Anonymous
02/25/2021 07:45
Subject: Re:Arlington ECNL, FCV not ECNL
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I guess that means a couple more years of trash talking on DCUM between FCV and Loudoun parents/staff before they are ever in same league. Oh boy
FCV and Arlington not getting ECNL.
Loudoun having ECNL should be clue 1
Arlington removing boys from ECNL should be clue 2
Also committed and gone in and a year and with it the parental loyalty to the club.
Anonymous
02/25/2021 06:57
Subject: Re:Arlington ECNL, FCV not ECNL
Anonymous wrote:I guess that means a couple more years of trash talking on DCUM between FCV and Loudoun parents/staff before they are ever in same league. Oh boy
FCV and Arlington not getting ECNL.
Loudoun having ECNL should be clue 1
Arlington removing boys from ECNL should be clue 2
Anonymous
02/25/2021 06:41
Subject: Re:Arlington ECNL, FCV not ECNL
I guess that means a couple more years of trash talking on DCUM between FCV and Loudoun parents/staff before they are ever in same league. Oh boy
Anonymous
02/25/2021 06:36
Subject: Re:Arlington ECNL, FCV not ECNL
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:FCV being considered for ECNL but waiting for clarity on post-COVID stability and evaluating density (re dilution) impact in Loudoun county and NOVA and long term plans from TSJ for FCV. Not before 2023-2024 at the earliest. Arlington has geographical issue with McLean which may or may not be true but it is an issue that I don’t see a resolution to anytime soon unless there is a push from the guys side.
So FCV will go ECNL in 3 years?
I would call that 2 years. From post it sounds like they may get ECNL in 2 years, not definite.
Can PP elaborate on Arl issue? Are they referring to Arl boys leaving ECNL for MLS/next?
Anonymous
02/25/2021 06:24
Subject: Re:Arlington ECNL, FCV not ECNL
Anonymous wrote:FCV being considered for ECNL but waiting for clarity on post-COVID stability and evaluating density (re dilution) impact in Loudoun county and NOVA and long term plans from TSJ for FCV. Not before 2023-2024 at the earliest. Arlington has geographical issue with McLean which may or may not be true but it is an issue that I don’t see a resolution to anytime soon unless there is a push from the guys side.
So FCV will go ECNL in 3 years?
Anonymous
02/24/2021 23:37
Subject: Re:Arlington ECNL, FCV not ECNL
FCV being considered for ECNL but waiting for clarity on post-COVID stability and evaluating density (re dilution) impact in Loudoun county and NOVA and long term plans from TSJ for FCV. Not before 2023-2024 at the earliest. Arlington has geographical issue with McLean which may or may not be true but it is an issue that I don’t see a resolution to anytime soon unless there is a push from the guys side.
Anonymous
02/23/2021 20:17
Subject: Arlington ECNL, FCV not ECNL
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:It’s not a matter of FCV being bad and that’s why they aren’t getting ECNL. It sounds political and they burned bridges when they left for the DA. Loudoun got ECNL in their geographic area so that’s that.
They haven’t performed all that stellar against local ECNL teams in recent scrimmages either-suggesting they would not be as dominant as they currently are in GA.
What was different in the way FCV left ECNL versus the numerous other teams who left ECNL for DA and have since returned? I've only heard "burned bridges" as the reason, but many other teams took the same route and have since returned. Honest question on what did FCV do that was so egregious?
Don’t know-but I am sure that the fact that they are so close to Loudoun is an issue for ECNL. McLean and Arlington have greater geographic distance based on where Arlington usually practices, while Loudoun and Evergreen are about 5 miles away from each other. Also, FCV has no boys teams to offer to sweeten the deal of an all in club.
Loudoun and Evergreen are actually much closer than 5 miles. More like a quarter of a mile, if that.
Anonymous
02/23/2021 20:13
Subject: Arlington ECNL, FCV not ECNL
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:It’s not a matter of FCV being bad and that’s why they aren’t getting ECNL. It sounds political and they burned bridges when they left for the DA. Loudoun got ECNL in their geographic area so that’s that.
They haven’t performed all that stellar against local ECNL teams in recent scrimmages either-suggesting they would not be as dominant as they currently are in GA.
What was different in the way FCV left ECNL versus the numerous other teams who left ECNL for DA and have since returned? I've only heard "burned bridges" as the reason, but many other teams took the same route and have since returned. Honest question on what did FCV do that was so egregious?
Don’t know-but I am sure that the fact that they are so close to Loudoun is an issue for ECNL. McLean and Arlington have greater geographic distance based on where Arlington usually practices, while Loudoun and Evergreen are about 5 miles away from each other. Also, FCV has no boys teams to offer to sweeten the deal of an all in club.
I thought about proximity, but in other places, that doesn't seem an issue. Charlotte, for example, has 2 ECNL teams. I guess the argument there is that Charlotte (Pop: 850k+) is bigger than Loudoun County (Pop: 410k+) and can sustain two teams?
Charlotte metro is 3.6 million or so.
Excuse me. That's 2.6 million, not 3.6 million.
Anonymous
02/23/2021 20:12
Subject: Arlington ECNL, FCV not ECNL
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:It’s not a matter of FCV being bad and that’s why they aren’t getting ECNL. It sounds political and they burned bridges when they left for the DA. Loudoun got ECNL in their geographic area so that’s that.
They haven’t performed all that stellar against local ECNL teams in recent scrimmages either-suggesting they would not be as dominant as they currently are in GA.
What was different in the way FCV left ECNL versus the numerous other teams who left ECNL for DA and have since returned? I've only heard "burned bridges" as the reason, but many other teams took the same route and have since returned. Honest question on what did FCV do that was so egregious?
Don’t know-but I am sure that the fact that they are so close to Loudoun is an issue for ECNL. McLean and Arlington have greater geographic distance based on where Arlington usually practices, while Loudoun and Evergreen are about 5 miles away from each other. Also, FCV has no boys teams to offer to sweeten the deal of an all in club.
I thought about proximity, but in other places, that doesn't seem an issue. Charlotte, for example, has 2 ECNL teams. I guess the argument there is that Charlotte (Pop: 850k+) is bigger than Loudoun County (Pop: 410k+) and can sustain two teams?
Charlotte metro is 3.6 million or so.
Anonymous
02/23/2021 20:05
Subject: Arlington ECNL, FCV not ECNL
The backed the wrong horse. In all the wrong ways. The gave Loudoun their spot. It’s game over
Anonymous
02/23/2021 19:15
Subject: Arlington ECNL, FCV not ECNL
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:It’s not a matter of FCV being bad and that’s why they aren’t getting ECNL. It sounds political and they burned bridges when they left for the DA. Loudoun got ECNL in their geographic area so that’s that.
They haven’t performed all that stellar against local ECNL teams in recent scrimmages either-suggesting they would not be as dominant as they currently are in GA.
What was different in the way FCV left ECNL versus the numerous other teams who left ECNL for DA and have since returned? I've only heard "burned bridges" as the reason, but many other teams took the same route and have since returned. Honest question on what did FCV do that was so egregious?
Don’t know-but I am sure that the fact that they are so close to Loudoun is an issue for ECNL. McLean and Arlington have greater geographic distance based on where Arlington usually practices, while Loudoun and Evergreen are about 5 miles away from each other. Also, FCV has no boys teams to offer to sweeten the deal of an all in club.
I thought about proximity, but in other places, that doesn't seem an issue. Charlotte, for example, has 2 ECNL teams. I guess the argument there is that Charlotte (Pop: 850k+) is bigger than Loudoun County (Pop: 410k+) and can sustain two teams?
Correct.
Anonymous
02/23/2021 17:30
Subject: Arlington ECNL, FCV not ECNL
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:It’s not a matter of FCV being bad and that’s why they aren’t getting ECNL. It sounds political and they burned bridges when they left for the DA. Loudoun got ECNL in their geographic area so that’s that.
They haven’t performed all that stellar against local ECNL teams in recent scrimmages either-suggesting they would not be as dominant as they currently are in GA.
What was different in the way FCV left ECNL versus the numerous other teams who left ECNL for DA and have since returned? I've only heard "burned bridges" as the reason, but many other teams took the same route and have since returned. Honest question on what did FCV do that was so egregious?
Don’t know-but I am sure that the fact that they are so close to Loudoun is an issue for ECNL. McLean and Arlington have greater geographic distance based on where Arlington usually practices, while Loudoun and Evergreen are about 5 miles away from each other. Also, FCV has no boys teams to offer to sweeten the deal of an all in club.
I thought about proximity, but in other places, that doesn't seem an issue. Charlotte, for example, has 2 ECNL teams. I guess the argument there is that Charlotte (Pop: 850k+) is bigger than Loudoun County (Pop: 410k+) and can sustain two teams?
Anonymous
02/23/2021 17:27
Subject: Arlington ECNL, FCV not ECNL
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:It’s not a matter of FCV being bad and that’s why they aren’t getting ECNL. It sounds political and they burned bridges when they left for the DA. Loudoun got ECNL in their geographic area so that’s that.
They haven’t performed all that stellar against local ECNL teams in recent scrimmages either-suggesting they would not be as dominant as they currently are in GA.
What was different in the way FCV left ECNL versus the numerous other teams who left ECNL for DA and have since returned? I've only heard "burned bridges" as the reason, but many other teams took the same route and have since returned. Honest question on what did FCV do that was so egregious?
Don’t know-but I am sure that the fact that they are so close to Loudoun is an issue for ECNL. McLean and Arlington have greater geographic distance based on where Arlington usually practices, while Loudoun and Evergreen are about 5 miles away from each other. Also, FCV has no boys teams to offer to sweeten the deal of an all in club.
Anonymous
02/23/2021 16:30
Subject: Arlington ECNL, FCV not ECNL
Anonymous wrote:It’s not a matter of FCV being bad and that’s why they aren’t getting ECNL. It sounds political and they burned bridges when they left for the DA. Loudoun got ECNL in their geographic area so that’s that.
They haven’t performed all that stellar against local ECNL teams in recent scrimmages either-suggesting they would not be as dominant as they currently are in GA.
What was different in the way FCV left ECNL versus the numerous other teams who left ECNL for DA and have since returned? I've only heard "burned bridges" as the reason, but many other teams took the same route and have since returned. Honest question on what did FCV do that was so egregious?
Anonymous
02/23/2021 16:23
Subject: Arlington ECNL, FCV not ECNL
ARL 08s not very good either. Can't even beat BRYC....