Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Our DD plays U14 for a club generally considered to be very good on these forums. I'm not sure I would call the top MOCO U14 team the best of the "average clubs". The MOCO1s were legitimately top 10 in the region this year, even after losing their U13s MB and Libero to Metro Travel.

You are correct to call me out on that. MOCO1 is legitimately a top team in the region, even though it is less competitive against what I would call the top teams (MDJRs Elite, Metro, Paramount, MVSA1). It is definitely not fair to call it average. What I wanted to say (and didn't come out right) was that MOCO1 was much better than any team listed in the title. In terms of tryout strategy, I would not even try to make a MOCO team at U14 without some volleyball experience. There are always exceptions for tall, athletic players, but those are rare. If your kid has no volleyball experience and dreams of playing volleyball without putting any work into it, you are wasting time and money by trying out for MOCO.

Anonymous wrote:U14 has a really wide range of abilities and a lot of teams in the region. The midpoint team in CHRVA was ranked ~4000 in the nation. Using that metric, PVC 1s, both MEVC teams and all 3 MOCO teams were above that ranking. DMV was just below 4000. Honestly, that feels about right both for the performance of those teams both inside and outside the region. So if this year is any guide for next years 15s, you should see MOCO1, a big gap, then PVC1 > MOCO2 > MEVC1 > MOCO3 > MEVC2 > DMV > PVC2 > PVC3. Just keep in mind that U15 brings in a lot of new HS players so there is a lot of movement every year depending where the talent goes.

The list above is a good guidance for what offers to accept and in what order. MEVC has a good player retention, so it is hard to make one of their teams, even though they didn't do that well this season. Rookies have a better chance of making PVC (where retention seems to be a serious problem) or DMV (where the cost is outrageous).

Just a note that the U14 DMV team beat MOCO3 when they played them at National Harbor. The teams in the middle are all fairly comparable and which team is better really depends on the day.

Anonymous wrote:Our DD plays U14 for a club generally considered to be very good on these forums. I'm not sure I would call the top MOCO U14 team the best of the "average clubs". The MOCO1s were legitimately top 10 in the region this year, even after losing their U13s MB and Libero to Metro Travel.

You are correct to call me out on that. MOCO1 is legitimately a top team in the region, even though it is less competitive against what I would call the top teams (MDJRs Elite, Metro, Paramount, MVSA1). It is definitely not fair to call it average. What I wanted to say (and didn't come out right) was that MOCO1 was much better than any team listed in the title. In terms of tryout strategy, I would not even try to make a MOCO team at U14 without some volleyball experience. There are always exceptions for tall, athletic players, but those are rare. If your kid has no volleyball experience and dreams of playing volleyball without putting any work into it, you are wasting time and money by trying out for MOCO.

Anonymous wrote:U14 has a really wide range of abilities and a lot of teams in the region. The midpoint team in CHRVA was ranked ~4000 in the nation. Using that metric, PVC 1s, both MEVC teams and all 3 MOCO teams were above that ranking. DMV was just below 4000. Honestly, that feels about right both for the performance of those teams both inside and outside the region. So if this year is any guide for next years 15s, you should see MOCO1, a big gap, then PVC1 > MOCO2 > MEVC1 > MOCO3 > MEVC2 > DMV > PVC2 > PVC3. Just keep in mind that U15 brings in a lot of new HS players so there is a lot of movement every year depending where the talent goes.

The list above is a good guidance for what offers to accept and in what order. MEVC has a good player retention, so it is hard to make one of their teams, even though they didn't do that well this season. Rookies have a better chance of making PVC (where retention seems to be a serious problem) or DMV (where the cost is outrageous).

If you are choosing among these clubs, do your research, go to the pre-tryout clinics, and meet the actual coaches that are assigned to the specific teams. Keep in mind there are other considerations besides skill level of the club and cost that may make one club a better fit than others.

That's good advice for all age groups and all clubs. Most clubs will let parents watch pre-tryout sessions. Watch the other players in the gym, see how the coaches interact with the players.

Anonymous wrote:
I don't think there is any doubt that MOCO1 dominates the 14s in the average club category. Last year they earned a bid to the USAV Nationals, but they lost some players to better teams (including Metro). This year they went to the AAU Nationals, where they ranked 33 in the Aspire division: https://results.advancedeventsystems.com/event/PTAwMDAwNDAzMTA90/divisions/188464/standings . PVC1 (50), MOCO2 (83), and MEVC1 (83) happened to be in the same division: https://results.advancedeventsystems.com/event/PTAwMDAwNDAzMTA90/divisions/190676/standings . Assuming that the teams stay together, you will likely see MOCO1 >> PVC1 > MOCO2 ~ MEVC1 for the next season's 15s. But few teams stay together - some reshuffling will happen with the best players moving up to better clubs.

Our DD plays U14 for a club generally considered to be very good on these forums. I'm not sure I would call the top MOCO U14 team the best of the "average clubs". The MOCO1s were legitimately top 10 in the region this year, even after losing their U13s MB and Libero to Metro Travel.

U14 has a really wide range of abilities and a lot of teams in the region. The midpoint team in CHRVA was ranked ~4000 in the nation. Using that metric, PVC 1s, both MEVC teams and all 3 MOCO teams were above that ranking. DMV was just below 4000. Honestly, that feels about right both for the performance of those teams both inside and outside the region. So if this year is any guide for next years 15s, you should see MOCO1, a big gap, then PVC1 > MOCO2 > MEVC1 > MOCO3 > MEVC2 > DMV > PVC2 > PVC3. Just keep in mind that U15 brings in a lot of new HS players so there is a lot of movement every year depending where the talent goes.

Also, sometimes you have to be careful looking at AAU or any nationals results. It all depends on which players go to nationals, and often teams are missing some players as sometimes families prioritize vacations, especially at the younger ages. That said, reviewing the AES links above it looks like MOCO2 played MEVC1 at AAUs and won, so the rankings looked like they were roughly correct. But a better comparison is usually the head-to-head results during the regular season, the level of play (open, club, etc.) and the team finishes in tournaments.

At U14 level, the top 10 is a bit subjective but based on rankings + us watching/playing the teams I think: BAVA 1s, Blue Ridge 1s, LEVBC 1s, MDJRs Elite 1s, Metro Travel, MOCO 1s, MVSA 1s, Paramount 1s, VA Juniors were the best teams.

Any team in the top 10 is arguably very good. What's new now is that the distance between the teams in the top 10 was much smaller than we've seen in previous years. Paramount beat MDJrs late in the season, but lost to Metro Travel. MD Jrs split 2 matches with Metro Travel and beat MVSA 3x. Blue Ridge tied MVSA, beat BAVA and VA Juniors. MOCO beat VA Juniors. VA Juniors beat BAVA, lost to Metro in 3 at bids. MVSA was an outlier this year, I don't think they had a win against any of the other teams in the top 10 but they had a very close match against Metro at bids and were very good in NEQs and ECC.

What's great about the U14 age group is that the recent efforts of some clubs to start early development of players (U10+) is starting to show up now. That means the next group of teams and clubs will also be more competitive, which is what we need in the region. PVC and MEVC are both benefiting from that trend, plus their own efforts in younger player development. If you are looking for a mid-tier (but above "average") team both of those clubs are worth considering, along with the 2s and/or 3s team at some of the clubs that also have very good 1s teams.

Anonymous wrote:OP says her kid is 2010 age group. Would that have been 15s this year? I followed the 16s this year and from what I heard and saw, I would say MEVC 1s was the best of these clubs, then MoCo 1s. Neither PVC 1s or 2s (and we're talking about Platform, not Paramount or other "P" team) looked very strong. I watched them play in a smaller MVSA tournament in May and I would say they would rank last in this list, with DMV and MoCo 2's tied for second to last.

Last year, this forum made it sound like MoCo was the best of this list, but MEVC 1s looked solid this season. I thought MoCo 2s would have done better, but they came out below DMV in a couple of tournaments.

One thing to consider in addition to a club's skill level is the practical aspect of travel arrangements. I heard that PVC requires their players to room together, without any input from the players, and that if parents come to the travel tournaments, they have to pay for their own room, separate from their child. This resulted in lots of unnecessary drama and extra energy wasted on the social aspect of the team, not to mention more costs for the parents. While some families might like the team bonding aspect of this travel arrangement, it would be a non-starter for other families.

If you are choosing among these clubs, do your research, go to the pre-tryout clinics, and meet the actual coaches that are assigned to the specific teams. Keep in mind there are other considerations besides skill level of the club and cost that may make one club a better fit than others.

I don't think there is any doubt that MOCO1 dominates the 14s in the average club category. Last year they earned a bid to the USAV Nationals, but they lost some players to better teams (including Metro). This year they went to the AAU Nationals, where they ranked 33 in the Aspire division: https://results.advancedeventsystems.com/event/PTAwMDAwNDAzMTA90/divisions/188464/standings . PVC1 (50), MOCO2 (83), and MEVC1 (83) happened to be in the same division: https://results.advancedeventsystems.com/event/PTAwMDAwNDAzMTA90/divisions/190676/standings . Assuming that the teams stay together, you will likely see MOCO1 >> PVC1 > MOCO2 ~ MEVC1 for the next season's 15s. But few teams stay together - some reshuffling will happen with the best players moving up to better clubs.

Anonymous wrote:OP says her kid is 2010 age group. Would that have been 15s this year? I followed the 16s this year and from what I heard and saw, I would say MEVC 1s was the best of these clubs, then MoCo 1s. Neither PVC 1s or 2s (and we're talking about Platform, not Paramount or other "P" team) looked very strong. I watched them play in a smaller MVSA tournament in May and I would say they would rank last in this list, with DMV and MoCo 2's tied for second to last.

Last year, this forum made it sound like MoCo was the best of this list, but MEVC 1s looked solid this season. I thought MoCo 2s would have done better, but they came out below DMV in a couple of tournaments.

One thing to consider in addition to a club's skill level is the practical aspect of travel arrangements. I heard that PVC requires their players to room together, without any input from the players, and that if parents come to the travel tournaments, they have to pay for their own room, separate from their child. This resulted in lots of unnecessary drama and extra energy wasted on the social aspect of the team, not to mention more costs for the parents. While some families might like the team bonding aspect of this travel arrangement, it would be a non-starter for other families.

If you are choosing among these clubs, do your research, go to the pre-tryout clinics, and meet the actual coaches that are assigned to the specific teams. Keep in mind there are other considerations besides skill level of the club and cost that may make one club a better fit than others.

PVC parent here. The bolded is only partially correct: players submit two rooming preferences and they are paired with at least one of their favorite teammates. Parents do stay separately and that adds to the cost. It is rare for both parents to travel to tournaments because of siblings or other commitments. Imagine one parent staying in a room that has enough space to accommodate the player, but having to pay extra for the player to stay in a different room. You can imagine that most parents don't like this arrangement. Besides the additional cost, the players take advantage of their newfound liberty to stay up late to enjoy the company or just to stare at their screens. They typically play worse during travel tournaments because they don't get enough rest.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I disagree with PP's statement that DMV is only where players with no other offers go. DD chose to play for DMV over another team, as did at least 2 or 3 of her teammates. They liked the coaches better than the other clubs extending offers. We were new to club volleyball this year, and DD had friends playing for other clubs, and we were shocked at how negative their coaches were at other teams. They were cursing at the players, singling out players, screaming at them during the tournaments. We never experienced that at DMV.

It means that you can afford to throw money away, which is fine. I am sure they are happy to find as many families like your as they need to fill their rosters. I only know a couple of DMV players: one ended up there because she was new and no other club wanted to take her, the other one ended up in DMV because her previous club didn't make her an offer (even though she played for that club for two years prior).

You have all kinds of coaches in all the clubs. Some coaches try to pump up the players no matter how many mistakes they make. Others accept that players may have a bad day and simply take them off the court if they have alternatives. Stick around on this forum enough and you will read about coaches who yell or even curse at their players. But it's not like the best coaches are in DMV and all the other clubs have coaches who are negative at their teams. It's all about you doing your homework and avoiding red flags when you choose your club.

Since you are new to club volleyball, you should know that the expectations are pretty low during the first year: players need to practice and create habits. After the first year you will hear the coaches saying things like: "you cannot serve into the net at this level" or "you cannot let the ball drop without even attempting to move." Some will yell "get to the ball" or "move your feet" - and the tone can vary. After another year of club volleyball, the expectations will increase further and they will involve more advanced topics than serve or serve-receive. Other actions (or inactions) will become unacceptable as the years pass by or the team level increases. I am not saying that the coaches are necessarily going to start yelling or be negative, but they are going to expect more. The coaches of higher level teams have even more expectations and they put more pressure on their players.

This is good advice.

Anonymous wrote:I disagree with PP's statement that DMV is only where players with no other offers go. DD chose to play for DMV over another team, as did at least 2 or 3 of her teammates. They liked the coaches better than the other clubs extending offers. We were new to club volleyball this year, and DD had friends playing for other clubs, and we were shocked at how negative their coaches were at other teams. They were cursing at the players, singling out players, screaming at them during the tournaments. We never experienced that at DMV.

It means that you can afford to throw money away, which is fine. I am sure they are happy to find as many families like your as they need to fill their rosters. I only know a couple of DMV players: one ended up there because she was new and no other club wanted to take her, the other one ended up in DMV because her previous club didn't make her an offer (even though she played for that club for two years prior).

You have all kinds of coaches in all the clubs. Some coaches try to pump up the players no matter how many mistakes they make. Others accept that players may have a bad day and simply take them off the court if they have alternatives. Stick around on this forum enough and you will read about coaches who yell or even curse at their players. But it's not like the best coaches are in DMV and all the other clubs have coaches who are negative at their teams. It's all about you doing your homework and avoiding red flags when you choose your club.

Since you are new to club volleyball, you should know that the expectations are pretty low during the first year: players need to practice and create habits. After the first year you will hear the coaches saying things like: "you cannot serve into the net at this level" or "you cannot let the ball drop without even attempting to move." Some will yell "get to the ball" or "move your feet" - and the tone can vary. After another year of club volleyball, the expectations will increase further and they will involve more advanced topics than serve or serve-receive. Other actions (or inactions) will become unacceptable as the years pass by or the team level increases. I am not saying that the coaches are necessarily going to start yelling or be negative, but they are going to expect more. The coaches of higher level teams have even more expectations and they put more pressure on their players.

If you want to travel less and play for a team that goes to mostly regional tournaments, also check out XPerience and Stars. Probably same caliber as PVC and DMV, more one-day tournaments. At least that’s the case for XPerience.

Anonymous wrote:I disagree with PP's statement that DMV is only where players with no other offers go. DD chose to play for DMV over another team, as did at least 2 or 3 of her teammates. They liked the coaches better than the other clubs extending offers. We were new to club volleyball this year, and DD had friends playing for other clubs, and we were shocked at how negative their coaches were at other teams. They were cursing at the players, singling out players, screaming at them during the tournaments. We never experienced that at DMV.

Thanks for the alternative POV about DMV. It sounds like the three are sort of the same in terms of level of play, if posters are differing about how to place them. I don’t like the idea of PVC making the girls room together for tournaments- that sounds like unnecessary drama and expense. Will do o more research but thanks to the PPs for chiming in on these clubs. If anyone has other suggestions for MD clubs like these that we should be looking at, please suggest away!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP says her kid is 2010 age group. Would that have been 15s this year? I followed the 16s this year and from what I heard and saw, I would say MEVC 1s was the best of these clubs, then MoCo 1s. Neither PVC 1s or 2s (and we're talking about Platform, not Paramount or other "P" team) looked very strong. I watched them play in a smaller MVSA tournament in May and I would say they would rank last in this list, with DMV and MoCo 2's tied for second to last.

Last year, this forum made it sound like MoCo was the best of this list, but MEVC 1s looked solid this season. I thought MoCo 2s would have done better, but they came out below DMV in a couple of tournaments.

One thing to consider in addition to a club's skill level is the practical aspect of travel arrangements. I heard that PVC requires their players to room together, without any input from the players, and that if parents come to the travel tournaments, they have to pay for their own room, separate from their child. This resulted in lots of unnecessary drama and extra energy wasted on the social aspect of the team, not to mention more costs for the parents. While some families might like the team bonding aspect of this travel arrangement, it would be a non-starter for other families.

If you are choosing among these clubs, do your research, go to the pre-tryout clinics, and meet the actual coaches that are assigned to the specific teams. Keep in mind there are other considerations besides skill level of the club and cost that may make one club a better fit than others.

2010 can mean both 14s and 15s, depending on the birthday. Each of the PPs might be correct depending on the age group.

Platform rankings for 14s: 14 Black (1619), 14 Purple (4368), 14 White (4864)
MEVC rankings for 14s: 14U Pride (2832), 14U Impact (3764)

Platform rankings for 15s: 15 Black (3536), 15 Purple (3540), 15 White (4381)
MEVC rankings for 14s: 15U Commit (1232), 15U Elite (1290)

Including the rankings for DMV:
Platform rankings for 14s: 14 Black (1619), 14 Purple (4368), 14 White (4864)
MEVC rankings for 14s: 14U Pride (2832), 14U Impact (3764)
DMV rankings for 14s: DMV Academy 14 Blue (4234)

Platform rankings for 15s: 15 Black (3536), 15 Purple (3540), 15 White (4381)
MEVC rankings for 15s: 15U Commit (1232), 15U Elite (1290)
DMV rankings for 15s: DMV Academy 15 Blue (2670), DMV Elite 15 (4107)

Anonymous wrote:OP says her kid is 2010 age group. Would that have been 15s this year? I followed the 16s this year and from what I heard and saw, I would say MEVC 1s was the best of these clubs, then MoCo 1s. Neither PVC 1s or 2s (and we're talking about Platform, not Paramount or other "P" team) looked very strong. I watched them play in a smaller MVSA tournament in May and I would say they would rank last in this list, with DMV and MoCo 2's tied for second to last.

Last year, this forum made it sound like MoCo was the best of this list, but MEVC 1s looked solid this season. I thought MoCo 2s would have done better, but they came out below DMV in a couple of tournaments.

One thing to consider in addition to a club's skill level is the practical aspect of travel arrangements. I heard that PVC requires their players to room together, without any input from the players, and that if parents come to the travel tournaments, they have to pay for their own room, separate from their child. This resulted in lots of unnecessary drama and extra energy wasted on the social aspect of the team, not to mention more costs for the parents. While some families might like the team bonding aspect of this travel arrangement, it would be a non-starter for other families.

If you are choosing among these clubs, do your research, go to the pre-tryout clinics, and meet the actual coaches that are assigned to the specific teams. Keep in mind there are other considerations besides skill level of the club and cost that may make one club a better fit than others.

2010 can mean both 14s and 15s, depending on the birthday. Each of the PPs might be correct depending on the age group.

Platform rankings for 14s: 14 Black (1619), 14 Purple (4368), 14 White (4864)
MEVC rankings for 14s: 14U Pride (2832), 14U Impact (3764)

Platform rankings for 15s: 15 Black (3536), 15 Purple (3540), 15 White (4381)
MEVC rankings for 14s: 15U Commit (1232), 15U Elite (1290)

I disagree with PP's statement that DMV is only where players with no other offers go. DD chose to play for DMV over another team, as did at least 2 or 3 of her teammates. They liked the coaches better than the other clubs extending offers. We were new to club volleyball this year, and DD had friends playing for other clubs, and we were shocked at how negative their coaches were at other teams. They were cursing at the players, singling out players, screaming at them during the tournaments. We never experienced that at DMV.

OP says her kid is 2010 age group. Would that have been 15s this year? I followed the 16s this year and from what I heard and saw, I would say MEVC 1s was the best of these clubs, then MoCo 1s. Neither PVC 1s or 2s (and we're talking about Platform, not Paramount or other "P" team) looked very strong. I watched them play in a smaller MVSA tournament in May and I would say they would rank last in this list, with DMV and MoCo 2's tied for second to last.

Last year, this forum made it sound like MoCo was the best of this list, but MEVC 1s looked solid this season. I thought MoCo 2s would have done better, but they came out below DMV in a couple of tournaments.

One thing to consider in addition to a club's skill level is the practical aspect of travel arrangements. I heard that PVC requires their players to room together, without any input from the players, and that if parents come to the travel tournaments, they have to pay for their own room, separate from their child. This resulted in lots of unnecessary drama and extra energy wasted on the social aspect of the team, not to mention more costs for the parents. While some families might like the team bonding aspect of this travel arrangement, it would be a non-starter for other families.

If you are choosing among these clubs, do your research, go to the pre-tryout clinics, and meet the actual coaches that are assigned to the specific teams. Keep in mind there are other considerations besides skill level of the club and cost that may make one club a better fit than others.

Anonymous wrote:Anyone want to comment on these clubs? Any of them “better” in some way? Better coaching? Friendlier? They’re all mid-level, akin to MoCo and Metro Regionals? Ish?

Looking for mid-level Maryland clubs for my 2010 daughter to try out for this fall and I have heard of all these. Thanks!

My DD is in that age group, so I can tell you how PVC compares to the other clubs. With how much they charge, DMV attracts only players who couldn't make it in any other club. I would only consider it if you are desperate and willing to throw money out the window. Since their players are not very good, they lose a lot (poor experience both for the players and for the parents). The top PVC team is doing better than the MEVC teams, so I would consider them in the order PVC, MEVC, DMV. A top MoCo team is better than the top PVC team, but you may want to go with the top PVC team rather than the bottom MoCo team (better coaching - the bottom teams may even have parent coaches). The top PVC team usually wins against the Metro Regional teams.

Anyone want to comment on these clubs? Any of them “better” in some way? Better coaching? Friendlier? They’re all mid-level, akin to MoCo and Metro Regionals? Ish?

Looking for mid-level Maryland clubs for my 2010 daughter to try out for this fall and I have heard of all these. Thanks!