Arlington 2011 is a unicorn. Maybe they will continue to be successful at later age or maybe they won’t. Can’t really predict with this group honestly. The 2008 Arlington that was amazing early on (or even the 2009?) was not this strong in the early years like the 2011. They somehow got lucky with several kids that have technical skills, speed and athleticism. The fact that they haven’t really cut anyone can also add to the chemistry of the team since they have been together for a long time while the rest of us having to face the changes every year.

Anonymous wrote:Arlington is kick and run club that only plays all the athletic girls!!!!

Perhaps you could give an example of a club that avoids athletic kids?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Arlington has been a kickball club for the last 15 years, they just want to win games at all costs. Besides their 2011 girls team they have the worst girls program in the area.

What make the 2011 different than other age group? If we say Arlington does kickball - then I would assume they all are across the age group.

those girls get along.. are patient… play out of the back and played up against competition during their pre ecnl years. Synergy is maxed out… unicorn of a team and a thorn for all of the 2011s in this area

The answer is that they have some legitimately good players who have played together for years with the same coach. In Arlington, the 2011s get whatever they want...the same/best coach teaching the same group of quality players year in and year out.

Other age groups get different coaches every year, some good, some not so good. The revolving door and the inconsistent philosophy impacts the other age groups while the 2011s are relatively insulated from the constant change. That's been my observation at least.

I'm not sure if that observation is being made from someone internally or externally, but it's not accurate. The 2011 team has had a new coach in each of the past 3 years. Arlington girls has definitely had turnover in coaches the past few years as they transitioned from GA to ECNL, lost the ECNL director back to the club he came from just a year later, along with some coaches he brought in, and resetting again this fall. The only coach they had longer extended to 3 years, the same as many other clubs chose to do during the return back from the cancelled covid season.

Arlington is kick and run club that only plays all the athletic girls!!!!

Anonymous wrote:Arlington starts strong but finishes with a kick and run slant style of play.

Athletes also tend to equalize/normalize over time. What's big and fast at U13 isn't necessarily so at later ages.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Arlington has been a kickball club for the last 15 years, they just want to win games at all costs. Besides their 2011 girls team they have the worst girls program in the area.

What make the 2011 different than other age group? If we say Arlington does kickball - then I would assume they all are across the age group.

those girls get along.. are patient… play out of the back and played up against competition during their pre ecnl years. Synergy is maxed out… unicorn of a team and a thorn for all of the 2011s in this area

The answer is that they have some legitimately good players who have played together for years with the same coach. In Arlington, the 2011s get whatever they want...the same/best coach teaching the same group of quality players year in and year out.

Other age groups get different coaches every year, some good, some not so good. The revolving door and the inconsistent philosophy impacts the other age groups while the 2011s are relatively insulated from the constant change. That's been my observation at least.

Playing for the same coach for that many years is a negative from a long-term developmental perspective. Having a bad coach instead obviously is not better, so if that was the only alternative Arlington could offer then better to stick with the good coach, but players need to learn from more than one coach during those foundational years.

Don’t clubs have two-year caps on how long a coach can keep a team for precisely this reason?

That's been my experience. PP is right that this is a poor strategy for player development. Winning at that age is really not that important.

Arlington starts strong but finishes with a kick and run slant style of play.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Arlington has been a kickball club for the last 15 years, they just want to win games at all costs. Besides their 2011 girls team they have the worst girls program in the area.

What make the 2011 different than other age group? If we say Arlington does kickball - then I would assume they all are across the age group.

those girls get along.. are patient… play out of the back and played up against competition during their pre ecnl years. Synergy is maxed out… unicorn of a team and a thorn for all of the 2011s in this area

The answer is that they have some legitimately good players who have played together for years with the same coach. In Arlington, the 2011s get whatever they want...the same/best coach teaching the same group of quality players year in and year out.

Other age groups get different coaches every year, some good, some not so good. The revolving door and the inconsistent philosophy impacts the other age groups while the 2011s are relatively insulated from the constant change. That's been my observation at least.

Playing for the same coach for that many years is a negative from a long-term developmental perspective. Having a bad coach instead obviously is not better, so if that was the only alternative Arlington could offer then better to stick with the good coach, but players need to learn from more than one coach during those foundational years.

Don’t clubs have two-year caps on how long a coach can keep a team for precisely this reason?

Anonymous wrote:Yes, we are proud / supportive of our kids - not living through them as you suggest. It just so happens my kid is also a pretty good player on a great team.

Their success absolutely comes from the team’s culture. Half of them have been together since U9. They are also stacked with speed and skill.

Are they really the best 2011 team in the country, we’ll see this summer. But, they’ve certainly proven to be formidable with only four losses (on age) since U9 by a total of five goals.

Come watch them play. They are fun to support.

Got news for you. That is every ulittle Arlington team. Come back in a few years. All those 2008 will be holding your beer.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Arlington has been a kickball club for the last 15 years, they just want to win games at all costs. Besides their 2011 girls team they have the worst girls program in the area.

What make the 2011 different than other age group? If we say Arlington does kickball - then I would assume they all are across the age group.

those girls get along.. are patient… play out of the back and played up against competition during their pre ecnl years. Synergy is maxed out… unicorn of a team and a thorn for all of the 2011s in this area

The answer is that they have some legitimately good players who have played together for years with the same coach. In Arlington, the 2011s get whatever they want...the same/best coach teaching the same group of quality players year in and year out.

Other age groups get different coaches every year, some good, some not so good. The revolving door and the inconsistent philosophy impacts the other age groups while the 2011s are relatively insulated from the constant change. That's been my observation at least.

Playing for the same coach for that many years is a negative from a long-term developmental perspective. Having a bad coach instead obviously is not better, so if that was the only alternative Arlington could offer then better to stick with the good coach, but players need to learn from more than one coach during those foundational years.

Also coaches have their biases. Get fresh eyes and a reset on player/coach/parent relationship is good. What is a good player at u9 does not mean the player will be good at u15. Players positions should change. Same with the coaching. A good coach for u9 will not necessarily be a good coach for u15.

Maybe this is another reason some Arlington teams seem to start strong but fade at the older years.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Arlington has been a kickball club for the last 15 years, they just want to win games at all costs. Besides their 2011 girls team they have the worst girls program in the area.

What make the 2011 different than other age group? If we say Arlington does kickball - then I would assume they all are across the age group.

those girls get along.. are patient… play out of the back and played up against competition during their pre ecnl years. Synergy is maxed out… unicorn of a team and a thorn for all of the 2011s in this area

The answer is that they have some legitimately good players who have played together for years with the same coach. In Arlington, the 2011s get whatever they want...the same/best coach teaching the same group of quality players year in and year out.

Other age groups get different coaches every year, some good, some not so good. The revolving door and the inconsistent philosophy impacts the other age groups while the 2011s are relatively insulated from the constant change. That's been my observation at least.

Playing for the same coach for that many years is a negative from a long-term developmental perspective. Having a bad coach instead obviously is not better, so if that was the only alternative Arlington could offer then better to stick with the good coach, but players need to learn from more than one coach during those foundational years.

Also coaches have their biases. Get fresh eyes and a reset on player/coach/parent relationship is good. What is a good player at u9 does not mean the player will be good at u15. Players positions should change. Same with the coaching. A good coach for u9 will not necessarily be a good coach for u15.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Arlington has been a kickball club for the last 15 years, they just want to win games at all costs. Besides their 2011 girls team they have the worst girls program in the area.

What make the 2011 different than other age group? If we say Arlington does kickball - then I would assume they all are across the age group.

those girls get along.. are patient… play out of the back and played up against competition during their pre ecnl years. Synergy is maxed out… unicorn of a team and a thorn for all of the 2011s in this area

The answer is that they have some legitimately good players who have played together for years with the same coach. In Arlington, the 2011s get whatever they want...the same/best coach teaching the same group of quality players year in and year out.

Other age groups get different coaches every year, some good, some not so good. The revolving door and the inconsistent philosophy impacts the other age groups while the 2011s are relatively insulated from the constant change. That's been my observation at least.

Playing for the same coach for that many years is a negative from a long-term developmental perspective. Having a bad coach instead obviously is not better, so if that was the only alternative Arlington could offer then better to stick with the good coach, but players need to learn from more than one coach during those foundational years.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Arlington has been a kickball club for the last 15 years, they just want to win games at all costs. Besides their 2011 girls team they have the worst girls program in the area.

What make the 2011 different than other age group? If we say Arlington does kickball - then I would assume they all are across the age group.

those girls get along.. are patient… play out of the back and played up against competition during their pre ecnl years. Synergy is maxed out… unicorn of a team and a thorn for all of the 2011s in this area

The answer is that they have some legitimately good players who have played together for years with the same coach. In Arlington, the 2011s get whatever they want...the same/best coach teaching the same group of quality players year in and year out.

Other age groups get different coaches every year, some good, some not so good. The revolving door and the inconsistent philosophy impacts the other age groups while the 2011s are relatively insulated from the constant change. That's been my observation at least.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes, we are proud / supportive of our kids - not living through them as you suggest. It just so happens my kid is also a pretty good player on a great team.

Their success absolutely comes from the team’s culture. Half of them have been together since U9. They are also stacked with speed and skill.

Are they really the best 2011 team in the country, we’ll see this summer. But, they’ve certainly proven to be formidable with only four losses (on age) since U9 by a total of five goals.

Come watch them play. They are fun to support.

Are there any generalizations you can make about the girls who joined the team after the U9 season? Were there mostly gradual additions each new season or clusters of additions at U11 and U13 when moving to larger sides? What kinds of players did the club look for when it brought new players into the squad? As an original parent, how do you think the players, coaches, and parents treated the newbies?

One of my daughter's friends joined another squad that had been together since they were U9, and the parents were bordering on hostile and definitely unfriendly

The team picked up players as we moved from 7 v 7 to 11 v 11. A few from McLean, 1 SYC and 1 Brave. A couple got moved up from Arlington’s second team. The players coming in more recently were known to the girls so pretty easy.

The first year was probably the hardest, actually. Post COVID and we had our team bubble. But families are fully integrated and we know we’ll have a couple more joining next fall.

Where are the girls coming in from for the fall season?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes, we are proud / supportive of our kids - not living through them as you suggest. It just so happens my kid is also a pretty good player on a great team.

Their success absolutely comes from the team’s culture. Half of them have been together since U9. They are also stacked with speed and skill.

Are they really the best 2011 team in the country, we’ll see this summer. But, they’ve certainly proven to be formidable with only four losses (on age) since U9 by a total of five goals.

Come watch them play. They are fun to support.

Are there any generalizations you can make about the girls who joined the team after the U9 season? Were there mostly gradual additions each new season or clusters of additions at U11 and U13 when moving to larger sides? What kinds of players did the club look for when it brought new players into the squad? As an original parent, how do you think the players, coaches, and parents treated the newbies?

One of my daughter's friends joined another squad that had been together since they were U9, and the parents were bordering on hostile and definitely unfriendly

The team picked up players as we moved from 7 v 7 to 11 v 11. A few from McLean, 1 SYC and 1 Brave. A couple got moved up from Arlington’s second team. The players coming in more recently were known to the girls so pretty easy.

The first year was probably the hardest, actually. Post COVID and we had our team bubble. But families are fully integrated and we know we’ll have a couple more joining next fall.