Should be its own thread and stickied.
Youth Soccer Rankings ?
- Thread starter dawson
- Start date
RandomSoccerFan
GOLD
Freaking awesome. Way to go Mark. Hoping for a full-fledged web interface to it at some point, dealing with too much data at once just isn't fun in a limited app context on a small screen - but the accuracy and value of the data is most important. I am OK with the idea of free vs. paid features, and the $10 yearly is a a deal - with the hope that there is enough revenue to keep Mark interested in building/growing/maintaining it over time.
From an SEO perspective, we should all do our part not to backlink to that other site any longer. We should link to the app store download https://apps.apple.com/us/app/soccer-rankings/id1638526916 instead for youth club soccer rankings, including state specific rankings like California, Arizona, Texas, Utah, New York, and Florida, but also access to club soccer game history to see not only which teams are the best on average, but also head to head competition.
Also rate the app when you download!
Also rate the app when you download!
Futbol Dad
BRONZE
Downloaded the app and told multiple people already! Looks clean and easy to use!
1 question so far, do I only get to see the teams results if I pay for the “pro” version?
Thank you for putting in the time and effort to bring this to us
Not Mark, I just wanted to spread the word. I also think it deserves its own thread. I hope everyone puts up the $10 for him too since we all enjoyed his old site.
Surf Zombie
GOLD
I just spent the $10. It’s very cool.
The best age is 15. Suck it 16!
So Solar 07 is the best team in the country, per the rankings. But I'm told they lost two YNT camp-level players (one went to IMG, and another was cut for attitude reasons and is now playing Legends this fall...that will fill a big hole on that 07 Legends team). Solar won't be quite as good as in the past.
Texas is pretty far from California isn't it? They moved? To play for Legends??
diamondcoach
SILVER
The ‘05 HB Koge team is ranked 40th? How?
rainbow_unicorn
PREMIER
Sounds like these rankings are not very accurate. I see some third teams ranked higher than the same club's first team.
If you are an 05 team looking to win and get noticed, fill your roster with 07s. That's my takeaway.
RandomSoccerFan
GOLD
Remember, to my knowledge, Mark isn't on this site at all. This info just got posted to this forum because people here were using and interested in youthsoccerrankings.com prior. Any direct questions about this new app should probably be addressed right to him at: support@usasportstatistics.net
Right - that doesn't look like this app yet. In his email blast, he said Android was coming soon, but no idea whether that's days/weeks. I likely want to move over to the Android version and let the Apple version lapse if it comes out before the free trial runs out - but not a big deal either way. It's a simple app, the data is what's most important.
It sounds like it's using a similar setup to the YSL rankings. Teams get defined, then there is a process to grab data from a host of different scoring/tournament back ends (gotsoccer/gotsport/etc) for game info. That game info gets automatically pushed to a team, and there is a bunch of backend data normalization to try and make sure that the right data gets to the right team. There is plenty of room for data corruption here, as teams enter their names differently in various tournaments, teams themselves swap players and lineups over time, and a host of other reasons. But - for each team, there is a list of sources clearly defined at the bottom of the team data, so if it has pulled in incorrect data, the team can have that particular source deleted from their record. And similarly - if data hasn't been loaded to their team, they can search for that data that may have been pulled into the system, and have it assigned to the team. In the past, with YSL - anyone could submit corrections for any team, with no login or other requirements. I'm surprised there wasn't more pollution of the data with people messing with it, but I hadn't really seen that with all the teams I had been following, at least. With this new app - you can make the same requests to add data/delete data, but it's now at least tied to an account, that Mark may have an easier time validating whether someone is making updates in good faith or not.
Now in terms of the ratings themselves, it's as simple as goal difference by game. If a team is ranked 42, and they are playing a team ranked 40, they are expected to win by 2. If they win by more than 2, their score goes up a smidge. If they win by less than 2, their score goes down a smidge. Teams need 3 or 4 games in their data before their first rating shows up. So with this type of ranking, it doesn't really matter if teams are playing up. A 2007 team rated 42 should tie a 2008 team rated 42. And whichever team wins will have their rating upped a smidge, and the team that loses will have their rating go down a smidge. This head-to-head goals rating works quite well within a league / area, but if there are never any tournaments or other avenues for there to be cross-play between teams, leagues, or even states, there can certainly be some drift over different geographies. Nothing that will move the needle by several goals, but certainly some effect. Now - the amount that the rating changes, and how much weight is given to more recent games compared to older games, and when do older game results drop off entirely; that's all secret sauce that I don't believe was publicized for YSL, and hasn't been for this update either.
From personal experience - I have found the rankings to be extremely helpful in terms of what type of game we will expect, and I truly can't remember an instance where the rankings turned out to be entirely wrong. For example, this weekend - we had 3 games. We were expected to win one by 4-1, the second by 4-1, and tie the third 2-2. This meant we could expect to do well in 2, and have a tighter game for the third. Turns out we won the first 8-0, the second 7-1, and for the game we were expected to tie - we won 3-0 when the other team fell apart once scored upon.
That hasn't been my experience. If things seem wonky for a particular team or set of teams, go into that team's specific data that is being pulled in, and confirm that the source data is actually mapped to the correct team in each case. If A beats B, and B beats C, A should be better than C, and should show that in the rankings over time. Anything can happen in a single game - but the results will map to the expectations over time, as the ratings will correspond back to the results - as long as the right data is assigned to the right team.
Right - it's just an app in the app store like any other. Subscription gets paid via whatever payment process you have set up for your apple account.
Right - that doesn't look like this app yet. In his email blast, he said Android was coming soon, but no idea whether that's days/weeks. I likely want to move over to the Android version and let the Apple version lapse if it comes out before the free trial runs out - but not a big deal either way. It's a simple app, the data is what's most important.
It sounds like it's using a similar setup to the YSL rankings. Teams get defined, then there is a process to grab data from a host of different scoring/tournament back ends (gotsoccer/gotsport/etc) for game info. That game info gets automatically pushed to a team, and there is a bunch of backend data normalization to try and make sure that the right data gets to the right team. There is plenty of room for data corruption here, as teams enter their names differently in various tournaments, teams themselves swap players and lineups over time, and a host of other reasons. But - for each team, there is a list of sources clearly defined at the bottom of the team data, so if it has pulled in incorrect data, the team can have that particular source deleted from their record. And similarly - if data hasn't been loaded to their team, they can search for that data that may have been pulled into the system, and have it assigned to the team. In the past, with YSL - anyone could submit corrections for any team, with no login or other requirements. I'm surprised there wasn't more pollution of the data with people messing with it, but I hadn't really seen that with all the teams I had been following, at least. With this new app - you can make the same requests to add data/delete data, but it's now at least tied to an account, that Mark may have an easier time validating whether someone is making updates in good faith or not.
Now in terms of the ratings themselves, it's as simple as goal difference by game. If a team is ranked 42, and they are playing a team ranked 40, they are expected to win by 2. If they win by more than 2, their score goes up a smidge. If they win by less than 2, their score goes down a smidge. Teams need 3 or 4 games in their data before their first rating shows up. So with this type of ranking, it doesn't really matter if teams are playing up. A 2007 team rated 42 should tie a 2008 team rated 42. And whichever team wins will have their rating upped a smidge, and the team that loses will have their rating go down a smidge. This head-to-head goals rating works quite well within a league / area, but if there are never any tournaments or other avenues for there to be cross-play between teams, leagues, or even states, there can certainly be some drift over different geographies. Nothing that will move the needle by several goals, but certainly some effect. Now - the amount that the rating changes, and how much weight is given to more recent games compared to older games, and when do older game results drop off entirely; that's all secret sauce that I don't believe was publicized for YSL, and hasn't been for this update either.
From personal experience - I have found the rankings to be extremely helpful in terms of what type of game we will expect, and I truly can't remember an instance where the rankings turned out to be entirely wrong. For example, this weekend - we had 3 games. We were expected to win one by 4-1, the second by 4-1, and tie the third 2-2. This meant we could expect to do well in 2, and have a tighter game for the third. Turns out we won the first 8-0, the second 7-1, and for the game we were expected to tie - we won 3-0 when the other team fell apart once scored upon.
That hasn't been my experience. If things seem wonky for a particular team or set of teams, go into that team's specific data that is being pulled in, and confirm that the source data is actually mapped to the correct team in each case. If A beats B, and B beats C, A should be better than C, and should show that in the rankings over time. Anything can happen in a single game - but the results will map to the expectations over time, as the ratings will correspond back to the results - as long as the right data is assigned to the right team.
Right - it's just an app in the app store like any other. Subscription gets paid via whatever payment process you have set up for your apple account.
Agreed. These don't appear to be as accurate as YSR were. I only really know 2 age groups, and neither seem very accurate for Socal teams.