Maybe, I just picked the most recent games they played.
However, I also listed current rankings in Sonoran which is cumulative of all games played so far this season.
Either way results aren't ideal.
DMCV Sharks Girls Director
- Thread starter silverback
- Start date
However, I also listed current rankings in Sonoran which is cumulative of all games played so far this season.
Either way results aren't ideal.
RandomSoccerFan
GOLD
If their goal as a club was to be a true competitor to Surf, those results alone would show they have quite a ways to go. Some years are OK for ECNL, some years are near the bottom, as listed. If there is no movement year over year over year, seems like it would be hard to keep people over time (both coaches and players).
They were near bottom or the very bottom in every age group before Whittaker took over, so this is a huge improvement. I'm looking at improvement since he arrived, not chasing Surf. It's gonna take more than 2 years at a club to beat out the number 1 team. Sharks is number 2 in San Diego and that's with only 2 years and with Surf in his backyard taking the best talent.
Slammers has 2 ECNL teams and can't beat out Surf. Koge lost to Surf in every age group...maybe 1 tie in there. It's not fair to use
Surf as a metric of improvement.
I think the 06 Slammers FC and SURF teams have tied the last 2 times they've played. Tying in the consolation round of the ECNL Finals last year in Virginia, too. Keep in mind, the Slammers are splitting up their talent by having 2 teams. Keep in mind also the number of ECNL teams in close proximity in LA and Orange County. 4 or 5 ECNL clubs practice at the Great Park in Irvine, so the talent pool is diluted.
Code
SILVER ELITE
Fair perspective. Next, mayby Carlsbad7 can tell us all about how the City G2010GA team did against SURF RL team in Blues Cup a couple months ago?
I was using Slammers to show how tough it is to compete against Surf. Slammers is one of the best clubs in the country and at times Slammers still struggles against Surf. Sharks 2009 beat Surf 2009 by 3-1. That, in itself, is quite impressive progress for Sharks.
This conversation is silly. From what I can see, the program is more competitive than it was before MW came in. Prior to that, Sharks were at or near the bottom of the table in every age group post DA folding. That's success in my book. I don't think anyone thought the arrival of MW would result in going from worst to first.
I think MW has done a great job under tough competition. You got Surf offering full rides and one of the all-time great youth coaches as Doc. Plus, Covid was horrible for most clubs that didn't have their own fields. My pal told me Surf never stopped training. My dd was blocked from any field for over a year. I took her to a local park in Aliso Viejo and we got a big warning from city worker, "If you don't leave, I'm calling the Sherrif." Let's give it some time Carlsbad.......
It's been 2.5 years + I put the current numbers up + they're marginally better than before.
How much time does it take?
What's the expectation? I would throw out the last two years and give everyone fresh start. Withall the travel leagues and the Pac 12 jumping on the travel sport, I would place my bets on local. City has Oceanside and Carlsbad. Del Mar has Del Mar and little South. Surf has all of SD and OC and IE. Top players will make that drive to be coached by a legend.
How much time does what take? What is your expectation? While there may be marginal improvements, they're improvements, and the club is probably demonstrating to ECNL that they're making an effort to raise the bar. Don't forget that without MW's move to Sharks, they probably would have been kicked out of the league by now. That's a big win for the club in and of itself.
I agree with what is the expectation question. My DD is trapped ‘06 in the ECNL, meaning, she is a 2025 and will play with the ‘07’s her last year. Once recruiting time hits, the game goes from a team game to an individual game for most. Most are focused on their college dreams or picking up social activities they missed earlier the last couple years if committed early.
My DD’s team plays good soccer, competes with anyone when they have their full roster, but we have kids miss games and practice for homecoming, camps, convenience, vacation, etc. Some kids take it seriously after they commit, others do not. Some are getting ready and focused on getting to campus fit and ready to compete, and some are coasting after the IG Sweatshirt Pic.
My DD’s club has made it clear the focus is getting the kids committed the last two years, keeping them healthy, and making sure the kids who are not committed are getting opportunities in showcases…the club wants the team competitive and to win, but recruiting takes the top spot.
The expectations change at U17, and for me, I would look at the end result, are kids getting committed, v. W’s and L’s the last couple of years. I do agree, you need to be competitive, top half of the table, not getting crushed by 5 or 7 goals in showcases as you are building up to U17, because college coaches will wonder if this kid is good and talented, why are they on this team with poor results, especially in an area so dense like So Cal, with so many teams.
My DD’s ‘06 team has 17 of 23 players committed - 16 of 20 2024’s and 1 of 3 2025’s. All across D1,D2, D3. Ivy, P5, WCC, Big West, Mountain West, Big Sky…Parents are pretty happy and all anyone is really focused on is staying healthy and the kids playing well, far less emphasis on winning, no more crazy sideline antics, except for super hard fouls. It’s calmed down a lot.
I would judge Sharks or any club by how good they are placing kids at the end of the programming, not results in u12, u13. Isn’t that why everyone is doing this, for their kids to get to the next level?
My DD’s team plays good soccer, competes with anyone when they have their full roster, but we have kids miss games and practice for homecoming, camps, convenience, vacation, etc. Some kids take it seriously after they commit, others do not. Some are getting ready and focused on getting to campus fit and ready to compete, and some are coasting after the IG Sweatshirt Pic.
My DD’s club has made it clear the focus is getting the kids committed the last two years, keeping them healthy, and making sure the kids who are not committed are getting opportunities in showcases…the club wants the team competitive and to win, but recruiting takes the top spot.
The expectations change at U17, and for me, I would look at the end result, are kids getting committed, v. W’s and L’s the last couple of years. I do agree, you need to be competitive, top half of the table, not getting crushed by 5 or 7 goals in showcases as you are building up to U17, because college coaches will wonder if this kid is good and talented, why are they on this team with poor results, especially in an area so dense like So Cal, with so many teams.
My DD’s ‘06 team has 17 of 23 players committed - 16 of 20 2024’s and 1 of 3 2025’s. All across D1,D2, D3. Ivy, P5, WCC, Big West, Mountain West, Big Sky…Parents are pretty happy and all anyone is really focused on is staying healthy and the kids playing well, far less emphasis on winning, no more crazy sideline antics, except for super hard fouls. It’s calmed down a lot.
I would judge Sharks or any club by how good they are placing kids at the end of the programming, not results in u12, u13. Isn’t that why everyone is doing this, for their kids to get to the next level?
SoulTrain
BRONZE
I don't have a vested interest in either club but City SC GA is stronger at almost every level than Sharks. And their girls are much more highly recruited than Sharks (look at the 05/06 signing day offers for seniors). I would put Sharks as being the 4th best option in SD, behind Surf, City, and Rebels. But it's always dependent what you want out of a program and what sacrifices you want to make as to the best fit for your kid. Plenty of SD talent making the drive up to OC to play for Blues, Slammers, etc.
MW has only been there for 2 years and can't affect the 05/06. Why don't we judge MW's recruitment ability based on their 07 team commitments and beyond?
If you have a direct competition against 07-2010, I wonder how City would do against Sharks?
As for Rebels - they're behind Sharks in every age group except 2 and one of it is the 05/06.
RandomSoccerFan
GOLD
Here's a table of most of those listed. Happy to add more columns if there are any suggestions. Plenty of clubs would be very happy to trade with DMCV's rating/ranking, that's for sure. But they also have a ways to go if their ambitions are high. For what it's worth, only two teams younger than 2011's is in the top 100, and one of them is 96th. It sure seems like they have to continue to recruit if they are hoping these will turn into stronger teams as they move through the process.
Looking at their college commits - there seems to be a huge improvement since MW arrived. Comparing 2023 to 2022 college commits, the difference is huge.
College – DMCV Sharks
dmcvsharks.com
At this rate, the class of 2025 and 2026 should be a lot better.
Agreed 100%….When did having teams in the Top 100 in the country not be good enough. Expectations run high. Surf is Surf, like comparing Apples and Cars.
Surf is pretty much the only show in town in San Diego. Most top players play for Surf in San Diego, so their geographical pull is much stronger in the sense that they're the only show in town, compared to that of Orange County where the talent pool is diluted between 5 teams.
Question- Did Deza walk into a program like DelMar and really have to do anything to turn it around? I ask because his job is monumental. Almost impossible when competing with Surf. I think they hired the right person, but needs a number of years passed where we are now.