ECNL. The C stands for Cartel

[RandomSoccerFan]

1. I'm not denigrating football. I'm actually a fan. I like it more than I do soccer. I think it's more suited to the American character.

"I'm not a xxxist, I have xxx friends. I just say xxx things."

2. It's the sport's terminology, not mine. It's what they say themselves, which is why I carved out certain positions.

You continue to misuse and misunderstand the terminology, and you stated that most positions are low-skilled. It's right there in the quote.

A more interesting argument is whether a receiver is a harder skill to learn than a soccer player...I have my opinion but am agnostic as to the actual outcome...I can see the arguments for both sides with that.

So something that is harder to do takes more skill - or is it that less people can do that thing well - or is it how many hours spent working on that thing. The definition and use of skill can't be morphed like that - but if it is it's certainly pretty easy to morph whether something requires it to function well.

3. I already told you I'm willing to amend to say "football is a lowER skilled sports for most positions (QB,..."). Rather than take the win, you doubled down on the ridiculous assertion that a linesman is as hard as position to learn as QB or soccer player, a position for which you have advanced no evidence for despite the arguments made on the other side. Either that or you hold to the ridiculous belief that all sports positions are equally hard...that's not true either...the GK position in the modern game by far has much much more to learn than even the striker position.

That is neither a suitable amendment to avoid people continuing to point out that you have no idea what you're talking about, nor did anybody double down on anything except you. The statement being discussed from the beginning until now is that most football positions are low-skilled.

4. There's no backtracking here. You know QB is short for quarterback, right???? It's right there in the quote.

You posed lineman vs. qb, and said that you can't jump in to an unnamed school at the high school level, as proof that your initial statement isn't absurd. That's backtracking from the initial statement. I understand all of the positions. Do you?

 

[Grace T.]

"I'm not a xxxist, I have xxx friends. I just say xxx things."



You continue to misuse and misunderstand the terminology, and you stated that most positions are low-skilled. It's right there in the quote.



So something that is harder to do takes more skill - or is it that less people can do that thing well - or is it how many hours spent working on that thing. The definition and use of skill can't be morphed like that - but if it is it's certainly pretty easy to morph whether something requires it to function well.



That is neither a suitable amendment to avoid people continuing to point out that you have no idea what you're talking about, and nobody doubled down on anything except you. The statement being discussed from the beginning until now is that most football positions are low-skilled.



You posed lineman vs. qb, and said that you can't jump in to an unnamed school at the high school level, as proof that your initial statement isn't absurd. That's backtracking from the initial statement. I understand all of the positions. Do you?

Again, not my terminology and you have done nothing to rebut the wikipedia article with citations. The only thing your argument amounts to is "I know better" without any proof. I tried to meet you half way, give you the benefit of the doubt, but you wouldn't take it and instead double down on the absurd position. No 2+2 does not equal five and Oceania has not always been at war with East Asia. I can see what I can see with my own eyes, and you wishing it not to be so doesn't change that.

 

[RandomSoccerFan]

In real life, one doesn't win an argument if they can find enough citations that tangentially support the point they are trying to make. They are either right or wrong. And in most cases, both tend to leave in opposite directions and continue to believe they are right.

Pretty sure we're there. Others can make their own determinations.

 

[Grace T.]

Pretty sure we're there. Others can make their own determinations.

It's not just that. You've been presented with specific instances, theory, and the definitions of people involved in the sports itself. You've done nothing to alter it other than say you were offended by the lack of an "er" which I've granted you, and say you disagree. It's not a question of evidence v. evidence....it's that you've advanced nothing but personal belief, which is fine, but then don't be outraged. Your belief is your belief.

 

[Yours in futbol]

For clarification only:
https://socalsoccer.com/threads/wwc-2023.21157/page-13 post #254

She is not on the CSUF roster. Attempted to walk on at Long Beach State. Not on that roster either.

I've thought about this example a couple times over the last few days, and ultimately, she got her shot. So in this particular instance, it's hard to blame ECNL fees for not being able to crack a D1 roster.

 

[Yours in futbol]

All the more reason to get annoyed with ECNL. The ECNL map doesn't look like a map of the best soccer players. It's a map of where the rich families live. So, we have five clubs north of San Pablo Bay, and zero clubs in the Central Valley.

Sorry, but can you explain?

My point was that, if we take Norcal as an example (which is where I'm from), even Rage at the bottom of almost every age group in the ECNL league, can consistently beat the best non-ECNL/GA teams in NorCal and Central Valley (as they demonstrated when they were allowed to participate in NPL). So, unlike the situation with boys' teams, there aren't as many "diamonds in the rough" that are not scooped up by ECNL or GA.

On the boys' side, yes, there is so much talent that is missed by MLS/ECNL, that it's a sports crime. But on the girls' side, I don't think there is the same level of participation such that tons of girls are slipping through the cracks. Many of these excluded communities don't seem to support girls' soccer the same way that they support their boys' teams, or that the ECNL/GA-covered areas support girls' teams. I mean, if you play a Central Valley boys' team, you can expect a massive crowd, food, noise, etc. It's an EVENT. Not so much for their girls' teams - in my experience.

 

[nomo]

Just curious, how many people on this thread have ever competed in college athletics, regardless of sport

 

[MSK357]

Pretty sure we're there. Others can make their own determinations.

I have to agree with Grace. Football is a game of skill, but is far more dependent on size, strength and speed than soccer. Here's some examples who have taken years long gaps between playing, some of which never played American football until the NFL:

NFL Players Who Skipped College - TheSpread.com

5 Rugby players to crossover to the NFL (americanfootballinternational.com)

Stephen Neal's unique journey to the NFL has proven successful (patriots.com)

Chester Pitts - Wikipedia (Didn't play in highschool)

These are the only unskilled players that "played" pro soccer that I can think of and they both at least played growing up:

Carlos Kaiser (footballer) - Wikipedia

Usain Bolt - Wikipedia

 

[RandomSoccerFan]

I have to agree with Grace. Football is a game of skill, but is far more dependent on size, strength and speed than soccer.

I might even agree with much of that. But Grace said that most positions in football are low-skilled. Not that soccer positions are more skilled than football positions. Do you still agree with her?

 

[RandomSoccerFan]

Just curious, how many people on this thread have ever competed in college athletics, regardless of sport

Does the 12-oz lift count? It was incredibly competitive.

 

[dad4]

Sorry, but can you explain?

My point was that, if we take Norcal as an example (which is where I'm from), even Rage at the bottom of almost every age group in the ECNL league, can consistently beat the best non-ECNL/GA teams in NorCal and Central Valley (as they demonstrated when they were allowed to participate in NPL). So, unlike the situation with boys' teams, there aren't as many "diamonds in the rough" that are not scooped up by ECNL or GA.

On the boys' side, yes, there is so much talent that is missed by MLS/ECNL, that it's a sports crime. But on the girls' side, I don't think there is the same level of participation such that tons of girls are slipping through the cracks. Many of these excluded communities don't seem to support girls' soccer the same way that they support their boys' teams, or that the ECNL/GA-covered areas support girls' teams. I mean, if you play a Central Valley boys' team, you can expect a massive crowd, food, noise, etc. It's an EVENT. Not so much for their girls' teams - in my experience.

ECNL has essentially nothing for the Central Valley girls. A few make the drive to Mustang or MVLA, but it's a huge hole in the map.

Meanwhile, Marin and Sonoma county each get their own club. Plus one for Davis and two for Sacramento.

It makes sense if you ask "who can pay for a three night hotel stay in Phoenix?". But it makes no sense if you want to know "where are there enough good athletes to field a strong team?"

 

[nomo]

Does the 12-oz lift count? It was incredibly competitive.

lol. sounds about right

 

[whatithink]

I have to agree with Grace. Football is a game of skill, but is far more dependent on size, strength and speed than soccer. Here's some examples who have taken years long gaps between playing, some of which never played American football until the NFL:

NFL Players Who Skipped College - TheSpread.com

5 Rugby players to crossover to the NFL (americanfootballinternational.com)

Stephen Neal's unique journey to the NFL has proven successful (patriots.com)

Chester Pitts - Wikipedia (Didn't play in highschool)

These are the only unskilled players that "played" pro soccer that I can think of and they both at least played growing up:

Carlos Kaiser (footballer) - Wikipedia

Usain Bolt - Wikipedia

Currently playing, Jordan Mailata (philadelphiaeagles.com)

How Jordan Mailata transformed from a rugby player to Eagles' $64 million left tackle - ESPN

Obviously a beast of an individual.

 

[Grace T.]

I might even agree with much of that. But Grace said that most positions in football are low-skilled. Not that soccer positions are more skilled than football positions. Do you still agree with her?

Dude I amended my answer to say "lower" and said you had a point. That I should have made it relative instead of objective and that I didn't mean to imply it was a no skill position. You wouldn't take the win. I then asked you if you seriously considered a linesman as technically skilled as a soccer player or even a QB and you doubled down on it. Which I then proceeded to call a ridiculous statement, based on everything that's been thrown up here, and where you have thrown up nothing. You are right on the former, you are wrong on the latter. If you are now climbing down from that, we may have actually hit agreement.

 

[MSK357]

I might even agree with much of that. But Grace said that most positions in football are low-skilled. Not that soccer positions are more skilled than football positions. Do you still agree with her?

I agree with grace amending it to lowER skilled, wrong if grace thinks linemen require no or little skills. football at all positions require skills, some more so than others. And I'd have to say soccer is more of a skilled sport than football is overall. Or else we'd see more successful cross overs but we don't. Usually its from another sport to football where we see success and that's because athleticism is the most important attribute in american football.

 

[Larzby]

The issue isn't NFL players v. a high school freshman or novice just starting out in the game. All professionals are higher learned skilled than novice across all sports. The question is the amount of effort (for which time is razor) it takes to get skilled at the game (which will be different for each individual but likely averages out over time into various bell curves). The secondary question is how that relates to other sports...the relative measure of how long it takes to get skilled at one game v another.

My nephew is able to walk on as a freshman who hadn't played (outside of some peewee football really early on and touch in pe) football as de at a top 20 socal school and make varsity as a sophomore. Despite his height and athleticism, he could not do the same with an MLS Next team let alone my kid's varsity team. The Usain bolt video above is very illustrative...I'd venture running track is a lower skilled sport and the main variable there really is athleticism...like the SAT you can improve with practice and education but at heart the SAT is an IQ test especially once you get to the 80th percentile.

Grace, I applaud you for your effort, and I'm astounded with your patience! Mahe, who didn't play a single snap of football since peewee, got a scholarship to play O-line at UCLA because he had an enormous amount of muscle mass ... and because the UCLA coaches understood that the position requires RELATIVELY less sport-specific skill. Nothing against linemen - they're great! And I'd love to be wrong, but someone show me some athletes who went from not playing soccer since age 12 straight onto an elite team one step away from the highest tier of the sport.

 

[Larzby]

I have to agree with Grace. Football is a game of skill, but is far more dependent on size, strength and speed than soccer. Here's some examples who have taken years long gaps between playing, some of which never played American football until the NFL:

NFL Players Who Skipped College - TheSpread.com

5 Rugby players to crossover to the NFL (americanfootballinternational.com)

Stephen Neal's unique journey to the NFL has proven successful (patriots.com)

Chester Pitts - Wikipedia (Didn't play in highschool)

These are the only unskilled players that "played" pro soccer that I can think of and they both at least played growing up:

Carlos Kaiser (footballer) - Wikipedia

Usain Bolt - Wikipedia

This!!!

 

[Chelsea dad g09]

Just curious, how many people on this thread have ever competed in college athletics, regardless of sport

Baseball

 

[Chelsea dad g09]

Currently playing, Jordan Mailata (philadelphiaeagles.com)

How Jordan Mailata transformed from a rugby player to Eagles' $64 million left tackle - ESPN

Obviously a beast of an individual.

Ochocinco played after football in Mexico

 

[RandomSoccerFan]

Dude I amended my answer to say "lower" and said you had a point. That I should have made it relative instead of objective and that I didn't mean to imply it was a no skill position. You wouldn't take the win. I then asked you if you seriously considered a linesman as technically skilled as a soccer player or even a QB and you doubled down on it. Which I then proceeded to call a ridiculous statement, based on everything that's been thrown up here, and where you have thrown up nothing. You are right on the former, you are wrong on the latter. If you are now climbing down from that, we may have actually hit agreement.

Climbing down from your strawman argument is never going to be necessary or appropriate. I neither posited, posted, implied, or even believed that a lineman (playing at the same level) has the exact same skill as a qb (playing at the same level). These were your words, not mine - just read the posts.

While this is a soccer board (had to recheck the URL), and any objectivity is going to go out the window even if we didn't want it to, it is absurd to call one sport requiring more skill than another - and it's specifically absurd to call players of any sport at the highest level as low skilled. One thing that is conveniently ignored is that the skill involved in playing football - regardless the position, regardless the level, is valued by many times over compared so most other sports. We can see this all over the country, where high schools spend untold budgets building football stadiums, let alone colleges. States/cities fight over football stadiums and fall over themselves to give hundreds of millions of dollars away. In comparison, soccer is right there with the band and field hockey in terms of budget. All require skill, one skill is clearly more highly valued.

I'll likely be off for a few days. We are leaving shortly for a tournament weekend in Phoenix - where neither soccer nor football will demonstrate their skill superiority, but it should be fun to watch kids play basketball. Hope all have as fun and entertaining weekend!