself of gearing my daughter for this and maybe it helps in the long run, but girls will get comfortable and avoid discomfort, so the atmosphere will keep some girls from wanting to expand their skills in other positions. This sucks and leaves it to the parents to get the kid whatever skills they need outside of team training, but game time iq is very important.
Matter of fact, I've seen several occasions where the girl getting offensive time gave up goals on defense. The defenders that kicked butt and kept their team in every game always stay back. In fairness though, great defenders are very hard to make and find, so there is some future relevance to learning how to defend. It's just frustrating to see weak finishing when your best shooters are staying back keeping the team in every game.
It takes a very good coach to build a team with quality skills where players can be moved around though. I have a coach like this now and I love it, but sometimes you don't win and it's frustrating. I will just say it's very good to move girls around and develop their iq and kudos to the teams that are willing to not always win to do so. I learned first hand that being on a great team does not guarantee you future spots anywhere. Being on a winning team, may get you exposure, but it won't guarantee a spot or play time anywhere. I have to check myself often to shutup and let her develop. Team success really doesn't mean much at this age.