LMVSC town hall

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you want to know how this plays out, check out the Barca academy thread/debate. There was a long going debate about the merits of academy training, at the end of the day what happened was they basically accept anyone into academy training and it tends to water down the level of the players overall.

the very top players end up leaving and looking elsewhere. After they have left, the next group of top players once more of a challenge and then they leave. And then you simply just have kind of a mid-level semi-competitive program left in your hands

Well I think the reason it didn't work immediately with Barcelona is because they had no teams and they did allow everyone in to build the program. Not many top players left to go there. Although not at all age groups, there is some good talent at LMVSC on some teams so it may be different. We'll have to see how it plays out. I assume that although players will be training together for the entire age group, within practice they will be grouped with the equal level talent to ensure proper competition. Even on the Barcelona thread it is how it's done for training.

Oh now I see. Group them together, and separate them again? So why group them together in the first place? But okay so the reason it didn't work with Barcelona (since apparently you know?) is because they didn't have many teams? Well there is no 2006 girls team, one 2007 girls team (with not that many players), one 2008 girls team (with not that many players). How is that academy supposed to work? If you ask me, we lost a lot of players last year and now we're willing to take in anybody.

And I still don't know what the plan is for showcase-playing teams. Nothing was discussed for U16 and up. The only thing I see is the same coaches, which we were told last year there was supposed to be a two year cap with a team.

I assume because when they put them together it's easier to move them around as needed based on level and you are seeing them side by side instead of asking a kid to go to a completely different practice somewhere else to see where they stand on the team. Not sure what they'll do with 06 and 07 girls but I guess they have to do something to fill those groups. If there aren't enough for more than one team than I guess the model won't apply for that specific age group and it's just as it always was.

Not sure about U16 but it sounded like this model wouldn't apply. Since everyone is invited back, they'll evaluate players then or base it on last year's performance. Maybe email them and see what they say.

Last year's departures impacted the club with player numbers for sure but I thought they handled it as best as they could given the situation.

It was made pretty clearly DD will train side-by-side (which others are now saying then regrouped). But again, didn't they say academy coaches get a 'real view of the player' during games and that's why academy coach will watch at least one game a year? Which, is pretty difficult to get a 'real view of the player' once in a year. I have no problem with this but not if we're supposed to be competing in CCL. I don't think this model is an actual model with 'standardization'. They're not accounting for level of competition, which that will be their only focus when games begin. Especially now that the DA is gone and every club surrounding us will incorporate those players.

[Anonymous]

Several good points made (club affiliation shouldnt matter). My opinion is the academy model as presented by LMVSC wont work at this age group nor if the measure of success is competing. The European model is focused on training at the younger ages and not competition so training as one team enhances everyone's skills with the understanding training with older age groups can challenge those higher skilled players. The US model is focused on competition and the success is based on wins/losses - we all know this because after the game we analyze what coaches/clubs are doing wrong, we need more space, we arent passing etc. So saying you are going to use a pool of players and not get results I feel is going to fail for a number of years until the model can be accepted. Also another good point is how do you challenge the red team/star players if they are in a pool of not as or lower skilled players? I have heard from LMVSC that they will offer to play up training/opportunities and it has never happened in our age group. I personally am not confident in this model and after giving LMVSC a year to dust itself off after the LMVSC/SYC shake up plan to not renew, look elsewhere or do Rec for one season. Shoot we may not even be competing in the fall who knows. I applaud LMVSC for the townhall, the coaches and sticking to their approach successful or no.

[Anonymous]

I thought the town hall contained a lot of information. My experience has been a good one, my player has played on the Red team multiple times and has enjoyed the group practices. My other player’s team (red, if it matters) already gave a round of refunds, perhaps the manager was just more proactive? We have excellent coaches on all of our LMVSC teams and appreciate how the coaches are keeping the kids connected.

Also, they did speak to U16-19, as it will be not be the Academy model. They gave several reasons for this during the presentation.

Sometimes if you go in negative, you leave negative...I chose to accept that everyone is doing the best they can.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Several good points made (club affiliation shouldnt matter). My opinion is the academy model as presented by LMVSC wont work at this age group nor if the measure of success is competing. The European model is focused on training at the younger ages and not competition so training as one team enhances everyone's skills with the understanding training with older age groups can challenge those higher skilled players. The US model is focused on competition and the success is based on wins/losses - we all know this because after the game we analyze what coaches/clubs are doing wrong, we need more space, we arent passing etc. So saying you are going to use a pool of players and not get results I feel is going to fail for a number of years until the model can be accepted. Also another good point is how do you challenge the red team/star players if they are in a pool of not as or lower skilled players? I have heard from LMVSC that they will offer to play up training/opportunities and it has never happened in our age group. I personally am not confident in this model and after giving LMVSC a year to dust itself off after the LMVSC/SYC shake up plan to not renew, look elsewhere or do Rec for one season. Shoot we may not even be competing in the fall who knows. I applaud LMVSC for the townhall, the coaches and sticking to their approach successful or no.

What age group are you referring to that won't work for you? I think it would have been better if done only up to U13. Maybe they could have expanded on why they decided to include U14 & U15 in this model.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I thought the town hall contained a lot of information. My experience has been a good one, my player has played on the Red team multiple times and has enjoyed the group practices. My other player’s team (red, if it matters) already gave a round of refunds, perhaps the manager was just more proactive? We have excellent coaches on all of our LMVSC teams and appreciate how the coaches are keeping the kids connected.

Also, they did speak to U16-19, as it will be not be the Academy model. They gave several reasons for this during the presentation.

Sometimes if you go in negative, you leave negative...I chose to accept that everyone is doing the best they can.

It contained plenty of information, except when we'll see refund or how much. I'm glad your experience has been good, I want to know why DD's experience will be good. I'm not convinced.

[Anonymous]

Yes agree that the refund question was asked multiple times. That seemed to be top of mind of everyone

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I thought the town hall contained a lot of information. My experience has been a good one, my player has played on the Red team multiple times and has enjoyed the group practices. My other player’s team (red, if it matters) already gave a round of refunds, perhaps the manager was just more proactive? We have excellent coaches on all of our LMVSC teams and appreciate how the coaches are keeping the kids connected.

Also, they did speak to U16-19, as it will be not be the Academy model. They gave several reasons for this during the presentation.

Sometimes if you go in negative, you leave negative...I chose to accept that everyone is doing the best they can.

It contained plenty of information, except when we'll see refund or how much. I'm glad your experience has been good, I want to know why DD's experience will be good. I'm not convinced.

I think your DD will have a good time, I get it change is hard. My experience has also been good so far. No club is perfect and maybe the change of direction might be good for this particular club.

[Anonymous]

Let's be honest, the only reason they will be doing Academy style is because they don't have enough players. PEP training was a mess, how's this different? The Club and Coaches as usual only focus on Red team players, nothing has changed there.

[Anonymous]

Change is hard, but it doesn't have to be. Plenty of options of competitive teams around. As previously said, BRYC has ECNL and there's always Alexandria, SYC, and Arlington. I don't believe in 'hey try it for a year', either. The other models ran by previously-named clubs produced plenty of competitive, top teams and I know DS will benefit from bigger age group anyways.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Let's be honest, the only reason they will be doing Academy style is because they don't have enough players. PEP training was a mess, how's this different? The Club and Coaches as usual only focus on Red team players, nothing has changed there.

Only similarity between this and PEP is that the kids from the same age group will be on the same field at the same time. It was a mess and in my opinion because they had way too many different age groups on the field at the same time. Sessions were also smaller so they tried to cram as much as possible into that time.

My friends at Alexandria said they do academy style and it seems to work for them as the age groups that started in the academy are now starting to show results. I think "red" players will still train with "red" players and same for "white" with the occasional movement based on how players are progressing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Let's be honest, the only reason they will be doing Academy style is because they don't have enough players. PEP training was a mess, how's this different? The Club and Coaches as usual only focus on Red team players, nothing has changed there.

Only similarity between this and PEP is that the kids from the same age group will be on the same field at the same time. It was a mess and in my opinion because they had way too many different age groups on the field at the same time. Sessions were also smaller so they tried to cram as much as possible into that time.

My friends at Alexandria said they do academy style and it seems to work for them as the age groups that started in the academy are now starting to show results. I think "red" players will still train with "red" players and same for "white" with the occasional movement based on how players are progressing.

The previous model produced top players and teams (State Cups, National League, winning big events, etc). This new proposed model 'might' work but Alexandria has the amount of players to pull it off. And again, if it ends up red still trains with red and white still trains with white, it looks to me like they're lying to white players. And if they do follow through of mixing it up, it just sounds like lesser challenges for red.

I heard last night 'this model works in Europe' and now seeing some posters as above say it works in Alexandria. Well take a look at ourselves, we're not Europeans and this isn't ASA. Just because it worked there doesn't mean it's what's best for us, let alone DS.

[Anonymous]

The academy model promptly ended at SYC after the great SYC/LMVSC DT/Coach swap and has now come full circle to LMVSC.

[Anonymous]

Not the OP, but from the notes I took last night for player development:
- standardization and consistency in training environment (sounds to me either too easy for red or too hard for white)
- fluidity of player movement (no mention of a standard, and since they've said that this season I didn't see much)
- cross-interaction and integration
- establishing player pathway for player to be at the right place and right time (sounds like academy sound will watch white team one time and make a decision based off one game; not very standardized)

[Anonymous]

he previous model produced top players and teams (State Cups, National League, winning big events, etc). This new proposed model 'might' work but Alexandria has the amount of players to pull it off. And again, if it ends up red still trains with red and white still trains with white, it looks to me like they're lying to white players. And if they do follow through of mixing it up, it just sounds like lesser challenges for red.

There's honestly not that huge a difference between Alexandria team levels one level apart. My child has played for them for a long time. Two levels, yes, there is a big difference, and yes, the higher level team would always win more scrimmages between the two - but not every one. There will always be some kids on a team one level up who were on the cusp of being one level down and vice versa. It's fine.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The academy model promptly ended at SYC after the great SYC/LMVSC DT/Coach swap and has now come full circle to LMVSC.

Stop with the SYC—LMVSC nonsense, it is really immature, petty and trivial. (From an Alexandria parent)