ECNL forcing Brave & Union Partnership

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:2012s, 50-60 players. 6 goalies. Clear top field. Light on BRYC. Don't know about externals or VYS. Couldn't tell by numbers if they were pre grouped.

Thought there was fairly equal representation of the 3 clubs. Maybe VYS a little more, BRYC a little less and McLean in the middle. A handful of outside girls. There clearly was prior discussion and coordination between the coaches on how the groups would be split and even which girls, if not pre-selected for the top field, were going to get looks and rotated. 9-10 coaches out there.

It appeared to be mostly merit-based with a slight lean towards equal representation (hopefully how this whole merger goes). A few stronger VYS girls never made it to the top field while other clubs’ girls got rotated in. MV ran the show and then joined CW who never left the top field.

This is sport why you looking or hoping for equal representation? That mentality is not going to end well for you in this ridiculous ECNL soccer world. Seriously…good luck to you!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:2012s, 50-60 players. 6 goalies. Clear top field. Light on BRYC. Don't know about externals or VYS. Couldn't tell by numbers if they were pre grouped.

Thought there was fairly equal representation of the 3 clubs. Maybe VYS a little more, BRYC a little less and McLean in the middle. A handful of outside girls. There clearly was prior discussion and coordination between the coaches on how the groups would be split and even which girls, if not pre-selected for the top field, were going to get looks and rotated. 9-10 coaches out there.

It appeared to be mostly merit-based with a slight lean towards equal representation (hopefully how this whole merger goes). A few stronger VYS girls never made it to the top field while other clubs’ girls got rotated in. MV ran the show and then joined CW who never left the top field.

This is sport why you looking or hoping for equal representation? That mentality is not going to end well for you in this ridiculous ECNL soccer world. Seriously…good luck to you!

I would prefer 100% merit-based but that’s not reality. So if it’s only a slight lean towards equal representation, I think that is a win. Maybe in a few years, all of the politics can be removed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:CW — beautiful coach and human. Always has the interest of all his players — best and weakest. Development over winning, short passes over long balls.

McLean is doing their best to remain transparent.

Boys — VU boys side has concerns as Fairfax or BRYC should place lots of boys on the ECNL merged teams. Hopefully it will strengthen.

Girls — it will be competitive to make teams. Over past several years relationship with SYC has been mixed bag. Some teams benefited and others did not. MYS could have managed to recruit on their own but with this merger if the best current VU players stay and Fairfax’s best come onto teams (along with a handful of from other clubs), even with big rosters, it will be good for development and solid competitive play. No more shuddering when subs come on but rather this should provide for deeper teams, better training, and mix of coaching approaches. (Or maybe that is too optimistic)

Organization — communication is very good at McLean. Fairfax families might actually receive regular notices and communications. Brace yourselves.

SYC saved McLean in every age group from 2008 and younger.

Maybe SYC plans to eventually take over the newly open ECNL franchise in the DMV.

But GA????

Trolls or just dense not sure? SYC is exactly where they have wanted to be when they got MLSN, now girls have their platform too, 5 year plan complete. No mergers or alliances needed, talent and development for days at SYC. ECNL took a club away for poor performance they are not adding anymore for now. One club in every county is nice setup moving forward.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:2012s, 50-60 players. 6 goalies. Clear top field. Light on BRYC. Don't know about externals or VYS. Couldn't tell by numbers if they were pre grouped.

Did they say if the second session is invite only for the 2012 group? Any mention of when offers will start going out?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:First girls trials were tonight. Any report backs?

2008G - 44 players included 5 goalies
My dd said MV announced he is the head coach, BL is his assistant

Offer will be send out, next ID sessions are invitation. Good luck to the girls … will be tearful for half of the girls… good job Bunions

30+ for 2010's a few external players mixed in. Your typical ID session...Top field & Bottom field. Same announcement as PP but opposite the 08's....MV announced ML will be HC and MV his Assistant. ML, MV, LO, NM, BL, KL, CW in attendance.

How many GK?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Sounds like sort of light numbers, tbh.

Agreed. Know there were several 2010G at SYC GA tryouts and know at least 1 player already took an invite at another club.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:2012s, 50-60 players. 6 goalies. Clear top field. Light on BRYC. Don't know about externals or VYS. Couldn't tell by numbers if they were pre grouped.

Did they say if the second session is invite only for the 2012 group? Any mention of when offers will start going out?

I think all are to come. Not sure there were any girls outside the three orgs on the "top" field.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:2012s, 50-60 players. 6 goalies. Clear top field. Light on BRYC. Don't know about externals or VYS. Couldn't tell by numbers if they were pre grouped.

Did they say if the second session is invite only for the 2012 group? Any mention of when offers will start going out?

I think all are to come. Not sure there were any girls outside the three orgs on the "top" field.

Some kids got an offer on the spot.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:CW — beautiful coach and human. Always has the interest of all his players — best and weakest. Development over winning, short passes over long balls.

McLean is doing their best to remain transparent.

Boys — VU boys side has concerns as Fairfax or BRYC should place lots of boys on the ECNL merged teams. Hopefully it will strengthen.

Girls — it will be competitive to make teams. Over past several years relationship with SYC has been mixed bag. Some teams benefited and others did not. MYS could have managed to recruit on their own but with this merger if the best current VU players stay and Fairfax’s best come onto teams (along with a handful of from other clubs), even with big rosters, it will be good for development and solid competitive play. No more shuddering when subs come on but rather this should provide for deeper teams, better training, and mix of coaching approaches. (Or maybe that is too optimistic)

Organization — communication is very good at McLean. Fairfax families might actually receive regular notices and communications. Brace yourselves.

McLean is transparent? Get outta here.

There are concerns on both sides at McLean. Boys and girls.

Communication is not good at McLean lol…

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:2012s, 50-60 players. 6 goalies. Clear top field. Light on BRYC. Don't know about externals or VYS. Couldn't tell by numbers if they were pre grouped.

Did they say if the second session is invite only for the 2012 group? Any mention of when offers will start going out?

I think all are to come. Not sure there were any girls outside the three orgs on the "top" field.

Some kids got an offer on the spot.

This isn’t true. Coaches specifically said to the entire group they needed time to review and not to expect immediate offers.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:2012s, 50-60 players. 6 goalies. Clear top field. Light on BRYC. Don't know about externals or VYS. Couldn't tell by numbers if they were pre grouped.

Did they say if the second session is invite only for the 2012 group? Any mention of when offers will start going out?

I think all are to come. Not sure there were any girls outside the three orgs on the "top" field.

Some kids got an offer on the spot.

This isn’t true. Coaches specifically said to the entire group they needed time to review and not to expect immediate offers.

I guess you didn't see the individual conversations. Of course their message to the entire group is that, but the individual conversations aren't the same.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:2012s, 50-60 players. 6 goalies. Clear top field. Light on BRYC. Don't know about externals or VYS. Couldn't tell by numbers if they were pre grouped.

Did they say if the second session is invite only for the 2012 group? Any mention of when offers will start going out?

I think all are to come. Not sure there were any girls outside the three orgs on the "top" field.

Some kids got an offer on the spot.

This isn’t true. Coaches specifically said to the entire group they needed time to review and not to expect immediate offers.

I guess you didn't see the individual conversations. Of course their message to the entire group is that, but the individual conversations aren't the same.

I saw one individual conversation but we left the field pretty quickly.

[Anonymous]

This practice is nothing new. What's presented publicly as a whole is the message they want everybody to see. Clubs will always try to lockdown who they want quickly, often times on the field with a quick 'expect an offer by tonight/tomorrow' individually. The rest are rolling and they will figure out over time.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:2012s, 50-60 players. 6 goalies. Clear top field. Light on BRYC. Don't know about externals or VYS. Couldn't tell by numbers if they were pre grouped.

Did they say if the second session is invite only for the 2012 group? Any mention of when offers will start going out?

I think all are to come. Not sure there were any girls outside the three orgs on the "top" field.

Some kids got an offer on the spot.

This isn’t true. Coaches specifically said to the entire group they needed time to review and not to expect immediate offers.

I guess you didn't see the individual conversations. Of course their message to the entire group is that, but the individual conversations aren't the same.

Nice try, troll. Go back to the SYC thread. I am 100% positive they did not give field offers.

[Anonymous]

Message from Nadir on Fairfax VA Union Girls Program

Current VA Union Girls ECNL NL Families,
 
Some of you have reached out with understandable concerns regarding the club’s messaging on Fairfax VA Union, and with respect to the boys’ program. While the intent has been to provide full transparency, I want to stress that the decision to merge was not made under pressure from ECNL for our girls’ teams. VA Union’s or Brave’s ECNL girls were not flagged for performance. 


The ECNL was created to provide top level competition and player development in the country – to have the best players and coaches compete against the best. The ECNL supports, and we all agree, that increasing our player pool will help us continue to perform at this level. We are excited about the opportunity to keep getting stronger as a club, working with BRAVE coaches.  

With change comes uncertainty, but for elite players, Fairfax VA Union will be the surest thing in our area. No other local club has retained the same coaching staff or directors for multiple years – over 10 years in McLean. Our leadership does not allow staff to cut corners in player development just to win games. We know our style of play competes nationally and wins championships. While good athletes with poor style of play and low soccer IQ can win locally and at a young age, this does not find success against great athletes in Texas and Southern California. McLean has been the only local club to make multiple national championship finals. 

As for staff, Clyde is one of the most well-respected coaches/leaders locally and nationally. Under his leadership, McLean was the only club in our area to be accepted into the ECNL based on merits of the girl’s program when the ECNL consisted of only the top 60 some clubs in the country (almost 15 years ago). As the soccer landscape changed, BRYC (now BRAVE) was added as the next best club based on its girl’s merits. All the other local clubs were admitted later because the ECNL wanted their boys’ programs to join so the league could compete with DA/GA/MLS Next.

Our girls’ program is not under any probationary period and our status will have no bearing on the boys’ program. While all boys and girls programs are under ECNL’s review each year, they know our girls leadership and that a name change or merger will not discourage their utmost respect for our club, the best girls’ program in the DMV for the last 20 plus years. 

We look forward to tryouts starting tonight for some groups. If you have any questions or concerns, please do not hesitate to reach out. If anyone has attended another ID session or is thinking about it and has not talked to their coach, I encourage you to reach out before making a decision.  

Thanks!
 
Nadir Moumen
Fairfax VA Union ECNL Girls Director
[e-mail] (mailto:[e-mail])


Doesn't this mean that the whole this was a lie from the beginning? The girls were never in danger so why do they need to merge? Parents need to be asking more questions. It also begs the question even more why the MYS boys leadership were not involved the negotiations. I can see now why they are leaving. The MYS leadership and board are so inept it baffles me they still have jobs. The town hall is going to be fireworks.