Reply to Bethesda Soccer Club's Frostburg Camp

Forum Index » Soccer

Reply to "Bethesda Soccer Club's Frostburg Camp"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]
I think this has all changed. I heard the u11 girls were having a hard fielding 2 teams. This was because of the coaching. Sounds like the programs is in trouble on the girls side. [/quote]

In the U11 age group, there was a disgruntled parent whose daughter was on the top team as a U9 and was (rightfully) demoted to the b team for the U10 season. When his daughter was not moved up to the top team for the U11 season, he then formed a new club and took virtually all of the b team to that new team. Since there were only 3 teams in that age group and this defection occurred after tryouts, BSC currently has  “only” two teams in that age group.  I would expect this will be remedied next season after this spring’s tryouts.

Again, look at the big picture. In every other age group, BSC has several teams. They have a lot of success (see earlier post about Region 1 rankings) and are a good platform for girls who want to play college soccer. Are they the only option?  Of course not, but they are one of the 3-4 top clubs in the DMV. [/quote]

No people left because the age group director/coach is/was abusive. They lost players from the blue also. Many of the parents on the blue team are very unhappy she is still the coach but are afraid to say anything. They fear their kid will be retaliated against. This is the culture of the girls program in the early years at BSC. I heard she has been force out and is leaving. I am sure she will continue to turn young girls off of soccer where ever she lands. 
The upper years are not players who were developed by BSC. Also if the other year classes are so dominant why don’t they play in the top bracket at their own tournament?  So just stop with eveything great. There are culture problems at McLean and BSC. [/quote]

A couple of things:  I know several people with daughters on the Blue and White team in this age group.  They forwarded the "recruiting email" that this disgruntled dad prepared last spring when he decided to form his own team and selectively tried to recruit players from Blue and White.  Not surprisingly, he started with the top players (in his mind) and, as he received rejections, continued to move down his list until he was able to draw enough girls away to form a team around his daughter.  He ended up with a team that was basically made up of White players and, to be fair, parents who were not happy with BSC (which is also stating the obvious, since you would not leave if you were happy).  With that said, the disgruntled dad is a piece of work and thinks highly of himself, his soccer IQ, and his daughter's soccer skills.  I personally know him, and I have talked to him over the years at winter clinics.  You can say that some people left because of unhappiness with a coach, and I cannot speak to everyone's motivations.  But I do know the disgruntled dad's motivations, and he was motivated by the fact that he thought his daughter is better than she is and deserved to be on the Blue team.

As for your comments about the "upper years" not being players "developed" by BSC, this is just an ignorant comment.  For starters, as anybody with older kids knows, all of the original ECNL teams in the DMV (i.e., clubs that had ECNL before DA existed and before the expansion of ECNL teams) attracted girls from outside their clubs who wanted to join an ECNL team.  It is not a knock on BSC's ability to "develop" their own players if a girl from SAC's Blue team, for example, decided to join BSC's ECNL team.  The same was true with respect to McLean, for example, if a girl left Loudoun's Red team (before Loudoun had ECNL) to join McLean's ECNL team.  Under that old system, it would be stupid to fault any of those original ECNL teams for failing to have ALL of the best girls in the DMV area in their U-Little program, since most parents of U-Littles pick a club that is "good" and is convenient to where they live.  It is not until soccer gets more serious at the ECNL ages that parents (generally speaking) are more willing to drive further distances to have their kids play for a club that gives their child a better platform than their current club.  Yet, you seem to imply that BSC, McLean, etc. are bad programs because their 2001 ECNL team, for example, is not comprised entirely of girls who started at those clubs in the U8 program.

With the addition of the DA teams and the expansion of ECNL teams in the DMV in the last 2 years, the talent has been diluted, and you have seen significantly less girls switch to BSC, McLean, etc. than in the past, when those clubs were the only game in town.  This was absolutely true for BSC's 2005 and 2006 ECNL teams (i.e., the two youngest ECNL teams).  As a result, these are the two best teams to analyze to determine whether BSC is actually able to "develop" its own players and where those teams compare to other teams in the area.  So let's look:

The 2006 team played so poorly when they were U11s in EDP that they were demoted from the top EDP division to the second division in the spring of their U11 year and for their entire U12 year.  Since tournament placement seems important to you, I would note that the 2006 BSC Blue team was placed in the 6th of 9 brackets at Jeff Cup last year.  Surely, you'd say, this is evidence at BSC's failure to develop these girls.  And yet, the 2006 BSC ECNL team finished 6th out of 15 teams in ECNL's NE division this fall (based on points per game), they are ranked #39 in Region 1 by youthsoccerrankings.com (ahead of FCV, McLean, Arlington, MD United, and both Washington Spirit teams), and they are in the 2nd of 13 brackets in this year's Jefferson Cup.  This dramatic improvement was not the result of outside girls joining that team, as the entire 2006 ECNL team is comprised of girls who were previously U12s on BSC's Blue, White and Green teams.  To say that again:  the entire 2006 ECNL team were girls "developed" by BSC.  These facts would seem to indicate that BSC did a good job developing these girls into one of the top area girls' teams.

As for the 2005 team, they are ranked #11 in Region 1 by youthsoccerrankings.com (ahead of every team in VA, MD United, and Washington Spirit MD) and they are in the top of the 13 brackets in this year's Jefferson Cup.  Again, these results would seem to indicate that BSC did a good job developing its girls into one of the top area girls' teams.

In summary, you can sit there and trash the entire girls' program at BSC (and McLean), but your negative statements about BSC's program are not supported by fact.  As I have said, no big club is perfect.  Far from it, as evidenced by all of the posts on this DCUrbanMom site trashing every single soccer club and league in the DMV.  But BSC is one of the top 3-4 girls' clubs in the area, as reflected in its college commitments, the results of its ECNL teams, and the development of its players.  To state otherwise is to ignore facts.

[/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