Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:At the NITQs at United Sports in PA, Husel U19 qualified and beat Freedom U19 (lost 2 games, tied 1). Warhawks U19 lost 2 games so far.
They beat the non-top Freedom team. They still qualified and good on them but they had a weak pool.
Anonymous wrote:At the NITQs at United Sports in PA, Husel U19 qualified and beat Freedom U19 (lost 2 games, tied 1). Warhawks U19 lost 2 games so far.
Anonymous wrote:Did any DMV teams qualify today?
Anonymous wrote:Did any DMV teams qualify today?
Anonymous wrote:The pools for the Sunshine Showcase later this month have been released. Love the matchups!
Anonymous wrote:Question - Isn't indoor completely different from outdoor? Can you judge a club based on their performance at NITQs? or even NITs?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:NP. Current Wolves parent in the upper age group. I read this post fully and IMO there are truths to both the positive and critical posts about the Wolves. I can easily name what a PP poster called who the core players are versus the sidelined players are in the upper age group. IMO here are the top three positives and negatives about the Wolves.
Positives: 1) Excellent u12/u14 coaches that have been brought in 2) Superb goalie coaches 3) Strong recruiting advise
Negatives: 1) Inconsistent and/or ineffective (different learning styles) coaching for older age group during practices/tournaments 2) Limited skill development for less skilled upper aged players due to limited playing opportunities and skill practice differentiation 3) Coaching philosophy stated versus executed are a mismatch sometimes
Possible areas to improve: 1) Skills differentiation and playing opportunities for highly skilled players versus developing players 2) Effective practice time focusing on skills (repetition), strategy (field IQ, watching games for movement and positioning) 3) Strength and conditioning integration
I agree with other posters there isn’t a perfect club out there. Everywhere has their positives and negatives. Do your homework before deciding on a club.
Current Wolves parent. My main beef with this club is that some of the core players are not necessarily better than the sidelined players. This is what is frustrating to me.
Looking forward to watching this weekends NITQs since most teams that have been discussed are playing from Next Level, Wolves, Metro, Alpha and other top clubs from PA/NJ. It will be interesting to see roster size, playing time, skill, coaching style across both u16 and u19.
Anonymous wrote:Question - Isn't indoor completely different from outdoor? Can you judge a club based on their performance at NITQs? or even NITs?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:NP. Current Wolves parent in the upper age group. I read this post fully and IMO there are truths to both the positive and critical posts about the Wolves. I can easily name what a PP poster called who the core players are versus the sidelined players are in the upper age group. IMO here are the top three positives and negatives about the Wolves.
Positives: 1) Excellent u12/u14 coaches that have been brought in 2) Superb goalie coaches 3) Strong recruiting advise
Negatives: 1) Inconsistent and/or ineffective (different learning styles) coaching for older age group during practices/tournaments 2) Limited skill development for less skilled upper aged players due to limited playing opportunities and skill practice differentiation 3) Coaching philosophy stated versus executed are a mismatch sometimes
Possible areas to improve: 1) Skills differentiation and playing opportunities for highly skilled players versus developing players 2) Effective practice time focusing on skills (repetition), strategy (field IQ, watching games for movement and positioning) 3) Strength and conditioning integration
I agree with other posters there isn’t a perfect club out there. Everywhere has their positives and negatives. Do your homework before deciding on a club.
Current Wolves parent. My main beef with this club is that some of the core players are not necessarily better than the sidelined players. This is what is frustrating to me.
Looking forward to watching this weekends NITQs since most teams that have been discussed are playing from Next Level, Wolves, Metro, Alpha and other top clubs from PA/NJ. It will be interesting to see roster size, playing time, skill, coaching style across both u16 and u19.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:A Hammers player recently committed to Bryn Mawr. Congratulations to her and her family!
A program on the rise with an excellent coach. He’s doing a ton of recruiting.
Everybody loves Victor. He attends events and does follow-up like no other college recruiter. He does a great job of making a case for Bryn Mawr. But, unfortunately, even he can't get top players to want to go to such a progressive women's school and that team isn't really on the rise. It's a great school and a wonderful program though.
If he can't recruit b/c of what you say, it's because people are simply buying your silly narrative. It's a women's school but there are men in classes. And the women can attend classes (incl major classes), activities, and events at Haverford, Swat, and Penn. It provides an amazing experience on a lot of levels. They have done really well the last couple of years athletically and I expect them to continue that trend.
Luckily, people are starting to and can look beyond the talking points of "progressive women's school."
^^^ great response to the backhanded compliment! You knew someone out there was gonna spin their negativity about a positive post.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:NP. Current Wolves parent in the upper age group. I read this post fully and IMO there are truths to both the positive and critical posts about the Wolves. I can easily name what a PP poster called who the core players are versus the sidelined players are in the upper age group. IMO here are the top three positives and negatives about the Wolves.
Positives: 1) Excellent u12/u14 coaches that have been brought in 2) Superb goalie coaches 3) Strong recruiting advise
Negatives: 1) Inconsistent and/or ineffective (different learning styles) coaching for older age group during practices/tournaments 2) Limited skill development for less skilled upper aged players due to limited playing opportunities and skill practice differentiation 3) Coaching philosophy stated versus executed are a mismatch sometimes
Possible areas to improve: 1) Skills differentiation and playing opportunities for highly skilled players versus developing players 2) Effective practice time focusing on skills (repetition), strategy (field IQ, watching games for movement and positioning) 3) Strength and conditioning integration
I agree with other posters there isn’t a perfect club out there. Everywhere has their positives and negatives. Do your homework before deciding on a club.
Current Wolves parent. My main beef with this club is that some of the core players are not necessarily better than the sidelined players. This is what is frustrating to me.