How do leagues stack up?

[dad4]

Isn't this the exact conversation we had last year around this time? It's obvious people have an an investment in one league or another + they're not going to change their views.

Last year the conversation fizzled out with "See you at Surf Cup". I suggest fast forwarding to this instead of wasting time going back and forth discussing perspectives that won't change.

Your theory boils down to thinking that college coaches can be fooled by racking up a bunch of wins against weak opponents.

It's easy enough to test that theory. Look at who the schools signed:

2025 Recruiting | Socal Soccer

The numbers do not appear to support your theory. Evan after accounting for league size, early signings were about 3:1 ECNL.

I'm not saying GA is a bad place to play soccer. But the argument in favor is not "it's the best way to get on a D1 roster".

 

[Code]

It looks like USA Sports Statistics just posted the same chart, but for national rankings rather than just California. This has same methodology, in choosing the top 10 teams in each league, rather than the older methodology of taking the average of the entire league. Age used is the same 2009 group. Will likely trigger the same questions about NPL vs. ECNL-RL, National League Pro, etc.

View attachment 19242

I really think taking the top 10 from each league is a statistical mistake. The base # of teams from each league is different, as others have pointed out, and likely skews the data. I wish they would have used the top 10%, or 20%; would have given a more accurate assessment IMO. Either way, I'm more interested in average of all teams in the league when evaluating the "strength" of a league. The SR App can easily tell us what the team to team ranking is. It would be interesting to see a side by side of Top 10, Top 10%, and All; if they are close the data is likely good, if there are significant differences, the data is likely invalid in one or all methodologies.

 

[Code]

What this chart is saying is that playing for the top 10 girls ECNL teams nationally makes sense.

What if your kids ECNL team loses week after week. Does it still make sense to be cannon fodder for the better ECNL teams?

This is the problem with data, some people don't understand math + jump to conclusions that aren't correct.

How are any of the other leagues different. All leagues have cannon fodder, some are just worse than others. The best way to tell how balanced or imbalanced a league is is the PPG stats. In a perfect league all teams would be 1.5 PPG; that will never happen. If all the teams are between 1.0 and 2.0 that is an ideal scenario. If there are multiple teams below 0.5 and above 2.5, the teams are not playing at the same level of play.

 

[Code]

Isn't this the exact conversation we had last year around this time? It's obvious people have an an investment in one league or another + they're not going to change their views.

Last year the conversation fizzled out with "See you at Surf Cup". I suggest fast forwarding to this instead of wasting time going back and forth discussing perspectives that won't change.

And before that it was "lets see what happens after the summer tournys", before that was "lets see what happens after League play", before that was "Covid messed up the teams, this summer tournys don't count"........

Three years ago I was on here saying that in SoCal the GA is not challenging the ECNL for top league. I also said the GA was slowly but steadily slipping in quality year over year, and in the next few years would probably by in third or lower when ranking leagues; being surpassed by ECRL and/or NPL. Today, when you look at the Top 10 CA teams per league, GA and ECRL are equal, and NPL is slightly higher. Shoot even DPL caught up to GA. If they ranked all the teams in the leagues, I'm sure we would see GA fall behind ECRL, as the GA has a number of lower ranked teams, and the ECRL seems to have more consistency in the level of play.

The conversation fizzled out because the GA proponents are like gambling addicts looking for the the "next one will show us"... but it the same result every time.

 

[Carlsbad7]

And before that it was "lets see what happens after the summer tournys", before that was "lets see what happens after League play", before that was "Covid messed up the teams, this summer tournys don't count"........

Three years ago I was on here saying that in SoCal the GA is not challenging the ECNL for top league. I also said the GA was slowly but steadily slipping in quality year over year, and in the next few years would probably by in third or lower when ranking leagues; being surpassed by ECRL and/or NPL. Today, when you look at the Top 10 CA teams per league, GA and ECRL are equal, and NPL is slightly higher. Shoot even DPL caught up to GA. If they ranked all the teams in the leagues, I'm sure we would see GA fall behind ECRL, as the GA has a number of lower ranked teams, and the ECRL seems to have more consistency in the level of play.

The conversation fizzled out because the GA proponents are like gambling addicts looking for the the "next one will show us"... but it the same result every time.

I seem to remember top Socal GA teams doing very well at Surf Cup last summer. Better than most of the mid tier Socal ECNL clubs.

Unless your kid plays on a top 10 Socal team you probably shouldn't comment.

 

[Noticer]

Your theory boils down to thinking that college coaches can be fooled by racking up a bunch of wins against weak opponents.

It's easy enough to test that theory. Look at who the schools signed:

2025 Recruiting | Socal Soccer

The numbers do not appear to support your theory. Evan after accounting for league size, early signings were about 3:1 ECNL.

I'm not saying GA is a bad place to play soccer. But the argument in favor is not "it's the best way to get on a D1 roster".

For a truly reasonable assessment to be made about the 75% to 25% statistic, we have to know what the actual player-pool size is for ECNL and GA.
Just as an example, since we know ECNL is a larger league, if the total number of players from GA + ECNL is 10,000, with 7,500 ECNL and 2,500 GA,
and 750 ECNL girls are signed and 250 GA girls are signed, then it's an even proportional split.
If, however, in that 10,000 player pool, 9,000 are ECNL and 1000 are GA, and you have 750 ECNL to 250 GA, the argument is that more GA girls are recruited (per capita.)

 

[Jamisfoes]

For a truly reasonable assessment to be made about the 75% to 25% statistic, we have to know what the actual player-pool size is for ECNL and GA.
Just as an example, since we know ECNL is a larger league, if the total number of players from GA + ECNL is 10,000, with 7,500 ECNL and 2,500 GA,
and 750 ECNL girls are signed and 250 GA girls are signed, then it's an even proportional split.
If, however, in that 10,000 player pool, 9,000 are ECNL and 1000 are GA, and you have 750 ECNL to 250 GA, the argument is that more GA girls are recruited (per capita.)

We also need to weigh D1 school by the school’s academic ranking. An UCLA scholarship should count 10x more than a cal state scholarship.

 

[Carlsbad7]

Came across an article that was written last July that very clearly describes the current state of Girls Youth Soccer.

I thought it was good enough to share...

How the USWNT’s pipeline got fractured by a youth soccer turf war

The USWNT team has continued to win. But beneath the surface, cracks are crystalizing. With European powers investing and improving, the vulnerable balance of power in international women’s soccer is shifting.

sports.yahoo.com

 

[focomoso]

For all those reasons, plus the decadeslong head start due to Title IX, plus a burgeoning pro league (the NWSL), nobody believes that the USWNT will suddenly tumble out of the sport’s top tier.

But eventually, Hickey predicts, perhaps as soon as 2027, “I think it's gonna be clear that we have to do something in this country to make sure that girls have better environments.”

Well... sooner than that, it seems.

 

[crush]

Came across an article that was written last July that very clearly describes the current state of Girls Youth Soccer.

I thought it was good enough to share...

How the USWNT’s pipeline got fractured by a youth soccer turf war

The USWNT team has continued to win. But beneath the surface, cracks are crystalizing. With European powers investing and improving, the vulnerable balance of power in international women’s soccer is shifting.

sports.yahoo.com

100% and the kids and parents were stuck in the middle. Very sad

 

[RandomSoccerFan]

For a truly reasonable assessment to be made about the 75% to 25% statistic, we have to know what the actual player-pool size is for ECNL and GA.
Just as an example, since we know ECNL is a larger league, if the total number of players from GA + ECNL is 10,000, with 7,500 ECNL and 2,500 GA,
and 750 ECNL girls are signed and 250 GA girls are signed, then it's an even proportional split.
If, however, in that 10,000 player pool, 9,000 are ECNL and 1000 are GA, and you have 750 ECNL to 250 GA, the argument is that more GA girls are recruited (per capita.)

No, to be truly reasonable, once you were shown the numbers someone bringing up this theoretical point would go "huh, I guess that's the case" or "huh, I guess that's not the case". But GA supporters continue to throw something at the wall and hope either other people can't do math, or have memories of goldfish.

Here's what was posted last time.

And this is something that can be calculated rather than assumed. GA shows 14000 players, 94 clubs here. Can't find a clean total # of ECNL Girls players, but it shows 120 clubs with ECNL Girls here. If there is a population number available - please let me know so I can update.

Playing in a specific league isn't a golden ticket - but ECNL apparently manages to send many more girls than GA to D1, accounting for the different populations. ECNL-girls shows as only 27% more clubs, but well over twice the D1 recruits. Seeing as ECNL dominates the top 10, the top 50, and the top 100, this aligns with the thinking that the better team you're on, the more visibility you will have, and the better the chances for recruitment. Does that mean nobody else has a chance? Of course not - not by a long shot. But assuming there are equal chances available across the board doesn't match the easily available info.

What the numbers can't show as easily, is for when the specific choices for a player are between a weaker team in a strong bracket, or a stronger team in a weak bracket - which would provide more exposure for a particular player. And another hard to answer conundrum is whether it's better to be a standout starter on a weaker team, or a more marginal player on the best team available.

 

[Carlsbad7]

100% and the kids and parents were stuck in the middle. Very sad

What I think sucks about the whole DA blowing up situation is that ECNL had it all.

ECNL could have worked with the former DA clubs and let them all in. I'm sure some would have still chosen to not play in ECNL but that's their decision. Instead we ended up with GA which isn't bad. But it could have been much better.

For a moment there was a shot at a single national funnel for all of the top youth female talent.

Soon there's going to be NWSL Next and things will get even weirder for girls.

 

[Noticer]

No, to be truly reasonable, once you were shown the numbers someone bringing up this theoretical point would go "huh, I guess that's the case" or "huh, I guess that's not the case". But GA supporters continue to throw something at the wall and hope either other people can't do math, or have memories of goldfish.

Here's what was posted last time.

Gotcha- I hadnt seen that post or those numbers. I'd guess comparing number of clubs per league would yield a close representation of players.
Though, I think the 14k number given by GA is inflated.
Consider 6 age groups- (U13, U14, U15, U16, U17, and U19)
6 X 94 clubs = 564 (granted, there are clubs like top hat that field a 1st and 2nd team both in GA, but we can ~overly account for that by making each roster 20 players)

564x20 = 11,280

 

[RandomSoccerFan]

Gotcha- I hadnt seen that post or those numbers. I'd guess comparing number of clubs per league would yield a close representation of players.
Though, I think the 14k number given by GA is inflated.
Consider 6 age groups- (U13, U14, U15, U16, U17, and U19)
6 X 94 clubs = 564 (granted, there are clubs like top hat that field a 1st and 2nd team both in GA, but we can ~overly account for that by making each roster 20 players)

564x20 = 11,280

Sure - but the 14,000 number is taken directly from GA's website. Are you saying that they themselves are intentionally off by 20%?

 

[Noticer]

Sure - but the 14,000 number is taken directly from GA's website. Are you saying that they themselves are intentionally off by 20%?

I wouldn't be surprised. They are struggling, clearly, so why wouldnt they inflate their numbers? 14k based on that # of clubs... Something seems off