Field hockey clubs feedback

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The Wolves team that qualified for NIT lost 1-0 to the NL team that didn’t qualify for NIT. Maybe this means they are pretty evenly matched. Or one team had bad day or was missing players or someone was recovering from injury and not 100%. This could have been the case at the NL NIT qualifier or at the match yesterday. There are likely factors at play that outsiders don’t know.

There is too much pitting clubs against one another on this thread. They all have their positives and negatives.

Wolves Black lost in the 5th/6th place bracket game vs Next Level Blue (possible A team.) However, Wolves Black is the B team and they did not qualify for NITS. Washington Wolves A team lost in the finals of the other bracket division to PA Revs.

[Anonymous]

Thank you for contributing a more mature perspective here that isn’t reinforcing what is likely a few people’s individual hangups. The tone on this thread is 95% helpful and the few here who do this game-by-game horse-race stuff (especially when vindictive towards one specific club) need to let go and reassess their priorities.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Thank you for contributing a more mature perspective here that isn’t reinforcing what is likely a few people’s individual hangups. The tone on this thread is 95% helpful and the few here who do this game-by-game horse-race stuff (especially when vindictive towards one specific club) need to let go and reassess their priorities.

It's hardly "vindictive towards one specific club" as there has been comments about several on here. And these are individual perspectives and experiences. Regardless of what you think of the tone, those are valid perspectives and ones worth at least considering if you're planning to join a local club or transfer clubs.

[Anonymous]

Tourney app says that Wolves black was in the advanced pool and lost in the last game to NL.

It also says that the other Wolves team that lost to PA Revs was in the intermediate pool.

Was the Wolves team that qualified for NITs playing in the lower pool yesterday?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The Wolves team that qualified for NIT lost 1-0 to the NL team that didn’t qualify for NIT. Maybe this means they are pretty evenly matched. Or one team had bad day or was missing players or someone was recovering from injury and not 100%. This could have been the case at the NL NIT qualifier or at the match yesterday. There are likely factors at play that outsiders don’t know.

There is too much pitting clubs against one another on this thread. They all have their positives and negatives.

Wolves Black lost in the 5th/6th place bracket game vs Next Level Blue (possible A team.) However, Wolves Black is the B team and they did not qualify for NITS. Washington Wolves A team lost in the finals of the other bracket division to PA Revs.

This is not correct.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The Wolves team that qualified for NIT lost 1-0 to the NL team that didn’t qualify for NIT. Maybe this means they are pretty evenly matched. Or one team had bad day or was missing players or someone was recovering from injury and not 100%. This could have been the case at the NL NIT qualifier or at the match yesterday. There are likely factors at play that outsiders don’t know.

There is too much pitting clubs against one another on this thread. They all have their positives and negatives.

Wolves Black lost in the 5th/6th place bracket game vs Next Level Blue (possible A team.) However, Wolves Black is the B team and they did not qualify for NITS. Washington Wolves A team lost in the finals of the other bracket division to PA Revs.

This is not correct.

Wolves play the team color name game like Next Level and a lot of other clubs. It can be difficult to determine between A and B teams (C and D and so on) and that is by design. Also Wolves’ jerseys will sometimes have their last name and sometimes not. Probably so competition can’t look up their names/number on website and determine A vs. B teams, etc. Sneaky but practical for indoor season. Outdoor showcase tournaments not practical - names and sometimes grad years should be displayed on all jerseys.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The Wolves team that qualified for NIT lost 1-0 to the NL team that didn’t qualify for NIT. Maybe this means they are pretty evenly matched. Or one team had bad day or was missing players or someone was recovering from injury and not 100%. This could have been the case at the NL NIT qualifier or at the match yesterday. There are likely factors at play that outsiders don’t know.

There is too much pitting clubs against one another on this thread. They all have their positives and negatives.

Wolves Black lost in the 5th/6th place bracket game vs Next Level Blue (possible A team.) However, Wolves Black is the B team and they did not qualify for NITS. Washington Wolves A team lost in the finals of the other bracket division to PA Revs.

This is not correct.

Wolves play the team color name game like Next Level and a lot of other clubs. It can be difficult to determine between A and B teams (C and D and so on) and that is by design. Also Wolves’ jerseys will sometimes have their last name and sometimes not. Probably so competition can’t look up their names/number on website and determine A vs. B teams, etc. Sneaky but practical for indoor season. Outdoor showcase tournaments not practical - names and sometimes grad years should be displayed on all jerseys.

Off the top of my head, Freedom, Warhawks, and WC don’t include last name or grad year on their jersey. Smaller clubs don’t need to repeat numbers so they aren’t trying to hide anything by leaving off a grad year or last name.

I think grad year is more helpful than last name when it comes to showcases or large tournaments.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Next Level sent three U19 teams to a Freedom Tournament in Maryland. Looks like all 3 got clobbered. Washington Wolves were there too and fared a little better.

Clobbered is a pretty strong word when referring to a team made of literal children. Sometimes the score doesn’t reflect the actual level of play.

You’ve made your “anonymous” feelings known about NL as a club, but keep in mind that you are speaking about people’s children. May your child never have someone say they were clobbered.

And one persons “perspective” isn’t actual fact nor is it another person’s experience. Maybe we can focus on being supportive of CHILDREN and acknowledge, gracefully, it’s not a good fit for everyone.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Wolves play the team color name game like Next Level and a lot of other clubs. It can be difficult to determine between A and B teams (C and D and so on) and that is by design. Also Wolves’ jerseys will sometimes have their last name and sometimes not. Probably so competition can’t look up their names/number on website and determine A vs. B teams, etc. Sneaky but practical for indoor season. Outdoor showcase tournaments not practical - names and sometimes grad years should be displayed on all jerseys.

This is all nonsense. Wolves (and Freedom, and Warhawks) none of them have names or grad years on their jerseys.
The color name game is simply because when you register multiple teams for a tournament, you have to give each team a name.

Names and grad years on jerseys for ??? And none of these teams is trying to "hide" looking up a name. Whoever you are, you speak with authority but you should rethink your biases because everything you write is bs.

[Anonymous]

There are probably two diehard cheerleaders for each club in this thread that will spew nonsense about their perceived "enemy club".

Like it has been said many times before, every club in the area has something going for it, even if not for you. Denigrating these clubs (and contrary to all the chatter, none of these clubs are rich or making a ton of money) only serves to make the commenter look delusional or idiotic.

As for thinking you are making some sort of point by looking at a single game or a win/loss at a local tournament is so beyond what ANY of these clubs and coaches are trying to teach your children it is laughable. Your misunderstanding of both the game and the point of youth sports IS the reason you find one club or another so objectionable - but it isn't grounded in reality. Stop it. It reflects poorly on you and the club you think you are supporting.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:There are probably two diehard cheerleaders for each club in this thread that will spew nonsense about their perceived "enemy club".

Like it has been said many times before, every club in the area has something going for it, even if not for you. Denigrating these clubs (and contrary to all the chatter, none of these clubs are rich or making a ton of money) only serves to make the commenter look delusional or idiotic.

As for thinking you are making some sort of point by looking at a single game or a win/loss at a local tournament is so beyond what ANY of these clubs and coaches are trying to teach your children it is laughable. Your misunderstanding of both the game and the point of youth sports IS the reason you find one club or another so objectionable - but it isn't grounded in reality. Stop it. It reflects poorly on you and the club you think you are supporting.

Please. If you think coaches in these clubs have selfless motives and just trying to grow the love of the game for the children then you are on another planet.

[Anonymous]

Wolves is a good club. Not a great club. The coaching is above average and is great for beginners and intermediate players. Gloria cares about the players but she isn’t a highly skilled coach even though she is nice, supportative to the players off the field. There is no strategic play, intensity for the next level of play. The issue is that the coaching isn’t up to par for advanced and elite level of playing so players who have the potential start to fizzle in skill and capability because they stay too long with the club. The players that are committed went beyond the club walls with privates and other outside opportunities to get committed. Again, the club is a good club upto an intermediate level of playing and coaching. Beyond that, you have to supplement or leave the club.

[Anonymous]

What are the local clubs that are better for the advanced/elite players then?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:What are the local clubs that are better for the advanced/elite players then?

Freedom and Warhawks

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What are the local clubs that are better for the advanced/elite players then?

Freedom and Warhawks

If you can’t get on Freedom or Warhawks A or B team then Wolves or Next Level or Alpha’s A team.