ECNL forcing Brave & Union Partnership

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Any rhyme or reason to the 2010 Pinnie colors last night?

Not sure. Would be interesting to know though!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:McLean parent already have ML in their pocket so that's why they are so pissed off, and why SYC families are so willing to leave. MV has never demonstrated that he cares what any parent thinks. This is every overinvolved soccer parents worst fear but may lead to better results. Give the Dutch guy a shot

Better results than what? Winning the top bracket of Jeff cup? Finishing in 2nd place in conference play with just 1 loss? And no, no one has ML in their pocket. He's a tough but fair coach. He has a great reputation and every parent I know whose daughter played for him has nothing but good things to say, whether they played for him in Herndon, DMV FC, or McLean. Stop trying to create a false narrative. The "Dutch guy" doesn't have a good record and Brave families will tell you they are disappointed he's on the coaching slate.

Nice try, but not true. Most Brave players and families have embraced these upcoming changes only because MV is involved.

Not a false narrative this is the truth. Call me what you will, but I've been spot on for all this since page 1 of this thread. MV is well regarded, respected, and appreciated by Brave families. Notice I didn't say liked. They will certainly follow him to Union, IF they are able to make the team. He's not sentimental so he will put best team together from who shows up to tyouts and IDs. The fact that 7 Brave offers were made at 2010s speaks volumes to not his favoritism to Brave players, but the reality that half of the current Union team is not coming back, thats on ML and MYS parents specifically. If the team that just won Jeff Cup was bringing everyone back and just reloading with 2-3 best players at Brave, and 2-3 other solid players in NoVa making moves then sure my narrative is wrong. The truth is the team will be different, and ML had to bend and invite 7 Brave players. We all know only 2-3 should have been added, but when you lose talent you got be creative so more offers had to be made to the inferior group of players.

MV is in over his head regardless of what VYS parents who never had ECNL aspirations before believe. The reality is the BRAVE families lucked out that they will inherit McLean experience and connections because MV has zero pull with college coaches.

MV puts 4 players in college. LOL

Wrong, he has 17 girls...

Class of 2023 - 6 girls committed
Class of 2024 - 9 girls committed
Class of 2025 - 2 girls committed

I think McLean has about that much committed for the class of 2024

Those are not good numbers at all. Union has nearly every 05/06 girl committed, with the uncommitted kids being trapped players. From the Instagram page it looks like Arlington has all but 2 2024s and 2 2025’s committed. (granted, Arlington’s commits are heavy on academic schools, not necessarily P4 D1). Which raises a good point, for all of those Arlington kids listed as “committed” does that mean they are actually on the soccer team? Or is Arlington counting kids who just happen to be going to those schools and play at their club as “committed”? Because if those kids are all playing, then it’s a damn impressive list from an academic perspective. If not, then Arlington is dishonest AF.

It is all true and honest and only committed seniors are listed.

That’s completely incorrect. Arlington 25s have only a few committed

I looked at the Arlington instagram page, pretty sure they’re talking about “trapped” 25’s. there are two trapped players I can find with links, one to Vanderbilt and one to UPenn. The Vandy kid is well known and is an obvious standout, no idea on other one. two more 25’s there, but can’t find anything on them committing. So it’s possible Arlington has every kid on the 05/06 committed who wants to play. Worst case they are short like 3 kids.

It’s possible that Arlington has been quietly grinding away while our club has been stuck in drama mode.

Not talking about the 07 team that is still in process. Talking about 05/06 with all players committed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It could have been stronger than before if they were building from strength to strength. The reality is they are not, so just cause you can't handle that truth doesn't make it misleading or misinformation. You're just coming off disinformed.

+1 (parent who's player is safe but questioning strength of team next year and leadership)

You got me pegged. Specfically a parent who's player is safe, has mulitple offers in ECNL and GA. Not caught up with ECNL vs GA, will pick best environment and teammates matter for my DD. Definetly questioning if the FVU experiment is worth commiting to. The first Union was not all that, why will this one be different? BRYC is failing and VYS has some encouraging things but they are so new to this "elite" scene, so this new Union isnt exactly attractive. Of course college is the goal but not the goal at the expense of playing time and opportunity to be featured i.e. environment is everything. Generally though FVU has the college connections covered, but not confident with coaching at Union, and not a MYS famly so I get the critiscm of the parents attached to Union (MYS-there are more good ones than not). Its hard to know exactly where your kid stands, but trust what you are seeing at practice and at league games not tournaments or showcases. Playing time and having a coach who believes in your kid's talent is paramount

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It could have been stronger than before if they were building from strength to strength. The reality is they are not, so just cause you can't handle that truth doesn't make it misleading or misinformation. You're just coming off disinformed.

+1 (parent who's player is safe but questioning strength of team next year and leadership)

From what I know of the 11 or so 2011s who have received offers, they are a strong and talented group of players. Not sure how the rest of the roster will fill out but it looks promising so far. Next step will be building some team chemistry between the players (which may be easier than building chemistry between the parents given the discourse on this site).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It could have been stronger than before if they were building from strength to strength. The reality is they are not, so just cause you can't handle that truth doesn't make it misleading or misinformation. You're just coming off disinformed.

+1 (parent who's player is safe but questioning strength of team next year and leadership)

So much of this is subjective and skill/talent are not the only factors. Work ethic, growth, both physical and skill, level of commitment and any family concerns are all being looked at. There are a lot of girls to choose from and if your player was not marked as must have, those factors will be considered as the difference in talent is marginal at best.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It is mostly based on skill 70% but then which coach is going to push for their bubble players 30% in this year of sausage making. That's where VA Union people are upset if CW is not pushing but LO is.

The other unknown is roster size. If they go larger then may have 3-4 players not dressing along with 7 subs. Nobody wants to be that player.

A lot of unknowns in this sausage!

Not the first time a CW team has had upheaval just search the archives.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It could have been stronger than before if they were building from strength to strength. The reality is they are not, so just cause you can't handle that truth doesn't make it misleading or misinformation. You're just coming off disinformed.

+1 (parent who's player is safe but questioning strength of team next year and leadership)

So much of this is subjective and skill/talent are not the only factors. Work ethic, growth, both physical and skill, level of commitment and any family concerns are all being looked at. There are a lot of girls to choose from and if your player was not marked as must have, those factors will be considered as the difference in talent is marginal at best.

How can that be evaluated for players new to the coaches?

[Anonymous]

What type of "family concerns" play a role in ECNL roster formation?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:What type of "family concerns" play a role in ECNL roster formation?

All else being equal, I would take the player who doesn't have parents that are constantly asking to talk to the coaches about playing time etc.

[Anonymous]

"Family concerns" sounds code for racism or classism.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:"Family concerns" sounds code for racism or classism.

+1000

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What type of "family concerns" play a role in ECNL roster formation?

All else being equal, I would take the player who doesn't have parents that are constantly asking to talk to the coaches about playing time etc.

All else being equal, I would take the player who has parents that are constantly offering Commanders tickets they can't use conveniently on Sundays when we don't have games.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:"Family concerns" sounds code for racism or classism.

I got a dog whistle to see you, it works really well in McLean

[Anonymous]

on my kid's team "family concerns" is the mouthy joysticking dad. I'll be happy to see him go

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:on my kid's team "family concerns" is the mouthy joysticking dad. I'll be happy to see him go

You mean mom. Nothing is worse than the mom who played, oh lawd!