Brave new world: BRYC and VYS partnership is on
![[Post New]](/jforum/templates/default/images/icon_minipost_new.gif){kind=icon}
Swaggalicious
Member Offline
Member Offline
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. |
SoccerD
Member Offline
Member Offline
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. |
Cruzado
Member Offline
Member Offline
Would be nice to see the top VYS 2012 team play the top BRYC 2012 team as an indication of what to expect in the future in terms of a joint ECNL effort. Both are playing in the Arlington ASIST tournament, but unfortunately not in the same flight — VYS’ top 2012 Boys team is in the highest flight, however, so they must be pretty competitive; BRYC’s top 2012 Boys team is two flights lower. Bottom line is that I don’t see any reason for anyone at either club to be upset by this. VYS lacks access to ECNL and routinely loses top players to other clubs for ECNL (although as others have said, I doubt many players leave VYS for BRYC). Meanwhile BRYC has a solid club but is struggling in ECNL and would benefit from a larger player pool that a collaboration with VYS would bring. The fact that these two clubs are next-door to one another makes it an organic affiliation. I don’t think either team technically includes Fairfax City in its zone, but they’re the best teams closest to Fairfax City, in the heart of Fairfax County, and one would think the Fairfax City area should be fielding a strong team competitive with Arlington and Alexandria. |
YellaCard
Member Offline
Member Offline
|
Looks like lots of spirited dialogue. Here is what I am seeing and hearing from these posts:
1. BRYC needs to improve its performance in ECNL 2. BRYC girls are far under performing in ECNL 3. BRYC girls were put on probation 4. BRYC Girls would benefit most from a local deal with VYS 5. BRYC Boys perform better than BRYC girls 6. BRYC Boys could benefit from different partnerships 7. BRYC has decided to do a merger with VYS on both sides 8. BRYC did not listen to consult with Boys ECNL leadership 9. BRYC may not have taken this to a proper vote per 503C rules 10. BRYC may have a non-valid board based on lack of elections protocol 11. BRYC boys do not agree with this move and have a petition 12. BRYC did not engage membership until the late hour All of the other back and forth aside that seems to be more subjective than objective, I would put forth the following suggestions / conclusions: 1. BRYC senior leaders handled this poorly 2. BRYC leaders should call a board meeting and invite their membership 3. BRYC should allow for a vote on open board seats by its members per bylaws 4. BRYC should allow for a vote on this merger / partnership by its members per bylaws 5. BRYC should consult ECNL Boys and ECNL girls leadership for guidance |
Mannschaft
Member Offline
Member Offline
I don’t know the 2011 girls but I do know the 2010 girls teams for both BRYC and VYS. The 2010 BRYC girls pre-ECNL plays in NCSL D1, and only had 2 wins in the fall, and 6 GF/38 GA. One of the bridge teams was actually better, finishing middle of the table in D1. The other 2 bridge teams played in D4. The 2010 VYS red girls team played in ECNL-R, and I believe had no losses. The black team finished 3rd in NCSL D1 (above both BRYC teams), and their white team was competitive in D2. I feel pretty comfortable that for the 2010 year on the girls’ side, VYS is substantially stronger. Without a partnership, things could be really ugly for the 2010 BRYC girls in ECNL next fall. With one, the team could be very competitive. |
Cruzado
Member Offline
Member Offline
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. |
SoccerD
Member Offline
Member Offline
Read higher - no “partnership”/merger needed according to BRYC Boys folks in the know. Affiliations preferred. |
MadridFan
Member Offline
Member Offline
...because BRYC boys are going to get demoted to lower level teams. |
SoccerD
Member Offline
Member Offline
No one said to me or said here that anyone is afraid of competition for spots. Want best growth model. Best talent. That is not VYS boys basically. |
Cruzado
Member Offline
Member Offline
Yet VYS boys U12 on down are stronger than BRYC. And BRYC’s “model” has made them the floor mat of ECNL for years. Go figure. If this doesn’t work out it will be because of drama like this—not like VYS talent doesn’t have other nearby options if they want to play in ECNL. |
MadridFan
Member Offline
Member Offline
...or BRYC boys. |
FCV-Dad
Member Offline
Member Offline
| The crazy thing here is that Dolansky never mentioned the FCV angle. Why did he not even mention that? Bryc and VYS will greatly improve the FCV boys side. But, more importantly, fcv girls will make huge improvements to bryc ecnl and VYS ecnlr. |
NovaAttackingMid
Member Offline
Member Offline
|
Our son has played for both clubs - one very recently after transferring from the other. We were with one club for 4 years and the other for less than half of a season. The bottom line is this...there are some great kids at BRYC who are having the system fail them. There are also many kids playing at ECNL level who could not make an ECNL roster elsewhere. As you get in the older age groups, BRYC becomes more competitive because the league has flushed out some who can't compete and drawn others who want a roster out of convenience or a myriad of other reasons. BRYC is the absolute worst at recruiting, and alot of that can be pinned on the lack of administration, structure, and personalities to make that happen. You kind of have to stumble into the club or know someone to be brought in. And that's not because it's elite - they literally have next to no outreach mechanism. There are several issues stopping both boys and girls from excelling. While talent level is one, another huge one is the lack of training field space. Teams are often on a space that's as small as 1/8th the size of a regulation pitch. Hard to practice through balls like that. A "partnership" with Vienna would presumably create additional field space. But, I think the adjoining issue is that the one field was being divided so that a scarce staff at BRYC could cram in their practices in one spot - Woodson HS. Another motivating factor for BRYC to do a partnership is there are a couple age groups (one in particular) that is completely barren. They don't have a competitive team to put on the field and got absolutely embarrassed in EDP this past fall. It drove the few talented kids away.
Vienna - some great coaches and kids and a no frills environment. Hate to stereotype any club or kid, but it is a very white collar area. So, while there are some very skilled players and they do a decent job of developing them at the U-littles, the kids often lack grit. There are many hungry-hustle kids, so don't get all bent out of shape. But they tend to lose close games because "some" of their kids lack an edge.Honestly, I don't know how much you can teach that once you get to ECNL level. There are a couple of age groups at Vienna that can compete with about any club in the area. Our kid was on a top team that won top flight of a tournament or two throughout the DC region. So, I wouldn't look down on Vienna because it's a small club. It only takes a handful of really skilled kids to put out a great product. And those kids are trickling away for bigger platforms of ECNL and MLS Next. Question is - does Vienna want to try to keep them and pump the resources that go with being an ECNL / MLS Next Club. Doubt it. Bottom line - BRYC needs VYS more than VYS needs BRYC. Without a new talent pool, BRYC is on verge of collapsing at a couple of age groups. Vienna should probably keep the model they have unless they're aiming to become a Bethesda. And, I don't think they have the horses at the top or connections to make that happen for years to come. |
soccerNOVA
Member Offline
Member Offline
Getting affiliates isn’t an option though. If it was then BRYC would already have them. Instead, BRYC has the best platform that exists, yet no one has considered them a destination club for the last 5-10 years. Kids don’t even want to drive 20 minutes to play ECNL there. No other club wants to be their affiliate and it’s not working at younger ages on the girls side or the boys side. I don’t know any of these people, but that should be a knock on everyone involved including the TD and the commissioner. It might not be entirely their fault though. BRYC is nowhere near the size of Arlington and Loudoun, so at the ECNL level they probably do need to expand the player pool however they can. That is the VDA and VA Union model, right? Best case is working with your neighbors, staying in Fairfax, keeping your coaches, and giving your kids the exact same opportunities that they had in previous years. Isn’t that what’s happening? It’s just that the rebranding at the ECNL level is necessary for anyone currently outside the club to actually want to join. From what I’ve read, no one is saying that VYS is taking over. More like BRYC is expanding in greater FX County. You know what is as big as Loudoun or Arlington? Fairfax County. This should be a good opportunity for high level players in FX…. And I see is as a great save and even expansion for BRYC. Do you have any actual alternatives, SoccerD? |
SoccerSkeptic
Member Offline
Member Offline
| Yes, BRYC Boys are doing better than their girls. BRYC boys still need a lot of help. Not sure VYS will help much, but better than nothing. BRYC boys had 0 teams go to the ECNL playoffs last year and most likely will have zero again this year. The 08 Boys are currently in via a wildcard, but they have a tough schedule ahead and most likely won’t make it. |