Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They were great players at union (boys) and Brave (girls) that got dropped, not because they were benching, but mostly how the process was established. All behind doors, not a fair process in my view.

+1. Applies to my player. Didn't think process or outcome was fair.

Applies to our player as well. We aren't sticking around to support MYS, the club we've been with (for the most part) since our college-age player was U6. We didn't expect any special treatment, as we know for a fact some received. We only wanted a fair tryout process and possibly a little loyalty. MYS has not lifted a finger to advocate for its member players over outside players who are not any better.

How can the tryout process be fair if there is loyalty being shown?

Good point and a reason Union was not as good as it could have been. They showed loyalty to a fault.

Above U13, if a player isn't a starter, then their spot on a team is in jeopardy during tryout season.

I've personally seen Union coaches not pay attention to the boys trying out for two years in a row before we moved on to Arlington a year ago. And I mean had their backs to the all the boys and only turned around to the action on the field when they told everyone to take a break. They acted like the Union team was top of the table and no better players were available on the field trying out. It was a waste of time to even come out to Union tryouts.

When we tried out for Arlington, there were 3 coaches locked in to the action on the pitch. I was told after the fact that the Arlington coaches knew within 5 minutes who they were interested in, they engaged with the tryouts the whole time though. It was very professional in my opinion and why they are one of the best academies in the area and state.

There is a reason ECNL forced this merger on Union and it started with the mediocre teams that were the norm for Union.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They were great players at union (boys) and Brave (girls) that got dropped, not because they were benching, but mostly how the process was established. All behind doors, not a fair process in my view.

+1. Applies to my player. Didn't think process or outcome was fair.

Applies to our player as well. We aren't sticking around to support MYS, the club we've been with (for the most part) since our college-age player was U6. We didn't expect any special treatment, as we know for a fact some received. We only wanted a fair tryout process and possibly a little loyalty. MYS has not lifted a finger to advocate for its member players over outside players who are not any better.

How can the tryout process be fair if there is loyalty being shown?

What I meant is that if a member player and an outside player are on equal footing, the club shows loyalty to the member player.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They were great players at union (boys) and Brave (girls) that got dropped, not because they were benching, but mostly how the process was established. All behind doors, not a fair process in my view.

+1. Applies to my player. Didn't think process or outcome was fair.

Applies to our player as well. We aren't sticking around to support MYS, the club we've been with (for the most part) since our college-age player was U6. We didn't expect any special treatment, as we know for a fact some received. We only wanted a fair tryout process and possibly a little loyalty. MYS has not lifted a finger to advocate for its member players over outside players who are not any better.

How can the tryout process be fair if there is loyalty being shown?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They were great players at union (boys) and Brave (girls) that got dropped, not because they were benching, but mostly how the process was established. All behind doors, not a fair process in my view.

+1. Applies to my player. Didn't think process or outcome was fair.

Applies to our player as well. We aren't sticking around to support MYS, the club we've been with (for the most part) since our college-age player was U6. We didn't expect any special treatment, as we know for a fact some received. We only wanted a fair tryout process and possibly a little loyalty. MYS has not lifted a finger to advocate for its member players over outside players who are not any better.

a son on Union not given a shot on FVU? I wonder if boys parents vs. girl parents have a different perspective on how to tryout process was handled

Anonymous wrote:sorry ECNL-RL tryouts were weeks later.

MYS ENRL tryouts are still happening...

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They were great players at union (boys) and Brave (girls) that got dropped, not because they were benching, but mostly how the process was established. All behind doors, not a fair process in my view.

+1. Applies to my player. Didn't think process or outcome was fair.

Applies to our player as well. We aren't sticking around to support MYS, the club we've been with (for the most part) since our college-age player was U6. We didn't expect any special treatment, as we know for a fact some received. We only wanted a fair tryout process and possibly a little loyalty. MYS has not lifted a finger to advocate for its member players over outside players who are not any better.

I think part of the problem is that you still see this as a McLean led team.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They were great players at union (boys) and Brave (girls) that got dropped, not because they were benching, but mostly how the process was established. All behind doors, not a fair process in my view.

+1. Applies to my player. Didn't think process or outcome was fair.

Applies to our player as well. We aren't sticking around to support MYS, the club we've been with (for the most part) since our college-age player was U6. We didn't expect any special treatment, as we know for a fact some received. We only wanted a fair tryout process and possibly a little loyalty. MYS has not lifted a finger to advocate for its member players over outside players who are not any better.

McLean had strong RL teams and some great athletes. The RL teams are well matched across the board so the score are often very close and are good competition. Often McLean lost by 1 this season but performed well at tournaments and scrimmages against non-RL teans

Anonymous wrote:McLean RL teams are not strong which is not good. Good RL teams in the area are Bethesda and Arlington to some extent.

The following girls’ ECRL teams say hi:
- 2006 Loudoun and Stafford
- 2007 Loudoun and Valor
- 2008 VSA
- 2009 GFR and VSA
- 2010 Vienna and Loudoun
- 2011 Valor

Along with Arlington (who are excellent), many of those teams have former ECNL players (who wanted less travel or to start rather than come off the bench), and many have beaten ECNL teams in tournaments.

Anonymous wrote:They were great players at union (boys) and Brave (girls) that got dropped, not because they were benching, but mostly how the process was established. All behind doors, not a fair process in my view.

+1. Applies to my player. Didn't think process or outcome was fair.

McLean RL teams are not strong which is not good. Good RL teams in the area are Bethesda and Arlington to some extent.

Again, Brave kept most of the boys side, and Union kept most on the girls side.

They were great players at union (boys) and Brave (girls) that got dropped, not because they were benching, but mostly how the process was established. All behind doors, not a fair process in my view.

I would assume that the better players left out from MYS would seek out other ECNL or GA options. Those that did not see much game time or rode the bench might drop to ECNL-RL, but that is probably all.

If the current ECNL girls at MYS stick with MYS and play on a lower ECNL R team, those teams should be pretty decent.

But I am sure those parents would rather their daughters not be abandoned by the club, and will likely be moving their daughters away. You can see a lot of the anger in these threads.

I don't have a DD in this, but I wouldn't stay with McLean after the way all of this transpired, especially if my DD played in McLean for years only to be left behind now.