Arlington RL to ECNL

[Anonymous]

It's funny to read the comments how Arlington doesn't develop players. The 2011 rl girls are the best team in the state including ga but excluding ecnl nl. Several of those girls can start on an ecnl team.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It's funny to read the comments how Arlington doesn't develop players. The 2011 rl girls are the best team in the state including ga but excluding ecnl nl. Several of those girls can start on an ecnl team.

This is more a reflection of the depth of talent in the 2011 age group. Even the third team in that age group is better than most rl and aspire teams.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's funny to read the comments how Arlington doesn't develop players. The 2011 rl girls are the best team in the state including ga but excluding ecnl nl. Several of those girls can start on an ecnl team.

This is more a reflection of the depth of talent in the 2011 age group. Even the third team in that age group is better than most rl and aspire teams.

Is it true that the ECNL team lost a few players this cycle?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It's funny to read the comments how Arlington doesn't develop players. The 2011 rl girls are the best team in the state including ga but excluding ecnl nl. Several of those girls can start on an ecnl team.

VDA and FVU would beg to differ.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's funny to read the comments how Arlington doesn't develop players. The 2011 rl girls are the best team in the state including ga but excluding ecnl nl. Several of those girls can start on an ecnl team.

This is more a reflection of the depth of talent in the 2011 age group. Even the third team in that age group is better than most rl and aspire teams.

Is it true that the ECNL team lost a few players this cycle?

Picked up 2 but don’t think any were dropped.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It's funny to read the comments how Arlington doesn't develop players. The 2011 rl girls are the best team in the state including ga but excluding ecnl nl. Several of those girls can start on an ecnl team.

Arlington ECNL has offered starting spots to several RL girls and they all have declined?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Arlington Soccer is run by and full of the absolute worst people.

It is probably the best run club with little or no drama.

Agreed but with the lowest expectations for soccer outcomes, so theres that too... Keep getting dem checks from eager college driven parents!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Arlington Soccer is run by and full of the absolute worst people.

It is probably the best run club with little or no drama.

Wow, these opinions couldn't be more different? Dare I ask why? (I assume its someone who didn't make the team they wanted or didn't get as much playing time as they thought they deserved)

[Anonymous]

Ask Arlington how many RL girls made it to NL this tryout season. Other than the two 2012 RL girls that previously were on NL and got demoted for a year until the roster went to 22. How many legit RL to NL players were there.

Zero.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Ask Arlington how many RL girls made it to NL this tryout season. Other than the two 2012 RL girls that previously were on NL and got demoted for a year until the roster went to 22. How many legit RL to NL players were there.

Zero.

But they have several ECNL starter caliber players on their RL teams? They really do develop talent

[Anonymous]

I'm trying to understand how any club can take credit for developing a player. In my experience and my DC has always been on the top team, and still is, including at Arlington (so this isn't about sour grapes) but what I have seen is development is on the player/family not the club. The club only offers a platform to show the work the player has put in themselves, right? Has anyone actually been "developed" by any club here in the DMV?

My sense is DC has been on those teams and recognized elsewhere because of their hard work, talent and grit. Maybe it's just the coaches we've had but actual development as a soccer talent? That's not the role of the club and if it is I'm waiting to see it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ask Arlington how many RL girls made it to NL this tryout season. Other than the two 2012 RL girls that previously were on NL and got demoted for a year until the roster went to 22. How many legit RL to NL players were there.

Zero.

But they have several ECNL starter caliber players on their RL teams? They really do develop talent

Let me help you out here with a fill-in-the-blank:

If they were ECNL starter caliber players, they would be starting on the E C _ L team.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'm trying to understand how any club can take credit for developing a player. In my experience and my DC has always been on the top team, and still is, including at Arlington (so this isn't about sour grapes) but what I have seen is development is on the player/family not the club. The club only offers a platform to show the work the player has put in themselves, right? Has anyone actually been "developed" by any club here in the DMV?

My sense is DC has been on those teams and recognized elsewhere because of their hard work, talent and grit. Maybe it's just the coaches we've had but actual development as a soccer talent? That's not the role of the club and if it is I'm waiting to see it.

Quality coaches dont always end up at "the best" clubs. Development takes time and effort. Picking the biggest and oldest players is a shortcut. Another shortcut is creating a big pool, pulling up the biggest and oldest, then winning. Wins bring parents that want to be on the winning team. Which expands the player pool. In the end you get ego maniac coaches that dont develop because its easier and faster to just replace with new from the pool.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm trying to understand how any club can take credit for developing a player. In my experience and my DC has always been on the top team, and still is, including at Arlington (so this isn't about sour grapes) but what I have seen is development is on the player/family not the club. The club only offers a platform to show the work the player has put in themselves, right? Has anyone actually been "developed" by any club here in the DMV?

My sense is DC has been on those teams and recognized elsewhere because of their hard work, talent and grit. Maybe it's just the coaches we've had but actual development as a soccer talent? That's not the role of the club and if it is I'm waiting to see it.

Quality coaches dont always end up at "the best" clubs. Development takes time and effort. Picking the biggest and oldest players is a shortcut. Another shortcut is creating a big pool, pulling up the biggest and oldest, then winning. Wins bring parents that want to be on the winning team. Which expands the player pool. In the end you get ego maniac coaches that dont develop because its easier and faster to just replace with new from the pool.

Perfectly stated - my experience as well outside of the DMV as well

[Anonymous]

After a certain age the development isn't from the side training which is mostly about footskills, rather the development they are or aren't getting should be about how to actually play the game. Aside from watching soccer on their own (which I'm sure many/more than half do), that development of how to play the game isn't really going to be on the families. It's going to come from the coaches or it won't. Again, look at clubs that win a lot but do so with "tactics" that emphasize a team with physical advantages. Once they get to higher levels like D1 and beyond that won't really serve them as well because everyone will be like they are, but others might have gotten better development on how to play the game etc.