Washington Spirit VA ID sessions this Sunday

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They have the plan to pick up as many talented players as they can this spring/summer. As stated many times here, 3-4 per age group, in some cases 1-2, is all that’s needed. Training and environment have been great. Costs are on par with the other DAs. There’s really not much else to plan for other than recruiting those few players needed to make the rosters stronger.

If you have seen the 06 team play they need a good 5-6.

Nah, it’s about 3-4. But thanks for playing.

They lost to FCV yesterday 12-0 and Penn 9-0 last weekend. I would say there is a much bigger problem there. I agree with PPs that they need to reduce rosters as a whole and pick up some decent talent in the next couple months, otherwise WS is going to be in trouble.

Yes, they lost in the midfield. Did you watch the games?

What does that mean? Seems to me they lost in the recruiting department.

Yes, that's saying the same thing. If they had been able to recruit 4 talented 2006 players to play in the middle of the field, those wouldn't have been lopsided results. The one defining characteristic of the WS 2006 team is that they are average to small across the board. FCV for the most part looks like an age group up, or two, against them. This doesn't help.

If had to pick the two WS 06s most likely to play for FCV some day. They are both midfielders.

Yes, in a different age group. However, not on the 2006. That's the issue.

PP here.

I was referring to actual 06 players. Not 07 and 08s playing 06. I think both of the younger players did quite well yesterday.

In that case, I disagree with your assessment.

Also, when the result is 0-12, no one did "quite well"

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They have the plan to pick up as many talented players as they can this spring/summer. As stated many times here, 3-4 per age group, in some cases 1-2, is all that’s needed. Training and environment have been great. Costs are on par with the other DAs. There’s really not much else to plan for other than recruiting those few players needed to make the rosters stronger.

If you have seen the 06 team play they need a good 5-6.

Nah, it’s about 3-4. But thanks for playing.

They lost to FCV yesterday 12-0 and Penn 9-0 last weekend. I would say there is a much bigger problem there. I agree with PPs that they need to reduce rosters as a whole and pick up some decent talent in the next couple months, otherwise WS is going to be in trouble.

Yes, they lost in the midfield. Did you watch the games?

What does that mean? Seems to me they lost in the recruiting department.

Yes, that's saying the same thing. If they had been able to recruit 4 talented 2006 players to play in the middle of the field, those wouldn't have been lopsided results. The one defining characteristic of the WS 2006 team is that they are average to small across the board. FCV for the most part looks like an age group up, or two, against them. This doesn't help.

If had to pick the two WS 06s most likely to play for FCV some day. They are both midfielders.

Yes, in a different age group. However, not on the 2006. That's the issue.

PP here.

I was referring to actual 06 players. Not 07 and 08s playing 06. I think both of the younger players did quite well yesterday.

In that case, I disagree with your assessment.

Also, when the result is 0-12, no one did "quite well"

You try playing up two age groups midfield against what is arguably one the best teams in the area if not the country who have been selected for size speed aggressiveness etc and see how you daughter performs.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They have the plan to pick up as many talented players as they can this spring/summer. As stated many times here, 3-4 per age group, in some cases 1-2, is all that’s needed. Training and environment have been great. Costs are on par with the other DAs. There’s really not much else to plan for other than recruiting those few players needed to make the rosters stronger.

If you have seen the 06 team play they need a good 5-6.

Nah, it’s about 3-4. But thanks for playing.

They lost to FCV yesterday 12-0 and Penn 9-0 last weekend. I would say there is a much bigger problem there. I agree with PPs that they need to reduce rosters as a whole and pick up some decent talent in the next couple months, otherwise WS is going to be in trouble.

Yes, they lost in the midfield. Did you watch the games?

What does that mean? Seems to me they lost in the recruiting department.

Yes, that's saying the same thing. If they had been able to recruit 4 talented 2006 players to play in the middle of the field, those wouldn't have been lopsided results. The one defining characteristic of the WS 2006 team is that they are average to small across the board. FCV for the most part looks like an age group up, or two, against them. This doesn't help.

If had to pick the two WS 06s most likely to play for FCV some day. They are both midfielders.

Yes, in a different age group. However, not on the 2006. That's the issue.

PP here.

I was referring to actual 06 players. Not 07 and 08s playing 06. I think both of the younger players did quite well yesterday.

In that case, I disagree with your assessment.

Also, when the result is 0-12, no one did "quite well"

You try playing up two age groups in midfield against what is arguably one the best teams in the area if not the country who have been selected for size speed aggressiveness etc and see how your daughter performs.

It is a question of expectations.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They have the plan to pick up as many talented players as they can this spring/summer. As stated many times here, 3-4 per age group, in some cases 1-2, is all that’s needed. Training and environment have been great. Costs are on par with the other DAs. There’s really not much else to plan for other than recruiting those few players needed to make the rosters stronger.

If you have seen the 06 team play they need a good 5-6.

Nah, it’s about 3-4. But thanks for playing.

They lost to FCV yesterday 12-0 and Penn 9-0 last weekend. I would say there is a much bigger problem there. I agree with PPs that they need to reduce rosters as a whole and pick up some decent talent in the next couple months, otherwise WS is going to be in trouble.

Yes, they lost in the midfield. Did you watch the games?

What does that mean? Seems to me they lost in the recruiting department.

Yes, that's saying the same thing. If they had been able to recruit 4 talented 2006 players to play in the middle of the field, those wouldn't have been lopsided results. The one defining characteristic of the WS 2006 team is that they are average to small across the board. FCV for the most part looks like an age group up, or two, against them. This doesn't help.

If had to pick the two WS 06s most likely to play for FCV some day. They are both midfielders.

Yes, in a different age group. However, not on the 2006. That's the issue.

PP here.

I was referring to actual 06 players. Not 07 and 08s playing 06. I think both of the younger players did quite well yesterday.

In that case, I disagree with your assessment.

Also, when the result is 0-12, no one did "quite well"

You try playing up two age groups midfield against what is arguably one the best teams in the area if not the country who have been selected for size speed aggressiveness etc and see how you daughter performs.

Look, hoss, no one is saying the 2008 and 2007 aren't good players. No one played well in that game, that's a fact. They are the ones most likely to play for FCV as well. The 2006s on the team could not start for FCV 2006 and thinking that is a bit delusional.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They have a plan? What does this mean? The kids have to want to leave their current teams to come play for WS. Not trolling here. What’s the plan? Discount fees? Train with older teams?

This line of thought is just stupid. The training environment is very good, the talent just isn’t there quite yet. If talented players want an opportunity to play DA and have opportunity to be scouted more often, they have a great chance to start/play complete games with a WS team. They can make an impact and improve the teams. Or, they can play for their current, non ECNL/DA teams, against inferior competition, and not see the improvement they would against tougher competition. It’s really their choice. Or, if they’d rather ride pine at a top DA/ECNL team, that’s an option too. I’d rather my kid start and play whole games, but some people like paying big $$ watching other people’s kids win trophies. It’s all about preferences.

Agreed. If you are the best player on your current non DA team then Spirit might be the best place for you to develop!

And then once you get really good you can go play for FCV.

Or mclean

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They have the plan to pick up as many talented players as they can this spring/summer. As stated many times here, 3-4 per age group, in some cases 1-2, is all that’s needed. Training and environment have been great. Costs are on par with the other DAs. There’s really not much else to plan for other than recruiting those few players needed to make the rosters stronger.

If you have seen the 06 team play they need a good 5-6.

Nah, it’s about 3-4. But thanks for playing.

They lost to FCV yesterday 12-0 and Penn 9-0 last weekend. I would say there is a much bigger problem there. I agree with PPs that they need to reduce rosters as a whole and pick up some decent talent in the next couple months, otherwise WS is going to be in trouble.

Yes, they lost in the midfield. Did you watch the games?

What does that mean? Seems to me they lost in the recruiting department.

Yes, that's saying the same thing. If they had been able to recruit 4 talented 2006 players to play in the middle of the field, those wouldn't have been lopsided results. The one defining characteristic of the WS 2006 team is that they are average to small across the board. FCV for the most part looks like an age group up, or two, against them. This doesn't help.

If had to pick the two WS 06s most likely to play for FCV some day. They are both midfielders.

Yes, in a different age group. However, not on the 2006. That's the issue.

PP here.

I was referring to actual 06 players. Not 07 and 08s playing 06. I think both of the younger players did quite well yesterday.

In that case, I disagree with your assessment.

Also, when the result is 0-12, no one did "quite well"

You try playing up two age groups midfield against what is arguably one the best teams in the area if not the country who have been selected for size speed aggressiveness etc and see how you daughter performs.

Look, hoss, no one is saying the 2008 and 2007 aren't good players. No one played well in that game, that's a fact. They are the ones most likely to play for FCV as well. The 2006s on the team could not start for FCV 2006 and thinking that is a bit delusional.

12-0 in a 11v11 game? It’s okay. They’re “developing” at spirit.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They have the plan to pick up as many talented players as they can this spring/summer. As stated many times here, 3-4 per age group, in some cases 1-2, is all that’s needed. Training and environment have been great. Costs are on par with the other DAs. There’s really not much else to plan for other than recruiting those few players needed to make the rosters stronger.

If you have seen the 06 team play they need a good 5-6.

Nah, it’s about 3-4. But thanks for playing.

They lost to FCV yesterday 12-0 and Penn 9-0 last weekend. I would say there is a much bigger problem there. I agree with PPs that they need to reduce rosters as a whole and pick up some decent talent in the next couple months, otherwise WS is going to be in trouble.

Yes, they lost in the midfield. Did you watch the games?

What does that mean? Seems to me they lost in the recruiting department.

Yes, that's saying the same thing. If they had been able to recruit 4 talented 2006 players to play in the middle of the field, those wouldn't have been lopsided results. The one defining characteristic of the WS 2006 team is that they are average to small across the board. FCV for the most part looks like an age group up, or two, against them. This doesn't help.

If had to pick the two WS 06s most likely to play for FCV some day. They are both midfielders.

Yes, in a different age group. However, not on the 2006. That's the issue.

PP here.

I was referring to actual 06 players. Not 07 and 08s playing 06. I think both of the younger players did quite well yesterday.

In that case, I disagree with your assessment.

Also, when the result is 0-12, no one did "quite well"

You try playing up two age groups midfield against what is arguably one the best teams in the area if not the country who have been selected for size speed aggressiveness etc and see how you daughter performs.

Look, hoss, no one is saying the 2008 and 2007 aren't good players. No one played well in that game, that's a fact. They are the ones most likely to play for FCV as well. The 2006s on the team could not start for FCV 2006 and thinking that is a bit delusional.

12-0 in a 11v11 game? It’s okay. They’re “developing” at spirit.

I'd love to see the 0-20 result against your non-ECNL/DA team.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They have the plan to pick up as many talented players as they can this spring/summer. As stated many times here, 3-4 per age group, in some cases 1-2, is all that’s needed. Training and environment have been great. Costs are on par with the other DAs. There’s really not much else to plan for other than recruiting those few players needed to make the rosters stronger.

If you have seen the 06 team play they need a good 5-6.

Nah, it’s about 3-4. But thanks for playing.

They lost to FCV yesterday 12-0 and Penn 9-0 last weekend. I would say there is a much bigger problem there. I agree with PPs that they need to reduce rosters as a whole and pick up some decent talent in the next couple months, otherwise WS is going to be in trouble.

Yes, they lost in the midfield. Did you watch the games?

What does that mean? Seems to me they lost in the recruiting department.

Yes, that's saying the same thing. If they had been able to recruit 4 talented 2006 players to play in the middle of the field, those wouldn't have been lopsided results. The one defining characteristic of the WS 2006 team is that they are average to small across the board. FCV for the most part looks like an age group up, or two, against them. This doesn't help.

If had to pick the two WS 06s most likely to play for FCV some day. They are both midfielders.

Yes, in a different age group. However, not on the 2006. That's the issue.

PP here.

I was referring to actual 06 players. Not 07 and 08s playing 06. I think both of the younger players did quite well yesterday.

In that case, I disagree with your assessment.

Also, when the result is 0-12, no one did "quite well"

You try playing up two age groups midfield against what is arguably one the best teams in the area if not the country who have been selected for size speed aggressiveness etc and see how you daughter performs.

Look, hoss, no one is saying the 2008 and 2007 aren't good players. No one played well in that game, that's a fact. They are the ones most likely to play for FCV as well. The 2006s on the team could not start for FCV 2006 and thinking that is a bit delusional.

12-0 in a 11v11 game? It’s okay. They’re “developing” at spirit.

I'd love to see the 0-20 result against your non-ECNL/DA team.

Your team vs FCV to be very clear. It wouldn't be anywhere near as close as -12.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They have the plan to pick up as many talented players as they can this spring/summer. As stated many times here, 3-4 per age group, in some cases 1-2, is all that’s needed. Training and environment have been great. Costs are on par with the other DAs. There’s really not much else to plan for other than recruiting those few players needed to make the rosters stronger.

If you have seen the 06 team play they need a good 5-6.

Nah, it’s about 3-4. But thanks for playing.

They lost to FCV yesterday 12-0 and Penn 9-0 last weekend. I would say there is a much bigger problem there. I agree with PPs that they need to reduce rosters as a whole and pick up some decent talent in the next couple months, otherwise WS is going to be in trouble.

Yes, they lost in the midfield. Did you watch the games?

What does that mean? Seems to me they lost in the recruiting department.

Yes, that's saying the same thing. If they had been able to recruit 4 talented 2006 players to play in the middle of the field, those wouldn't have been lopsided results. The one defining characteristic of the WS 2006 team is that they are average to small across the board. FCV for the most part looks like an age group up, or two, against them. This doesn't help.

If had to pick the two WS 06s most likely to play for FCV some day. They are both midfielders.

Yes, in a different age group. However, not on the 2006. That's the issue.

PP here.

I was referring to actual 06 players. Not 07 and 08s playing 06. I think both of the younger players did quite well yesterday.

In that case, I disagree with your assessment.

Also, when the result is 0-12, no one did "quite well"

You try playing up two age groups midfield against what is arguably one the best teams in the area if not the country who have been selected for size speed aggressiveness etc and see how you daughter performs.

Look, hoss, no one is saying the 2008 and 2007 aren't good players. No one played well in that game, that's a fact. They are the ones most likely to play for FCV as well. The 2006s on the team could not start for FCV 2006 and thinking that is a bit delusional.

12-0 in a 11v11 game? It’s okay. They’re “developing” at spirit.

This team has continuously lost, and not by a little bit. 12-0 may be an "ok" Result for someone thats DD doesn't belong in DA to begin with or can't make or play at another DA/ECNL team such as FCV, but gets to start and play at WS. If your daughter is actually top DA caliber I can't see this being acceptable.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They have the plan to pick up as many talented players as they can this spring/summer. As stated many times here, 3-4 per age group, in some cases 1-2, is all that’s needed. Training and environment have been great. Costs are on par with the other DAs. There’s really not much else to plan for other than recruiting those few players needed to make the rosters stronger.

If you have seen the 06 team play they need a good 5-6.

Nah, it’s about 3-4. But thanks for playing.

They lost to FCV yesterday 12-0 and Penn 9-0 last weekend. I would say there is a much bigger problem there. I agree with PPs that they need to reduce rosters as a whole and pick up some decent talent in the next couple months, otherwise WS is going to be in trouble.

Yes, they lost in the midfield. Did you watch the games?

What does that mean? Seems to me they lost in the recruiting department.

Yes, that's saying the same thing. If they had been able to recruit 4 talented 2006 players to play in the middle of the field, those wouldn't have been lopsided results. The one defining characteristic of the WS 2006 team is that they are average to small across the board. FCV for the most part looks like an age group up, or two, against them. This doesn't help.

If had to pick the two WS 06s most likely to play for FCV some day. They are both midfielders.

Yes, in a different age group. However, not on the 2006. That's the issue.

PP here.

I was referring to actual 06 players. Not 07 and 08s playing 06. I think both of the younger players did quite well yesterday.

In that case, I disagree with your assessment.

Also, when the result is 0-12, no one did "quite well"

You try playing up two age groups midfield against what is arguably one the best teams in the area if not the country who have been selected for size speed aggressiveness etc and see how you daughter performs.

Look, hoss, no one is saying the 2008 and 2007 aren't good players. No one played well in that game, that's a fact. They are the ones most likely to play for FCV as well. The 2006s on the team could not start for FCV 2006 and thinking that is a bit delusional.

12-0 in a 11v11 game? It’s okay. They’re “developing” at spirit.

I'd love to see the 0-20 result against your non-ECNL/DA team.

Your team vs FCV to be very clear. It wouldn't be anywhere near as close as -12.

Top Spirit 06 Players: there are a lot of options for you in nova. Find one.

[Anonymous]

Can WSVA be relegated to ncsl?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They have the plan to pick up as many talented players as they can this spring/summer. As stated many times here, 3-4 per age group, in some cases 1-2, is all that’s needed. Training and environment have been great. Costs are on par with the other DAs. There’s really not much else to plan for other than recruiting those few players needed to make the rosters stronger.

If you have seen the 06 team play they need a good 5-6.

Nah, it’s about 3-4. But thanks for playing.

They lost to FCV yesterday 12-0 and Penn 9-0 last weekend. I would say there is a much bigger problem there. I agree with PPs that they need to reduce rosters as a whole and pick up some decent talent in the next couple months, otherwise WS is going to be in trouble.

Yes, they lost in the midfield. Did you watch the games?

What does that mean? Seems to me they lost in the recruiting department.

Yes, that's saying the same thing. If they had been able to recruit 4 talented 2006 players to play in the middle of the field, those wouldn't have been lopsided results. The one defining characteristic of the WS 2006 team is that they are average to small across the board. FCV for the most part looks like an age group up, or two, against them. This doesn't help.

If had to pick the two WS 06s most likely to play for FCV some day. They are both midfielders.

Yes, in a different age group. However, not on the 2006. That's the issue.

PP here.

I was referring to actual 06 players. Not 07 and 08s playing 06. I think both of the younger players did quite well yesterday.

In that case, I disagree with your assessment.

Also, when the result is 0-12, no one did "quite well"

You try playing up two age groups midfield against what is arguably one the best teams in the area if not the country who have been selected for size speed aggressiveness etc and see how you daughter performs.

Look, hoss, no one is saying the 2008 and 2007 aren't good players. No one played well in that game, that's a fact. They are the ones most likely to play for FCV as well. The 2006s on the team could not start for FCV 2006 and thinking that is a bit delusional.

12-0 in a 11v11 game? It’s okay. They’re “developing” at spirit.

I'd love to see the 0-20 result against your non-ECNL/DA team.

Your team vs FCV to be very clear. It wouldn't be anywhere near as close as -12.

Top Spirit 06 Players: there are a lot of options for you in nova. Find one.

Converse is true. Excellent opportunity for pine riders at top ECNL/DA clubs to start. Then when they combine with the top 2006s on Spirit they will be competitive with FCV.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They have the plan to pick up as many talented players as they can this spring/summer. As stated many times here, 3-4 per age group, in some cases 1-2, is all that’s needed. Training and environment have been great. Costs are on par with the other DAs. There’s really not much else to plan for other than recruiting those few players needed to make the rosters stronger.

If you have seen the 06 team play they need a good 5-6.

Nah, it’s about 3-4. But thanks for playing.

They lost to FCV yesterday 12-0 and Penn 9-0 last weekend. I would say there is a much bigger problem there. I agree with PPs that they need to reduce rosters as a whole and pick up some decent talent in the next couple months, otherwise WS is going to be in trouble.

Yes, they lost in the midfield. Did you watch the games?

What does that mean? Seems to me they lost in the recruiting department.

Yes, that's saying the same thing. If they had been able to recruit 4 talented 2006 players to play in the middle of the field, those wouldn't have been lopsided results. The one defining characteristic of the WS 2006 team is that they are average to small across the board. FCV for the most part looks like an age group up, or two, against them. This doesn't help.

If had to pick the two WS 06s most likely to play for FCV some day. They are both midfielders.

Yes, in a different age group. However, not on the 2006. That's the issue.

PP here.

I was referring to actual 06 players. Not 07 and 08s playing 06. I think both of the younger players did quite well yesterday.

In that case, I disagree with your assessment.

Also, when the result is 0-12, no one did "quite well"

You try playing up two age groups midfield against what is arguably one the best teams in the area if not the country who have been selected for size speed aggressiveness etc and see how you daughter performs.

Look, hoss, no one is saying the 2008 and 2007 aren't good players. No one played well in that game, that's a fact. They are the ones most likely to play for FCV as well. The 2006s on the team could not start for FCV 2006 and thinking that is a bit delusional.

One of the actual 2006s midfielders has played for WS 05 DA and Loudoun 06 ECNL this year. I think she is good enough to start for FCV even if you and the FCV coaches dont agree. My guess is she will continue to improve over time as well relative to the FCV players.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They have the plan to pick up as many talented players as they can this spring/summer. As stated many times here, 3-4 per age group, in some cases 1-2, is all that’s needed. Training and environment have been great. Costs are on par with the other DAs. There’s really not much else to plan for other than recruiting those few players needed to make the rosters stronger.

If you have seen the 06 team play they need a good 5-6.

Nah, it’s about 3-4. But thanks for playing.

They lost to FCV yesterday 12-0 and Penn 9-0 last weekend. I would say there is a much bigger problem there. I agree with PPs that they need to reduce rosters as a whole and pick up some decent talent in the next couple months, otherwise WS is going to be in trouble.

Yes, they lost in the midfield. Did you watch the games?

What does that mean? Seems to me they lost in the recruiting department.

Yes, that's saying the same thing. If they had been able to recruit 4 talented 2006 players to play in the middle of the field, those wouldn't have been lopsided results. The one defining characteristic of the WS 2006 team is that they are average to small across the board. FCV for the most part looks like an age group up, or two, against them. This doesn't help.

If had to pick the two WS 06s most likely to play for FCV some day. They are both midfielders.

Yes, in a different age group. However, not on the 2006. That's the issue.

PP here.

I was referring to actual 06 players. Not 07 and 08s playing 06. I think both of the younger players did quite well yesterday.

In that case, I disagree with your assessment.

Also, when the result is 0-12, no one did "quite well"

You try playing up two age groups midfield against what is arguably one the best teams in the area if not the country who have been selected for size speed aggressiveness etc and see how you daughter performs.

Look, hoss, no one is saying the 2008 and 2007 aren't good players. No one played well in that game, that's a fact. They are the ones most likely to play for FCV as well. The 2006s on the team could not start for FCV 2006 and thinking that is a bit delusional.

One of the actual 2006s midfielders has played for WS 05 DA and Loudoun 06 ECNL this year. I think she is good enough to start for FCV even if you and the FCV coaches dont agree. My guess is she will continue to improve over time as well relative to the FCV players.

OK, mom. Others have watched FCV and disagree. Can we move on now?

[Anonymous]

vda
Fcv
Loudoun
Arlington
McLean
Bryc

So tell me, why WSVA?