Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:BSC 05 should bounce back next year when injured players return. The team had 8 draws and was the only team in the conference to stay close with PDA.

Agree. The only trouble spot on the girls side right now are the 08s and everyone on DCUM loves to attack that group. 07s, 06s, and 05s are all well above average in terms of ECNL. Two of the three made Champions League which is an achievement in itself. The upcoming 09s, 10s, and 11s, although very young are all showing signs of being very good teams as well however we all know how things change once 11v11 starts.

I hope the 08s were able to recruit some skill. It's a shame reading this forum how they are constantly used as an example of BSC when they are the minority. Nobody in the DMV is PDA or Solar and there will be a sub par team at every major club in the DMV. Personally, I like to see all the clubs in our area do well.

The BSC 08's and the discussion around them are more endemic of dramatic changes in both the Macro soccer landscape and its effect on the DMV. There is far more competition now for players than there ever was in the past. Clubs like BSC, MD United, McLean and FCV can no longer sit back and wait for the players to come to them. For the first time these clubs actually need to sell themselves to parents and players in what has become a buyers market.

But when you have parents who still pick a club based on the performance of much older age groups it isn't reflective of their particular teams true reality. The 08 BSC by ECNL standards and club past performance is a bad team. It is difficult to attract good players to a bad team especially when many of those players have a more talented team that is closer to them. It is hard to attract kids from Columbia to BSC now. But this isn't just a BSC problem.

Loudoun and FCV are competing for the same players diluting both clubs. Loudoun's 08's and FCV's 08's are good teams but they are far from anything special. McLean and Arlington have similar issues. VDA is the only club that kinda sits out on its own little island and their results are reflective in their geographic location.

For BSC to improve and move forward they can no longer rely on arrogant entitlement. They have to hustle to attract kids. Knowing players have choice having a coach who rubs players/parents the wrong way is no longer a pathway to success. Player retention is more important than ever. Kids don't need to put up a coach they don't like or feels doesn't like them. It is also hard to attract players who might drive past currently better options to be treated poorly, and currently to be treated poorly with terrible results. Time sometimes passes coaches by and in a buyers market you can't afford a bad reputation.

Isn't parity good for everyone though since it forces coaches to develop the weaker players?

Considering the expansion of ECNL overall but in particular the DMV in a few short years ECNL has gone from 4 DMV Clubs to 8 ECNL Clubs.

Assuming 20 players per roster the opportunities for kids went from 80 ECNL slots to 160 possible ECNL slots. There are kids playing in ECNL who never would have sniffed a ECNL roster 5 years ago. So when the reality of BSC losing to FC Frederick twice would have been unthinkable 5 years ago. ECNL has expanded so much that any club at any given age group is closer competitive wise to teams in a "lower league" like CCL than they are in their own league.

You can use "parity" as an argument all you want but the parity is supposed to be with teams within the league not parity between leagues.

So if you look at a team like BSC 08 or any of BRYC's teams where are the players going to come from? You already have the best 180 kids in the area rostered somewhere before you even touch on GA. So now with GA you have 80 more kids out there. There are probably 2-4 kids on any given GA team from Armor, Celtic/Union, FCV and Metro who could make their local ECNL team, some starters some just pushing out subs. But then its done, the players have dried up. 240 kids are playing in a "national league" in the area. That isn't parity, it's dilution.

And this is why you have so many ECNL boosters on this site. They know where the last few players are and they know their team or club needs an infusion of talent.

I would rather more clubs than having to drive 300 miles for division games. Feel free to look at ECNL Map by divisions to get a good idea of how much travel is involved outside of the North Atlantic League. The New England Division is similar. Meanwhile, Mid-Atlantic has teams all over North Carolina and South Carolina. It just gets worse the more you work you way West.

I dream of a day ECNL and GA quit the BS and combine leagues!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:BSC 05 should bounce back next year when injured players return. The team had 8 draws and was the only team in the conference to stay close with PDA.

Agree. The only trouble spot on the girls side right now are the 08s and everyone on DCUM loves to attack that group. 07s, 06s, and 05s are all well above average in terms of ECNL. Two of the three made Champions League which is an achievement in itself. The upcoming 09s, 10s, and 11s, although very young are all showing signs of being very good teams as well however we all know how things change once 11v11 starts.

I hope the 08s were able to recruit some skill. It's a shame reading this forum how they are constantly used as an example of BSC when they are the minority. Nobody in the DMV is PDA or Solar and there will be a sub par team at every major club in the DMV. Personally, I like to see all the clubs in our area do well.

The BSC 08's and the discussion around them are more endemic of dramatic changes in both the Macro soccer landscape and its effect on the DMV. There is far more competition now for players than there ever was in the past. Clubs like BSC, MD United, McLean and FCV can no longer sit back and wait for the players to come to them. For the first time these clubs actually need to sell themselves to parents and players in what has become a buyers market.

But when you have parents who still pick a club based on the performance of much older age groups it isn't reflective of their particular teams true reality. The 08 BSC by ECNL standards and club past performance is a bad team. It is difficult to attract good players to a bad team especially when many of those players have a more talented team that is closer to them. It is hard to attract kids from Columbia to BSC now. But this isn't just a BSC problem.

Loudoun and FCV are competing for the same players diluting both clubs. Loudoun's 08's and FCV's 08's are good teams but they are far from anything special. McLean and Arlington have similar issues. VDA is the only club that kinda sits out on its own little island and their results are reflective in their geographic location.

For BSC to improve and move forward they can no longer rely on arrogant entitlement. They have to hustle to attract kids. Knowing players have choice having a coach who rubs players/parents the wrong way is no longer a pathway to success. Player retention is more important than ever. Kids don't need to put up a coach they don't like or feels doesn't like them. It is also hard to attract players who might drive past currently better options to be treated poorly, and currently to be treated poorly with terrible results. Time sometimes passes coaches by and in a buyers market you can't afford a bad reputation.

Isn't parity good for everyone though since it forces coaches to develop the weaker players?

Considering the expansion of ECNL overall but in particular the DMV in a few short years ECNL has gone from 4 DMV Clubs to 8 ECNL Clubs.

Assuming 20 players per roster the opportunities for kids went from 80 ECNL slots to 160 possible ECNL slots. There are kids playing in ECNL who never would have sniffed a ECNL roster 5 years ago. So when the reality of BSC losing to FC Frederick twice would have been unthinkable 5 years ago. ECNL has expanded so much that any club at any given age group is closer competitive wise to teams in a "lower league" like CCL than they are in their own league.

You can use "parity" as an argument all you want but the parity is supposed to be with teams within the league not parity between leagues.

So if you look at a team like BSC 08 or any of BRYC's teams where are the players going to come from? You already have the best 180 kids in the area rostered somewhere before you even touch on GA. So now with GA you have 80 more kids out there. There are probably 2-4 kids on any given GA team from Armor, Celtic/Union, FCV and Metro who could make their local ECNL team, some starters some just pushing out subs. But then its done, the players have dried up. 240 kids are playing in a "national league" in the area. That isn't parity, it's dilution.

And this is why you have so many ECNL boosters on this site. They know where the last few players are and they know their team or club needs an infusion of talent.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Let’s see where they all fall when the season is complete. Bethesda and mu are a bunch of games behind most of the northern clubs. They’re cramming in games like crazy the next two weeks.

Bethesda 06 won their ECNL conference...pretty impressive considering the teams in their conference.

What are you talking about "considering the teams in their conference"?

Your conference has two top 50 teams while the Mid Atlantic has 5.

Your Conference has 4 top 100 teams while the Mid Atlantic has 8. Your Conference for your age group is not exactly a ECNL murderers row.

National Rankings for the Conference:
13 Bethesda (which is impressive)
22 PDA Blue
84 Penn Fusion
94 FC Delco
108 FC Bucks
120 MD United
149 Match Fit
253 Pipeline
323 PDA South


ECNL Mid Atlantic:
12 McLean
23 Carolina Elite
24 VDA
32 Charlotte
42 NC Courage
73 SC United
80 NC Fusion
85 Richmond
114 Charlotte Independence
127 BRYC
166 Loudoun
240 Willmington

Rankings? What is this...who cares. Simply pointing out the Bethesda 06 won their conference. It wasn't a very complicated comment. I'm sure the difference between most of these teams is a few players here and there. That VDA team is great. Bethesda vs. VDA final at Jefferson Cup was an awesome game.

The post is simply a reaction to the following quote in the PP, "pretty impressive considering the teams in their conference".

The point being that "the teams in their conference" are overall less impressive than the Mid Atlantic overall. Your Conference has the name brand of PDA but that's it for this age group. This does not imply that the Bethesda team is not a very, very good team but this particular conference for this particular age group isn't even the most competitive Conference on the East Coast.

That's fine, I'll take the bait on rankings. Where is this ranking? As an example, there is no chance McLean is ranked higher than Bethesda, VDA and PDA. I'm sure McLean is an OK team but the ranking system is flawed.

You are correct. McLean is actually #49. Pretty safe to say the same Bethesda hating McLean parent made the post. Par for the course.