TOP 10 2007 teams

Then maybe some kids have played up with the top team before, because they were recognized by the players on the field who had never played that team before.
It was a hot, windy, battle for sure.

That makes sense. When the team formed this past Spring about 4 of the boys from the original team were moved to it.

Hot was an understatement...felt bad for the boys battling it out an extra 20(ish) minutes.

The results for Volkan were underwhelming at best all weekend. Are the other teams getting better or is Volkan slipping? The majority of the field was PPL level...

TayJ6 wrote:Then maybe some kids have played up with the top team before, because they were recognized by the players on the field who had never played that team before.
It was a hot, windy, battle for sure.

McKinney's 2nd team was seeded with kids from the top team when it was formed.

Really surprised Volkan didn't walk through the competition this past weekend. They were the only true gold team registered in a division rounded out with only one silver team and some bronze level competition.

Having watched the McKinney/Lanier team a number of matches over the last couple months (and knowing quite a few kids on the team), they are not close to a top 20 squad and are likely even on the bubble for D2 come qualifying. They shouldn't have given Volkan any issues. So either Volkan has slid or the McKinney squad has vastly improved (and I find it hard to believe a team that was playing some pretty ugly kickball a little over a month ago has improved that dramatically in that short a period of time without wholesale changes to their squad).

That said, picking up Lanier to coach that squad is a huge add. He's a great coach and a solid addition to that team. Wish them well in building to the future, have no doubt Lanier will get them moving in the right direction.

Thanks for under estimating the "second team".  Exactly the label and position you want to be in going into qualifying. I would say Solar M/L held their own just fine and in fact, connected more passes together than the bigger, faster Volkan team.

Good thing Volkan had that guest FC Dallas player to hit that last shot to tie -  two minutes past when time ended... just sayin...

Since we are "just saying..." we can add that all 5 goals scored in the game were scored by Volkan. Even the own goal that put them in the hole late to begin with.
Yes, the guest player got lucky and hit a perfect strike. He hadn't done that much all game.  Guest players during June are pretty normal. We'll see if he is on the roster in a few weeks, or not.
The "2 minutes" past time ending, was injury time for the keeper. Which the ref clearly identified when he held up 2 fingers as everyone's cell phone timers were going off and people started yelling at the ref (including the coach).
It was a very dramatic game, but a very fair one. If Volkan had lost they would have deserved it, having given up an own goal w/ maybe 5 minutes to play in extra time.  As it turned out, they went into overdrive pushing for the equalizer and got lucky on a semi-counter. They could not penetrate McKinney's defense when it was set up. They tried all game. Ultimately it was defense vs. defense as the back lines thwarted many an attempt on both side.  Not very many difficult shots made it to either keeper. A couple good saves on both sides.

Agree with that assessment - Volcan had an own goal off a well placed corner, and a beautiful strike in "questionable" extra time - plus all three penalties. Im guessing M/L will be practicing penalty kicks in upcoming practices

Kinda upset I missed this game. I suspect there were a lot of cleared balls by each team's back line. Very little to no play out of the back, and a lot of counterattacking on longish "passes". On a hot/humid day, that would've made for a lot of running for the boys with very little to show for it which makes for a long/tough game for sure.

Two more weeks (and only one more weekend) of silly season then we get to see how teams form up going into QT. Should be interesting.

On that note, what's the word on who is picking up/losing boys? Who's improving/dropping in the rankings?

I've seen quite a few FCD boys making the rounds at try-outs as well as a several Solar boys from some of the top teams and only a few limited DT boys.

Rumor mill says parents don't like the new FCD blue coach and parents do like the new DTR coach.

Seems most coaches are looking to sign 12 to 14 which leaves room to add post July 1 if someone ends up without a team.

Lots of cleared balls from the back. Lots of dribbling midfielders. And lots of balls in front for wings to run onto. Volkan played a lot of balls into their forward with his back to the goal but he was smothered by the defense before he could get turned most of the time. 70 min of playing time before penalties!

I agree, I'm ready for rosters to lock down and move forward with some King Tut and QT.

FCD exodus notwithstanding, there's no more meaningful tourneys left before signing day. I'm going to post my last pre-signing Top 10.

1. FCD Premier
2. Texans Red
3. Solar McKinney
4. Rush
5. PST
6. Elite United
7. Dallas Rebels
8. LP Owen
9. Solar Kennington
10. Allegiance

Our little team shows heart and promise and is exactly how we want it at this age. It is centered around development rather than "win" mentality.

The parents could care less about being mentioned with the "Top 10" of 9 and 10 year olds or even what Classic division they make at this point. - we do expect them to compete in Classic League.

But be assured, this is a solid core of good kids who are receiving quality training from two respected and seasoned coaches. This team will only get better.

Best of luck to everyone.

No argument that a "Top 10" list for 9 and 10yr olds is an inherently ridiculous premise. But much like Reality TV its entertaining at worst and drives compelling arguments at best. I'm not the least bit ashamed to take part.

Ironically, the litmus test of development is often winning and losing.
A "development centered" program just has longer term goals for winning.

I too, will gladly participate in internet banter involving 9 and 10 yr old athletics, but obviously will always positively interact with all players and parents at the games regardless of affiliation. (okay, so it's "almost always" when it comes to the ref. That's one place where I expect perfection!)

Solar 07B wrote:Our little team shows heart and promise and is exactly how we want it at this age. It is centered around development rather than "win" mentality.  

The parents could care less about being mentioned with the "Top 10" of 9 and 10 year olds or even what Classic division they make at this point. - we do expect them to compete in Classic League.

But be assured, this is a solid core of good kids who are receiving quality training from two respected and seasoned coaches. This team will only get better.

Best of luck to everyone.

What does "centered around development" actually mean? Doesn't development mean learning how to properly execute the technical and tactical skills learned in training during game time at game speed under game stress? And isn't winning determined by a combination of physical prowess and technical/tactical execution on game day? So isn't winning at least in part a measure of development? Certainly seems to be.

A gold team beating a silver team doesn't mean the gold team values winning more than the silver team it also doesn't mean the game was a success from a developmental standpoint for the gold team or a bad game from a developmental standpoint from the silver team. I'd wager Volkan doesn't see this past weekend as a successful outing even though they won the tournament (know our coach wouldn't) and I'd wager the McKinney/Lanier side doesn't necessarily see the finals as a bad outing even though they lost.

TayJ6 wrote:Ironically, the litmus test of development is often winning and losing.
A "development centered" program just has longer term goals for winning.

I too, will gladly participate in internet banter involving 9 and 10 yr old athletics, but obviously will always positively interact with all players and parents at the games regardless of affiliation. (okay, so it's "almost always" when it comes to the ref. That's one place where I expect perfection!)

DragonStryker wrote:

Solar 07B wrote:Our little team shows heart and promise and is exactly how we want it at this age. It is centered around development rather than "win" mentality.  

The parents could care less about being mentioned with the "Top 10" of 9 and 10 year olds or even what Classic division they make at this point. - we do expect them to compete in Classic League.

But be assured, this is a solid core of good kids who are receiving quality training from two respected and seasoned coaches. This team will only get better.

Best of luck to everyone.

What does "centered around development" actually mean?  Doesn't development mean learning how to properly execute the technical and tactical skills learned in training during game time at game speed under game stress?  And isn't winning determined by a combination of physical prowess and technical/tactical execution on game day?  So isn't winning at least in part a measure of development?  Certainly seems to be.

A gold team beating a silver team doesn't mean the gold team values winning more than the silver team it also doesn't mean the game was a success from a developmental standpoint for the gold team or a bad game from a developmental standpoint from the silver team.  I'd wager Volkan doesn't see this past weekend as a successful outing even though they won the tournament (know our coach wouldn't) and I'd wager the McKinney/Lanier side doesn't necessarily see the finals as a bad outing even though they lost.

Some good points but I think in regards to our team the "centered around development" means moving our boys around to all different positions to get them new "stress" under pressure experience and sometimes that comes at a cost. Our coach moves those boys all over the field. Even in that game our starting CM played a good chunk of the game at LB. First game he has done that and I believe will make him a better all around player in the long run.

So when you look at the development aspect and are comfortable putting kids in positions they haven't been used to playing I call that a win. I think the rest is table stakes with learning your angles, passing and building an attack.

I've seen kids that get put at one spot from rec through select and never experience playing anywhere else on the pitch. Why? Because that's what they have always played and moving that kid around may result in a loss. They are 10...big deal.

Now qualifying may be a different story.....