Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Message from Nadir on Fairfax VA Union Girls Program

Current VA Union Girls ECNL NL Families,
 
Some of you have reached out with understandable concerns regarding the club’s messaging on Fairfax VA Union, and with respect to the boys’ program. While the intent has been to provide full transparency, I want to stress that the decision to merge was not made under pressure from ECNL for our girls’ teams. VA Union’s or Brave’s ECNL girls were not flagged for performance. 


The ECNL was created to provide top level competition and player development in the country – to have the best players and coaches compete against the best. The ECNL supports, and we all agree, that increasing our player pool will help us continue to perform at this level. We are excited about the opportunity to keep getting stronger as a club, working with BRAVE coaches.  

With change comes uncertainty, but for elite players, Fairfax VA Union will be the surest thing in our area. No other local club has retained the same coaching staff or directors for multiple years – over 10 years in McLean. Our leadership does not allow staff to cut corners in player development just to win games. We know our style of play competes nationally and wins championships. While good athletes with poor style of play and low soccer IQ can win locally and at a young age, this does not find success against great athletes in Texas and Southern California. McLean has been the only local club to make multiple national championship finals. 

As for staff, Clyde is one of the most well-respected coaches/leaders locally and nationally. Under his leadership, McLean was the only club in our area to be accepted into the ECNL based on merits of the girl’s program when the ECNL consisted of only the top 60 some clubs in the country (almost 15 years ago). As the soccer landscape changed, BRYC (now BRAVE) was added as the next best club based on its girl’s merits. All the other local clubs were admitted later because the ECNL wanted their boys’ programs to join so the league could compete with DA/GA/MLS Next.

Our girls’ program is not under any probationary period and our status will have no bearing on the boys’ program. While all boys and girls programs are under ECNL’s review each year, they know our girls leadership and that a name change or merger will not discourage their utmost respect for our club, the best girls’ program in the DMV for the last 20 plus years. 

We look forward to tryouts starting tonight for some groups. If you have any questions or concerns, please do not hesitate to reach out. If anyone has attended another ID session or is thinking about it and has not talked to their coach, I encourage you to reach out before making a decision.  

Thanks!
 
Nadir Moumen
Fairfax VA Union ECNL Girls Director
nadir.moumen@mcleansoccer.org (mailto:nadir.moumen@mcleansoccer.org)


Doesn't this mean that the whole this was a lie from the beginning? The girls were never in danger so why do they need to merge? Parents need to be asking more questions. It also begs the question even more why the MYS boys leadership were not involved the negotiations. I can see now why they are leaving. The MYS leadership and board are so inept it baffles me they still have jobs. The town hall is going to be fireworks.

Are you stupid? you can't just merge one side and not the other...thats not how it works.

NP, but I guess I'm stupid too. Girls and boys ECNL are both called Mid Atlantic, but they consist of different teams. They could have 100% combined the boys and kept the girls separate if both were doing so great.

How does that keep the conference in balance for scheduling? It doesn't.

Boys and girls teams don't travel together. Show me the boys NC Courage. Show me the girls Skyline in ECNL.

It would still have an uneven balance for the boys side if they did that, and from what I've seen, when the boys are home, girls are away and vice versa.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:First ID for 2010G was mostly current players. Any idea how quickly they'll lock players in and whether they'll open up 2nd ID to more outside players?

Is this a trial, tryout or a ID session?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:CW — beautiful coach and human. Always has the interest of all his players — best and weakest. Development over winning, short passes over long balls.

McLean is doing their best to remain transparent.

Boys — VU boys side has concerns as Fairfax or BRYC should place lots of boys on the ECNL merged teams. Hopefully it will strengthen.

Girls — it will be competitive to make teams. Over past several years relationship with SYC has been mixed bag. Some teams benefited and others did not. MYS could have managed to recruit on their own but with this merger if the best current VU players stay and Fairfax’s best come onto teams (along with a handful of from other clubs), even with big rosters, it will be good for development and solid competitive play. No more shuddering when subs come on but rather this should provide for deeper teams, better training, and mix of coaching approaches. (Or maybe that is too optimistic)

Organization — communication is very good at McLean. Fairfax families might actually receive regular notices and communications. Brace yourselves.

SYC saved McLean in every age group from 2008 and younger.

Anonymous wrote:First ID for 2010G was mostly current players. Any idea how quickly they'll lock players in and whether they'll open up 2nd ID to more outside players?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There has one been one ID session - 2012G. So if there are any offers out, it has to be for that team.

All the McLean 2012 girls showed up for SYC tryouts, and none made the team? oooff that was a broken union.

Should be plenty of McLean girls looking to make this Union then, and that explains the neuroticism. 2 McLean girls offered when whole team attended ID so confirming yes they are looking for a home wit FVU

As mentioned earlier in this thread, McLean 2012 is one of the poorer performing clubs. It would make sense that most of those players would not make SYC. If I had to guess, most will not make FVU either.

Someone in touch with reality, thank you! McLean is failing, let's hope being the county team will help you now. Arlington girls arent leaving for Union, Springfield girls arent leaving for Union, Loudoun girls have multiple options they aren't leaving for Union, VDA is looking the strongest and they aren't leaving for Union way down in PW. So where is your talent coming from? Developing it right, get going NM + ML, this is what your so famous for right?

Development is not NM’s thing.

He tried to skate around McLeans lack of development in the younger ages by taking shots at ‘good athletes with poor style of play and low soccer IQ’ in his email. But when ECNL begins where is all of the high IQ McLean talent then?

That talent is either non existent or has been pushed out of the club already by McLean’s finest, The Honorable JA.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:At least VRSC has actual former ECNL/DA/GA coaches running the program and coaching the teams.

That very much remains to be seen. Check back in the fall to see who's actually doing the coaching. If it's the former FCV coaches, then ok. But if not...$4500 is a lot of money for a coach whose credentials max out at a 7v7 grassroots license or USSF-C (best case).

Yeah, almost all of the FCV coaches went over to VRSC to coach NCSL all while handing over the newly acquired GA teams, through the efforts of those same FCV coaches, to those current NCSL coaches.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There has one been one ID session - 2012G. So if there are any offers out, it has to be for that team.

All the McLean 2012 girls showed up for SYC tryouts, and none made the team? oooff that was a broken union.

Should be plenty of McLean girls looking to make this Union then, and that explains the neuroticism. 2 McLean girls offered when whole team attended ID so confirming yes they are looking for a home wit FVU

Some Mclean 12s already accepted SYC offers.

People will really commute from McLean to Springfield for 12yo soccer?

Wow. Apparently I don't love my kids enough.

Another blindly privileged McLean parent speaking out of their arse. Do you realize how lucky you are to have all these options to choose from within a 15-20 mile radius and you wouldn't choose a team because of what traffic?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:At least VRSC has actual former ECNL/DA/GA coaches running the program and coaching the teams.

That very much remains to be seen. Check back in the fall to see who's actually doing the coaching. If it's the former FCV coaches, then ok. But if not...$4500 is a lot of money for a coach whose credentials max out at a 7v7 grassroots license or USSF-C (best case).

Anonymous wrote:At least VRSC has actual former ECNL/DA/GA coaches running the program and coaching the teams.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If plan A doesnt work out, what do you all recommend for Plan B for Girls? Is GA better than RL ?

Absolutley! Unless you are going to VRSC (too new) or FCV (too broken) then you might be better off going RL

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is what really happened:
1- JW accepts an offer from Arlington mid-January
2 - McLean BOD panics and tries desperately to poach top coaches from neighboring clubs. It fails.
3 - Braves and McLean gets a warning from ECNL.
4 - Given their inability to recruit a solid coaching slate for the boy side, McLean BOD figures it is their way out. They negotiate to keep control of the girl side while they surrender the boy side.

JW, new TD at Arlington?

I couldn’t find Arlington’s coaching slate online. Anyone know what it is?