MVLA getting MLS Next??

[NorCalDad]

Variance makes a lot of sense.

I think the MLS Next programs in general are ranked lower than they should be because they don't (in general) play as many tournaments as ECNL or NPL clubs, so you get a situation where Woodside's 12B NPL team is ranked 27th and their MLS Next team is ranked 62nd.

Yeah, can't say I understand that Woodside scenario -- even looking at the matchups and results it's not adding up to me. Has to be something there I'm not seeing.

 

[RandomSoccerFan]

‍A: We use the average of the ratings of the top teams. This is equivalent to two (2) clubs playing their top teams against each other and then aggregating the scores to see who is best. We include the core competitive age groups of U11 - U17. A club must have teams in five (5) age groups to be ranked.
----

Maybe those U11 and U12 age groups are distorting things a bit. But I've seen just about all the teams play from multiple age groups from the clubs you listed. Very few are universally good -- across all age groups. That variance could also explain the ranking.

The way the math works, the older teams are weighted somewhat more than the younger teams, even as the top 7 are averaged. A top 2014B team is in the mid 40's, while a top 2008B team is in the mid to high 50's. Which is probably the preference of most anyway, having the older teams count just a little bit more than the youngers.

 

[RandomSoccerFan]

Variance makes a lot of sense.

I think the MLS Next programs in general are ranked lower than they should be because they don't (in general) play as many tournaments as ECNL or NPL clubs, so you get a situation where Woodside's 12B NPL team is ranked 27th and their MLS Next team is ranked 62nd.

This is because Woodside plays MLS players on the NPL team to destroy the rankings. (and keep the parents happy with wins while playing on a weak MLS team). A few other of the lesser MLS clubs do the same thing.

 

[AlicanteFC]

This is because Woodside plays MLS players on the NPL team to destroy the rankings. (and keep the parents happy with wins while playing on a weak MLS team). A few other of the lesser MLS clubs do the same thing.

Winning NPL shouldn't account for a top 30 ranking.

And yes, they are the only club not wear MLS Next badges so parents of opposing teams don't complain when little Johnny in the Silver division loses 10-0 to MLS Next players.

 

[RandomSoccerFan]

Winning NPL shouldn't account for a top 30 ranking.

And yes, they are the only club not wear MLS Next badges so parents of opposing teams don't complain when little Johnny in the Silver division loses 10-0 to MLS Next players.

Well, it's that - and also keep in mind for the 2012's, they *were* the NPL team up until a minute ago. The MLS N team didn't exist until this season. It's not doing well in MLS N, while the remaining NPL team is still doing OK in NPL. Over time - the ratings will flip as the new NPL team's rating starts to reflect its current performance over time. But the ratings between the two teams will always stay close as long as they play MLS ringers on the NPL team in the older ages (which they do). If the same impactful players are on both teams - the teams will have similar performance. It's not the intent of the Futures program, and they abuse it.

 

[Zeke]

Winning NPL shouldn't account for a top 30 ranking.

And yes, they are the only club not wear MLS Next badges so parents of opposing teams don't complain when little Johnny in the Silver division loses 10-0 to MLS Next players.

The SR algorithm overvalues goal differential.

Still useful, but if you see a team where the green bars are all blowouts of weak teams, the rating is fluff.

If you need a rating for such a team, take the average rating of the opponents they tied. (+-1 goal)

 

[RandomSoccerFan]

The SR algorithm overvalues goal differential.

Still useful, but if you see a team where the green bars are all blowouts of weak teams, the rating is fluff.

If you need a rating for such a team, take the average rating of the opponents they tied. (+-1 goal)

I'm not sure this is a good take. The SR algorithm is optimized to pick the next winner. And is continuously tweaked over the years to optimize exactly that over thousands and thousands of actual game results. For everyone that complains that their team isn't getting enough credit for beating another team, there is a counterpart who complains that their team is penalized too much for not beating another team enough. They may be both right, they may be both wrong, or any other combination - but in the aggregate - it doesn't matter. That also doesn't mean that I think it's always "right", as it's generally going to get 1 game prediction wrong out of 6 no matter what. It's just probably not going to get many games wrong in a row.

The average opponent ranking is a good addition - as it can certainly add context to the teams they played to get that rating. A 52 playing 54's means they are a comparatively weak team in the bottom of the bracket; a 52 playing 50's is likely at the top of the table. A 52 playing 46's is cherrypicking wins in a weak league.

 

[soccerdad247]

Variance makes a lot of sense.

I think the MLS Next programs in general are ranked lower than they should be because they don't (in general) play as many tournaments as ECNL or NPL clubs, so you get a situation where Woodside's 12B NPL team is ranked 27th and their MLS Next team is ranked 62nd.

And the Woodside 2012 NPL team is the same players as the MLS Next team. So the NPL team beats up on other NPL teams, and gets a high ranking because of it.