Alexandria

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

I am shocked we actually were offered any refund at all.

I have 2 kids that play for Alexandria, one on a red team, one on a white team. The red team coach has been completely checked out this entire quarantine time. We have had only ONE zoom session that is only our team, and a handful of others (maybe 4) that are combined with either other age groups or all teams for several age groups so there are sometimes almost 100 kids on the call. It's a total waste of time. It's some kind of a joke. What is the coach doing all this time? It's his full time job to work for ASA.

My other kid on white has had semi-regular zoom session of just the team. Weekly check in with the coach. And the coach has a full-time job somewhere else, yet he manages to make an effort.

I hear from my friends with kids in Arlington ASA that they have had regular zoom practices all along.

I am so upset with the red team coach, he has zero fs to give and takes all our money. I don't understand how in some other job that would be permissible. UGH.

Wow, I am sorry to hear that. We are on a lower-level Alexandria team, and our coach has had regular zoom training sessions, plus a few hangout sessions for the kids.

Hopefully it's fixed, sounds like an easy fix.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I thought they had been over charging for years in order to build up the sustainability fund. It seems like this is the time they should be using those funds to give proper refunds .... maybe that fund is more subterfuge from the board and club.

I had two in Alexandria this year (one is graduating), and they each have played for other top area clubs. Alexandria's fees are not out of line with anybody else. As for playing in house tournaments, my younger kid was slated to play three outside tournaments and the ASK, same as Arlington for that age group (theirs is the ASIST). My older kid was slated for four outside tournaments, plus State Cup, two CCL showcases, the Alexandria showcase, and the EDP spring conference. Seems in line with everyone competing at that level.

Don't forget, regardless of not-for-profit status, this is a business not some city service. There is overhead, bonding, field and facility rentals. I'll be none of that was prorated.

There is plenty of room for improvement -- I would like to see top teams move into ECNL and pursue more regional/national competition, and have the white teams pursue state-wide prominence and compete in second tier competitions such as President’s Cup -- but as for the cost, it’s the going rate.

I have a very good understanding of how soccer clubs operate. While it is a business, in this case it is first a non-profit than a business. Either through a lack of knowledge or something else, this club has demonstrated that it is not following the laws for non-profits. Maybe they hope they won’t get caught, but they probably don’t realize the personal penalties involved.

I encourage you to explore some of the other area options. If you find an better deal, come back and let us all know will you?

There is nothing at Arlington that you aren't going to find here (except ECNL for the top teams). LMVSC chases away all of its best coaches every three years, SYC doesn’t have the players because the go to BRYC's ECNL teams. But BRYC isn't giving anything away for free, and its lower teams are poor. McLean? They are more expensive and anything below the ECNL team and you are just revenue. PAC doesn’t have the facilities or the players.

Even for top teams on the boys side, ECNL or USYS and/or Acela League for top Alexandria boys teams in addition to CCL? The latter, no contest, at least in younger groups.

Not sure I understand the above. From the info it seems like if I have a competitive player I should seek out BRYC, McLean or Arlington. Everything else is just revenue?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I thought they had been over charging for years in order to build up the sustainability fund. It seems like this is the time they should be using those funds to give proper refunds .... maybe that fund is more subterfuge from the board and club.

I had two in Alexandria this year (one is graduating), and they each have played for other top area clubs. Alexandria's fees are not out of line with anybody else. As for playing in house tournaments, my younger kid was slated to play three outside tournaments and the ASK, same as Arlington for that age group (theirs is the ASIST). My older kid was slated for four outside tournaments, plus State Cup, two CCL showcases, the Alexandria showcase, and the EDP spring conference. Seems in line with everyone competing at that level.

Don't forget, regardless of not-for-profit status, this is a business not some city service. There is overhead, bonding, field and facility rentals. I'll be none of that was prorated.

There is plenty of room for improvement -- I would like to see top teams move into ECNL and pursue more regional/national competition, and have the white teams pursue state-wide prominence and compete in second tier competitions such as President’s Cup -- but as for the cost, it’s the going rate.

I have a very good understanding of how soccer clubs operate. While it is a business, in this case it is first a non-profit than a business. Either through a lack of knowledge or something else, this club has demonstrated that it is not following the laws for non-profits. Maybe they hope they won’t get caught, but they probably don’t realize the personal penalties involved.

I encourage you to explore some of the other area options. If you find an better deal, come back and let us all know will you?

There is nothing at Arlington that you aren't going to find here (except ECNL for the top teams). LMVSC chases away all of its best coaches every three years, SYC doesn’t have the players because the go to BRYC's ECNL teams. But BRYC isn't giving anything away for free, and its lower teams are poor. McLean? They are more expensive and anything below the ECNL team and you are just revenue. PAC doesn’t have the facilities or the players.

Even for top teams on the boys side, ECNL or USYS and/or Acela League for top Alexandria boys teams in addition to CCL? The latter, no contest, at least in younger groups.

Not sure I understand the above. From the info it seems like if I have a competitive player I should seek out BRYC, McLean or Arlington. Everything else is just revenue?

Not what I meant. In most age groups, Alexandria top boys teams played better schedules than ECNL boys teams last year through USYS and, for U12s, Acela (in addition to games they play under CCL). USYS involves top boys teams in area playing in South Atlantic in addition to their regular league schedules. See http://events.gotsport.com/events/Default.aspx?eventid=75518
For U12s, Alexandria also played in Acela last fall, which is Red Bulls, Philly Union, others. See https://www.aplsoccer.com/content/acela-premiership This was the league a lot of clubs further north created for U12s who could not play DA (because DA became U13 only).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I thought they had been over charging for years in order to build up the sustainability fund. It seems like this is the time they should be using those funds to give proper refunds .... maybe that fund is more subterfuge from the board and club.

I had two in Alexandria this year (one is graduating), and they each have played for other top area clubs. Alexandria's fees are not out of line with anybody else. As for playing in house tournaments, my younger kid was slated to play three outside tournaments and the ASK, same as Arlington for that age group (theirs is the ASIST). My older kid was slated for four outside tournaments, plus State Cup, two CCL showcases, the Alexandria showcase, and the EDP spring conference. Seems in line with everyone competing at that level.

Don't forget, regardless of not-for-profit status, this is a business not some city service. There is overhead, bonding, field and facility rentals. I'll be none of that was prorated.

There is plenty of room for improvement -- I would like to see top teams move into ECNL and pursue more regional/national competition, and have the white teams pursue state-wide prominence and compete in second tier competitions such as President’s Cup -- but as for the cost, it’s the going rate.

I have a very good understanding of how soccer clubs operate. While it is a business, in this case it is first a non-profit than a business. Either through a lack of knowledge or something else, this club has demonstrated that it is not following the laws for non-profits. Maybe they hope they won’t get caught, but they probably don’t realize the personal penalties involved.

I encourage you to explore some of the other area options. If you find an better deal, come back and let us all know will you?

There is nothing at Arlington that you aren't going to find here (except ECNL for the top teams). LMVSC chases away all of its best coaches every three years, SYC doesn’t have the players because the go to BRYC's ECNL teams. But BRYC isn't giving anything away for free, and its lower teams are poor. McLean? They are more expensive and anything below the ECNL team and you are just revenue. PAC doesn’t have the facilities or the players.

Even for top teams on the boys side, ECNL or USYS and/or Acela League for top Alexandria boys teams in addition to CCL? The latter, no contest, at least in younger groups.

Not sure I understand the above. From the info it seems like if I have a competitive player I should seek out BRYC, McLean or Arlington. Everything else is just revenue?

Not what I meant. In most age groups, Alexandria top boys teams played better schedules than ECNL boys teams last year through USYS and, for U12s, Acela (in addition to games they play under CCL). USYS involves top boys teams in area playing in South Atlantic in addition to their regular league schedules. See http://events.gotsport.com/events/Default.aspx?eventid=75518
For U12s, Alexandria also played in Acela last fall, which is Red Bulls, Philly Union, others. See https://www.aplsoccer.com/content/acela-premiership This was the league a lot of clubs further north created for U12s who could not play DA (because DA became U13 only).

This is about U12s? At that age kids should just play wherever is close, there’s not a whole lot a difference between clubs. U13+ is where competitive players need to find Better competition. So I think the ECNL options make more sense.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I thought they had been over charging for years in order to build up the sustainability fund. It seems like this is the time they should be using those funds to give proper refunds .... maybe that fund is more subterfuge from the board and club.

I had two in Alexandria this year (one is graduating), and they each have played for other top area clubs. Alexandria's fees are not out of line with anybody else. As for playing in house tournaments, my younger kid was slated to play three outside tournaments and the ASK, same as Arlington for that age group (theirs is the ASIST). My older kid was slated for four outside tournaments, plus State Cup, two CCL showcases, the Alexandria showcase, and the EDP spring conference. Seems in line with everyone competing at that level.

Don't forget, regardless of not-for-profit status, this is a business not some city service. There is overhead, bonding, field and facility rentals. I'll be none of that was prorated.

There is plenty of room for improvement -- I would like to see top teams move into ECNL and pursue more regional/national competition, and have the white teams pursue state-wide prominence and compete in second tier competitions such as President’s Cup -- but as for the cost, it’s the going rate.

I have a very good understanding of how soccer clubs operate. While it is a business, in this case it is first a non-profit than a business. Either through a lack of knowledge or something else, this club has demonstrated that it is not following the laws for non-profits. Maybe they hope they won’t get caught, but they probably don’t realize the personal penalties involved.

I encourage you to explore some of the other area options. If you find an better deal, come back and let us all know will you?

There is nothing at Arlington that you aren't going to find here (except ECNL for the top teams). LMVSC chases away all of its best coaches every three years, SYC doesn’t have the players because the go to BRYC's ECNL teams. But BRYC isn't giving anything away for free, and its lower teams are poor. McLean? They are more expensive and anything below the ECNL team and you are just revenue. PAC doesn’t have the facilities or the players.

Even for top teams on the boys side, ECNL or USYS and/or Acela League for top Alexandria boys teams in addition to CCL? The latter, no contest, at least in younger groups.

Not sure I understand the above. From the info it seems like if I have a competitive player I should seek out BRYC, McLean or Arlington. Everything else is just revenue?

Not what I meant. In most age groups, Alexandria top boys teams played better schedules than ECNL boys teams last year through USYS and, for U12s, Acela (in addition to games they play under CCL). USYS involves top boys teams in area playing in South Atlantic in addition to their regular league schedules. See http://events.gotsport.com/events/Default.aspx?eventid=75518
For U12s, Alexandria also played in Acela last fall, which is Red Bulls, Philly Union, others. See https://www.aplsoccer.com/content/acela-premiership This was the league a lot of clubs further north created for U12s who could not play DA (because DA became U13 only).

This is about U12s? At that age kids should just play wherever is close, there’s not a whole lot a difference between clubs. U13+ is where competitive players need to find Better competition. So I think the ECNL options make more sense.

No, not just about U12s. But they develop boys as well as if not better than any other club in this area, and it shows throughout their boys teams, which are ranked higher than most and in some age groups all of the ECNL teams in this area. So if you want your kid to learn how to play, you certainly won't go wrong there. They play plenty of first-rate competition in olrder age groups, and are themselves more competitive than the ECNLers. I don't think that's going to change anytime soon, especially when Arlington sheds players. I think VDA will emerge as strongest ECNL program over time. I don't know think the ECNL boys are comparable to a lot of top EDP competition today, but that could change in the future. We'll see.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I thought they had been over charging for years in order to build up the sustainability fund. It seems like this is the time they should be using those funds to give proper refunds .... maybe that fund is more subterfuge from the board and club.

I had two in Alexandria this year (one is graduating), and they each have played for other top area clubs. Alexandria's fees are not out of line with anybody else. As for playing in house tournaments, my younger kid was slated to play three outside tournaments and the ASK, same as Arlington for that age group (theirs is the ASIST). My older kid was slated for four outside tournaments, plus State Cup, two CCL showcases, the Alexandria showcase, and the EDP spring conference. Seems in line with everyone competing at that level.

Don't forget, regardless of not-for-profit status, this is a business not some city service. There is overhead, bonding, field and facility rentals. I'll be none of that was prorated.

There is plenty of room for improvement -- I would like to see top teams move into ECNL and pursue more regional/national competition, and have the white teams pursue state-wide prominence and compete in second tier competitions such as President’s Cup -- but as for the cost, it’s the going rate.

I have a very good understanding of how soccer clubs operate. While it is a business, in this case it is first a non-profit than a business. Either through a lack of knowledge or something else, this club has demonstrated that it is not following the laws for non-profits. Maybe they hope they won’t get caught, but they probably don’t realize the personal penalties involved.

I encourage you to explore some of the other area options. If you find an better deal, come back and let us all know will you?

There is nothing at Arlington that you aren't going to find here (except ECNL for the top teams). LMVSC chases away all of its best coaches every three years, SYC doesn’t have the players because the go to BRYC's ECNL teams. But BRYC isn't giving anything away for free, and its lower teams are poor. McLean? They are more expensive and anything below the ECNL team and you are just revenue. PAC doesn’t have the facilities or the players.

Even for top teams on the boys side, ECNL or USYS and/or Acela League for top Alexandria boys teams in addition to CCL? The latter, no contest, at least in younger groups.

Not sure I understand the above. From the info it seems like if I have a competitive player I should seek out BRYC, McLean or Arlington. Everything else is just revenue?

Not what I meant. In most age groups, Alexandria top boys teams played better schedules than ECNL boys teams last year through USYS and, for U12s, Acela (in addition to games they play under CCL). USYS involves top boys teams in area playing in South Atlantic in addition to their regular league schedules. See http://events.gotsport.com/events/Default.aspx?eventid=75518
For U12s, Alexandria also played in Acela last fall, which is Red Bulls, Philly Union, others. See https://www.aplsoccer.com/content/acela-premiership This was the league a lot of clubs further north created for U12s who could not play DA (because DA became U13 only).

This is about U12s? At that age kids should just play wherever is close, there’s not a whole lot a difference between clubs. U13+ is where competitive players need to find Better competition. So I think the ECNL options make more sense.

No, not just about U12s. But they develop boys as well as if not better than any other club in this area, and it shows throughout their boys teams, which are ranked higher than most and in some age groups all of the ECNL teams in this area. So if you want your kid to learn how to play, you certainly won't go wrong there. They play plenty of first-rate competition in olrder age groups, and are themselves more competitive than the ECNLers. I don't think that's going to change anytime soon, especially when Arlington sheds players. I think VDA will emerge as strongest ECNL program over time. I don't know think the ECNL boys are comparable to a lot of top EDP competition today, but that could change in the future. We'll see.

This is mostly true on the boys side, but not for the girls. They stop being competitive around U13 and U14.