Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Vienna has a long history of not developing players. You would expect that to change with the number of paid staff rather than the old parent coach/trainer model, but the leadership and coaches have been poor, especially for the younger girls.
They talk great a great game and make lots of promises, but there is very little actual development and once you are in they tend to treat you poorly. Communication is awful. There is a reason they have such consistently high attrition compared to other local clubs.
None of this is even close to true. Maybe 5+ years ago, but the coaching is excellent on the uLittle girls’ side, and the teams are very competitive. Vincent and Regi are great.
Anonymous wrote:Vienna has a long history of not developing players. You would expect that to change with the number of paid staff rather than the old parent coach/trainer model, but the leadership and coaches have been poor, especially for the younger girls.
They talk great a great game and make lots of promises, but there is very little actual development and once you are in they tend to treat you poorly. Communication is awful. There is a reason they have such consistently high attrition compared to other local clubs.
Anonymous wrote:How typical is this? Tryouts, kid gets accepted to a "higher level color team" we pay the travel fee. They say they will continue to assess team placement, solidifying at the end of August. Get our "higher level" team placement end of August, practice commences. 2 weeks later, kid is bumped down to the next level down team. This seems to be happening to a bunch of kids. Is this typical? I feel like it's a bait and switch- get 'em in the club by promising them higher level play, having them forego perhaps other travel team offers and then, JUST KIDDING, you are dropped down. There have been maybe 5 games played in total, and a handful of practices. Whatever happened to making a commitment to coach the players who have committed to you and giving them a runway to improve and for the team to mesh? I get VYS has to try raise their profile by winning, but I was under the impression they were a little more concerned with player development. This is our first year, maybe this is typical at other clubs as well?
Anonymous wrote:
You are complaining because they promoted some kids but then also complaining that they aren't promoting kids. Clearly you haven't asked for or know of the coaches reasoning.
Maybe for the B kids who really are great this affords them to play more. And let's be honest, the competition level of the teams they are playing against are good enough--nobody on the B team you mention is always the best player on the field in those B team games against other teams.
If they promoted your kid, they'd be caving to parents who "nag" on DCUM.
Anonymous wrote:Maybe it’s a bait and switch, but then you need to think about development. If the coach doesn’t think your kid can cut it, why keep them there? There is no guarantee of playing time, so is your child better off keeping the label of the “top team” and riding the bench, or are they better playing with a lower team, likely as a starter but certainly with more time, where they can develop their skills? I’d prefer the latter. No kid enjoys riding the bench.
Anonymous wrote:
You are complaining because they promoted some kids but then also complaining that they aren't promoting kids. Clearly you haven't asked for or know of the coaches reasoning.
Maybe for the B kids who really are great this affords them to play more. And let's be honest, the competition level of the teams they are playing against are good enough--nobody on the B team you mention is always the best player on the field in those B team games against other teams.
If they promoted your kid, they'd be caving to parents who "nag" on DCUM.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Can someone explain why VYS would promote a few players from the B team who were one of the weakest to the A team? Not only are they struggling with team A, but several players on the B team are easily much better than more than half of team A. Do they cave into nagging parents even though the players don't belong? Do they reward "loyalty" by staying with the club over actual soccer skills and abilities with new incoming players? I understand balancing the A and B teams but it is ridiculous watching players fumble around on the ball that certainly don't belong.
You are complaining because they promoted some kids but then also complaining that they aren't promoting kids. Clearly you haven't asked for or know of the coaches reasoning.
Maybe for the B kids who really are great this affords them to play more. And let's be honest, the competition level of the teams they are playing against are good enough--nobody on the B team you mention is always the best player on the field in those B team games against other teams.
If they promoted your kid, they'd be caving to parents who "nag" on DCUM.
Anonymous wrote:Can someone explain why VYS would promote a few players from the B team who were one of the weakest to the A team? Not only are they struggling with team A, but several players on the B team are easily much better than more than half of team A. Do they cave into nagging parents even though the players don't belong? Do they reward "loyalty" by staying with the club over actual soccer skills and abilities with new incoming players? I understand balancing the A and B teams but it is ridiculous watching players fumble around on the ball that certainly don't belong.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Maybe it’s a bait and switch, but then you need to think about development. If the coach doesn’t think your kid can cut it, why keep them there? There is no guarantee of playing time, so is your child better off keeping the label of the “top team” and riding the bench, or are they better playing with a lower team, likely as a starter but certainly with more time, where they can develop their skills? I’d prefer the latter. No kid enjoys riding the bench.
When the drop off between A and B is large, the kid is probably better off developing on the A team bench. You don't get better if you're practicing and playing with players significantly below you. The advantage to clubs like Bethesda, McLean and Arlington is that there are so many teams that your kid can find their level. At clubs with two teams, kids may be both not good enough for the A team and way better than the B team. If I was OP, I'd get my money back and try to have my kid practice with another club.
But you are assuming the next team down is significantly below the top team. Maybe, in which case your kid may be just much better (but then, theoretically, there wouldn’t be the performance issue causing them to get moved down). But if your kid cannot keep up it may be they were placed on the wrong team, in which case they really WONT develop with those kids. It’s really hard to judge a player based on a few tryouts, and sometimes new talent comes in and switches things up too. I certainly think you could make the case to going to another club and getting released, but to demand and underperformer on the top team because that was their offer doesn’t hurt the club—they just won’t play them—but it will hurt your kid. Parents need to be realistic about their kids’ performance.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Maybe it’s a bait and switch, but then you need to think about development. If the coach doesn’t think your kid can cut it, why keep them there? There is no guarantee of playing time, so is your child better off keeping the label of the “top team” and riding the bench, or are they better playing with a lower team, likely as a starter but certainly with more time, where they can develop their skills? I’d prefer the latter. No kid enjoys riding the bench.
When the drop off between A and B is large, the kid is probably better off developing on the A team bench. You don't get better if you're practicing and playing with players significantly below you. The advantage to clubs like Bethesda, McLean and Arlington is that there are so many teams that your kid can find their level. At clubs with two teams, kids may be both not good enough for the A team and way better than the B team. If I was OP, I'd get my money back and try to have my kid practice with another club.
Anonymous wrote:Maybe it’s a bait and switch, but then you need to think about development. If the coach doesn’t think your kid can cut it, why keep them there? There is no guarantee of playing time, so is your child better off keeping the label of the “top team” and riding the bench, or are they better playing with a lower team, likely as a starter but certainly with more time, where they can develop their skills? I’d prefer the latter. No kid enjoys riding the bench.
Anonymous wrote:We left VYS two years ago. Only regret is not leaving sooner. The age group my son was with (first team / Eagles) has had the same coach for 5 of their 7 years with the club - including the transition to Brave. Hard to produce a well-rounded player when you're slotted into the same position, doing the same drills, with the same coach for your entire youth soccer experience. Stop trying to make them better. Focus on making your kid better - just leave.