Message
If this is a younger player, U12 and under, I would have them on a year round futsal team. Outdoor team doesn't matter as long as the commute is short enough to allow the time and money to focus on futsal.
Manodedios wrote:VDA added Herndon about a year ago, maybe not even a full year ago, and I think this is ‘turf’ protection from the other 3 clubs. I know Herndon was offering some RL players the opportunity to PT play/practice with VDA, which GFR and Valor couldn’t match. Loudoun pulls players from Western Fairfax, so they probably want to limit Herndon and VDA as much as possible. I don’t think there is a lot of love between those two (Loudoun and VDA).
Ultimately, though, all of these partnerships are about protecting the salaries of a handful of directors and do zero to improve player development.
ECNL would be better with a pro/rel system than this mega merger BS. The 07 boys GFR team could play in ECNL today if there was promotion. How many lifelong Loudoun players will get cut to make room on a combined team ?
FGDaddio wrote:Yes, one of the offers is BRYC. I know they didn't do well in regular ECNL this year, but next year they will do BRAVE for ECNL. We were offered ECNL-R. It seems that ECNL-R is more competetive than NCSL, yes? Most of the area clubs who have multiple teams seem to have their C teams in NCSL 1. My son is seeking a more challenging play environment, but again we don't have any familiarity with the coaches at either club with offers. He was also offered to stay on the current team next year, but there will be a new coach for that team too, that we don't know. So no matter what it's a new coach for him.
BRYC is definitely in for a challenge in ECNL-R, at least for boys. You don't normally see scores like that for U15 and U16 ages.
https://public.totalglobalsports.com/public/event/2561/club-schedules/357
MadridFan wrote:Yes, this is the same developer that had the original Youth Soccer Rankings site. It is much more accurate than GotSoccer!
I agree looks fairly accurate. Much more accurate than gotsoccer. Predicted results feature is cool, maybe enough people will purchase it to keep the app in business.
RedCard wrote:Arlington ADP's program runs through age 11. After this age, a child must either switch to the travel program or head back to the rec league.
My kids are in the ADP program and we love it. One gets a lot of bang for the buck, the games are competitive, and all games are played locally. Also, with only 2 practices a week as opposed to 3 (travel program), there is enough time available for other activities or sports.
I believe DC and Alexandra have ADP-style programs that run through age 13. This gives kids two additional years in which they have time for multiple sports. This makes a lot of sense, IMO.
I was told that Arlington cannot offer ADP through age 13 due to space constraints -- that is, there simply aren't enough fields for weekend games. Yet DC and Alexandria are somehow able to offer ADP-style programs through age 13.
I'm curious for this group's thoughts on the following:
1. What is the optimal cut-off age for an ADP-style program? (11, 12, 13?)
2. Are space constraints the sole reason that Arlington stops its ADP program at age 11? Or could there be other reasons?
3. Are there any solutions to Arlington's space constraints? Maybe kids are switched to large fields at too young an age? Using smaller fields (and small-sided games) might help resolve space issues.
Does Arlington still have middle school soccer ? I know there are other counties that have no middle school soccer because the local soccer club runs an ADP style program through middle school age groups. The county and club could work together to use middle school fields to provide soccer in fall and spring for an expanded ADP program.