LMVSC town hall

[Anonymous]

Reading this thread makes me laugh. Yes it sounds like the leadership is a train wreck. The parents make me laugh too. You are kidding yourself if you think the talent pool there is above mediocre at best.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Reading this thread makes me laugh. Yes it sounds like the leadership is a train wreck. The parents make me laugh too. You are kidding yourself if you think the talent pool there is above mediocre at best.

Yea, this thread is wild. A couple pages back someone makes the claim the directors make 30k with no benefits and people go back to arguing about ccl. The most NoVA sh*t ever. Same people who complain about their Amazon delivery not being overnight or yell at Starbucks because their coffee is too whatever.

[Anonymous]

That barista making more than the directors, yo!
People on this forum also act like these coaches etc are doing this as their full time and only job. Many aren’t getting g close to minimum wage when all the time is factored in. You can tell the parents who complains lot also haven’t coached before, just try to buy one rather than step forward and give it a try to help “fix” all these “problems.”

[Anonymous]

the beatings will continue until morale improves

- LMVSC

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ccl2 has the same allure of ncsl division two or three

1. What were the ramifications from when LMVSC pulled out of CCL Championship (CCL2)?
2. What is the problem for our red teams playing in CCL Championship? Several of our red teams are right now playing in NCSL non-Div 1.

Can somebody please explain to me how it's not a financial decision?

PP here. Seeing that the conversation stopped, the responses stopped, and the comment immediately above attempted to ad hominem the conversation... perhaps it's been LMVSC staff the are responding to defend themselves. Perhaps not, but would make sense.

I've been part of this conversation and not staff, just didn't respond to this.
1. I don't believe there were any ramifications for leaving CCL2. Just less money going in to the CCL accounts. Maybe there were some things administratively that impacted the club but I'm not staff so I can't say. Maybe something like less voting power on decisions made in collective.
2. There are clubs that are only CCL2 because their "top" teams are not "strong" enough or not enough teams at each age group. One that comes to mind is McLean and Fauquier County Soccer Club. Not all CCL2 clubs have access to both ccl college showcases. In the past there was one done for CCL2 but not sure if still around. College Showcase would only impact a few teams within the club unless they plan to bring in new coaches/teams where there are current gaps.

Thank you for responding; I do appreciate. I'm sorry for presuming you were part of the administration or staff.

If there were no ramifications for leaving CCL2, there should be no ramifications for putting our red teams in CCL2. On average we're below average, and missing many teams (especially in the older age groups). I can't imagine CCL likes having so many showcase-aged teams missing during showcases, especially when scheduling is club-to-club. And if money is the issue, there's a conversation to be had given said missing teams.

McLean's first teams are in ECNL, and to my understanding CCL wants a member's first teams in CCL. I believe that is what is fueling the rumors that Arlington will be joining ECNL-R now that they have ECNL for both boys and girls.

I looked at standings for past couple years, the results are trending downwards basically across the board. I can't imagine they improve next year since the player pool has also been trending downward just as much if not more (approximately one-third of total players leaving in consecutive seasons). This includes NCSL, where out second teams (including DC's) have generally been moving down the divisions as well. I've reached out to some friends and colleagues that are more well-versed in the travel soccer community, and I now suspect this trend will continue even more so this year. It was expressed that remaining 'very talented/talented' players would depart due to the training environment, results, and predictive trends of the aforementioned. Some think that we could lose almost half of the current players this year, or, rapidly become a club that can only field teams up until U13 or U14.

CCL Championship is not a bad option but there are several drawbacks. First, the competition remains the same each year, as there is no promotion/relegation that NCSL/EDP provides. Second, being most clubs 2nd team, the quality varies a lot. There will be some competitive games for sure but also many that will be blowouts to one side. Last, in our experience, there are a lot of weekends where teams are idle due to opposing clubs not being able to field teams. So, if you’re okay with paying LMVS $2K, told you will get 16-20 games during the year and only get 75% of that in return, carry on. The lack of games tends to occur with the older age groups. It is also true CCL has eliminated the oldest age groups for CCL Championship (U17-18), as well as the College Showcase for this portion of the league.

Administratively, it really looks as if it is best for LMVS is to move out of CCL due to lack teams and quality teams. My intel could be wrong but have heard clubs are required to commit as a whole, meaning they are financially required to pay for each age group/gender the league offers (CCL U11-U18 or CCL2 U11-U16). (Due to the pandemic, CCL waived the payment rule for the 2020-21 season forecasting a slight drop in registration numbers.). If a club is unable to field a team in a specific age, the club is still required to pay for the vacancy or find a filler team that will agree to pay to play in the league.

As it currently stands, LMVS is a voting member of CCL. If they relinquish their ability to play in CCL Premiership, LMVS will no longer have the ability to vote on important league matters. All clubs that only play CCL2 are non-voting members of the league. With that, LMVS leadership is unlikely to accept a role where s(he) is unable to manipulate or have the ability to have input on matters.

NCSL clubs do not have the attraction they once did but this looks like the route LMVS will need to take until leadership is changed with one that has the ability to move the club forward. It’s been stuck in a downward spiral for years and LB has pointed fingers at multiple people, who have moved on, yet the problem(s) remains.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ccl2 has the same allure of ncsl division two or three

1. What were the ramifications from when LMVSC pulled out of CCL Championship (CCL2)?
2. What is the problem for our red teams playing in CCL Championship? Several of our red teams are right now playing in NCSL non-Div 1.

Can somebody please explain to me how it's not a financial decision?

PP here. Seeing that the conversation stopped, the responses stopped, and the comment immediately above attempted to ad hominem the conversation... perhaps it's been LMVSC staff the are responding to defend themselves. Perhaps not, but would make sense.

I've been part of this conversation and not staff, just didn't respond to this.
1. I don't believe there were any ramifications for leaving CCL2. Just less money going in to the CCL accounts. Maybe there were some things administratively that impacted the club but I'm not staff so I can't say. Maybe something like less voting power on decisions made in collective.
2. There are clubs that are only CCL2 because their "top" teams are not "strong" enough or not enough teams at each age group. One that comes to mind is McLean and Fauquier County Soccer Club. Not all CCL2 clubs have access to both ccl college showcases. In the past there was one done for CCL2 but not sure if still around. College Showcase would only impact a few teams within the club unless they plan to bring in new coaches/teams where there are current gaps.

Thank you for responding; I do appreciate. I'm sorry for presuming you were part of the administration or staff.

If there were no ramifications for leaving CCL2, there should be no ramifications for putting our red teams in CCL2. On average we're below average, and missing many teams (especially in the older age groups). I can't imagine CCL likes having so many showcase-aged teams missing during showcases, especially when scheduling is club-to-club. And if money is the issue, there's a conversation to be had given said missing teams.

McLean's first teams are in ECNL, and to my understanding CCL wants a member's first teams in CCL. I believe that is what is fueling the rumors that Arlington will be joining ECNL-R now that they have ECNL for both boys and girls.

I looked at standings for past couple years, the results are trending downwards basically across the board. I can't imagine they improve next year since the player pool has also been trending downward just as much if not more (approximately one-third of total players leaving in consecutive seasons). This includes NCSL, where out second teams (including DC's) have generally been moving down the divisions as well. I've reached out to some friends and colleagues that are more well-versed in the travel soccer community, and I now suspect this trend will continue even more so this year. It was expressed that remaining 'very talented/talented' players would depart due to the training environment, results, and predictive trends of the aforementioned. Some think that we could lose almost half of the current players this year, or, rapidly become a club that can only field teams up until U13 or U14.

CCL Championship is not a bad option but there are several drawbacks. First, the competition remains the same each year, as there is no promotion/relegation that NCSL/EDP provides. Second, being most clubs 2nd team, the quality varies a lot. There will be some competitive games for sure but also many that will be blowouts to one side. Last, in our experience, there are a lot of weekends where teams are idle due to opposing clubs not being able to field teams. So, if you’re okay with paying LMVS $2K, told you will get 16-20 games during the year and only get 75% of that in return, carry on. The lack of games tends to occur with the older age groups. It is also true CCL has eliminated the oldest age groups for CCL Championship (U17-18), as well as the College Showcase for this portion of the league.

Administratively, it really looks as if it is best for LMVS is to move out of CCL due to lack teams and quality teams. My intel could be wrong but have heard clubs are required to commit as a whole, meaning they are financially required to pay for each age group/gender the league offers (CCL U11-U18 or CCL2 U11-U16). (Due to the pandemic, CCL waived the payment rule for the 2020-21 season forecasting a slight drop in registration numbers.). If a club is unable to field a team in a specific age, the club is still required to pay for the vacancy or find a filler team that will agree to pay to play in the league.

As it currently stands, LMVS is a voting member of CCL. If they relinquish their ability to play in CCL Premiership, LMVS will no longer have the ability to vote on important league matters. All clubs that only play CCL2 are non-voting members of the league. With that, LMVS leadership is unlikely to accept a role where s(he) is unable to manipulate or have the ability to have input on matters.

NCSL clubs do not have the attraction they once did but this looks like the route LMVS will need to take until leadership is changed with one that has the ability to move the club forward. It’s been stuck in a downward spiral for years and LB has pointed fingers at multiple people, who have moved on, yet the problem(s) remains.

I agree with what's said above. The best for the club would be to first replace LB with someone that will change the direction of the club. Hopefully it is able to field more teams to remain in CCL Premiership. As you mention NCSL is no longer the draw that it was. That combined with new leadership may hopefully change the direction of the club.

[Anonymous]

How do you all think CCL Championship compare to NCSL as a whole or the top 2-3 divisions of NCSL Competition-wise?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:How do you all think CCL Championship compare to NCSL as a whole or the top 2-3 divisions of NCSL Competition-wise?

I would say divisions 3-5 in ncsl.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How do you all think CCL Championship compare to NCSL as a whole or the top 2-3 divisions of NCSL Competition-wise?

I would say divisions 3-5 in ncsl.

+1 with the likelihood of missed games that are never made up. NCSL seems to provide the full assortment of games whereas CCL does not. CCL2 is not a high priority for CCL so they are less concerned about the 2nd division and amount of games provided.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

CCL Championship is not a bad option but there are several drawbacks. First, the competition remains the same each year, as there is no promotion/relegation that NCSL/EDP provides. Second, being most clubs 2nd team, the quality varies a lot. There will be some competitive games for sure but also many that will be blowouts to one side. Last, in our experience, there are a lot of weekends where teams are idle due to opposing clubs not being able to field teams. So, if you’re okay with paying LMVS $2K, told you will get 16-20 games during the year and only get 75% of that in return, carry on. The lack of games tends to occur with the older age groups. It is also true CCL has eliminated the oldest age groups for CCL Championship (U17-18), as well as the College Showcase for this portion of the league.

Administratively, it really looks as if it is best for LMVS is to move out of CCL due to lack teams and quality teams. My intel could be wrong but have heard clubs are required to commit as a whole, meaning they are financially required to pay for each age group/gender the league offers (CCL U11-U18 or CCL2 U11-U16). (Due to the pandemic, CCL waived the payment rule for the 2020-21 season forecasting a slight drop in registration numbers.). If a club is unable to field a team in a specific age, the club is still required to pay for the vacancy or find a filler team that will agree to pay to play in the league.

As it currently stands, LMVS is a voting member of CCL. If they relinquish their ability to play in CCL Premiership, LMVS will no longer have the ability to vote on important league matters. All clubs that only play CCL2 are non-voting members of the league. With that, LMVS leadership is unlikely to accept a role where s(he) is unable to manipulate or have the ability to have input on matters.

NCSL clubs do not have the attraction they once did but this looks like the route LMVS will need to take until leadership is changed with one that has the ability to move the club forward. It’s been stuck in a downward spiral for years and LB has pointed fingers at multiple people, who have moved on, yet the problem(s) remains.

Okay, let me get this straight

1. CCL normally requires you to pay for every team's slot in CCL, or, find a filler team?
2. We currently have 9 missing teams in CCL with more on the horizon when 2002 and 2003 boys graduate
3a. There are rumors circulating that our TD and some other coaches are going to leave
3b. Last time that happened, we lost almost half of the players (most of which were red team)

I saw a post previously that said LMVSC could become a club that ages out at U14 but I'm now getting worried about the travel program folding.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How do you all think CCL Championship compare to NCSL as a whole or the top 2-3 divisions of NCSL Competition-wise?

I would say divisions 3-5 in ncsl.

+1 with the likelihood of missed games that are never made up. NCSL seems to provide the full assortment of games whereas CCL does not. CCL2 is not a high priority for CCL so they are less concerned about the 2nd division and amount of games provided.

I just responded to a different post; can we just start doing EDP or something?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

CCL Championship is not a bad option but there are several drawbacks. First, the competition remains the same each year, as there is no promotion/relegation that NCSL/EDP provides. Second, being most clubs 2nd team, the quality varies a lot. There will be some competitive games for sure but also many that will be blowouts to one side. Last, in our experience, there are a lot of weekends where teams are idle due to opposing clubs not being able to field teams. So, if you’re okay with paying LMVS $2K, told you will get 16-20 games during the year and only get 75% of that in return, carry on. The lack of games tends to occur with the older age groups. It is also true CCL has eliminated the oldest age groups for CCL Championship (U17-18), as well as the College Showcase for this portion of the league.

Administratively, it really looks as if it is best for LMVS is to move out of CCL due to lack teams and quality teams. My intel could be wrong but have heard clubs are required to commit as a whole, meaning they are financially required to pay for each age group/gender the league offers (CCL U11-U18 or CCL2 U11-U16). (Due to the pandemic, CCL waived the payment rule for the 2020-21 season forecasting a slight drop in registration numbers.). If a club is unable to field a team in a specific age, the club is still required to pay for the vacancy or find a filler team that will agree to pay to play in the league.

As it currently stands, LMVS is a voting member of CCL. If they relinquish their ability to play in CCL Premiership, LMVS will no longer have the ability to vote on important league matters. All clubs that only play CCL2 are non-voting members of the league. With that, LMVS leadership is unlikely to accept a role where s(he) is unable to manipulate or have the ability to have input on matters.

NCSL clubs do not have the attraction they once did but this looks like the route LMVS will need to take until leadership is changed with one that has the ability to move the club forward. It’s been stuck in a downward spiral for years and LB has pointed fingers at multiple people, who have moved on, yet the problem(s) remains.

Okay, let me get this straight

1. CCL normally requires you to pay for every team's slot in CCL, or, find a filler team?
2. We currently have 9 missing teams in CCL with more on the horizon when 2002 and 2003 boys graduate
3a. There are rumors circulating that our TD and some other coaches are going to leave
3b. Last time that happened, we lost almost half of the players (most of which were red team)

I saw a post previously that said LMVSC could become a club that ages out at U14 but I'm now getting worried about the travel program folding.

There are tons of small clubs that have happy parents and players. LMVSC just needs to acknowledge what it is and reorient

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

CCL Championship is not a bad option but there are several drawbacks. First, the competition remains the same each year, as there is no promotion/relegation that NCSL/EDP provides. Second, being most clubs 2nd team, the quality varies a lot. There will be some competitive games for sure but also many that will be blowouts to one side. Last, in our experience, there are a lot of weekends where teams are idle due to opposing clubs not being able to field teams. So, if you’re okay with paying LMVS $2K, told you will get 16-20 games during the year and only get 75% of that in return, carry on. The lack of games tends to occur with the older age groups. It is also true CCL has eliminated the oldest age groups for CCL Championship (U17-18), as well as the College Showcase for this portion of the league.

Administratively, it really looks as if it is best for LMVS is to move out of CCL due to lack teams and quality teams. My intel could be wrong but have heard clubs are required to commit as a whole, meaning they are financially required to pay for each age group/gender the league offers (CCL U11-U18 or CCL2 U11-U16). (Due to the pandemic, CCL waived the payment rule for the 2020-21 season forecasting a slight drop in registration numbers.). If a club is unable to field a team in a specific age, the club is still required to pay for the vacancy or find a filler team that will agree to pay to play in the league.

As it currently stands, LMVS is a voting member of CCL. If they relinquish their ability to play in CCL Premiership, LMVS will no longer have the ability to vote on important league matters. All clubs that only play CCL2 are non-voting members of the league. With that, LMVS leadership is unlikely to accept a role where s(he) is unable to manipulate or have the ability to have input on matters.

NCSL clubs do not have the attraction they once did but this looks like the route LMVS will need to take until leadership is changed with one that has the ability to move the club forward. It’s been stuck in a downward spiral for years and LB has pointed fingers at multiple people, who have moved on, yet the problem(s) remains.

Okay, let me get this straight

1. CCL normally requires you to pay for every team's slot in CCL, or, find a filler team?
2. We currently have 9 missing teams in CCL with more on the horizon when 2002 and 2003 boys graduate
3a. There are rumors circulating that our TD and some other coaches are going to leave
3b. Last time that happened, we lost almost half of the players (most of which were red team)

I saw a post previously that said LMVSC could become a club that ages out at U14 but I'm now getting worried about the travel program folding.

Yes.

1. For CCL branding, it is preferred each club provides teams from within their own club. Filler team is the next option and no team gets you on the $h!t list. If CCL did not charge the club for the lack of teams last year, you’d think the fees will be increasing this year to cover the cost.
2. You are right. There are also 0 U9-U10 girls teams in CCL. I believe 02&03 age out but nevertheless there are way too many teams missing and many age groups with rosters comprised of many underage players.
3a. Following
3b. At tryouts and after teams were formed, our DC age group (currently only team & plays NCSL) had half of the age group leave, even after they accepted a spot. This left many wondering how to continue and have a gut feeling this will happen again this year. Fortunately, we have seen it happen and will not be stranded like we were previously.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

CCL Championship is not a bad option but there are several drawbacks. First, the competition remains the same each year, as there is no promotion/relegation that NCSL/EDP provides. Second, being most clubs 2nd team, the quality varies a lot. There will be some competitive games for sure but also many that will be blowouts to one side. Last, in our experience, there are a lot of weekends where teams are idle due to opposing clubs not being able to field teams. So, if you’re okay with paying LMVS $2K, told you will get 16-20 games during the year and only get 75% of that in return, carry on. The lack of games tends to occur with the older age groups. It is also true CCL has eliminated the oldest age groups for CCL Championship (U17-18), as well as the College Showcase for this portion of the league.

Administratively, it really looks as if it is best for LMVS is to move out of CCL due to lack teams and quality teams. My intel could be wrong but have heard clubs are required to commit as a whole, meaning they are financially required to pay for each age group/gender the league offers (CCL U11-U18 or CCL2 U11-U16). (Due to the pandemic, CCL waived the payment rule for the 2020-21 season forecasting a slight drop in registration numbers.). If a club is unable to field a team in a specific age, the club is still required to pay for the vacancy or find a filler team that will agree to pay to play in the league.

As it currently stands, LMVS is a voting member of CCL. If they relinquish their ability to play in CCL Premiership, LMVS will no longer have the ability to vote on important league matters. All clubs that only play CCL2 are non-voting members of the league. With that, LMVS leadership is unlikely to accept a role where s(he) is unable to manipulate or have the ability to have input on matters.

NCSL clubs do not have the attraction they once did but this looks like the route LMVS will need to take until leadership is changed with one that has the ability to move the club forward. It’s been stuck in a downward spiral for years and LB has pointed fingers at multiple people, who have moved on, yet the problem(s) remains.

Okay, let me get this straight

1. CCL normally requires you to pay for every team's slot in CCL, or, find a filler team?
2. We currently have 9 missing teams in CCL with more on the horizon when 2002 and 2003 boys graduate
3a. There are rumors circulating that our TD and some other coaches are going to leave
3b. Last time that happened, we lost almost half of the players (most of which were red team)

I saw a post previously that said LMVSC could become a club that ages out at U14 but I'm now getting worried about the travel program folding.

Yes.

1. For CCL branding, it is preferred each club provides teams from within their own club. Filler team is the next option and no team gets you on the $h!t list. If CCL did not charge the club for the lack of teams last year, you’d think the fees will be increasing this year to cover the cost.
2. You are right. There are also 0 U9-U10 girls teams in CCL. I believe 02&03 age out but nevertheless there are way too many teams missing and many age groups with rosters comprised of many underage players.
3a. Following
3b. At tryouts and after teams were formed, our DC age group (currently only team & plays NCSL) had half of the age group leave, even after they accepted a spot. This left many wondering how to continue and have a gut feeling this will happen again this year. Fortunately, we have seen it happen and will not be stranded like we were previously.

Thank you for responding; this is just unbelievable. We had been considering looking at clubs in the area at these "ID session" but this is just too much. At no point have we been informed about a direction or vision. And I agree with a previous poster; there are plenty of small clubs. We would be okay playing at LMVSC for DC's first few years but I just don't understand what has happened.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How do you all think CCL Championship compare to NCSL as a whole or the top 2-3 divisions of NCSL Competition-wise?

I would say divisions 3-5 in ncsl.

+1 with the likelihood of missed games that are never made up. NCSL seems to provide the full assortment of games whereas CCL does not. CCL2 is not a high priority for CCL so they are less concerned about the 2nd division and amount of games provided.

I just responded to a different post; can we just start doing EDP or something?

If your teams lose in ccl and can’t get into high divisions in NCSL, what makes you think EDP won’t be worse? The level of play is generally higher than NCSL, so it’s not like they would easily climb the ranks in EDP