Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Some clubs don't play for wins in the u13-u14 age group, at BRYC we are told not to worry about winning games until u15, is this normal at other ECNL clubs

What the club tells you and what the coach does can be very different

At U15, they will recruit heavily from other clubs and replace BRYC kids, who played on their U13-U14 teams, with better players that were developed elsewhere.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Some clubs don't play for wins in the u13-u14 age group, at BRYC we are told not to worry about winning games until u15, is this normal at other ECNL clubs

What the club tells you and what the coach does can be very different

It takes time and good coaching, if you look at the top teams in every age group the coaches have been with them for a while. We also have to understand the quality of player that clubs are starting with at certain age groups. The 06-05-04 age groups are diluted because of the DA. Players that were being developed by clubs may have left.... it is also very rare that a club has great coaches in every age group. Most ECNL clubs have 1 or 2 really good coaches, they cannot develop every player in the ECNL age groups.

Anonymous wrote:Some clubs don't play for wins in the u13-u14 age group, at BRYC we are told not to worry about winning games until u15, is this normal at other ECNL clubs

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Every ECNL club in the country draw in top players at u15. Don't think it is just your club that adds players at these age groups. It is part of playing in a national league. The parents who say our club doesn't develop their own and current kids lose spots to outside players need to understand that if you want a spot in an ECNL club at u15 it has to be earned and won't be given just because you have been there....

It is true that the spots on the top team must be earned and that it is OK to recruit players from other clubs. If a club is indeed good about "developing" their own players, their top teams will largely stay the same, but add a handful of new players and a couple of players may be dropped to a lower level team with a meaningful opportunity to work their way up. This is a healthy model. However, I think the concern is that certain clubs replace most of their top team at older ages by brining a dozen or more players from other clubs, while using "development" as an excuse for poor results at younger ages. These are two different situations. If the club is stellar at "developing" its own players, there should not be a need for wholesale roster changes on the top teams at the older ages. Some coaches/clubs are amazing at recruiting players from other clubs, but mediocre at developing players they already have or the new players they get.

Anonymous wrote:Every ECNL club in the country draw in top players at u15. Don't think it is just your club that adds players at these age groups. It is part of playing in a national league. The parents who say our club doesn't develop their own and current kids lose spots to outside players need to understand that if you want a spot in an ECNL club at u15 it has to be earned and won't be given just because you have been there....

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Win percentage After first 2 weeks

1.McLean - 54.1%.
2.BRYC - 50%.
3.Richmond United - 41.6%
4. VDA - 33.3%
5. Loudoun - 33.3%

Interesting

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I was kind of surprised that VDA tied Richmond, after several players from their 03 squad left. Did they recruit well, or were the players that left a little overrated? Very curious...

2 games in one weekend, driving from Richmond for 2 games, also having to play the hardest game of year on Saturday.

I was at the game. It was a torrential down-pour all game and VDA got a PK when RU fouled in the box to tie it up. RU also hit post more than once. VDA's keeper played extraordinarily well!
Also, one of RU's top midfielders was concussed against BRYC on Saturday and is out for atleast a week. VDA made the most of the conditions and for that they should be commended. But, I wouldn't judge RU (or VDA) based on this match since the conditions were the most difficult I've seen to say the least.

Did only VDA play in the rain?

Anonymous wrote:Win percentage After first 2 weeks

1.McLean - 54.1%.
2.BRYC - 50%.
3.Richmond United - 41.6%
4. VDA - 33.3%
5. Loudoun - 33.3%

Anonymous wrote:I understnd the concept, but the score differentials are dramatic. tell me more about current natural positions? Given the changes that occur in the girls side from u6-u14, how can any player have a natural position? especially if they are never really playing there for a significant period when pace and numbers change. Once that player moves into that natural position, what players know how to play the recently vacated presumably important position if the un-natural position played there for u13-u14.

The ideas sounds great in theory for the star player ls in the coaxhes mind. not so great for the expendables who are playing those star players future positions.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:At McLean they tend to bring in new players at the u15 age group.

BRYC also recruits heavily from other clubs for the older age groups, at least on the boys side. This is a common practice for quite a few clubs, but this is something for the parents to keep in mind, since the influx of new players and coaches (who bring their own players) may move many of the existing players to lower level teams.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I was kind of surprised that VDA tied Richmond, after several players from their 03 squad left. Did they recruit well, or were the players that left a little overrated? Very curious...

2 games in one weekend, driving from Richmond for 2 games, also having to play the hardest game of year on Saturday.

I was at the game. It was a torrential down-pour all game and VDA got a PK when RU fouled in the box to tie it up. RU also hit post more than once. VDA's keeper played extraordinarily well!
Also, one of RU's top midfielders was concussed against BRYC on Saturday and is out for atleast a week. VDA made the most of the conditions and for that they should be commended. But, I wouldn't judge RU (or VDA) based on this match since the conditions were the most difficult I've seen to say the least.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I was kind of surprised that VDA tied Richmond, after several players from their 03 squad left. Did they recruit well, or were the players that left a little overrated? Very curious...

2 games in one weekend, driving from Richmond for 2 games, also having to play the hardest game of year on Saturday.