U16 (1997) Girls OYSL

[quietobserver]

All good stuff folks...and no argument from me.

Recall....I did say that you have to have balance (team or individual) of all the necessary attributes (athleticism, determination, skill, heart, coachable, IQ and don't forget playing as a team. (We've seen players with lots of fancy moves that refuse to pass and end up turning the ball over way too many times because they think they can beat 3 defenders.)

Good players (and teams) in any sport find out what their opponents weakness is...and then exploit it to create the desired outcome (which is winning). A tennis player will discover that his opponent can't return backhand....and will try to serve to the backhand. Does that mean he can't serve to the forehand....NO...it just means he's smart and knows how to win.

TheFarPost is convinced that Darlington is/was the only passing team at this age group. If they were so good at retaining possession then how/why did they give up so many goals? Perhaps....the teams that had more success had a balance of passing/possession and - what did you call it GG - direct play! I don't believe for a second that all of the other teams were playing kick and run all the time. Maybe they mixed it up when it made sense to exploit the opposition's weakness?

Regardless.....statistically very few of these girls will be playing at a high level in 4-5 years....I'll hazard a guess that the ones that aren't athletic now aren't going to magically become athletic in the future - but the athletic ones can improve their skill (if they don't already have it)!

[TheFarPost]

All good stuff folks...and no argument from me.

Recall....I did say that you have to have balance (team or individual) of all the necessary attributes (athleticism, determination, skill, heart, coachable, IQ and don't forget playing as a team. (We've seen players with lots of fancy moves that refuse to pass and end up turning the ball over way too many times because they think they can beat 3 defenders.)

Good players (and teams) in any sport find out what their opponents weakness is...and then exploit it to create the desired outcome (which is winning). A tennis player will discover that his opponent can't return backhand....and will try to serve to the backhand. Does that mean he can't serve to the forehand....NO...it just means he's smart and knows how to win.

TheFarPost is convinced that Darlington is/was the only passing team at this age group. If they were so good at retaining possession then how/why did they give up so many goals? Perhaps....the teams that had more success had a balance of passing/possession and - what did you call it GG - direct play! I don't believe for a second that all of the other teams were playing kick and run all the time. Maybe they mixed it up when it made sense to exploit the opposition's weakness?

Regardless.....statistically very few of these girls will be playing at a high level in 4-5 years....I'll hazard a guess that the ones that aren't athletic now aren't going to magically become athletic in the future - but the athletic ones can improve their skill (if they don't already have it)!

QO, to be exact - I said Darlington was the only passing team other than Brams. The best game I've seen at this age group was Brams-Darlington; two passing teams engaged in a very fluid game, lots of creativity on both sides.
I never said Darlington was perfect, they had their ups and downs, they gave up so many goals. But - remember - they beat Vaughan twice, quite easily. I don't know if they lost players or brought in new ones, but I certainly hope that they will keep their playing style.

As for athletic players that play kick-and-run and then magically turn the page and become skilful players - that doesn't happen. By this age the player's blue-print is pretty much drawn, the older the player - the harder to change the bad habits. Check the Canada team's performance at the last WC for reference...
Besides - I don't think that anyone here is talking about 'non athletic players', the assumption is that at this level most players are athletic, and they are. I don't think that the Burlington team was more athletic than - let' say - Waterloo, or any other team for that matter. Some teams were focused on the ball, other teams were focused on muscling out the opponents. That's all. Burlington won against Brams without putting more than 3 passes together, in a game where Brams had about 80% possession and countless shots. It happens...but not very often.

Since I mentioned Waterloo - I need to make one correction: they were also a good and skilled passing team. My apologies.

[quietobserver]

I stand corrected....you did mention that Brams was the other passing team. Your argument(s) for 'all' the girls being athletic at this stage are somewhat valid. Some girls are just more athletic than others. I would like to think that most of the girls playing at this level are also pretty skilled (not just athletic) so your argument really upholds both sides!

Again...you are painting all of these quality teams and players with the broad stroke that all they play is kick and run. You don't really believe that do you?

Last year's Waterloo team struggled. If they were athletic and skilled....then it bodes the question - why didn't they have more success? What if Darlington had really stuck to it's 'plan' of playing the passing game for the sake of the future and became relegated (hypothetically). There's a strong chance the best players would have left the program in pursuit of playing at the highest level...thus destroying the chances of the team ever realizing the 'future' objective. I'd hazard to say that girls from L4 and L5 don't get scholarships or play beyond high school age! That's just reality.

[TheFarPost]

QO, you're right in that all girls at this level are pretty skilled.
You're also right in that there's no absolute passing team, just as there's no absolute kick-and-run team. What's important is where your main focus is, the pattern matters. A team that is not used to possession will lose all that passing when under pressure, the old habits will always prevail. Canada Womens' team looked like a passing team under CarolinaM. until the WC; then as soon as they were under pressure by good teams, they forgot all that passing and returned to what their blue-print was: kick-and-run.

Waterloo started well, then something happened. I always admired their well structured and balanced game. I personally think that the coach did the right thing by insisting on possession game as opposed to long ball. The have developed skilled players, a number of them in the provincial program; that says something about their player development program.
I don't know if they will loose players or not...but that's not really what matters. They will do again the right thing and will be back.

As for the 'objective'...I think that winning a scolarship is a wrong objective; most players will burn out and quit football before reaching their objective, if that's what drives them. They cannot play with passion and train hard for years if that's what they are after, it becomes some sort of job. I know such a player, could have been exceptional if her dad wouldn't remind her daily about the scolarship $$$. She played and trained like a good soldier, because she's a good kid. At some point she quit, she didn't enjoy anymore...

[Greatgame]

Again...you are painting all of these quality teams and players with the broad stroke that all they play is kick and run. You don't really believe that do you?

I think, the players that get the most development on the direct teams are the strikers/forwards, the least development goes to the mid-fielders, followed pretty close by defenders. I think, all teams play direct, just some much more then others. No one plays exclusive one style or the other it's degrees of the two styles.

There's a strong chance the best players would have left the program in pursuit of playing at the highest level...thus destroying the chances of the team ever realizing the 'future' objective. I'd hazard to say that girls from L4 and L5 don't get scholarships or play beyond high school age! That's just reality.

[/quote]

Not always, true, I have seen teams not make OYSL, not lose any players and in fact good players came because of the development.

[Top Right Corner]

QO, you're right in that all girls at this level are pretty skilled.
You're also right in that there's no absolute passing team, just as there's no absolute kick-and-run team. What's important is where your main focus is, the pattern matters. A team that is not used to possession will lose all that passing when under pressure, the old habits will always prevail. Canada Womens' team looked like a passing team under CarolinaM. until the WC; then as soon as they were under pressure by good teams, they forgot all that passing and returned to what their blue-print was: kick-and-run.

Waterloo started well, then something happened. I always admired their well structured and balanced game. I personally think that the coach did the right thing by insisting on possession game as opposed to long ball. The have developed skilled players, a number of them in the provincial program; that says something about their player development program.
I don't know if they will loose players or not...but that's not really what matters. They will do again the right thing and will be back.

As for the 'objective'...I think that winning a scolarship is a wrong objective; most players will burn out and quit


football before reaching their objective, if that's what drives them. They cannot play with passion and train hard for






years if that's what they are after, it becomes some sort of job. I know such a player, could have been exceptional if



her dad wouldn't remind her daily about the scolarship $$$. She played and trained like a good soldier, because she's




a good kid. At some point she quit, she didn't enjoy anymore...

Totally agree with Farpost,

My daughter has taken off this year from OYSL due to burnout, I blame myself for insisting she participate in District and Regional programs. I believe these programs made her a better player on the field, however, she started to not enjoy the game over a year ago. I have now decided to lay off and let her enjoy high school sports and wait to see if she regains the passion for the game at a competitive level.
So no need for pressuring these girls for scholarships, let them have fun!!

[quietobserver]

So presumptuous.....who says I (or other parents for that matter) are pushing our kids? If I was going to "live vicariously through my daughter" and push her into something it would have been a different sport. She loves soccer and "drives" herself towards a scholarship with parents giving her support and a dose of reality (having personally lived it I DO know what its like). Too many parents who never participated in competitive sport beyond 12 or 13 (or at all for that matter) are living their dream through their kid.

As for scholarships....without spending an exhausting amount of time ( I'm pretty sure I know the answer but am too tired to prove it).....how many of the current Canadian WNT players did NOT play at a major US school....or better yet...how many of the current US WNT players didn't first pursue a US scholarship as a) a way to get a free education and b) as a stepping stone to professional and 'National' teams?

How are these girls going to pursue the highest level if they don't first play at the 'next' highest level? Skip from U17 OYSL to the National Team???

[dropkick]

Good series of friendlies this Friday at WWK: NMiss '98, NMiss '97; Darlington; Toronto High Park; Bolton; Toronto Eagles '98.

[1966]

Oakville 1997 and North Mississauga 1998 played this past weekend. Does anybody know what the result was?

[dropkick]

2-2 final I believe. Good result for a '98 NM team minus its provincial players.

[mykidsthebest]

My predictions.

West

North Miss
Oakville
Burlington
Eastside
Erin Mills
North London

East

Vaughan
Brams
Darlington
Ottawa
Ajax
High Park

Good luck to all the girls. Despite what I predict I know I will see great soccer from all teams. Stay healthy girls.

[for the girls]

After Day 1 in Indiana

Ajax win 1-0
Brams win 3-0
Burlington win 4-0
North London win 4-2
Oakville loss 0-3

Good looking Canadian teams!

[renegadesofsoccer]

After Day 1 in Indiana

Ajax win 1-0
Brams win 3-0
Burlington win 4-0
North London win 4-2
Oakville loss 0-3

Good looking Canadian teams!

We have good quality Canadian girl teams representing. For the girls, we appreciate the update and continued posts.

[np8]

Following this link if you want to see scores ...

http://events.gotsport.com/events/results.aspx?EventID=21691&Sex=Girls&Age=15

Today the Canadian teams went 2W, 2D and 1L, but the results are not that important. There are a couple of very good US teams at the event - since there is no tiering, it is luck of the draw whether you get to play them. Good news is that the Canadian teams did not have to play each other, and got to face some teams they have never seen before. Enjoy the last day of the showcase, and stay healthy for the start of the season.

[for the girls]

FYI - There is an incorrect posted score from Indiana. Burlington won their last game 3-2, not a 2-2 draw as posted. This gives Burlington a 2-0-1 record, 19 points and a 9th place finish.

Some comparable games;

Ajax 1 - Lexington 0
Oakville 4 - Lexington 0

Ajax 0 - Brentwood 2
Burlington 0 - Brentwood 1