Brave 09g rant

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:With VYS coaches at the helm of BRAVE, they play direct, transition ball which is the opposite of BRYC possession ball and positioning that is taught. No wonder there is confusion when merging players and I can't see how it's going to benefit talented BRYC players whose only job will be to look mediocre and play it directly to the fast forward(s).

Certainly talented BRYC players get recruited by other clubs but why can't those clubs develop their own talent/promote from within? They want to profit from the work of others who have developed these players for them.

The play is rather direct but seems to progress over the years. Not sure how many BRYC girls are on the ‘08 and younger rosters. I believe not a single one on 2011.

I would say talented girls from any club get recruited not just the special BRYC ones. Let’s stop pretending the clubs are the biggest reason for development. It largely falls on the individual and the work they put in on their own.

How do you play direct when OP says they only play with one striker? 5 central midfielders leads me to believe it’s not a confusion issue on possession vs direct but confusion on the formation. There must be some wide, left, right midfielders?

Most teams around here that I’ve seen use 5 Midfielders and a back 4 are just parking the bus…And when they gain possession they are just pinging it long in the general direction of the striker and hoping for a fluke goal. Definitely have seen some BRAVE teams play that way.

This sounds terrible. I can see this if you have a lead to preserve in the final minutes but to play like this all of the time is criminal. Young players will never develop doing this. How is Brave winning with this style of play?

It is terrible and you are absolutely right that it does zero for the players long term…It just makes the results more palatable. BRAVE teams have a combined 28 wins in 96 matches, so there is a lot more losing going on than winning.

Is that the girls side or both? What about Union, Arlington, NVA and VDA? How many wins on their girls side in comparison?

No one is saying Brave is the best around, at least I think, but it seems that some of the teams have outperformed expectations.

And if their terrible strategy does not develop players then surely by U16 (2008) these other teams with their superior styles should be running circles around these undeveloped girls right? Or do these other clubs need one more year to prove they develop (recruit) the best?

If you strictly want to look at points per game from U13-U19 on the girls side through the current year, it would look like this... Brave still cradled at the bottom.

1. NVA - 1.95
2. Union - 1.73
3. VDA - 1.62
4. ARL - 1.23
5. Brave - 1.20

So Arl, who was DA/GA prior to ECNL, and Brave, who had the BRYC foundation that wasn’t pretty to say the least, are essentially performing the same.

Why do you care so much about all of these other teams/clubs anyways? Just focus on your kid’s development and the success of their own team.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:With VYS coaches at the helm of BRAVE, they play direct, transition ball which is the opposite of BRYC possession ball and positioning that is taught. No wonder there is confusion when merging players and I can't see how it's going to benefit talented BRYC players whose only job will be to look mediocre and play it directly to the fast forward(s).

Certainly talented BRYC players get recruited by other clubs but why can't those clubs develop their own talent/promote from within? They want to profit from the work of others who have developed these players for them.

The play is rather direct but seems to progress over the years. Not sure how many BRYC girls are on the ‘08 and younger rosters. I believe not a single one on 2011.

I would say talented girls from any club get recruited not just the special BRYC ones. Let’s stop pretending the clubs are the biggest reason for development. It largely falls on the individual and the work they put in on their own.

How do you play direct when OP says they only play with one striker? 5 central midfielders leads me to believe it’s not a confusion issue on possession vs direct but confusion on the formation. There must be some wide, left, right midfielders?

Most teams around here that I’ve seen use 5 Midfielders and a back 4 are just parking the bus…And when they gain possession they are just pinging it long in the general direction of the striker and hoping for a fluke goal. Definitely have seen some BRAVE teams play that way.

This sounds terrible. I can see this if you have a lead to preserve in the final minutes but to play like this all of the time is criminal. Young players will never develop doing this. How is Brave winning with this style of play?

It is terrible and you are absolutely right that it does zero for the players long term…It just makes the results more palatable. BRAVE teams have a combined 28 wins in 96 matches, so there is a lot more losing going on than winning.

Is that the girls side or both? What about Union, Arlington, NVA and VDA? How many wins on their girls side in comparison?

No one is saying Brave is the best around, at least I think, but it seems that some of the teams have outperformed expectations.

And if their terrible strategy does not develop players then surely by U16 (2008) these other teams with their superior styles should be running circles around these undeveloped girls right? Or do these other clubs need one more year to prove they develop (recruit) the best?

If you strictly want to look at points per game from U13-U19 on the girls side through the current year, it would look like this... Brave still cradled at the bottom.

1. NVA - 1.95
2. Union - 1.73
3. VDA - 1.62
4. ARL - 1.23
5. Brave - 1.20

So Arl, who was DA/GA prior to ECNL, and Brave, who had the BRYC foundation that wasn’t pretty to say the least, are essentially performing the same.

Why do you care so much about all of these other teams/clubs anyways? Just focus on your kid’s development and the success of their own team.

BRYC had some of the top ECNL teams in the country as recently as 4-5 years ago, but BRAVE is a new club, right?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:With VYS coaches at the helm of BRAVE, they play direct, transition ball which is the opposite of BRYC possession ball and positioning that is taught. No wonder there is confusion when merging players and I can't see how it's going to benefit talented BRYC players whose only job will be to look mediocre and play it directly to the fast forward(s).

Certainly talented BRYC players get recruited by other clubs but why can't those clubs develop their own talent/promote from within? They want to profit from the work of others who have developed these players for them.

The play is rather direct but seems to progress over the years. Not sure how many BRYC girls are on the ‘08 and younger rosters. I believe not a single one on 2011.

I would say talented girls from any club get recruited not just the special BRYC ones. Let’s stop pretending the clubs are the biggest reason for development. It largely falls on the individual and the work they put in on their own.

How do you play direct when OP says they only play with one striker? 5 central midfielders leads me to believe it’s not a confusion issue on possession vs direct but confusion on the formation. There must be some wide, left, right midfielders?

Most teams around here that I’ve seen use 5 Midfielders and a back 4 are just parking the bus…And when they gain possession they are just pinging it long in the general direction of the striker and hoping for a fluke goal. Definitely have seen some BRAVE teams play that way.

This sounds terrible. I can see this if you have a lead to preserve in the final minutes but to play like this all of the time is criminal. Young players will never develop doing this. How is Brave winning with this style of play?

It is terrible and you are absolutely right that it does zero for the players long term…It just makes the results more palatable. BRAVE teams have a combined 28 wins in 96 matches, so there is a lot more losing going on than winning.

Is that the girls side or both? What about Union, Arlington, NVA and VDA? How many wins on their girls side in comparison?

No one is saying Brave is the best around, at least I think, but it seems that some of the teams have outperformed expectations.

And if their terrible strategy does not develop players then surely by U16 (2008) these other teams with their superior styles should be running circles around these undeveloped girls right? Or do these other clubs need one more year to prove they develop (recruit) the best?

If you strictly want to look at points per game from U13-U19 on the girls side through the current year, it would look like this... Brave still cradled at the bottom.

1. NVA - 1.95
2. Union - 1.73
3. VDA - 1.62
4. ARL - 1.23
5. Brave - 1.20

So Arl, who was DA/GA prior to ECNL, and Brave, who had the BRYC foundation that wasn’t pretty to say the least, are essentially performing the same.

Why do you care so much about all of these other teams/clubs anyways? Just focus on your kid’s development and the success of their own team.

BRYC had some of the top ECNL teams in the country as recently as 4-5 years ago, but BRAVE is a new club, right?

BRYC 03 was a great team. That’s about it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:With VYS coaches at the helm of BRAVE, they play direct, transition ball which is the opposite of BRYC possession ball and positioning that is taught. No wonder there is confusion when merging players and I can't see how it's going to benefit talented BRYC players whose only job will be to look mediocre and play it directly to the fast forward(s).

Certainly talented BRYC players get recruited by other clubs but why can't those clubs develop their own talent/promote from within? They want to profit from the work of others who have developed these players for them.

The play is rather direct but seems to progress over the years. Not sure how many BRYC girls are on the ‘08 and younger rosters. I believe not a single one on 2011.

I would say talented girls from any club get recruited not just the special BRYC ones. Let’s stop pretending the clubs are the biggest reason for development. It largely falls on the individual and the work they put in on their own.

How do you play direct when OP says they only play with one striker? 5 central midfielders leads me to believe it’s not a confusion issue on possession vs direct but confusion on the formation. There must be some wide, left, right midfielders?

Most teams around here that I’ve seen use 5 Midfielders and a back 4 are just parking the bus…And when they gain possession they are just pinging it long in the general direction of the striker and hoping for a fluke goal. Definitely have seen some BRAVE teams play that way.

This sounds terrible. I can see this if you have a lead to preserve in the final minutes but to play like this all of the time is criminal. Young players will never develop doing this. How is Brave winning with this style of play?

It is terrible and you are absolutely right that it does zero for the players long term…It just makes the results more palatable. BRAVE teams have a combined 28 wins in 96 matches, so there is a lot more losing going on than winning.

Is that the girls side or both? What about Union, Arlington, NVA and VDA? How many wins on their girls side in comparison?

No one is saying Brave is the best around, at least I think, but it seems that some of the teams have outperformed expectations.

And if their terrible strategy does not develop players then surely by U16 (2008) these other teams with their superior styles should be running circles around these undeveloped girls right? Or do these other clubs need one more year to prove they develop (recruit) the best?

If you strictly want to look at points per game from U13-U19 on the girls side through the current year, it would look like this... Brave still cradled at the bottom.

1. NVA - 1.95
2. Union - 1.73
3. VDA - 1.62
4. ARL - 1.23
5. Brave - 1.20

So Arl, who was DA/GA prior to ECNL, and Brave, who had the BRYC foundation that wasn’t pretty to say the least, are essentially performing the same.

Why do you care so much about all of these other teams/clubs anyways? Just focus on your kid’s development and the success of their own team.

BRYC had some of the top ECNL teams in the country as recently as 4-5 years ago, but BRAVE is a new club, right?

Give it up already.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:With VYS coaches at the helm of BRAVE, they play direct, transition ball which is the opposite of BRYC possession ball and positioning that is taught. No wonder there is confusion when merging players and I can't see how it's going to benefit talented BRYC players whose only job will be to look mediocre and play it directly to the fast forward(s).

Certainly talented BRYC players get recruited by other clubs but why can't those clubs develop their own talent/promote from within? They want to profit from the work of others who have developed these players for them.

The play is rather direct but seems to progress over the years. Not sure how many BRYC girls are on the ‘08 and younger rosters. I believe not a single one on 2011.

I would say talented girls from any club get recruited not just the special BRYC ones. Let’s stop pretending the clubs are the biggest reason for development. It largely falls on the individual and the work they put in on their own.

How do you play direct when OP says they only play with one striker? 5 central midfielders leads me to believe it’s not a confusion issue on possession vs direct but confusion on the formation. There must be some wide, left, right midfielders?

Most teams around here that I’ve seen use 5 Midfielders and a back 4 are just parking the bus…And when they gain possession they are just pinging it long in the general direction of the striker and hoping for a fluke goal. Definitely have seen some BRAVE teams play that way.

This sounds terrible. I can see this if you have a lead to preserve in the final minutes but to play like this all of the time is criminal. Young players will never develop doing this. How is Brave winning with this style of play?

It is terrible and you are absolutely right that it does zero for the players long term…It just makes the results more palatable. BRAVE teams have a combined 28 wins in 96 matches, so there is a lot more losing going on than winning.

Is that the girls side or both? What about Union, Arlington, NVA and VDA? How many wins on their girls side in comparison?

No one is saying Brave is the best around, at least I think, but it seems that some of the teams have outperformed expectations.

And if their terrible strategy does not develop players then surely by U16 (2008) these other teams with their superior styles should be running circles around these undeveloped girls right? Or do these other clubs need one more year to prove they develop (recruit) the best?

That is both sides. Generally, the Northern VA ECNL clubs aren’t especially good at developing players. It’s too bad BRAVE doesn’t focus on developing players, but seem to be more about results than the other clubs, despite their port results.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:With VYS coaches at the helm of BRAVE, they play direct, transition ball which is the opposite of BRYC possession ball and positioning that is taught. No wonder there is confusion when merging players and I can't see how it's going to benefit talented BRYC players whose only job will be to look mediocre and play it directly to the fast forward(s).

Certainly talented BRYC players get recruited by other clubs but why can't those clubs develop their own talent/promote from within? They want to profit from the work of others who have developed these players for them.

The play is rather direct but seems to progress over the years. Not sure how many BRYC girls are on the ‘08 and younger rosters. I believe not a single one on 2011.

I would say talented girls from any club get recruited not just the special BRYC ones. Let’s stop pretending the clubs are the biggest reason for development. It largely falls on the individual and the work they put in on their own.

How do you play direct when OP says they only play with one striker? 5 central midfielders leads me to believe it’s not a confusion issue on possession vs direct but confusion on the formation. There must be some wide, left, right midfielders?

Most teams around here that I’ve seen use 5 Midfielders and a back 4 are just parking the bus…And when they gain possession they are just pinging it long in the general direction of the striker and hoping for a fluke goal. Definitely have seen some BRAVE teams play that way.

This sounds terrible. I can see this if you have a lead to preserve in the final minutes but to play like this all of the time is criminal. Young players will never develop doing this. How is Brave winning with this style of play?

It is terrible and you are absolutely right that it does zero for the players long term…It just makes the results more palatable. BRAVE teams have a combined 28 wins in 96 matches, so there is a lot more losing going on than winning.

Is that the girls side or both? What about Union, Arlington, NVA and VDA? How many wins on their girls side in comparison?

No one is saying Brave is the best around, at least I think, but it seems that some of the teams have outperformed expectations.

And if their terrible strategy does not develop players then surely by U16 (2008) these other teams with their superior styles should be running circles around these undeveloped girls right? Or do these other clubs need one more year to prove they develop (recruit) the best?

That is both sides. Generally, the Northern VA ECNL clubs aren’t especially good at developing players. It’s too bad BRAVE doesn’t focus on developing players, but seem to be more about results than the other clubs, despite their port results.

Clearly some of the clubs are good at developing players. How else do any of these girls become YNT and P5 college?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:With VYS coaches at the helm of BRAVE, they play direct, transition ball which is the opposite of BRYC possession ball and positioning that is taught. No wonder there is confusion when merging players and I can't see how it's going to benefit talented BRYC players whose only job will be to look mediocre and play it directly to the fast forward(s).

Certainly talented BRYC players get recruited by other clubs but why can't those clubs develop their own talent/promote from within? They want to profit from the work of others who have developed these players for them.

The play is rather direct but seems to progress over the years. Not sure how many BRYC girls are on the ‘08 and younger rosters. I believe not a single one on 2011.

I would say talented girls from any club get recruited not just the special BRYC ones. Let’s stop pretending the clubs are the biggest reason for development. It largely falls on the individual and the work they put in on their own.

How do you play direct when OP says they only play with one striker? 5 central midfielders leads me to believe it’s not a confusion issue on possession vs direct but confusion on the formation. There must be some wide, left, right midfielders?

Most teams around here that I’ve seen use 5 Midfielders and a back 4 are just parking the bus…And when they gain possession they are just pinging it long in the general direction of the striker and hoping for a fluke goal. Definitely have seen some BRAVE teams play that way.

This sounds terrible. I can see this if you have a lead to preserve in the final minutes but to play like this all of the time is criminal. Young players will never develop doing this. How is Brave winning with this style of play?

It is terrible and you are absolutely right that it does zero for the players long term…It just makes the results more palatable. BRAVE teams have a combined 28 wins in 96 matches, so there is a lot more losing going on than winning.

Is that the girls side or both? What about Union, Arlington, NVA and VDA? How many wins on their girls side in comparison?

No one is saying Brave is the best around, at least I think, but it seems that some of the teams have outperformed expectations.

And if their terrible strategy does not develop players then surely by U16 (2008) these other teams with their superior styles should be running circles around these undeveloped girls right? Or do these other clubs need one more year to prove they develop (recruit) the best?

That is both sides. Generally, the Northern VA ECNL clubs aren’t especially good at developing players. It’s too bad BRAVE doesn’t focus on developing players, but seem to be more about results than the other clubs, despite their port results.

I’m not a fan of the direct play either but I think we can understand the thinking playing for results. With how the majority of strong players flock to winning teams, it is difficult for lesser skilled teams to attract better players that have the ability to play a less direct style if they are losing all of the time.

If parents didn’t emphasize winning so much then all clubs could focus on actual development but we all know this is not the case.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:With VYS coaches at the helm of BRAVE, they play direct, transition ball which is the opposite of BRYC possession ball and positioning that is taught. No wonder there is confusion when merging players and I can't see how it's going to benefit talented BRYC players whose only job will be to look mediocre and play it directly to the fast forward(s).

Certainly talented BRYC players get recruited by other clubs but why can't those clubs develop their own talent/promote from within? They want to profit from the work of others who have developed these players for them.

The play is rather direct but seems to progress over the years. Not sure how many BRYC girls are on the ‘08 and younger rosters. I believe not a single one on 2011.

I would say talented girls from any club get recruited not just the special BRYC ones. Let’s stop pretending the clubs are the biggest reason for development. It largely falls on the individual and the work they put in on their own.

How do you play direct when OP says they only play with one striker? 5 central midfielders leads me to believe it’s not a confusion issue on possession vs direct but confusion on the formation. There must be some wide, left, right midfielders?

Most teams around here that I’ve seen use 5 Midfielders and a back 4 are just parking the bus…And when they gain possession they are just pinging it long in the general direction of the striker and hoping for a fluke goal. Definitely have seen some BRAVE teams play that way.

This sounds terrible. I can see this if you have a lead to preserve in the final minutes but to play like this all of the time is criminal. Young players will never develop doing this. How is Brave winning with this style of play?

It is terrible and you are absolutely right that it does zero for the players long term…It just makes the results more palatable. BRAVE teams have a combined 28 wins in 96 matches, so there is a lot more losing going on than winning.

Is that the girls side or both? What about Union, Arlington, NVA and VDA? How many wins on their girls side in comparison?

No one is saying Brave is the best around, at least I think, but it seems that some of the teams have outperformed expectations.

And if their terrible strategy does not develop players then surely by U16 (2008) these other teams with their superior styles should be running circles around these undeveloped girls right? Or do these other clubs need one more year to prove they develop (recruit) the best?

That is both sides. Generally, the Northern VA ECNL clubs aren’t especially good at developing players. It’s too bad BRAVE doesn’t focus on developing players, but seem to be more about results than the other clubs, despite their port results.

Clearly some of the clubs are good at developing players. How else do any of these girls become YNT and P5 college?

Imagine if it's a culmination of THEIR own hard work and nothing to do with the club patch. Maybe partially due to the league patch but at the end of the day more credit should be given to the individual player most of the time around this area.

[Anonymous]

Somebody has to be developing the players who are playing ECNL and committing to college. But players and families will always think the grass is greener somewhere else, thus all the movement, especially when there are so many nearby clubs.

A question (because I really don't know the answer): are there other areas of the country that have 6 ECNL teams -- Brave, McLean, Arlington, VDA, NVA, Bethesda all packed in a (admittedly highly populated) 30 mile radius? Maybe SoCal? I mean, Brave, MYS, and Arlington all practice within 10 miles of each other.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Somebody has to be developing the players who are playing ECNL and committing to college. But players and families will always think the grass is greener somewhere else, thus all the movement, especially when there are so many nearby clubs.

A question (because I really don't know the answer): are there other areas of the country that have 6 ECNL teams -- Brave, McLean, Arlington, VDA, NVA, Bethesda all packed in a (admittedly highly populated) 30 mile radius? Maybe SoCal? I mean, Brave, MYS, and Arlington all practice within 10 miles of each other.

Dallas area has a similar footprint. Atlanta is close if you decide to include GA teams for all those metro areas as well.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Somebody has to be developing the players who are playing ECNL and committing to college. But players and families will always think the grass is greener somewhere else, thus all the movement, especially when there are so many nearby clubs.

A question (because I really don't know the answer): are there other areas of the country that have 6 ECNL teams -- Brave, McLean, Arlington, VDA, NVA, Bethesda all packed in a (admittedly highly populated) 30 mile radius? Maybe SoCal? I mean, Brave, MYS, and Arlington all practice within 10 miles of each other.

Dallas area has a similar footprint. Atlanta is close if you decide to include GA teams for all those metro areas as well.

Dallas doesn’t have this many clubs. No other area does.

[Anonymous]

I believe the Dallas area has 6 clubs that compete in ECNL:
Sting Dallas Black ECNL
Solar SC ECNL
DKSC ECNL
FC Dallas ECNL
Dallas Texans ECNL
Sting Dallas Royal ECNL

Agree our area should have less, but I think the direction the ECNL will take is more clubs, not less.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I believe the Dallas area has 6 clubs that compete in ECNL:
Sting Dallas Black ECNL
Solar SC ECNL
DKSC ECNL
FC Dallas ECNL
Dallas Texans ECNL
Sting Dallas Royal ECNL

Agree our area should have less, but I think the direction the ECNL will take is more clubs, not less.

Brave
Union
NVA
Vda
Arlington
Bethesda
Maryland United
Pipeline

[Anonymous]

If we are talking about MV- dude is a clown. Get your kid out of Brave ASAP. Horrible coach, horrible director. Imagine asking kids to sit back and defend the whole game. Makes 0 sense, horrible for development.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
Clearly some of the clubs are good at developing players. How else do any of these girls become YNT and P5 college?

People are overestimating how much players are “found” and “developed” by clubs. Its not like club coaches are finding kids with raw undeveloped talent playing on dirt fields and teach them the game.

We’re talking about a large population of parents with a lot of resources that get their kids private trainers, camps, equipment, strength and mental fitness programs, winter futsal, and the academic resources that allows them to be accepted to highly competitive colleges and afford the high tuition. The development is mostly done individually and outside the club with parent resources. Most every one of these local girls going to P5 schools has been doing all this external development since they were 12 years old. Many have moved clubs one or more times.

I know because my DD is part of it and I see what everyone else on the team is doing including her. The clubs role in all this is to facilitate the connections and opportunities to play in front of college coaches.