Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The Great Falls players play dirty. It shouldn't be a surprise where they learn this from based on the comments above. The parents seem to be unethical too. Encourage the girls to play dirty on the field...and don't hide it either.

I think it depends on the team. Our players are not dirty at all. We might have one or two extra physical players on the team but overall no, not dirty.

though I am not a fan of the club. they dont play dirty they
Play fast and physical. There kids are athletes not overall super technical. But at RL level and lower that works.

Anonymous wrote:The Great Falls players play dirty. It shouldn't be a surprise where they learn this from based on the comments above. The parents seem to be unethical too. Encourage the girls to play dirty on the field...and don't hide it either.

I think it depends on the team. Our players are not dirty at all. We might have one or two extra physical players on the team but overall no, not dirty.

The Great Falls players play dirty. It shouldn't be a surprise where they learn this from based on the comments above. The parents seem to be unethical too. Encourage the girls to play dirty on the field...and don't hide it either.

Anonymous wrote:

Many clubs do this, PWSI is another.

Not many clubs do this. PWSI is the only other one- and they have their own arrangement that may very well be indeed for people who cannot afford the fees.

PWSI isn’t the only other one. BRYC has about 20 “bridge” teams. Loudoun offers “green” teams that are the same thing, etc. Your point that it is somehow unethical to charge people less for less (i.e. no paid coach) makes zero sense. It’s a feature, not a flaw.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:That club is not known for its ethics...

Sadly, this is more true than most people know.

+1

Especially after all that went down last season

Many clubs do this, PWSI is another.

Not many clubs do this. PWSI is the only other one- and they have their own arrangement that may very well be indeed for people who cannot afford the fees.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

No coach should be coaching kids on their team. Anything different is unethical.

That club is not known for its ethics - including letting a lot of teams pay 1/4 of what others pay and use the GFR "umbrella" to get into NCSL/travel tournaments as "part of" GFR.

Also personally know of at least a few of (former?) coaches who solicited / picked up private lessons for players on their current team (S.A. who is now at Valor did this a lot).

OK you just completely changed my perspective on GFR. I wondered how small local clubs that cater to a population that probably cannot afford most travel fees to play were able to get into these leagues. That's great that GFR allows them to do that.

Many clubs do this, PWSI is another. Their “classic” teams typically have parent volunteers coaching, which is why they pay a reduced rate. Some clubs charge full price and ‘place’ your kid on a team with a parent volunteer coach - THOSE are the unethical ones!

Anonymous wrote:That club is not known for its ethics...

Sadly, this is more true than most people know.

Anonymous wrote:

I wondered how small local clubs that cater to a population that probably cannot afford most travel fees to play were able to get into these leagues.

That's based on some false assumptions though - it's not small local clubs. It's, at least some, parents who are friends with the TC / exec director who brought teams in via a negotiation.

I thought deportivo Sterling was playing under GFR is that wrong?

I wondered how small local clubs that cater to a population that probably cannot afford most travel fees to play were able to get into these leagues.

That's based on some false assumptions though - it's not small local clubs. It's, at least some, parents who are friends with the TC / exec director who brought teams in via a negotiation.

Anonymous wrote:

No coach should be coaching kids on their team. Anything different is unethical.

That club is not known for its ethics - including letting a lot of teams pay 1/4 of what others pay and use the GFR "umbrella" to get into NCSL/travel tournaments as "part of" GFR.

Also personally know of at least a few of (former?) coaches who solicited / picked up private lessons for players on their current team (S.A. who is now at Valor did this a lot).

OK you just completely changed my perspective on GFR. I wondered how small local clubs that cater to a population that probably cannot afford most travel fees to play were able to get into these leagues. That's great that GFR allows them to do that.

No coach should be coaching kids on their team. Anything different is unethical.

That club is not known for its ethics - including letting a lot of teams pay 1/4 of what others pay and use the GFR "umbrella" to get into NCSL/travel tournaments as "part of" GFR.

Also personally know of at least a few of (former?) coaches who solicited / picked up private lessons for players on their current team (S.A. who is now at Valor did this a lot).

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Safe sport complaints weren't from this last weekend. They were from several weeks ago. Probably just a LS parent trying to stir the pot. Gus is a class act and I don't know why any complaints would be filed against him. He is respected by many!

Ummm, sure. The person you are touting as a "class act" is notorious for picking favorites and playing the people who pay him a lot of $$$$ to privately train them This is a well known fact.
Respected by many? Why don't you ask some of the former GFR families who left last season about that claim. Or anyone who was coached by him at Bethesda or FCV.

All coaches have their favorites. That's just human nature. However, in this case, I would agree with you that there is definitely a correlation between being a "favorite" and paying for extra training on the side. What makes that particularly obvious is that some of those players aren't nearly as good as their playing time would suggest. But no club is going to question the coach about something like this. Your choice is to deal with it or move on (as some players chose to do).

As a former parent of the coach mentioned the writing was on the wall for us since my kid was good, but there were a few better players on the team. He made promises of getting her to top teams and leagues and schools when we paid for private training sessions. When she got in high school and the course load was too much to get to those private trainings the playing time dropped significantly and we left after the season was done. She was never treated the same after we had to stop paying him on the side.

No coach should be coaching kids on their team. Anything different is unethical.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Safe sport complaints weren't from this last weekend. They were from several weeks ago. Probably just a LS parent trying to stir the pot. Gus is a class act and I don't know why any complaints would be filed against him. He is respected by many!

Ummm, sure. The person you are touting as a "class act" is notorious for picking favorites and playing the people who pay him a lot of $$$$ to privately train them This is a well known fact.
Respected by many? Why don't you ask some of the former GFR families who left last season about that claim. Or anyone who was coached by him at Bethesda or FCV.

All coaches have their favorites. That's just human nature. However, in this case, I would agree with you that there is definitely a correlation between being a "favorite" and paying for extra training on the side. What makes that particularly obvious is that some of those players aren't nearly as good as their playing time would suggest. But no club is going to question the coach about something like this. Your choice is to deal with it or move on (as some players chose to do).