Arch wrote:I thought the BRYC rec program (.org) was the nonprofit but the BRYC academy (.com) wasn't necessarily a nonprofit. Academy is "BRYC" in name only; the rec program is part of BRYC nonprofit proper, correct? The ECNL and NCSL access the "BRYC" name has is through the .com. Why would there be any board approval necessary for the for-profit side to run their business?
IMO, this move is also looking ahead because while, performance-wise, BRYC may be on notice by ECNL (no idea if that's true or not), there aren't enough players in the 2011 pool to field a team in BRYC partly because there are three bridge teams cannibalizing the 2011 players. This move ensures they will have enough to roster a 2011 team in ECNL when they become age-eligible because they can fill-out the roster with VYS players as well as of course any players from other clubs that wish to try out.
Regarding your obsession with the boys, if BRYC coaches are going to head up the ECNL team they don't have to pick any VYS players if they don't think they're good enough. Just as they don't have to pick any of the BRYC pool players either. There are no player quotas required from BRYC or VYS for the BRAVE rosters.
Also, for the boys, the TD was just hired as an assistant by GMU. Maybe he is going to be moving on anyway.
One clarification on the 2011 Girls - the 3 bridge teams aren't what caused the collapse of the 2011 Girls Elite team. There was a 2011 Girls Elite team, but most of the strongest players left for other clubs (not to the bridge teams). One of the bridge teams is fairly strong (D1 NCSL) but most of the players on the other 2 bridge teams are not at the level of pre-ENCL. My understanding is that the Vienna 2011 Girls pre-ENCL team isn't particularly strong either. So, there will be a gap to fill -- BRAVE is going to have to convince strong players from other clubs to make a move (either clubs that don't have an ENCL team or strong clubs where talented players would be on the second team).