Travel Soccer teams around NOVA let's discuss

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:CCL is a big loser here, with BRYC probably out (because they won't have enough teams for CCL and ECNL), and the quality of Loudoun girls teams going down with their top players going to FCV.

Look for Beach and VaRush to win more State Cup titles as NOVA talent is spread out over more teams.

I'm curious to see if Spirit MD can attract any girls from Bethesda ECNL, which has top quality coaching and currently draws the top players from the MD suburbs

I think this depends on both the level of the DA teams and whether the practices are up near Baltimore Armour headquarters. There is a lot of coaching talent at the Baltimore Armour boys' DA, and I think if they can offer that on the girls' side they can quickly put together a good team. But Baltimore is awfully hard for Bethesda kids to get to (though some boys from Bethesda, Rockville and Potomac do play for Armour or Baltimore Celtic). Reston would be closer.

It seemed odd to me that Bethesda opted to stay with ECNL instead of applying for a DA spot. I will be curious to see what happens when the dust settles. Very glad my soccer players are boys!

Also agree that CCL is put in a bad position by all the ECNL and DA developments. I wonder if they will go back to just serving southern and central VA? In NoVa, they can't really claim to be an elite league. "We're better than NCSL" is pretty much what they are left with.

CCL was never....NEVER...considered an Elite league in NOVA.

You have no idea what your talking about.

Ha,ha,ha ... hiya troll

Now we just need the CCL Guy who loves the regional travel. There's a league for everyone you know!! LoL.

And this is when you decided to stir the pot.

http://www.dcurbanmom.com/jforum/posts/list/619396.page

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:To go back and answer the ODSL question -- yes, it's still "travel light" in a sense, but I worry that it's dying. The more clubs put their top teams in "elite" leagues (CCL, EDP, VPL, etc.) the more of a domino effect you'll see in which clubs' B, C and D teams all move into NCSL and leave precious little for ODSL.

So ODSL has become a few clubs' absolute lowest teams, plus a handful of clubs (Cougars, Dynamite) that aren't in NCSL and simply annihilate the competition.

It's a real shame, because THIS is the level of travel most of our little darlings should be in. If you want the travel experience but don't have delusions that your kid is getting a D1 scholarship -- or if your kid is young and may still develop into an "elite" player -- this is the level for you.

I guess NCSL's lower divisions will fill that void now. NCSL D1 still has a few "elite" players, but I wonder how much longer that'll last.

Personally, I'd like to see some sort of ODSL/SFL merger. SFL is already "travel light" -- teams travel, generally practice twice a week, etc. They just usually have parent coaches and rec-league fees.

Combine ODSL and SFL, and you'd have scores of teams per age group. No need to drive to Clarke County because you only have six teams in your age group.

But that would make too much sense.

The problem is with so many leagues above ODSL there really are not many clubs that have teams left over to put into ODSL after NPL, VPL, CCL, CCL II, NCSL have all taken their piece of the pie. Your club either needs to have a 5th team or is a really small mom and pop shop that has a very small talent pool and just a team or two across the age groups.

Agree with both here but think that merger with NCSL would be best versus SFL. The overall play in ODSL is currently at the level of middle to bottom divisions in NCSL which is why I say that makes more sense and they already travel to places like W VA and MD versus SFL which does not travel as far. There is some talent in ODSL that would do very well in higher divisions of NCSL but there aren't that many. Some good coaches as well that are doing a good job of developing some good players and building decent teams.

I agree that ODSL is going to have to merge and NCSL seems to be the natural partner. The SFL merger is an interesting one as it is a great "in between" league and is very well run. But SFL starts at U11, so where does that leave clubs with multiple teams that normally push them to ODSL? Also, I could see some intense parents being upset that their kids are now playing with rec players, regardless of the rec skill level or the overall competition on the field. It seems there is a need for the developmental aspect that ODSL provides clubs and players and I hope that does not get lost in the shuffle.

An ODSL/NCSL merger could work, but NCSL already spans such a broad range of competition. By the second season of U11, teams are finally sorted into divisions, so you no longer have as many mismatches as you have at U9-U11, so that helps a bit.

Maybe NCSL should simply offer 2-3 levels of competition at U9/U11, and the lowest level could serve as the "developmental" tier.

But I still like the idea of ODSL being that "Rec-Plus" league and combining its functions with SFL. ODSL already allows rec players to play as guest players.

I've coached in SFL for many years. SFL is run very well. Division 1 of SFL (the top 10-12 teams of the 50-60 teams in each age group) is as competitive as both ODSL and the lower divisions of NCSL.

On Division 1 teams kids get to play good competitive soccer close to home at a cost of roughly $100 per player per season.

My club's travel side wants me to take my SFL team into ODSL or NCSL, but I see no advantages to doing so when compared with playing in Division 1 of SFL.

I really don't see much reason for ODSL (above U11 or U12) given the availability of competitive SFL soccer and lower division NCSL soccer.

[Anonymous]

Any of you who are copying and pasting past discussions, or posting the link to the CCL thread really need to stop. You're making it impossible for the grownups to have a discussion.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Any of you who are copying and pasting past discussions, or posting the link to the CCL thread really need to stop. You're making it impossible for the grownups to have a discussion.

I wonder if DCUM would ever consider making us adopt user IDs to post. We could still be anonymous, but then we wouldn't have this "You weren't arguing with me, you were arguing with that other guy!" nonsense.

And we could ask for a ban whenever we see one person obviously derailing the conversation.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Any of you who are copying and pasting past discussions, or posting the link to the CCL thread really need to stop. You're making it impossible for the grownups to have a discussion.

I wonder if DCUM would ever consider making us adopt user IDs to post. We could still be anonymous, but then we wouldn't have this "You weren't arguing with me, you were arguing with that other guy!" nonsense.

And we could ask for a ban whenever we see one person obviously derailing the conversation.

Excellent idea. Why don't you start with creating your own account first.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Any of you who are copying and pasting past discussions, or posting the link to the CCL thread really need to stop. You're making it impossible for the grownups to have a discussion.

I wonder if DCUM would ever consider making us adopt user IDs to post. We could still be anonymous, but then we wouldn't have this "You weren't arguing with me, you were arguing with that other guy!" nonsense.

And we could ask for a ban whenever we see one person obviously derailing the conversation.

That idea has been discussed a lot in the Website Feedback forum, and Jeff has very good reasons for not adopting the practice. That forum makes for pretty interesting reading if you've never checked it out. You'll see that the really annoying type of people and issues we deal with here are common on other threads as well.

I'm wondering if what we need is a general "Take It Outside" sticky thread. Then anyone who is derailing any thread in any forum on DCUM with their petty spats could be directed over there.

[Anonymous]

where is AskSoccerNoVA?

The gold standard!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Any of you who are copying and pasting past discussions, or posting the link to the CCL thread really need to stop. You're making it impossible for the grownups to have a discussion.

I wonder if DCUM would ever consider making us adopt user IDs to post. We could still be anonymous, but then we wouldn't have this "You weren't arguing with me, you were arguing with that other guy!" nonsense.

And we could ask for a ban whenever we see one person obviously derailing the conversation.

That idea has been discussed a lot in the Website Feedback forum, and Jeff has very good reasons for not adopting the practice. That forum makes for pretty interesting reading if you've never checked it out. You'll see that the really annoying type of people and issues we deal with here are common on other threads as well.

I'm wondering if what we need is a general "Take It Outside" sticky thread. Then anyone who is derailing any thread in any forum on DCUM with their petty spats could be directed over there.

I've apologized for my own behavior and I've recommended and created "take it outside" threads. Upon my urging someone did create the VYS thread, which is doing very well. I created the CCL thread today in hopes that those minutia discussions happen there as well. I'm no different than anyone else when I come here and want good general discussion. I'm also no different than anyone else and can react badly to being trolled simply because I have a dissenting opinion.

While occasionally snarky, I try and remain civil and respectful of others but do occasionally fail. When I see something derailing a thread I have, as stated above, tried to create a space for that discussion. Unfortunately, today, that simply led to more trolling and reposts of past discussions, a few of which I was not even a part of.

Again, I apologize to the general community.

Signed-The one accused of being "CCL Guy"

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Any of you who are copying and pasting past discussions, or posting the link to the CCL thread really need to stop. You're making it impossible for the grownups to have a discussion.

I wonder if DCUM would ever consider making us adopt user IDs to post. We could still be anonymous, but then we wouldn't have this "You weren't arguing with me, you were arguing with that other guy!" nonsense.

And we could ask for a ban whenever we see one person obviously derailing the conversation.

Excellent idea. Why don't you start with creating your own account first.

+1

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:To go back and answer the ODSL question -- yes, it's still "travel light" in a sense, but I worry that it's dying. The more clubs put their top teams in "elite" leagues (CCL, EDP, VPL, etc.) the more of a domino effect you'll see in which clubs' B, C and D teams all move into NCSL and leave precious little for ODSL.

So ODSL has become a few clubs' absolute lowest teams, plus a handful of clubs (Cougars, Dynamite) that aren't in NCSL and simply annihilate the competition.

It's a real shame, because THIS is the level of travel most of our little darlings should be in. If you want the travel experience but don't have delusions that your kid is getting a D1 scholarship -- or if your kid is young and may still develop into an "elite" player -- this is the level for you.

I guess NCSL's lower divisions will fill that void now. NCSL D1 still has a few "elite" players, but I wonder how much longer that'll last.

Personally, I'd like to see some sort of ODSL/SFL merger. SFL is already "travel light" -- teams travel, generally practice twice a week, etc. They just usually have parent coaches and rec-league fees.

Combine ODSL and SFL, and you'd have scores of teams per age group. No need to drive to Clarke County because you only have six teams in your age group.

But that would make too much sense.

The problem is with so many leagues above ODSL there really are not many clubs that have teams left over to put into ODSL after NPL, VPL, CCL, CCL II, NCSL have all taken their piece of the pie. Your club either needs to have a 5th team or is a really small mom and pop shop that has a very small talent pool and just a team or two across the age groups.

Agree with both here but think that merger with NCSL would be best versus SFL. The overall play in ODSL is currently at the level of middle to bottom divisions in NCSL which is why I say that makes more sense and they already travel to places like W VA and MD versus SFL which does not travel as far. There is some talent in ODSL that would do very well in higher divisions of NCSL but there aren't that many. Some good coaches as well that are doing a good job of developing some good players and building decent teams.

I agree that ODSL is going to have to merge and NCSL seems to be the natural partner. The SFL merger is an interesting one as it is a great "in between" league and is very well run. But SFL starts at U11, so where does that leave clubs with multiple teams that normally push them to ODSL? Also, I could see some intense parents being upset that their kids are now playing with rec players, regardless of the rec skill level or the overall competition on the field. It seems there is a need for the developmental aspect that ODSL provides clubs and players and I hope that does not get lost in the shuffle.

An ODSL/NCSL merger could work, but NCSL already spans such a broad range of competition. By the second season of U11, teams are finally sorted into divisions, so you no longer have as many mismatches as you have at U9-U11, so that helps a bit.

Maybe NCSL should simply offer 2-3 levels of competition at U9/U11, and the lowest level could serve as the "developmental" tier.

But I still like the idea of ODSL being that "Rec-Plus" league and combining its functions with SFL. ODSL already allows rec players to play as guest players.

I've coached in SFL for many years. SFL is run very well. Division 1 of SFL (the top 10-12 teams of the 50-60 teams in each age group) is as competitive as both ODSL and the lower divisions of NCSL.

On Division 1 teams kids get to play good competitive soccer close to home at a cost of roughly $100 per player per season.

My club's travel side wants me to take my SFL team into ODSL or NCSL, but I see no advantages to doing so when compared with playing in Division 1 of SFL.

I really don't see much reason for ODSL (above U11 or U12) given the availability of competitive SFL soccer and lower division NCSL soccer.

Does your club's travel side understand the value of SFL in terms of Division 1 experience for a cost-effective price or are they hand wringing the lost travel fees for the team? As the parents probably see it much differently than the travel folks, especially the cost savings!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:To go back and answer the ODSL question -- yes, it's still "travel light" in a sense, but I worry that it's dying. The more clubs put their top teams in "elite" leagues (CCL, EDP, VPL, etc.) the more of a domino effect you'll see in which clubs' B, C and D teams all move into NCSL and leave precious little for ODSL.

So ODSL has become a few clubs' absolute lowest teams, plus a handful of clubs (Cougars, Dynamite) that aren't in NCSL and simply annihilate the competition.

It's a real shame, because THIS is the level of travel most of our little darlings should be in. If you want the travel experience but don't have delusions that your kid is getting a D1 scholarship -- or if your kid is young and may still develop into an "elite" player -- this is the level for you.

I guess NCSL's lower divisions will fill that void now. NCSL D1 still has a few "elite" players, but I wonder how much longer that'll last.

Personally, I'd like to see some sort of ODSL/SFL merger. SFL is already "travel light" -- teams travel, generally practice twice a week, etc. They just usually have parent coaches and rec-league fees.

Combine ODSL and SFL, and you'd have scores of teams per age group. No need to drive to Clarke County because you only have six teams in your age group.

But that would make too much sense.

The problem is with so many leagues above ODSL there really are not many clubs that have teams left over to put into ODSL after NPL, VPL, CCL, CCL II, NCSL have all taken their piece of the pie. Your club either needs to have a 5th team or is a really small mom and pop shop that has a very small talent pool and just a team or two across the age groups.

Agree with both here but think that merger with NCSL would be best versus SFL. The overall play in ODSL is currently at the level of middle to bottom divisions in NCSL which is why I say that makes more sense and they already travel to places like W VA and MD versus SFL which does not travel as far. There is some talent in ODSL that would do very well in higher divisions of NCSL but there aren't that many. Some good coaches as well that are doing a good job of developing some good players and building decent teams.

I agree that ODSL is going to have to merge and NCSL seems to be the natural partner. The SFL merger is an interesting one as it is a great "in between" league and is very well run. But SFL starts at U11, so where does that leave clubs with multiple teams that normally push them to ODSL? Also, I could see some intense parents being upset that their kids are now playing with rec players, regardless of the rec skill level or the overall competition on the field. It seems there is a need for the developmental aspect that ODSL provides clubs and players and I hope that does not get lost in the shuffle.

An ODSL/NCSL merger could work, but NCSL already spans such a broad range of competition. By the second season of U11, teams are finally sorted into divisions, so you no longer have as many mismatches as you have at U9-U11, so that helps a bit.

Maybe NCSL should simply offer 2-3 levels of competition at U9/U11, and the lowest level could serve as the "developmental" tier.

But I still like the idea of ODSL being that "Rec-Plus" league and combining its functions with SFL. ODSL already allows rec players to play as guest players.

I've coached in SFL for many years. SFL is run very well. Division 1 of SFL (the top 10-12 teams of the 50-60 teams in each age group) is as competitive as both ODSL and the lower divisions of NCSL.

On Division 1 teams kids get to play good competitive soccer close to home at a cost of roughly $100 per player per season.

My club's travel side wants me to take my SFL team into ODSL or NCSL, but I see no advantages to doing so when compared with playing in Division 1 of SFL.

I really don't see much reason for ODSL (above U11 or U12) given the availability of competitive SFL soccer and lower division NCSL soccer.

Does your club's travel side understand the value of SFL in terms of Division 1 experience for a cost-effective price or are they hand wringing the lost travel fees for the team? As the parents probably see it much differently than the travel folks, especially the cost savings!

My club's travel side -- I've also coached on the travel side -- would obviously love to get thousands of dollars in additional club fees out of my players.

But they (and my kids' parents) realize it makes no sense to switch to ODSL or NCSL when the kids are getting good competition and good training at 5-10% of the cost of travel soccer in my club.

[Anonymous]

My DD, going into 8th grade next year, has stayed put with a good NCSL-based local travel club for social and traffic reasons. She and I have both been told that if she wants a shot at playing in college, she needs to switch teams next year. And she's decided she wants to try. I'm not really a sports person myself, but people who are tell me she has a good shot at playing in college. It seems like the posters here have more of an idea about the more college-focused leagues than I do -- if there is so much turmoil about the DA and ECNL teams right now, does anyone have thoughts about how to approach the teams and coaches prior to tryouts? If all the ECNL FCV girls are heading to BRYC, for example, maybe that opens up opportunities. We had also been thinking about maybe Arlington but that seems no better an option for being seen by college coaches than our local club now that DA and ECNL don't seem to be options. Anyone have thoughts?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:My DD, going into 8th grade next year, has stayed put with a good NCSL-based local travel club for social and traffic reasons. She and I have both been told that if she wants a shot at playing in college, she needs to switch teams next year. And she's decided she wants to try. I'm not really a sports person myself, but people who are tell me she has a good shot at playing in college. It seems like the posters here have more of an idea about the more college-focused leagues than I do -- if there is so much turmoil about the DA and ECNL teams right now, does anyone have thoughts about how to approach the teams and coaches prior to tryouts? If all the ECNL FCV girls are heading to BRYC, for example, maybe that opens up opportunities. We had also been thinking about maybe Arlington but that seems no better an option for being seen by college coaches than our local club now that DA and ECNL don't seem to be options. Anyone have thoughts?

My daughter made the same move that you are contemplating at the same age. It is true that the exposure to showcase tournaments in a top team helps with college recruiting opportunities.

I would suggest you plan on having your DD try out widely. Assuming you are inside Fairfax County you have many good options to consider.

The new DA and ECNL teams?
Arlington or other good CCL teams in your DD's year?
McLean (ECNL and CCL) ?
Any team that was a state cup semifinalist?

Good luck to your DD!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:My DD, going into 8th grade next year, has stayed put with a good NCSL-based local travel club for social and traffic reasons. She and I have both been told that if she wants a shot at playing in college, she needs to switch teams next year. And she's decided she wants to try. I'm not really a sports person myself, but people who are tell me she has a good shot at playing in college. It seems like the posters here have more of an idea about the more college-focused leagues than I do -- if there is so much turmoil about the DA and ECNL teams right now, does anyone have thoughts about how to approach the teams and coaches prior to tryouts? If all the ECNL FCV girls are heading to BRYC, for example, maybe that opens up opportunities. We had also been thinking about maybe Arlington but that seems no better an option for being seen by college coaches than our local club now that DA and ECNL don't seem to be options. Anyone have thoughts?

1)What area are you in?

2)Would you be willing to drive to Reston or Boyds 4x a week in evenings?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

WS should pull out of VA...but it's too late now....now they are holding a VA DA slot....and most kids will be from MD on team

Have they had a lot of MD players at the VA ID clinics?

The washington suburbs in Md do not have a DA. There are a ton of kids there. They are going to get rostered on the Spirit VA team because they won't get enough talent out of Nova to fill a substantial part of their rosters....because most VA kids will stay put

U r right. WS just changed website to ths:


Feb 25, 2017:
Location: Maryland Soccerplex – Viginia Only Interest
(The Maryland Interest players will now need to attend March 1.)

Time:
14/15U: 8:30am – 10:00am – 30 max
16/17U: 10:00am- 11:30am – 30 max
18/19U: 11:30am-1:00pm – 30 max