DA vs ECNL vs everything else

[Anonymous]

FCV can market the hell out of this case and leave the rest of the haters looking like jilted lovers. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mXTfdOLNXq4

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:what they don't say about the DA futures program is that at every level as you move up the pyramid, players get weeded out as the level gets higher.

There's no guarantee that your child will make it to DA level by U13/U14, primarily because of motivation level and the interest from the player. How much a player practices on their own, if they grow up in a soccer household, and if they do a lot of individual lessons outside of team training, and innate talent or athletic ability are the determinants.

And? That is exactly as I, or anyone else with a kid playing competitive travel should expect. That isn't an FCV thing. That happens (and should happen I might add) at all clubs.

The problem is FCV IS advertising development and promoting their DA players as "home grown" when in fact most are not. And that worked fine for ECNL when it was essentially a showcase league, but DA idealistically wants their clubs to be more than collectors of talented kids, they want them to have a proven an established curriculum. When far more than half of any FCV DA team never pulled on a FCV jersey before 14 years old you can certainly claim to have strong teams but stop saying that as a club FCV develops talent.

And yes, selling "DA Futures" to a bunch of 7-8 year old kids is hilarious.

This is just incorrect. I get that you have a thing about FCV...got it. But at least get the facts right. Half the 04 DA team isn't even 14yrs old yet, so stop. Also, besides the 5 very good players that came over from the Loudoun merger, the rest were FCV. They were either play-ups coming down on age or had been on the pre-ECNL team and many had been FCV Ashburn or whatever since they were young. It's crazy to act like all those kids came from outside the club, it's just not true. And it's not the vast majority you randomly sited.

How many of those "FCV girls" were cut and are no longer there? The 04's added 3 kids from McLean at the expense of their own "developed" kids. And that is just the one to one trade off. Other kids were cut to get from 22 down to 18. How many kids on the upcoming roster will have been FCV for more than 3-4 years? 5? 8?

Add a kid here and there over the next 3 years and that number will dip below 5 home grown kids. When you start at U14 with half the roster with your own kids and then reduce that by a third within one year is not #Development.

The 04 DA team added three players. What's wrong with that? Didn't other DA's in the area add to their rosters, cut from their rosters? I thought that's how it goes. Some kids left on their own, others weren't offered spots this time around. That's how it goes on ANY team. I have no idea why you project this onto FCV as though the other club rosters stayed the same, no one got cut and no "outside players" joined. It happens every year at EVERY high level club. It's not an FCV thing, it's a soccer thing. Should clubs just not even bother with tryouts then? And more like 10+ of the 04 team is "homegrown."

FCV projects itself as a club that develops talent. Lets start there. That would indicate that long term trained within FCV would stand more than a fighting chance to stick to a roster. If FCV is going to advertise a "DA Futures" youth program then the club should actually demonstrate that there is an inherent advantage to playing at FCV from a early age.

So, after one year of DA FCV has already reduced its home grown talent, that they had years to develop, by a third for kids essentially off the street. So it begs the question, what is the point of a program like "DA Futures" when your own long term developed kids can't hold off a kid from outside? And how many of those outside kids are truly better than the ones they are replacing?

Every club should always add talent when they can. I have no issue with that but it is the image that FCV likes to project that they DEVELOP when in fact they simply recruit. Just call it what it is. And again, when they were a ECNL club the point was to collect a bunch of good players and go to showcases. If collecting talent was all US Soccer wanted then ODP would still be a real thing. But the point of DA is to have vertical integration where kids are developed from young ages from within each DA club not just to wait until U14/U15 and see who shows up for ID sessions and cut lose kids you spent 4+ years supposedly developing.

Most of the kids did stick to the roster. The other local DA also cut its 04 roster drastically to get to a more manageable number, don't blame either club for doing that. So all 10+ of the kids on the 04 team that have been FCV for years, doesn't that shoot down your "they don't develop" mantra? Those kids are good, the team is good. People want to join a good team, so naturally you'll have some "outside" kids wanting to join the team. If they're good, should the club turn them away? You're saying that because every single player didn't stay on the roster, that FCV can't develop players? That's garbage. People leave for lots of reasons. I think the 04 DA showcases the development. You'll find lots of pics of those kids in FCV jerseys dating back to rec. I don't think we'll agree on this. You're hung up on the fact that some kids got cut or left, while completely overlooking that fact that most kids didn't.

When you cut kids that your club spent 4+ years “developing” then you are not developing.

When over the course of a season 60%+ of the roster is from the outside that is more than just “some outside kids”.

When you go from “10+” home grown kids down to about 6 that does not demonstrate “development”.

And, if you look deeper at the actual meaningful roles that the FCV kids actually play the real impact players drop down to 2-3 kids. FCV can’t even keep their home grown kids on the field over outside players.

LOL, now your just making stuff up and being subjective. I get it, the reality doesn't support your argument. I'll let this go now, can't believe I bothered actually. They didn't go from 10+ to 6, you're totally making things up now. The 10+ is for the next roster, staying put. Anyway, you'll note we managed this chat without me disparaging any other club. I respect them all. Try it sometime.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:FCV can market the hell out of this case and leave the rest of the haters looking like jilted lovers. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mXTfdOLNXq4

Yup, they can market the heel out of ONE player, meanwhile:
http://www.pennfusion.org/girls-academy-teams/u-s-national-team-placement

[Anonymous]

You know who benifits from the DA combined age group...Loudoun ECNL. It would have been McLean in the past...but Loudoun will be the new winner.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:what they don't say about the DA futures program is that at every level as you move up the pyramid, players get weeded out as the level gets higher.

There's no guarantee that your child will make it to DA level by U13/U14, primarily because of motivation level and the interest from the player. How much a player practices on their own, if they grow up in a soccer household, and if they do a lot of individual lessons outside of team training, and innate talent or athletic ability are the determinants.

And? That is exactly as I, or anyone else with a kid playing competitive travel should expect. That isn't an FCV thing. That happens (and should happen I might add) at all clubs.

The problem is FCV IS advertising development and promoting their DA players as "home grown" when in fact most are not. And that worked fine for ECNL when it was essentially a showcase league, but DA idealistically wants their clubs to be more than collectors of talented kids, they want them to have a proven an established curriculum. When far more than half of any FCV DA team never pulled on a FCV jersey before 14 years old you can certainly claim to have strong teams but stop saying that as a club FCV develops talent.

And yes, selling "DA Futures" to a bunch of 7-8 year old kids is hilarious.

This is just incorrect. I get that you have a thing about FCV...got it. But at least get the facts right. Half the 04 DA team isn't even 14yrs old yet, so stop. Also, besides the 5 very good players that came over from the Loudoun merger, the rest were FCV. They were either play-ups coming down on age or had been on the pre-ECNL team and many had been FCV Ashburn or whatever since they were young. It's crazy to act like all those kids came from outside the club, it's just not true. And it's not the vast majority you randomly sited.

How many of those "FCV girls" were cut and are no longer there? The 04's added 3 kids from McLean at the expense of their own "developed" kids. And that is just the one to one trade off. Other kids were cut to get from 22 down to 18. How many kids on the upcoming roster will have been FCV for more than 3-4 years? 5? 8?

Add a kid here and there over the next 3 years and that number will dip below 5 home grown kids. When you start at U14 with half the roster with your own kids and then reduce that by a third within one year is not #Development.

The 04 DA team added three players. What's wrong with that? Didn't other DA's in the area add to their rosters, cut from their rosters? I thought that's how it goes. Some kids left on their own, others weren't offered spots this time around. That's how it goes on ANY team. I have no idea why you project this onto FCV as though the other club rosters stayed the same, no one got cut and no "outside players" joined. It happens every year at EVERY high level club. It's not an FCV thing, it's a soccer thing. Should clubs just not even bother with tryouts then? And more like 10+ of the 04 team is "homegrown."

FCV projects itself as a club that develops talent. Lets start there. That would indicate that long term trained within FCV would stand more than a fighting chance to stick to a roster. If FCV is going to advertise a "DA Futures" youth program then the club should actually demonstrate that there is an inherent advantage to playing at FCV from a early age.

So, after one year of DA FCV has already reduced its home grown talent, that they had years to develop, by a third for kids essentially off the street. So it begs the question, what is the point of a program like "DA Futures" when your own long term developed kids can't hold off a kid from outside? And how many of those outside kids are truly better than the ones they are replacing?

Every club should always add talent when they can. I have no issue with that but it is the image that FCV likes to project that they DEVELOP when in fact they simply recruit. Just call it what it is. And again, when they were a ECNL club the point was to collect a bunch of good players and go to showcases. If collecting talent was all US Soccer wanted then ODP would still be a real thing. But the point of DA is to have vertical integration where kids are developed from young ages from within each DA club not just to wait until U14/U15 and see who shows up for ID sessions and cut lose kids you spent 4+ years supposedly developing.

Most of the kids did stick to the roster. The other local DA also cut its 04 roster drastically to get to a more manageable number, don't blame either club for doing that. So all 10+ of the kids on the 04 team that have been FCV for years, doesn't that shoot down your "they don't develop" mantra? Those kids are good, the team is good. People want to join a good team, so naturally you'll have some "outside" kids wanting to join the team. If they're good, should the club turn them away? You're saying that because every single player didn't stay on the roster, that FCV can't develop players? That's garbage. People leave for lots of reasons. I think the 04 DA showcases the development. You'll find lots of pics of those kids in FCV jerseys dating back to rec. I don't think we'll agree on this. You're hung up on the fact that some kids got cut or left, while completely overlooking that fact that most kids didn't.

When you cut kids that your club spent 4+ years “developing” then you are not developing.

When over the course of a season 60%+ of the roster is from the outside that is more than just “some outside kids”.

When you go from “10+” home grown kids down to about 6 that does not demonstrate “development”.

And, if you look deeper at the actual meaningful roles that the FCV kids actually play the real impact players drop down to 2-3 kids. FCV can’t even keep their home grown kids on the field over outside players.

LOL, now your just making stuff up and being subjective. I get it, the reality doesn't support your argument. I'll let this go now, can't believe I bothered actually. They didn't go from 10+ to 6, you're totally making things up now. The 10+ is for the next roster, staying put. Anyway, you'll note we managed this chat without me disparaging any other club. I respect them all. Try it sometime.

So of 22 kids 10+ kids are staying put? I guess 10+ sounds better in your narrative than 14 out of 22 kids "staying put". I like how you use "staying put" almost implying that the 7 cut kids had a choice. It is a pretty telling number for such a developmental club as FCV is that they have a 40% churn rate in players.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:You know who benifits from the DA combined age group...Loudoun ECNL. It would have been McLean in the past...but Loudoun will be the new winner.

Why does Loudoun benefit more than McLean, BRYC or VDA?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:what they don't say about the DA futures program is that at every level as you move up the pyramid, players get weeded out as the level gets higher.

There's no guarantee that your child will make it to DA level by U13/U14, primarily because of motivation level and the interest from the player. How much a player practices on their own, if they grow up in a soccer household, and if they do a lot of individual lessons outside of team training, and innate talent or athletic ability are the determinants.

And? That is exactly as I, or anyone else with a kid playing competitive travel should expect. That isn't an FCV thing. That happens (and should happen I might add) at all clubs.

The problem is FCV IS advertising development and promoting their DA players as "home grown" when in fact most are not. And that worked fine for ECNL when it was essentially a showcase league, but DA idealistically wants their clubs to be more than collectors of talented kids, they want them to have a proven an established curriculum. When far more than half of any FCV DA team never pulled on a FCV jersey before 14 years old you can certainly claim to have strong teams but stop saying that as a club FCV develops talent.

And yes, selling "DA Futures" to a bunch of 7-8 year old kids is hilarious.

This is just incorrect. I get that you have a thing about FCV...got it. But at least get the facts right. Half the 04 DA team isn't even 14yrs old yet, so stop. Also, besides the 5 very good players that came over from the Loudoun merger, the rest were FCV. They were either play-ups coming down on age or had been on the pre-ECNL team and many had been FCV Ashburn or whatever since they were young. It's crazy to act like all those kids came from outside the club, it's just not true. And it's not the vast majority you randomly sited.

How many of those "FCV girls" were cut and are no longer there? The 04's added 3 kids from McLean at the expense of their own "developed" kids. And that is just the one to one trade off. Other kids were cut to get from 22 down to 18. How many kids on the upcoming roster will have been FCV for more than 3-4 years? 5? 8?

Add a kid here and there over the next 3 years and that number will dip below 5 home grown kids. When you start at U14 with half the roster with your own kids and then reduce that by a third within one year is not #Development.

The 04 DA team added three players. What's wrong with that? Didn't other DA's in the area add to their rosters, cut from their rosters? I thought that's how it goes. Some kids left on their own, others weren't offered spots this time around. That's how it goes on ANY team. I have no idea why you project this onto FCV as though the other club rosters stayed the same, no one got cut and no "outside players" joined. It happens every year at EVERY high level club. It's not an FCV thing, it's a soccer thing. Should clubs just not even bother with tryouts then? And more like 10+ of the 04 team is "homegrown."

FCV projects itself as a club that develops talent. Lets start there. That would indicate that long term trained within FCV would stand more than a fighting chance to stick to a roster. If FCV is going to advertise a "DA Futures" youth program then the club should actually demonstrate that there is an inherent advantage to playing at FCV from a early age.

So, after one year of DA FCV has already reduced its home grown talent, that they had years to develop, by a third for kids essentially off the street. So it begs the question, what is the point of a program like "DA Futures" when your own long term developed kids can't hold off a kid from outside? And how many of those outside kids are truly better than the ones they are replacing?

Every club should always add talent when they can. I have no issue with that but it is the image that FCV likes to project that they DEVELOP when in fact they simply recruit. Just call it what it is. And again, when they were a ECNL club the point was to collect a bunch of good players and go to showcases. If collecting talent was all US Soccer wanted then ODP would still be a real thing. But the point of DA is to have vertical integration where kids are developed from young ages from within each DA club not just to wait until U14/U15 and see who shows up for ID sessions and cut lose kids you spent 4+ years supposedly developing.

Most of the kids did stick to the roster. The other local DA also cut its 04 roster drastically to get to a more manageable number, don't blame either club for doing that. So all 10+ of the kids on the 04 team that have been FCV for years, doesn't that shoot down your "they don't develop" mantra? Those kids are good, the team is good. People want to join a good team, so naturally you'll have some "outside" kids wanting to join the team. If they're good, should the club turn them away? You're saying that because every single player didn't stay on the roster, that FCV can't develop players? That's garbage. People leave for lots of reasons. I think the 04 DA showcases the development. You'll find lots of pics of those kids in FCV jerseys dating back to rec. I don't think we'll agree on this. You're hung up on the fact that some kids got cut or left, while completely overlooking that fact that most kids didn't.

When you cut kids that your club spent 4+ years “developing” then you are not developing.

When over the course of a season 60%+ of the roster is from the outside that is more than just “some outside kids”.

When you go from “10+” home grown kids down to about 6 that does not demonstrate “development”.

And, if you look deeper at the actual meaningful roles that the FCV kids actually play the real impact players drop down to 2-3 kids. FCV can’t even keep their home grown kids on the field over outside players.

LOL, now your just making stuff up and being subjective. I get it, the reality doesn't support your argument. I'll let this go now, can't believe I bothered actually. They didn't go from 10+ to 6, you're totally making things up now. The 10+ is for the next roster, staying put. Anyway, you'll note we managed this chat without me disparaging any other club. I respect them all. Try it sometime.

So of 22 kids 10+ kids are staying put? I guess 10+ sounds better in your narrative than 14 out of 22 kids "staying put". I like how you use "staying put" almost implying that the 7 cut kids had a choice. It is a pretty telling number for such a developmental club as FCV is that they have a 40% churn rate in players.

The numbers are wrong, but I won't bother correcting them. I won't be feeding you any info. I think that's the point here, for you to try to gain info. It's pointless, you don't want to believe that the club develops kids. Lots of evidence to the contrary, but you're firm in your stance. Do you. Wish you the best at your club. Stop worrying so much about a club you're not even involved with. All of the parents at FCV aren't dumb, there's a reason they stay and it's not all about winning. Seriously, I hope you spend this much energy on your own club.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:what they don't say about the DA futures program is that at every level as you move up the pyramid, players get weeded out as the level gets higher.

There's no guarantee that your child will make it to DA level by U13/U14, primarily because of motivation level and the interest from the player. How much a player practices on their own, if they grow up in a soccer household, and if they do a lot of individual lessons outside of team training, and innate talent or athletic ability are the determinants.

And? That is exactly as I, or anyone else with a kid playing competitive travel should expect. That isn't an FCV thing. That happens (and should happen I might add) at all clubs.

The problem is FCV IS advertising development and promoting their DA players as "home grown" when in fact most are not. And that worked fine for ECNL when it was essentially a showcase league, but DA idealistically wants their clubs to be more than collectors of talented kids, they want them to have a proven an established curriculum. When far more than half of any FCV DA team never pulled on a FCV jersey before 14 years old you can certainly claim to have strong teams but stop saying that as a club FCV develops talent.

And yes, selling "DA Futures" to a bunch of 7-8 year old kids is hilarious.

This is just incorrect. I get that you have a thing about FCV...got it. But at least get the facts right. Half the 04 DA team isn't even 14yrs old yet, so stop. Also, besides the 5 very good players that came over from the Loudoun merger, the rest were FCV. They were either play-ups coming down on age or had been on the pre-ECNL team and many had been FCV Ashburn or whatever since they were young. It's crazy to act like all those kids came from outside the club, it's just not true. And it's not the vast majority you randomly sited.

How many of those "FCV girls" were cut and are no longer there? The 04's added 3 kids from McLean at the expense of their own "developed" kids. And that is just the one to one trade off. Other kids were cut to get from 22 down to 18. How many kids on the upcoming roster will have been FCV for more than 3-4 years? 5? 8?

Add a kid here and there over the next 3 years and that number will dip below 5 home grown kids. When you start at U14 with half the roster with your own kids and then reduce that by a third within one year is not #Development.

The 04 DA team added three players. What's wrong with that? Didn't other DA's in the area add to their rosters, cut from their rosters? I thought that's how it goes. Some kids left on their own, others weren't offered spots this time around. That's how it goes on ANY team. I have no idea why you project this onto FCV as though the other club rosters stayed the same, no one got cut and no "outside players" joined. It happens every year at EVERY high level club. It's not an FCV thing, it's a soccer thing. Should clubs just not even bother with tryouts then? And more like 10+ of the 04 team is "homegrown."

FCV projects itself as a club that develops talent. Lets start there. That would indicate that long term trained within FCV would stand more than a fighting chance to stick to a roster. If FCV is going to advertise a "DA Futures" youth program then the club should actually demonstrate that there is an inherent advantage to playing at FCV from a early age.

So, after one year of DA FCV has already reduced its home grown talent, that they had years to develop, by a third for kids essentially off the street. So it begs the question, what is the point of a program like "DA Futures" when your own long term developed kids can't hold off a kid from outside? And how many of those outside kids are truly better than the ones they are replacing?

Every club should always add talent when they can. I have no issue with that but it is the image that FCV likes to project that they DEVELOP when in fact they simply recruit. Just call it what it is. And again, when they were a ECNL club the point was to collect a bunch of good players and go to showcases. If collecting talent was all US Soccer wanted then ODP would still be a real thing. But the point of DA is to have vertical integration where kids are developed from young ages from within each DA club not just to wait until U14/U15 and see who shows up for ID sessions and cut lose kids you spent 4+ years supposedly developing.

Most of the kids did stick to the roster. The other local DA also cut its 04 roster drastically to get to a more manageable number, don't blame either club for doing that. So all 10+ of the kids on the 04 team that have been FCV for years, doesn't that shoot down your "they don't develop" mantra? Those kids are good, the team is good. People want to join a good team, so naturally you'll have some "outside" kids wanting to join the team. If they're good, should the club turn them away? You're saying that because every single player didn't stay on the roster, that FCV can't develop players? That's garbage. People leave for lots of reasons. I think the 04 DA showcases the development. You'll find lots of pics of those kids in FCV jerseys dating back to rec. I don't think we'll agree on this. You're hung up on the fact that some kids got cut or left, while completely overlooking that fact that most kids didn't.

When you cut kids that your club spent 4+ years “developing” then you are not developing.

When over the course of a season 60%+ of the roster is from the outside that is more than just “some outside kids”.

When you go from “10+” home grown kids down to about 6 that does not demonstrate “development”.

And, if you look deeper at the actual meaningful roles that the FCV kids actually play the real impact players drop down to 2-3 kids. FCV can’t even keep their home grown kids on the field over outside players.

LOL, now your just making stuff up and being subjective. I get it, the reality doesn't support your argument. I'll let this go now, can't believe I bothered actually. They didn't go from 10+ to 6, you're totally making things up now. The 10+ is for the next roster, staying put. Anyway, you'll note we managed this chat without me disparaging any other club. I respect them all. Try it sometime.

So of 22 kids 10+ kids are staying put? I guess 10+ sounds better in your narrative than 14 out of 22 kids "staying put". I like how you use "staying put" almost implying that the 7 cut kids had a choice. It is a pretty telling number for such a developmental club as FCV is that they have a 40% churn rate in players.

First of all I should preface this by saying that my daughter has not, nor will she ever play at FCV. We travel far enough to play now, and another 20-30+ minutes to FCV is not in the cards for us. I say this so that it is clear we are not FCV people and have no vested interest in them good or bad.

OK, so you do understand that the DA is supposed to be made up of the most elite players in the area right? I can't imagine that FCV's Elite/Premier team supplied the majority of players to their ECNL teams. Players from PW County, Fairfax County, Loudon County, Arlington, etc were coming and taking positions at both McLean and FCV at U14. This is no different. You have to understand that the DA is supposed to be the place where the top 1% of females play. I am sorry, but all 18 girls playing U12 or U13 at FCV or even U14 were not among the top 1%. The reason that there aren't more DA (or ECNL teams) is honestly because it is expected that the best players may need to travel to play on one of those teams. If you want to play FCV DA, you have to assume you will need to be better than kids from maybe a 20-30 or maybe even further mile radius. The fact that FCV has 8-10 kids left on their DA who started at FCV is actually impressive. Yes, kids who started with FCV will get cut as top players from other clubs decide they want to play in the DA. That is part of the process. Get over it.

[Anonymous]

^^^
I understand all of this. But to bring this full circle back to the original topic that started it, "DA Futures". FCV is advertising and pushing the dream of DA and the promise of development to play DA upon the parents of 7 year old kids.

If attaching your name historically to clubs like SYA, South County and Ashburn and then picking the players that those youth programs developed then yes FCV is amazing. But clubs like McLean, BRYC, Arlington and Loudoun seem to do fine on their own without club grabs, team grabs and player grabs like FCV does.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:^^^
I understand all of this. But to bring this full circle back to the original topic that started it, "DA Futures". FCV is advertising and pushing the dream of DA and the promise of development to play DA upon the parents of 7 year old kids.

If attaching your name historically to clubs like SYA, South County and Ashburn and then picking the players that those youth programs developed then yes FCV is amazing. But clubs like McLean, BRYC, Arlington and Loudoun seem to do fine on their own without club grabs, team grabs and player grabs like FCV does.

So if they changed the name of that program to "FCV Tots", you'd let all this go?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^^^
I understand all of this. But to bring this full circle back to the original topic that started it, "DA Futures". FCV is advertising and pushing the dream of DA and the promise of development to play DA upon the parents of 7 year old kids.

If attaching your name historically to clubs like SYA, South County and Ashburn and then picking the players that those youth programs developed then yes FCV is amazing. But clubs like McLean, BRYC, Arlington and Loudoun seem to do fine on their own without club grabs, team grabs and player grabs like FCV does.

So if they changed the name of that program to "FCV Tots", you'd let all this go?

It would be just as ridiculous but at least it would be accurate.

But in the meantime I'll just wait for the next big club "merger" FCV makes in order to develop the next great generation of other coaches work.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^^^
I understand all of this. But to bring this full circle back to the original topic that started it, "DA Futures". FCV is advertising and pushing the dream of DA and the promise of development to play DA upon the parents of 7 year old kids.

If attaching your name historically to clubs like SYA, South County and Ashburn and then picking the players that those youth programs developed then yes FCV is amazing. But clubs like McLean, BRYC, Arlington and Loudoun seem to do fine on their own without club grabs, team grabs and player grabs like FCV does.

So if they changed the name of that program to "FCV Tots", you'd let all this go?

It would be just as ridiculous but at least it would be accurate.

But in the meantime I'll just wait for the next big club "merger" FCV makes in order to develop the next great generation of other coaches work.

What's your motivation? Is it just to try and steer folks clear of the evil FCV? Just curious as I can not see spending this much energy when you're not even involved with the club. What do you hope to gain? I don't know your story, but I'd assume FCV is in your rearview, you're on to a new club, why keep looking back?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^^^
I understand all of this. But to bring this full circle back to the original topic that started it, "DA Futures". FCV is advertising and pushing the dream of DA and the promise of development to play DA upon the parents of 7 year old kids.

If attaching your name historically to clubs like SYA, South County and Ashburn and then picking the players that those youth programs developed then yes FCV is amazing. But clubs like McLean, BRYC, Arlington and Loudoun seem to do fine on their own without club grabs, team grabs and player grabs like FCV does.

So if they changed the name of that program to "FCV Tots", you'd let all this go?

It would be just as ridiculous but at least it would be accurate.

But in the meantime I'll just wait for the next big club "merger" FCV makes in order to develop the next great generation of other coaches work.

What's your motivation? Is it just to try and steer folks clear of the evil FCV? Just curious as I can not see spending this much energy when you're not even involved with the club. What do you hope to gain? I don't know your story, but I'd assume FCV is in your rearview, you're on to a new club, why keep looking back?

When people claim that FCV develops, or the club likes to make such claims I'm just asking for supporting evidence. Merging with clubs, grabbing teams and poaching players IS what they do but I'm not sure that can be called development. One does not even need to be affiliated with the club to know how FCV has operates. here is the list of the clubs they had mergers with:
Loudoun
Fusion
Ashburn
South County
SYA

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^^^
I understand all of this. But to bring this full circle back to the original topic that started it, "DA Futures". FCV is advertising and pushing the dream of DA and the promise of development to play DA upon the parents of 7 year old kids.

If attaching your name historically to clubs like SYA, South County and Ashburn and then picking the players that those youth programs developed then yes FCV is amazing. But clubs like McLean, BRYC, Arlington and Loudoun seem to do fine on their own without club grabs, team grabs and player grabs like FCV does.

So if they changed the name of that program to "FCV Tots", you'd let all this go?

It would be just as ridiculous but at least it would be accurate.

But in the meantime I'll just wait for the next big club "merger" FCV makes in order to develop the next great generation of other coaches work.

What's your motivation? Is it just to try and steer folks clear of the evil FCV? Just curious as I can not see spending this much energy when you're not even involved with the club. What do you hope to gain? I don't know your story, but I'd assume FCV is in your rearview, you're on to a new club, why keep looking back?

When people claim that FCV develops, or the club likes to make such claims I'm just asking for supporting evidence. Merging with clubs, grabbing teams and poaching players IS what they do but I'm not sure that can be called development. One does not even need to be affiliated with the club to know how FCV has operates. here is the list of the clubs they had mergers with:
Loudoun
Fusion
Ashburn
South County
SYA

Seems to me there’s been evidence just in this thread alone. Does someone need to post links to all the kids that started with the club and are now DA? That’s crazy. You don’t want to see that they develop, so you won’t. Again, why are you so hung up on a club you’re not even with?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^^^
I understand all of this. But to bring this full circle back to the original topic that started it, "DA Futures". FCV is advertising and pushing the dream of DA and the promise of development to play DA upon the parents of 7 year old kids.

If attaching your name historically to clubs like SYA, South County and Ashburn and then picking the players that those youth programs developed then yes FCV is amazing. But clubs like McLean, BRYC, Arlington and Loudoun seem to do fine on their own without club grabs, team grabs and player grabs like FCV does.

So if they changed the name of that program to "FCV Tots", you'd let all this go?

It would be just as ridiculous but at least it would be accurate.

But in the meantime I'll just wait for the next big club "merger" FCV makes in order to develop the next great generation of other coaches work.

What's your motivation? Is it just to try and steer folks clear of the evil FCV? Just curious as I can not see spending this much energy when you're not even involved with the club. What do you hope to gain? I don't know your story, but I'd assume FCV is in your rearview, you're on to a new club, why keep looking back?

When people claim that FCV develops, or the club likes to make such claims I'm just asking for supporting evidence. Merging with clubs, grabbing teams and poaching players IS what they do but I'm not sure that can be called development. One does not even need to be affiliated with the club to know how FCV has operates. here is the list of the clubs they had mergers with:
Loudoun
Fusion
Ashburn
South County
SYA

Seems to me there’s been evidence just in this thread alone. Does someone need to post links to all the kids that started with the club and are now DA? That’s crazy. You don’t want to see that they develop, so you won’t. Again, why are you so hung up on a club you’re not even with?

The first age group that FCV had under their own umbrella since U9, and not through affiliation with any other club would be 06. All older age groups were developed though mergers and acquisitions.