which club will leave ECNL next

Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:So, locally, Bethesda is grandfathered, but most are not? Arlington, VDA, Pipeline, Richmond United…all are not, is that right?


VDA will be an interesting one, there is massive hole not having an MLSN club within PWC. How that happens will be another story, maybe PWSI breaks off on their own.
the relationship between vda and rev is interesting for this reason. Could a club purchase the best of both worlds and be grandfathered in?
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:So, locally, Bethesda is grandfathered, but most are not? Arlington, VDA, Pipeline, Richmond United…all are not, is that right?


VDA will be an interesting one, there is massive hole not having an MLSN club within PWC. How that happens will be another story, maybe PWSI breaks off on their own.
the relationship between vda and rev is interesting for this reason. Could a club purchase the best of both worlds and be grandfathered in?


Not gonna happen too many egos involved
Anonymous
Everyone keeps forgetting that a lot of the Directors have roles within US Club and/or ECNL programming. They aren’t taking the clubs out as they then lose those roles. MLS Next won’t have the same opportunity for them.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:So, locally, Bethesda is grandfathered, but most are not? Arlington, VDA, Pipeline, Richmond United…all are not, is that right?


VDA will be an interesting one, there is massive hole not having an MLSN club within PWC. How that happens will be another story, maybe PWSI breaks off on their own.
the relationship between vda and rev is interesting for this reason. Could a club purchase the best of both worlds and be grandfathered in?


Not gonna happen too many egos involved


It's not even egos it makes zero sense for either club. Their relationship is purely field space for tournaments. I'm not sure what either club would get out of a joint venture other than making players drive farther and farther for practices between Loudoun and PW fields. I'll drive Fredericksburg to the vda fields just fine and I can put up with driving to VSA Fields. Many of us have zero interest in driving out to Leesburg and I'm sure Leesburg families don't want to come out to us either.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:Everyone keeps forgetting that a lot of the Directors have roles within US Club and/or ECNL programming. They aren’t taking the clubs out as they then lose those roles. MLS Next won’t have the same opportunity for them.

First, club owners make the decision to switch from one league to another not directors or coaches. Although, club owners might make the decision with coach and director feedback.

Second, MLSN and GA are likely aware of any coaches or directors that are "juiced in" at US Club. They know that getting clubs to switch might involve providing something equivalent to make the deal work.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:So, locally, Bethesda is grandfathered, but most are not? Arlington, VDA, Pipeline, Richmond United…all are not, is that right?


VDA will be an interesting one, there is massive hole not having an MLSN club within PWC. How that happens will be another story, maybe PWSI breaks off on their own.
the relationship between vda and rev is interesting for this reason. Could a club purchase the best of both worlds and be grandfathered in?


Not gonna happen too many egos involved


It's not even egos it makes zero sense for either club. Their relationship is purely field space for tournaments. I'm not sure what either club would get out of a joint venture other than making players drive farther and farther for practices between Loudoun and PW fields. I'll drive Fredericksburg to the vda fields just fine and I can put up with driving to VSA Fields. Many of us have zero interest in driving out to Leesburg and I'm sure Leesburg families don't want to come out to us either.
when have these clubs ever gave a crap about what we want lol. Its next player up if we cant make the commute. Not disagreeing but it will really come down to are the boys leaving in mass for mlsn and heavier on the balance sheet.
Anonymous
Do you think ECNL would take a club if the club offered to leave MLS on the boys side if they took both the boys and girls to ECNL? or is ECNL not as worried on the boys side as some posters are saying? To me, ECNL is only worried about the girls side.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:Do you think ECNL would take a club if the club offered to leave MLS on the boys side if they took both the boys and girls to ECNL? or is ECNL not as worried on the boys side as some posters are saying? To me, ECNL is only worried about the girls side.

I have a g2016 that started last year and a g2010 that started when she was 5. Because my oldest stopped playing in combined boys+girls tournaments 5 years ago i havent seen whats hapoening with the boys in a while. However with my 2016, she just started playing in combined tournaments again I get to see first hand all the changes the different leagues have caused.

The first and most dramatic thing I noticed was that clubs with MLSN had 4-6 youngers boys teams per age group. Clubs with boys ECNL had 1 and maybe 2 youngers teams. It was not like this 5 years ago. Back then DA clubs got all the boys but even with DA the number of younger teams wasnt as dramatic as with MLSN clubs now.

For girls 5 years ago DA + ECNL were fighting the same way GA + ECNL fight today. So nothing has really changed. Recently it seems like GA is getting better. Girls ECNL clubs dont really pull more youngers teams than any other league clubs. I think this is because with girls the top teams seem to be set at earlier ages.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:Do you think ECNL would take a club if the club offered to leave MLS on the boys side if they took both the boys and girls to ECNL? or is ECNL not as worried on the boys side as some posters are saying? To me, ECNL is only worried about the girls side.

Currently...

Clubs want MLSN. GA is OK but its not clubs first choice.

Clubs want girls ECNL. Boys ECNL is OK but its not clubs first choice.

As long as MLS + MLSN are connected the MLSN+GA combo will continue to get better and better over time. GA is almost identical to girls ECNL from a league and events perspective. Over time clubs will realize that they can make the same amount of money with GA as they can with girls ECNL and a lot more money with MLSN than boys ECNL.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:Do you think ECNL would take a club if the club offered to leave MLS on the boys side if they took both the boys and girls to ECNL? or is ECNL not as worried on the boys side as some posters are saying? To me, ECNL is only worried about the girls side.

Currently...

Clubs want MLSN. GA is OK but its not clubs first choice.

Clubs want girls ECNL. Boys ECNL is OK but its not clubs first choice.

As long as MLS + MLSN are connected the MLSN+GA combo will continue to get better and better over time. GA is almost identical to girls ECNL from a league and events perspective. Over time clubs will realize that they can make the same amount of money with GA as they can with girls ECNL and a lot more money with MLSN than boys ECNL.


+100000000000000
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:Do you think ECNL would take a club if the club offered to leave MLS on the boys side if they took both the boys and girls to ECNL? or is ECNL not as worried on the boys side as some posters are saying? To me, ECNL is only worried about the girls side.

Currently...

Clubs want MLSN. GA is OK but its not clubs first choice.

Clubs want girls ECNL. Boys ECNL is OK but its not clubs first choice.

As long as MLS + MLSN are connected the MLSN+GA combo will continue to get better and better over time. GA is almost identical to girls ECNL from a league and events perspective. Over time clubs will realize that they can make the same amount of money with GA as they can with girls ECNL and a lot more money with MLSN than boys ECNL.


Way to dream GA booster. No parent is willing to sacrifice their player on your 3 year bet with GA. ECNL is the best girls league and will be for another 3 years minimum. The short answer to the question is …I suspect ECNL would open up ECNL for girls for a club if a boys team left MLSN for ECNL. This is how Arlington got ECNL girls. It’s a business decision and that is probably a good one for them —-assuming the GA club is mid and not awful

Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:Do you think ECNL would take a club if the club offered to leave MLS on the boys side if they took both the boys and girls to ECNL? or is ECNL not as worried on the boys side as some posters are saying? To me, ECNL is only worried about the girls side.

Currently...

Clubs want MLSN. GA is OK but its not clubs first choice.

Clubs want girls ECNL. Boys ECNL is OK but its not clubs first choice.

As long as MLS + MLSN are connected the MLSN+GA combo will continue to get better and better over time. GA is almost identical to girls ECNL from a league and events perspective. Over time clubs will realize that they can make the same amount of money with GA as they can with girls ECNL and a lot more money with MLSN than boys ECNL.


So my kids have played recently for both GA and ECNL. I would say the coaching is about the equal. I would say that ECNL has a deeper bench and perhaps better level of a few top line players. The biggest difference I see between ECNL and GA is the number of coaches who show up for ECNL events. It is not even close. We have seen upwards of 150 coaches on the sidelines in North Carolina at one of our games in the last 12 months. We have seen more on average 30-60 coaches for ECNL. Sometimes we are lucky to see 20 coaches for GA and when we do it is more for D2 or D3. When we have gone to college ID sessions out of interest from coaches ECNL is way more "valuable" a commodity than GA. This may seem like a homer parent perspective, but given that our ECNL National experience is more recent I get why people say that ECNL has an edge on GA. Furthermore, you have to consider whether you are a person who is coming from a boy or girl perspective. I just don't see GA offering the same benefits as ECNL for girls. I can understand how a parent of a boy might see this differently. Bottom line is people reading this board need to consider whether they know if the poster is talking about a girl or boy situation.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:Do you think ECNL would take a club if the club offered to leave MLS on the boys side if they took both the boys and girls to ECNL? or is ECNL not as worried on the boys side as some posters are saying? To me, ECNL is only worried about the girls side.

Currently...

Clubs want MLSN. GA is OK but its not clubs first choice.

Clubs want girls ECNL. Boys ECNL is OK but its not clubs first choice.

As long as MLS + MLSN are connected the MLSN+GA combo will continue to get better and better over time. GA is almost identical to girls ECNL from a league and events perspective. Over time clubs will realize that they can make the same amount of money with GA as they can with girls ECNL and a lot more money with MLSN than boys ECNL.


Way to dream GA booster. No parent is willing to sacrifice their player on your 3 year bet with GA. ECNL is the best girls league and will be for another 3 years minimum. The short answer to the question is …I suspect ECNL would open up ECNL for girls for a club if a boys team left MLSN for ECNL. This is how Arlington got ECNL girls. It’s a business decision and that is probably a good one for them —-assuming the GA club is mid and not awful


Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:Do you think ECNL would take a club if the club offered to leave MLS on the boys side if they took both the boys and girls to ECNL? or is ECNL not as worried on the boys side as some posters are saying? To me, ECNL is only worried about the girls side.

Currently...

Clubs want MLSN. GA is OK but its not clubs first choice.

Clubs want girls ECNL. Boys ECNL is OK but its not clubs first choice.

As long as MLS + MLSN are connected the MLSN+GA combo will continue to get better and better over time. GA is almost identical to girls ECNL from a league and events perspective. Over time clubs will realize that they can make the same amount of money with GA as they can with girls ECNL and a lot more money with MLSN than boys ECNL.


So my kids have played recently for both GA and ECNL. I would say the coaching is about the equal. I would say that ECNL has a deeper bench and perhaps better level of a few top line players. The biggest difference I see between ECNL and GA is the number of coaches who show up for ECNL events. It is not even close. We have seen upwards of 150 coaches on the sidelines in North Carolina at one of our games in the last 12 months. We have seen more on average 30-60 coaches for ECNL. Sometimes we are lucky to see 20 coaches for GA and when we do it is more for D2 or D3. When we have gone to college ID sessions out of interest from coaches ECNL is way more "valuable" a commodity than GA. This may seem like a homer parent perspective, but given that our ECNL National experience is more recent I get why people say that ECNL has an edge on GA. Furthermore, you have to consider whether you are a person who is coming from a boy or girl perspective. I just don't see GA offering the same benefits as ECNL for girls. I can understand how a parent of a boy might see this differently. Bottom line is people reading this board need to consider whether they know if the poster is talking about a girl or boy situation.

Not trying to cause a fight but how does more or less recruiters at events change the amount of money the club makes? In both leagues theres only one team attending events. The amount of money clubs make is exactly the same.
Anonymous
My daughter has also played ECNL and GA in resent years. Currently in GA. In our area, the number of D1 commits between ECNL and GA is a 50/50 split.
post reply Forum Index » Soccer
Message Quick Reply
Go to: