Is Gunston & LMVSC merging?

[Anonymous]

If you think a merge will help, look at this post from the ‘LMVSC townhall’ thread:
Joined LMVSC Red last year and directly familiar with BRYC, AUFC, VIVA, Arlington, and Barca.

LMVSC is late to academy training, especially compared to these other clubs.

Whether this change helps or hurts your player's development depends upon several factors IMHO:

1. Your child's ability and commitment
2. The coach's ability and commitment
3. The team's ability and commitment

Honestly, I found very little difference between and among the clubs. I found huge differences between coaches and players and these differences greatly impacted development.

My player is looking to play college soccer. Our family decided ECNL would be detrimental to academics. Plus the HS team usually challenges for league and state title.

CCL gave decent exposure. Tournament play even more.

Coaching and perhaps half of the Red players were mixed (i.e., inconsistent.) Some of these players were White and never able to "step up" consistently to Red.

That said, LMVSC kind of let this team do its own thing WRT tournaments. For this reason, I think the team matters more than the club...and this was true elsewhere too.

We are not returning.

Much of the decision stems from getting as much college exposure as possible, presuming there's any play in the fall.

The idea that any exposure is good exposure does not cut it if you hope your kid plays in college.

Getting beaten soundly in top flight matches doesn't impress college coaches nor motivate the players either.

If you just want your kid to develop and play, then LMVSC or most any area club will provide this experience.

If your player wants to go into college soccer, LMVSC right now is not a good way to get there.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If you think a merge will help, look at this post from the ‘LMVSC townhall’ thread:
Joined LMVSC Red last year and directly familiar with BRYC, AUFC, VIVA, Arlington, and Barca.

LMVSC is late to academy training, especially compared to these other clubs.

Whether this change helps or hurts your player's development depends upon several factors IMHO:

1. Your child's ability and commitment
2. The coach's ability and commitment
3. The team's ability and commitment

Honestly, I found very little difference between and among the clubs. I found huge differences between coaches and players and these differences greatly impacted development.

My player is looking to play college soccer. Our family decided ECNL would be detrimental to academics. Plus the HS team usually challenges for league and state title.

CCL gave decent exposure. Tournament play even more.

Coaching and perhaps half of the Red players were mixed (i.e., inconsistent.) Some of these players were White and never able to "step up" consistently to Red.

That said, LMVSC kind of let this team do its own thing WRT tournaments. For this reason, I think the team matters more than the club...and this was true elsewhere too.

We are not returning.

Much of the decision stems from getting as much college exposure as possible, presuming there's any play in the fall.

The idea that any exposure is good exposure does not cut it if you hope your kid plays in college.

Getting beaten soundly in top flight matches doesn't impress college coaches nor motivate the players either.

If you just want your kid to develop and play, then LMVSC or most any area club will provide this experience.

If your player wants to go into college soccer, LMVSC right now is not a good way to get there.

Yeah, we know why they’d want to merge, and it’s nothing to benefit us. They’re just testing to stay in CCL, they’d break apart our teams.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you think a merge will help, look at this post from the ‘LMVSC townhall’ thread:
Joined LMVSC Red last year and directly familiar with BRYC, AUFC, VIVA, Arlington, and Barca.

LMVSC is late to academy training, especially compared to these other clubs.

Whether this change helps or hurts your player's development depends upon several factors IMHO:

1. Your child's ability and commitment
2. The coach's ability and commitment
3. The team's ability and commitment

Honestly, I found very little difference between and among the clubs. I found huge differences between coaches and players and these differences greatly impacted development.

My player is looking to play college soccer. Our family decided ECNL would be detrimental to academics. Plus the HS team usually challenges for league and state title.

CCL gave decent exposure. Tournament play even more.

Coaching and perhaps half of the Red players were mixed (i.e., inconsistent.) Some of these players were White and never able to "step up" consistently to Red.

That said, LMVSC kind of let this team do its own thing WRT tournaments. For this reason, I think the team matters more than the club...and this was true elsewhere too.

We are not returning.

Much of the decision stems from getting as much college exposure as possible, presuming there's any play in the fall.

The idea that any exposure is good exposure does not cut it if you hope your kid plays in college.

Getting beaten soundly in top flight matches doesn't impress college coaches nor motivate the players either.

If you just want your kid to develop and play, then LMVSC or most any area club will provide this experience.

If your player wants to go into college soccer, LMVSC right now is not a good way to get there.

Yeah, we know why they’d want to merge, and it’s nothing to benefit us. They’re just testing to stay in CCL, they’d break apart our teams.

But Gunston wasn’t in CCL? I thought they were NPL? So they would merge to get into CCL via LMVSC? These two clubs should have merged two years ago, if not last spring. Anyone know why they didn’t consider a merger then? Ego?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you think a merge will help, look at this post from the ‘LMVSC townhall’ thread:
Joined LMVSC Red last year and directly familiar with BRYC, AUFC, VIVA, Arlington, and Barca.

LMVSC is late to academy training, especially compared to these other clubs.

Whether this change helps or hurts your player's development depends upon several factors IMHO:

1. Your child's ability and commitment
2. The coach's ability and commitment
3. The team's ability and commitment

Honestly, I found very little difference between and among the clubs. I found huge differences between coaches and players and these differences greatly impacted development.

My player is looking to play college soccer. Our family decided ECNL would be detrimental to academics. Plus the HS team usually challenges for league and state title.

CCL gave decent exposure. Tournament play even more.

Coaching and perhaps half of the Red players were mixed (i.e., inconsistent.) Some of these players were White and never able to "step up" consistently to Red.

That said, LMVSC kind of let this team do its own thing WRT tournaments. For this reason, I think the team matters more than the club...and this was true elsewhere too.

We are not returning.

Much of the decision stems from getting as much college exposure as possible, presuming there's any play in the fall.

The idea that any exposure is good exposure does not cut it if you hope your kid plays in college.

Getting beaten soundly in top flight matches doesn't impress college coaches nor motivate the players either.

If you just want your kid to develop and play, then LMVSC or most any area club will provide this experience.

If your player wants to go into college soccer, LMVSC right now is not a good way to get there.

Yeah, we know why they’d want to merge, and it’s nothing to benefit us. They’re just testing to stay in CCL, they’d break apart our teams.

But Gunston wasn’t in CCL? I thought they were NPL? So they would merge to get into CCL via LMVSC? These two clubs should have merged two years ago, if not last spring. Anyone know why they didn’t consider a merger then? Ego?

Lmvsc is trying to stay in CCL. They’d love to get Gunston players just to fill their ranks since so many of us are leaving and have left; Gunston teams would be broken apart.

[Anonymous]

Has Gunston offered their players a refund or credit yet?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Has Gunston offered their players a refund or credit yet?

$185 credit for fall.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:With Vicky Hall leaving I could see that happening. Both teams lack some depth and merging to get some strong teams across the squads would be a benefit for players and parents. The better players are leaving or have left to SYC or Alexandria...we are leaving also.

If better players are leaving, how does this bring about better teams? LMVSC has already promised us that the academy is what brings about better players and teams. More kids means less individual attention from the coach. They promised us more individual attention.

Just my opinion that this academy model isnt going to bring better players/teams. The fact that we lost 5 players because of this I think is proof. My take was you will have better teams if you have more depth and pool of players to create the squads. I dont think better players will leave if you have solid squads at each level. The drop off from red to white is a large gap..academy wont close this. My 2cents from sideline parent

The drop off between red and white is a large gap? Not from what I have seen, at least at the younger age groups.

You're probably just basing it on this past year. Previous years the gap between Red and White was huge all across. "Red players" left last year!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:With Vicky Hall leaving I could see that happening. Both teams lack some depth and merging to get some strong teams across the squads would be a benefit for players and parents. The better players are leaving or have left to SYC or Alexandria...we are leaving also.

If better players are leaving, how does this bring about better teams? LMVSC has already promised us that the academy is what brings about better players and teams. More kids means less individual attention from the coach. They promised us more individual attention.

Just my opinion that this academy model isnt going to bring better players/teams. The fact that we lost 5 players because of this I think is proof. My take was you will have better teams if you have more depth and pool of players to create the squads. I dont think better players will leave if you have solid squads at each level. The drop off from red to white is a large gap..academy wont close this. My 2cents from sideline parent

The drop off between red and white is a large gap? Not from what I have seen, at least at the younger age groups.

You're probably just basing it on this past year. Previous years the gap between Red and White was huge all across. "Red players" left last year!

Okay, maybe the older age groups followed their long time coach, but the younger players did not leave. I know my kid’s team (Red if it matters) is the same as it was in 2018.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:With Vicky Hall leaving I could see that happening. Both teams lack some depth and merging to get some strong teams across the squads would be a benefit for players and parents. The better players are leaving or have left to SYC or Alexandria...we are leaving also.

If better players are leaving, how does this bring about better teams? LMVSC has already promised us that the academy is what brings about better players and teams. More kids means less individual attention from the coach. They promised us more individual attention.

Just my opinion that this academy model isnt going to bring better players/teams. The fact that we lost 5 players because of this I think is proof. My take was you will have better teams if you have more depth and pool of players to create the squads. I dont think better players will leave if you have solid squads at each level. The drop off from red to white is a large gap..academy wont close this. My 2cents from sideline parent

The drop off between red and white is a large gap? Not from what I have seen, at least at the younger age groups.

You're probably just basing it on this past year. Previous years the gap between Red and White was huge all across. "Red players" left last year!

Okay, maybe the older age groups followed their long time coach, but the younger players did not leave. I know my kid’s team (Red if it matters) is the same as it was in 2018.

Really? There was no U14 girls team, one U13 girls team, one U12 girls team. Should I count? Because we experienced a massive disparity; most red players left the club and white players were promoted to fill it in. Blue became white.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:With Vicky Hall leaving I could see that happening. Both teams lack some depth and merging to get some strong teams across the squads would be a benefit for players and parents. The better players are leaving or have left to SYC or Alexandria...we are leaving also.

If better players are leaving, how does this bring about better teams? LMVSC has already promised us that the academy is what brings about better players and teams. More kids means less individual attention from the coach. They promised us more individual attention.

Just my opinion that this academy model isnt going to bring better players/teams. The fact that we lost 5 players because of this I think is proof. My take was you will have better teams if you have more depth and pool of players to create the squads. I dont think better players will leave if you have solid squads at each level. The drop off from red to white is a large gap..academy wont close this. My 2cents from sideline parent

The drop off between red and white is a large gap? Not from what I have seen, at least at the younger age groups.

You're probably just basing it on this past year. Previous years the gap between Red and White was huge all across. "Red players" left last year!

Okay, maybe the older age groups followed their long time coach, but the younger players did not leave. I know my kid’s team (Red if it matters) is the same as it was in 2018.

Really? There was no U14 girls team, one U13 girls team, one U12 girls team. Should I count? Because we experienced a massive disparity; most red players left the club and white players were promoted to fill it in. Blue became white.

You are focused on the U12-14 girls. This was about the younger boys (U10-12).

[Anonymous]

Pretty sure the 09 Red boys all up and left minus one player. What other proof do you need?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:With Vicky Hall leaving I could see that happening. Both teams lack some depth and merging to get some strong teams across the squads would be a benefit for players and parents. The better players are leaving or have left to SYC or Alexandria...we are leaving also.

If better players are leaving, how does this bring about better teams? LMVSC has already promised us that the academy is what brings about better players and teams. More kids means less individual attention from the coach. They promised us more individual attention.

Just my opinion that this academy model isnt going to bring better players/teams. The fact that we lost 5 players because of this I think is proof. My take was you will have better teams if you have more depth and pool of players to create the squads. I dont think better players will leave if you have solid squads at each level. The drop off from red to white is a large gap..academy wont close this. My 2cents from sideline parent

The drop off between red and white is a large gap? Not from what I have seen, at least at the younger age groups.

You're probably just basing it on this past year. Previous years the gap between Red and White was huge all across. "Red players" left last year!

Okay, maybe the older age groups followed their long time coach, but the younger players did not leave. I know my kid’s team (Red if it matters) is the same as it was in 2018.

Really? There was no U14 girls team, one U13 girls team, one U12 girls team. Should I count? Because we experienced a massive disparity; most red players left the club and white players were promoted to fill it in. Blue became white.

You are focused on the U12-14 girls. This was about the younger boys (U10-12).

Like I said, should I count? See post above regarding 09 boys. How many 08 boys left last year? How many are leaving this year? You do realize the 09 boys white team became the 09 boys red team yes? Like 80% of the players that left last season were red players. And I'm already aware of DS red teammates that are leaving for other clubs. DS is leaving soccer as a whole

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:With Vicky Hall leaving I could see that happening. Both teams lack some depth and merging to get some strong teams across the squads would be a benefit for players and parents. The better players are leaving or have left to SYC or Alexandria...we are leaving also.

If better players are leaving, how does this bring about better teams? LMVSC has already promised us that the academy is what brings about better players and teams. More kids means less individual attention from the coach. They promised us more individual attention.

Just my opinion that this academy model isnt going to bring better players/teams. The fact that we lost 5 players because of this I think is proof. My take was you will have better teams if you have more depth and pool of players to create the squads. I dont think better players will leave if you have solid squads at each level. The drop off from red to white is a large gap..academy wont close this. My 2cents from sideline parent

The drop off between red and white is a large gap? Not from what I have seen, at least at the younger age groups.

You're probably just basing it on this past year. Previous years the gap between Red and White was huge all across. "Red players" left last year!

Okay, maybe the older age groups followed their long time coach, but the younger players did not leave. I know my kid’s team (Red if it matters) is the same as it was in 2018.

Lies. No team stayed the same.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:With Vicky Hall leaving I could see that happening. Both teams lack some depth and merging to get some strong teams across the squads would be a benefit for players and parents. The better players are leaving or have left to SYC or Alexandria...we are leaving also.

Where is she going?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:With Vicky Hall leaving I could see that happening. Both teams lack some depth and merging to get some strong teams across the squads would be a benefit for players and parents. The better players are leaving or have left to SYC or Alexandria...we are leaving also.

Where is she going?

She went to SYC. The announcement was a few weeks back. SYC is building an empire with coaches from all the other clubs. They got some cash stashed away for sure.!!