New Additions to Leagues Check Up (ECNL & GA)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:ECNL RL expanding in MI…

Mi Burn
Mi Rangers
DCFC

Currently either DPL or usys

Add Detroit City FC boys and girls to RL
Nationals SC Capital Area to RL



Holy crap these are terrible adds.

I think the word you're looking for is "watered down".

Isn't that what all the ECNL people used to say?

Sorry to be the one to relay but leagues make $$$ from the number of clubs they can get under their umbrella. Exclusively and success create interest but they don't pay the bills unless leagues capitalize by letting more clubs join.

Call it what you want to, but every move ECNL has been a desperation move.

You never know ECNL might be able to pull a rabbit out of it hat. But I agree the moves (so far) this year seem desperate especially when compared to previous years.

The MLSN hook with GA as a by product is very appealing to clubs. Ironic because ECNL used to do the same thing with girls ECNL forcing clubs to do boys ECNL.

May pull a rabbit out of a hat right after champions cup. The real games begin

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:ECNL RL expanding in MI…

Mi Burn
Mi Rangers
DCFC

Currently either DPL or usys

Add Detroit City FC boys and girls to RL
Nationals SC Capital Area to RL



Holy crap these are terrible adds.

I think the word you're looking for is "watered down".

Isn't that what all the ECNL people used to say?

Sorry to be the one to relay but leagues make $$$ from the number of clubs they can get under their umbrella. Exclusively and success create interest but they don't pay the bills unless leagues capitalize by letting more clubs join.

Call it what you want to, but every move ECNL has been a desperation move.

You never know ECNL might be able to pull a rabbit out of it hat. But I agree the moves (so far) this year seem desperate especially when compared to previous years.

The MLSN hook with GA as a by product is very appealing to clubs. Ironic because ECNL used to do the same thing with girls ECNL forcing clubs to do boys ECNL.

If ECNL was smart, they would pull Tophat and STA while they can.

This might be their last chance to do so.

The rest of the top programs in GA are MLSN

It would be fun to be a fly on the wall at the Top Hat + ECNL meeting.

ECNL saying can't we just be friends? Nevermind the 5 years after DA where we ignored you and were jerkoffs.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:ECNL RL expanding in MI…

Mi Burn
Mi Rangers
DCFC

Currently either DPL or usys

Add Detroit City FC boys and girls to RL
Nationals SC Capital Area to RL



Holy crap these are terrible adds.

I think the word you're looking for is "watered down".

Isn't that what all the ECNL people used to say?

Sorry to be the one to relay but leagues make $$$ from the number of clubs they can get under their umbrella. Exclusively and success create interest but they don't pay the bills unless leagues capitalize by letting more clubs join.

Call it what you want to, but every move ECNL has been a desperation move.

You never know ECNL might be able to pull a rabbit out of it hat. But I agree the moves (so far) this year seem desperate especially when compared to previous years.

The MLSN hook with GA as a by product is very appealing to clubs. Ironic because ECNL used to do the same thing with girls ECNL forcing clubs to do boys ECNL.

If ECNL was smart, they would pull Tophat and STA while they can.

This might be their last chance to do so.

The rest of the top programs in GA are MLSN

Could go the other way as well STA getting MLSN. From what I hear Top Hat prefers ECNL for it's boys because it's strong in the Atlanta area.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:ECNL RL expanding in MI…

Mi Burn
Mi Rangers
DCFC

Currently either DPL or usys

Add Detroit City FC boys and girls to RL
Nationals SC Capital Area to RL



Holy crap these are terrible adds.

I think the word you're looking for is "watered down".

Isn't that what all the ECNL people used to say?

Sorry to be the one to relay but leagues make $$$ from the number of clubs they can get under their umbrella. Exclusively and success create interest but they don't pay the bills unless leagues capitalize by letting more clubs join.

Call it what you want to, but every move ECNL has been a desperation move.

You never know ECNL might be able to pull a rabbit out of it hat. But I agree the moves (so far) this year seem desperate especially when compared to previous years.

The MLSN hook with GA as a by product is very appealing to clubs. Ironic because ECNL used to do the same thing with girls ECNL forcing clubs to do boys ECNL.

If ECNL was smart, they would pull Tophat and STA while they can.

This might be their last chance to do so.

The rest of the top programs in GA are MLSN

Could go the other way as well STA getting MLSN. From what I hear Top Hat prefers ECNL for it's boys because it's strong in the Atlanta area.

Boys programs and girls programs work separately in most cases. Boys side could care less what the girls do and vice versa

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:ECNL RL expanding in MI…

Mi Burn
Mi Rangers
DCFC

Currently either DPL or usys

Add Detroit City FC boys and girls to RL
Nationals SC Capital Area to RL



Holy crap these are terrible adds.

I think the word you're looking for is "watered down".

Isn't that what all the ECNL people used to say?

Sorry to be the one to relay but leagues make $$$ from the number of clubs they can get under their umbrella. Exclusively and success create interest but they don't pay the bills unless leagues capitalize by letting more clubs join.

Call it what you want to, but every move ECNL has been a desperation move.

You never know ECNL might be able to pull a rabbit out of it hat. But I agree the moves (so far) this year seem desperate especially when compared to previous years.

The MLSN hook with GA as a by product is very appealing to clubs. Ironic because ECNL used to do the same thing with girls ECNL forcing clubs to do boys ECNL.

If ECNL was smart, they would pull Tophat and STA while they can.

This might be their last chance to do so.

The rest of the top programs in GA are MLSN

Could go the other way as well STA getting MLSN. From what I hear Top Hat prefers ECNL for it's boys because it's strong in the Atlanta area.

Boys programs and girls programs work separately in most cases. Boys side could care less what the girls do and vice versa

For Top Hat yes/correct

For most clubs no. Leagues try to pressure clubs to do the less popular option they're selling by bundling it with the more popular option. ECNL girls trys to tell clubs that they need to participle in ECNL boys before they'll let them in. MLSN is the opposite + strongly hints that clubs need to play in GA if they want MLSN.

You likely have a kid in either the boys or girls side so you don't see what happens on the other side. Gentle hint MLSN is MUCH more popular with boys than ECNL.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:“Parents have been told via email that we have a meeting on Monday to explain the changes, but apparently CISC has left ECNL on both boys and girls side.

Boys will have a single team in MLS Next Competition Tier, Girls will play (allegedly) in GA, Aspire, and DPL.

This is NOT what we signed up for when we were asked to make a commitment fee after tryouts. We'll be exploring our options (as will many other families we have spoken to on our team)”

Who is Cisc? Charlotte?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:“Parents have been told via email that we have a meeting on Monday to explain the changes, but apparently CISC has left ECNL on both boys and girls side.

Boys will have a single team in MLS Next Competition Tier, Girls will play (allegedly) in GA, Aspire, and DPL.

This is NOT what we signed up for when we were asked to make a commitment fee after tryouts. We'll be exploring our options (as will many other families we have spoken to on our team)”

Who is Cisc? Charlotte?

Yes. Charlotte ind

[Anonymous]

Hahah as much as that might be cool, sadly no email in my inbox as a Cisc parent.

Amazing rumor mongering though,, wish we were passing the real thread to 1000 though

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Hahah as much as that might be cool, sadly no email in my inbox as a Cisc parent.

Amazing rumor mongering though,, wish we were passing the real thread to 1000 though

I don’t think people would randomly assume CISC was going MLSN:GA.

Theres some truth to that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Hahah as much as that might be cool, sadly no email in my inbox as a Cisc parent.

Amazing rumor mongering though,, wish we were passing the real thread to 1000 though

I don’t think people would randomly assume CISC was going MLSN:GA.

Theres some truth to that.

Parent meeting(s) are tomorrow night

[Anonymous]

Get ready CISC parent…after they let everyone know Monday, maybe you will find out. Text a few pals who might know more then you.

[Anonymous]

Imagine still being in denial.

Folks. Mls next is very attractive for boys programs. specially Tier 1

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:ECNL RL expanding in MI…

Mi Burn
Mi Rangers
DCFC

Currently either DPL or usys

Add Detroit City FC boys and girls to RL
Nationals SC Capital Area to RL



Holy crap these are terrible adds.

I think the word you're looking for is "watered down".

Isn't that what all the ECNL people used to say?

Sorry to be the one to relay but leagues make $$$ from the number of clubs they can get under their umbrella. Exclusively and success create interest but they don't pay the bills unless leagues capitalize by letting more clubs join.

Call it what you want to, but every move ECNL has been a desperation move.

You never know ECNL might be able to pull a rabbit out of it hat. But I agree the moves (so far) this year seem desperate especially when compared to previous years.

The MLSN hook with GA as a by product is very appealing to clubs. Ironic because ECNL used to do the same thing with girls ECNL forcing clubs to do boys ECNL.

If ECNL was smart, they would pull Tophat and STA while they can.

This might be their last chance to do so.

The rest of the top programs in GA are MLSN

Could go the other way as well STA getting MLSN. From what I hear Top Hat prefers ECNL for it's boys because it's strong in the Atlanta area.

Boys programs and girls programs work separately in most cases. Boys side could care less what the girls do and vice versa

For Top Hat yes/correct

For most clubs no. Leagues try to pressure clubs to do the less popular option they're selling by bundling it with the more popular option. ECNL girls trys to tell clubs that they need to participle in ECNL boys before they'll let them in. MLSN is the opposite + strongly hints that clubs need to play in GA if they want MLSN.

You likely have a kid in either the boys or girls side so you don't see what happens on the other side. Gentle hint MLSN is MUCH more popular with boys than ECNL.

Not in the south. Concorde and nasa (boys side to tophat) are powerhouse clubs. Concorde will stick with ECNL as they have people on the board at ECNL.

NASA may be sticking with ECNL to keep a foot in for the girls side. Or maybe the girls side doesn’t even want ECNL anymore ..

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Imagine still being in denial.

Folks. Mls next is very attractive for boys programs. specially Tier 1

PP here, I'd welcome the shift to MLSN as a boy parent at CISC. Seems unlikely but who knows

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Imagine still being in denial.

Folks. Mls next is very attractive for boys programs. specially Tier 1

PP here, I'd welcome the shift to MLSN as a boy parent at CISC. Seems unlikely but who knows

Just out of curiosity - do the CISC Academy parents you know all want MLS Next? I ask b/c most of the kids I know (09s and older) currently play HS soccer and I guess they wouldn't be able to that any longer.