McLean leaving FVU

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have a hard time believing that MLS next tier 2 will be the equivalent of ECNL, despite that being what tier 2 clubs are trying to brand as.

Many ECNL teams were comprised of mixed communities and alliances, for better or worse. There were not very many of them, and ECNL kept it that way for a reason - to keep the playing level high. Now, if every club that doesn’t like being in an alliance says we are going to spin off and apply for acceptance to MLA next tier 2, and claims that it is an ECNL competitor, they are purely marketing. ECNL is supposed to be super competitive. And so if McLean was contributing let’s say three or four kids to Fairfax union and the other teams were contributing three or four kids, that was the make up of the team. It doesn’t stand to reason that all of the individual clubs can claim that they can break off and field that many ECNL caliber kids on their own. And the more that joined/join 2 while claiming that, the more diluted the player pool quality becomes. Perhaps eventually some of these teams will build and recruit players in such a way that they are comparable to an ECNL team, but certainly not in the expansion years.

It is the equivalent of a bunch of NFL owners and players spinning off and creating the XFL along with some heavy marketing and celebrities, and claiming that it is a competitor to the NFL. It’s not.

Cool story. You are free to take your business elsewhere

Next 2 is not the equivalent of ECNL. It is equivalent to ECRL. McLean’s RL team will become its Next 2 team.

Bingo. MYS Green (currently ECRL) becomes their Tier II 1st team playing in MLS Next Tier II, and MYS White (currently a strong NCSL team) becomes their Tier II 2nd team playing in NAL. Everyone else (Gold, Silver) to stay NCSL. In my opinion the biggest difference here isn't that the top team (Green) plays in an ECRL-competitor, but rather that the 2nd team (White) is no longer playing in NCSL but rather in NAL - which is a step up from NCSL.

And what it means is that any younger players who do happen to have talent will move on to other clubs, such as Springfield, Arlington, FVU, NVA or maybe a MD club, since they will not have access to a higher level of competition. Talent needs competition to be maximized and flourish.

McLean just does not provide the population or culture for this. MYS provides a destination for coaches to get overpaid to train a bunch of privileged kids. And with that you get the politics that has made MYS a below average academy that has required it to create 2 failed partnerships (with SYC and BRAVE) and have it's ECNL-N badge pulled over the last 4 years.

It's really hard to fail at something to this extent unless you are trying to.

Overpaid how? The only material way for coaches in this youth soccer market to get overpaid is to drive excessively large rosters (which is a big red flag) or to stretch their coaches across more teams than usual (which isn't really an issue unless they're unable to focus on each team sufficiently enough). So, which one are they doing? Otherwise, there are likely very trivial differences between a 1099 coach at MYS vs a 1099 coach at [insert any other comparable size/reputation club here].

The most logical argument you above is that the reason McLean has "struggled" in recent years is because of population. It isn't like a Springfield or an Arlington, and it's adjacent to many other clubs which are near-peer competitors - Arlington, Great Falls, Vienna, Potomac, Bethesda, and LOTS of private schools. The reason they've not done great is because of that, not because they're running some scam where they pay coaches more and train kids less.

[Anonymous]

Politics is the magic keyword.

Politics = play weaker players = losing team
Therefore McLean loses .

And when the club teams keep losing, talent will run away. It is a small club catering to the chic community in McLean. But in soccer, kids don’t lie on the field.

[Anonymous]

"it's all politics" bot checking in.

[Anonymous]

It’s what the PP said—they just need to recognize that the best players will move on. And that’s fine, they still have GA/Next 2 which will draw certain players in.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have a hard time believing that MLS next tier 2 will be the equivalent of ECNL, despite that being what tier 2 clubs are trying to brand as.

Many ECNL teams were comprised of mixed communities and alliances, for better or worse. There were not very many of them, and ECNL kept it that way for a reason - to keep the playing level high. Now, if every club that doesn’t like being in an alliance says we are going to spin off and apply for acceptance to MLA next tier 2, and claims that it is an ECNL competitor, they are purely marketing. ECNL is supposed to be super competitive. And so if McLean was contributing let’s say three or four kids to Fairfax union and the other teams were contributing three or four kids, that was the make up of the team. It doesn’t stand to reason that all of the individual clubs can claim that they can break off and field that many ECNL caliber kids on their own. And the more that joined/join 2 while claiming that, the more diluted the player pool quality becomes. Perhaps eventually some of these teams will build and recruit players in such a way that they are comparable to an ECNL team, but certainly not in the expansion years.

It is the equivalent of a bunch of NFL owners and players spinning off and creating the XFL along with some heavy marketing and celebrities, and claiming that it is a competitor to the NFL. It’s not.

Cool story. You are free to take your business elsewhere

Next 2 is not the equivalent of ECNL. It is equivalent to ECRL. McLean’s RL team will become its Next 2 team.

Bingo. MYS Green (currently ECRL) becomes their Tier II 1st team playing in MLS Next Tier II, and MYS White (currently a strong NCSL team) becomes their Tier II 2nd team playing in NAL. Everyone else (Gold, Silver) to stay NCSL. In my opinion the biggest difference here isn't that the top team (Green) plays in an ECRL-competitor, but rather that the 2nd team (White) is no longer playing in NCSL but rather in NAL - which is a step up from NCSL.

And what it means is that any younger players who do happen to have talent will move on to other clubs, such as Springfield, Arlington, FVU, NVA or maybe a MD club, since they will not have access to a higher level of competition. Talent needs competition to be maximized and flourish.

McLean just does not provide the population or culture for this. MYS provides a destination for coaches to get overpaid to train a bunch of privileged kids. And with that you get the politics that has made MYS a below average academy that has required it to create 2 failed partnerships (with SYC and BRAVE) and have it's ECNL-N badge pulled over the last 4 years.

It's really hard to fail at something to this extent unless you are trying to.

Overpaid how? The only material way for coaches in this youth soccer market to get overpaid is to drive excessively large rosters (which is a big red flag) or to stretch their coaches across more teams than usual (which isn't really an issue unless they're unable to focus on each team sufficiently enough). So, which one are they doing? Otherwise, there are likely very trivial differences between a 1099 coach at MYS vs a 1099 coach at [insert any other comparable size/reputation club here].

The most logical argument you above is that the reason McLean has "struggled" in recent years is because of population. It isn't like a Springfield or an Arlington, and it's adjacent to many other clubs which are near-peer competitors - Arlington, Great Falls, Vienna, Potomac, Bethesda, and LOTS of private schools. The reason they've not done great is because of that, not because they're running some scam where they pay coaches more and train kids less.

It's not just population. Coaches do get paid more at MYS. And it creates a self perpetuating situation of increased politics and poor play on each team.

Coaches make a significant amount of money doing private trainings at MYS; I have heard it straight from a coach that they can make $120 an hour. You will not find that in the club finances, but it is a reason many coaches will not leave MYS. And if a parent is paying this amount of money to have their little Johnny be trained separately by their coach, that parent expects that little Johnny will play significant amount of minutes each game. And this creates dissatisfaction amongst other parents and players on the team as they see a less skilled player getting those minutes over a better player. Plus this means the team will more than likely have a better chance at a loosing record, which then means parents will pull their better players off of MYS teams to play at another club. And this is how you end up with bottom of the barrel teams by U13/U14 ages.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have a hard time believing that MLS next tier 2 will be the equivalent of ECNL, despite that being what tier 2 clubs are trying to brand as.

Many ECNL teams were comprised of mixed communities and alliances, for better or worse. There were not very many of them, and ECNL kept it that way for a reason - to keep the playing level high. Now, if every club that doesn’t like being in an alliance says we are going to spin off and apply for acceptance to MLA next tier 2, and claims that it is an ECNL competitor, they are purely marketing. ECNL is supposed to be super competitive. And so if McLean was contributing let’s say three or four kids to Fairfax union and the other teams were contributing three or four kids, that was the make up of the team. It doesn’t stand to reason that all of the individual clubs can claim that they can break off and field that many ECNL caliber kids on their own. And the more that joined/join 2 while claiming that, the more diluted the player pool quality becomes. Perhaps eventually some of these teams will build and recruit players in such a way that they are comparable to an ECNL team, but certainly not in the expansion years.

It is the equivalent of a bunch of NFL owners and players spinning off and creating the XFL along with some heavy marketing and celebrities, and claiming that it is a competitor to the NFL. It’s not.

Cool story. You are free to take your business elsewhere

Next 2 is not the equivalent of ECNL. It is equivalent to ECRL. McLean’s RL team will become its Next 2 team.

Bingo. MYS Green (currently ECRL) becomes their Tier II 1st team playing in MLS Next Tier II, and MYS White (currently a strong NCSL team) becomes their Tier II 2nd team playing in NAL. Everyone else (Gold, Silver) to stay NCSL. In my opinion the biggest difference here isn't that the top team (Green) plays in an ECRL-competitor, but rather that the 2nd team (White) is no longer playing in NCSL but rather in NAL - which is a step up from NCSL.

And what it means is that any younger players who do happen to have talent will move on to other clubs, such as Springfield, Arlington, FVU, NVA or maybe a MD club, since they will not have access to a higher level of competition. Talent needs competition to be maximized and flourish.

McLean just does not provide the population or culture for this. MYS provides a destination for coaches to get overpaid to train a bunch of privileged kids. And with that you get the politics that has made MYS a below average academy that has required it to create 2 failed partnerships (with SYC and BRAVE) and have it's ECNL-N badge pulled over the last 4 years.

It's really hard to fail at something to this extent unless you are trying to.

Overpaid how? The only material way for coaches in this youth soccer market to get overpaid is to drive excessively large rosters (which is a big red flag) or to stretch their coaches across more teams than usual (which isn't really an issue unless they're unable to focus on each team sufficiently enough). So, which one are they doing? Otherwise, there are likely very trivial differences between a 1099 coach at MYS vs a 1099 coach at [insert any other comparable size/reputation club here].

The most logical argument you above is that the reason McLean has "struggled" in recent years is because of population. It isn't like a Springfield or an Arlington, and it's adjacent to many other clubs which are near-peer competitors - Arlington, Great Falls, Vienna, Potomac, Bethesda, and LOTS of private schools. The reason they've not done great is because of that, not because they're running some scam where they pay coaches more and train kids less.

It's not just population. Coaches do get paid more at MYS. And it creates a self perpetuating situation of increased politics and poor play on each team.

Coaches make a significant amount of money doing private trainings at MYS; I have heard it straight from a coach that they can make $120 an hour. You will not find that in the club finances, but it is a reason many coaches will not leave MYS. And if a parent is paying this amount of money to have their little Johnny be trained separately by their coach, that parent expects that little Johnny will play significant amount of minutes each game. And this creates dissatisfaction amongst other parents and players on the team as they see a less skilled player getting those minutes over a better player. Plus this means the team will more than likely have a better chance at a loosing record, which then means parents will pull their better players off of MYS teams to play at another club. And this is how you end up with bottom of the barrel teams by U13/U14 ages.

100% that is exactly why we left MYS last year. By the way some other clubs have the same kind of politics. Bottom line, if you want to know if a team stinks with parent politics, just look around and check the rankings. If the team is at the bottom half, it is most likely parent politics. Run for your dear life.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have a hard time believing that MLS next tier 2 will be the equivalent of ECNL, despite that being what tier 2 clubs are trying to brand as.

Many ECNL teams were comprised of mixed communities and alliances, for better or worse. There were not very many of them, and ECNL kept it that way for a reason - to keep the playing level high. Now, if every club that doesn’t like being in an alliance says we are going to spin off and apply for acceptance to MLA next tier 2, and claims that it is an ECNL competitor, they are purely marketing. ECNL is supposed to be super competitive. And so if McLean was contributing let’s say three or four kids to Fairfax union and the other teams were contributing three or four kids, that was the make up of the team. It doesn’t stand to reason that all of the individual clubs can claim that they can break off and field that many ECNL caliber kids on their own. And the more that joined/join 2 while claiming that, the more diluted the player pool quality becomes. Perhaps eventually some of these teams will build and recruit players in such a way that they are comparable to an ECNL team, but certainly not in the expansion years.

It is the equivalent of a bunch of NFL owners and players spinning off and creating the XFL along with some heavy marketing and celebrities, and claiming that it is a competitor to the NFL. It’s not.

Cool story. You are free to take your business elsewhere

Next 2 is not the equivalent of ECNL. It is equivalent to ECRL. McLean’s RL team will become its Next 2 team.

Bingo. MYS Green (currently ECRL) becomes their Tier II 1st team playing in MLS Next Tier II, and MYS White (currently a strong NCSL team) becomes their Tier II 2nd team playing in NAL. Everyone else (Gold, Silver) to stay NCSL. In my opinion the biggest difference here isn't that the top team (Green) plays in an ECRL-competitor, but rather that the 2nd team (White) is no longer playing in NCSL but rather in NAL - which is a step up from NCSL.

And what it means is that any younger players who do happen to have talent will move on to other clubs, such as Springfield, Arlington, FVU, NVA or maybe a MD club, since they will not have access to a higher level of competition. Talent needs competition to be maximized and flourish.

McLean just does not provide the population or culture for this. MYS provides a destination for coaches to get overpaid to train a bunch of privileged kids. And with that you get the politics that has made MYS a below average academy that has required it to create 2 failed partnerships (with SYC and BRAVE) and have it's ECNL-N badge pulled over the last 4 years.

It's really hard to fail at something to this extent unless you are trying to.

Overpaid how? The only material way for coaches in this youth soccer market to get overpaid is to drive excessively large rosters (which is a big red flag) or to stretch their coaches across more teams than usual (which isn't really an issue unless they're unable to focus on each team sufficiently enough). So, which one are they doing? Otherwise, there are likely very trivial differences between a 1099 coach at MYS vs a 1099 coach at [insert any other comparable size/reputation club here].

The most logical argument you above is that the reason McLean has "struggled" in recent years is because of population. It isn't like a Springfield or an Arlington, and it's adjacent to many other clubs which are near-peer competitors - Arlington, Great Falls, Vienna, Potomac, Bethesda, and LOTS of private schools. The reason they've not done great is because of that, not because they're running some scam where they pay coaches more and train kids less.

It's not just population. Coaches do get paid more at MYS. And it creates a self perpetuating situation of increased politics and poor play on each team.

Coaches make a significant amount of money doing private trainings at MYS; I have heard it straight from a coach that they can make $120 an hour. You will not find that in the club finances, but it is a reason many coaches will not leave MYS. And if a parent is paying this amount of money to have their little Johnny be trained separately by their coach, that parent expects that little Johnny will play significant amount of minutes each game. And this creates dissatisfaction amongst other parents and players on the team as they see a less skilled player getting those minutes over a better player. Plus this means the team will more than likely have a better chance at a loosing record, which then means parents will pull their better players off of MYS teams to play at another club. And this is how you end up with bottom of the barrel teams by U13/U14 ages.

100% that is exactly why we left MYS last year. By the way some other clubs have the same kind of politics. Bottom line, if you want to know if a team stinks with parent politics, just look around and check the rankings. If the team is at the bottom half, it is most likely parent politics. Run for your dear life.

Why does losing equate to parent politics. I don’t know what that means.

[Anonymous]

These issues are circling back to the top. Weak and comfortable management that doesn’t care about player pathway and their development. If this is a real business, the president and the entire board would have been fired. Under her guidance (LW), two failed mergers. Max exudes a lack of players and top coaches. No checks and balances whatsoever. The joke is on the people that are staying and paying this club. What a shame.

[Anonymous]

WWhat is JH's philosophy on player development? Which clubs did he work for before Mclean that qualified him as a top candidate to lead it? He was a standout player for the NT, but what about his coaching abilities and background? If I'm footing the bill, I need to know what for. I'm uncertain about JH quality as a youth coach and a TD. Is this a matter of favoritism or nepotism? LW is known for dropping names. Is this just a ploy to boast about having Captain America in our club? What achievements did he have in his initial stint at the club years ago that earned him the role of TD this time around? Just posing these challenging questions to help us decide whether to stay or go. Two failed mergers under LW. If this was a real business, the whole board and TD would have been fired immediately. But not here. I truly believe LW thinks that she is entitled and not replaceable.

[Anonymous]

We have experienced much fewer politics at McLean than other clubs our kids have played at. Overall it has been a good experience and our kids are excited about the changes for next year. Our kids have had the best coaches too at McLeN.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:We have experienced much fewer politics at McLean than other clubs our kids have played at. Overall it has been a good experience and our kids are excited about the changes for next year. Our kids have had the best coaches too at McLeN.

This has been true for us as well. I’ve found the club to be proactive in terms of development opportunities for my kid. I will say that some of the other parents complain about everything, but that may be pretty normal.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have a hard time believing that MLS next tier 2 will be the equivalent of ECNL, despite that being what tier 2 clubs are trying to brand as.

Many ECNL teams were comprised of mixed communities and alliances, for better or worse. There were not very many of them, and ECNL kept it that way for a reason - to keep the playing level high. Now, if every club that doesn’t like being in an alliance says we are going to spin off and apply for acceptance to MLA next tier 2, and claims that it is an ECNL competitor, they are purely marketing. ECNL is supposed to be super competitive. And so if McLean was contributing let’s say three or four kids to Fairfax union and the other teams were contributing three or four kids, that was the make up of the team. It doesn’t stand to reason that all of the individual clubs can claim that they can break off and field that many ECNL caliber kids on their own. And the more that joined/join 2 while claiming that, the more diluted the player pool quality becomes. Perhaps eventually some of these teams will build and recruit players in such a way that they are comparable to an ECNL team, but certainly not in the expansion years.

It is the equivalent of a bunch of NFL owners and players spinning off and creating the XFL along with some heavy marketing and celebrities, and claiming that it is a competitor to the NFL. It’s not.

Cool story. You are free to take your business elsewhere

Next 2 is not the equivalent of ECNL. It is equivalent to ECRL. McLean’s RL team will become its Next 2 team.

Bingo. MYS Green (currently ECRL) becomes their Tier II 1st team playing in MLS Next Tier II, and MYS White (currently a strong NCSL team) becomes their Tier II 2nd team playing in NAL. Everyone else (Gold, Silver) to stay NCSL. In my opinion the biggest difference here isn't that the top team (Green) plays in an ECRL-competitor, but rather that the 2nd team (White) is no longer playing in NCSL but rather in NAL - which is a step up from NCSL.

And what it means is that any younger players who do happen to have talent will move on to other clubs, such as Springfield, Arlington, FVU, NVA or maybe a MD club, since they will not have access to a higher level of competition. Talent needs competition to be maximized and flourish.

McLean just does not provide the population or culture for this. MYS provides a destination for coaches to get overpaid to train a bunch of privileged kids. And with that you get the politics that has made MYS a below average academy that has required it to create 2 failed partnerships (with SYC and BRAVE) and have it's ECNL-N badge pulled over the last 4 years.

It's really hard to fail at something to this extent unless you are trying to.

Overpaid how? The only material way for coaches in this youth soccer market to get overpaid is to drive excessively large rosters (which is a big red flag) or to stretch their coaches across more teams than usual (which isn't really an issue unless they're unable to focus on each team sufficiently enough). So, which one are they doing? Otherwise, there are likely very trivial differences between a 1099 coach at MYS vs a 1099 coach at [insert any other comparable size/reputation club here].

The most logical argument you above is that the reason McLean has "struggled" in recent years is because of population. It isn't like a Springfield or an Arlington, and it's adjacent to many other clubs which are near-peer competitors - Arlington, Great Falls, Vienna, Potomac, Bethesda, and LOTS of private schools. The reason they've not done great is because of that, not because they're running some scam where they pay coaches more and train kids less.

It's not just population. Coaches do get paid more at MYS. And it creates a self perpetuating situation of increased politics and poor play on each team.

Coaches make a significant amount of money doing private trainings at MYS; I have heard it straight from a coach that they can make $120 an hour. You will not find that in the club finances, but it is a reason many coaches will not leave MYS. And if a parent is paying this amount of money to have their little Johnny be trained separately by their coach, that parent expects that little Johnny will play significant amount of minutes each game. And this creates dissatisfaction amongst other parents and players on the team as they see a less skilled player getting those minutes over a better player. Plus this means the team will more than likely have a better chance at a loosing record, which then means parents will pull their better players off of MYS teams to play at another club. And this is how you end up with bottom of the barrel teams by U13/U14 ages.

I've heard this BS and it's always from parents who's kids are not that great. Why? Because the real truth is coaches will play the kids who are best. I know many players in MYS who don't get personal training and they start each game and play the majority of minutes.

Cry all you want. But, just because a player gets personal training doesn't mean they get more time on the field UNLESS they are actually good. That's just fact. This whole idea of "coaches play the kids who pay for personal training" is a lie. Now, if that kid who does personal training is good enough to take a spot on the field then that's just that. Has nothing to do with anything else. I also know a few kids who personal train and they don't start so there's many kids who are the counter argument to this lie about coaches, personal training, and play time.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have a hard time believing that MLS next tier 2 will be the equivalent of ECNL, despite that being what tier 2 clubs are trying to brand as.

Many ECNL teams were comprised of mixed communities and alliances, for better or worse. There were not very many of them, and ECNL kept it that way for a reason - to keep the playing level high. Now, if every club that doesn’t like being in an alliance says we are going to spin off and apply for acceptance to MLA next tier 2, and claims that it is an ECNL competitor, they are purely marketing. ECNL is supposed to be super competitive. And so if McLean was contributing let’s say three or four kids to Fairfax union and the other teams were contributing three or four kids, that was the make up of the team. It doesn’t stand to reason that all of the individual clubs can claim that they can break off and field that many ECNL caliber kids on their own. And the more that joined/join 2 while claiming that, the more diluted the player pool quality becomes. Perhaps eventually some of these teams will build and recruit players in such a way that they are comparable to an ECNL team, but certainly not in the expansion years.

It is the equivalent of a bunch of NFL owners and players spinning off and creating the XFL along with some heavy marketing and celebrities, and claiming that it is a competitor to the NFL. It’s not.

Cool story. You are free to take your business elsewhere

Next 2 is not the equivalent of ECNL. It is equivalent to ECRL. McLean’s RL team will become its Next 2 team.

Bingo. MYS Green (currently ECRL) becomes their Tier II 1st team playing in MLS Next Tier II, and MYS White (currently a strong NCSL team) becomes their Tier II 2nd team playing in NAL. Everyone else (Gold, Silver) to stay NCSL. In my opinion the biggest difference here isn't that the top team (Green) plays in an ECRL-competitor, but rather that the 2nd team (White) is no longer playing in NCSL but rather in NAL - which is a step up from NCSL.

And what it means is that any younger players who do happen to have talent will move on to other clubs, such as Springfield, Arlington, FVU, NVA or maybe a MD club, since they will not have access to a higher level of competition. Talent needs competition to be maximized and flourish.

McLean just does not provide the population or culture for this. MYS provides a destination for coaches to get overpaid to train a bunch of privileged kids. And with that you get the politics that has made MYS a below average academy that has required it to create 2 failed partnerships (with SYC and BRAVE) and have it's ECNL-N badge pulled over the last 4 years.

It's really hard to fail at something to this extent unless you are trying to.

Overpaid how? The only material way for coaches in this youth soccer market to get overpaid is to drive excessively large rosters (which is a big red flag) or to stretch their coaches across more teams than usual (which isn't really an issue unless they're unable to focus on each team sufficiently enough). So, which one are they doing? Otherwise, there are likely very trivial differences between a 1099 coach at MYS vs a 1099 coach at [insert any other comparable size/reputation club here].

The most logical argument you above is that the reason McLean has "struggled" in recent years is because of population. It isn't like a Springfield or an Arlington, and it's adjacent to many other clubs which are near-peer competitors - Arlington, Great Falls, Vienna, Potomac, Bethesda, and LOTS of private schools. The reason they've not done great is because of that, not because they're running some scam where they pay coaches more and train kids less.

It's not just population. Coaches do get paid more at MYS. And it creates a self perpetuating situation of increased politics and poor play on each team.

Coaches make a significant amount of money doing private trainings at MYS; I have heard it straight from a coach that they can make $120 an hour. You will not find that in the club finances, but it is a reason many coaches will not leave MYS. And if a parent is paying this amount of money to have their little Johnny be trained separately by their coach, that parent expects that little Johnny will play significant amount of minutes each game. And this creates dissatisfaction amongst other parents and players on the team as they see a less skilled player getting those minutes over a better player. Plus this means the team will more than likely have a better chance at a loosing record, which then means parents will pull their better players off of MYS teams to play at another club. And this is how you end up with bottom of the barrel teams by U13/U14 ages.

I've heard this BS and it's always from parents who's kids are not that great. Why? Because the real truth is coaches will play the kids who are best. I know many players in MYS who don't get personal training and they start each game and play the majority of minutes.

Cry all you want. But, just because a player gets personal training doesn't mean they get more time on the field UNLESS they are actually good. That's just fact. This whole idea of "coaches play the kids who pay for personal training" is a lie. Now, if that kid who does personal training is good enough to take a spot on the field then that's just that. Has nothing to do with anything else. I also know a few kids who personal train and they don't start so there's many kids who are the counter argument to this lie about coaches, personal training, and play time.

Comfirmed.....

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have a hard time believing that MLS next tier 2 will be the equivalent of ECNL, despite that being what tier 2 clubs are trying to brand as.

Many ECNL teams were comprised of mixed communities and alliances, for better or worse. There were not very many of them, and ECNL kept it that way for a reason - to keep the playing level high. Now, if every club that doesn’t like being in an alliance says we are going to spin off and apply for acceptance to MLA next tier 2, and claims that it is an ECNL competitor, they are purely marketing. ECNL is supposed to be super competitive. And so if McLean was contributing let’s say three or four kids to Fairfax union and the other teams were contributing three or four kids, that was the make up of the team. It doesn’t stand to reason that all of the individual clubs can claim that they can break off and field that many ECNL caliber kids on their own. And the more that joined/join 2 while claiming that, the more diluted the player pool quality becomes. Perhaps eventually some of these teams will build and recruit players in such a way that they are comparable to an ECNL team, but certainly not in the expansion years.

It is the equivalent of a bunch of NFL owners and players spinning off and creating the XFL along with some heavy marketing and celebrities, and claiming that it is a competitor to the NFL. It’s not.

Cool story. You are free to take your business elsewhere

Next 2 is not the equivalent of ECNL. It is equivalent to ECRL. McLean’s RL team will become its Next 2 team.

Bingo. MYS Green (currently ECRL) becomes their Tier II 1st team playing in MLS Next Tier II, and MYS White (currently a strong NCSL team) becomes their Tier II 2nd team playing in NAL. Everyone else (Gold, Silver) to stay NCSL. In my opinion the biggest difference here isn't that the top team (Green) plays in an ECRL-competitor, but rather that the 2nd team (White) is no longer playing in NCSL but rather in NAL - which is a step up from NCSL.

And what it means is that any younger players who do happen to have talent will move on to other clubs, such as Springfield, Arlington, FVU, NVA or maybe a MD club, since they will not have access to a higher level of competition. Talent needs competition to be maximized and flourish.

McLean just does not provide the population or culture for this. MYS provides a destination for coaches to get overpaid to train a bunch of privileged kids. And with that you get the politics that has made MYS a below average academy that has required it to create 2 failed partnerships (with SYC and BRAVE) and have it's ECNL-N badge pulled over the last 4 years.

It's really hard to fail at something to this extent unless you are trying to.

Overpaid how? The only material way for coaches in this youth soccer market to get overpaid is to drive excessively large rosters (which is a big red flag) or to stretch their coaches across more teams than usual (which isn't really an issue unless they're unable to focus on each team sufficiently enough). So, which one are they doing? Otherwise, there are likely very trivial differences between a 1099 coach at MYS vs a 1099 coach at [insert any other comparable size/reputation club here].

The most logical argument you above is that the reason McLean has "struggled" in recent years is because of population. It isn't like a Springfield or an Arlington, and it's adjacent to many other clubs which are near-peer competitors - Arlington, Great Falls, Vienna, Potomac, Bethesda, and LOTS of private schools. The reason they've not done great is because of that, not because they're running some scam where they pay coaches more and train kids less.

It's not just population. Coaches do get paid more at MYS. And it creates a self perpetuating situation of increased politics and poor play on each team.

Coaches make a significant amount of money doing private trainings at MYS; I have heard it straight from a coach that they can make $120 an hour. You will not find that in the club finances, but it is a reason many coaches will not leave MYS. And if a parent is paying this amount of money to have their little Johnny be trained separately by their coach, that parent expects that little Johnny will play significant amount of minutes each game. And this creates dissatisfaction amongst other parents and players on the team as they see a less skilled player getting those minutes over a better player. Plus this means the team will more than likely have a better chance at a loosing record, which then means parents will pull their better players off of MYS teams to play at another club. And this is how you end up with bottom of the barrel teams by U13/U14 ages.

I've heard this BS and it's always from parents who's kids are not that great. Why? Because the real truth is coaches will play the kids who are best. I know many players in MYS who don't get personal training and they start each game and play the majority of minutes.

Cry all you want. But, just because a player gets personal training doesn't mean they get more time on the field UNLESS they are actually good. That's just fact. This whole idea of "coaches play the kids who pay for personal training" is a lie. Now, if that kid who does personal training is good enough to take a spot on the field then that's just that. Has nothing to do with anything else. I also know a few kids who personal train and they don't start so there's many kids who are the counter argument to this lie about coaches, personal training, and play time.

I agree with you but to avoid any issues or conflict of interest, just get personal training from a club coach that is not your team's coach.

[Anonymous]

I believe Mclean has a policy preventing their coaches from doing private training for any kid at MYS?