Washington Spirit VA ID sessions this Sunday

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:IMO the problem with play ups is it leads to clubs having weaker teams sometimes every other year. Example - Vienna has a strong(ish) 2008 team. It has the strongest 2009's playing up on it. All of the strong 2008's have stayed put because the 2007 team loses all the time. However, this has left the 2009 team struggling too. So they have one strong team flanked by 2 weaker teams. Although it may be best for those 3 players, it has created a hole in the 2009 age group and its not in the best interest of the club as a whole.

It all depends on the priority. If I am the parent of one of the 2009 play ups, I am probably more interested in my players development and challenges than the 2009 team. I don't have a significant interest in the 2007 or 2009 team. they are just coincidental. As for the club overall record... who cares? Does anyone outside of FCV talk about overall club records? Good on Vienna for taking on individual challenges rather than propping up the 2009 team. The 2008s on the team that don't want to play with the 2007s, eh... looks like they aren't that into taking on challenges. Maybe they know they aren't good enough to actually make a difference to the record. That's a decision. Sounds more like a rec decision, but hey, that's ok.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I wonder if Spirit would have better results if they forced all the girls to play in their age group for the spring season? Probably yes? However, I bet all the parents would then leave next year since they can't claim their DD is "playing up"anymore!

They should do that, and if the players leave, so be it. Having them play up does nothing for the teams they play up on, and not having them play their own age group means they aren’t helping that age group either.

The training is good, the coaches are too, and they face tough competition. That should be enough stick around for.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:IMO the problem with play ups is it leads to clubs having weaker teams sometimes every other year. Example - Vienna has a strong(ish) 2008 team. It has the strongest 2009's playing up on it. All of the strong 2008's have stayed put because the 2007 team loses all the time. However, this has left the 2009 team struggling too. So they have one strong team flanked by 2 weaker teams. Although it may be best for those 3 players, it has created a hole in the 2009 age group and its not in the best interest of the club as a whole.

It all depends on the priority. If I am the parent of one of the 2009 play ups, I am probably more interested in my players development and challenges than the 2009 team. I don't have a significant interest in the 2007 or 2009 team. they are just coincidental. As for the club overall record... who cares? Does anyone outside of FCV talk about overall club records? Good on Vienna for taking on individual challenges rather than propping up the 2009 team. The 2008s on the team that don't want to play with the 2007s, eh... looks like they aren't that into taking on challenges. Maybe they know they aren't good enough to actually make a difference to the record. That's a decision. Sounds more like a rec decision, but hey, that's ok.

Or the player could be age appropriate and learn how to be a leader on the team. That’s important for development too.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:IMO the problem with play ups is it leads to clubs having weaker teams sometimes every other year. Example - Vienna has a strong(ish) 2008 team. It has the strongest 2009's playing up on it. All of the strong 2008's have stayed put because the 2007 team loses all the time. However, this has left the 2009 team struggling too. So they have one strong team flanked by 2 weaker teams. Although it may be best for those 3 players, it has created a hole in the 2009 age group and its not in the best interest of the club as a whole.

It all depends on the priority. If I am the parent of one of the 2009 play ups, I am probably more interested in my players development and challenges than the 2009 team. I don't have a significant interest in the 2007 or 2009 team. they are just coincidental. As for the club overall record... who cares? Does anyone outside of FCV talk about overall club records? Good on Vienna for taking on individual challenges rather than propping up the 2009 team. The 2008s on the team that don't want to play with the 2007s, eh... looks like they aren't that into taking on challenges. Maybe they know they aren't good enough to actually make a difference to the record. That's a decision. Sounds more like a rec decision, but hey, that's ok.

Or the player could be age appropriate and learn how to be a leader on the team. That’s important for development too.

Soccer isn't the only place to learn to be a leader. Being a great teammate is up there in priorities too.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Every surrounding club is better. Let that sink in.

That is understood, but it doesn't mean that it will always be the case.

Spirit is a club that is for profit. Spirit VA exists to provide financial support to them...not the other way around.

Spirit VA is no different than Barca.

Not sure how Barca is even part of this discussion at all, but there’s a big difference. spirit va teams could wipe the floor with the age group compared Barca girls teams and barca’s competition level is much lower than Spirit’s.

It isn't about talent it is about the tired argument of soccer being a big money grab.

People in this area tend to view achievement as a consumable. Look at he current college scandal. So the crux is people are either paying hteir way on to teams and taking away spots away from more deserving kids. Barca, is just taking peoples money and buying yachts with it. Spirit is clearly taking money from parents and just lining the owners pockets as a part of the NWSL Billionaires Boys Club..

And the knock on Spirit is they charge and lose.

Non-profits also charge but then people complain about TD director salaries but then as is the case with SYC and LMVSC director poach, they bitch and moan when their good director gets poached by a neighboring club.

Just find the right level of competition, the right level budget wise and just enjoy watching your kid play.

ECNL or DA are not for everyone. ECNL in particular is not a charity. It's sole purpose is to have a platform for kids to get showcased for college coaches. As a league it has no altruistic motives to live up to. People will pay lots of money for the opportunity to be exclusively showcased in front of college coaches. Does that need to be a measuring stick of how you or your family enjoys the game of soccer? NO.

DA, is also not interested everyone either. They are interested in finding players for the National team. They only care about the .01% The rest of the kids are there also for the college exposure.

College exposure is not necessary for your child to enjoy playing soccer.

ECNL and DA are not keeping any kids from playing soccer. That would be like saying BMW is pricing you out of a car. Can't afford a BMW? Buy a Toyota, it will still get you where you need to go, more reliably and for a lot less.

Still not a good analogy.

ECNL or DA clubs are products customers consume to play at a higher level and act as a showcasing vehicle for college recruiting. Say what one will about WSVA, the training is very good and the platform works to get your player reviewed by college coaches. They go to the showcases no matter the league record, and if DD shines, no one will remember or even care about their U15 DA team's W/L record.

Barca is almost as costly as a DA club. While the training may be somewhat similar, the level of competition on the girls side is rec/low travel and you will have essentially no platform.

That's what I'd call an awful deal, unless you like paying a premium to wear the FCB crest. I like the Barca men's 1st team, but there are plenty of other dumpsters I can burn my $$ in before I put my HS age DD into an expensive rec level program.

Next time, try using another DA or ECNL club as your comparison. They all have similar costs, pros, and cons.

Agreed that if you are not at this level for college exposure, your kid should be playing rec/regular travel.

+1. Barca Academy was a bizarre example to use in this thread. Wonder why they keep coming up here when there is absolutely no relationship or comparison

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:IMO the problem with play ups is it leads to clubs having weaker teams sometimes every other year. Example - Vienna has a strong(ish) 2008 team. It has the strongest 2009's playing up on it. All of the strong 2008's have stayed put because the 2007 team loses all the time. However, this has left the 2009 team struggling too. So they have one strong team flanked by 2 weaker teams. Although it may be best for those 3 players, it has created a hole in the 2009 age group and its not in the best interest of the club as a whole.

It all depends on the priority. If I am the parent of one of the 2009 play ups, I am probably more interested in my players development and challenges than the 2009 team. I don't have a significant interest in the 2007 or 2009 team. they are just coincidental. As for the club overall record... who cares? Does anyone outside of FCV talk about overall club records? Good on Vienna for taking on individual challenges rather than propping up the 2009 team. The 2008s on the team that don't want to play with the 2007s, eh... looks like they aren't that into taking on challenges. Maybe they know they aren't good enough to actually make a difference to the record. That's a decision. Sounds more like a rec decision, but hey, that's ok.

Or the player could be age appropriate and learn how to be a leader on the team. That’s important for development too.

Soccer isn't the only place to learn to be a leader. Being a great teammate is up there in priorities too.

For sure. Yet another reason to play age appropriate. Excellent point.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:IMO the problem with play ups is it leads to clubs having weaker teams sometimes every other year. Example - Vienna has a strong(ish) 2008 team. It has the strongest 2009's playing up on it. All of the strong 2008's have stayed put because the 2007 team loses all the time. However, this has left the 2009 team struggling too. So they have one strong team flanked by 2 weaker teams. Although it may be best for those 3 players, it has created a hole in the 2009 age group and its not in the best interest of the club as a whole.

It all depends on the priority. If I am the parent of one of the 2009 play ups, I am probably more interested in my players development and challenges than the 2009 team. I don't have a significant interest in the 2007 or 2009 team. they are just coincidental. As for the club overall record... who cares? Does anyone outside of FCV talk about overall club records? Good on Vienna for taking on individual challenges rather than propping up the 2009 team. The 2008s on the team that don't want to play with the 2007s, eh... looks like they aren't that into taking on challenges. Maybe they know they aren't good enough to actually make a difference to the record. That's a decision. Sounds more like a rec decision, but hey, that's ok.

Or the player could be age appropriate and learn how to be a leader on the team. That’s important for development too.

Soccer isn't the only place to learn to be a leader. Being a great teammate is up there in priorities too.

For sure. Yet another reason to play age appropriate. Excellent point.

age appropriate may not have anything to do with being a great teammate or leadership. Sorry, the point isn't made by this argument. Being a great teammate is usually signified by many other characteristics, age having nothing to do with it. If you play up, you better be consistently an asset, not a liability.

[Anonymous]

I have a strong DD 2007 player and coaches are offering her time playing with 2006. She has a late 2007 birthday and we keep saying no. I'm not super excited about my 5th grader hanging out with a team of 7th graders. She's already the youngest on her 2007 team. I just don't want to kill her love for soccer by placing her in awkward social situations playing with girls who probably don't want someone this young hanging around them. Maybe I am stifling her development but so be it

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:IMO the problem with play ups is it leads to clubs having weaker teams sometimes every other year. Example - Vienna has a strong(ish) 2008 team. It has the strongest 2009's playing up on it. All of the strong 2008's have stayed put because the 2007 team loses all the time. However, this has left the 2009 team struggling too. So they have one strong team flanked by 2 weaker teams. Although it may be best for those 3 players, it has created a hole in the 2009 age group and its not in the best interest of the club as a whole.

It all depends on the priority. If I am the parent of one of the 2009 play ups, I am probably more interested in my players development and challenges than the 2009 team. I don't have a significant interest in the 2007 or 2009 team. they are just coincidental. As for the club overall record... who cares? Does anyone outside of FCV talk about overall club records? Good on Vienna for taking on individual challenges rather than propping up the 2009 team. The 2008s on the team that don't want to play with the 2007s, eh... looks like they aren't that into taking on challenges. Maybe they know they aren't good enough to actually make a difference to the record. That's a decision. Sounds more like a rec decision, but hey, that's ok.

Or the player could be age appropriate and learn how to be a leader on the team. That’s important for development too.

Soccer isn't the only place to learn to be a leader. Being a great teammate is up there in priorities too.

For sure. Yet another reason to play age appropriate. Excellent point.

age appropriate may not have anything to do with being a great teammate or leadership. Sorry, the point isn't made by this argument. Being a great teammate is usually signified by many other characteristics, age having nothing to do with it. If you play up, you better be consistently an asset, not a liability.

I don’t disagree there either. So for all these reasons and more, Spirit needs to return play ups to their at age teams.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I have a strong DD 2007 player and coaches are offering her time playing with 2006. She has a late 2007 birthday and we keep saying no. I'm not super excited about my 5th grader hanging out with a team of 7th graders. She's already the youngest on her 2007 team. I just don't want to kill her love for soccer by placing her in awkward social situations playing with girls who probably don't want someone this young hanging around them. Maybe I am stifling her development but so be it

I think you are smart. Don’t get caught up in the latest fashion in soccer. Do what’s right for her. Nothing wrong with staying where she can have time on the ball and the confidence to dominate.

[Anonymous]

The regular playups, except for the 07, are not the best in their age group.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The regular playups, except for the 07, are not the best in their age group.

And the 07 shouldn't be playing 05. She's not getting it done there either.

[Anonymous]

Is the 07 the best in that age group? Have you seen a game?

[Anonymous]

I've seen the 07 I think we are discussing. She is amazing for an 07. IMO should find a strong 06 team. Playing 05 (and 04) is not doing anything for her except giving parents something to talk about.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The regular playups, except for the 07, are not the best in their age group.

Could it be that the position needed to be filled is not the primary position of the best player in their own age group? I.e, defensive vice offensive? Did i read this wrong? The previous 2 replies seem to talk out of an age group.