I am wanting to know what other people think of this age group...

In my opinion .... #1 Solar - Team is big, strong and have great key players that can make plays when they need them.

#2 Andro- team has good size, great skill, but lack finishers. there team had couple very talented midfielders but no finishers and there defence can keep them in game

#3 Fcd- Have one or two dominate players them lots of players that shouldnt be there. but they can score the ball , but average or below average defence

#4 texans red-same as Fcd have couple dominate players but theres are less active but there defence is better but lack one star player and have no style of play and no chemistry just a group of good players

tell me what you think and why

The post is irrealivant .. Why ? cause you can't spell " DEFENSE"

Just kidding bro ! I can't spell worth a crap either..

I wouldn't count out the Tejanos yet

soccerdad1 wrote:I wouldn't count out the Tejanos yet

Good team but a notch below the other 4 (and actually the other 3 appear to be a notch below Solar this season.

soccerballer wrote:I am wanting to know what other people think of this age group...

In my opinion .... #1 Solar - Team is big, strong and have great key players that can make plays when they need them.

#2 Andro- team has good size, great skill, but lack finishers. there team had couple very talented midfielders but no finishers and there defence can keep them in game

#3 Fcd- Have one or two dominate players them lots of players that shouldnt be there. but they can score the ball , but average or below average defence

#4 texans red-same as Fcd have couple dominate players but theres are less active but there defence is better but lack one star player and have no style of play and no chemistry just a group of good players

tell me what you think and why

OK. I will play along....

#1--Solar. I wouldnt consider them big and strong. No bigger than any other team and have in the past seasons been regarded and small and weak. I dont think they really have any "key players". They simply have kept their core together, are well organized, and play nicely together on the field.

#2--Texans Red. Contrary to Solar, they have some big and strong players and have a couple key players. I consider their defense to be their weakness. I agree the team needs more chemistry. But obviously caused by lots of turnover last several years. I like watching their agressiveness and desire.

#3--Andromeda. No superstars, just a solid group of starters who work hard. Its been nice to see their success.

#4--FCD. I agree. A couple strong goal scorers and then a considerable drop off. A disappointment this year compared to past years.

But let's face it--a few more weeks and this dialogue will be moot. These four teams are all off to Academy next year and there will likely be considerable changes across the board.

Worse than not spelling "defense" right, it's "domiNANT" players, not "domiNATE" players.
Of course, if you have dominant players, you may well dominate your opponents.

well i guess we will see who is best on saturday Texans vs Andro and Solar vs Fc Dallas and i have to disagree with no superstars on andromeda they have #8 who has great skill but lazy thats why i put them at 2

But let's face it--a few more weeks and this dialogue will be moot. These four teams are all off to Academy next year and there will likely be considerable changes across the board

I thought these teams already have academy teams?...I heard from an Andro 96' parent that the academy team bascially will take the top few from DI to replace the players forced to move up, but their DI team will stay DI...is there a whole new league that will be seperate from the current academy league? if so what is this league?