Are you thinking of trying to change teams now, for the spring season, or just looking ahead to tryouts and moving next fall? It could be helpful to spy on a few practices and possibly try and attend one or two as a guest just to see what your daughter thinks and how she fits, do you see yourself making the drive 3+ times a week, etc. This is what we did and it was helpful. This is a bit more challenging obviously if you are looking to move for spring given some of the restrictions still in place with pods and indoor observer restrictions, but would certainly be more doable if it is a fall move you have in mind.
He hasn't said what age daughter is but if h.s. age or close and you go Sockers, your daughter will get coach Rudy. From what I've seen overall they are doing a strong job of rebuilding girls side. Especially Rudy. His groups are very disciplined keeping shape both ways and girls seem to get better technically under him. Because they are rebuilding, being new not as likely to keep new kids rotting in lower groups if the pool... Just my .02
I see IWSL and IHSA are working together to ensure girls high school teams can play this Spring. Have not heard anything from MRL - nothing on their latest letter indicating that they will host a Spring high school season for D1 Illinois teams - despite that I have "heard" we will be playing games in Rockford as early as next month. It would be a shame if IYSA did not officially manage these games - but it would not be a shock either.
Just had some down time - looking at rosters for womens soccer at WIU and I see quite a few players from outside the States. Is this new or has it been happening for some time? Are players from Europe, Canada and Brazil comeing to the States just for soccer - perhaps a scholarship? https://goleathernecks.com/sports/womens-soccer/roster Interesting.
This is a great point. We left a well respected but still community club for the "Academy" level at an Eclipse/FCU-style girls program this season. My family is "all in" when it comes to all of our kids' activities, so the 4 days a week of practice and travel out of state was no problem for us (in fact, it kept my daughter sane to have the normalcy of soccer in her life), it is going to be very difficult for some families. I've heard rumors that a few of the girls from the club we left might be trying out at the club we moved to. I wonder if parents new to an Eclipse/FCU/Sockers-style program are actually ready or even understand just how much soccer and soccer-dedication is necessary with such a move. Being at the club for organized soccer time is just the tip of the iceberg. The kids who "want it" are playing futsal, driving 30 miles to practice, flying to other states to play in 3v3 or futsal tournaments and when not doing that, they're in their garage or basement or even on the side of the house working on soccer. For families who are used to picking and choosing which practices they will attend this week based on their upcoming schedule, these academy-level programs won't be a fit. And that's okay. Water needs to seek its own level. To me, the key to these academy level programs is that you have families and clubs that are roughly committed to playing soccer at a high level and players, coaches, and parents who are willing to do what it takes to do that.
Not new at all, though maybe newer on the women's side. Go look at some men's rosters -- many are half or more non-US, even DIII and NAIA (I took a look recently at Indiana, just out of curiosity, and they appear to be a notable exception). Any coaches out there can correct me if I'm wrong on this, but I'd guess that a big chunk of the already limited scholarship money goes to these players. Even the junior colleges draw a ton of foreign kids. I know a juco men's coach who is inundated with highlight videos from kids outside the US looking for a way to get here, and he signs quite a few. My son's HS team played this school last year: https://gsalions.com/ They were good and, from what I could tell, composed almost entirely of kids from Brazil. Someone from the school said their kids generally come here in search of scholarships.
Curious if any clubs are communicating yet about their spring plans for HS-age players, with the IHSA firming up season dates and the like. I think my son's club is still trying to talk with HS coaches about what's possible and hoping for some flexibility.
Back in the day the FC Alliance/Stamford Bridge and Crystal Lake Force had some chips on their shoulders for Sockers - whether it be the now defunct CL Sockers or Palatine Sockers - it never mattered. My guess is that they were used to being a big fish in a little pond and the only way to prove to parents that they were getting value - was to beat a big fish from a big pond. In any case these clubs had some really nasty parents. I knew of few of them - had a conversation with one guy whose kid used to play with my older daughter and he kept saying "We could be just as good - easily!" Then I explained to him that we were training 4 days a week - had NPL games at 9PM or 930PM during the week and then weekend games. You could see in his face that as a parent - he was not even up to that sort of commitment. You gotta put the time in if you want to play at that level - period. It's going to impact not just your player but you as parents and your other siblings. Hell I remember when I pleaded with Lynn and Leanne to offer wifi for parents at Soccer City so that parents (me in particular) could work - since I was there so often. Now that said, the StamfordBridge/Alliance club is gone but the Force is offering a good deal more training sessions and other opportunities to train then they were when my now 22 year old was playing. Coaches are given more control of the teams so you do see - especially with the "elite" teams, more opportunities to play. I don't think the quality measure up in many cases - but you can find some that do. Not to praise my kids club but we do have the former ECNL and Girls Dir from Sockers coaching our team and we train 3-4 times a week, plenty of games and meaningful tourneys where we are playing top teams and challenged. So if we are doing it and not one of the bif three - I have to imagine other clubs are as well, Chicago Inter perhaps?
This thread essentially derived from the old Sockers vs Magic threads (5). I recall in those when Fire was the new kid on the block. It's been a long time - Magic is essentially done in terms of the power house they once were. As far as Fire, I just get the feeling sometimes that they prefer to just be a pro team and not have the youth club so closely tied to them. I think Part 1-3 are archived but here is Part IV and there is a Part 5 - good reads for sure regarding how the top level of soccer for the boys emerged over the years. https://www.bigsoccer.com/threads/chicago-magic-vs-sockers-fc-chicago-part-iv.636779/
These are really a great read as to the landscape of youth soccer - in some cases more exclusive to the boys side but still a great read if you have the time. Lots of great coaches - bad club decisions in here. Sockers moving AG out of the u-littles program that he developed is likely one that Sockers may regret today. The total collapse of Magic because 2 rich daddys didn't want to drive to Frankfort - SO MANY GREAT COACHES from that club now scattered or retired.The demise of Wind, fall of Schwaben and de-value of MRL as Magic and Sockers pulled their teams out for Academy and PreAcademy play. Just a ton of past history. Again - worth the long read. Magic vs Sockers 1 https://www.bigsoccer.com/threads/magic-vs-sockers-fc.198616/#post-4957831 Magic vs Sockers 2 https://www.bigsoccer.com/threads/chicago-magic-vs-sockers-part-ii.376130/#post-8863841 Magic vs Sockers 3 https://www.bigsoccer.com/threads/chicago-magic-vs-sockers-part-iii.468058/#post-10514462 Magic vs Sockers 4 https://www.bigsoccer.com/threads/chicago-magic-vs-sockers-fc-chicago-part-iv.636779/#post-13510954 Magic vs Sockers 5 https://www.bigsoccer.com/threads/chicago-magic-vs-sockers-fc-chicago-part-iv.636779/
Thank you, very interesting to read. You can add Raiders to the list of collapsed clubs once the owners kids lost interest in soccer
Screwed up Part 5 - here is the right link. https://www.bigsoccer.com/threads/chicago-magic-vs-sockers-fc-chicago-part-5.1444354/#post-20847167
I don't know if it was the drop ceiling or cinder brick walls but it just came too me It's only funny if you've been there long enough!
A teammate and good friend of my kid has a sibling who moved on from our club to Fire. Says its great cuz it doesn't cost anything lol. They did admit that they might have gone to Sockers if it was also free because they, in their words, produce more pro players. Don't know if that's true but its what they said. If it is true I find it strange that the pro club that's free to play at doesn't produce as many pros. No money and no pros? Whats the point of the academy then?
Sockers is the only game in Chicagoland for the top boys IMO. Sure there are some really talented boys playing at FCU, Fire and other clubs but the reality is that the majority - or largest pool of talent is and always has been at Sockers. Now - that being said, if your boy is not at the top of the heap - he'll for sure be considered just a number. As far as I know - the only club that came close to emulating Sockers success on the boys side was Chicago Magic during the MM days.
I'd say it's at least partly a coaching staff with stability at the older aged pools. I'm positive they have many many contacts to scouts and coaches including a former usmnt coach... They get players to the right places after h.s. Look at Mueller. Lot of talent senior year but didnt have his act together. There's a reason he ended up at Wisconsin. Crushed it last 2 years and now hes Pro and still room for improvement. For every pro there's 10 guys or more with at least equal talent but didnt get the right breaks... Yes, Sockers is competitive. I think 04 pool will still have over 60 players. I think most 04 pools are big, because of age cutoff redux from years past?
Got me thinking... Is the fall out for talented teams worse or the same between the girls and boys? First off, lets go back to those Magic/Sockers days when they ruled State Cup and both participated in MRL exclusively - Pre DA essentially. We know that once these two clubs left for DA, that the State Cup was taken over by other clubs - as these two would basically send in their 2nd squads. We also know that the overall level of play in MRL went down quite a bit. *I think* we can say that the DA - and eventually ECNL in 2009, had the exact same impact to MRL and ODP as well. That being said, I believe that the "best of the rest" and many other clubs did not just take over those top spots (at first to a lesser extent because in many cases they were not as good of teams on the boys side as Magic/Sockers) but yet some did well - Campton girls, Raiders boys, Grove United had 1 or two good girls teams, NSA and of course TC boys and girls and Galaxy girls. Around this time many clubs went from 2 days of training to 3 and also added more programming during the winter season. 3v3 and futsal was brought in at many of these clubs and tourneys exploded - Grove United at Olympic for example. I'd argue that the Boys DA and the Girls ECNL (when they were the top and only dogs in the hunt) was a stablizing period for youth soccer. ODP started to build back, MRL started to build back and even though it was segmented, We could see a pyramid... Boys: 1. DA (Club exclusive) 2. NPL (Not club exclusive) 3. NISL (Not club exclusive) 4. MRL (Not club exclusive) Girls: 1. ECNL (Club exclusive) 2. MRL (Not club exclusive) 3. NPL (Not club exclusive) 4. IWSL (Not club exclusive) The DA adding girls - and the ECNL upping the game on the boys side started to water down top leagues - essentially and logically, lowering the game for all but mostly on the girls side. Boys: 1. DA (Club exclusive) 2. NPL (Not club exclusive) 3. NISL (Not club exclusive) 4. MRL (Not club exclusive) Girls: 1. ECNL or DA? Depends on the region. 2. MRL - There was hope here that we may see growth as some of the second - former DA teams were considering placment in MRL which would have increased the competition in P1 and downward essentially. 3. IWSL 4. NPL which at this point was worse then the A division of IWSL IMO. USYS went on to instead creat Club v Club as a place holder for the top GDA teams who eventually chose to go with the GA which I believe is basically run by TopHat - a way to keep them out of ECNL and add legitamacy to the new league. Instead of nixing CvC, USYS moved up some of the P1 and P2 teams but did so based on clubs - the same way ECNL and the now defucnt DA did. This essentially turned the MRL into the IWSL and pushed the IWSL lower in terms of competition and talent. So no what do we have? Boys: 1. MRL/GA? (Club exclusive) 2. NPL (Not club exclusive) 3. NISL (Not club exclusive) 4. MRL (Not club exclusive) Girls: 1. ECNL (Club exclusive) 2. GDA (Club exclusive) 3. SCNL (Club exclusive) 4. CvC or MRL? (Maybe Club exclusive?) So someone on the boys end help me out here - if I a wrong or missing something. Not sure that is the case because NPL and NISL on the boys side has always been incredibly strong. Nontheless I think - if SCNL is a full on league, that the girls end has suffered far more simply because all top for leagues are now exclusive. If you are a top female player at Northwind, Strikers or Celtic, you have to leave your team and join one of the clubs that are members of these leagues. Is that a good thing? How will this impact soccer over the next few years?
Regarding the boys - I think you have it right in some respects. Remember NISL is similar to YSSL in the fact that they have multiple different levels and are a local league (broken down by color) so to put them ahead of MRL I am not sure about that. You are not exactly comparing apples to apples when you compare NISL to those other leagues because they are pretty much IL specific (maybe with some northern IN outliers?). If you want to compare NISL to YSSL and talk about strength, I would agree that NISL is stronger. Are all these leagues a good thing? 1. It gives a place for players to play so yes... kids (and/or their parents) are enjoying the game 2. But... no... because it waters down the overall level. Honestly, I am not sure the indvidual level of soccer has improved since the days of Magic and Sockers (of old). They produced/recruited some fantastic players and had some very strong teams. I just don't see Illinois teams competing at the same level as they used to. I think a major part of it is that players/teams cannot train year round outside while in many area's they can train 10-12 months in an outdoor environment playing 11v11 soccer. Regarding players having to leave one program and go to another to get better competition... that still happened back in the Magic/Sockers days (it's in the threads you linked).
Well my point is the top of NISL is easily compared to MRL as it's light years past the top of the YSSL in terms of talent which is more comparable to P1 and P2 boys MRL IMO. Yes this trumps all IMO because in the end it produces players who are not challenged as much as they could be. I agree 100%. I talk with former coaches and parents going back to those days and we all agree - soccer was just better all around - expecially when ODP was the only "elite" game in town. But they can and do. Outside of COVID, some clubs have very good resources that allow them to play all year around. I'd push back and say it's a failure of a pyramid/relegation that provides stability for parents and players. Also a total lack of any overall governing body to manage the mess... Yes it did but now you have parents leaving for GLSA, Team Chicago and Chicago Inter because they too are part of an "exclusive" platform that promotes itself as the greatest in the land. We've covered it may times before - parents (for the most part) are donkeys when it comes to understanding the real landscape of youth soccer - same could be said for probably most youth sports - I would imagine. This allows clubs and leagues to get away with essentially the Canadian Football League duping Americans that their competition is much greater then the NFL. So while I agree that we'll always have good player running to Sockers, FCU, Eclipse... The expansion of that "exclusivity" that only "they have access to the top levels of youth sports" along with multiple of other clubs - where this is simply not true, is adverse to maintaining a good pyramid of development and growth for soccer - especially on the girls side. My argument is that this is not good for the sport and that while from 2009 - 2015 we were seeing a solid rebuild, today we are seeing a segmented sport that makes no sense and in many cases, has peaked in terms of ripping parents - and players off. All about the $$$
Popping in with a couple observations on the last few pages: - Would love to hear an update from s0cc3rdad011. Starting to see some clubs scheduling May dates for tryouts for next year which will obviously be a big driver of player movement. We will see who has been practicing in the basement (on zoom or not) and who has had enough of soccer. I suspect numbers will go down significantly, but maybe (and hopefully) people will remember what they love about it if some real games can be played. I just know a lot of parents who were not happy about what was or was not provided during this year of disruption, and that spans many different clubs. Some of the vitrol is deserved, and some probably not. But a smaller pool sort of hurts everyone, so I am trying to be the cheerleader as much as possible and hopefully others feel the same. - Those 5 threads were impressive and took a lot of time to get through. Who knew soccer drama from 10 years ago could be so riveting. I guess one universal constant is that soccer parents are crazy! - On the question of leagues above, its all quite confusing to think about. I tend to think that consumer choice is a good thing even if there is not an absolute defined pyramid. That said, I think that the non ECNL/ GAL leagues/ competitions will have to really up their marketing game to thrive in the coming years, and of course this will take some $$ that might not be around. We can probably debate how much flash vs. substance there is behind ECNL/ GAL, but both leagues certainly have good players and teams, and equally important in this day and age do a great job at communicating what they are and promoting both individual players and participating clubs. Having tried to figure out Club v. Club, MRL, NPL in the past, in my opinion its just not well explained or at the same level in terms of consumer/ parent/ player outreach. That doesn't mean that they are bad in any way, but putting myself in the shoes of a young player I'd find it harder to say "I want to do that" when it seems so much more opaque and bland compared to the other alternatives. I think they will really need to step it up to maintain relevance/ existing talent if player participation numbers do in fact decrease substantially.