for u11 next year (08s)- i would say skill wise on par with the arlington silver team, but showing clear development year after year. For the u12 (07) navy team - i would say better than that. They are on par with the black arlington team i would say and also getting better every year. They key IMO is where is your child soccer wise? What is your child and family life like? We really like the regularity of the practices - no guessing what night and when and where will practice be. Makes it easier for planning. My son is no superstar but he's happy, making friends and developing good solid soccer skills. It's a longer range approach. I just want my child to play a competitive sport b/c i think it's good for him for time management, for making friends and for working on a skill and developing it. I have no delusions that my kid will play college soccer.

What would navy team for pac equate to in Arlington? For U11 or U12?

Anonymous wrote:Do PAC before wasting time in an Arl. D, E, or F team. You won't get My better in Arlington. PAC will help you get much better. If your DC is Blue or higher, you will hate PAC. The bottom players on their teams are so bad it is beyond frustrating.

Agree.

My experience is with PAC and McLean. I 100% agree that it is a much better experience at PAC than on the lower teams of McLean in absolutely every way. I can't speak highly enough about how PAC develops players. It is true that in the early years, PAC will take players that other clubs reject, but it's because the club believes in its training program! I have seen them turn a somewhat unskilled group of kids into a team that plays beautiful soccer in about a year.

I think some of the posts above undersell the level at PAC. I think it's the 2004s and 2003 that have very recently had teams that could compete with the neighboring big clubs' top teams--not their middle and lower teams. However, the size of the club, while a huge part of what's great about it, has its drawbacks. One of those teams sent its two strongest players on scholarship to the UK this year, plus a couple more to their proper age group. As a result, the team went from Division 1 to Division 3. A club this size doesn't have the reserves in place when players move around--and players do sometimes leave because the may be looking for Academy teams or ECNL.

If you are looking for a club that cares about player development and teaches good soccer, PAC is a great place.

We played vs PAC Navy today and they were a very well coached team. They show good decision-making and Sully is a very classy coach. I can’t speak as to the lower age groups.

Do PAC before wasting time in an Arl. D, E, or F team. You won't get My better in Arlington. PAC will help you get much better. If your DC is Blue or higher, you will hate PAC. The bottom players on their teams are so bad it is beyond frustrating.

The club probably averages a couple of teams per age group. PAC's Navy team is usually on the level of Arlington Blue, sometimes much better, sometimes a little worse. When my kids have played Arlington Black, PAC typically wins.

We like the club. Good training and good soccer and a much more friendly vibe all around than the club we came from!

PAC is a very small club and thus inconsistent in terms of how strong their teams are. They have had some excellent teams in the last few years.

I agree with previous posters that the majority of the kids are on the level of Arlington Black through Gold but there are definitely some much stronger players.

I'd say you have to think of it in different terms from Arlington, for better and for worse. At PAC: you are going to get a ton more attention for your kid, every coach knows all the kids' names, and the training is very strong. At Arlington: you pretty much know by the color of the team the level of play that you are getting, the organization is consistent and well-run.

My kid is on a strong team so I have experienced mostly the benefits of being on a small club.

PAC isn’t a financial racket anymore than any other travel soccer program is. The kids get training 2-3x a week from pro coaches 90% of the year, play a fall & spring season, 3-4 tournaments a year, and are in a futsal league in the winter for about $2200.

I agree with the previous poster that PAC’s players are typically equivalent to the players in the bigger clubs’ lower-level teams. PAC plays those teams and usually does fine against them. There are some players with even lower skill levels though and that can turn a close game into a lose, which can get frustrating for some of the kids..

So, if your kid is very skilled and competitive, you probably would look to get him or her on a top team in a big club and not join PAC.

If your kid loves soccer, wants to develop, and wants to be part of a travel team, PAC could be a great fit and is worth checking out.

hi! Here is the deal with PAC from my point of view as a mom with a kids at PAC and Arlington. As a general rule, they start with lower skilled players than Arlington and Mclean start with. I would equate the kids they get to more about the black/gold/silver depending a little on age. While they don't take "everyone" they do give more chances to kids who want to develop and learn than the other big clubs in large part b/c they can. The club also operates differently than the larger clubs in the area. If your kid is coming to practice, trying hard and developing he/she will be offered a spot for the upcoming year without the stress of two short try outs. For my one son, this has been a great fit. The stress of annual try outs and uncertainty of making a team or not would have been too much for him and he would have quit by now. PAC also take more time to teach and develop the kids. If your child does not get it the first time, the coach will pull a few aside to make sure the kids understand what they are being taught. Our experience in Arlington has been far more coach demonstrating to 20 kids and then they are left to execute on their own. While that works great for some kids (our other child for example) it does not work well for others.

The financial racket is a very interesting comment - sure if you don't want to pay for professional training for your child then you would equate all travel soccer a financial racket. Fees are comparable if not a little cheaper at PAC than Arlington, but you are still paying for someone to train your child.

We have been very happy at PAC. My son gets good training and has developed nicely as a soccer player among a group of kids who want to develop and play soccer. Is my kid going to develop into a DI soccer player? Ummm probably not... but that is probably more a function of the fact he does not have the natural talent than a lack of training on their part. I will also add I could say the exact same thing about my other child who plays on a top Arlington team - not going to play DI soccer. My only goal is for my kids to have fun and develop their soccer skills to their best they want. Both Arlington and PAC allow that to happen for both my very different children and I am thankful we have such different clubs in this area.

What is the deal with PAC travel soccer? I keep hearing mixed things -- from that they take just about anyone who tries out and it's just a financial racket, to it's a highly competitive travel program. There's a kid from my kid's soccer team who made it who is not a particularly strong player, so I'm curious what the real story is. My kid is happy in the program we have now, but wondering if this is worth considering for the future?