Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How do you evaluate "doing a great job"?

Generally speaking, when your players want to stay and new players from the outside are fighting to make the team.

Specifically, lots of factors and my factors likely have differences from yours and those of other parents.

But if your team/club is facing mass exodus and no one is clamoring to join, maybe that bag of clues from Amazon would help.

Anonymous wrote:How do you evaluate "doing a great job"?

Anonymous wrote:To be clear, the 10:51 and 11:04 poster couldn’t find a clue if he/she were buried in a bag of clues.

Anonymous wrote:So MU players are terrible, just look at the game scores that prove it. Also expect FCV to recruit them away because FCV is great. Got it.

Where do the current FCV players go when the MU players come over?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:MU has just as real a staff as any of these other options. What they don’t have in some age groups is the same number of players at the needed level. Yet. There’s no evidence to suggest that players don’t develop there; the opposite is actually true with all the recruiting done by other clubs to get the upper third Spirit/MU players.

Why so quick to assume the moves are due to recruiting? Why couldn't the players who moved just have made a choice to have a different experience?

Because when your kid has been recruited, you know it. Parents also talk.

Sure, there are some players have left because they want to be on winning teams, but people leave clubs everywhere for other reasons, including FCV (especially given some of the incidents, not to be named, that have been discussed here).

You do realize that the GDA is supposed to be a competitive environment right? So if a club isn't competitive AND isn't developing the players (beyond the PR campaign of its staff and coaches) what else is there at this level? Just for fun? GDA isn't for just having fun - it is COMPETITIVE. Why is this so hard to appreciate?

Top players naturally want to play on top teams and with other top players. Competitive coaches are...competitive. The question every club and coach at the most competitive levels should be asking is whether or not they are doing a good-enough job to retain and attract talent.

If the answer is no, then there is no one to blame but themselves. It isn't some conspiracy against your club no matter how many lunatics on these forums tell you so. It is competition.

Ummm who said there was a conspiracy? A PP stated that MU players had been recruited away from MU to FCV. A FCV poster laughed this off as impossible because in their mind if a player is on a bad team then they are also a bad player.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:MU has just as real a staff as any of these other options. What they don’t have in some age groups is the same number of players at the needed level. Yet. There’s no evidence to suggest that players don’t develop there; the opposite is actually true with all the recruiting done by other clubs to get the upper third Spirit/MU players.

Why so quick to assume the moves are due to recruiting? Why couldn't the players who moved just have made a choice to have a different experience?

Because when your kid has been recruited, you know it. Parents also talk.

Sure, there are some players have left because they want to be on winning teams, but people leave clubs everywhere for other reasons, including FCV (especially given some of the incidents, not to be named, that have been discussed here).

You do realize that the GDA is supposed to be a competitive environment right? So if a club isn't competitive AND isn't developing the players (beyond the PR campaign of its staff and coaches) what else is there at this level? Just for fun? GDA isn't for just having fun - it is COMPETITIVE. Why is this so hard to appreciate?

Top players naturally want to play on top teams and with other top players. Competitive coaches are...competitive. The question every club and coach at the most competitive levels should be asking is whether or not they are doing a good-enough job to retain and attract talent.

If the answer is no, then there is no one to blame but themselves. It isn't some conspiracy against your club no matter how many lunatics on these forums tell you so. It is competition.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:MU has just as real a staff as any of these other options. What they don’t have in some age groups is the same number of players at the needed level. Yet. There’s no evidence to suggest that players don’t develop there; the opposite is actually true with all the recruiting done by other clubs to get the upper third Spirit/MU players.

Why so quick to assume the moves are due to recruiting? Why couldn't the players who moved just have made a choice to have a different experience?

Because when your kid has been recruited, you know it. Parents also talk.

Sure, there are some players have left because they want to be on winning teams, but people leave clubs everywhere for other reasons, including FCV (especially given some of the incidents, not to be named, that have been discussed here).

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:MU has just as real a staff as any of these other options. What they don’t have in some age groups is the same number of players at the needed level. Yet. There’s no evidence to suggest that players don’t develop there; the opposite is actually true with all the recruiting done by other clubs to get the upper third Spirit/MU players.

Why so quick to assume the moves are due to recruiting? Why couldn't the players who moved just have made a choice to have a different experience?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:MU has just as real a staff as any of these other options. What they don’t have in some age groups is the same number of players at the needed level. Yet. There’s no evidence to suggest that players don’t develop there; the opposite is actually true with all the recruiting done by other clubs to get the upper third Spirit/MU players.

I agree. They would probably retain more of those players if they made more competitive decisions with their available player pool.

Anonymous wrote:MU has just as real a staff as any of these other options. What they don’t have in some age groups is the same number of players at the needed level. Yet. There’s no evidence to suggest that players don’t develop there; the opposite is actually true with all the recruiting done by other clubs to get the upper third Spirit/MU players.

Anonymous wrote:MU has just as real a staff as any of these other options. What they don’t have in some age groups is the same number of players at the needed level. Yet. There’s no evidence to suggest that players don’t develop there; the opposite is actually true with all the recruiting done by other clubs to get the upper third Spirit/MU players.