ECNL forcing Brave & Union Partnership

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Heavily influenced by behind the wall negotiations and pressures by parents (mcl) Really sucky process.

I no don’t think so.

I can’t speak to the 2007/2008/2009 girls but here is what we are seeing for the younger groups:

2010s — hard to know but the union team is exceptional for that age/year. Hopefully this team stays strong and starters don’t drift to other clubs.

For the 2011s girls it seemed to be entirely skills/position/player based. Quotas for each team were not part of the equation. There may be more past union players on the final list but it looks like they moved fairly far into both club’s current rosters to build this team. At least three high quality union players are going elsewhere and some of them were clear starters in this year’s team. Only one external player know to have received an offer.

Feels like 2012s were a complete selection process from scratch and very much determined at the ID sessions. Hard to make these kinds of decisions with so many available and skilled young players.

Unfortunately, this is part of the process and parents will do what is best for their kid. For the kids that are leaving that do not have offers in hand, we wish them well and best of luck to them. For the ones that have offers and going elsewhere (including DB's team @ NVA), the grass is not always greener and we wish them well too. There will always be new equivalent or better talent to take their place.

You are wrong about the 2012s too.

Not PP but which part? "There will always be new equivalent or better talent to take their place?"
Some top players are going to SYC so it could be true if those folks want to move in the future. There also are always head-scratcher selections that presumably will be sorted out and corrected in future years and 2012 is no different. Still a talented group and will be competitive.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Indeed, brave girls were asked to players in completely different positions, McLean players kept same positions as usual. Coincidence?

We experienced this last year. This is something CW will often ask players to do at ID sessions. I don’t think it was a set up — some of the union players were also asked to do so. The ones with offers already in hand did play their normal positions.

This is done to look for intuitive understanding of other roles on field. Common to see this asked particularly for players where there is an interest in order to understand their capacity. Not a set up for failure but method for a deeper look.

A player that is versatile and can play different positions is more valuable. My teens have played every position on the field and have no problem if coach needs to fill them in somewhere else.

Perfectly fine on a practice set up and a later ages. Here after a merge, players were there to show their best not otherwise. Really, some people here have no clue or have never played the sport.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Indeed, brave girls were asked to players in completely different positions, McLean players kept same positions as usual. Coincidence?

We experienced this last year. This is something CW will often ask players to do at ID sessions. I don’t think it was a set up — some of the union players were also asked to do so. The ones with offers already in hand did play their normal positions.

This is done to look for intuitive understanding of other roles on field. Common to see this asked particularly for players where there is an interest in order to understand their capacity. Not a set up for failure but method for a deeper look.

A player that is versatile and can play different positions is more valuable. My teens have played every position on the field and have no problem if coach needs to fill them in somewhere else.

Perfectly fine on a practice set up and a later ages. Here after a merge, players were there to show their best not otherwise. Really, some people here have no clue or have never played the sport.

-Tactical Dad

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Heavily influenced by behind the wall negotiations and pressures by parents (mcl) Really sucky process.

I no don’t think so.

I can’t speak to the 2007/2008/2009 girls but here is what we are seeing for the younger groups:

2010s — hard to know but the union team is exceptional for that age/year. Hopefully this team stays strong and starters don’t drift to other clubs.

For the 2011s girls it seemed to be entirely skills/position/player based. Quotas for each team were not part of the equation. There may be more past union players on the final list but it looks like they moved fairly far into both club’s current rosters to build this team. At least three high quality union players are going elsewhere and some of them were clear starters in this year’s team. Only one external player know to have received an offer.

Feels like 2012s were a complete selection process from scratch and very much determined at the ID sessions. Hard to make these kinds of decisions with so many available and skilled young players.

Unfortunately, this is part of the process and parents will do what is best for their kid. For the kids that are leaving that do not have offers in hand, we wish them well and best of luck to them. For the ones that have offers and going elsewhere (including DB's team @ NVA), the grass is not always greener and we wish them well too. There will always be new equivalent or better talent to take their place.

You are wrong about the 2012s too.

Not PP but which part? "There will always be new equivalent or better talent to take their place?"
Some top players are going to SYC so it could be true if those folks want to move in the future. There also are always head-scratcher selections that presumably will be sorted out and corrected in future years and 2012 is no different. Still a talented group and will be competitive.

The three best McLean 2012s are gone, continuing the parade of top talent leaving that team.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Oh. Trust me, top players have options always. No way will stay on this shit show and deal with the ones like you. Sorry to inform you but, McLean was not creating talent, see the 2010 as for example, best players were from SYC. Same in 2011. Enjoy next season

SYC didn't create the 2010 talent. Those girls had a lot of raw talent to start with. MYS was the one that coached them to a Jefferson Cup win.

[Anonymous]

206 pages and counting. Entertaining!

Choice. You and your kid (the kid, really...us parents are along for the journey) have a choice. Your kid can trial at other clubs and make the team there. If your kid does not have that choice or can't make another team, then there's really no room to be upset with the process everyone is up in arms about. It sucks, yes, but it is what it is. Not trying to hurl grenades, but that's where some of us are in all of this.

And as far as college prospects go...sure, some clubs have better pathways than others. Chalk it up to club coach/college coach relationships. But NO family should rely on club coaches to do their recruiting bid for them. That's something you have to own with your kid, with support from a coach. Period. Take the initiative. Otherwise, what the heck are we teaching our kids? How ironic it is to get pissed at tryout favoritism and politics, but be cool with leaning on a coach who knows someone, in hopes of gaining an edge in a process?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Indeed, brave girls were asked to players in completely different positions, McLean players kept same positions as usual. Coincidence?

We experienced this last year. This is something CW will often ask players to do at ID sessions. I don’t think it was a set up — some of the union players were also asked to do so. The ones with offers already in hand did play their normal positions.

This is done to look for intuitive understanding of other roles on field. Common to see this asked particularly for players where there is an interest in order to understand their capacity. Not a set up for failure but method for a deeper look.

A player that is versatile and can play different positions is more valuable. My teens have played every position on the field and have no problem if coach needs to fill them in somewhere else.

Perfectly fine on a practice set up and a later ages. Here after a merge, players were there to show their best not otherwise. Really, some people here have no clue or have never played the sport.

DP. any kid old enough to play ECNL should have the versatility to play any field position well. It actually sounds like you didn't play competitively.

[Anonymous]

If you can play you can play, coaches are not perfect but they know what to look for

[Anonymous]

The three best McLean 2012s are gone, continuing the parade of top talent leaving that team.

“Best” is subjective…

[Anonymous]

If you got offers from more than one club and only went to one ID then “Best” is just right

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Indeed, brave girls were asked to players in completely different positions, McLean players kept same positions as usual. Coincidence?

We experienced this last year. This is something CW will often ask players to do at ID sessions. I don’t think it was a set up — some of the union players were also asked to do so. The ones with offers already in hand did play their normal positions.

This is done to look for intuitive understanding of other roles on field. Common to see this asked particularly for players where there is an interest in order to understand their capacity. Not a set up for failure but method for a deeper look.

A player that is versatile and can play different positions is more valuable. My teens have played every position on the field and have no problem if coach needs to fill them in somewhere else.

Perfectly fine on a practice set up and a later ages. Here after a merge, players were there to show their best not otherwise. Really, some people here have no clue or have never played the sport.

DP. any kid old enough to play ECNL should have the versatility to play any field position well. It actually sounds like you didn't play competitively.

haha, I did, I would love to show you how it is done. There are levels. They are from 2011 (not old enough); again, no clue! Keep watching baseball.

[Anonymous]

Unfortunately, this is part of the process and parents will do what is best for their kid. For the kids that are leaving that do not have offers in hand, we wish them well and best of luck to them. For the ones that have offers and going elsewhere (including DB's team @ NVA), the grass is not always greener and we wish them well too. There will always be new equivalent or better talent to take their place.


Would love for the person that posted this to manup and come out from behind your anonymous post lol!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Heavily influenced by behind the wall negotiations and pressures by parents (mcl) Really sucky process.

I no don’t think so.

I can’t speak to the 2007/2008/2009 girls but here is what we are seeing for the younger groups:

2010s — hard to know but the union team is exceptional for that age/year. Hopefully this team stays strong and starters don’t drift to other clubs.

For the 2011s girls it seemed to be entirely skills/position/player based. Quotas for each team were not part of the equation. There may be more past union players on the final list but it looks like they moved fairly far into both club’s current rosters to build this team. At least three high quality union players are going elsewhere and some of them were clear starters in this year’s team. Only one external player know to have received an offer.

Feels like 2012s were a complete selection process from scratch and very much determined at the ID sessions. Hard to make these kinds of decisions with so many available and skilled young players.

Where are the 3 high quality 2011G players going?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:206 pages and counting. Entertaining!

Choice. You and your kid (the kid, really...us parents are along for the journey) have a choice. Your kid can trial at other clubs and make the team there. If your kid does not have that choice or can't make another team, then there's really no room to be upset with the process everyone is up in arms about. It sucks, yes, but it is what it is. Not trying to hurl grenades, but that's where some of us are in all of this.

And as far as college prospects go...sure, some clubs have better pathways than others. Chalk it up to club coach/college coach relationships. But NO family should rely on club coaches to do their recruiting bid for them. That's something you have to own with your kid, with support from a coach. Period. Take the initiative. Otherwise, what the heck are we teaching our kids? How ironic it is to get pissed at tryout favoritism and politics, but be cool with leaning on a coach who knows someone, in hopes of gaining an edge in a process?

Well said.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Indeed, brave girls were asked to players in completely different positions, McLean players kept same positions as usual. Coincidence?

We experienced this last year. This is something CW will often ask players to do at ID sessions. I don’t think it was a set up — some of the union players were also asked to do so. The ones with offers already in hand did play their normal positions.

This is done to look for intuitive understanding of other roles on field. Common to see this asked particularly for players where there is an interest in order to understand their capacity. Not a set up for failure but method for a deeper look.

A player that is versatile and can play different positions is more valuable. My teens have played every position on the field and have no problem if coach needs to fill them in somewhere else.

Perfectly fine on a practice set up and a later ages. Here after a merge, players were there to show their best not otherwise. Really, some people here have no clue or have never played the sport.

DP. any kid old enough to play ECNL should have the versatility to play any field position well. It actually sounds like you didn't play competitively.

haha, I did, I would love to show you how it is done. There are levels. They are from 2011 (not old enough); again, no clue! Keep watching baseball.

You're an idiot. No one cares about your aging soccer skills. Go coach a team and you can run your tryouts however you want. The coaches at the ID sessions from Union and Brave know these girls. They've tried out together the past few years and they've played with or against each other for just as long. They've seen their improvements over the past year or two. They know who is working outside of practice and who isn't. ID sessions are a chance for kids to show interest, compatibility, and little more. They're not combing the country for the next great music icon, they're looking for the 18-20 kids that they've seen for years that want to play for them and fill a need.