Reply to New Additions to Leagues Check Up (ECNL & GA)

Forum Index » Soccer

Reply to "New Additions to Leagues Check Up (ECNL & GA)"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]Competitive in the oldest two age groups, but those boys will be aged out soon. Those teams have been more established and not been poached by the shiny new toy that was Fox.🦊 take a look at their 2 youngest age groups, to 2011s and 2012s.  The future of the program and a key look at what it will be a few years down the road. Bottom of the table, basically. Those poor boys would lose 95% of their games in MLS Next. [/quote]

In the 2 youngest age groups I would agree.  The Academy teams 2010 and older will be fine, particularly if they bioband a few of the Q3/4 players on existing Academy and ECNL teams.

Am hoping going from 4 teams (2 RL, 2 NL) to 3 will help with the loss of players to Fox SA, as most RL teams are as non-competitive as the ECNL teams 09 and younger.
[/quote]

For CISC, I see this more of a strategic move against Fox (who they were losing players to) vs a repudiation of ECNL.  Fox got MLSN2 on boys side and is DPL on girls side - and no secret they want to be MLSN/GA eventually.  If CISC gets MLSN plus 2 MLSN2 teams, they will pull top players back from Fox who want to play MLS Next, and at MLSN2 level, it will be all about what clubs facilities are more convenient for most families.

On girls side, CISC in GA will preclude Fox from ever getting it. North Charlotte area isn't anywhere as populated as DMV and two GA teams there would just make them both watered down and terrible.

[/quote]

CISC has bigger problems, mainly $$$$$. Supposedly they haven't paid their field fees for months.  [/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics