So a good deal of the larger clubs - at least from Illinois are gobbling up smaller clubs in areas where the do not have a presence. Fire, Magic & Sockers have all done so while Eclipse have spread their wings as well. I was just wondering whether those of you out there with such experience as players or parents, have any thoughts regarding the level of training players get at these satellite locations vs the main hub are any different?
One man's opinion... Eclipse is a multi-site machine on the girl's side. They're all about finding the best athletes in the Chicago area and beyond to compete for national championships. I don't think they care much where you came from as long as you can help them win. Magic is similar, but has much more competition in the Chicago area, so they find talent literally anywhere they can. I was on a flight recently from the west coast, and sat next to a dad who was bringing his kid to play with Magic. Sockers is probably the opposite extreme. They are focused almost exclusively on development and they believe nobody can do it like Schaumburg. Kids at satellite locations often feel like they don't get opportunities to play on top teams. I don't know that all are worthy, but I've known some that were and never got a chance. It's hard to consider Fire a multi-location club even though they may have more satellite locations than anyone. In their case, the satellite locations license the use of the name and uniforms, but are completely separate, independent clubs. Players at these clubs can certainly reach the Fire Academy, but they really don't have more opportunity than anyone else. Like I said, just one man's opinion.
I forgot to address training, which was your main point. I think in most cases the top teams will get the best training. Lower teams get lower level training, regardless of location. Sockers is likely an exception with all Schaumburg kids getting the same training. I don't think this applies to Fire as I explained above.
I think the biggest problem with Eclipse is that certain ages are located exclusively in certain areas - such a u15 and up girls. That's all Oak Brook and poses a daunting drive for some parents that are in the NW burbs. You are right about Magic - we all know those stories for sure. But I am wonder what the training is like from the hub to the satellite branches... Is it uniform? Does LM have a handle on all these locations - draft the coaching and training methods etc... In other words are they similar and how far off are they in terms of resources - same said for Eclipse??? As far as Sockers is concerned I see their biggest challenge as being themselves. I believe they have the right formula in Schaumburg - better than the rest. However the problem with that is that they know it. That ideology exists at their satelite locations as well and the sort of attitude that "They will come to us" doesn't play well when you're surrounded by a massive amount of other programs. I feel they need to do more in CL and Naperville. And what is going on with their Wisconsin locations - not a peep anywhere on that? Fire seems to be a mess - more then likely as a result of many locations just leasing the name for a cost plus uniform fee. Do they follow a coaching method that is developed from Bridgeview? How involved is the hub with these satellite locations? I have seen MANY really bad Chi Fire Jr teams - especially out of the North location. So bad you scratch your head and wonder why the hell parents are paying for that?
A lot of clubs do this on a team by team basis, instead of affiliating entire clubs. Usually the team uses it to get into leagues that their town club could not get into otherwise. The training often is still the local people, with perhaps the bigger name club teaching the coaches to train or guest training. I can think of no case of the bigger name club actually sending its own trainers to satellite locations. No matter the club or how big the name, or how good the training is for a certain team or age group, you should take your child to open practices for the team to see what the training is really like. Then you should do your due dilligence to chat the parents up and see if things should be the same the following year. Finding the best youth soccer team for your child is much more about the specific situation instead of the club reputation.
They are getting exposed in the ECNL on regional and national level, even though they are still #1 in IL on the girls side. I do not like how most of their teams are playing and how they are developing players. There is simply more competition and talent available on the boys side. I would say that Sockers is the club that develops players closest to what I personally like. They are a club that believes in their philosophy and ways to a fault almost. At least they have one, as opposed to the rest. I think you are right. I don't think the Fire is the same at all locations. But that may apply to the other clubs as well. It is hard for any club to run all its locations the same way. Eclipse's older teams (ECNL teams) also practice in Waukeegan. I heard that LM is more on a part-time basis now. He spends more time in Rockford. I have no idea if he or anyone else is coordinating all their locations. IMO having multiple locations for any of these clubs is a good way to reach a larger talent pool, but at the same time, it always presents organizational problems. The main coaches cannot be at all locations at the same time and it's difficult to hire all quality coaches in one location, let alone at multiple locations.
Have to agree darn near 100% with GKParent's original comments, and the responses from everyone else to that post that filled in some more of the details. It's precisely what I've heard, and experienced. I think I'm finally starting to have a handle on the scene, as there's a lot of conflicting info.
Not sure if this is the right thread but it is about the eclipse. It is pretty amazing how they get parents to remain so committed to most of their teams. I noticed that they had 2 outstanding teams at u14 last year. It appeared that they made 2 different teams this year; one for year round girls in the ecnl and the other for usysa competitions. The ecnl team won the nationals the same week the usysa team was winning regionals. Pretty amazing accomplishment but it looks like they have dropped a bunch of the usysa girls and replaced them with ecnl girls for those finals. I would be very upset if I had played all the usysa events ( MRL, national league, state cup and regionals) and then was dumped for someone who already finished their season in a different league. Maybe all the girls are injured or on vacation.
That is a very talented age group for them, especially the girls who play on the U15 ECNL team this year. So far they have developed them well. How do you know that they have dropped a bunch of the usysa players and used ecnl players instead in the finals?
I think the very talented team had some troubles with the Sockers ECNL team this year. From my recolection Eclipse won 1, tied one - only because Sockers headed a ball in their own net, and lost 2 to Sockers. It was a shame that the USClub was so anemic in that age group this year - no Hawks or Eclipse.
Very good age group for Eclipse. I think they had the 3, if not all 4, of the state cup semi finalists. The rosters for the events are all posted. I have some former players in that pool so i checked the results.
The u15 Sockers ECNL team (last years u14s) has some serious talent......and I expect Eclipse will have their hands full with them this year. Sockers U16s beat eclipse in regular season last year as well, but doesn't have the depth as their " little sisters", and they lost some talent this year. It doesn't surprise me at all that Eclipse would change a roster Ina championship game, their only concern is to win. And who really cares about the psyche of a 15 year old girl? Ugh. I'll stick with Sockers.
It seems too me that winning is # 1 and expanding to pull in more top players is how they want to achieve that. Unless my kid is a u14 player and in the top end of the heap, there is always more to learn and I feel Sockers is where you will get that. So it's not to say that Ecplise is bad, just more geared (IMO) to the top players who need or want to be on a top team. But as you implied, Sockers are catching up on that end as well.
I don't know which team you are thinking of, but the U15s games between Eclipse and Sockers were 5:0 and 1:2 during regular season. The ECNL schedule doesn't show them playing more than twice against each other, unless you are talking about other competitions. If you are accusing Eclipse of just caring about winning, then it's funny that you would be talking about comparing teams via results. Sockers care about winning too, btw. I feel like Sockers is developing the players well up until the U14 age group where Ahmed is overseeing the process. But after that they are about the same as every other "top club" in Chicago. Sockers are trying to catch up to Eclipse on the girls side, but they are still a little short on talent, especially at the U15 age group (U16 for the new upcoming season). I think Sockers should start playing their girls teams in the IWSL instead of the lower boys divisions in NISL, which is what appears to be happening for the new Fall season.
I do not disagree with what you are saying for the most part. And I was talking about non-ECNL games (I attended these). Of course things may change during these games but essentially it was the sam bunch of girls. Of all in the U14 group I felt that Hawks and Sockers played the most skilled soccer. Sockers were just not as fast or physical as Eclipse. Yes - they are playing in IWSL but some teams will still play in NISL and NPL. Question for you - what are the benefits you see in playing in IWSL that will help?
Agree yonko............and yes. the Sockers girls will be playing in IWSL this year as well as ECNL and NPL. I agree with your comment about the U15 girls (upcoming u16s) but they did some damage, however, out in New Jersey at the ECNL PDA Showcase this past May. Went 3-0 in shut outs and won the whole thing, first out of 26 teams at a premier tournament. Now, one can argue that the competition wasn't that great, but they were all ECNL teams so how bad could they be? And they went 2-1 at ECNL Playoffs in June. Hopefully they will be competitive this year.
First, you are talking about non-ECNL games. Second, you are talking about the U14s. When did Eclipse's U15s played Sockers in non-ECNL games and for what competition? There is a difference between their U14s and U15s from last season. The U15s are pretty much the most talented group of girls Eclipse has had (ECNL pool). And many of these girls are different type of players than what is typically an Eclipse player. At that age group they have a ECNL pool roster and a USYSA team. BTW, I have seen Sockers' U14 girls play in one game and they looked good. Ahmed had them playing well. The main benefit in playing IWSL is familiarity with your opponent. For which part?
Yup - sometimes I get the ages mixed in the opening of the season - I assumed they were discussion last year's u14 / this years u15. My bad. Many of the girls teams will play in both IWSL and NISL. Seeing some of the McH teams (arguably the weakest) come in and spend 2 years playing boys has made a tremendous difference in how aggressive they play. During the winter those girls teams were soundly beating other girls teams that they had once lost to frequently. And they were beating them 8-0 and more. Sure there was an improvement in skill but the agressiveness stood out more so. Not that - that is how it should be but it is part of the game and I do not think they would have come off that way had they not been playing against boys. I think in general - especially at the lower ages, boys hustle and ball hog more then the girls. I see really good u8/u9 girls get very frustrated because of this during dev play. Is that good/bad? I look at it as another angle in the game to provide them experience if nothing else.
No problem. We were talking about last year's U15s, which is this year's U16s and by "year" I mean "season". I know it gets tricky this time of the year. I saw in one game Socker's U14s in June coached by Ahmed and I liked how they played. Really? So how many game would each team play? Does the club charge extra for that? I can see how playing against boys can help the girls become more aggressive and brave with their play, but at some point they have to play only against other girls, just for familiarity with the opponents for future competitions like State Cup, Regionals, ECNL, etc. On another note, where did the McH Sockers' teams played during the winter? Depending on location, it is easier to beat up on teams during indoor leagues as the competition is watered-down in many indoor facilities. Perhaps a better combination would be to play NISL in the fall and IWSL in the spring. I would say that boys are more eager to stand out individually and beat opponents by dribbling than girls are. On the other hand, girls are more willing team players. Players who stand out on the girls side are usually players with "boys mentality" - more aggressive, brave, selfish, intuitive, etc. "Individuality", "selfishness", "ball hogging" whatever you call it is not a bad thing at the U8-U10 age group. This is the time when individual skills and tactics are the priority anyway. Group and team concepts come later. If players (boys and girls) do not learn to dribble and play individually when they are younger, when are they going to learn it? I'll give you an example. Over the weekend I was watching a high-level competitive U17 game between Eclipse and NSA Premier. It was a final for a tournament. I can tell you that I rarely saw any player from either team to break down the opponents defense with dribbling or taking players 1v1/1v2, especially in the attacking third. There was some nice passing in midfield and switching play (especially from Eclipse's players), but players were not willing or capable of dribbling past their defender and creating more dangerous situations in most occasions. There were only couple of instances when that happened and immediately created a goal scoring chance, more dangerous than anything else created. I don't know how these high level coaches from Eclipse and NSA do not see this and coach it/demand it from their players. I mean the whole point of all this passing and switching play is (or should be) about creating situations where a player should look to penetrate or break down the defense with individual play (dribbling, shooting).
We were talking about Eclipse's current U16 "dream team", which won the national championship last year. I noticed they are off to a mediocre start this year, a tie and a loss up in Michigan last weekend. Uncharacteristic for them as I know there is a ton of talent. What gives? Are there injuries?