Jefferson Cup!
![[Post New]](/jforum/templates/default/images/icon_minipost_new.gif){kind=icon}
Anonymous
I took a look at the RU records as they become older. Here are the two oldest groups. They look fairly competitive to me. I'm not an RU fan but they are a well run club and do have quite a bit of success. Girls: 07 - #7 in Mid-Atlantic with record of 7-4-3 (the weakest of the 4 older teams across RU's boys and girls) 06/05 - #2 in Mid-Atlantic with a record of 10-2 and only one draw away from being tied for first (fairly competitive) Boys 07 - #1 in Mid-Atlantic with 11-3-1 record this fall season (fairly competitive) 06/05 - Currently #5 in Mid-Atlantic with a 9-2-4 record and defending national champions (fairly competitive in arguably the best ECNL group of teams in the country over the last 3 years) |
Exactly đź‘Ť check the fields assigned to RU teams.
Anonymous
|
There were some teams that played in lower brackets to pad their rankings and other teams that used placement to get an advantage. The RU teams intentionally put themselves in a top bracket so they could get to the finals.
The referees made sure teams like the 2009 team won their games. Most of the teams in this top two brackets were better than them, yet they still managed to pull out wins. This happens when the tournament is rigged for college exposure. Look at the Union team, they played in a much lower bracket, mostly against weaker teams to get a higher ranking. Their team didn't look very good and yet they still won. The GA teams also looked pretty average. One team didn't win any games. The other team won two games but lost to the ECNL teams. Overall the RU teams did better than they normally would in every age group because the referees are coaches of their lower level teams. They require all of their coaches to be licensed referees for this purpose. The RU players tend not to do so well when they get to college because they don't really develop the players. They make sure they look good by using the referee situation to their advantage. Only less regarded clubs act this way. |
Anonymous
Agree, refs are always favoring RU teams. |
Anonymous
This sounds like sour grapes to me! RU is a solid club and thinking they go to this extreme is laughable. They don't have enough coaches to put out on the field as refs when they are trying to coach all of their teams in the tournament. Furthermore, the RU players do quite well. They have signed multiple on the boys side to USL contracts over recent years and these kids are getting playing time. They have players on the girls side who have been, and others that currently are, impact players on high level teams national power teams (ACC, SEC, etc.) and in national team camps. They even have a girl who plays internationally and played in this past women's World Cup as a college sophomore. Are there players from RU that don't do well in college? Of course! And the same is true for every club across the country. I think they do quite well and don't need help from the refs. Not a big RU fan but I can give respect where respect is due. I think it is comical how people make up all these stories and conspiracies about how and why teams do well instead of just giving respect to teams and players that accomplish things. Says a lot about the problems of today with thinking like this vs. celebrating others success. |
Anonymous
|
Agree. Sour VDA grapes. Lose 5-2 in final and blame RU for easy schedule and biased refs. You lost. Move on and stop making excuses.
I also agree that whoever the tournament director was really messed up the '09 brackets. Bethesda, TSJ and STA should not have been in the top bracket yet alone in the same division with Richmond. That is poor form by whoever put that together. |
Anonymous
It sounds like more sour grapes above. The two teams in RU bracket did better than the ECNL clubs. |
Anonymous
There was only one other ECNL team in the group, Bethesda. |
Anonymous
STA and TSJ had a better showing than VDA and Bethesda. |
Anonymous
Not STA. TSJ benefited from being with STA and Bethesda. TSJ would have gone 0-3 in the other side, same with STA and Bethesda. Apples to oranges. All three of those teams should have been one or two divisions lower. |
Anonymous
VDA went 2-1 in group play. Lost in the finals. That’s a good weekend. |
Anonymous
|
Championship Bracket A
RU ECNL - 5th Place MA ECNL TSJ FCV GA - 5th Place MA GA Bethesda ECNL - 9th Place NA ECNL STA GA - 8th Place NE GA Championship Bracket B Loudoun ECNL - 1st Place MA ECNL VDA ECNL - 3rd Place MA ECNL MFA ECNL - 2nd Place NA ECNL SUSA ECNL - 3rd Place NE ECNL 'nuff said. |
Anonymous
So it’s not sour grapes… |
Anonymous
| There are so many sour grapes in NoVA resulting in the finest whine/wine in the country! |
Anonymous
| The 2009 FCV girls only lost 2-0. VDA lost by three goals. The two D1 coaches that were watching voiced concern to the tournament director due to RU girls multiple fouls and no calls. There were at least four stoppages of play due to injuries. The two college coaches were there to see several of the top FCV players who couldn't make it. |
Anonymous
Please don't bring boys into this. Richmond has no local MLS Next or even ECNL competition for recruitment and are playing teams that lost players to MLS Next after 2020. Pretty much every decent team left in ECNL that does not compete against local MLS Next clubs for talent are going to look like worldbeaters. That said, their younger top teams are taught how to play properly, no question about it. |