How to Make the Jump from RL to NL

[WatchthemPlay]

Ya that’s what I’m trying to separately D2 and D3 for RL. D1 for NL with low end D1 for RL. There are some RL players who are going to CBU, UCR and a few other D1s from top RL clubs. But you’re still more likely going to go D1 sitting on the bench of a top D1 program like koge, slammers and legends then you would on a top RL team.

But for D2, D3, RL is just as good.

I generally agree with this. Totally depends what your kid’s goals are and how much work they are willing to do get recruited. Emailing coaches constantly, having updated highlight videos, engaging on social media, going to very specific ID camps that are at the right level. Seen RL kids do all these things to get to a lower D2 schools and it worked, but they were also starters are recognized clubs. Low ranked ECNL might have a unicorn get a good D1 offer, a few get low D1 offers and the rest are D2/D3. Playing GA at one of the top clubs is a consideration for D1 and can be a smart alternative (City comes to mind) again stacked rosters so need to come in with something to really offer to get any play time. Lower GA is equivalent to RL in terms of recruitment, but many do get kids to D1 also.

 

[davidnunez]

Folks are overthinking this.
The club's primary goal is to make money - "no revenue, no mission." Of course, having a winning team will help recruit players. But, the primary focus for pay-for-play soccer is to make money. Please understand this.
So, if your kid is sitting on an RL team and doing really well, your club would much rather recruit a kid from another RL team or NL team to bring in new revenue. You can question the decision, but you'll be told "we see potential... her tactical skills are great... blah blah."
Use this to your advantage and take your kid to another NL program and now that other club will be happy to get new revenue.
In club circles, clubs that bring up RL kids are doing so only because they can't keep the NL kids or can't recruit kids from outside the club.

 

[WNYtoYL]

Folks are overthinking this.
The club's primary goal is to make money - "no revenue, no mission." Of course, having a winning team will help recruit players. But, the primary focus for pay-for-play soccer is to make money. Please understand this.
So, if your kid is sitting on an RL team and doing really well, your club would much rather recruit a kid from another RL team or NL team to bring in new revenue. You can question the decision, but you'll be told "we see potential... her tactical skills are great... blah blah."
Use this to your advantage and take your kid to another NL program and now that other club will be happy to get new revenue.
In club circles, clubs that bring up RL kids are doing so only because they can't keep the NL kids or can't recruit kids from outside the club.

Do coaches get a little $ for bringing in new players to the organization?

 

[Carlsbad7]

Do coaches get a little $ for bringing in new players to the organization?

Yes they do.

 

[Zeke]

In club circles, clubs that bring up RL kids are doing so only because they can't keep the NL kids or can't recruit kids from outside the club.

I know a few RL kids who made the NL jump staying within a high status club. The most recent were not due to NL kids leaving or a lack of external interest. Just the occasional kid who works hard but bloomed late. But it’s difficult.

 

[WatchthemPlay]

I know a few RL kids who made the NL jump staying within a high status club. The most recent were not due to NL kids leaving or a lack of external interest. Just the occasional kid who works hard but bloomed late. But it’s difficult.

It is definitely an exception. RL is not a pathway to NL no matter what the club says just like Slammers is not the pathway to HB Koge. Happens once in awhile but no real incentive for the club and there are very few examples.

 

[XX..XX]

100% agree with WatchthemPlay. These clubs and coaches don't care about your kid's best interest. They want the MONEY. They will lie to you and tell you that putting in the time as a top player on an RL team will get them to NL but they will never do it. It's 99% money and 1% ego. Can't have a lowly RL player moving into the elite group. Does not matter if your kid is clearly better than some players already on the NL/GA team. Coaches don't care about your kid and they don't care about what is best for the top team. They'll let a better player rot on the 2nd team forever because of their greed and ego. Beach is the absolute worst for this.

 

[jasportsdad]

It is definitely an exception. RL is not a pathway to NL no matter what the club says just like Slammers is not the pathway to HB Koge. Happens once in awhile but no real incentive for the club and there are very few examples.

100% agree with WatchthemPlay. These clubs and coaches don't care about your kid's best interest. They want the MONEY. They will lie to you and tell you that putting in the time as a top player on an RL team will get them to NL but they will never do it. It's 99% money and 1% ego. Can't have a lowly RL player moving into the elite group. Does not matter if your kid is clearly better than some players already on the NL/GA team. Coaches don't care about your kid and they don't care about what is best for the top team. They'll let a better player rot on the 2nd team forever because of their greed and ego. Beach is the absolute worst for this.

Based on this, sounds like the best chance for OPs daughter to make the current club's NL team would be: move to a mid-tier (or lower-tier) NL team for a year, and then try to move back to the current club's NL team the following year. Is that the concensus?

If so, what's everyone's experience with a club taking back a player who left for another NL team? Assuming player is good enough and player/family left on good terms.

 

[Messi>CR7]

Based on this, sounds like the best chance for OPs daughter to make the current club's NL team would be: move to a mid-tier (or lower-tier) NL team for a year, and then try to move back to the current club's NL team the following year. Is that the concensus?

If so, what's everyone's experience with a club taking back a player who left for another NL team? Assuming player is good enough and player/family left on good terms.

It took me a couple of years to figure out, but our coach (top team of the club) is only looking to add immediate starters.
-He will absolutely take a kid from our 2nd team if that kid is good enough to be a starter on the 1st team.
-He is not going to promote a kid from our 2nd team to be on our bench and demote one of our current bench players.
-It’s hard to get promoted from ECRL to ECNL, but I don’t think it’s because some unwritten business practice. Iron sharpens iron. Take two identical kids and put them on ECNL and ECRL teams of the same club respectively. A year later the ECNL kid will be stronger because she trains with and plays against stronger players every day. It’s simply harder for the ECRL kid to improve at the same rate.

Yes, go to a lesser ECNL team and craft your skills there. That’s how it works in life too. It’s much easier to get a VP title from your competitor than waiting for an internal promotion. You’re always worth more to your competitors.

If your kid can ball, most coaches “should” welcome your kid back. However, what you deem “left on good terms” might not be the sentiment shared by a petty person. A few years back my older one got benched for the playoffs after informing the coach the decision to leave. You don’t want to go back to that kind of coaches/people anyway.

Best of luck.