A soccer player choosing between dominating a lower league or riding the bench in a prestigious one should pick the prestigious league for exposure. Email subject lines mentioning MLS Next get 15 times more responses than club-level mentions, making visibility the deciding factor unless you can get noticed another way.
Is it better to be on a good team in a bad league, or is it better to be on a bad team in a good league? Now I want you to change the word good and bad to exposure. Which one is going to give you the most exposure? If you're on EDP or E64 and you're the number one team in the state or in the country, that's called big fish small pond. Maybe that's a really good place for you because college coaches will know you're one of the better teams, not as good players, because you're going to get noticed. Likewise, if you're playing MLS Next and you're the worst in MLS Next, maybe you're not going to get noticed because you're the worst MLS team. I will tell you the short answer though is you should always play in the better league and be on a worse team. The word MLS next gets responded to 15 times more in the subject line than club level. So if you had to pick, pick to be on the bad team at a better club level unless you confirm you can get exposure elsewhere. And it also depends on your college coach and the club and other factors. So if you want more help so I can determine that with you, give me a call. Links in the bio.
