Roster Changes - u15/2005 birth year for 2019-20

Discussion in 'Boys Development Academy' started by Kante, Aug 28, 2019.

  1. Kante

    Kante

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2018
    Messages:
    552
    Likes Received:
    201
    Trophy Points:
    43
    Ratings:
    +285 / 3
    A handful of 05 SoCal teams have had full rosters published so far. Here's what the attrition looks like. #'s below are just where player has been confirmed on a new roster. actual attrition/change is likely higher but won't know for sure until final rosters for all teams are available. Will post more detail in a day or so.

    TFA: -4 players
    LAUFA: -4 players
    San Diego Surf: -3 players (this likely will be ~2x higher as wom had a number of players going to Barca but Barca hasn't published their u15 roster yet)
    Nomads: -2
    Strikers: -2
    Albion: -1
    Arsenal: -1
    LAGSD: -1
    Real SoCal: -1
     
    Last edited: Aug 28, 2019
  2. soccerdad79

    soccerdad79 BRONZE

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2019
    Messages:
    15
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    3
    Ratings:
    +10 / 0

    SD Surf had 4 players EZ, RM, DL, AL go to RSL, 4 players MMG, ME, DN, GE go to Barca, and 4 players GD, QG, DS, VB go to LAGSD.
     
    • Informative Informative x 2
  3. Purabarca

    Purabarca SILVER

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2017
    Messages:
    40
    Likes Received:
    12
    Trophy Points:
    8
    Ratings:
    +19 / 0
    I've heard 12+ NEW players headed to SD Surf DA team, and few NEW players we're also invited to National camps numerous times.......
     
  4. BJ18

    BJ18

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2016
    Messages:
    184
    Likes Received:
    55
    Trophy Points:
    28
    Ratings:
    +97 / 4
    Are these new players the same ones that just lost to Celtic at Surf Cup or is this a whole new group coming in after Surf Cup?
     
  5. soccerdad79

    soccerdad79 BRONZE

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2019
    Messages:
    15
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    3
    Ratings:
    +10 / 0
    50% of the new team was at Surf Cup. They had to bring up some 06 DA players just to be able to fill a team for Surf Cup
     
    • Informative Informative x 1
  6. Kante

    Kante

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2018
    Messages:
    552
    Likes Received:
    201
    Trophy Points:
    43
    Ratings:
    +285 / 3
    Here’s more detailed info. Am sure that these numbers will change as teams add tweaks to their roster. Arsenal, Barca and LAUFA have not posted their rosters yet.

    Key takeaways:
    1. San Diego Surf and TFA – hmm, how to put this? – had their rosters savaged over the summer by external recruiting and are basically brand new teams in 2019-20. Suspect - but don’t know - that LAUFA may also have experienced significant churn, which would the second time in two years that they've lost significant players to other teams
    2. The median attrition rate of 36% seems, uh, ridonkulously high. More than one in three players from 2018-19 did not continue with the same team in 2019-20…
    If a business had a 36% attrition rate, it would go out of business.

    But clubs look at families as suppliers, not customers. From that pov, the 36% attrition rate makes sense.

    (whether or not families should be looked as suppliers, not customers, when, even at u15, more than half of the teams charge btw $2k-$3k per player per year plus all the other travel costs is an important conversation, but for a different time)

    Other minor notes:
    1. LA Galaxy, after replacing half their team last year, has settled down and has also added all new coaches for their 05s.
    2. Pateadores and Albion, after disappointing 2018-19 seasons (for different reasons), are rebooting in 2019-20
    3. Nomads had a late season uptick in 2018-19 and are taking another step up in 2019-20
    4. Chula Vista, even though they were shut down for u14 by USSDA, were the DA entry point for five players who are now rostered on 05 academy teams (well done!)
    5. LAFC looks set to continue their reign of terror
    Enjoy and welcome to 2019-20!

    Looking at the table below, here’s what’s what, moving left to right,

    • In the first column, teams are listed first sorted by alpha.
    • The 2nd yoy Attrition column is the # of 2018 players who were included at least once in a game roster who are not listed as of 8/29 on the team 2019-20 roster. The data for 2018-19 rosters in pulled from last year’s game reports.
    • The 3rd yoy Attrition as % is pretty self-explanatory.
    • The # of players added is the # of players on the 2019-20 roster who were not on the 2018-19 roster. The # of total players on the 2019-20 roster is pulled from the USSDA website as of 8/29. (this number is likely to change a bit).
    • The % new column is straight forward.
    • The “from which club” column is the clubs where the new players played in 2018-19.
    upload_2019-8-30_7-54-19.png
     
    Last edited: Aug 30, 2019
  7. Soccerdad2016

    Soccerdad2016 BRONZE

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2016
    Messages:
    28
    Likes Received:
    10
    Trophy Points:
    3
    Ratings:
    +24 / 0
    Lots of data but there is a lot behind the numbers (were players dropped or did the better ones move on?). Some of the teams here replaced with better talent and some were decimated by moves to better opportunities. Rosters are still moving or being updated so a few weeks from now things will look different as well.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  8. Kante

    Kante

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2018
    Messages:
    552
    Likes Received:
    201
    Trophy Points:
    43
    Ratings:
    +285 / 3
    All legit points and genuinely well-received.

    Absolutely rosters are still being updated and so that's a caveat on the data. As an fyi, however, only included teams with at least 14 rostered (14 is the min required) so those rosters listed are either final or close to final (eg, Arsenal only has nine players rostered so far so was listed tdb in the table)

    Guess the significant point that jumped out (and was surprising) was that the high rate of attrition across the board, particularly for the non-MLS teams.

    Last year, folks were outraged that LAG churned close to 50% of their 05 team but the reality was that they were largely an outlier.

    This year, that kind of churn looks like standard operating procedure. To be fair, don't know what the churn has historically been moving from u14 to u15 in SoCal, but 40% churn seems extraordinarily high.

    So, why is it happening? Agreed that teams are replacing with better talent and/or players are moving on to better opportunities. Would add that teams look like they are also slimming rosters down to increase PT.

    All these things are legit practices.

    It's the volume/degree/frequency to which they are occurring that is attention getting.

    In some cases, eg SD Surf and TFA, there was coaching turnover. It's reasonable why the coaching turnover happened but it's also reasonable to that coaching churn would ead to player churn.

    In most other cases, though, either the expert coaching staff at clubs are systematically poor judges of talent or they systematically misrepresented the player potential/likelihood for development to the families (either by commission or, more likely, omission).

    Why? Well, one of the byproduct of adding so many players is increased club fees.

    Doing the math, the average non-MLS team carrying players for one year (u14) who will likely be cut in the next year (u15) generated an average of $10k to $15k extra per team. Not that much, but all these clubs are non-profits, all these coaches are under-paid and all the DA teams are likely loss-leaders for the clubs, so the $10k to $15k could be considered by the club to be consequential.

    Again, what's most concerning is that, looking at the numbers, it appears that this was a standard operating practice last year... (am flashing to the Casablanca scene where Renault says he is shocked, absolutely shocked "there is gambling going on in this establishment.")

    Don't mean to be glib (well, maybe a little).

    Am 100% on board that the non-MLS coaches need to be paid more and the non-MLS clubs need a more stable source of income. Non-MLS clubs clearly need help from somewhere in order to support the infrastructure (eg, high quality coaching, professional player/family interactions, adequate practice time i.e 4x week for 2 hours, and adequate practice field space) necessary to be consistently competitive year in and year out with MLS DA teams.

    Not sure that running a bait and switch with families who may not fully understand the Darwinistic nature of DA is the best way to do that.

    (and now time for more coffee...)
     
    Last edited: Aug 30, 2019
  9. justneededaname

    justneededaname SILVER ELITE

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2016
    Messages:
    143
    Likes Received:
    70
    Trophy Points:
    28
    Ratings:
    +144 / 1
    U14 to 15 is also the first year of high school. So I think this is a sorting year.

    Players who are on non-mls teams that think they still have a shot, are trying to do what they think is needed to make it. This includes joining MLS academies in other cities, moving to soccer boarding schools, and switching clubs (moving to Tier 1 from Tier 2).

    Players now have options to play high school sports that didn't exist before so they are dropping out of DA to be able to play at their schools (and maybe not just play soccer).

    Paying players that spent a lot of time on the bench are realizing they are not going to make it so parents are choosing to spend their money and time somewhere else.

    Players from non-DA teams are filling in the open spots. Many of these players are coming in on scholarships. They were not in the DA before because their parents either didn't know about it or could not afford it. They are being recruited to fill roster spots. These kids are on neither the pro or college track.
     
    • Informative Informative x 1
  10. Emilio Castro

    Emilio Castro BRONZE

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2019
    Messages:
    24
    Likes Received:
    8
    Trophy Points:
    3
    Ratings:
    +14 / 1

    Key takeaways:
    1. San Diego Surf and TFA – hmm, how to put this? – had their rosters savaged over the summer by external recruiting and are basically brand new teams in 2019-20. Suspect - but don’t know - that LAUFA may also have experienced significant churn, which would the second time in two years that they've lost significant players to other teams
    Here we go again...
    Another season full of up and downs. not speaking behind the wall as 98% here. we are currently at FCGS (left TFA)
    FCGS is looking pretty good, a lot of kids, big roster and a lot of internal competition. Some upsets will definitely land of players attending 4 days of practice and 0 min of playing time. (Hopefully not me, lol)
    I hope TFA rebuilds in a good way, it will be a challenge. they just lost 9-0 vs LAFC couple weeks ago in a friendly. They got 4 players form LAUFA according a TFA parent, these parents are "trouble maker parents". I wonder why they were cut, umm!
    many doubts until the ball start rolling My biggest hope on TFA, we are thankful with that club and staff
    Speaking with my friend at LAUFA last night. The team has 4 or 5 new kids, most of them new to DA but interesting players, will see.
    it is not new that either TFA, FCGS or LAUFA can surprise anybody at anytime.
    Good luck to everyone!! Welcome 2019-2020 DA season.

    Shake the Crystal ball Nostradamus-Kante and predict on my favor. FCGS will beat everyone. Lol!
     
    • Like Like x 2
  11. Carl

    Carl BRONZE

    Joined:
    Dec 19, 2018
    Messages:
    12
    Likes Received:
    6
    Trophy Points:
    3
    Ratings:
    +8 / 0
    For LAFC you didn't mention the player from TFA. For TFA's coaching change not one player followed WD and their U14 kept all their players except a few that were cut and replaced with stronger players.
     
    • Informative Informative x 1
  12. Kante

    Kante

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2018
    Messages:
    552
    Likes Received:
    201
    Trophy Points:
    43
    Ratings:
    +285 / 3
    Got it. Thx. Just saw HA when the roster was refreshed today. Will add him in. On the u14, looks like TFA picked up LAFC's D, yes?
     
  13. Soccerdad2016

    Soccerdad2016 BRONZE

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2016
    Messages:
    28
    Likes Received:
    10
    Trophy Points:
    3
    Ratings:
    +24 / 0
  14. Kante

    Kante

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2018
    Messages:
    552
    Likes Received:
    201
    Trophy Points:
    43
    Ratings:
    +285 / 3
    Here's updated boys 05 DA roster churn numbers from 2018-19 season to 2019-20 season. per some input (thank you for that!) removed the PT and non-2005 players so it was a true apples to apples comparison. Figure new DA parents would want to know info on how much a club churns thru players before they sign-up.

    Here's socal team churn sorted by team alpha:

    upload_2019-9-12_13-5-48.png


    Here's comparative socal team churn sorted by most churn to least churn (was surprised to see Albion and Real SoCal so high up):

    upload_2019-9-12_13-8-42.png
     
    • Informative Informative x 1
  15. Raakjoer

    Raakjoer BRONZE

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2019
    Messages:
    5
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    1
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0
    It would be interesting to see the same thing for U15 -> U16/17. I would have to imagine the attrition numbers are even higher considering the teams aren't cutting U16s to make way for incoming U15s. Numerous factors of course, but one would assume ~50% of the U15s have to find a new team for U16/17 year. But, could be totally wrong.
     
  16. Kante

    Kante

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2018
    Messages:
    552
    Likes Received:
    201
    Trophy Points:
    43
    Ratings:
    +285 / 3
    good point. have eyeballed the #'s from u15 to u16/u17 (really, u17 - USSDA calling it u16/u17 is USSDA marketing...)

    typically u17 socal teams have btw 2-4 u16s and park the rest of the u16s in club premier or its equivalent for one year.
     
  17. SoCalFutBolCrazy

    SoCalFutBolCrazy BRONZE

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2019
    Messages:
    6
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    1
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0
    Interesting... so was wondering if club DA roster attrition good or bad? Without knowing the actual reason for the attrition it's difficult to tell I think.
     
  18. 3leches

    3leches SILVER

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2016
    Messages:
    93
    Likes Received:
    15
    Trophy Points:
    8
    Ratings:
    +39 / 1
    I think Galaxy would have done an overhaul of the 2005 team if there wasn’t a staff change. A lot of kids were saved by the bell so to speak.
     
  19. 66 GTO

    66 GTO SILVER ELITE

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2016
    Messages:
    169
    Likes Received:
    38
    Trophy Points:
    28
    Ratings:
    +53 / 1
    Not really..
    The team was mostly set by the old coaching staff Before the staff changed
    New coaching staff brought in 2 players
     
  20. Kante

    Kante

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2018
    Messages:
    552
    Likes Received:
    201
    Trophy Points:
    43
    Ratings:
    +285 / 3
    What would be an example of where club attrition rates would be good? (genuinely asking)

    Can see where a certain of yoy attrition/churn is reasonable and should be expected, just like lay-offs in a business eg, bottom 10% etc. LAFC is probably the best example of this. For the 05s, they've been btw 15-20% churn for each of the past two years.

    But attrition above this "reasonable" rate seems like it's inherently indicative of instability.
     

Share This Page