Prfc announcement

whatithink said:
They seem to be competitive in their conference and in showcases, obv. not every age group. If ECNL are cherry picking clubs to drop, then they could have a (legal) problem if someone were inclined. The quality of teams & clubs in any age group and any "elite" league varies enormously from the top performers to the bottom performers, in both conferences and the ECNL in general. So if ECNL are hanging their hat on "competitiveness", that would be transparently wrong.

I thought ECNL had a stipulation on the boys side that you had to enter your top teams, but assumed I had that wrong as there are obvious examples, Rising being one, where that doesn't happen and is allowed by ECNL not to happen. So they couldn't hang their hat on that either.

In short, ECNL should be consistent, and they don't appear to be and that could be problematic if someone were inclined to take a run at them in court.
Click to expand...

I don't think ECNL is hanging their hat on competitiveness for this, and I think it's a red herring in this argument. Using competitiveness as a guide to keep clubs in - even if the teams aren't meeting whatever arbitrary requirements the board has decided are important/valid - would have some rationale if truly awesome teams were kept in, but mid-pack and bottom-feeders were asked to leave.

That isn't what has actually happened here. Teams that weren't great, that lose to their MLS peers in that state by many goals, that were set up as the second team for the club by design, were booted for next season.

Pointing at other truly bad teams and wondering "hey, what about them?" isn't a particularly useful train of thought. Those teams are certainly an argument for why a closed league with no pro/rel can apparently keep bad teams around indefinitely. But that's not very relevant to PRFC getting booted.
 
i think it is to a degree, performance based. maybe a little too late for rising. the boys ecnl division in arizona used to be the socal conference. a couple of years ago, that changed to the mountain conference. the girls stayed in the socal conference. why? their top teams are the ecnl teams. the boys struggled against cali teams and they were shuffled around. Vegas stayed in the socal conference. why? because they have 1 ecnl, 2 mls next teams. their talent pool isn't spread across 8 different teams. we have 4 mls next teams, and 4 ecnl teams, now about to be 3 ecnl teams. it's too much. they will end up with ea, like a majority of the mls next clubs. credit to those mls next clubs that can retain and develop both teams. lafc, fc dallas, fc delco, tamp bay united, it can be done.
 
RandomSoccerFan said:
I don't think ECNL is hanging their hat on competitiveness for this, and I think it's a red herring in this argument. Using competitiveness as a guide to keep clubs in - even if the teams aren't meeting whatever arbitrary requirements the board has decided are important/valid - would have some rationale if truly awesome teams were kept in, but mid-pack and bottom-feeders were asked to leave.

That isn't what has actually happened here. Teams that weren't great, that lose to their MLS peers in that state by many goals, that were set up as the second team for the club by design, were booted for next season.

Pointing at other truly bad teams and wondering "hey, what about them?" isn't a particularly useful train of thought. Those teams are certainly an argument for why a closed league with no pro/rel can apparently keep bad teams around indefinitely. But that's not very relevant to PRFC getting booted.
Click to expand...
We obviously don't know what ECNL has specifically said to Rising. I expect it went through their lawyers first.

Pro/rel is a whole other conversation which, imv, just weakens the ECNL product in general, on both the boys & girls side. Fwiw, I think they should develop a hierarchy with teams (not clubs) dictating their place and getting pro/rel at the end of each season. New age groups can be based on the clubs' aggregate score or something. ECRL should flow up and clubs should be able to have multiple teams in leagues/divisions if they have the depth. Its either about the best talent or its not.
 
Carlsbad7 said:
ENCL or any league for that matter can include or exclude based on some type of performance metric.

What you can't do is tie two seperate products together and make it so customers can't just buy one of the products. This is what's happening. As an example say a clubs girls ecnl program was was doing very well. That same club happens to have MLS Next and ECNL (which appears to be the case here). ECNL can pull either boys or girls from the club if there's a definable metric that shows that the relationship isn't working out.. What ECNL can't do is pull both girls and boys ECNL just because a club has MLS Next.

I understand that ECNL doesn't want their boys ECNL teams to play as second teams behind MLSN. But again they can't pull ECNL boys access just because a club also has MLSN. If the clubs ECNL teams were terrible in league and ECNL had a defined set of metrics for determining what terrible means then no problem booting them.

I realize that some of this sounds weird beacause this kind of thing seems like it happens all the time. However its not right.
Click to expand...
I dunno...I struggle to see how a rule requiring they put their top boys team would violate any sort of competition law.....as others have pointed out, a lot of it turns on what exactly they said.

The more interesting argument is the tying between girl's and boy's soccer. That would in part turn on the question of whether or not they are the same product or different products and whether it has any pro competitive effects (e.g. MLS Next clubs don't always have robust girl's programs).

I've always felt a greater vulnerability is from a club that is locked out of letter league but otherwise has the requirements to be there, but for the fact they are locked out of letter league and are losing talent.
 
Grace T. said:
I dunno...I struggle to see how a rule requiring they put their top boys team would violate any sort of competition law.....as others have pointed out, a lot of it turns on what exactly they said.

The more interesting argument is the tying between girl's and boy's soccer. That would in part turn on the question of whether or not they are the same product or different products and whether it has any pro competitive effects (e.g. MLS Next clubs don't always have robust girl's programs).

I've always felt a greater vulnerability is from a club that is locked out of letter league but otherwise has the requirements to be there, but for the fact they are locked out of letter league and are losing talent.
Click to expand...
Somewhere a EA league executive is laughing. That is the league Rising will end up going to. Everyone knows MLS next is top. ECNL is kidding themselves if they think clubs will leave MLS to stay in ECNL. ECNL is top for girls ... no doubt just as MLS next is top for boys. ECNL is playing with fire making clubs choose between girls and boys leagues. This just may be what GA needs to fight ECNL on the girls side. With the ability to potentially sell talent in MLS next or to MLS Academy ECNL is digging a hole. ECNL is top on girls side but money based transfers are a long way off and likely much less lucrative. Clubs will choose MLS every time and that will build EA and potentially GA.
 
whatithink said:
We obviously don't know what ECNL has specifically said to Rising. I expect it went through their lawyers first.

Pro/rel is a whole other conversation which, imv, just weakens the ECNL product in general, on both the boys & girls side. Fwiw, I think they should develop a hierarchy with teams (not clubs) dictating their place and getting pro/rel at the end of each season. New age groups can be based on the clubs' aggregate score or something. ECRL should flow up and clubs should be able to have multiple teams in leagues/divisions if they have the depth. Its either about the best talent or its not.
Click to expand...
You realize FC Arizona got boys ECNL last year? Tell me that isn't a complete $hit show. That is the example I would bring up. Rising has a proven track record of quality organizationally, financially and competitively. FC Arizona is the exact opposite but ECNL boys will keep them and remove Rising. Its laughable. Rising's ECNL teams are blowing out FC Arizona by 4+ goals a game head to head across multiple age groups. They removed RSL 2 yrs ago for "recruiting violations" true or not they are pissing off the two biggest clubs by far in AZ.
 
tjinaz said:
You realize FC Arizona got boys ECNL last year? Tell me that isn't a complete $hit show. That is the example I would bring up. Rising has a proven track record of quality organizationally, financially and competitively. FC Arizona is the exact opposite but ECNL boys will keep them and remove Rising. Its laughable. Rising's ECNL teams are blowing out FC Arizona by 4+ goals a game head to head across multiple age groups. They removed RSL 2 yrs ago for "recruiting violations" true or not they are pissing off the two biggest clubs by far in AZ.
Click to expand...
Yes, and I see that FC Arizona are a crap.

If I were a lawyer making a case, I'd say that the kids that want a pro path are in MLS N and the ones that want a college path are ECNL - if my club had both, as ECNL does not sell itself as the pro path.

Rising will go EA as stated above. ECNL & EA isn't ranked in AZ from my conversations with various parents across the valley. Its MLS or just play for the most part. There are teams in SAAZ or ASA leagues that would compete comfortably or beat their corresponding EA/ECNL age group teams.
 
On a separate note, I hear rumors that Rising are pulling out of SAAZ and that it will therefore fold for next year with everyone reverting back to ASA. If true, that's a shit show waiting to happen given the volume of teams from both clubs.
 
Do you think they could use gender discrimination as a means to sue? To my understanding title IX includes disfavoring someone based off their gender. So it would seem to me that to disfavor the girls program that are ran independently of the boys program would fall within that stipulation?
 
whatithink said:
Rising will go EA as stated above. ECNL & EA isn't ranked in AZ from my conversations with various parents across the valley. Its MLS or just play for the most part. There are teams in SAAZ or ASA leagues that would compete comfortably or beat their corresponding EA/ECNL age group teams.
Click to expand...
whatithink said:
On a separate note, I hear rumors that Rising are pulling out of SAAZ and that it will therefore fold for next year with everyone reverting back to ASA. If true, that's a shit show waiting to happen given the volume of teams from both clubs.
Click to expand...

From the outside, it sure looks like AZ splits their top talent between way too many leagues. Here are the top 20 2008B (U16) teams in state, out of 82 total in the state that have enough history to be rated. Check out the different leagues in the last column. An argument could be made that the strongest league after MLS is a tie between ASA, E64, ECNL, SAAZ, EA, and USYS National. A top team in any of them would be a top team in any of the rest of them.

AZ 2008B Teams.png
 
i would be curious to ask where these rankings are from? some of this is apples to oranges. mls plays much tougher competition vs let's say a state league team. lafc or the local club team this weekend? not much comparison.
 
pitchplease said:
i would be curious to ask where these rankings are from? some of this is apples to oranges. mls plays much tougher competition vs let's say a state league team. lafc or the local club team this weekend? not much comparison.
Click to expand...
I assume its the soccer rankings app. Obv. that's only as good as the data entered, e.g. I checked out the 2007 boys and it has RSL MLSN as the #1 team in AZ. From what I've heard that team hadn't won an MLS game up to Dec23 and had basically imploded. They may have resurrected, but its bizarre if they are ranked as #1.

The other thing is that the teams in the diff leagues don't play each other, so comparing is difficult. The scores should reflect the strength of the opposition and the win/lose/draw results but if each letter/local league is predominantly in their own bubble, the only time you can really compare is the big independent showcases.
 
2008 Boy mls standings, league play Barca 1st, Rising 12th, Del Sol 16th, and rsl.
for flex play, only has Barca qualifying for Maryland.
the other 3 clubs are all below the qualifying line, 14th place, 15th place, and dead last. rsl between the two leagues has literally won like 2 games. ouch.

10701.png

Barca Residency Academy
30
2.73
11
10
1
0
3.00
1.00
2.00

12
16105.png

Phoenix Rising FC
9
1.13
8
2
3
3
1.00
1.38
-0.38

16
16827.png

SC Del Sol
9
0.82
11
2
6
3
1.55
2.36
-0.82
8
16965.png

RSL Arizona
4
0.44
9
1
7
1
1.11
2.44
-1.33
 
whatithink said:
I assume its the soccer rankings app. Obv. that's only as good as the data entered, e.g. I checked out the 2007 boys and it has RSL MLSN as the #1 team in AZ. From what I've heard that team hadn't won an MLS game up to Dec23 and had basically imploded. They may have resurrected, but its bizarre if they are ranked as #1.

The other thing is that the teams in the diff leagues don't play each other, so comparing is difficult. The scores should reflect the strength of the opposition and the win/lose/draw results but if each letter/local league is predominantly in their own bubble, the only time you can really compare is the big independent showcases.
Click to expand...
spot on. mls and ecnl could care less of data outside of their own personal rankings within themselves. typically state league and maybe ea use a national ranking system.
 
pitchplease said:
i would be curious to ask where these rankings are from? some of this is apples to oranges. mls plays much tougher competition vs let's say a state league team. lafc or the local club team this weekend? not much comparison.
Click to expand...

They are from Soccer Rankings. It's apples to apples. Of course they play in different leagues, and of course competition is taken into account. There's a 14-page thread on it right here on this board. The rankings are never going to be perfect - they are just prediction based on past data, but it turns out that they are very good predictor of future performance. All of these teams clustered together at pretty much the same ranking (the rating ~ goals, so a 51 would be expected to beat a 50 by 1 goal), is a bit different than other geographies, where there is a clearer difference between top teams in various leagues.
 
whatithink said:
On a separate note, I hear rumors that Rising are pulling out of SAAZ and that it will therefore fold for next year with everyone reverting back to ASA. If true, that's a shit show waiting to happen given the volume of teams from both clubs.
Click to expand...
I really hope that happens. Having 2 state leagues is awful. Hopefully ASA got better and they can recombine and make everyone happy.
 
RandomSoccerFan said:
It doesn't matter what they care about. All that matters is if the game data is accessible online. I'd suggest you read up a bit on current ranking.
Click to expand...
Have to say the app is awesome. Did the predictions for a tournament and they were right on every time. App picked right winner and i think was off by one goal across 8 games. Very impressive.
 
pitchplease said:
2008 Boy mls standings, league play Barca 1st, Rising 12th, Del Sol 16th, and rsl.
for flex play, only has Barca qualifying for Maryland.
the other 3 clubs are all below the qualifying line, 14th place, 15th place, and dead last. rsl between the two leagues has literally won like 2 games. ouch.
Click to expand...

And? The only 4 2008B MLS N teams in Arizona are ranked Barca > Del Sol > Rising > RSL. Barca would be expected to beat RSL 4-1, and would win or tie 84% of the time. Even that may be too generous to RSL. Barca would be expected to beat Del Sol 3-1, and would win or tie 75% of the time. They are clearly the class of the field, and the results they put on the field show that.
 
tjinaz said:
Have to say the app is awesome. Did the predictions for a tournament and they were right on every time. App picked right winner and i think was off by one goal across 8 games. Very impressive.
Click to expand...

It's been pretty spot-on for years if you take the table of teams pre-season, use the ratings to make a prediction, and then compare how they finish at the end of season. It shouldn't be surprising, as it turns out that youth soccer is pretty predictable, but it still is interesting to see the data over time. One of our teams sure hit the statistical long tail during this year's state cup. A predicted win turned out to be a close loss, a predicted loss turned out to be a close win, and a predicted win turned out to be a close loss. If we were betting on that trifecta at the beginning of the streak, it would have been about a 1 in 216 shot - it's the first time I can remember ever seeing it get 3 games wrong in a row.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top