LMVSC town hall

[Anonymous]

as an outsider looking in... wow. we've been competing against lee mt vernon for a few years in ccl. i was aware of the leadership change last season, and this year's ccl match was obviously a lot different from years past. but i didn't know it was like this. i'm sure this thread isn't a pure representation of the entire club but it does appear to be emblematic

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We should play NCSL
CCL cost too much
We should merge
I dont think academy is good for our club
We need more players

Go somewhere else!!! If that is how you feel then go spend your money and enjoy the experience somewhere else.
How much more whining is necessary?

LMVSC is not merging
They will play CCL
It will be academy based

Done, take it or leave it, its your choice

Okey dokey

People are taking statements made here by others, some which are members and others which are not but are pretending to be, as if it's being stated by staff or coaches. You want to know how this academy impacts your child and their development, reach out to your coach. You will not get any clear answers on this board, it would be sad to see fellow members leave based on assumptions made here. I reached out to mine and I've spoken to my DS coach. Yes, not having tryouts sucks but it's the same everywhere else. No one has a clear picture of how they'll come out of this situation.

Thanks Admin. but we all know coaches have no saying on what was presented at the meeting. No one is asking about having tryouts, we know they are taking anyone who is willing to stay/pay. Nothing has change since last tryouts.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:as an outsider looking in... wow. we've been competing against lee mt vernon for a few years in ccl. i was aware of the leadership change last season, and this year's ccl match was obviously a lot different from years past. but i didn't know it was like this. i'm sure this thread isn't a pure representation of the entire club but it does appear to be emblematic

It isn't, some disagree which is fine but I feel like the coaches do care about their players and are doing their best to improve the players and teams after the many that left last year. The club or coaches don't have control of that but I have never seen another coach or my two kids coaches not care or not give their best to improve the players and teams. I don't understand what these people are saying about them not caring about community.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:as an outsider looking in... wow. we've been competing against lee mt vernon for a few years in ccl. i was aware of the leadership change last season, and this year's ccl match was obviously a lot different from years past. but i didn't know it was like this. i'm sure this thread isn't a pure representation of the entire club but it does appear to be emblematic

It isn't, some disagree which is fine but I feel like the coaches do care about their players and are doing their best to improve the players and teams after the many that left last year. The club or coaches don't have control of that but I have never seen another coach or my two kids coaches not care or not give their best to improve the players and teams. I don't understand what these people are saying about them not caring about community.

i've read through this all; i don't think the issue is a matter of coaches caring--although it does appear there is some skepticism that academy coaches will fulfill their obligation. but the attitude being conveyed is more of dissatisfaction with the direction of the club: fees, league participation, lack of message regarding the academy system, the academy system itself, etc. and again, we've lost time and time again to lee mt vernon but this year was a complete opposite. besides the game not being competitive, there seemed to be a general lackluster (not from the players).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:as an outsider looking in... wow. we've been competing against lee mt vernon for a few years in ccl. i was aware of the leadership change last season, and this year's ccl match was obviously a lot different from years past. but i didn't know it was like this. i'm sure this thread isn't a pure representation of the entire club but it does appear to be emblematic

It isn't, some disagree which is fine but I feel like the coaches do care about their players and are doing their best to improve the players and teams after the many that left last year. The club or coaches don't have control of that but I have never seen another coach or my two kids coaches not care or not give their best to improve the players and teams. I don't understand what these people are saying about them not caring about community.

No one has said anything negative about the coaches, maybe concerns about the directors but not the coaches, the coaches work with what's presented to them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:as an outsider looking in... wow. we've been competing against lee mt vernon for a few years in ccl. i was aware of the leadership change last season, and this year's ccl match was obviously a lot different from years past. but i didn't know it was like this. i'm sure this thread isn't a pure representation of the entire club but it does appear to be emblematic

It isn't, some disagree which is fine but I feel like the coaches do care about their players and are doing their best to improve the players and teams after the many that left last year. The club or coaches don't have control of that but I have never seen another coach or my two kids coaches not care or not give their best to improve the players and teams. I don't understand what these people are saying about them not caring about community.

i've read through this all; i don't think the issue is a matter of coaches caring--although it does appear there is some skepticism that academy coaches will fulfill their obligation. but the attitude being conveyed is more of dissatisfaction with the direction of the club: fees, league participation, lack of message regarding the academy system, the academy system itself, etc. and again, we've lost time and time again to lee mt vernon but this year was a complete opposite. besides the game not being competitive, there seemed to be a general lackluster (not from the players).

Everyone is going to have a different experience as to how they are impacted and I'm not saying that everything is perfect but they are trying to respond to the big blow they had a year ago when many left and only really had a half year with this group of players. I give them credit for trying something different but don't know if it'll work. Doing the same old thing as they had done before I don't think would have worked. In my opinion I thing they are trying to be more inclusive of all players including those on lower teams and at the same type hoping that the lower level players will improve and maybe push the higher level players to also continue improving. Only time will tell.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:as an outsider looking in... wow. we've been competing against lee mt vernon for a few years in ccl. i was aware of the leadership change last season, and this year's ccl match was obviously a lot different from years past. but i didn't know it was like this. i'm sure this thread isn't a pure representation of the entire club but it does appear to be emblematic

It isn't, some disagree which is fine but I feel like the coaches do care about their players and are doing their best to improve the players and teams after the many that left last year. The club or coaches don't have control of that but I have never seen another coach or my two kids coaches not care or not give their best to improve the players and teams. I don't understand what these people are saying about them not caring about community.

No one has said anything negative about the coaches, maybe concerns about the directors but not the coaches, the coaches work with what's presented to them.

Sorry if I misread but was sort of responding to the "skepticism that coaches will meet their obligations" and the "lackluster not from players". My bad if I read it wrong.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:as an outsider looking in... wow. we've been competing against lee mt vernon for a few years in ccl. i was aware of the leadership change last season, and this year's ccl match was obviously a lot different from years past. but i didn't know it was like this. i'm sure this thread isn't a pure representation of the entire club but it does appear to be emblematic

It isn't, some disagree which is fine but I feel like the coaches do care about their players and are doing their best to improve the players and teams after the many that left last year. The club or coaches don't have control of that but I have never seen another coach or my two kids coaches not care or not give their best to improve the players and teams. I don't understand what these people are saying about them not caring about community.

i've read through this all; i don't think the issue is a matter of coaches caring--although it does appear there is some skepticism that academy coaches will fulfill their obligation. but the attitude being conveyed is more of dissatisfaction with the direction of the club: fees, league participation, lack of message regarding the academy system, the academy system itself, etc. and again, we've lost time and time again to lee mt vernon but this year was a complete opposite. besides the game not being competitive, there seemed to be a general lackluster (not from the players).

Everyone is going to have a different experience as to how they are impacted and I'm not saying that everything is perfect but they are trying to respond to the big blow they had a year ago when many left and only really had a half year with this group of players. I give them credit for trying something different but don't know if it'll work. Doing the same old thing as they had done before I don't think would have worked. In my opinion I thing they are trying to be more inclusive of all players including those on lower teams and at the same type hoping that the lower level players will improve and maybe push the higher level players to also continue improving. Only time will tell.

We won't know. Because the moment TD left, the program already began to change (age group training format). And then came the coaching changes when most players, coaches left. The curriculum stayed the same from that spring, and then COVID. Now, we're getting sweeping changes. But you're right, not everything changed. CCL as our top league where we're not competitive, some of the higher costs for fees.

And btw, to those previous responses of "your DD/DS won't play D1 or pro, stop complaining":
- if not D1/pro, why are we bothering with CCL? we had no problem leaving CCL2 for NCSL, why not leave CCL for NCSL
- why are we doing a 'great European format' if the result won't be 'great European football'

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:as an outsider looking in... wow. we've been competing against lee mt vernon for a few years in ccl. i was aware of the leadership change last season, and this year's ccl match was obviously a lot different from years past. but i didn't know it was like this. i'm sure this thread isn't a pure representation of the entire club but it does appear to be emblematic

It isn't, some disagree which is fine but I feel like the coaches do care about their players and are doing their best to improve the players and teams after the many that left last year. The club or coaches don't have control of that but I have never seen another coach or my two kids coaches not care or not give their best to improve the players and teams. I don't understand what these people are saying about them not caring about community.

i've read through this all; i don't think the issue is a matter of coaches caring--although it does appear there is some skepticism that academy coaches will fulfill their obligation. but the attitude being conveyed is more of dissatisfaction with the direction of the club: fees, league participation, lack of message regarding the academy system, the academy system itself, etc. and again, we've lost time and time again to lee mt vernon but this year was a complete opposite. besides the game not being competitive, there seemed to be a general lackluster (not from the players).

Everyone is going to have a different experience as to how they are impacted and I'm not saying that everything is perfect but they are trying to respond to the big blow they had a year ago when many left and only really had a half year with this group of players. I give them credit for trying something different but don't know if it'll work. Doing the same old thing as they had done before I don't think would have worked. In my opinion I thing they are trying to be more inclusive of all players including those on lower teams and at the same type hoping that the lower level players will improve and maybe push the higher level players to also continue improving. Only time will tell.

We won't know. Because the moment TD left, the program already began to change (age group training format). And then came the coaching changes when most players, coaches left. The curriculum stayed the same from that spring, and then COVID. Now, we're getting sweeping changes. But you're right, not everything changed. CCL as our top league where we're not competitive, some of the higher costs for fees.

And btw, to those previous responses of "your DD/DS won't play D1 or pro, stop complaining":
- if not D1/pro, why are we bothering with CCL? we had no problem leaving CCL2 for NCSL, why not leave CCL for NCSL
- why are we doing a 'great European format' if the result won't be 'great European football'

Sorry I can't respond for those people that stated you're D1, stop complaining. I think everyone's experience is different. I personally am ok with CCL, my kids team's had competitive games. Some age groups did struggle. I'm sure they hope with this format it'll get them back to being competitive at some point, maybe not this year but they hope to see improvement. I want to see progressive improvement in my two kids. I could care less about the "European" system, it has also been tried in US before where it works in some places and not in others.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:as an outsider looking in... wow. we've been competing against lee mt vernon for a few years in ccl. i was aware of the leadership change last season, and this year's ccl match was obviously a lot different from years past. but i didn't know it was like this. i'm sure this thread isn't a pure representation of the entire club but it does appear to be emblematic

It isn't, some disagree which is fine but I feel like the coaches do care about their players and are doing their best to improve the players and teams after the many that left last year. The club or coaches don't have control of that but I have never seen another coach or my two kids coaches not care or not give their best to improve the players and teams. I don't understand what these people are saying about them not caring about community.

i've read through this all; i don't think the issue is a matter of coaches caring--although it does appear there is some skepticism that academy coaches will fulfill their obligation. but the attitude being conveyed is more of dissatisfaction with the direction of the club: fees, league participation, lack of message regarding the academy system, the academy system itself, etc. and again, we've lost time and time again to lee mt vernon but this year was a complete opposite. besides the game not being competitive, there seemed to be a general lackluster (not from the players).

Everyone is going to have a different experience as to how they are impacted and I'm not saying that everything is perfect but they are trying to respond to the big blow they had a year ago when many left and only really had a half year with this group of players. I give them credit for trying something different but don't know if it'll work. Doing the same old thing as they had done before I don't think would have worked. In my opinion I thing they are trying to be more inclusive of all players including those on lower teams and at the same type hoping that the lower level players will improve and maybe push the higher level players to also continue improving. Only time will tell.

We won't know. Because the moment TD left, the program already began to change (age group training format). And then came the coaching changes when most players, coaches left. The curriculum stayed the same from that spring, and then COVID. Now, we're getting sweeping changes. But you're right, not everything changed. CCL as our top league where we're not competitive, some of the higher costs for fees.

And btw, to those previous responses of "your DD/DS won't play D1 or pro, stop complaining":
- if not D1/pro, why are we bothering with CCL? we had no problem leaving CCL2 for NCSL, why not leave CCL for NCSL
- why are we doing a 'great European format' if the result won't be 'great European football'

Sorry I can't respond for those people that stated you're D1, stop complaining. I think everyone's experience is different. I personally am ok with CCL, my kids team's had competitive games. Some age groups did struggle. I'm sure they hope with this format it'll get them back to being competitive at some point, maybe not this year but they hope to see improvement. I want to see progressive improvement in my two kids. I could care less about the "European" system, it has also been tried in US before where it works in some places and not in others.

We have one winning team in CCL; the 07 boys. A handful of teams can be sort of competitive with losing records. The majority of our teams (in CCL) are not competitive with not only a losing record, but basically in range of last place. I'm glad your kid's age group is doing well. The club is not.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:as an outsider looking in... wow. we've been competing against lee mt vernon for a few years in ccl. i was aware of the leadership change last season, and this year's ccl match was obviously a lot different from years past. but i didn't know it was like this. i'm sure this thread isn't a pure representation of the entire club but it does appear to be emblematic

It isn't, some disagree which is fine but I feel like the coaches do care about their players and are doing their best to improve the players and teams after the many that left last year. The club or coaches don't have control of that but I have never seen another coach or my two kids coaches not care or not give their best to improve the players and teams. I don't understand what these people are saying about them not caring about community.

i've read through this all; i don't think the issue is a matter of coaches caring--although it does appear there is some skepticism that academy coaches will fulfill their obligation. but the attitude being conveyed is more of dissatisfaction with the direction of the club: fees, league participation, lack of message regarding the academy system, the academy system itself, etc. and again, we've lost time and time again to lee mt vernon but this year was a complete opposite. besides the game not being competitive, there seemed to be a general lackluster (not from the players).

Everyone is going to have a different experience as to how they are impacted and I'm not saying that everything is perfect but they are trying to respond to the big blow they had a year ago when many left and only really had a half year with this group of players. I give them credit for trying something different but don't know if it'll work. Doing the same old thing as they had done before I don't think would have worked. In my opinion I thing they are trying to be more inclusive of all players including those on lower teams and at the same type hoping that the lower level players will improve and maybe push the higher level players to also continue improving. Only time will tell.

We won't know. Because the moment TD left, the program already began to change (age group training format). And then came the coaching changes when most players, coaches left. The curriculum stayed the same from that spring, and then COVID. Now, we're getting sweeping changes. But you're right, not everything changed. CCL as our top league where we're not competitive, some of the higher costs for fees.

And btw, to those previous responses of "your DD/DS won't play D1 or pro, stop complaining":
- if not D1/pro, why are we bothering with CCL? we had no problem leaving CCL2 for NCSL, why not leave CCL for NCSL
- why are we doing a 'great European format' if the result won't be 'great European football'

Sorry I can't respond for those people that stated you're D1, stop complaining. I think everyone's experience is different. I personally am ok with CCL, my kids team's had competitive games. Some age groups did struggle. I'm sure they hope with this format it'll get them back to being competitive at some point, maybe not this year but they hope to see improvement. I want to see progressive improvement in my two kids. I could care less about the "European" system, it has also been tried in US before where it works in some places and not in others.

We have one winning team in CCL; the 07 boys. A handful of teams can be sort of competitive with losing records. The majority of our teams (in CCL) are not competitive with not only a losing record, but basically in range of last place. I'm glad your kid's age group is doing well. The club is not.

The problem is that if the club leaves CCL they won't be able to get back in. Even though I don't have any say, I think the club should stay another year and if still not very competitive after that look to base themselves in NCSL and the more competitive teams in something like EDP. At least give it a chance to build back up.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:as an outsider looking in... wow. we've been competing against lee mt vernon for a few years in ccl. i was aware of the leadership change last season, and this year's ccl match was obviously a lot different from years past. but i didn't know it was like this. i'm sure this thread isn't a pure representation of the entire club but it does appear to be emblematic

It isn't, some disagree which is fine but I feel like the coaches do care about their players and are doing their best to improve the players and teams after the many that left last year. The club or coaches don't have control of that but I have never seen another coach or my two kids coaches not care or not give their best to improve the players and teams. I don't understand what these people are saying about them not caring about community.

i've read through this all; i don't think the issue is a matter of coaches caring--although it does appear there is some skepticism that academy coaches will fulfill their obligation. but the attitude being conveyed is more of dissatisfaction with the direction of the club: fees, league participation, lack of message regarding the academy system, the academy system itself, etc. and again, we've lost time and time again to lee mt vernon but this year was a complete opposite. besides the game not being competitive, there seemed to be a general lackluster (not from the players).

Everyone is going to have a different experience as to how they are impacted and I'm not saying that everything is perfect but they are trying to respond to the big blow they had a year ago when many left and only really had a half year with this group of players. I give them credit for trying something different but don't know if it'll work. Doing the same old thing as they had done before I don't think would have worked. In my opinion I thing they are trying to be more inclusive of all players including those on lower teams and at the same type hoping that the lower level players will improve and maybe push the higher level players to also continue improving. Only time will tell.

We won't know. Because the moment TD left, the program already began to change (age group training format). And then came the coaching changes when most players, coaches left. The curriculum stayed the same from that spring, and then COVID. Now, we're getting sweeping changes. But you're right, not everything changed. CCL as our top league where we're not competitive, some of the higher costs for fees.

And btw, to those previous responses of "your DD/DS won't play D1 or pro, stop complaining":
- if not D1/pro, why are we bothering with CCL? we had no problem leaving CCL2 for NCSL, why not leave CCL for NCSL
- why are we doing a 'great European format' if the result won't be 'great European football'

Sorry I can't respond for those people that stated you're D1, stop complaining. I think everyone's experience is different. I personally am ok with CCL, my kids team's had competitive games. Some age groups did struggle. I'm sure they hope with this format it'll get them back to being competitive at some point, maybe not this year but they hope to see improvement. I want to see progressive improvement in my two kids. I could care less about the "European" system, it has also been tried in US before where it works in some places and not in others.

We have one winning team in CCL; the 07 boys. A handful of teams can be sort of competitive with losing records. The majority of our teams (in CCL) are not competitive with not only a losing record, but basically in range of last place. I'm glad your kid's age group is doing well. The club is not.

The problem is that if the club leaves CCL they won't be able to get back in. Even though I don't have any say, I think the club should stay another year and if still not very competitive after that look to base themselves in NCSL and the more competitive teams in something like EDP. At least give it a chance to build back up.

The problem is that if the club leaves CCL they won't be able to get back in - Is this really true? Sounds like CCL would welcome anyone willing to pay with all these other leagues popping up.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:as an outsider looking in... wow. we've been competing against lee mt vernon for a few years in ccl. i was aware of the leadership change last season, and this year's ccl match was obviously a lot different from years past. but i didn't know it was like this. i'm sure this thread isn't a pure representation of the entire club but it does appear to be emblematic

It isn't, some disagree which is fine but I feel like the coaches do care about their players and are doing their best to improve the players and teams after the many that left last year. The club or coaches don't have control of that but I have never seen another coach or my two kids coaches not care or not give their best to improve the players and teams. I don't understand what these people are saying about them not caring about community.

I will admit, I can't speak for everybody. I'm not sure about 'emblematic'; however: we the paying members didn't ask for such a big change to the club. It's been what, almost 18 months now since leadership changed and now I'm being told to give it more time? Why? In all this time, club hasn't been around my child's team. I've seen this academy in use during PAT. Most red players left; how is that going to bring up the abilities of white and blue to replace red? It's not, and that has shown this year.

If the club wants time, if you other parents want time, let's play CCL2 or NCSL. Still competitive. Still good teams. MUCH LESS TRAVEL. And if you don't, YOU can leave. But DS isn't going to develop without game development (something that the club said was most important). Can't really develop after a 4 hour drive to Roanoke and another shutout loss where we can't hold onto the ball. We're only trying to stay in CCL because we're trying to bring in other players--does that sound very 'community-based' to you?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:as an outsider looking in... wow. we've been competing against lee mt vernon for a few years in ccl. i was aware of the leadership change last season, and this year's ccl match was obviously a lot different from years past. but i didn't know it was like this. i'm sure this thread isn't a pure representation of the entire club but it does appear to be emblematic

It isn't, some disagree which is fine but I feel like the coaches do care about their players and are doing their best to improve the players and teams after the many that left last year. The club or coaches don't have control of that but I have never seen another coach or my two kids coaches not care or not give their best to improve the players and teams. I don't understand what these people are saying about them not caring about community.

i've read through this all; i don't think the issue is a matter of coaches caring--although it does appear there is some skepticism that academy coaches will fulfill their obligation. but the attitude being conveyed is more of dissatisfaction with the direction of the club: fees, league participation, lack of message regarding the academy system, the academy system itself, etc. and again, we've lost time and time again to lee mt vernon but this year was a complete opposite. besides the game not being competitive, there seemed to be a general lackluster (not from the players).

Everyone is going to have a different experience as to how they are impacted and I'm not saying that everything is perfect but they are trying to respond to the big blow they had a year ago when many left and only really had a half year with this group of players. I give them credit for trying something different but don't know if it'll work. Doing the same old thing as they had done before I don't think would have worked. In my opinion I thing they are trying to be more inclusive of all players including those on lower teams and at the same type hoping that the lower level players will improve and maybe push the higher level players to also continue improving. Only time will tell.

We won't know. Because the moment TD left, the program already began to change (age group training format). And then came the coaching changes when most players, coaches left. The curriculum stayed the same from that spring, and then COVID. Now, we're getting sweeping changes. But you're right, not everything changed. CCL as our top league where we're not competitive, some of the higher costs for fees.

And btw, to those previous responses of "your DD/DS won't play D1 or pro, stop complaining":
- if not D1/pro, why are we bothering with CCL? we had no problem leaving CCL2 for NCSL, why not leave CCL for NCSL
- why are we doing a 'great European format' if the result won't be 'great European football'

Sorry I can't respond for those people that stated you're D1, stop complaining. I think everyone's experience is different. I personally am ok with CCL, my kids team's had competitive games. Some age groups did struggle. I'm sure they hope with this format it'll get them back to being competitive at some point, maybe not this year but they hope to see improvement. I want to see progressive improvement in my two kids. I could care less about the "European" system, it has also been tried in US before where it works in some places and not in others.

We have one winning team in CCL; the 07 boys. A handful of teams can be sort of competitive with losing records. The majority of our teams (in CCL) are not competitive with not only a losing record, but basically in range of last place. I'm glad your kid's age group is doing well. The club is not.

The problem is that if the club leaves CCL they won't be able to get back in. Even though I don't have any say, I think the club should stay another year and if still not very competitive after that look to base themselves in NCSL and the more competitive teams in something like EDP. At least give it a chance to build back up.

The problem is that if the club leaves CCL they won't be able to get back in - Is this really true? Sounds like CCL would welcome anyone willing to pay with all these other leagues popping up.

IT IS NOT TRUE. And if we couldn't get back in CCL, guess what? That means you didn't belong in there to begin with.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:as an outsider looking in... wow. we've been competing against lee mt vernon for a few years in ccl. i was aware of the leadership change last season, and this year's ccl match was obviously a lot different from years past. but i didn't know it was like this. i'm sure this thread isn't a pure representation of the entire club but it does appear to be emblematic

It isn't, some disagree which is fine but I feel like the coaches do care about their players and are doing their best to improve the players and teams after the many that left last year. The club or coaches don't have control of that but I have never seen another coach or my two kids coaches not care or not give their best to improve the players and teams. I don't understand what these people are saying about them not caring about community.

i've read through this all; i don't think the issue is a matter of coaches caring--although it does appear there is some skepticism that academy coaches will fulfill their obligation. but the attitude being conveyed is more of dissatisfaction with the direction of the club: fees, league participation, lack of message regarding the academy system, the academy system itself, etc. and again, we've lost time and time again to lee mt vernon but this year was a complete opposite. besides the game not being competitive, there seemed to be a general lackluster (not from the players).

Everyone is going to have a different experience as to how they are impacted and I'm not saying that everything is perfect but they are trying to respond to the big blow they had a year ago when many left and only really had a half year with this group of players. I give them credit for trying something different but don't know if it'll work. Doing the same old thing as they had done before I don't think would have worked. In my opinion I thing they are trying to be more inclusive of all players including those on lower teams and at the same type hoping that the lower level players will improve and maybe push the higher level players to also continue improving. Only time will tell.

We won't know. Because the moment TD left, the program already began to change (age group training format). And then came the coaching changes when most players, coaches left. The curriculum stayed the same from that spring, and then COVID. Now, we're getting sweeping changes. But you're right, not everything changed. CCL as our top league where we're not competitive, some of the higher costs for fees.

And btw, to those previous responses of "your DD/DS won't play D1 or pro, stop complaining":
- if not D1/pro, why are we bothering with CCL? we had no problem leaving CCL2 for NCSL, why not leave CCL for NCSL
- why are we doing a 'great European format' if the result won't be 'great European football'

Sorry I can't respond for those people that stated you're D1, stop complaining. I think everyone's experience is different. I personally am ok with CCL, my kids team's had competitive games. Some age groups did struggle. I'm sure they hope with this format it'll get them back to being competitive at some point, maybe not this year but they hope to see improvement. I want to see progressive improvement in my two kids. I could care less about the "European" system, it has also been tried in US before where it works in some places and not in others.

We have one winning team in CCL; the 07 boys. A handful of teams can be sort of competitive with losing records. The majority of our teams (in CCL) are not competitive with not only a losing record, but basically in range of last place. I'm glad your kid's age group is doing well. The club is not.

The problem is that if the club leaves CCL they won't be able to get back in. Even though I don't have any say, I think the club should stay another year and if still not very competitive after that look to base themselves in NCSL and the more competitive teams in something like EDP. At least give it a chance to build back up.

What you're saying isn't true. Yes, we'd have to reapply. But at this point, we're just grasping to straws to stay in. Look at the table. I don't like admitting we're no longer what we once were, but I'm also not going to lie to myself and pretend that we are.