Travel Soccer teams around NOVA let's discuss

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Well, there's a history of FPYC players, as they get older, leaving the club (which isn't necessarily positive, of course) for elite squads (e.g., DA). Plus, I have, in the past, seen some of those teams play, and the kids back then were noticeably more advanced with 1 v. 1 skills, calmer and more clever with the ball, more "sophisticate" than I'd assumed was possible at that age. It's possible that's no longer the case, but to me FPYC is a strong, player-focused club.

This is still accurate. FPYC still has a strong focus on development -- but yes, many of our good players do get poached away by the larger clubs. That's good (shows they are being trained well) and bad (hurts our growth).

Were these kids really "poached" meaning that someone from an outside club actively recruited them away or did these parents just think that another club would be better for them and their kid?

Well, the coach from the club they are now watched them on occasion last year...did the same with other clubs. Aided by a few parents as well.

Well your prior post made it seem like "the larger clubs" [plural] are "poaching" all these kids over multiple years. Now it seems like it's one club who got some kids in once. So now your prior post seems like a embellished, sour grapes statement.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Well, there's a history of FPYC players, as they get older, leaving the club (which isn't necessarily positive, of course) for elite squads (e.g., DA). Plus, I have, in the past, seen some of those teams play, and the kids back then were noticeably more advanced with 1 v. 1 skills, calmer and more clever with the ball, more "sophisticate" than I'd assumed was possible at that age. It's possible that's no longer the case, but to me FPYC is a strong, player-focused club.

This is still accurate. FPYC still has a strong focus on development -- but yes, many of our good players do get poached away by the larger clubs. That's good (shows they are being trained well) and bad (hurts our growth).

Were these kids really "poached" meaning that someone from an outside club actively recruited them away or did these parents just think that another club would be better for them and their kid?

Well, the coach from the club they are now watched them on occasion last year...did the same with other clubs. Aided by a few parents as well.

Well your prior post made it seem like "the larger clubs" [plural] are "poaching" all these kids over multiple years. Now it seems like it's one club who got some kids in once. So now your prior post seems like a embellished, sour grapes statement.

I'm pretty sure that this poster is talking about Bethesda South and how some of these kids left to go there. Most of those kids were already training in Joga so they had a connection there. Don't think that there was poaching going on. Parents just wanted to be on a more talented/competitive team. My kid is not one these kids but I know some of those that went over there.

[Anonymous]

^^ Our kid left a different club---not fypc--it was a ccl club.

This was long in the works. There was no poaching. Older kid trained elsewhere and saw how much he was missing out on. He wanted better training and asked us to let him check out some other clubs.

We hit up a few practices at other Clubs in the Spring season--loved Bethesda South btw--but it was just too far of a weeknight drive for us. Even the tryout session was a better "practice" than my older son had in 2 years with his old Club. Tryouts they just didn't throw all kids onto scrimmage field with 350 kids. They actually had many different assessments and the quality there was very high.

We ended up at another great development club with both our kids. People have insinuated my kids were poached or that we had connections at the other Club or that we were just shopping for an 'A' team placement. Absolutely, none of these statements are true.

We certainly looked for a travel club that mirrored the same style of possession play that my kids were getting in their training sessions.

Sometimes it's easier for a place to cry foul than admit people left for legit reasons.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:^^ Our kid left a different club---not fypc--it was a ccl club.

This was long in the works. There was no poaching. Older kid trained elsewhere and saw how much he was missing out on. He wanted better training and asked us to let him check out some other clubs.

We hit up a few practices at other Clubs in the Spring season--loved Bethesda South btw--but it was just too far of a weeknight drive for us. Even the tryout session was a better "practice" than my older son had in 2 years with his old Club. Tryouts they just didn't throw all kids onto scrimmage field with 350 kids. They actually had many different assessments and the quality there was very high.

We ended up at another great development club with both our kids. People have insinuated my kids were poached or that we had connections at the other Club or that we were just shopping for an 'A' team placement. Absolutely, none of these statements are true.

We certainly looked for a travel club that mirrored the same style of possession play that my kids were getting in their training sessions.

Sometimes it's easier for a place to cry foul than admit people left for legit reasons.

Exactly!!!!! + 10000000

[Anonymous]

LMVSC seems to lose a lot of kids in what other people claim to be poaching on a regular basis.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:^^ Our kid left a different club---not fypc--it was a ccl club.

This was long in the works. There was no poaching. Older kid trained elsewhere and saw how much he was missing out on. He wanted better training and asked us to let him check out some other clubs.

We hit up a few practices at other Clubs in the Spring season--loved Bethesda South btw--but it was just too far of a weeknight drive for us. Even the tryout session was a better "practice" than my older son had in 2 years with his old Club. Tryouts they just didn't throw all kids onto scrimmage field with 350 kids. They actually had many different assessments and the quality there was very high.

We ended up at another great development club with both our kids. People have insinuated my kids were poached or that we had connections at the other Club or that we were just shopping for an 'A' team placement. Absolutely, none of these statements are true.

We certainly looked for a travel club that mirrored the same style of possession play that my kids were getting in their training sessions.

Sometimes it's easier for a place to cry foul than admit people left for legit reasons.

Can you name club? All parents are interested in getting quality training, since were all paying thousands for soccer training, we should share as much as possible.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^^ Our kid left a different club---not fypc--it was a ccl club.

This was long in the works. There was no poaching. Older kid trained elsewhere and saw how much he was missing out on. He wanted better training and asked us to let him check out some other clubs.

We hit up a few practices at other Clubs in the Spring season--loved Bethesda South btw--but it was just too far of a weeknight drive for us. Even the tryout session was a better "practice" than my older son had in 2 years with his old Club. Tryouts they just didn't throw all kids onto scrimmage field with 350 kids. They actually had many different assessments and the quality there was very high.

We ended up at another great development club with both our kids. People have insinuated my kids were poached or that we had connections at the other Club or that we were just shopping for an 'A' team placement. Absolutely, none of these statements are true.

We certainly looked for a travel club that mirrored the same style of possession play that my kids were getting in their training sessions.

Sometimes it's easier for a place to cry foul than admit people left for legit reasons.

Can you name club? All parents are interested in getting quality training, since were all paying thousands for soccer training, we should share as much as possible.

Sorry, I don't know you. You could be one of those annoying parents I loathe...not to mention the other anonymous ones out there ....

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:LMVSC seems to lose a lot of kids in what other people claim to be poaching on a regular basis.

I don't think it's "poaching"; i think LMVSC can only meet the needs up to a certain age group, and once they are teens and/or in high school, there seems to be an exodus. A great program with great staff though for younger kids!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:LMVSC seems to lose a lot of kids in what other people claim to be poaching on a regular basis.

I don't think it's "poaching"; i think LMVSC can only meet the needs up to a certain age group, and once they are teens and/or in high school, there seems to be an exodus. A great program with great staff though for younger kids!

They develop then and then the large CCL clubs take the credit when they get them in their teens. Ccl "loyal" patents start crying as this is when their poorly developed sons start getting cut for these outside players.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:LMVSC seems to lose a lot of kids in what other people claim to be poaching on a regular basis.

I don't think it's "poaching"; i think LMVSC can only meet the needs up to a certain age group, and once they are teens and/or in high school, there seems to be an exodus. A great program with great staff though for younger kids!

They develop then and then the large CCL clubs take the credit when they get them in their teens. Ccl "loyal" patents start crying as this is when their poorly developed sons start getting cut for these outside players.

This happened with the new DA teams at our Club. All outside players.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:LMVSC seems to lose a lot of kids in what other people claim to be poaching on a regular basis.

I don't think it's "poaching"; i think LMVSC can only meet the needs up to a certain age group, and once they are teens and/or in high school, there seems to be an exodus. A great program with great staff though for younger kids!

They develop then and then the large CCL clubs take the credit when they get them in their teens. Ccl "loyal" patents start crying as this is when their poorly developed sons start getting cut for these outside players.

This happened with the new DA teams at our Club. All outside players.

Of course that is going to happen to a degree with DA as there are only a handful of those and they will attract the top kids from across the region. Did any kids from the home club make the DA?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:LMVSC seems to lose a lot of kids in what other people claim to be poaching on a regular basis.

I don't think it's "poaching"; i think LMVSC can only meet the needs up to a certain age group, and once they are teens and/or in high school, there seems to be an exodus. A great program with great staff though for younger kids!

They develop then and then the large CCL clubs take the credit when they get them in their teens. Ccl "loyal" patents start crying as this is when their poorly developed sons start getting cut for these outside players.

This happened with the new DA teams at our Club. All outside players.

Of course that is going to happen to a degree with DA as there are only a handful of those and they will attract the top kids from across the region. Did any kids from the home club make the DA?

26 players. 1 or 2 and it's a club with 6 teams per age group. Pretty shitty stats.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:LMVSC seems to lose a lot of kids in what other people claim to be poaching on a regular basis.

I don't think it's "poaching"; i think LMVSC can only meet the needs up to a certain age group, and once they are teens and/or in high school, there seems to be an exodus. A great program with great staff though for younger kids!

They develop then and then the large CCL clubs take the credit when they get them in their teens. Ccl "loyal" patents start crying as this is when their poorly developed sons start getting cut for these outside players.

This happened with the new DA teams at our Club. All outside players.

Of course that is going to happen to a degree with DA as there are only a handful of those and they will attract the top kids from across the region. Did any kids from the home club make the DA?

26 players. 1 or 2 and it's a club with 6 teams per age group. Pretty shitty stats.

NP here. Those are disappointing stats. Could be a fluke since it's the first year--maybe that was an unusually weak age group for the club? If not, I'd definitely want the club leadership to talk about why they have not been able to develop DA level players in the large pool of kids who have been training at the club for years.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:LMVSC seems to lose a lot of kids in what other people claim to be poaching on a regular basis.

I don't think it's "poaching"; i think LMVSC can only meet the needs up to a certain age group, and once they are teens and/or in high school, there seems to be an exodus. A great program with great staff though for younger kids!

What is the club not doing at the older ages? Just curious because I would think if they have a great program in developing kids at the younger ages what is it they aren't doing that is not meeting the needs of older kids. Saw their U9 kids play this morning and they move the ball well.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:LMVSC seems to lose a lot of kids in what other people claim to be poaching on a regular basis.

I don't think it's "poaching"; i think LMVSC can only meet the needs up to a certain age group, and once they are teens and/or in high school, there seems to be an exodus. A great program with great staff though for younger kids!

They develop then and then the large CCL clubs take the credit when they get them in their teens. Ccl "loyal" patents start crying as this is when their poorly developed sons start getting cut for these outside players.

This happened with the new DA teams at our Club. All outside players.

Of course that is going to happen to a degree with DA as there are only a handful of those and they will attract the top kids from across the region. Did any kids from the home club make the DA?

26 players. 1 or 2 and it's a club with 6 teams per age group. Pretty shitty stats.

NP here. Those are disappointing stats. Could be a fluke since it's the first year--maybe that was an unusually weak age group for the club? If not, I'd definitely want the club leadership to talk about why they have not been able to develop DA level players in the large pool of kids who have been training at the club for years.

I wonder why US Soccer would grant DA status to a club with such a poor record of developing players when it seems like there are other local clubs doing a much better job.

Playing style? Politics? Laziness?