DA vs ECNL vs everything else

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why do so many Mclean 04 kids always get invited to the National Training Centers. Is team really that stacked?

No. It was because D Drake was there as DOC for ECNL. Just like when A Brunner had his crew all in from Richmond when he ran it prior.

So, it's political?

Surely our scouts are looking to identify the next crop of NT players and not just pad the hometown players resumes...right?

It is because USSF is spending so much money on former pros, scouts, etc to identify the top 1% of 1% of 1%. They will get it right.

Well, if the ECNL standings are any indication then our USSNT is doomed.

Selections are always partly political and partly biased due to familiarity with a player. D Drake for example should have excused herself from running the 03/04 USTC group when her daughter was in the mix. But that did not happen. She then took her child to FCV DA along with another player as she was pushed to go DA and not have her kid stay in ECNL. So, yes....there is politics. And not, to a previous poster, the USTC is not going to always get it right. There are always folks who like / hate our USM / USW coaches and player selections. Coaches have biases. Just look at the NCAA and types of teams and play . USC is vastly different than Florida State or UNC.

She should also excuse herself because a lot of kids were paying customers at her camp. Not saying those kids aren't good. Just saying something looks fishy

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why do so many Mclean 04 kids always get invited to the National Training Centers. Is team really that stacked?

No. It was because D Drake was there as DOC for ECNL. Just like when A Brunner had his crew all in from Richmond when he ran it prior.

So, it's political?

Surely our scouts are looking to identify the next crop of NT players and not just pad the hometown players resumes...right?

It is because USSF is spending so much money on former pros, scouts, etc to identify the top 1% of 1% of 1%. They will get it right.

Well, if the ECNL standings are any indication then our USSNT is doomed.

Selections are always partly political and partly biased due to familiarity with a player. D Drake for example should have excused herself from running the 03/04 USTC group when her daughter was in the mix. But that did not happen. She then took her child to FCV DA along with another player as she was pushed to go DA and not have her kid stay in ECNL. So, yes....there is politics. And not, to a previous poster, the USTC is not going to always get it right. There are always folks who like / hate our USM / USW coaches and player selections. Coaches have biases. Just look at the NCAA and types of teams and play . USC is vastly different than Florida State or UNC.

She should also excuse herself because a lot of kids were paying customers at her camp. Not saying those kids aren't good. Just saying something looks fishy

+1000

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why do so many Mclean 04 kids always get invited to the National Training Centers. Is team really that stacked?

No. It was because D Drake was there as DOC for ECNL. Just like when A Brunner had his crew all in from Richmond when he ran it prior.

So, it's political?

Surely our scouts are looking to identify the next crop of NT players and not just pad the hometown players resumes...right?

It is because USSF is spending so much money on former pros, scouts, etc to identify the top 1% of 1% of 1%. They will get it right.

Well, if the ECNL standings are any indication then our USSNT is doomed.

Again with the standings?

Yes. The standings. The team Diane Drake coached is the most well represented team at the National Training Center despite the fact that they sit 6th out of 8 in a very weak MA division.

Wheres the Richmond ECNL kids?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why do so many Mclean 04 kids always get invited to the National Training Centers. Is team really that stacked?

No. It was because D Drake was there as DOC for ECNL. Just like when A Brunner had his crew all in from Richmond when he ran it prior.

So, it's political?

Surely our scouts are looking to identify the next crop of NT players and not just pad the hometown players resumes...right?

It is because USSF is spending so much money on former pros, scouts, etc to identify the top 1% of 1% of 1%. They will get it right.

Well, if the ECNL standings are any indication then our USSNT is doomed.

Selections are always partly political and partly biased due to familiarity with a player. D Drake for example should have excused herself from running the 03/04 USTC group when her daughter was in the mix. But that did not happen. She then took her child to FCV DA along with another player as she was pushed to go DA and not have her kid stay in ECNL. So, yes....there is politics. And not, to a previous poster, the USTC is not going to always get it right. There are always folks who like / hate our USM / USW coaches and player selections. Coaches have biases. Just look at the NCAA and types of teams and play . USC is vastly different than Florida State or UNC.

She should also excuse herself because a lot of kids were paying customers at her camp. Not saying those kids aren't good. Just saying something looks fishy

That's a pretty ballsy accusation there...anything to back that up?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why do so many Mclean 04 kids always get invited to the National Training Centers. Is team really that stacked?

No. It was because D Drake was there as DOC for ECNL. Just like when A Brunner had his crew all in from Richmond when he ran it prior.

So, it's political?

Surely our scouts are looking to identify the next crop of NT players and not just pad the hometown players resumes...right?

It is because USSF is spending so much money on former pros, scouts, etc to identify the top 1% of 1% of 1%. They will get it right.

Well, if the ECNL standings are any indication then our USSNT is doomed.

Selections are always partly political and partly biased due to familiarity with a player. D Drake for example should have excused herself from running the 03/04 USTC group when her daughter was in the mix. But that did not happen. She then took her child to FCV DA along with another player as she was pushed to go DA and not have her kid stay in ECNL. So, yes....there is politics. And not, to a previous poster, the USTC is not going to always get it right. There are always folks who like / hate our USM / USW coaches and player selections. Coaches have biases. Just look at the NCAA and types of teams and play . USC is vastly different than Florida State or UNC.

She should also excuse herself because a lot of kids were paying customers at her camp. Not saying those kids aren't good. Just saying something looks fishy

That's a pretty ballsy accusation there...anything to back that up?

Why is it ballsy? It online for everyone to see. It's not being hidden.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why do so many Mclean 04 kids always get invited to the National Training Centers. Is team really that stacked?

No. It was because D Drake was there as DOC for ECNL. Just like when A Brunner had his crew all in from Richmond when he ran it prior.

So, it's political?

Surely our scouts are looking to identify the next crop of NT players and not just pad the hometown players resumes...right?

It is because USSF is spending so much money on former pros, scouts, etc to identify the top 1% of 1% of 1%. They will get it right.

Well, if the ECNL standings are any indication then our USSNT is doomed.

Selections are always partly political and partly biased due to familiarity with a player. D Drake for example should have excused herself from running the 03/04 USTC group when her daughter was in the mix. But that did not happen. She then took her child to FCV DA along with another player as she was pushed to go DA and not have her kid stay in ECNL. So, yes....there is politics. And not, to a previous poster, the USTC is not going to always get it right. There are always folks who like / hate our USM / USW coaches and player selections. Coaches have biases. Just look at the NCAA and types of teams and play . USC is vastly different than Florida State or UNC.

She should also excuse herself because a lot of kids were paying customers at her camp. Not saying those kids aren't good. Just saying something looks fishy

That's a pretty ballsy accusation there...anything to back that up?

How is it ballsy to point out two facts? 1) she was head scout for USTC and her daughter was selected to that pool to be trained by her (conflict of interest) and 2) players from MYS ECNL who were on the USTC roster under her also attended her camps and paid a fee to do so. Its pretty ballsy of you to defend either of those actions as acceptable. If you dont think that either is true, look at any USTC invite list Fall of 2017 and then ask MYS parents who was at her camp as a paying attendee.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why do so many Mclean 04 kids always get invited to the National Training Centers. Is team really that stacked?

No. It was because D Drake was there as DOC for ECNL. Just like when A Brunner had his crew all in from Richmond when he ran it prior.

So, it's political?

Surely our scouts are looking to identify the next crop of NT players and not just pad the hometown players resumes...right?

It is because USSF is spending so much money on former pros, scouts, etc to identify the top 1% of 1% of 1%. They will get it right.

Well, if the ECNL standings are any indication then our USSNT is doomed.

Again with the standings?

Yes. The standings. The team Diane Drake coached is the most well represented team at the National Training Center despite the fact that they sit 6th out of 8 in a very weak MA division.

Wheres the Richmond ECNL kids?

Not sure why the record of a McLean team not coached by Diane Drake is relevant to Diane Drake but I'll play. BRYC and McLean sit at the bottom of MA division. What does that say about ECNL around this area? And now you're adding more teams? Where is the talent coming from?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why do so many Mclean 04 kids always get invited to the National Training Centers. Is team really that stacked?

No. It was because D Drake was there as DOC for ECNL. Just like when A Brunner had his crew all in from Richmond when he ran it prior.

So, it's political?

Surely our scouts are looking to identify the next crop of NT players and not just pad the hometown players resumes...right?

It is because USSF is spending so much money on former pros, scouts, etc to identify the top 1% of 1% of 1%. They will get it right.

Well, if the ECNL standings are any indication then our USSNT is doomed.

Again with the standings?

Yes. The standings. The team Diane Drake coached is the most well represented team at the National Training Center despite the fact that they sit 6th out of 8 in a very weak MA division.

Wheres the Richmond ECNL kids?

Not sure why the record of a McLean team not coached by Diane Drake is relevant to Diane Drake but I'll play. BRYC and McLean sit at the bottom of MA division. What does that say about ECNL around this area? And now you're adding more teams? Where is the talent coming from?

What standings are you looking at? 04? Then sure, MYS and BYRC are at the bottom. Just like Spirit is at at the bottom for DA at 04. U15 BYRC is 1st and #3 in US ECNL. MYS is 4th in U15. U16 MYS is 1st and BYRC is 3rd. U17 MYS is 1st and BYRC 4th. U18 MYS is 1st.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why do so many Mclean 04 kids always get invited to the National Training Centers. Is team really that stacked?

No. It was because D Drake was there as DOC for ECNL. Just like when A Brunner had his crew all in from Richmond when he ran it prior.

So, it's political?

Surely our scouts are looking to identify the next crop of NT players and not just pad the hometown players resumes...right?

It is because USSF is spending so much money on former pros, scouts, etc to identify the top 1% of 1% of 1%. They will get it right.

Well, if the ECNL standings are any indication then our USSNT is doomed.

Selections are always partly political and partly biased due to familiarity with a player. D Drake for example should have excused herself from running the 03/04 USTC group when her daughter was in the mix. But that did not happen. She then took her child to FCV DA along with another player as she was pushed to go DA and not have her kid stay in ECNL. So, yes....there is politics. And not, to a previous poster, the USTC is not going to always get it right. There are always folks who like / hate our USM / USW coaches and player selections. Coaches have biases. Just look at the NCAA and types of teams and play . USC is vastly different than Florida State or UNC.

She should also excuse herself because a lot of kids were paying customers at her camp. Not saying those kids aren't good. Just saying something looks fishy

That's a pretty ballsy accusation there...anything to back that up?

How is it ballsy to point out two facts? 1) she was head scout for USTC and her daughter was selected to that pool to be trained by her (conflict of interest) and 2) players from MYS ECNL who were on the USTC roster under her also attended her camps and paid a fee to do so. Its pretty ballsy of you to defend either of those actions as acceptable. If you dont think that either is true, look at any USTC invite list Fall of 2017 and then ask MYS parents who was at her camp as a paying attendee.

Just to recap...the fact that some players at NTC went to her camp, they were not deserving of the NTC slots they received just because posters say so. And also you mention facts. Fact is GDA and ECNL are heavily represented at NTC and that shouldn't be surprising. Where other than those 6 clubs should the NTC players come from since you seem to know all the talent in the area.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why do so many Mclean 04 kids always get invited to the National Training Centers. Is team really that stacked?

No. It was because D Drake was there as DOC for ECNL. Just like when A Brunner had his crew all in from Richmond when he ran it prior.

So, it's political?

Surely our scouts are looking to identify the next crop of NT players and not just pad the hometown players resumes...right?

It is because USSF is spending so much money on former pros, scouts, etc to identify the top 1% of 1% of 1%. They will get it right.

Well, if the ECNL standings are any indication then our USSNT is doomed.

Again with the standings?

Yes. The standings. The team Diane Drake coached is the most well represented team at the National Training Center despite the fact that they sit 6th out of 8 in a very weak MA division.

Wheres the Richmond ECNL kids?

Not sure why the record of a McLean team not coached by Diane Drake is relevant to Diane Drake but I'll play. BRYC and McLean sit at the bottom of MA division. What does that say about ECNL around this area? And now you're adding more teams? Where is the talent coming from?

What standings are you looking at? 04? Then sure, MYS and BYRC are at the bottom. Just like Spirit is at at the bottom for DA at 04. U15 BYRC is 1st and #3 in US ECNL. MYS is 4th in U15. U16 MYS is 1st and BYRC is 3rd. U17 MYS is 1st and BYRC 4th. U18 MYS is 1st.

Silly me, I thought we were talking about Diane Drake's age group.

[Anonymous]

I think the answer to that question is obvious, Pipeline.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think the answer to that question is obvious, Pipeline.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why do so many Mclean 04 kids always get invited to the National Training Centers. Is team really that stacked?

No. It was because D Drake was there as DOC for ECNL. Just like when A Brunner had his crew all in from Richmond when he ran it prior.

So, it's political?

Surely our scouts are looking to identify the next crop of NT players and not just pad the hometown players resumes...right?

It is because USSF is spending so much money on former pros, scouts, etc to identify the top 1% of 1% of 1%. They will get it right.

Well, if the ECNL standings are any indication then our USSNT is doomed.

Again with the standings?

Yes. The standings. The team Diane Drake coached is the most well represented team at the National Training Center despite the fact that they sit 6th out of 8 in a very weak MA division.

Wheres the Richmond ECNL kids?

Not sure why the record of a McLean team not coached by Diane Drake is relevant to Diane Drake but I'll play. BRYC and McLean sit at the bottom of MA division. What does that say about ECNL around this area? And now you're adding more teams? Where is the talent coming from?

What standings are you looking at? 04? Then sure, MYS and BYRC are at the bottom. Just like Spirit is at at the bottom for DA at 04. U15 BYRC is 1st and #3 in US ECNL. MYS is 4th in U15. U16 MYS is 1st and BYRC is 3rd. U17 MYS is 1st and BYRC 4th. U18 MYS is 1st.

Silly me, I thought we were talking about Diane Drake's age group.

Fair enough. Yes, her team was highly average. Ergo, too much representation on USTC. More slots should have gone to players outside of MYS in that situation for 04 age group. More to either FCV or Arlington - two much better 04 clubs.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why do so many Mclean 04 kids always get invited to the National Training Centers. Is team really that stacked?

No. It was because D Drake was there as DOC for ECNL. Just like when A Brunner had his crew all in from Richmond when he ran it prior.

So, it's political?

Surely our scouts are looking to identify the next crop of NT players and not just pad the hometown players resumes...right?

It is because USSF is spending so much money on former pros, scouts, etc to identify the top 1% of 1% of 1%. They will get it right.

Well, if the ECNL standings are any indication then our USSNT is doomed.

Again with the standings?

Yes. The standings. The team Diane Drake coached is the most well represented team at the National Training Center despite the fact that they sit 6th out of 8 in a very weak MA division.

Wheres the Richmond ECNL kids?

Not sure why the record of a McLean team not coached by Diane Drake is relevant to Diane Drake but I'll play. BRYC and McLean sit at the bottom of MA division. What does that say about ECNL around this area? And now you're adding more teams? Where is the talent coming from?

What standings are you looking at? 04? Then sure, MYS and BYRC are at the bottom. Just like Spirit is at at the bottom for DA at 04. U15 BYRC is 1st and #3 in US ECNL. MYS is 4th in U15. U16 MYS is 1st and BYRC is 3rd. U17 MYS is 1st and BYRC 4th. U18 MYS is 1st.

Silly me, I thought we were talking about Diane Drake's age group.

Fair enough. Yes, her team was highly average. Ergo, too much representation on USTC. More slots should have gone to players outside of MYS in that situation for 04 age group. More to either FCV or Arlington - two much better 04 clubs.

From what I understand only 3 players from that McLean 04 age group at NTC. Hardly a scandal. FCV seems highly represented as does Bethesda BRYC and Richmond. VDA and Spirit not as much. So I am not sure why this seems so controversial.

[Anonymous]

I am talking about Diane Drakes former age group 04...of which is the most represented club at that age at NTC. A team that sits 6 out of 8 but has almost half of their starting field players at NTC.

Sounds legit.

Nepotism and politics OR the appearance thereof must be avoided at all cost.

Barely any MD 04 kids at the same NYC. Don't forget, this is a regional NTC. Not a VA NTC.