Families with experience in multiple clubs. Thoughts?

[Anonymous]

For the parents who's had kids in different local clubs, what is some feedback you have? Pros and cons.

Arlington
McLean
Vienna
Great Falls/Reston
Bethesda
Springfield

Pros. Cons.

[Anonymous]

It depend on the level of play.

For Springfield, the club only cares if you are on their top flight. Otherwise, you get the crapper fields and practice time.

[Anonymous]

Your question is not specific enough to provide solid advice. Need gender, age, skill level, and whether he/she is a one sport player or not.

[Anonymous]

I am convinced the big clubs are all the same. And the small clubs are all pretty similar. If you can find a club with a good coach, nice kids and parents and good communication, you found a unicorn. You should stay.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:For the parents who's had kids in different local clubs, what is some feedback you have? Pros and cons.

Arlington
McLean
Vienna
Great Falls/Reston
Bethesda
Springfield

Pros. Cons.

Girls or boys?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It depend on the level of play.

For Springfield, the club only cares if you are on their top flight. Otherwise, you get the crapper fields and practice time.

This is true everywhere. Absolutely every club that has multiple teams and levels of play will give the best of its resources to its best team.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It depend on the level of play.

For Springfield, the club only cares if you are on their top flight. Otherwise, you get the crapper fields and practice time.

Hate to break it to you, but ALL club sports operate this way. The many support the few at the top. If your kid is not on a top team and you are not happy with the coaching, other kids, practice times, etc., you should move on. If your kid is on the top team, then let's discuss which clubs are better.

[Anonymous]

During this tryout season, I've been surprised at how a handful of the larger clubs have been responsive to emails and questions (boys side). Maybe it's a ruse to reel you in, but still, it's nice given how some clubs really don't care at all because they know there are tons of kids looking to fill their limited spots.

[Anonymous]

Arlington, McLean, Springfield and Bethesda - none of these clubs develop players. They all recruit natural talent. If someone better comes along you get bumped.

PPs are correct, focus is usually on the top teams. You are wasting your money for second team down at most clubs.* If your kid is placed on a second team, have them start training on their own and look for first team placement at a different club next season. I have very very rarely seen a second team player move to first team within the same club.

*Anything under second team should be playing rec. Why people pay thousands of dollars for 3rd and 4th teams is unexplainable.

[Anonymous]

This!

 

Anonymous wrote:Arlington, McLean, Springfield and Bethesda - none of these clubs develop players. They all recruit natural talent. If someone better comes along you get bumped.

PPs are correct, focus is usually on the top teams. You are wasting your money for second team down at most clubs.* If your kid is placed on a second team, have them start training on their own and look for first team placement at a different club next season. I have very very rarely seen a second team player move to first team within the same club.

*Anything under second team should be playing rec. Why people pay thousands of dollars for 3rd and 4th teams is unexplainable.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Arlington, McLean, Springfield and Bethesda - none of these clubs develop players. They all recruit natural talent. If someone better comes along you get bumped.

PPs are correct, focus is usually on the top teams. You are wasting your money for second team down at most clubs.* If your kid is placed on a second team, have them start training on their own and look for first team placement at a different club next season. I have very very rarely seen a second team player move to first team within the same club.

*Anything under second team should be playing rec. Why people pay thousands of dollars for 3rd and 4th teams is unexplainable.

This last line is such a dumbass take. Might as well say “Why people pay thousands of dollars for an ATV is unexplainable”. Or more similarly “Why people let their kid take ballet/art/theatre when they aren’t going to be a professional is unexplainable”.

But for a very specific reason - fields. Rec teams at least in Arlington play on just absolute trash fields. Rutted expanses that alternate between mud pits and clay as hard as concrete in the baking sun with dodgy nets are the norm.

Also, again your “no one moves up” is also BS. Taking a look at the current 07 and 08 girls at Arlington, there are several who had been on white (second team) and a few that had been on blue at some point. I don’t know the 05/06 team as well, but I am pretty sure there’s a couple of players that got moved up in the last few years - I think one may have actually been on the 4th team as a uLittle.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Arlington, McLean, Springfield and Bethesda - none of these clubs develop players. They all recruit natural talent. If someone better comes along you get bumped.

PPs are correct, focus is usually on the top teams. You are wasting your money for second team down at most clubs.* If your kid is placed on a second team, have them start training on their own and look for first team placement at a different club next season. I have very very rarely seen a second team player move to first team within the same club.

*Anything under second team should be playing rec. Why people pay thousands of dollars for 3rd and 4th teams is unexplainable.

Thanks for all the responses. We are moving into the area. Two girls U9 and U11. Both played travel soccer in NY. We'll be on the border of McLean and Arlington. We prefer a club that helps kids develop. Practices for us were three days a week which was over four hours a week not including weekends. I know some clubs just toss kids out there without really developing them from fall to spring. My spouse also doesn't want to deal with coaches who don't know what they are doing (for kids this age) or clubs who aren't organized. Both girls played for the second level team.

[Anonymous]

McLean sort of ignores their bottom level team, they get less qualified coaches and get fewer training opportunities than kids on the higher teams. For example, a mid-level team was offered winter conditioning and the lower level team was not. Neither of these teams were ECNL and paid the same amount so essentially on a lower level team, you pay the same and get less.

[Anonymous]

^ we noticed that only the mid-level teams on the girls side went to tournaments for preseason the spring. The lower level girls teams were not even even asked if they wanted to go.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
*Anything under second team should be playing rec. Why people pay thousands of dollars for 3rd and 4th teams is unexplainable.

The reason kids should be in travel even if on the 3-6 teams is because the development is better. Rec practices once a week and plays one game a weekend. Unless that kid is training at home an additional 3-4 days a week the kid's going to suck.

Travel, even on 3-6 teams they practice usually 2-3 times a week with 1-3 games on weekends. Way more touches on the ball and travel has qualified professional coaches versus rec which are coached by volunteer parents.