Travel Soccer teams around NOVA let's discuss

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I chatted with someone in southern California recently about their league structure. Here's what they have:

- DA/ECNL
- CSL (Coast Soccer League)
- SCDSL

In CSL, the teams are placed into divisions. It's not strict promotion/relegation -- the Board grants itself a lot of leeway. The tiers are Premier (older age groups), Gold, Silver Elite, Silver and Bronze. It's a pyramid -- Premier appears to be one division for the whole area, Gold may have three, and so on until Bronze has a lot of divisions based more on geography.

SCDSL is newer, and its Tiers are arranged by the clubs, not by pro/rel. (I'm sure if you have a +50 or -50 goal difference in a season, you'll ask for a change).

There's a pretty good blog summary here: http://socalsoccermom.com/csl-vs-scdsl-playing-sides/

Read that, then try to tell me we're better off here with the split into CCL/VPL/EDP/NCSL/ODSL and the other nonsense we have here.

what seems to be coming from your nocal and socal forums is that:

- nocal is very much like here. ecnl still the influence and girls da kind of a mess. WS is not alone with its cr@ppy start. At least in nocal they name coaches, and who is moving where. lack of info here is an embarrassment. noone even posting reviews about the new WS TD.

- socal is all about the dual clubs and DA is the first team, ECNl second team, and the third team is being called Academy Reserves with no HS restrictions. the possibility of their being a DA II league in socal seems to have died.

- the impression in socal is that da will go to single age groups sooner then later, maybe next year.

- the best notion out of there is that DA on boys and girls sides is slowly becoming the true "travel soccer player" program, with everything else (ecnl, ccl club soccer with 5-6 teams per age groups, etc.) eventually being considered glorified recreational soccer (certainly true for ccl). Just like in the 80s and 90s when "select travel soccer" meant something and only the elite were selected, DA is beginning to set that line of demarcation again, for better or for worse.

that is california though - we are so behind out here, we will endure several years of scr@wed up watering down of better female player teams between too many (five!) options.

Hush up and go move to Cali. Virginia will be better for it

And BTW, there is not 5 options because Mclean sucks. You hear that Mclean!


Spirit is not a mess. Its freaking March. The DA season starts in 6 months. Take a deep breath and go drink your Frappamochacapacrapa

[Anonymous]

^ Whoosh ... Right over your head lover boy.

WS DA will be fine ... just require a longer transition time. ECNL will fade ... don't need California blogs to know this.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I chatted with someone in southern California recently about their league structure. Here's what they have:

- DA/ECNL
- CSL (Coast Soccer League)
- SCDSL

In CSL, the teams are placed into divisions. It's not strict promotion/relegation -- the Board grants itself a lot of leeway. The tiers are Premier (older age groups), Gold, Silver Elite, Silver and Bronze. It's a pyramid -- Premier appears to be one division for the whole area, Gold may have three, and so on until Bronze has a lot of divisions based more on geography.

SCDSL is newer, and its Tiers are arranged by the clubs, not by pro/rel. (I'm sure if you have a +50 or -50 goal difference in a season, you'll ask for a change).

There's a pretty good blog summary here: http://socalsoccermom.com/csl-vs-scdsl-playing-sides/

Read that, then try to tell me we're better off here with the split into CCL/VPL/EDP/NCSL/ODSL and the other nonsense we have here.

what seems to be coming from your nocal and socal forums is that:

- nocal is very much like here. ecnl still the influence and girls da kind of a mess. WS is not alone with its cr@ppy start. At least in nocal they name coaches, and who is moving where. lack of info here is an embarrassment. noone even posting reviews about the new WS TD.

- socal is all about the dual clubs and DA is the first team, ECNl second team, and the third team is being called Academy Reserves with no HS restrictions. the possibility of their being a DA II league in socal seems to have died.

- the impression in socal is that da will go to single age groups sooner then later, maybe next year.

- the best notion out of there is that DA on boys and girls sides is slowly becoming the true "travel soccer player" program, with everything else (ecnl, ccl club soccer with 5-6 teams per age groups, etc.) eventually being considered glorified recreational soccer (certainly true for ccl). Just like in the 80s and 90s when "select travel soccer" meant something and only the elite were selected, DA is beginning to set that line of demarcation again, for better or for worse.

that is california though - we are so behind out here, we will endure several years of scr@wed up watering down of better female player teams between too many (five!) options.

Hush up and go move to Cali. Virginia will be better for it

And BTW, there is not 5 options because Mclean sucks. You hear that Mclean!


Spirit is not a mess. Its freaking March. The DA season starts in 6 months. Take a deep breath and go drink your Frappamochacapacrapa

- what do you know about mclean? they cut your poor little benchwarmer?

- that's what I thought . . .

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I chatted with someone in southern California recently about their league structure. Here's what they have:

- DA/ECNL
- CSL (Coast Soccer League)
- SCDSL

In CSL, the teams are placed into divisions. It's not strict promotion/relegation -- the Board grants itself a lot of leeway. The tiers are Premier (older age groups), Gold, Silver Elite, Silver and Bronze. It's a pyramid -- Premier appears to be one division for the whole area, Gold may have three, and so on until Bronze has a lot of divisions based more on geography.

SCDSL is newer, and its Tiers are arranged by the clubs, not by pro/rel. (I'm sure if you have a +50 or -50 goal difference in a season, you'll ask for a change).

There's a pretty good blog summary here: http://socalsoccermom.com/csl-vs-scdsl-playing-sides/

Read that, then try to tell me we're better off here with the split into CCL/VPL/EDP/NCSL/ODSL and the other nonsense we have here.

what seems to be coming from your nocal and socal forums is that:

- nocal is very much like here. ecnl still the influence and girls da kind of a mess. WS is not alone with its cr@ppy start. At least in nocal they name coaches, and who is moving where. lack of info here is an embarrassment. noone even posting reviews about the new WS TD.

- socal is all about the dual clubs and DA is the first team, ECNl second team, and the third team is being called Academy Reserves with no HS restrictions. the possibility of their being a DA II league in socal seems to have died.

- the impression in socal is that da will go to single age groups sooner then later, maybe next year.

- the best notion out of there is that DA on boys and girls sides is slowly becoming the true "travel soccer player" program, with everything else (ecnl, ccl club soccer with 5-6 teams per age groups, etc.) eventually being considered glorified recreational soccer (certainly true for ccl). Just like in the 80s and 90s when "select travel soccer" meant something and only the elite were selected, DA is beginning to set that line of demarcation again, for better or for worse.

that is california though - we are so behind out here, we will endure several years of scr@wed up watering down of better female player teams between too many (five!) options.

Hush up and go move to Cali. Virginia will be better for it

And BTW, there is not 5 options because Mclean sucks. You hear that Mclean!


Spirit is not a mess. Its freaking March. The DA season starts in 6 months. Take a deep breath and go drink your Frappamochacapacrapa

- what do you know about mclean? they cut your poor little benchwarmer?

- that's what I thought . . .

Mclean bench my kid?....lol...Everyone knows Mclean is FCV's sloppy seconds

[Anonymous]

I thought it would be interesting to see how FCV and McLean stacks up. Here are the head-to-head results from this year:

U18 – McLean won 2-1, tied 0-0
U17 – McLean won 6-1, FCV 2-1
U16 – Tied 2-2, 1-1
U15 – FCV won 2-1, lost 1-0
U14 – FCV won 3-0

Also McLean is higher in the conference standings in 3 out of 5 divisions.

Looks like the clubs are very even.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I thought it would be interesting to see how FCV and McLean stacks up. Here are the head-to-head results from this year:

U18 – McLean won 2-1, tied 0-0
U17 – McLean won 6-1, FCV 2-1
U16 – Tied 2-2, 1-1
U15 – FCV won 2-1, lost 1-0
U14 – FCV won 3-0

Also McLean is higher in the conference standings in 3 out of 5 divisions.

Looks like the clubs are very even.

U18 ECNL is obsolete. Just so you know. So take those standings out

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I thought it would be interesting to see how FCV and McLean stacks up. Here are the head-to-head results from this year:

U18 – McLean won 2-1, tied 0-0
U17 – McLean won 6-1, FCV 2-1
U16 – Tied 2-2, 1-1
U15 – FCV won 2-1, lost 1-0
U14 – FCV won 3-0

Also McLean is higher in the conference standings in 3 out of 5 divisions.

Looks like the clubs are very even.

Since you have so much time...look at the hometown of the Mclean kids on the team page. Tell me what percent is Loudoun and what percent is Mclean area

[Anonymous]

How many FCV players are from the Fairfax area? Does that make them BRYC rejects?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:How many FCV players are from the Fairfax area? Does that make them BRYC rejects?

No...they came from fairfax to play ECNL at FCV.....not Mclean...which is closer. Hummmm

[Anonymous]

For being sloppy seconds, the results show that the clubs are even. If anything, the fact that McLean does better as the age groups get old suggests that the coaching is better at McLean. And that proves the only thing that FCV is better at is recruiting players to its club.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:For being sloppy seconds, the results show that the clubs are even. If anything, the fact that McLean does better as the age groups get old suggests that the coaching is better at McLean. And that proves the only thing that FCV is better at is recruiting players to its club.

Or, as kids commit the coaches start working playing time and exposure to the bench players. That goes for both clubs.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:For being sloppy seconds, the results show that the clubs are even. If anything, the fact that McLean does better as the age groups get old suggests that the coaching is better at McLean. And that proves the only thing that FCV is better at is recruiting players to its club.

New thread for this nonsense:
http://www.dcurbanmom.com/jforum/posts/list/0/631762.page#10657471

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For being sloppy seconds, the results show that the clubs are even. If anything, the fact that McLean does better as the age groups get old suggests that the coaching is better at McLean. And that proves the only thing that FCV is better at is recruiting players to its club.

New thread for this nonsense:
http://www.dcurbanmom.com/jforum/posts/list/0/631762.page#10657471

Again with the sensativity. It's just banter.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For being sloppy seconds, the results show that the clubs are even. If anything, the fact that McLean does better as the age groups get old suggests that the coaching is better at McLean. And that proves the only thing that FCV is better at is recruiting players to its club.

New thread for this nonsense:
http://www.dcurbanmom.com/jforum/posts/list/0/631762.page#10657471

Again with the sensativity. It's just banter.

Well pardon me for being "sensative" about taking over what could be a useful information-sharing forum with trash talk over the dubious athletic accomplishments of 11-year-olds, but may I suggest a few other more suitable topics for "banter" that don't turn what should be a great part of childhood into parental chest-puffing?

1. Is "gif" pronounced with a hard g or soft g?

2. Kirk or Picard?

3. Is Terrelle Pryor a step up from Pierre Garcon?

4. Dandelions, friend or foe?

5. Why wasn't "Rogue One" nominated for Best Picture?

6. Sammy Hagar or David Lee Roth?

7. Duke-bashers -- legitimate points or just haters?

8. Boxing or MMA?

9. NASCAR or Formula 1?

10. Who let the dogs out?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For being sloppy seconds, the results show that the clubs are even. If anything, the fact that McLean does better as the age groups get old suggests that the coaching is better at McLean. And that proves the only thing that FCV is better at is recruiting players to its club.

New thread for this nonsense:
http://www.dcurbanmom.com/jforum/posts/list/0/631762.page#10657471

Again with the sensativity. It's just banter.

Well pardon me for being "sensative" about taking over what could be a useful information-sharing forum with trash talk over the dubious athletic accomplishments of 11-year-olds, but may I suggest a few other more suitable topics for "banter" that don't turn what should be a great part of childhood into parental chest-puffing?

1. Is "gif" pronounced with a hard g or soft g? hard

2. Kirk or Picard? picard

3. Is Terrelle Pryor a step up from Pierre Garcon? No

4. Dandelions, friend or foe? friend

5. Why wasn't "Rogue One" nominated for Best Picture? sci-fi

6. Sammy Hagar or David Lee Roth? hagar

7. Duke-bashers -- legitimate points or just haters? just haters

8. Boxing or MMA? boxing

9. NASCAR or Formula 1? Formula 1

10. Who let the dogs out?

the mailman