The US women's soccer team getting beat by HS boys in a scrimmage should be far more widely known than it is - especially since Megan Rapinoe was on that same fucking team!
The US women's soccer team getting beat by HS boys in a scrimmage should be far more widely known than it is - especially since Megan Rapinoe was on that same fucking team!
This point is exactly why I am annoyed by people boiling this down to "high schoolers beat the best women's team in the world!". Yes, it's absolutely significant that the top women's team lost to a team of 14-15 year old boys, it's definitively evidence of the physical disparity for sure. But then people think it means that *any* team of 14-15 year old boys could beat any women's team, which is an exaggeration in the opposite direction. FC Dallas is a top club that produces truly amazing players, this isn't just any old team of middle/high school boys. It is both true that there are hundreds of boys teams in the world that could beat any women's team in the world, and that there are many, many more boys (and mens) teams that definitely could not.
Yes, I'm well aware, but this is a weird reply unless you are somehow interpreting "hundreds of boys teams could beat any women's team" as saying that the same boys teams could also beat literally any other team, including the men's national team. They can't and nothing I said implied they could. Actually accurately gauging where competitive women lie in the field is relevant to this conversation, and doesn't boil down to "can they beat the absolute best men or not". Especially since the answer to that is almost always no.
The point I was making is that I don't know why the 14/15 year old boys being really good makes any difference? You seemed to have wanted to make that point that you were bothered by the fact they were particularly good, but I don't see why that matters at all. The women's team would have the experience, training and maturity. So then the only advantage for the boys should be gender differences. I'd argue these boys were still at an disadvantage as they weren't even the under 15 boys national team!
The best Adult Women's soccer athletes cannot beat top tier but not the best 14/15 male athletes.
The best Adult Men Athletes could easily beat top tier but not the best 14/15 make athletes.
The US women's soccer team getting beat by HS boys in a scrimmage should be far more widely known than it is - especially since Megan Rapinoe was on that same fucking team!
To be fair FC Dallas has an absolutely phenomenal development program if you consider the current makeup of the mens team.
And as teenagers beat the most highly trained world dominating team of adult females.
This point is exactly why I am annoyed by people boiling this down to "high schoolers beat the best women's team in the world!". Yes, it's absolutely significant that the top women's team lost to a team of 14-15 year old boys, it's definitively evidence of the physical disparity for sure. But then people think it means that *any* team of 14-15 year old boys could beat any women's team, which is an exaggeration in the opposite direction. FC Dallas is a top club that produces truly amazing players, this isn't just any old team of middle/high school boys. It is both true that there are hundreds of boys teams in the world that could beat any women's team in the world, and that there are many, many more boys (and mens) teams that definitely could not.
...its irrelevant because incredibly 14/15 year old boys with get wiped playing against the US National teams grown men.
Yes, I'm well aware, but this is a weird reply unless you are somehow interpreting "hundreds of boys teams could beat any women's team" as saying that the same boys teams could also beat literally any other team, including the men's national team. They can't and nothing I said implied they could. Actually accurately gauging where competitive women lie in the field is relevant to this conversation, and doesn't boil down to "can they beat the absolute best men or not". Especially since the answer to that is almost always no.
The point I was making is that I don't know why the 14/15 year old boys being really good makes any difference? You seemed to have wanted to make that point that you were bothered by the fact they were particularly good, but I don't see why that matters at all. The women's team would have the experience, training and maturity. So then the only advantage for the boys should be gender differences. I'd argue these boys were still at an disadvantage as they weren't even the under 15 boys national team!
The best Adult Women's soccer athletes cannot beat top tier but not the best 14/15 male athletes.
The best Adult Men Athletes could easily beat top tier but not the best 14/15 make athletes.