We left VYS two years ago. Only regret is not leaving sooner. The age group my son was with (first team / Eagles) has had the same coach for 5 of their 7 years with the club - including the transition to Brave. Hard to produce a well-rounded player when you're slotted into the same position, doing the same drills, with the same coach for your entire youth soccer experience. Stop trying to make them better. Focus on making your kid better - just leave.

Anonymous wrote:Maybe it’s a bait and switch, but then you need to think about development. If the coach doesn’t think your kid can cut it, why keep them there? There is no guarantee of playing time, so is your child better off keeping the label of the “top team” and riding the bench, or are they better playing with a lower team, likely as a starter but certainly with more time, where they can develop their skills? I’d prefer the latter. No kid enjoys riding the bench.

When the drop off between A and B is large, the kid is probably better off developing on the A team bench. You don't get better if you're practicing and playing with players significantly below you. The advantage to clubs like Bethesda, McLean and Arlington is that there are so many teams that your kid can find their level. At clubs with two teams, kids may be both not good enough for the A team and way better than the B team. If I was OP, I'd get my money back and try to have my kid practice with another club.

Anonymous wrote:Can someone explain why VYS would promote a few players from the B team who were one of the weakest to the A team? Not only are they struggling with team A, but several players on the B team are easily much better than more than half of team A. Do they cave into nagging parents even though the players don't belong? Do they reward "loyalty" by staying with the club over actual soccer skills and abilities with new incoming players? I understand balancing the A and B teams but it is ridiculous watching players fumble around on the ball that certainly don't belong.

This happens at our club too (hint: they get talked about a lot on here). It comes down to the parent having the right contacts and/or endlessley kissing the keester of the coach, age group coordinator, etc.

Maybe it’s a bait and switch, but then you need to think about development. If the coach doesn’t think your kid can cut it, why keep them there? There is no guarantee of playing time, so is your child better off keeping the label of the “top team” and riding the bench, or are they better playing with a lower team, likely as a starter but certainly with more time, where they can develop their skills? I’d prefer the latter. No kid enjoys riding the bench.

Anonymous wrote:What age group?

U9---->U11

Can someone explain why VYS would promote a few players from the B team who were one of the weakest to the A team? Not only are they struggling with team A, but several players on the B team are easily much better than more than half of team A. Do they cave into nagging parents even though the players don't belong? Do they reward "loyalty" by staying with the club over actual soccer skills and abilities with new incoming players? I understand balancing the A and B teams but it is ridiculous watching players fumble around on the ball that certainly don't belong.

Anonymous wrote:Vienna has a long history of not developing players. You would expect that to change with the number of paid staff rather than the old parent coach/trainer model, but the leadership and coaches have been poor, especially for the younger girls.

They talk great a great game and make lots of promises, but there is very little actual development and once you are in they tend to treat you poorly. Communication is awful. There is a reason they have such consistently high attrition compared to other local clubs.

They like to run-n-gun, use their athleticism to the hilt.

The thing is, even the top teams at vienna, particularly at the lower boys Us are not great. They aren't very competitive and lose all the time. So I'm not sure what all the player switching is accomplishing. I get trying to raise their profile, but moves like this turn parents and players off. Makes a kid feel like they suck bc they get "demoted" in the first month. at the little U-teams, give me a break! They just want to fill the rosters of lower teams so it's a shuffle/ money grab.

What age group?

Anonymous wrote:

They talk great a great game and make lots of promises, but there is very little actual development and once you are in they tend to treat you poorly. Communication is awful. There is a reason they have such consistently high attrition compared to other local clubs.

This statement can be applied to 90% of the clubs in the DMV and it would be true 100% of the time. SMH

Vienna has a long history of not developing players. You would expect that to change with the number of paid staff rather than the old parent coach/trainer model, but the leadership and coaches have been poor, especially for the younger girls.

They talk great a great game and make lots of promises, but there is very little actual development and once you are in they tend to treat you poorly. Communication is awful. There is a reason they have such consistently high attrition compared to other local clubs.

My DD was bumped from Vienna A after a couple years on the team to make room for new players who would not switch clubs for a B team. This is after we were told during our most recent "mid year review" that they were in the middle of the pack and a good fit for the A team. Child was extremely upset about being jerked around by a trusted coach, and we left for a new club, but it was tough.

Our club formed teams right before the fall season but did not promise anyone a particular team up front. This is bait and switch.

It is a bait and switch. If your offer is for a specific team (every offer that my kid has ever gotten names the team), I'd ask for my money and player card and go elsewhere. A good kid can still land with a team. Doing this is a way to boost numbers and quality on lower teams. They know that a kid who doesn't want Vienna B or C may take Vienna A. The offer prevents the kid from accepting an offer elsewhere that may be a better fit and then when they have no options in the fall, they find out they are a star on the B team.

How typical is this? Tryouts, kid gets accepted to a "higher level color team" we pay the travel fee. They say they will continue to assess team placement, solidifying at the end of August. Get our "higher level" team placement end of August, practice commences. 2 weeks later, kid is bumped down to the next level down team. This seems to be happening to a bunch of kids. Is this typical? I feel like it's a bait and switch- get 'em in the club by promising them higher level play, having them forego perhaps other travel team offers and then, JUST KIDDING, you are dropped down. There have been maybe 5 games played in total, and a handful of practices. Whatever happened to making a commitment to coach the players who have committed to you and giving them a runway to improve and for the team to mesh? I get VYS has to try raise their profile by winning, but I was under the impression they were a little more concerned with player development. This is our first year, maybe this is typical at other clubs as well?