Anonymous wrote:Pipeline's boys program is excellent.

Pipeline's girls program is crap because of SR.

That's all you need to know. Bring your DS to Pipeline but take your DD elsewhere. Seems the overall sentiment on this thread as well.

This!

The boys program is great...if you have a talented player. If he will be on the bubble of the top team I think you will get frustrated and have some of the same experiences mentioned here where he could easily be demoted or benched. It will happen, but what I have heard from those that experienced the issues they are pretty open about it...depending on the coach. Our coach is very open and honest about his expectations. He knows the kids that aren't training extra or dedicated to developing so if they don't perform they usually don't play or get demoted.

Now, I don't have any direct experience on the girls side, but from what I have heard from people that do, outside of Santino's teams and the younger teams, it is a dumpster fire. Tread lightly there depending on the coach.

Pipeline's boys program is excellent.

Pipeline's girls program is crap because of SR.

That's all you need to know. Bring your DS to Pipeline but take your DD elsewhere. Seems the overall sentiment on this thread as well.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Pipeline recruits players from other clubs to play in tournaments rather that giving their top B team players a chance to guest. That speaks volumes.

Actually a few kids move from B to A in each age level each year. They also bring in outside kids.

It’s really weird how Piepe inspires some posters here to just make shit up.

There are two examples in the above thread of the past month bringing in guests and dropped A players to B for the tournament and you're suggesting that it was just made up? One of them (2010 girls across 3 teams) was fairly specific about the teams involved and tournament. Has nothing to do with tryouts or whether kids have a chance to move up in a given tryout cycle, but certainly appears to be true and relevant to someone looking for advice on how they communicate and manage their teams. I'm not sure which side of it I fall on, but I'd certainly want to know how they communicate and operate before hanging my money to the club.

I think it really just depends on the situation. I can see it from both sides. If my child was on the B and guest players were playing in tournaments vs bringing up my kid I think that would upset me if I honestly thought they belonged there. However, if my child was on the A team and I knew for a fact the B team players were unable to play at a decent level in a big tournament I would be perfectly fine with them bringing in a guest player they were trying to recruit. The better the kids are that your kid practices with all week the better your kid becomes.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Pipeline recruits players from other clubs to play in tournaments rather that giving their top B team players a chance to guest. That speaks volumes.

Actually a few kids move from B to A in each age level each year. They also bring in outside kids.

It’s really weird how Piepe inspires some posters here to just make shit up.

There are two examples in the above thread of the past month bringing in guests and dropped A players to B for the tournament and you're suggesting that it was just made up? One of them (2010 girls across 3 teams) was fairly specific about the teams involved and tournament. Has nothing to do with tryouts or whether kids have a chance to move up in a given tryout cycle, but certainly appears to be true and relevant to someone looking for advice on how they communicate and manage their teams. I'm not sure which side of it I fall on, but I'd certainly want to know how they communicate and operate before hanging my money to the club.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP, I would recommend Baltimore Armour/SAC. The 2009 Top boys team is going to be very hard to break into. Pipeline is known for treating its second and third teams like step children on both boys and girls. Pipeline won’t even enter them in State or President’s Cup.

At Armour/SAC, they are separate entities so the top SAC team that feeds into Armour is still taken care of. Same can’t be said of the SAC B teams, but the club will still enter them in Presidents Cup.

Oh, I have also heard bad things about the girls side and the President of Pipeline, mainly because he micro manages every top girls team.

Best wishes in your hunt! Look for coaches who develop ball skills the most for your youngest and care less about the wins and losses.

Thanks for the recommendation. We looked at SAC and I think they have some great coaches/teams once they move over to the Baltimore Armour teams, but I've heard the younger SAC coaches are a little hit or miss and I saw the coach from one of their top boys younger teams berating his team at a tournament last year. Not really the person I want my child around or being coached by regardless of how good they are playing.

SAC coaches are known for a lot of yelling. I don't think the BA coaches are any better.

I think I know what team you are referring to. They played in the Arlington tournament this year and the coach was all over his kids and not in a good way. A lot of demeaning comments about being weak and soft.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP, I would recommend Baltimore Armour/SAC. The 2009 Top boys team is going to be very hard to break into. Pipeline is known for treating its second and third teams like step children on both boys and girls. Pipeline won’t even enter them in State or President’s Cup.

At Armour/SAC, they are separate entities so the top SAC team that feeds into Armour is still taken care of. Same can’t be said of the SAC B teams, but the club will still enter them in Presidents Cup.

Oh, I have also heard bad things about the girls side and the President of Pipeline, mainly because he micro manages every top girls team.

Best wishes in your hunt! Look for coaches who develop ball skills the most for your youngest and care less about the wins and losses.

Thanks for the recommendation. We looked at SAC and I think they have some great coaches/teams once they move over to the Baltimore Armour teams, but I've heard the younger SAC coaches are a little hit or miss and I saw the coach from one of their top boys younger teams berating his team at a tournament last year. Not really the person I want my child around or being coached by regardless of how good they are playing.

SAC coaches are known for a lot of yelling. I don't think the BA coaches are any better.

President of Pipeline, Sean "daddys money" Rush, personally texts and calls players to recruit them. Starts off as casual conversations and eventually turns into recruitment. Daddy's money is currently trying to 'buy' maryland united's girls 07 team. These behaviors are not documented on their social media platform, which portrays their club as pristine and perfect.

Anyone looking around should assess all options available. Every club has deficits and no one club has their act together. Some clubs have good coaches at specific age groups and poor coaches elsewhere. pipeline probably has good coaches, just like any other club.

Anonymous wrote:OP, I would recommend Baltimore Armour/SAC. The 2009 Top boys team is going to be very hard to break into. Pipeline is known for treating its second and third teams like step children on both boys and girls. Pipeline won’t even enter them in State or President’s Cup.

At Armour/SAC, they are separate entities so the top SAC team that feeds into Armour is still taken care of. Same can’t be said of the SAC B teams, but the club will still enter them in Presidents Cup.

Oh, I have also heard bad things about the girls side and the President of Pipeline, mainly because he micro manages every top girls team.

Best wishes in your hunt! Look for coaches who develop ball skills the most for your youngest and care less about the wins and losses.

Thanks for the recommendation. We looked at SAC and I think they have some great coaches/teams once they move over to the Baltimore Armour teams, but I've heard the younger SAC coaches are a little hit or miss and I saw the coach from one of their top boys younger teams berating his team at a tournament last year. Not really the person I want my child around or being coached by regardless of how good they are playing.

Favorite pipeline?

Gas;
Oil;
Banzai?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I've had limited exposure just watching boys side play in two different age groups. Both of those teams emphasized a style of play that was all about winning, running as fast as possible, and hoping to just score goals on breakaways and one-on-one. I was underwhelmed by their buildup play or off-the-ball play of the kids. It really was to find the fastest athletes and run them until they pass out. Then substitute and repeat.

This is just my experience watching two age groups. Others may vary.

Yes, that’s why the boys 2006 encl team hasn’t lost a game in more than 2 years.

Well boys ECNL sucks so there is that.

One, they’ve lost a few in those two years but still pretty much dominate.
Two- they just became ecnl so your comment is dumb.

Pretty sure they just celebrated two years without a loss. Where do you think they lost?

Anonymous wrote:Pipeline recruits players from other clubs to play in tournaments rather that giving their top B team players a chance to guest. That speaks volumes.

Actually a few kids move from B to A in each age level each year. They also bring in outside kids.

It’s really weird how Piepe inspires some posters here to just make shit up.

Anonymous wrote:OP, I would recommend Baltimore Armour/SAC. The 2009 Top boys team is going to be very hard to break into. Pipeline is known for treating its second and third teams like step children on both boys and girls. Pipeline won’t even enter them in State or President’s Cup.

At Armour/SAC, they are separate entities so the top SAC team that feeds into Armour is still taken care of. Same can’t be said of the SAC B teams, but the club will still enter them in Presidents Cup.

Oh, I have also heard bad things about the girls side and the President of Pipeline, mainly because he micro manages every top girls team.

Best wishes in your hunt! Look for coaches who develop ball skills the most for your youngest and care less about the wins and losses.

Not sure what you are smoking, Pipeline’s second boy’s teams compete in states. The 2006 pre encl team (then 2006 Black) went all the way to nationals two years ago.

OP, I would recommend Baltimore Armour/SAC. The 2009 Top boys team is going to be very hard to break into. Pipeline is known for treating its second and third teams like step children on both boys and girls. Pipeline won’t even enter them in State or President’s Cup.

At Armour/SAC, they are separate entities so the top SAC team that feeds into Armour is still taken care of. Same can’t be said of the SAC B teams, but the club will still enter them in Presidents Cup.

Oh, I have also heard bad things about the girls side and the President of Pipeline, mainly because he micro manages every top girls team.

Best wishes in your hunt! Look for coaches who develop ball skills the most for your youngest and care less about the wins and losses.

Pipeline recruits players from other clubs to play in tournaments rather that giving their top B team players a chance to guest. That speaks volumes.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I've had limited exposure just watching boys side play in two different age groups. Both of those teams emphasized a style of play that was all about winning, running as fast as possible, and hoping to just score goals on breakaways and one-on-one. I was underwhelmed by their buildup play or off-the-ball play of the kids. It really was to find the fastest athletes and run them until they pass out. Then substitute and repeat.

This is just my experience watching two age groups. Others may vary.

Yes, that’s why the boys 2006 encl team hasn’t lost a game in more than 2 years.

Well boys ECNL sucks so there is that.

One, they’ve lost a few in those two years but still pretty much dominate.
Two- they just became ecnl so your comment is dumb.