Phoenix Showcase

Well, I couldn't sleep so I reviewed the recently completed Phoenix showcase.

Taking into account every age group (15, 16, 17, 18) and looking at the Texas Conference and the SoCal teams this is the results.

SoCal Teams (West Coast, Surf, Blues, Slammers, Eagles, Arsenal, Strikers and Real SoCal) finished 36 wins, 22 Losses and 16 Draws. 49% Win percentage, 30% loss percentage.

Texas Conference (all teams) finished 46 wins, 17 losses and 19 draws which is 56% wins, 21% losses. Just the 5 North Texas teams 25 wins, 7 losses and 7 draws for a 64% win rate, 18% loss rate.

Not every team in every age group went to Phoenix and I did not look at other conferences but I would think that the Texas Conference and North Texas showed extremely well this past weekend.

Well done ladies.

DDdad wrote:Well, I couldn't sleep so I reviewed the recently completed Phoenix showcase.  

Taking into account every age group (15, 16, 17, 18) and looking at the Texas Conference and the SoCal teams this is the results.

SoCal Teams (West Coast, Surf, Blues, Slammers, Eagles, Arsenal, Strikers and Real SoCal) finished 36 wins, 22 Losses and 16 Draws.  49% Win percentage, 30% loss percentage.  

Texas Conference (all teams) finished 46 wins, 17 losses and 19 draws which is 56% wins, 21% losses.  Just the 5 North Texas teams 25 wins, 7 losses and 7 draws for a 64% win rate, 18% loss rate.

Not every team in every age group went to Phoenix and I did not look at other conferences but I would think that the Texas Conference and North Texas showed extremely well this past weekend.  

Well done ladies.  

Nice research DDad.  Impressive weekend for the Texas Conference and NTX.

BTW, a little scotch or tequila can help with the sleeping issues

soccer315 wrote:

DDdad wrote:Well, I couldn't sleep so I reviewed the recently completed Phoenix showcase.  

Taking into account every age group (15, 16, 17, 18) and looking at the Texas Conference and the SoCal teams this is the results.

SoCal Teams (West Coast, Surf, Blues, Slammers, Eagles, Arsenal, Strikers and Real SoCal) finished 36 wins, 22 Losses and 16 Draws.  49% Win percentage, 30% loss percentage.  

Texas Conference (all teams) finished 46 wins, 17 losses and 19 draws which is 56% wins, 21% losses.  Just the 5 North Texas teams 25 wins, 7 losses and 7 draws for a 64% win rate, 18% loss rate.

Not every team in every age group went to Phoenix and I did not look at other conferences but I would think that the Texas Conference and North Texas showed extremely well this past weekend.  

Well done ladies.  

Nice research DDad.  Impressive weekend for the Texas Conference and NTX.

BTW, a little scotch or tequila can help with the sleeping issues

One Tequila, Two Tequila, Tree tequeela...floor

The five U-17 North Texas ECNL teams were 12-0-3 in Phoenix.

Can't we get at least one poster to get on this thread and start crying about what is wrong with NT soccer?

Ill start out by saying we are still light years behind "SoCal" soccer! there still and will always be the meca of soccer in this country. North Texas should be sending there coaches to SoCal to watch and learn from them.

North Texas soccer is still terrible and shouldn't be even allowed on the same fields as our SoCal teams.

sccrprntsrcrazy wrote:Ill start out by saying we are still light years behind "SoCal" soccer! there still and will always be the meca of soccer in this country. North Texas should be sending there coaches to SoCal to watch and learn from them.

North Texas soccer is still terrible and shouldn't be even allowed on the same fields as our SoCal teams.

You write we are still light years behind So Cal...and shouldn't be even allowed on the same field as our So Cal teams???

Not the grammar police here but which side do you represent?  I suspect SoCal? 

Shotshagger wrote:Can't we get at least one poster to get on this thread and start crying about what is wrong with NT soccer?

I was just commenting on this, sparking up some conversation. Im all North Texas soccer i just repeat there attitude on the SoCal board's that they still think they are the Best Of the Best in the country.

sccrprntsrcrazy wrote:

Shotshagger wrote:Can't we get at least one poster to get on this thread and start crying about what is wrong with NT soccer?

I was just commenting on this, sparking up some conversation. Im all North Texas soccer i just repeat there attitude on the SoCal board's that they still think they are the Best Of the Best in the country.

The last I heard is that Texas is becoming the new California. Change is good, California has new competition in the soccer world. Competition should make all parties involved much better over time.

Nat team and college coaches would say that our NTX teams are well organized, physical, and effective (win). Our players are athletic, tough, and aggressive. They are a reflection of the emphasis our area puts on immediate results. Unfortunately college coaches don't recruit by the number of trophies we win.

Our basic mentality is that 'we won so our players must be better'. I mean who around here doesn't want their academy team to be ranked in the top 10 at U8? The end result is that the majority of our players are technically and tactically average, it's not even debatable just look at the rosters of the sweet 16 teams.

And Cali isn't the only area that excels at developing players. Va, NC, NJ, Fla are other states besides Cali that do a good job. (we can still beat their select teams, right?)

But what about A&M? Isn't their roster loaded with all the great NTX players our coaches have nurtured from 5-18? Nope, even coach G at A&M knows the truth, the beacon of college soccer success in Texas has only 3 NTX players on his roster (6 from Cali)

http://www.aggieathletics.com/SportSelect.dbml?&DB_LANG=C&DB_OEM_ID=27300&SPID=93233&SPSID=632674

So let me get this straight. NT soccer produces players that know how to win, but not how to play? Are you suggesting colleges value something that transcends merely winning and losing?

And to think…all this time, we've thought it boiled down to putting our shots in the net, and keeping theirs out.

DrSoccer wrote:Nat team and college coaches would say that our NTX teams are well organized, physical, and effective (win). Our players are athletic, tough, and aggressive. They are a reflection of the emphasis our area puts on immediate results. Unfortunately college coaches don't recruit by the number of trophies we win.

Our basic mentality is that 'we won so our players must be better'. I mean who around here doesn't want their academy team to be ranked in the top 10 at U8? The end result is that the majority of our players are technically and tactically average, it's not even debatable just look at the rosters of the sweet 16 teams.

And Cali isn't the only area that excels at developing players.  Va, NC, NJ, Fla are other states besides Cali that do a good job. (we can still beat their select teams, right?)

But what about A&M?  Isn't their roster loaded with all the great NTX players our coaches have nurtured from 5-18? Nope, even coach G at A&M knows the truth,  the beacon of college soccer success in Texas has only 3 NTX players on his roster (6 from Cali)

http://www.aggieathletics.com/SportSelect.dbml?&DB_LANG=C&DB_OEM_ID=27300&SPID=93233&SPSID=632674

The California teams we have played in the recent years have all been very physical and athletic as hell. Plus there style is very direct!

Unless you are new to this area this isn't new news. Ask Bell or G or that ex-Texas guy at smu, where NTX soccer stacks up nationally, its their opinion that matters not mine. Personally I like all the trophies in the garage too. As one successful NTX select coach once put it 'if I didn't have to win I could teach these girls how to play soccer'.

The coaches figure out how to win vs figuring out how to develop megan's tactical vision and technical passing skills. We all know possession soccer requires a higher level of skills than Megan kicking the ball blindly forward 20 times a game in the hope that Stephanie can 'run on' to the ball and kick it into the goal. Based on your assessment (us 1 goal, them 0) that would be a successful soccer result even if we just kicked the ball out of bounds the rest of the game, we won, right? But after 8 yrs we end up with 1 girl who can only kick the ball long, and another who can only run-on-to a ball. Neither player would be attractive to a top program, regardless of the full trophy case.

A high level of Competition is critical to development but winning isn't.

This is good stuff amigos what teams did you play? I think you might be yanking my chain. But just to keep this thread going...

So if your team beat all the direct, physical teams from Cali then your girls should be in line for some pretty nice offers from NC, Wake, Fl State, UCLA, Stanford, and A&M?

I came across this abt something they are doing in Cali, let me know if you disagree..

"The SCDSL was created simply to allow clubs the freedom to make decisions that were in the best interest of their teams. Prior to the SCDSL, success was measured by results.

Effort meant nothing without the win and achievement was not measured by effort. So much emphasis was placed on winning that player development was an afterthought to the service provided by coaches and the product provided by the clubs.

Good players will always be good players but other players didn't have the chance to get better because winning games was too important. Coaches couldn't risk playing the average player for fear of the loss. Creativity was not encouraged and players did not have the chance to play without the constant pressure of winning.

Taking away the pressure of winning does not make for less competitive games. The games are still competitive. Teams still want to do their best to win. The difference is that losing does not bring a staggering consequence when the effort to achieve is more important."

More reading here:

http://www.soccernation.com/where-are-we-now-an-update-on-southern-california-development-soccer-league-cms-4441

Take the importance off of the result and you now have the ability to promote creativity. Develop the player through practice sessions and apply those sessions to a game environment where it's ok to make a mistake and it's ok to lose a game because the effort that is made is what is most important. That effort becomes positive re-enforcement to the players and through a new found confidence players can develop. So through the creation of the SCDSL, soccer people were empowered to make decisions for the good of the soccer players. (Someone is actually talking about the good of the PLAYER and not the TEAM?)

DrSoccer wrote:Nat team and college coaches would say that our NTX teams are well organized, physical, and effective (win). Our players are athletic, tough, and aggressive. They are a reflection of the emphasis our area puts on immediate results. Unfortunately college coaches don't recruit by the number of trophies we win.

Our basic mentality is that 'we won so our players must be better'. I mean who around here doesn't want their academy team to be ranked in the top 10 at U8? The end result is that the majority of our players are technically and tactically average, it's not even debatable just look at the rosters of the sweet 16 teams.

And Cali isn't the only area that excels at developing players.  Va, NC, NJ, Fla are other states besides Cali that do a good job. (we can still beat their select teams, right?)

But what about A&M?  Isn't their roster loaded with all the great NTX players our coaches have nurtured from 5-18? Nope, even coach G at A&M knows the truth,  the beacon of college soccer success in Texas has only 3 NTX players on his roster (6 from Cali)

http://www.aggieathletics.com/SportSelect.dbml?&DB_LANG=C&DB_OEM_ID=27300&SPID=93233&SPSID=632674

NCAA final 16 includes Arkansas Razorbacks. 8 of their top 16 players are from North Texas.
Sting -4, Feet -1, Solar -1, FCD -1, Texans -1

Best of luck v. Duke tomorrow!

http://www.arkansasrazorbacks.com/SportSelect.dbml?SPID=678&SPSID=11475


http://www.arkansasrazorbacks.com/SportSelect.dbml?SPID=678&SPSID=11475

Sweep - yes a great run for that team!  I saw most of those kids play here in NTX.  Natasha Anasi, Txns 92 (D) scored the goal in the duke win over Fla yesterday, I believe there are 2 other NTXn s at Duke as well. It would be great to see ark move on...

So you're saying my kid's NT team must have been playing kickball to have beaten its California opponent last weekend?

The SC dads I overheard chalked it up to team speed, but the truth is, even our team's parents get frustrated by their daughters' determination to establish and maintain possession, even if that means the ball spends a lot of time in the bottom third of the field. I don't think we scored off a kick and chase play all weekend.  Didn't have to.  

NT kids certainly don't have some sort of genetic advantage, but the high level of competition in this area makes playing top teams from other regions 'just more of the same' instead of some jolt from an alternate universe of higher level soccer.

You watch your team and know what style of play they use, and also what type of soccer most play around these fair burbs. If your team is one of those playing possession soccer at the highest level then you know you are in the right spot.

I think there is truth in what both doc and amigo are saying. Doc is right on about the national assessment of NTX players. If you don't believe him, go study the commits lists and see for yourself. It's there in black and white. We have a lot of volume, but very few of our kids are going to the top programs in the country each year ( I used ncaa RPI). There are over 320 schools classified as d1, and I'd say a solid third of those schools are places you'd not want your kid attending otherwise. Some of the d2 and d3 schools with strong academic platforms look more appealing than some of these schools I'm seeing listed as commits at the bottom of D1.

Also think amigo is right and SoCal is starting to look more and more like NTX. I watched so cal blues and they look like carbon copies of a prototypical ntx team in both style of play and in the type of big, physical, aggressive athletes fielded. Majority of SoCal teams at surf cup last summer did not play possession soccer (at least not in my dds age group).

I think trend is swinging towards the east coast/northeast as the current mecca of women's soccer talent.

4-3-3 wrote:I think there is truth in what both doc and amigo are saying. Doc is right on about the national assessment of NTX players. If you don't believe him, go study the commits lists and see for yourself. It's there in black and white. We have a lot of volume, but very few of our kids are going to the top programs in the country each year ( I used ncaa RPI).  There are over 320 schools classified as d1, and I'd say a solid third of those schools are places you'd not want your kid attending otherwise. Some of the d2 and d3 schools with strong academic platforms look more appealing than some of these schools I'm seeing listed as commits at the bottom of D1.

Also think amigo is right and SoCal is starting to look more and more like NTX. I watched so cal blues and they look like carbon copies of a prototypical ntx team in both style of play and in the type of big, physical, aggressive athletes fielded. Majority of SoCal teams at surf cup last summer did not play possession soccer (at least not in my dds age group).

I think trend is swinging towards the east coast/northeast as the current mecca of women's soccer talent.

If you have seen that SoCal blues team play then you know about the two forwards. Big, physical, and fast that team is instructed to get the ball to them at every opportunity. Arsenal Agguero and legg, impressive athletically along with beach black and sharks "huge" San Diego surf was the only team that did not stand out as overly athletic, but very dangerous if you let them play.

May be I am slow in a take here.

So, let me see if I get this clear.

You have on one hand a bunch of SoCal teams loaded with well developed, creative, high soccer IQ and athletic girls but can not win against less developed, less creative, low soccer IQ and marginal athletic NTX teams?


In the U15 (98s) ECNL National Championship in Richmond, NTX had 3 teams in the final 8 (Sting, FCD, Texans) and SoCal had zero. The top team in SoCal conference, San Diego Surf, was eliminated by the 4th team in the Texas Conference in the National Playoffs.

It seems like the well developed, creative, high soccer IQ and athletic players can not seem to be able to play as a team.

Something doesn't add up here.

Pele98 wrote:May be I am slow in a take here.

So, let me see if I get this clear.

You have on one hand a bunch of SoCal teams loaded with well developed, creative, high soccer IQ and athletic girls but can not win against less developed, less creative, low soccer IQ and marginal athletic NTX teams?


In the U15 (98s) ECNL National Championship in Richmond, NTX had 3 teams in the final 8 (Sting, FCD, Texans) and SoCal had zero. The top team in SoCal conference, San Diego Surf, was eliminated by the 4th team in the Texas Conference in the National Playoffs.

It seems like the well developed, creative, high soccer IQ and athletic players can not seem to be able to play as a team.

Something doesn't add up here.

... ... ... ... ... ... ...  ....

Amigos wrote:

4-3-3 wrote:I think there is truth in what both doc and amigo are saying. Doc is right on about the national assessment of NTX players. If you don't believe him, go study the commits lists and see for yourself. It's there in black and white. We have a lot of volume, but very few of our kids are going to the top programs in the country each year ( I used ncaa RPI).  There are over 320 schools classified as d1, and I'd say a solid third of those schools are places you'd not want your kid attending otherwise. Some of the d2 and d3 schools with strong academic platforms look more appealing than some of these schools I'm seeing listed as commits at the bottom of D1.

Also think amigo is right and SoCal is starting to look more and more like NTX. I watched so cal blues and they look like carbon copies of a prototypical ntx team in both style of play and in the type of big, physical, aggressive athletes fielded. Majority of SoCal teams at surf cup last summer did not play possession soccer (at least not in my dds age group).

I think trend is swinging towards the east coast/northeast as the current mecca of women's soccer talent.

If you have seen that SoCal blues team play then you know about the two forwards. Big, physical, and fast that team is instructed to get the ball to them at every opportunity. Arsenal Agguero and legg, impressive athletically along with beach black and sharks "huge" San Diego surf was the only team that did not stand out as overly athletic, but very dangerous if you let them play.

Was very impressed with Arsenal Legg. Very technical, sophisticated style of play. Proof positive knowing how to play doesn't always win over BFS until they get older, as they were one of the few SoCal teams I thought played a possession game. Watched them completely outplay SoCal blues, but didn't make it out of bracket at surf.

Pele98 wrote:May be I am slow in a take here.

So, let me see if I get this clear.

You have on one hand a bunch of SoCal teams loaded with well developed, creative, high soccer IQ and athletic girls but can not win against less developed, less creative, low soccer IQ and marginal athletic NTX teams?


In the U15 (98s) ECNL National Championship in Richmond, NTX had 3 teams in the final 8 (Sting, FCD, Texans) and SoCal had zero. The top team in SoCal conference, San Diego Surf, was eliminated by the 4th team in the Texas Conference in the National Playoffs.

It seems like the well developed, creative, high soccer IQ and athletic players can not seem to be able to play as a team.

Something doesn't add up here.

So winning trumps development, creativity and soccer IQ? This pretty much sums up the problem with the focus of NT soccer.