Metro United

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Good job today Metro United

For what? I'm still not understanding. The only results posted were the U15s.

U14, U16, U17, U18 scores?

Because they played well, short staffed, with a new mix of players, playing together for the first time, against deep Richmond United teams. On a fricking hot day! To me - that earns a great job.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Believe whatever you like. I can't blame you given two years of mind boggling decisions that no other club in the country would have done and then justifying it with ludicrous explanations. Given all that Spirit did, it was hard for me to believe until I saw them cutting players, giving players PT offers, and losing players because they would no longer be played up. And the training environment has stepped up considerably, with coaches demanding intensity when they weren't empowered to before.

This year will be a turning point.

BTW - they kept the gals that play up. A few playing on U14 and
I believe a player on U15 playing up 2 yrs. They have much better coaching
which I think it plays a huge impact plus they are training 4-5 times a
week now not 3-5 like last 2 seasons. I’m sure there will be much improvement
as the seasons continue

They may have kept the one whose dad is one of the admins, but others were dropped back. I know of several examples. Today there was some playing up due to player shortages on some rosters, but that isn't the same as moving those players up permanently. The coaches themselves from last year say openly it was done too frequently and improperly.

Wrong. These players are permanent. Don’t think there’s a admin dad. If there was do t think his kid plays up

Wrong. These players are not. Games will start soon, and we will see. Last year there was one whose dad this year is involved in the administration. He even helped coin the name "Metro United" . Again, I know of several examples of players who were playing up and aren't now. I'm posting from first-hand knowledge.

MU parent here-
U16 - 1 playing up
U15-1 playing up 2 yrs
U14- 2 playing up

You’re an idiot - must be an FCV parent

I won't stoop to your level. I said I know of examples, and I do. One left MU because she wouldn't be offered a play up spot and is now gone. Two are back down in their own age group. One goalie who chronically played up last year is playing at age at Arlington.

As for the little 07, maybe she's good enough. Like I said, no one said never.

So are the remaining playups “worthy” of playing up?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Believe whatever you like. I can't blame you given two years of mind boggling decisions that no other club in the country would have done and then justifying it with ludicrous explanations. Given all that Spirit did, it was hard for me to believe until I saw them cutting players, giving players PT offers, and losing players because they would no longer be played up. And the training environment has stepped up considerably, with coaches demanding intensity when they weren't empowered to before.

This year will be a turning point.

BTW - they kept the gals that play up. A few playing on U14 and
I believe a player on U15 playing up 2 yrs. They have much better coaching
which I think it plays a huge impact plus they are training 4-5 times a
week now not 3-5 like last 2 seasons. I’m sure there will be much improvement
as the seasons continue

They may have kept the one whose dad is one of the admins, but others were dropped back. I know of several examples. Today there was some playing up due to player shortages on some rosters, but that isn't the same as moving those players up permanently. The coaches themselves from last year say openly it was done too frequently and improperly.

Wrong. These players are permanent. Don’t think there’s a admin dad. If there was do t think his kid plays up

Wrong. These players are not. Games will start soon, and we will see. Last year there was one whose dad this year is involved in the administration. He even helped coin the name "Metro United" . Again, I know of several examples of players who were playing up and aren't now. I'm posting from first-hand knowledge.

MU parent here-
U16 - 1 playing up
U15-1 playing up 2 yrs
U14- 2 playing up

You’re an idiot - must be an FCV parent

I won't stoop to your level. I said I know of examples, and I do. One left MU because she wouldn't be offered a play up spot and is now gone. Two are back down in their own age group. One goalie who chronically played up last year is playing at age at Arlington.

As for the little 07, maybe she's good enough. Like I said, no one said never.

So are the remaining playups “worthy” of playing up?

I'm not sure to be honest. It is more controlled than last year. Does it need more? Let's see how they do and I can only hope the coaches and parents won't force what doesn't work. Last year, it looked and even was "sold" as a matter of club policy.

As long as they keep up, sure. If a forward is still scoring, then she's getting it done. If not, she should go back down. A midfielder who is still making the plays and controlling play, sure. If not, she should go back down. So on and so forth.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Good job today Metro United

For what? I'm still not understanding. The only results posted were the U15s.

U14, U16, U17, U18 scores?

Because they played well, short staffed, with a new mix of players, playing together for the first time, against deep Richmond United teams. On a fricking hot day! To me - that earns a great job.

So they participated.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Good job today Metro United

For what? I'm still not understanding. The only results posted were the U15s.

U14, U16, U17, U18 scores?

Because they played well, short staffed, with a new mix of players, playing together for the first time, against deep Richmond United teams. On a fricking hot day! To me - that earns a great job.

100%

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Good job today Metro United

For what? I'm still not understanding. The only results posted were the U15s.

U14, U16, U17, U18 scores?

Because they played well, short staffed, with a new mix of players, playing together for the first time, against deep Richmond United teams. On a fricking hot day! To me - that earns a great job.

So they participated.

You are clueless

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Good job today Metro United

For what? I'm still not understanding. The only results posted were the U15s.

U14, U16, U17, U18 scores?

Because they played well, short staffed, with a new mix of players, playing together for the first time, against deep Richmond United teams. On a fricking hot day! To me - that earns a great job.

So they participated.

5-5 score even playing 10v11 for 15 min. You say this? Sure troll.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Good job today Metro United

For what? I'm still not understanding. The only results posted were the U15s.

U14, U16, U17, U18 scores?

Because they played well, short staffed, with a new mix of players, playing together for the first time, against deep Richmond United teams. On a fricking hot day! To me - that earns a great job.

So they participated.

5-5 score even playing 10v11 for 15 min. You say this? Sure troll.

Ok. The U15s, with 10 players on a hot summer day, came away with a tie. Is that all we are allowed to ask about?

U14, U16, U17, U18?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Good job today Metro United

For what? I'm still not understanding. The only results posted were the U15s.

U14, U16, U17, U18 scores?

Because they played well, short staffed, with a new mix of players, playing together for the first time, against deep Richmond United teams. On a fricking hot day! To me - that earns a great job.

So they participated.

5-5 score even playing 10v11 for 15 min. You say this? Sure troll.

Ok. The U15s, with 10 players on a hot summer day, came away with a tie. Is that all we are allowed to ask about?

U14, U16, U17, U18?

Perhaps that is the only score the person knows?

Is there a age group in particular you are interested in?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Good job today Metro United

For what? I'm still not understanding. The only results posted were the U15s.

U14, U16, U17, U18 scores?

Because they played well, short staffed, with a new mix of players, playing together for the first time, against deep Richmond United teams. On a fricking hot day! To me - that earns a great job.

So they participated.

5-5 score even playing 10v11 for 15 min. You say this? Sure troll.

Ok. The U15s, with 10 players on a hot summer day, came away with a tie. Is that all we are allowed to ask about?

U14, U16, U17, U18?

Perhaps that is the only score the person knows?

Is there a age group in particular you are interested in?

U14 and U16

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Good job today Metro United

For what? I'm still not understanding. The only results posted were the U15s.

U14, U16, U17, U18 scores?

Because they played well, short staffed, with a new mix of players, playing together for the first time, against deep Richmond United teams. On a fricking hot day! To me - that earns a great job.

So they participated.

5-5 score even playing 10v11 for 15 min. You say this? Sure troll.

Ok. The U15s, with 10 players on a hot summer day, came away with a tie. Is that all we are allowed to ask about?

U14, U16, U17, U18?

Perhaps that is the only score the person knows?

Is there a age group in particular you are interested in?

So many MU haters! This troll might be a parent of a player that got cut lol

U14 and U16

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Believe whatever you like. I can't blame you given two years of mind boggling decisions that no other club in the country would have done and then justifying it with ludicrous explanations. Given all that Spirit did, it was hard for me to believe until I saw them cutting players, giving players PT offers, and losing players because they would no longer be played up. And the training environment has stepped up considerably, with coaches demanding intensity when they weren't empowered to before.

This year will be a turning point.

BTW - they kept the gals that play up. A few playing on U14 and
I believe a player on U15 playing up 2 yrs. They have much better coaching
which I think it plays a huge impact plus they are training 4-5 times a
week now not 3-5 like last 2 seasons. I’m sure there will be much improvement
as the seasons continue

They may have kept the one whose dad is one of the admins, but others were dropped back. I know of several examples. Today there was some playing up due to player shortages on some rosters, but that isn't the same as moving those players up permanently. The coaches themselves from last year say openly it was done too frequently and improperly.

Wrong. These players are permanent. Don’t think there’s a admin dad. If there was do t think his kid plays up

Wrong. These players are not. Games will start soon, and we will see. Last year there was one whose dad this year is involved in the administration. He even helped coin the name "Metro United" . Again, I know of several examples of players who were playing up and aren't now. I'm posting from first-hand knowledge.

MU parent here-
U16 - 1 playing up
U15-1 playing up 2 yrs
U14- 2 playing up

You’re an idiot - must be an FCV parent

I won't stoop to your level. I said I know of examples, and I do. One left MU because she wouldn't be offered a play up spot and is now gone. Two are back down in their own age group. One goalie who chronically played up last year is playing at age at Arlington.

Not sure if I am thinking about same person. There may be more than one example.

In the case I am thinking of the the player had a choice of playing for MU at their age group or playing for a better team at their age group. Maybe they would have stayed if MU let them play up a year? If you are good enough to play up for MU you are probably good enough to play your age group for their competitors.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Good job today Metro United

For what? I'm still not understanding. The only results posted were the U15s.

U14, U16, U17, U18 scores?

Because they played well, short staffed, with a new mix of players, playing together for the first time, against deep Richmond United teams. On a fricking hot day! To me - that earns a great job.

So they participated.

5-5 score even playing 10v11 for 15 min. You say this? Sure troll.

Ok. The U15s, with 10 players on a hot summer day, came away with a tie. Is that all we are allowed to ask about?

U14, U16, U17, U18?

Perhaps that is the only score the person knows?

Is there a age group in particular you are interested in?

U14 and U16

Metro lost both U14 and U16 games by a score of 0-40. Happy now? Move along.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Good job today Metro United

For what? I'm still not understanding. The only results posted were the U15s.

U14, U16, U17, U18 scores?

Because they played well, short staffed, with a new mix of players, playing together for the first time, against deep Richmond United teams. On a fricking hot day! To me - that earns a great job.

So they participated.

5-5 score even playing 10v11 for 15 min. You say this? Sure troll.

Ok. The U15s, with 10 players on a hot summer day, came away with a tie. Is that all we are allowed to ask about?

U14, U16, U17, U18?

Perhaps that is the only score the person knows?

Is there a age group in particular you are interested in?

U14 and U16

Metro lost both U14 and U16 games by a score of 0-40. Happy now? Move along.

I heard it was 2:63 and 5 six year olds played U16

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Good job today Metro United

For what? I'm still not understanding. The only results posted were the U15s.

U14, U16, U17, U18 scores?

Because they played well, short staffed, with a new mix of players, playing together for the first time, against deep Richmond United teams. On a fricking hot day! To me - that earns a great job.

So they participated.

5-5 score even playing 10v11 for 15 min. You say this? Sure troll.

Are you saying that getting a tie against a lowly ECNL team in one age group is a noteworthy achievement for a mighty DA program such as MU?