ECNL forcing Brave & Union Partnership

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Alright! 24 hours since the announcement and everyone’s had some time to process the coaching slate and tryout schedule.

Are you all in on the merger and prioritizing FVU, are you thinking trying out other places in addition to it, or not convinced by what has transpired and just looking elsewhere?

I believe this “slate” is a bait and switch. The money’s not there to fund all those coaches. 1 coach will have to be in charge of each age group and others can help out or fill in as needed—which is no different than any other club.

Listing a bunch of names gives everyone some false sense of comfort when they see a name they like, but the devil’s still hidden in the unknown details.

Check fee rates for next year. Perhaps they plan to jack them up.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Alright! 24 hours since the announcement and everyone’s had some time to process the coaching slate and tryout schedule.

Are you all in on the merger and prioritizing FVU, are you thinking trying out other places in addition to it, or not convinced by what has transpired and just looking elsewhere?

I believe this “slate” is a bait and switch. The money’s not there to fund all those coaches. 1 coach will have to be in charge of each age group and others can help out or fill in as needed—which is no different than any other club.

Listing a bunch of names gives everyone some false sense of comfort when they see a name they like, but the devil’s still hidden in the unknown details.

Maybe the agreement was half or reduced coaching fee for teams with two or three coaches given every one is sharing the duties and has multiple teams.

There is much potential. Slate of multiple coaches, in most cases, is certainly to appease both those already with Fairfax or VA Union — who wants their coach to disappear if players are enjoying them? I think the styles, lead coach, and details of the coaching dynamics will work itself out. We’ve been with other clubs and the slates were reasonably considered and the coaches we’ve worked with from these clubs are better than many across the DMV (and beyond). McLean’s club organization and communication is definitely multiple steps beyond others in the region, we will have good fields, travel not too far for any of the sites, and hopefully players and parents who want to see it work.

Hopefully, as many have mentioned, they work to select the best talents, regardless of club or if external, without quotas, with coaches advocating for those they know will excel and form the best team. I feel for the 2008s who are in a critical year both otherwise, players will hopefully be assessed fairly and with coaches cooperating. This is only step 1, so hopefully they will work with a spirit of understanding, listening, and making real objective consideration.

Unhappy with a placement — look elsewhere. Yes, timing is tough but players can be considered at practices after ID sessions for the one or two additional spots with another club.

Rosters — I hope they try to keep the 2012s and 2011s to 18 rather than 20 or more. Too tough on the younger ECNL players to not dress or travel. Playing time for development will be the question among these ages too. Yes, trimming to 18 means there will be much disappointment but if you want to raise the level, don’t add two more who are not going to keep up.

Sorry to be optimistic as not many others seem not to be. I recognize the merger madness of the past several years has been rough for many, but this version could yield some strong results.

Nice to hear some positivity around this. I don’t think anyone wanted this to happen initially but there is opportunity for something good here.

I’ve heard that the younger ages will look to keep the rosters a bit lower.

Union 2011s are playing this year at 19 already before the merger.

O/U for 11s is 22.5. Place your bets!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Alright! 24 hours since the announcement and everyone’s had some time to process the coaching slate and tryout schedule.

Are you all in on the merger and prioritizing FVU, are you thinking trying out other places in addition to it, or not convinced by what has transpired and just looking elsewhere?

I believe this “slate” is a bait and switch. The money’s not there to fund all those coaches. 1 coach will have to be in charge of each age group and others can help out or fill in as needed—which is no different than any other club.

Listing a bunch of names gives everyone some false sense of comfort when they see a name they like, but the devil’s still hidden in the unknown details.

Maybe the agreement was half or reduced coaching fee for teams with two or three coaches given every one is sharing the duties and has multiple teams.

There is much potential. Slate of multiple coaches, in most cases, is certainly to appease both those already with Fairfax or VA Union — who wants their coach to disappear if players are enjoying them? I think the styles, lead coach, and details of the coaching dynamics will work itself out. We’ve been with other clubs and the slates were reasonably considered and the coaches we’ve worked with from these clubs are better than many across the DMV (and beyond). McLean’s club organization and communication is definitely multiple steps beyond others in the region, we will have good fields, travel not too far for any of the sites, and hopefully players and parents who want to see it work.

Hopefully, as many have mentioned, they work to select the best talents, regardless of club or if external, without quotas, with coaches advocating for those they know will excel and form the best team. I feel for the 2008s who are in a critical year both otherwise, players will hopefully be assessed fairly and with coaches cooperating. This is only step 1, so hopefully they will work with a spirit of understanding, listening, and making real objective consideration.

Unhappy with a placement — look elsewhere. Yes, timing is tough but players can be considered at practices after ID sessions for the one or two additional spots with another club.

Rosters — I hope they try to keep the 2012s and 2011s to 18 rather than 20 or more. Too tough on the younger ECNL players to not dress or travel. Playing time for development will be the question among these ages too. Yes, trimming to 18 means there will be much disappointment but if you want to raise the level, don’t add two more who are not going to keep up.

Sorry to be optimistic as not many others seem not to be. I recognize the merger madness of the past several years has been rough for many, but this version could yield some strong results.

Nice to hear some positivity around this. I don’t think anyone wanted this to happen initially but there is opportunity for something good here.

I’ve heard that the younger ages will look to keep the rosters a bit lower.

Union 2011s are playing this year at 19 already before the merger.

O/U for 11s is 22.5. Place your bets!

Shows the insanity of agreeing to pay $3000+ for the CHANCE for your kid to be among the rostered players just because it's ECNL.

[Anonymous]

There’s no way they keep 3 coaches. They won’t take 1/3 salary and the club won’t jack up the fees that much. Second, they’d all need to be at every training so that there’s continuity. You can’t have one coach tell the players one thing and another coach tell them something different. Been there and it doesn’t work. It just confuses the players which results in poor performance. Not saying it’s not good to mix things up and try new things but the coaches have to all be on board.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:There’s no way they keep 3 coaches. They won’t take 1/3 salary and the club won’t jack up the fees that much. Second, they’d all need to be at every training so that there’s continuity. You can’t have one coach tell the players one thing and another coach tell them something different. Been there and it doesn’t work. It just confuses the players which results in poor performance. Not saying it’s not good to mix things up and try new things but the coaches have to all be on board.

From a PP “the first 2 coaches listed are the main coaches who will be involved fully in each team. The 3rd listed is occasional.”

[Anonymous]

They’ll just increase fees slightly at MYS, VYS, and BRYC to cover.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Alright! 24 hours since the announcement and everyone’s had some time to process the coaching slate and tryout schedule.

Are you all in on the merger and prioritizing FVU, are you thinking trying out other places in addition to it, or not convinced by what has transpired and just looking elsewhere?

I believe this “slate” is a bait and switch. The money’s not there to fund all those coaches. 1 coach will have to be in charge of each age group and others can help out or fill in as needed—which is no different than any other club.

Listing a bunch of names gives everyone some false sense of comfort when they see a name they like, but the devil’s still hidden in the unknown details.

Maybe the agreement was half or reduced coaching fee for teams with two or three coaches given every one is sharing the duties and has multiple teams.

There is much potential. Slate of multiple coaches, in most cases, is certainly to appease both those already with Fairfax or VA Union — who wants their coach to disappear if players are enjoying them? I think the styles, lead coach, and details of the coaching dynamics will work itself out. We’ve been with other clubs and the slates were reasonably considered and the coaches we’ve worked with from these clubs are better than many across the DMV (and beyond). McLean’s club organization and communication is definitely multiple steps beyond others in the region, we will have good fields, travel not too far for any of the sites, and hopefully players and parents who want to see it work.

Hopefully, as many have mentioned, they work to select the best talents, regardless of club or if external, without quotas, with coaches advocating for those they know will excel and form the best team. I feel for the 2008s who are in a critical year both otherwise, players will hopefully be assessed fairly and with coaches cooperating. This is only step 1, so hopefully they will work with a spirit of understanding, listening, and making real objective consideration.

Unhappy with a placement — look elsewhere. Yes, timing is tough but players can be considered at practices after ID sessions for the one or two additional spots with another club.

Rosters — I hope they try to keep the 2012s and 2011s to 18 rather than 20 or more. Too tough on the younger ECNL players to not dress or travel. Playing time for development will be the question among these ages too. Yes, trimming to 18 means there will be much disappointment but if you want to raise the level, don’t add two more who are not going to keep up.

Sorry to be optimistic as not many others seem not to be. I recognize the merger madness of the past several years has been rough for many, but this version could yield some strong results.

Nice to hear some positivity around this. I don’t think anyone wanted this to happen initially but there is opportunity for something good here.

I’ve heard that the younger ages will look to keep the rosters a bit lower.

Union 2011s are playing this year at 19 already before the merger.

Since Michel is the age group director, hopefully they keep it to smaller rosters.

[Anonymous]

8 2011's at NVU last night.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:8 2011's at NVU last night.

In total?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:8 2011's at NVU last night.

DB will coach that team. Of course he would get on the phones with his former players along with any other player he can grab. It’s his MO.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You mean to tell us OP that if these same kids played for BRAVE, they'd be getting the same looks at showcases than the kids at Union? Wake up...

Wow, $5 mil a year and still have time for this forum. maybe we all should go to wherever it is you went and spend time trolling with 'IDIOT'IC replies...

Not OP and DD not at either of these clubs but yes, the look that kids got on brave is similar to Union. Any ECNL team gets a ton of exposure. What you do with it is yours. DD played a game with 125 scouts at an Ecnl showcase. Many might have been there for the other team. She had an outstanding game. Received more than 20 calls from schools she had not been in contact with. ECNL get you the exposure. Would you rather be on Union than Brave if the travel time was the same. Of course. Was there more exposure at Union, of course. But Brave got plenty of exposure.

+1000000
My DD plays Brave and the colleges these kids are writing to are attending their games including US Scouts - all the big conference teams attended and contacted coaches. I am honestly shocked how arrogant PP statement is. I really hope this parent leaves for another club because I can already hear his elitist commentary on the sidelines. Ick!

Yes, the college coaches are watching lots of teams, but if you don’t think club coach connections matter you are deceiving yourself. College coaches see lots of players but will rely on club coaches they know and trust and that is what will land the plane and result in actual offers and placement. This is true across all sports.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:8 2011's at NVU last night.

DB will coach that team. Of course he would get on the phones with his former players along with any other player he can grab. It’s his MO.

You would have to be the dumbest family in the world to pick DB over CW if you had an offer for both. Just like you would to chose Arlington who is winning now (like they always do at the young age groups). CW has developed more pro players than those coaches have developed players playing in college.

[Anonymous]

Ask any BRAVE Parent or player how many coaches watched their 07s in Florida when they were moved off-site for the second year in a row...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You mean to tell us OP that if these same kids played for BRAVE, they'd be getting the same looks at showcases than the kids at Union? Wake up...

Wow, $5 mil a year and still have time for this forum. maybe we all should go to wherever it is you went and spend time trolling with 'IDIOT'IC replies...

Not OP and DD not at either of these clubs but yes, the look that kids got on brave is similar to Union. Any ECNL team gets a ton of exposure. What you do with it is yours. DD played a game with 125 scouts at an Ecnl showcase. Many might have been there for the other team. She had an outstanding game. Received more than 20 calls from schools she had not been in contact with. ECNL get you the exposure. Would you rather be on Union than Brave if the travel time was the same. Of course. Was there more exposure at Union, of course. But Brave got plenty of exposure.

+1000000
My DD plays Brave and the colleges these kids are writing to are attending their games including US Scouts - all the big conference teams attended and contacted coaches. I am honestly shocked how arrogant PP statement is. I really hope this parent leaves for another club because I can already hear his elitist commentary on the sidelines. Ick!

Yes, the college coaches are watching lots of teams, but if you don’t think club coach connections matter you are deceiving yourself. College coaches see lots of players but will rely on club coaches they know and trust and that is what will land the plane and result in actual offers and placement. This is true across all sports.

No the club coaches do almost nothing. Most colleges coaches do not even reach out to club coaches before making a commit. Like 90%. If your experience was different then good for you but not that way at most clubs. Where club coaches do help is if you come up dry on your own and end junior year without a commit. Then yes club coaches make calls and really market you. Not earlier junior year though. Again -- if you have that you have something special that is not in wide use.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:8 2011's at NVU last night.

DB will coach that team. Of course he would get on the phones with his former players along with any other player he can grab. It’s his MO.

You would have to be the dumbest family in the world to pick DB over CW if you had an offer for both. Just like you would to chose Arlington who is winning now (like they always do at the young age groups). CW has developed more pro players than those coaches have developed players playing in college.

enough with the pro players. No one exepot a very few -- maybe 3-5 in NoVa want to be a pro player.