Where did McLean go wrong?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Arlington played Mclean earlier this season on the boys side. Arlington won all of the younger age brackets, and tied or lost the older ones.

I wonder how many of the older teams are carry overs from the days when McLean was a DA and had stronger teams, vs now when they are dealing with more competition.

U12: 1-0 (W)
U13: 7-1 (W)
U14: 7-0 (W)
U15: 4-2 (W)
U16: 1-1 (T)
U17: 1-1 (T)
U19: 4-2 (L)

It's also worth noting that the U16 and U17 games were pretty one sided in terms of play - McLean got lucky with the results. When the U16 boys played Arlington the following week in the state cup the result was 4-0 to Arlington .

They played friendlies over the winter too and Arlington won both the U16 and U17 games by large margins as well.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Arlington played Mclean earlier this season on the boys side. Arlington won all of the younger age brackets, and tied or lost the older ones.

I wonder how many of the older teams are carry overs from the days when McLean was a DA and had stronger teams, vs now when they are dealing with more competition.

U12: 1-0 (W)
U13: 7-1 (W)
U14: 7-0 (W)
U15: 4-2 (W)
U16: 1-1 (T)
U17: 1-1 (T)
U19: 4-2 (L)

It's also worth noting that the U16 and U17 games were pretty one sided in terms of play - McLean got lucky with the results. When the U16 boys played Arlington the following week in the state cup the result was 4-0 to Arlington .

And it was 3-1 for the U17 last week-end in the state cup.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:All I know is that FCV, Mclean and, to a lesser extent, Bethesda produce more elite players than the other clubs combined. Do your own research. That is not to say that McLean and FCV develop players from the ground up but once players are at a level and age where they believe that they can make it to the YNT or a top DI program, they usually head to one of the three and of the three, today, McLean is in the best position. FCV has an issue with its league affiliation and Bethesda has lost its ability to keep and attract talent. I know dozens of people who drive by Bethesda to go to MUFC, Pipeline and McLean.

I have watched a few college games over the past 18 month and watched former McLean players do the following:
Alabama soph. score an amazing goal against Tenn
Duke senior lead top-ranked defense
UNC sophomore assist on several amazing goals
Clemson freshman starting on top ranked team and delivering a perfect cross, leading to a goal
Wisconsin freshman start every game on that school's backline
Georgetown freshman start every game and make all-BIG East freshman team.
UVA Junior lead backline

Sorry but that is pretty strong support. No other club in the area has as many players impacting their respective schools.

Great repost from 2015.

Hey genius, this is all from this year except Wisconsin and Georgetown was last year? Also forgot the Florida State freshman header that hit the post and led to a goal.

If it wasn't this year, it could have included like 75 other players but nice try...keep hating

[Anonymous]

is your DD #26 on a mclean roster?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:is your DD #26 on a mclean roster?

25 right now as someone got hurt but we are very happy with our development and college commitment. How is your daughter and team doing?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:is your DD #26 on a mclean roster?

I have spoken to parents of kids who started for other local ECNL clubs but left to play on deep McLean teams because the coach had experience preparing kids for the next level. I don't understand the issue. As they say, "The proof is in the pudding."

FCV, Bethesda, and MUFC are good clubs but McLean is a step above.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Arlington played Mclean earlier this season on the boys side. Arlington won all of the younger age brackets, and tied or lost the older ones.

I wonder how many of the older teams are carry overs from the days when McLean was a DA and had stronger teams, vs now when they are dealing with more competition.

U12: 1-0 (W)
U13: 7-1 (W)
U14: 7-0 (W)
U15: 4-2 (W)
U16: 1-1 (T)
U17: 1-1 (T)
U19: 4-2 (L)

It's also worth noting that the U16 and U17 games were pretty one sided in terms of play - McLean got lucky with the results. When the U16 boys played Arlington the following week in the state cup the result was 4-0 to Arlington .

I agree Arlington U16 is a better team. But for that state cup game, McLean lost one main player in first half and also referee denied two goals from McLean in first half. Arlington dominated on the second half and scored all 4 goals. McLean lost another player due to concussion and had to play with 10 players.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Arlington played Mclean earlier this season on the boys side. Arlington won all of the younger age brackets, and tied or lost the older ones.

I wonder how many of the older teams are carry overs from the days when McLean was a DA and had stronger teams, vs now when they are dealing with more competition.

U12: 1-0 (W)
U13: 7-1 (W)
U14: 7-0 (W)
U15: 4-2 (W)
U16: 1-1 (T)
U17: 1-1 (T)
U19: 4-2 (L)

It's also worth noting that the U16 and U17 games were pretty one sided in terms of play - McLean got lucky with the results. When the U16 boys played Arlington the following week in the state cup the result was 4-0 to Arlington .

I agree Arlington U16 is a better team. But for that state cup game, McLean lost one main player in first half and also referee denied two goals from McLean in first half. Arlington dominated on the second half and scored all 4 goals. McLean lost another player due to concussion and had to play with 10 players.

Sure, another lucky draw was just 4 goals away.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Arlington played Mclean earlier this season on the boys side. Arlington won all of the younger age brackets, and tied or lost the older ones.

I wonder how many of the older teams are carry overs from the days when McLean was a DA and had stronger teams, vs now when they are dealing with more competition.

U12: 1-0 (W)
U13: 7-1 (W)
U14: 7-0 (W)
U15: 4-2 (W)
U16: 1-1 (T)
U17: 1-1 (T)
U19: 4-2 (L)

It's also worth noting that the U16 and U17 games were pretty one sided in terms of play - McLean got lucky with the results. When the U16 boys played Arlington the following week in the state cup the result was 4-0 to Arlington .

I agree Arlington U16 is a better team. But for that state cup game, McLean lost one main player in first half and also referee denied two goals from McLean in first half. Arlington dominated on the second half and scored all 4 goals. McLean lost another player due to concussion and had to play with 10 players.

The player lost due to concussion was close to the end of the game (which is why no subs were left) and Arlington was without multiple starters (including top players) due to injury in both games - so I suspect these types of issue affected both teams pretty much equally.

[Anonymous]

I think this will be McLean's last year with a good recruiting class. It already is not as impressive as previous years. Typically the entire team will either be playing D1 or be going to impressive D3 schools. Next year will be telling. I am guessing 1/2 the team will not be either D1 or (good school) D3 recruits.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think this will be McLean's last year with a good recruiting class. It already is not as impressive as previous years. Typically the entire team will either be playing D1 or be going to impressive D3 schools. Next year will be telling. I am guessing 1/2 the team will not be either D1 or (good school) D3 recruits.

This year is not as impressive as previous years but still the best team by miles and have like 15-20 kids committed. I think this class was affected by the age group change since they had so many kids that played a grade higher.

I don't know what is going to be telling about next year. The pandemic is going to have an effect on recruiting. McLean 04 won't be it's best class but it will still be just as good or better then all the other 04 teams in the area. McLean obviously lost some players in this age group because a previous coach (DD) was hired to sell a dying league. The 04 age group is just average in the area.
McLean 05, 06 and 07s will compare to previous recruiting classes as they already have a bunch of great players and will continue to get better.

[Anonymous]

Current McLean oldest girls team college commitments look very strong. The McLean girls 04 team has also gotten much better than they were last year very quickly (with all the same players). Same thing for the 06 team. Those coaches develop players.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Arlington played Mclean earlier this season on the boys side. Arlington won all of the younger age brackets, and tied or lost the older ones.

I wonder how many of the older teams are carry overs from the days when McLean was a DA and had stronger teams, vs now when they are dealing with more competition.

U12: 1-0 (W)
U13: 7-1 (W)
U14: 7-0 (W)
U15: 4-2 (W)
U16: 1-1 (T)
U17: 1-1 (T)
U19: 4-2 (L)

It's also worth noting that the U16 and U17 games were pretty one sided in terms of play - McLean got lucky with the results. When the U16 boys played Arlington the following week in the state cup the result was 4-0 to Arlington .

They played friendlies over the winter too and Arlington won both the U16 and U17 games by large margins as well.

Too bad Arlington's best players left for DCU or other MLS league team. Who has to stay in ECNL is not that elite anymore.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Arlington played Mclean earlier this season on the boys side. Arlington won all of the younger age brackets, and tied or lost the older ones.

I wonder how many of the older teams are carry overs from the days when McLean was a DA and had stronger teams, vs now when they are dealing with more competition.

U12: 1-0 (W)
U13: 7-1 (W)
U14: 7-0 (W)
U15: 4-2 (W)
U16: 1-1 (T)
U17: 1-1 (T)
U19: 4-2 (L)

It's also worth noting that the U16 and U17 games were pretty one sided in terms of play - McLean got lucky with the results. When the U16 boys played Arlington the following week in the state cup the result was 4-0 to Arlington .

I agree Arlington U16 is a better team. But for that state cup game, McLean lost one main player in first half and also referee denied two goals from McLean in first half. Arlington dominated on the second half and scored all 4 goals. McLean lost another player due to concussion and had to play with 10 players.

Sure, another lucky draw was just 4 goals away.

Home court with referee's help got you a lucky win.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Current McLean oldest girls team college commitments look very strong. The McLean girls 04 team has also gotten much better than they were last year very quickly (with all the same players). Same thing for the 06 team. Those coaches develop players.

Can you provide a list of commitments? I'm curious to see the schools.