Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:With the current market of ECNL and DA diluting the player pool a strong team no longer means what it once did. College coaches have to pan for gold now more than ever.
That's not what it looked like last year, but we will see if this year it is. Last year, they still showed up in droves for the same clubs.
If it is all about the strong teams hows does a team like Loudoun that has a 2-10 record have 11 girls with scholarships this week? That’s how it worked this year.
None of them went to top 50 programs. I believe only 3 have commitments to division 1 schools with the highest ranked program being Radford. The rest are division 2 and division 3 schools. Do you really have to spend big $$$$ on ECNL to get an offer from division 2 or 3 college?
LOL. Now you are moving the goalposts. How did the college scouts find them? That’s the big question. Kind of goes against what you said earlier.
I would say JMU is still a D1 school. Since they are #1 in the CAA conference you would know that too if you had college soccer players.
I can see that maybe you would miss all the other D1 schools for the Loudoun NLIs but that seals it for me on your lack of credibility.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:It's crazy that some parents think winning is not important 16+.... College coaches are not going to sit and watch a team that can't win a game. I would look at the amount of coaches that watch McLean and BRYC at 16-17-19 in Greer and Sanford and compare it to what shows up for Loudoun and VDA matches. There is absolutely no reason teams 16+ should not be going on the field to win games. If you are being told other wise run... fast.
Absolutely true. At that point, if a team is getting its ass handed to it game after game, either find another team to play or accept that your child should be playing in a lower division. Players won't get recruited from teams that can't compete.
OK --- then compare the commitments from the Richmond U-17 team (sub 500 win pct) and the BRYC U-17 (about 600 win pct) --- looks that Richmond team is doing just fine in placing girls in higher profile programs that the BRYC team.
BTW: If you think you're kid won't get recruited on a bad ECNL team because nobody watches them, how many coaches do you think come to CCL / NCSL / etc games? And do you think the coaches will be excited about a worse player on a successful CCL / NCSL player.
That's like saying only players from FBS teams will get drafted into the NFL, and if you're not one of those teams, no NFL scout will see you.
BRYC U-17 is basically a new team. They only have 2 of their original players. They may only have 4 committed to Division 1 schools, but there are several others talking to coaches. AND most of that team is sophomores! BRYC has a couple of 02s playing up that are committed! So that places the U-17s I believe at 6 committed to Divsion 1 schools. William and Mary, UConn, Naval Academy, Are the 3 I know of, can’t remember the other 3.
BRYC U17 team is almost the same team as least --- it's not new.
Their coach told the 02s that they should focus on D-2 and D-3 schools because only his only 03 players were good enough for D-1.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:With the current market of ECNL and DA diluting the player pool a strong team no longer means what it once did. College coaches have to pan for gold now more than ever.
That's not what it looked like last year, but we will see if this year it is. Last year, they still showed up in droves for the same clubs.
If it is all about the strong teams hows does a team like Loudoun that has a 2-10 record have 11 girls with scholarships this week? That’s how it worked this year.
None of them went to top 50 programs. I believe only 3 have commitments to division 1 schools with the highest ranked program being Radford. The rest are division 2 and division 3 schools. Do you really have to spend big $$$$ on ECNL to get an offer from division 2 or 3 college?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:It's crazy that some parents think winning is not important 16+.... College coaches are not going to sit and watch a team that can't win a game. I would look at the amount of coaches that watch McLean and BRYC at 16-17-19 in Greer and Sanford and compare it to what shows up for Loudoun and VDA matches. There is absolutely no reason teams 16+ should not be going on the field to win games. If you are being told other wise run... fast.
Absolutely true. At that point, if a team is getting its ass handed to it game after game, either find another team to play or accept that your child should be playing in a lower division. Players won't get recruited from teams that can't compete.
OK --- then compare the commitments from the Richmond U-17 team (sub 500 win pct) and the BRYC U-17 (about 600 win pct) --- looks that Richmond team is doing just fine in placing girls in higher profile programs that the BRYC team.
BTW: If you think you're kid won't get recruited on a bad ECNL team because nobody watches them, how many coaches do you think come to CCL / NCSL / etc games? And do you think the coaches will be excited about a worse player on a successful CCL / NCSL player.
That's like saying only players from FBS teams will get drafted into the NFL, and if you're not one of those teams, no NFL scout will see you.
BRYC U-17 is basically a new team. They only have 2 of their original players. They may only have 4 committed to Division 1 schools, but there are several others talking to coaches. AND most of that team is sophomores! BRYC has a couple of 02s playing up that are committed! So that places the U-17s I believe at 6 committed to Divsion 1 schools. William and Mary, UConn, Naval Academy, Are the 3 I know of, can’t remember the other 3.
BRYC U17 team is almost the same team as least --- it's not new.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:With the current market of ECNL and DA diluting the player pool a strong team no longer means what it once did. College coaches have to pan for gold now more than ever.
That's not what it looked like last year, but we will see if this year it is. Last year, they still showed up in droves for the same clubs.
If it is all about the strong teams hows does a team like Loudoun that has a 2-10 record have 11 girls with scholarships this week? That’s how it worked this year.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:With the current market of ECNL and DA diluting the player pool a strong team no longer means what it once did. College coaches have to pan for gold now more than ever.
That's not what it looked like last year, but we will see if this year it is. Last year, they still showed up in droves for the same clubs.
Anonymous wrote:For the love of Mary choose a college based on academic fit and interests and career goals and opportunities. try to make the soccer work after that.
Anonymous wrote:With the current market of ECNL and DA diluting the player pool a strong team no longer means what it once did. College coaches have to pan for gold now more than ever.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Pay attention at any college showcase. The strong teams are lined with scouts. The weaker ones hardly have 4 or 5. And yes, I have older children, I've been. That's how it works. Anyone who tells you anything else is just selling you. They aren't being honest.
Congrats on having older children.
If you're waiting on an ECNL showcase to initiate a contact, that's on you you.
So many more ways to get noticed --- you may have to do some work, but I'm sorry to inform you that ECNL showcases are the only source for college coaches to find recruits.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:It's crazy that some parents think winning is not important 16+.... College coaches are not going to sit and watch a team that can't win a game. I would look at the amount of coaches that watch McLean and BRYC at 16-17-19 in Greer and Sanford and compare it to what shows up for Loudoun and VDA matches. There is absolutely no reason teams 16+ should not be going on the field to win games. If you are being told other wise run... fast.
Absolutely true. At that point, if a team is getting its ass handed to it game after game, either find another team to play or accept that your child should be playing in a lower division. Players won't get recruited from teams that can't compete.
OK --- then compare the commitments from the Richmond U-17 team (sub 500 win pct) and the BRYC U-17 (about 600 win pct) --- looks that Richmond team is doing just fine in placing girls in higher profile programs that the BRYC team.
BTW: If you think you're kid won't get recruited on a bad ECNL team because nobody watches them, how many coaches do you think come to CCL / NCSL / etc games? And do you think the coaches will be excited about a worse player on a successful CCL / NCSL player.
That's like saying only players from FBS teams will get drafted into the NFL, and if you're not one of those teams, no NFL scout will see you.
BRYC U-17 is basically a new team. They only have 2 of their original players. They may only have 4 committed to Division 1 schools, but there are several others talking to coaches. AND most of that team is sophomores! BRYC has a couple of 02s playing up that are committed! So that places the U-17s I believe at 6 committed to Divsion 1 schools. William and Mary, UConn, Naval Academy, Are the 3 I know of, can’t remember the other 3.
Anonymous wrote:Pay attention at any college showcase. The strong teams are lined with scouts. The weaker ones hardly have 4 or 5. And yes, I have older children, I've been. That's how it works. Anyone who tells you anything else is just selling you. They aren't being honest.