Still waiting on email like that from Brave. Thankfully not holding my breath

sadly I can't think of any options for the boys Brave and Union bench players other than to move down to RL. At least the girls have more options with GA.

Agree, ECNL hurt McLean by allowing Arlington join ECNL 2 years ago.

Anonymous wrote:Guess there’s no email

Says the non-Mclean parent sticking her nose in where it doesn't belong.

Anonymous wrote:This point in the email makes me laugh "ECNL feels that Fairfax County is an over-saturated market"

And who do you think made it that way? ECNL!!! maybe look at a map before giving away ECNL memberships to everyone in the DMV.

No doubt that Northern Virginia is oversaturated. But when did Arlington get ECNL? 2 years ago? Nice job ECNL.

Guess there’s no email

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:McLean just sent out an email confirming that ECNL basically forced this on them and that ECNL was looking at pulling MYS' patch due to poor performance, particularly on the boys' side.

Kindly share email.

If you are a McLean family, you received the email. Of you are not a McLean family, the email isn't for you.

Anonymous wrote:McLean just sent out an email confirming that ECNL basically forced this on them and that ECNL was looking at pulling MYS' patch due to poor performance, particularly on the boys' side.

Kindly share email.

If I hear one more time: "we are working tirelessly to make decisions that are in the best interest of our players"...
If that were really true, ECNL would allow clubs to have time to improve or transition to a new state, not just threatened to remove the entire club from the league.
If that were true, clubs would advocate more for their programs and teams. They would also pay attention to what is going on in their teams, evaluate coaches in underperforming teams.
What is true is that ECNL and clubs think they are running a business, kids are an afterthought of all their decisions or maybe they don't measure the impact on those young lives.
Next year is going to be a gigantic mess, Brave coaches will keep their kids, and VA Union coaches will do the same. Kids will be left on the curb, kids who are in the middle of the delicate recruiting process will now have to wrestle with the unknown.
It did not have to be that way but it would have required more effort.
I hope people will vote with their feet.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
ECNL has specific terms about that if a club under the merger process or no long exits, the tryout limitation does not apply.

Union and Brave players are free to tryout any ECNL clubs before March 1st.

Where does it say this!?

It doesn't.....don't feed the troll!

ECNL has granted exceptions to the tryout period for new clubs in the past.

If the club isn’t part of the 24/25 season, there can’t be any violations. See you at practice!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
ECNL has specific terms about that if a club under the merger process or no long exits, the tryout limitation does not apply.

Union and Brave players are free to tryout any ECNL clubs before March 1st.

Where does it say this!?

It doesn't.....don't feed the troll!

ECNL has granted exceptions to the tryout period for new clubs in the past.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
ECNL has specific terms about that if a club under the merger process or no long exits, the tryout limitation does not apply.

Union and Brave players are free to tryout any ECNL clubs before March 1st.

Where does it say this!?

It doesn't.....don't feed the troll!

Anonymous wrote:
ECNL has specific terms about that if a club under the merger process or no long exits, the tryout limitation does not apply.

Union and Brave players are free to tryout any ECNL clubs before March 1st.

Where does it say this!?

ECNL has specific terms about that if a club under the merger process or no long exits, the tryout limitation does not apply.

Union and Brave players are free to tryout any ECNL clubs before March 1st.

Over -12000