ECNL forcing Brave & Union Partnership

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Creation of Fairfax VA Union

ECNL and ECNL R parents,
I am writing this email on behalf of the MYS Leadership and Board of Directors to give some additional context about the creation of the Fairfax VA Union ECNL club. First, we understand the impact this has on the MYS/VA Union players, coaches, and families. We have been faced with a difficult situation and are working tirelessly to make decisions that are in the best interest of our players and the organization in both the short and long term. 

Earlier this month, we were informed by the ECNL league that our National Program membership for the Virginia Union was in jeopardy due to poor performance, particularly on the boys side. We have had a downward trend and rank near the bottom in our region/nation on several performance metrics that are closely tracked by the league. We were also informed that our ECNL R program is under review and is subject to a hearing and potential removal.

At the request of the MYS Board of Directors, a follow-up meeting was held with ECNL President Christian Lavers. During this meeting, we were informed that ECNL has begun reviewing all participating clubs in order to enhance the level of competition and the player pool. ECNL feels that Fairfax County is an over-saturated market and given our performance in recent years, our boys program was one of the organizations under consideration for expulsion from the league. To maintain an ECNL pathway for our club, ECNL leadership encouraged VA Union/MYS to pursue a merger with another member club. Fairfax Brave was given a similar directive and given our geographic proximity and shared desire to provide an ECNL path for our members, we chose to merge Fairfax Brave and Virginia Union.  

As most of you are already aware, the Fairfax Brave club comprises the Vienna and Braddock Road clubs. In order to merge the VA Union with the Brave, we created a new entity and established the Fairfax VA Union club. This new entity has a three-club founding membership structure and under the agreement, each founding club represents one third of this new organization that has come together to make decisions that are in our best interests. Each club has two member representatives that sit on a Fairfax VA Union board of six directors. According to the bylaws of this new entity, all decisions regarding the new club must be voted on unanimously, including the coaching staff decisions. 

We hope to have the final coaching slate in place by midweek. As much as we want to place all of our existing VA Union/MYS coaches into this new club, we all must understand that it is a collaborative effort involving 3 clubs with talented and skilled coaches. It is our shared objective to ensure we are leveraging the tremendous coaching resources that all three clubs have to position the Fairfax VA Union teams to be competitive and to create better talent pathways for our players. Continuing to create these pathways is what will drive our focus at MYS with our involvement in the Fairfax VA Union for our ECNL level players, and for all our MYS players from recreation to travel.

We appreciate that there is a lot of change happening for our ECNL players during this transition and we will continue to provide our families with timely updates as they become available.

Yours in soccer,
Tim Ryerson
Associate Executive Director
McLean Youth Soccer

Wonder why this was not signed by Louise Waxler, Executive Director.

Wow. I don’t know why the many good female players and their coaches in Union would remain on this ship which is sinking through no fault of their own.

With FCV players leaving that club en masse to follow their coaching staff to VRSC, is there an opportunity for Union girls to leave en masse for FCV? I hear FCV is looking for some GA coaches, so in this case the coaches could follow their players! They’d all be playing Champions League next season, ironically based on the play of current FCV players who by then will be watching Champions League online from the comfort of Revolution Sportsplex!

Too late—FCV ID sessions wrapped up tonight.

No one cares. FCV has no fields and no coaches and apparently, according to the keyboard warriors here, soon will have no players. My club has fields but no coaches so at least I’m at 50%.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:GAs main focus is girls soccer.
ECNL is now having to maintain the girls side and the boys side (mls next competition). I am beginning to think this will not be the first/last time something like this happens

This is going to happen a lot and killing McLean will put the other clubs on notice that both the boys and girls sides need to be tended to. I assume that ECNL thought there was no way they could do it themselves. This might not be the last action. If they cannot put this together they all could still be out.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How many girls are being rostered for ECNL teams at Union? How do they determine who plays in the matches?

Next year expect inflated rosters. Playing time will vary based on the coach. Expect many players to self select out in year 2.

Could be but you can only dress 18.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It was the boys on both sides. But they didnt need to combine the girls, why not let them have two ECNL teams one from each club?

The boys would get them thrown out on both sides -- boys/girls. This was the death peanlty for McL

Maybe all the girl parents stopped reading after the mention of "particularly the boys program", but it also very clearly states their RL program wasn't up to par either. Take a quick look at the girls RL side. Don't worry ECNL parents, it's easy and it won't hurt, no one will even know you went slumming. It's the link right under ECNL on their website. 1-5-1, 3-3-11, 1-6-0, 1-6-1, 3-3-2, 2-3-3. That's Mclean girls RL records. BRYC isn't any better. In fact, VYS, the 3rd member, actually sits above Mclean and BRYC in the table in all but one age group. If we're all to believe that these Mclean coaches are the best in the area, why doesn't that show up below the ECNL level on their teams? Maybe because they've just recruited from elsewhere and not actually developed? No wonder their RL teams lose to GA teams, letting GA to dismiss those "same level as RL" jabs.

Yes, they're clearly pushing blame at the boys, and that side deserves much of the scrutiny. However same letter gives other hints about where else you can look to see Mclean is really just 3 good ECNL girls teams these days and 1 of them is nearly entirely rostered from their now-former partner who will also be stealing those fairfax county players from them. There are 21 other teams ECNL cares about for their image and funding (6 boys ecnl, 6 boys RL, 6 girls RL, 3 other girls ECNL).

[Anonymous]

ECNL has a flawed business model and the failure of McLean and Brave are just symptoms of this, not the cause.

The best boys (A/A+) are not in ECNL, they are in MLSN. There are not enough boys in the B+/A- range to populate as many boys ECNL teams as there are A level girls to populate the girls teams. The best girls want ECNL, the best boys do not. So, why does ECNL think there can be as many competitive boys teams in this area as girls teams?

Blend all the boys ECNL and ECNL-R leagues and allow for promotion or relegation. The girls are fine as they are.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:ECNL has a flawed business model and the failure of McLean and Brave are just symptoms of this, not the cause.

The best boys (A/A+) are not in ECNL, they are in MLSN. There are not enough boys in the B+/A- range to populate as many boys ECNL teams as there are A level girls to populate the girls teams. The best girls want ECNL, the best boys do not. So, why does ECNL think there can be as many competitive boys teams in this area as girls teams?

Blend all the boys ECNL and ECNL-R leagues and allow for promotion or relegation. The girls are fine as they are.

That is exactly right. ECNL needs to come to grips with the fact that their boys league is a sinking ship. ECNL clubs are going to either switch to MLS Next or bleed players to their neighboring MLS Next club(s). This merger isn’t going to lead to FVU boys teams…so what then?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:ECNL has a flawed business model and the failure of McLean and Brave are just symptoms of this, not the cause.

The best boys (A/A+) are not in ECNL, they are in MLSN. There are not enough boys in the B+/A- range to populate as many boys ECNL teams as there are A level girls to populate the girls teams. The best girls want ECNL, the best boys do not. So, why does ECNL think there can be as many competitive boys teams in this area as girls teams?

Blend all the boys ECNL and ECNL-R leagues and allow for promotion or relegation. The girls are fine as they are.

That is exactly right. ECNL needs to come to grips with the fact that their boys league is a sinking ship. ECNL clubs are going to either switch to MLS Next or bleed players to their neighboring MLS Next club(s). This merger isn’t going to lead to FVU boys teams…so what then?

* lead to strong FVU teams. If you mixed the 2 rosters right now, they are still a weaker program. ECNL going to cut them in a year or two?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How many girls are being rostered for ECNL teams at Union? How do they determine who plays in the matches?

Next year expect inflated rosters. Playing time will vary based on the coach. Expect many players to self select out in year 2.

Could be but you can only dress 18.

Why would the roster be more than 18 then?

[Anonymous]

Time for ECNL to decouple the boys and girls programs. Allow clubs to do what they want for theirboys. ECNL would remain the gold standard for girls and could continue to run a massive (and lucrative!) national ECNL/ECNL-R boys network, but call it what it is: at best, a feeder to MLSN.

The aggressive actions ECNL is taking against its own clubs (that are just trying to survive the war of attrition of quality boys to MLSN) will also lead to the downfall of ECNL’s girls program.

[Anonymous]

Let's throw the boys program under the bus to add to the already dumpster fire that is this merger rollout. What a shitty email to write to your own membership. The lack of leadership in McLean from Louise, Clyde and Tim should scare away most players and staff. Everyone keeps forgetting that end of the merger with SYC is what triggered this move. That partnership only benefited the girls. The McLean/Union girls program is in serious decline relative to it's past and this is a last desperate move to stay relevant. Blaming the boys program is a red herring. The boys program never stood a chance against SYC MLSNext. Despite that they have maintained their performance relative to their opponents in their division. Just think of how many powerhouse boys programs exist in the division add to that a overrsaturated NOVA market with MLSNext constantly taking players. Let's be realistic, the boys program were making minor miracles sending teams to playoffs and nearly winning a championship a couple years ago. Brave has never come close to that. This partnership will fail just like it did with SYC. Brave don't have the player pool to compete nationally. McLean Girls program have always recruited their way to the top via Nadir poaching players from Herndon and elsewhere. The well is drying up now that other clubs do a better job of developing their players. You won't hear that in the messaging becaue this deal is only going to benefit the girls program at the expense of the boys. We are witnessing the end of McLean.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Time for ECNL to decouple the boys and girls programs. Allow clubs to do what they want for theirboys. ECNL would remain the gold standard for girls and could continue to run a massive (and lucrative!) national ECNL/ECNL-R boys network, but call it what it is: at best, a feeder to MLSN.

The aggressive actions ECNL is taking against its own clubs (that are just trying to survive the war of attrition of quality boys to MLSN) will also lead to the downfall of ECNL’s girls program.

ECNL's goals are money and control. If they don't continue their preference for clubs to be in both of their national programs it will be a sign that they accepted defeat on the boys side to MLSN. Also keep in mind that they themselves are flexible on that ruling, it just depends on who the club is. Their rules change depending on who it applies to, which is also a bad look.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How many girls are being rostered for ECNL teams at Union? How do they determine who plays in the matches?

Next year expect inflated rosters. Playing time will vary based on the coach. Expect many players to self select out in year 2.

Could be but you can only dress 18.

Why would the roster be more than 18 then?

We got a first-timer on here, welcome!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:ECNL has a flawed business model and the failure of McLean and Brave are just symptoms of this, not the cause.

The best boys (A/A+) are not in ECNL, they are in MLSN. There are not enough boys in the B+/A- range to populate as many boys ECNL teams as there are A level girls to populate the girls teams. The best girls want ECNL, the best boys do not. So, why does ECNL think there can be as many competitive boys teams in this area as girls teams?

Blend all the boys ECNL and ECNL-R leagues and allow for promotion or relegation. The girls are fine as they are.

That is exactly right. ECNL needs to come to grips with the fact that their boys league is a sinking ship. ECNL clubs are going to either switch to MLS Next or bleed players to their neighboring MLS Next club(s). This merger isn’t going to lead to FVU boys teams…so what then?

The b boys are sitting on the Arlington and Alexandria benches instead of getting playing time.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How many girls are being rostered for ECNL teams at Union? How do they determine who plays in the matches?

Next year expect inflated rosters. Playing time will vary based on the coach. Expect many players to self select out in year 2.

Could be but you can only dress 18.

Why would the roster be more than 18 then?

We got a first-timer on here, welcome!

Different question. Why would girls want to be on a roster like that? Are the parents forcing them to be part of the "ECNL dream"? It doesn't seem like they'd get any of the supposed ECNL benefit from that type of arrangement. Kids only get so many years to play youth soccer, and this is just flushing it away.

[Anonymous]

Why is it a weird thing for ECNL to want only 1 program in Fairfax County?