Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Here is what annoyed me

#1- priority given to new players vs current players-even if those players coming from B teams at other clubs
#2 - head coach did not show up to tryouts even though new to age group and unfamiliar with each player
#3 - randomness of the decisions made (promoting untested players, bumping proven performers)
#4–lack of transparency...appreciate the clubs who share the final roster to avoid drama, share coaching lineup in advance so you know what you are signing up for and don’t try to sweep relevant changes under the rug (roster size, coaching changes, policies, league changes)

The ranking at another Club means shit. Some of those B team players got screwed over at their Club and have A team talent. That’s why they are over at your Club now.

If they are the same quality, but play goalie too or have some other needed talent I get it.

I agree with #2-4 and #1 conditionally as I stated. But, you are just as bad as the Clubs that ask potentially new players for their current team rank—A, B, C at registration and use it to guide where they put them at tryouts or place on their teams. Look at players as if there are no labels. It’s how you are currently playing ultimately and it could be that their Club never gave their players another look and relied on somebody else’s opinion instead of forming their own. The same thing you are complaining about. A lot of great players are lost in the system that way.

This is a good point. Many B team players are leaving their current club because they're actually BETTER than many of their current club's A team players but have been kept on B because of politics or because the B team needs a striker or whatever.
This is definitely the case for many who just left B at our club.

You also have to look at the coaches. Many times they stay with an age group too long and keep their biases about players. Best to mix things up every two years.

Our club switches coaches every two to three years and I never understood why, thanks for the explanation.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Here is what annoyed me

#1- priority given to new players vs current players-even if those players coming from B teams at other clubs
#2 - head coach did not show up to tryouts even though new to age group and unfamiliar with each player
#3 - randomness of the decisions made (promoting untested players, bumping proven performers)
#4–lack of transparency...appreciate the clubs who share the final roster to avoid drama, share coaching lineup in advance so you know what you are signing up for and don’t try to sweep relevant changes under the rug (roster size, coaching changes, policies, league changes)

The ranking at another Club means shit. Some of those B team players got screwed over at their Club and have A team talent. That’s why they are over at your Club now.

If they are the same quality, but play goalie too or have some other needed talent I get it.

I agree with #2-4 and #1 conditionally as I stated. But, you are just as bad as the Clubs that ask potentially new players for their current team rank—A, B, C at registration and use it to guide where they put them at tryouts or place on their teams. Look at players as if there are no labels. It’s how you are currently playing ultimately and it could be that their Club never gave their players another look and relied on somebody else’s opinion instead of forming their own. The same thing you are complaining about. A lot of great players are lost in the system that way.

This is a good point. Many B team players are leaving their current club because they're actually BETTER than many of their current club's A team players but have been kept on B because of politics or because the B team needs a striker or whatever.
This is definitely the case for many who just left B at our club.

You also have to look at the coaches. Many times they stay with an age group too long and keep their biases about players. Best to mix things up every two years.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Fake news. It is Arlington and not McLean.

that's laughable....the cultures are night and day between those 2 clubs. my $ on mclean too.

My question though, how are they finding out players are going to tryouts at other Clubs? Coaches at the other Club telling you, a spy from the home Club, another player back-stabbing, a post on social media with a tryout pic, etc? I did see a Coach from our home Club when my kid was trying out elsewhere.

Travel Clubs like to call players 'the customer'. Well, a smart customer shops around before shelling out $3k. I would welcome parents and players to research and look around before making a commitment. Insecurity is not flattering. If you are comfortable in your product and doing a good job, you should be confident you'll have retention.

McLean and Arlington share tryout lists

No surprise there. Both a bunch of douches.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Here is what annoyed me

#1- priority given to new players vs current players-even if those players coming from B teams at other clubs
#2 - head coach did not show up to tryouts even though new to age group and unfamiliar with each player
#3 - randomness of the decisions made (promoting untested players, bumping proven performers)
#4–lack of transparency...appreciate the clubs who share the final roster to avoid drama, share coaching lineup in advance so you know what you are signing up for and don’t try to sweep relevant changes under the rug (roster size, coaching changes, policies, league changes)

The ranking at another Club means shit. Some of those B team players got screwed over at their Club and have A team talent. That’s why they are over at your Club now.

If they are the same quality, but play goalie too or have some other needed talent I get it.

I agree with #2-4 and #1 conditionally as I stated. But, you are just as bad as the Clubs that ask potentially new players for their current team rank—A, B, C at registration and use it to guide where they put them at tryouts or place on their teams. Look at players as if there are no labels. It’s how you are currently playing ultimately and it could be that their Club never gave their players another look and relied on somebody else’s opinion instead of forming their own. The same thing you are complaining about. A lot of great players are lost in the system that way.

This is a good point. Many B team players are leaving their current club because they're actually BETTER than many of their current club's A team players but have been kept on B because of politics or because the B team needs a striker or whatever.
This is definitely the case for many who just left B at our club.

I'd love to know which club and age that was. Our B team is just about as strong as our A team, and the top 4 or 5 B team players could substitute for any A team players. It surprises me that nobody has left the B team for Greener pastures over the past several seasons. That may change when ECNL and DA are options.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Fake news. It is Arlington and not McLean.

that's laughable....the cultures are night and day between those 2 clubs. my $ on mclean too.

My question though, how are they finding out players are going to tryouts at other Clubs? Coaches at the other Club telling you, a spy from the home Club, another player back-stabbing, a post on social media with a tryout pic, etc? I did see a Coach from our home Club when my kid was trying out elsewhere.

Travel Clubs like to call players 'the customer'. Well, a smart customer shops around before shelling out $3k. I would welcome parents and players to research and look around before making a commitment. Insecurity is not flattering. If you are comfortable in your product and doing a good job, you should be confident you'll have retention.

McLean and Arlington share tryout lists

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Here is what annoyed me

#1- priority given to new players vs current players-even if those players coming from B teams at other clubs
#2 - head coach did not show up to tryouts even though new to age group and unfamiliar with each player
#3 - randomness of the decisions made (promoting untested players, bumping proven performers)
#4–lack of transparency...appreciate the clubs who share the final roster to avoid drama, share coaching lineup in advance so you know what you are signing up for and don’t try to sweep relevant changes under the rug (roster size, coaching changes, policies, league changes)

The ranking at another Club means shit. Some of those B team players got screwed over at their Club and have A team talent. That’s why they are over at your Club now.

If they are the same quality, but play goalie too or have some other needed talent I get it.

I agree with #2-4 and #1 conditionally as I stated. But, you are just as bad as the Clubs that ask potentially new players for their current team rank—A, B, C at registration and use it to guide where they put them at tryouts or place on their teams. Look at players as if there are no labels. It’s how you are currently playing ultimately and it could be that their Club never gave their players another look and relied on somebody else’s opinion instead of forming their own. The same thing you are complaining about. A lot of great players are lost in the system that way.

This is a good point. Many B team players are leaving their current club because they're actually BETTER than many of their current club's A team players but have been kept on B because of politics or because the B team needs a striker or whatever.
This is definitely the case for many who just left B at our club.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What annoyed me...how about the club apparently forgetting that they were holding tryouts for one particular age group. Kids showed up but no coaches or admin there to meet the kids.

Holy crap.

Please do tell what club this was.

Anonymous wrote:What annoyed me...how about the club apparently forgetting that they were holding tryouts for one particular age group. Kids showed up but no coaches or admin there to meet the kids.

Holy crap.

What annoyed me...how about the club apparently forgetting that they were holding tryouts for one particular age group. Kids showed up but no coaches or admin there to meet the kids.

Anonymous wrote:Here is what annoyed me

#1- priority given to new players vs current players-even if those players coming from B teams at other clubs
#2 - head coach did not show up to tryouts even though new to age group and unfamiliar with each player
#3 - randomness of the decisions made (promoting untested players, bumping proven performers)
#4–lack of transparency...appreciate the clubs who share the final roster to avoid drama, share coaching lineup in advance so you know what you are signing up for and don’t try to sweep relevant changes under the rug (roster size, coaching changes, policies, league changes)

The ranking at another Club means shit. Some of those B team players got screwed over at their Club and have A team talent. That’s why they are over at your Club now.

If they are the same quality, but play goalie too or have some other needed talent I get it.

I agree with #2-4 and #1 conditionally as I stated. But, you are just as bad as the Clubs that ask potentially new players for their current team rank—A, B, C at registration and use it to guide where they put them at tryouts or place on their teams. Look at players as if there are no labels. It’s how you are currently playing ultimately and it could be that their Club never gave their players another look and relied on somebody else’s opinion instead of forming their own. The same thing you are complaining about. A lot of great players are lost in the system that way.

Here is what annoyed me

#1- priority given to new players vs current players-even if those players coming from B teams at other clubs
#2 - head coach did not show up to tryouts even though new to age group and unfamiliar with each player
#3 - randomness of the decisions made (promoting untested players, bumping proven performers)
#4–lack of transparency...appreciate the clubs who share the final roster to avoid drama, share coaching lineup in advance so you know what you are signing up for and don’t try to sweep relevant changes under the rug (roster size, coaching changes, policies, league changes)

Anonymous wrote:Fake news. It is Arlington and not McLean.

OK, Coach. When did another club ever become relevant to what many departing players are saying about your club?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The coach for our team knocked down several good players for a few kids who tried out from another club even though they didn't necessarily look better in try-outs. Our kid was one who was bumped, and so we left. Disappointing, as it was a nice team and we hadn't anticipated having to leave.

C'mon, you don't honestly believe that tryouts for the big clubs are anything other than charades do you?
The only point to tryouts is to see if any hidden gems turn up.
Coaches know exactly where the returning players will most likely go before tryouts ever begin.
They see the kids all year...how could a few hours of try-outs possibly trump that?
Your kid wasn't bumped because he didn't do as well in tryouts as the other kids. He was bumped because your coach, that knew your kid well, decided he wasn't as good as the incoming kids.

Agreed except in some cases, the returning players are bumped for a kid with a mediocre display at tryouts. I get it if they're bumped for a kid who tries out exceptionally well. Some clubs will bump their own for anything new that walks through the door.

Yes, but again, the coaches see players from other teams during the season, not just players on his own team.

This is correct. In many cases coaches actively recruit players from other clubs and knock loyal players out/down to make room, regardless of skill (unless they are already superstars). It's counterintuitive, but given two players at a similar skill level, it seems that coaches tend to prefer the external player to the internal player; probably a "grass is greener" basis in that the coach has seen all of the negatives of the internal player throughout the year, but has yet to fully see those of the new player.

Which all points back to the question of what is more important to the coach, developing strong players from within for the ling term or winning tomorrow at any cost. And we know that answer to that one in almost all cases in this area.

yes, the "grass-is-greener" phenomenon is interesting. My rising U13 has put in a holding pattern by our current club while they took new players they saw for an hour. And there's no issues with work ethic, sportsmanship, family dynamics or whatever else was listed above. If anything, those are some of my kid's strong points.
I ended up taking this kid to tryouts this year and he got two top team offers at much better clubs and bumped their players down. I think a number of coaches just want to mix things up in hopes of getting the magic combo of winning kids.

The "grass-is-greener" mindset has always been a red flag for me. I see it as an indication that the coach doesn't really feel invested in his players, and also that the coach maybe isn't all that confident in his own training methods. After all, the sales pitch to get players to join a team in the first place basically boils down to "If your player joins our team he will develop more over the next year than if he joins any other team." That pitch is kind of undermined if the coach is constantly looking at other teams to replace the players he's already supposedly developed.

Our Office judges workplace environment by retention. If you are not doing a good job, you will have a large attrition rate. Big Clubs don't care, there are plenty of people willing to pay. Someone leaves, $ walks in the door to fill the spot.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Fake news. It is Arlington and not McLean.

that's laughable....the cultures are night and day between those 2 clubs. my $ on mclean too.

My question though, how are they finding out players are going to tryouts at other Clubs? Coaches at the other Club telling you, a spy from the home Club, another player back-stabbing, a post on social media with a tryout pic, etc? I did see a Coach from our home Club when my kid was trying out elsewhere.

Travel Clubs like to call players 'the customer'. Well, a smart customer shops around before shelling out $3k. I would welcome parents and players to research and look around before making a commitment. Insecurity is not flattering. If you are comfortable in your product and doing a good job, you should be confident you'll have retention.

Completely agree. I think any coach or club official who either scopes out another club's practice or threatens repercussions for current players if they look elsewhere should be publicly scorned and ridiculed. That negative energy could be much better spent focusing on helping players get better.