Valor

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I heard DS didn’t leave on good terms from VRSC?

What happened?

[Anonymous]

We have 2 kids at Valor at younger age groups and like it. 1 plays on the top team at her age group and the other on a lower team. At the younger age groups I think they need to form that 3rd/4th team to make sure they have enough kids to form 2 full teams at 11v11.

I feel like the lower tier teams have more issue with the kids being challenged by kids at the lower tier level in practice. Iron sharpens iron kind of thing. There's only so much a coach can do when most of the players aren't as athletic/skilled.

At the U12 and lower they have a weekly practice for all teams at the age group dedicated to skills. So it's not full time scrimmaging. I do think as a club though they could spend some more time on technique. Some of that is coach by coach though. I know for a fact that as the roster size expanded at U11 and U13, the 2nd team had 3-4 players move up to the top team. Several got a chance to come to the top team practice before tryouts too. I'd say there's at least a chance to move up organically.

NVA started with Loudon approaching them. But as people mentioned it's primarily just to cherry pick a few top kids before they get picked up by the BRAVE and UNIONs of the area.

Overall we like the club. The administration is good, the communication is good. Most of the younger age coaching are approachable and friendly.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think they play dirty at the older girl age groups and there seems to be a lot of bickering among their own team but if you live close by- check them out

This is accurate. We picked up at few girls from Valor a few seasons back.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I heard DS didn’t leave on good terms from VRSC?

What happened?

Interesting...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:My son played Valor for two years and then we switched because he also didn't make the next higher up team at Valor (seems to be a theme!). He was on the 3rd team and couldn't make the 2nd team, but then he got offered a spot on a team several divisions higher than the 2nd team he couldn't make so we switched. He didn't feel like the coaches even paid attention to him at tryouts, like he had already been slotted as a "3rd team player". (And reading this thread, I guess our family had been slotted as the suckers willing to keep paying).

The practices were not organized, especially the second year ,they were frequently combined with a younger team and then they would just scrimmage-which I did not think was fair to the boys or practices offering fair value for the cost.

Hmmmm, this seems a lot like what LS does too. I know players on their D team that could easily make the B team and they never move up. Its bizarre why clubs overlook solid players.

[Anonymous]

Its only bizarre if you think about it the way they sell it, the best players make the best team, and so forth.

If you think about it from a Making Money POV, it makes total sense.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Its only bizarre if you think about it the way they sell it, the best players make the best team, and so forth.

If you think about it from a Making Money POV, it makes total sense.

Yes, when every large club does the same exact thing, its because that's what makes them the most profit.

[Anonymous]

We took our dc to try out last spring. They asked the kids if they had played travel before and divided them across fields based on that. They didn't really pay attention to the "lowest" field which was apparently their current 3rd and 4th teams plus all the kids trying out with no travel experience.

We had just moved here and my ds didn't know that "travel" meant "club" so he was placed on that field. The coaches didn't pay attention to that field at all. Was offered a spot on their 4th team. Went elsewhere and ended up on a team that played their 1st team. Unimpressed with their org to say the least.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:We took our dc to try out last spring. They asked the kids if they had played travel before and divided them across fields based on that. They didn't really pay attention to the "lowest" field which was apparently their current 3rd and 4th teams plus all the kids trying out with no travel experience.

We had just moved here and my ds didn't know that "travel" meant "club" so he was placed on that field. The coaches didn't pay attention to that field at all. Was offered a spot on their 4th team. Went elsewhere and ended up on a team that played their 1st team. Unimpressed with their org to say the least.

Had the exact same experience with my youngest. Went down the street and made the first team at a competitor.

In a year we'll try out again at megaclub and likely make the 1st team. Maybe during the year I should pay the coach to teach my kid in privates?

So much corruption so little time.

[Anonymous]

Why would you want to go back when they are so poor judges of skill that they didn't take him the first time? It seems like the kids get no individual attention or notice at these soccer factories.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:We took our dc to try out last spring. They asked the kids if they had played travel before and divided them across fields based on that. They didn't really pay attention to the "lowest" field which was apparently their current 3rd and 4th teams plus all the kids trying out with no travel experience.

We had just moved here and my ds didn't know that "travel" meant "club" so he was placed on that field. The coaches didn't pay attention to that field at all. Was offered a spot on their 4th team. Went elsewhere and ended up on a team that played their 1st team. Unimpressed with their org to say the least.

Wow, they really didn't watch that lowest field at all.

[Anonymous]

well, not necessarily. the first two teams could have been full of returning players who would not pay if they were moved down. they gambled on a "dumb rec family" not realizing their kid could make a better team, hoping to get your money as well as retaining all their paying customers on the higher teams.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:well, not necessarily. the first two teams could have been full of returning players who would not pay if they were moved down. they gambled on a "dumb rec family" not realizing their kid could make a better team, hoping to get your money as well as retaining all their paying customers on the higher teams.

Winner winner chicken dinner.
Its not at all about who deserves to be on which team. Its about placing kids in a way that maximizes the number of paying customers.

[Anonymous]

So how many of your kids are on teams where there are kids that clearly belong on a higher/lower team and how does that play out on the sidelines?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So how many of your kids are on teams where there are kids that clearly belong on a higher/lower team and how does that play out on the sidelines?

Kid that should be on a higher team-plays almost the whole game.
"Legacy" players (we had two), played a few minutes or not at all. All season. It was painful to watch and I don't know how or why their parents were willing to pay for that.