MadridFan wrote:

Cruzado wrote:

SoccerD wrote:

Swaggalicious wrote:

SoccerD wrote:

Swaggalicious wrote:

SoccerD wrote:

Swaggalicious wrote:I don’t understand that issue here. To me it looks like the Union partnership or merger. Bringing together player pools to make both the girls and boys sides more competitive. Did these clubs get buy-in before creating Union? No. Isn’t everyone always posting about dilution? Doesn’t this help?

I don’t see treachery here or understand why bryc’s board and how they interface with the board is an issue. The board can always vote no, if a vote is even needed. More like a club struggling and making moves to improve the root issue.

After a closer read, I think SoccerD has some axe to grind with the bryc TD. Treachery, board is illegitimate, people are PM him about this, emasculated, hate backroom deals and failure to follow process/protocol/by-laws. These words and pov doesn’t come from an outside observer. If you’re upset, why don’t you just talk to Dolansky vs. posting here?

No axe to grind with the TD. I don't know Dolansky and it's not my role, obviously, to talk to him. The PMs I got were following my post. Folks should talk openly, IMO, if they have something to share. Obviously, people can disagree with my take and what I've been told. And they have. It's been an interesting dialogue from my perspective.

I appreciate the dialogue. I’m interested but not directly impacted. I just found it hard to believe that someone outside of bryc and doesn’t know the TD has such strong opinions of this person and how he’s communicating with his board. Just pointing out my point of view.

Got it. I believe the TD is Brian Welsh.
Mark Dolansky is the Travel Soccer Sports Commissioner acc. to the website. And I truly don't know him beyond the facts relayed, which are troubling to a lot of folks. I'm now hearing there is a petition in protest. What a mess.

You’re right. Dolansky is the Commish.

But I can’t resist taking one last bite of this apple. What facts are you referring to? My read of his email is basically there is no merger and very little info beyond that. Why would any parent protest this? What could be their concern beyond more competition for starting positions. How do you know about how Dolansky is communicating with the board?

I think if you were a bit more transparent, it would help all of us understand the reasoning behind your pov.

The facts reported to me from emails and communications seen (and now a petition). I can't be much more transparent on a message board than I've been, unless you want me to out the BRYC sources/friends, which I can't do. I read Dolansky's communication and it touched a nerve because it was not remotely transparent (ha!). Why protest? No buy-in from the membership, which as one pointed out about McLean/SYC, perhaps isn't the norm. No buy-in from the TD/DOC (as I've been reliably informed). The players may (speculation) revolt. The coaching staff is disenfranchised after being ignored and backdoored. The route was ECNL girls ... for the BRYC ECNL boys. it's being dictated. And VYS boys is weaker than the alternatives. You are reaching for low hanging fruit. If I were trying to grow the boys for any club, BRYC included, I would pick the best partner or not partner. Perhaps affiliate (not sure what is entailed there). I wouldn't ignore my DOC and ECNL Director's preference (again, facts reported to me), cater first/only to the girls, and upset my membership base, and then dictate a result that wasn't asked for or socialized. And I certainly wouldn't do it with a Board that reportedly is illegitimate (expired terms; not full; and ultimately not in the know). Those are the facts.

If the ends always justify the means, I guess folks won't care. That seems to be the sentiment from a bunch here. Except the ends aren't that great given the lack of strength of the VYS boy side. Seems like desperation to save the girls struck and VYS horse traded. "Give us your boys too or no deal."

If this were my 4th grader's club, I would wonder about the choices made, I would wonder who would coach if they made ECNL, etc. I might just be naive. This is how it's done? Lots are up in arms about it.

Thanks for the questions.

P.S. Great handle.

BRYC boys are “up in arms” and may “revolt” about … what? The VYS boys are “weaker than the alternative”—what other club with a stronger boys side has any interest in partnering with BRYC?

Would like to see a head to head VYS vs BRYC at all boys ages from U12 on down (the future). Maybe the BRYC boys would calm down when they realize that the combined team will be stronger.

...because BRYC boys are going to get demoted to lower level teams.

Cruzado wrote:

SoccerD wrote:

Swaggalicious wrote:

SoccerD wrote:

Swaggalicious wrote:

SoccerD wrote:

Swaggalicious wrote:I don’t understand that issue here. To me it looks like the Union partnership or merger. Bringing together player pools to make both the girls and boys sides more competitive. Did these clubs get buy-in before creating Union? No. Isn’t everyone always posting about dilution? Doesn’t this help?

I don’t see treachery here or understand why bryc’s board and how they interface with the board is an issue. The board can always vote no, if a vote is even needed. More like a club struggling and making moves to improve the root issue.

After a closer read, I think SoccerD has some axe to grind with the bryc TD. Treachery, board is illegitimate, people are PM him about this, emasculated, hate backroom deals and failure to follow process/protocol/by-laws. These words and pov doesn’t come from an outside observer. If you’re upset, why don’t you just talk to Dolansky vs. posting here?

No axe to grind with the TD. I don't know Dolansky and it's not my role, obviously, to talk to him. The PMs I got were following my post. Folks should talk openly, IMO, if they have something to share. Obviously, people can disagree with my take and what I've been told. And they have. It's been an interesting dialogue from my perspective.

I appreciate the dialogue. I’m interested but not directly impacted. I just found it hard to believe that someone outside of bryc and doesn’t know the TD has such strong opinions of this person and how he’s communicating with his board. Just pointing out my point of view.

Got it. I believe the TD is Brian Welsh.
Mark Dolansky is the Travel Soccer Sports Commissioner acc. to the website. And I truly don't know him beyond the facts relayed, which are troubling to a lot of folks. I'm now hearing there is a petition in protest. What a mess.

You’re right. Dolansky is the Commish.

But I can’t resist taking one last bite of this apple. What facts are you referring to? My read of his email is basically there is no merger and very little info beyond that. Why would any parent protest this? What could be their concern beyond more competition for starting positions. How do you know about how Dolansky is communicating with the board?

I think if you were a bit more transparent, it would help all of us understand the reasoning behind your pov.

The facts reported to me from emails and communications seen (and now a petition). I can't be much more transparent on a message board than I've been, unless you want me to out the BRYC sources/friends, which I can't do. I read Dolansky's communication and it touched a nerve because it was not remotely transparent (ha!). Why protest? No buy-in from the membership, which as one pointed out about McLean/SYC, perhaps isn't the norm. No buy-in from the TD/DOC (as I've been reliably informed). The players may (speculation) revolt. The coaching staff is disenfranchised after being ignored and backdoored. The route was ECNL girls ... for the BRYC ECNL boys. it's being dictated. And VYS boys is weaker than the alternatives. You are reaching for low hanging fruit. If I were trying to grow the boys for any club, BRYC included, I would pick the best partner or not partner. Perhaps affiliate (not sure what is entailed there). I wouldn't ignore my DOC and ECNL Director's preference (again, facts reported to me), cater first/only to the girls, and upset my membership base, and then dictate a result that wasn't asked for or socialized. And I certainly wouldn't do it with a Board that reportedly is illegitimate (expired terms; not full; and ultimately not in the know). Those are the facts.

If the ends always justify the means, I guess folks won't care. That seems to be the sentiment from a bunch here. Except the ends aren't that great given the lack of strength of the VYS boy side. Seems like desperation to save the girls struck and VYS horse traded. "Give us your boys too or no deal."

If this were my 4th grader's club, I would wonder about the choices made, I would wonder who would coach if they made ECNL, etc. I might just be naive. This is how it's done? Lots are up in arms about it.

Thanks for the questions.

P.S. Great handle.

BRYC boys are “up in arms” and may “revolt” about … what? The VYS boys are “weaker than the alternative”—what other club with a stronger boys side has any interest in partnering with BRYC?

Would like to see a head to head VYS vs BRYC at all boys ages from U12 on down (the future). Maybe the BRYC boys would calm down when they realize that the combined team will be stronger.

Swaggalicious wrote:

SoccerD wrote:

Swaggalicious wrote:

SoccerD wrote:

Swaggalicious wrote:I don’t understand that issue here. To me it looks like the Union partnership or merger. Bringing together player pools to make both the girls and boys sides more competitive. Did these clubs get buy-in before creating Union? No. Isn’t everyone always posting about dilution? Doesn’t this help?

I don’t see treachery here or understand why bryc’s board and how they interface with the board is an issue. The board can always vote no, if a vote is even needed. More like a club struggling and making moves to improve the root issue.

After a closer read, I think SoccerD has some axe to grind with the bryc TD. Treachery, board is illegitimate, people are PM him about this, emasculated, hate backroom deals and failure to follow process/protocol/by-laws. These words and pov doesn’t come from an outside observer. If you’re upset, why don’t you just talk to Dolansky vs. posting here?

No axe to grind with the TD. I don't know Dolansky and it's not my role, obviously, to talk to him. The PMs I got were following my post. Folks should talk openly, IMO, if they have something to share. Obviously, people can disagree with my take and what I've been told. And they have. It's been an interesting dialogue from my perspective.

I appreciate the dialogue. I’m interested but not directly impacted. I just found it hard to believe that someone outside of bryc and doesn’t know the TD has such strong opinions of this person and how he’s communicating with his board. Just pointing out my point of view.

Got it. I believe the TD is Brian Welsh.
Mark Dolansky is the Travel Soccer Sports Commissioner acc. to the website. And I truly don't know him beyond the facts relayed, which are troubling to a lot of folks. I'm now hearing there is a petition in protest. What a mess.

You’re right. Dolansky is the Commish.

But I can’t resist taking one last bite of this apple. What facts are you referring to? My read of his email is basically there is no merger and very little info beyond that. Why would any parent protest this? What could be their concern beyond more competition for starting positions. How do you know about how Dolansky is communicating with the board?

I think if you were a bit more transparent, it would help all of us understand the reasoning behind your pov.

Swaggalicious wrote:

SoccerD wrote:

Swaggalicious wrote:I don’t understand that issue here. To me it looks like the Union partnership or merger. Bringing together player pools to make both the girls and boys sides more competitive. Did these clubs get buy-in before creating Union? No. Isn’t everyone always posting about dilution? Doesn’t this help?

I don’t see treachery here or understand why bryc’s board and how they interface with the board is an issue. The board can always vote no, if a vote is even needed. More like a club struggling and making moves to improve the root issue.

After a closer read, I think SoccerD has some axe to grind with the bryc TD. Treachery, board is illegitimate, people are PM him about this, emasculated, hate backroom deals and failure to follow process/protocol/by-laws. These words and pov doesn’t come from an outside observer. If you’re upset, why don’t you just talk to Dolansky vs. posting here?

No axe to grind with the TD. I don't know Dolansky and it's not my role, obviously, to talk to him. The PMs I got were following my post. Folks should talk openly, IMO, if they have something to share. Obviously, people can disagree with my take and what I've been told. And they have. It's been an interesting dialogue from my perspective.

I appreciate the dialogue. I’m interested but not directly impacted. I just found it hard to believe that someone outside of bryc and doesn’t know the TD has such strong opinions of this person and how he’s communicating with his board. Just pointing out my point of view.

Swaggalicious wrote:I don’t understand that issue here. To me it looks like the Union partnership or merger. Bringing together player pools to make both the girls and boys sides more competitive. Did these clubs get buy-in before creating Union? No. Isn’t everyone always posting about dilution? Doesn’t this help?

I don’t see treachery here or understand why bryc’s board and how they interface with the board is an issue. The board can always vote no, if a vote is even needed. More like a club struggling and making moves to improve the root issue.

After a closer read, I think SoccerD has some axe to grind with the bryc TD. Treachery, board is illegitimate, people are PM him about this, emasculated, hate backroom deals and failure to follow process/protocol/by-laws. These words and pov doesn’t come from an outside observer. If you’re upset, why don’t you just talk to Dolansky vs. posting here?

dnl8675309 wrote:

SoccerD wrote:

Mannschaft wrote:

SoccerD wrote:I've seen emails and letters about this as rumors are flying like wildfire. Here's what I've recently learned. A friend I know has kids in the program and knows kids on both BRYC boys and girls sides.

Seems like BRYC treachery at an all-time high with Soccer Commissioner Dolansky. This is ENTIRELY a move to save bottom-of-the-barrel girls ECNL. They are on probation. The boys program is in good standing and VYS boys is bottom of ECNL-R. It's a joke. Dolansky has gone to ECNL girls and posed the merger -- and it is a merger at the ECNL level. They are creating a new corporation and BRYC ECNL will be gone and called BRAVE (Braddock Road and Vienna ECNL). VYS has already told its membership too. As if this is a done deal. The title of the thread says so, right?

The problem? BRYC's board is illegitimate. They have not had an election since 2019. They are not fully formed even if you ignore the expired terms. And, obviously, they have not gotten approval of the Board, illegitimate or not. The first word any of the paying members got of the secret maneuverings from Dolansky and 2 board members was yesterday. The BRYC Boys TD told Dolansky that VYS is not a good club to partner with/merge with at the ECNL level. Affiliations were preferred. VYS doesn't have the talent and they don't have a surplus of fields. So what are they bringing on the boys side? Nothing.

So without a Board vote, member disclosure (much less, buy-in), and without a Board at all as they're all past term and operating without quorums, Dolansky hatches a plan anyway for both BRYC ECNL boys and girls. It was not needed or wanted on the boys side. They are run separately, as is ECNL. The notion that somehow the Boys program needs VYS is such a joke. How someone could completely disregard BRYC ECNL leadership and basically tell them to shut up and take it, and expect that the staff and the talent would be okay is beyond me. It's insane.

So make no mistake, it's a merger. BRYC ECNL Boys and Girls would be no more. Ethics don't matter. Board by-laws apparently don't matter. I'm guessing COVID will be the excuse. Which also is a crock. This is a dirty deal without any disclosure, support, or sanity. Period. If the talent and staff leave, what makes folks think the license stays?

I hope ECNL sees through this. Apparently, they've been told. You have to feel bad for BRYC ECNL boys families, in particular. Talk about lighting your multi-year investment on fire. The disinformation on this board acting like "all is well" is laughable.

I’m interested in this take. How is getting some new talent a bad thing for existing BRYC coaches and players. The VYS boys may not be lighting the world on fire, but there are some very talented players, especially at uLittle. I have seen the 2012s play futsal at TSJ, and they were very good.

On the girls’ side, the combined top team should be very strong.

I'll take a crack at it. Why merge ECNL? Why change the name and the brand? Why not affiliate with VYS or Great Falls or others? And why VYS for boys? Saying there was a good futsal crew won't hold water for the whole club. Geographically I can see the attraction. But no one was seeking a merger at ECNL for Boys and suddenly, it's done. Does anyone know if they've shared other details. For my family, if my club was merging at any level, that would mean practices in multiple places rather than one. Isn't that what SYC and McLean have done? How has that worked out?

It certainly is true that the best players will play (or should). Got to believe that.

What about the possibility of losing the TD and ECNL Director, who have been emasculated (at the risk of using the wrong word)? Seems like getting their buy-in would have been critical. So you add some good players but maybe not the best, in adding VYS boys, and you lose the staff? Presumably, you lose players as a result (some say, not the stars?). Who coaches? What is their vision? VYS takes over? Does ECNL pull the license as a result?

I'm spinning here. But those were my first thoughts to your question.

Not a shit stirrer? Your lead sentence starts with "treachery" and continues downhill from there. Move on. This is not your club, not your circus. Get over it. The boys will continue to be competitive, the girls will get stronger. The boys coaches are truly professionals, smart and well liked - and it's up to them how they want to proceed. It's not your concern. I am a parent, I am a paying member and I couldn't be happier with this idea. I've had two kids at BRYC over the years - boy and girl. Supporting expanding access to talent is the only way to compete against club who have ALREADY successfully practiced a similar model. The entire program will benefit in the long run. Stay out of it. Go find your own circus to shit stir in.

Mannschaft wrote:

SoccerD wrote:I've seen emails and letters about this as rumors are flying like wildfire. Here's what I've recently learned. A friend I know has kids in the program and knows kids on both BRYC boys and girls sides.

Seems like BRYC treachery at an all-time high with Soccer Commissioner Dolansky. This is ENTIRELY a move to save bottom-of-the-barrel girls ECNL. They are on probation. The boys program is in good standing and VYS boys is bottom of ECNL-R. It's a joke. Dolansky has gone to ECNL girls and posed the merger -- and it is a merger at the ECNL level. They are creating a new corporation and BRYC ECNL will be gone and called BRAVE (Braddock Road and Vienna ECNL). VYS has already told its membership too. As if this is a done deal. The title of the thread says so, right?

The problem? BRYC's board is illegitimate. They have not had an election since 2019. They are not fully formed even if you ignore the expired terms. And, obviously, they have not gotten approval of the Board, illegitimate or not. The first word any of the paying members got of the secret maneuverings from Dolansky and 2 board members was yesterday. The BRYC Boys TD told Dolansky that VYS is not a good club to partner with/merge with at the ECNL level. Affiliations were preferred. VYS doesn't have the talent and they don't have a surplus of fields. So what are they bringing on the boys side? Nothing.

So without a Board vote, member disclosure (much less, buy-in), and without a Board at all as they're all past term and operating without quorums, Dolansky hatches a plan anyway for both BRYC ECNL boys and girls. It was not needed or wanted on the boys side. They are run separately, as is ECNL. The notion that somehow the Boys program needs VYS is such a joke. How someone could completely disregard BRYC ECNL leadership and basically tell them to shut up and take it, and expect that the staff and the talent would be okay is beyond me. It's insane.

So make no mistake, it's a merger. BRYC ECNL Boys and Girls would be no more. Ethics don't matter. Board by-laws apparently don't matter. I'm guessing COVID will be the excuse. Which also is a crock. This is a dirty deal without any disclosure, support, or sanity. Period. If the talent and staff leave, what makes folks think the license stays?

I hope ECNL sees through this. Apparently, they've been told. You have to feel bad for BRYC ECNL boys families, in particular. Talk about lighting your multi-year investment on fire. The disinformation on this board acting like "all is well" is laughable.

I’m interested in this take. How is getting some new talent a bad thing for existing BRYC coaches and players. The VYS boys may not be lighting the world on fire, but there are some very talented players, especially at uLittle. I have seen the 2012s play futsal at TSJ, and they were very good.

On the girls’ side, the combined top team should be very strong.

dnl8675309 wrote:

SoccerD wrote:It is a message board. Shit stirring by definition. Have kids in another club. Had considered BRYC for 4th grader. Are you not concerned by all of that?

No. Not concerned a bit because you really have no idea what you're talking about. You're a gossip and have shades of gray information. Do us all a favor and don't ever consider BRYC for your kids. BRYC parents are semi-normal with nice kids, you're a shit stirrer and unhelpful and would be a toxic parent at any club.