Anonymous wrote:yes its obnoxious to see travel players basically terrorizing rookie players so they can show off.

Not exactly how it is, at least not that I've seen. But there are often understandably HUGE skill gaps between travel players and some of the less skilled rec players, which allow a travel player to sometimes go end to end with relative ease.

My son was recruiting by his school's rec team because the teams they were playing had 1-3 travel players each, and they just couldn't compete without a couple travel players of their own. He was excited to be playing with his old rec teammates and the coach is careful to sub him and the other travel player in when the other team has their travel players on the field. While he's on the sidelines his teammates are urging him to score more so that they can win. He has fun trying to pass and set up his teammates for goals, usually with limited success because they just don't know the positioning or how to go to goal.

That begs the question as to why travel players are even allowed on rec. I can argue both sides, but despite how much fun my son is having with rec, I honestly feel it would be more fun for his teammates and competitive overall (albet at a lower level of gameplay), if travel players weren't allowed to play rec.

Anonymous wrote:What's sad is the whole thing has become a big business as opposed to having anything to do with the kids or the communities, and so many parents just buy into it. To go an out of town club to play travel soccer on the 3rd or 4th team in your age group is stupid.

Why would it be "stupid" to play for any club at whatever level if you can afford it and your kid is enjoying it? Some people just really love good soccer, which I think is probably not the case with those of you who are so negative on this thread. Plus, being on the 3rd or 4th team in a younger age group is no big deal if you are someplace that takes soccer seriously and teaches good skills. There are kids on local Development Academy teams that were on the 3rd or 4th team when they were U10 or U11--kids develop at different rates. At last year's tryout for my son's middle school team, virtually all the kids who played on the 1st - 4th teams at the best local club as 6th graders made the soccer team as seventh graders, while many players who played on the 1st teams of less good clubs did not.

Anonymous wrote:So, all this complaining is because of 2% of the program? Does 2% of the program really take up so many resources that the other 98% can't get a field? That does not make sense.

Not OP, but I'd see two issues here:

1. Arlington's top team in each age group having few players from Arlington. (That's the 5%. I say 2% because that should be the maximum of people who are really so good that they need to find the best possible team.)

2. Other players changing clubs and moving into Arlington on levels below the top team.

Anonymous wrote:MY gripe with ASA is that they allow travel players to take up a slot on the rec teams. If a kid wants to play travel, then they should give up their spot to allow another kid to learn the sport.

The kids (and parents) who choose travel for their kid (who gets an additional practice or two during the week with the travel coaches and skill building 'experts' AND then skip practice with the rec team) should not also be able to play rec. Should be either/or.

yes its obnoxious to see travel players basically terrorizing rookie players so they can show off.

My personal thoughts. I don't know anything about the specific clubs or governmental entities involved

In terms of field usage/cost -- That is up to whoever owns the fields. They can impose any reasonable requirements they want on usage. If they wanted to impose a requirement that users be from a particular location they could do so. They could also give preference in scheduling based on requirements that users are from a given area. Two issues -- first, in my limited experience governmental field owners/managers like the revenue generated from the rentals more than they like "local" resident usage figures although I suspect that most of the time they fail to take into account the capital cost paid by particular residents. Second, determining who exactly is using a field requires monitoring and is not simple. For example, if soccer club X has 25 teams and the make up of those teams is 80 percent from the proscribed area would it matter if the make up of the 4 older teams is only 10 percent from the proscribed area?

In terms of how clubs go about making up teams - it obviously differs from club to club. A typical community club will try and have several younger age teams -- say u9 to u11 or u12. Some will take anyone who shows up and can pay. Others will expect a certain minimum skill/athletic ability. With soccer what happens is that at either u12 or u13 (depending on the league) the number of players on the field will move up to 11 and the team size then will need to grow to somewhere in the range of 16-18. At the younger ages a team will have fewer players on the field and go with smaller team rosters so kids can get reasonable amounts of playing time. For example if the kids are playing 6v6 the team might have only 10 kids. If they are playing 8v8 that number might grow to 14. The problem comes if a club has say 2 u12 teams with 13 kids on each playing 8v8 games. When the kids move to u13 and start playing 11 v 11 they no longer have enough players to field 2 teams even assuming every player wants to keep playing. So, a club's choice is to (a) try and recruit additional players who are at that same skill level (or better), or (b) create the team(s) they can and cut kids -- never a fun thing to do.

With older age teams the situation is a bit different. Soccer like lots of youth sports is very stratified Players migrate to find a playing situation that works for their individual situation (cost, time, level of play, opportunities within a team (i.e. position availability), coach, club, friends, etc. . . For community clubs it can be a difficult proposition to field teams at older ages. If you have say 18 kids on a u13 roster and 5 are going to leave to play on "better" teams or do something else, unless you can find replacement players who are at least reasonably close in skill level to the remaining players that team is going to fold. At around u12 or u13 in particular you will see kids who are thinking about playing professionally or in college look at playing for the highest level teams/clubs.

Once kids hit high school ages it can be even more difficult for community clubs. Kids may quit playing club if they do not make their high school teams, or if they do make their teams and feel they do not need to keep playing to keep making the high school team. They may just decide they have other interests that have higher priority. So from about u15 and up you have very few kids who are playing just to have fun and clubs are always looking to add players who can play at their level. Kids will move from club to club to find playing situations that work for them (and their families - taking into account cost/time constraints). I would suggest that as a result of these and other factors imposing residency requirements for community clubs at those older ages may well mean that older age teams would fold.

MY gripe with ASA is that they allow travel players to take up a slot on the rec teams. If a kid wants to play travel, then they should give up their spot to allow another kid to learn the sport.

The kids (and parents) who choose travel for their kid (who gets an additional practice or two during the week with the travel coaches and skill building 'experts' AND then skip practice with the rec team) should not also be able to play rec. Should be either/or.

So, all this complaining is because of 2% of the program? Does 2% of the program really take up so many resources that the other 98% can't get a field? That does not make sense.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Arlington, Loudoun, PWSI, Bethesda, and a few others may recruit to a limited degree, but really the reason other players go there is because that is where a lot of the best coaches are. If you are paying for travel soccer and committing the time and resources to it, you want the best experience for your kid - and want them to learn the most they can. In the past 3-5 years Arlington and Loudoun have made a concerted effort to draw in better coaches so it should be no surprise that kids are being drawn there. This is where the difference is between that group and Vienna - they all want to look out for their local players, but there is no reason for playing in vienna aside from the concenience of you live there. They can say they are "community focused" all they want, but the fact is there is nothing there to attract anyone outside the community (or even many inside the community).

Define "many inside the community." This board tends to be dominated by people anonymously putting down anyone who's under the NCSL D2 level, but the fact is that's 95 percent of soccer players. VYS certainly has coaches capable of working at the NCSL D1 level and occasionally beyond, so really, they should be able to serve 98-99 percent of the kids in town.

We often talk on this board as if the top 2 percent are the only ones who matter. They're not. And many within that 2 percent think they HAVE to sacrifice everything to play soccer for the right coach or the right club or the right league, and that's not so.

Personally, I'd consider it a much greater accomplishment to make a good State Cup run with an underdog team than it is to play on a team of All-Stars all the time.

As for the fields - it is a wash. If you play in arlington yes you are on Arlington fields. If you join a team in Fairfax county, you are on Fairfax county fields, etc. Arlington is not the only place where tax dollars are used to build parks and fields. I would argue it's worse in McLean - where the club has drawn millions from the membership to build fields without county help - after years of long time McLean kids paying extra for fields your kid can come to tryouts, take their spot, and play on those fields.

Yep. McLean may have the two best coaches in the area in Clyde Watson and Ken Krieger, but the politics in that club make the House of Representatives look like a hippie commune.

What's sad is the whole thing has become a big business as opposed to having anything to do with the kids or the communities, and so many parents just buy into it. To go an out of town club to play travel soccer on the 3rd or 4th team in your age group is stupid.

Yep. Lots of snake oil being sold.

Anonymous wrote:Arlington, Loudoun, PWSI, Bethesda, and a few others may recruit to a limited degree, but really the reason other players go there is because that is where a lot of the best coaches are. If you are paying for travel soccer and committing the time and resources to it, you want the best experience for your kid - and want them to learn the most they can. In the past 3-5 years Arlington and Loudoun have made a concerted effort to draw in better coaches so it should be no surprise that kids are being drawn there. This is where the difference is between that group and Vienna - they all want to look out for their local players, but there is no reason for playing in vienna aside from the concenience of you live there. They can say they are "community focused" all they want, but the fact is there is nothing there to attract anyone outside the community (or even many inside the community).

Define "many inside the community." This board tends to be dominated by people anonymously putting down anyone who's under the NCSL D2 level, but the fact is that's 95 percent of soccer players. VYS certainly has coaches capable of working at the NCSL D1 level and occasionally beyond, so really, they should be able to serve 98-99 percent of the kids in town.

We often talk on this board as if the top 2 percent are the only ones who matter. They're not. And many within that 2 percent think they HAVE to sacrifice everything to play soccer for the right coach or the right club or the right league, and that's not so.

Personally, I'd consider it a much greater accomplishment to make a good State Cup run with an underdog team than it is to play on a team of All-Stars all the time.

As for the fields - it is a wash. If you play in arlington yes you are on Arlington fields. If you join a team in Fairfax county, you are on Fairfax county fields, etc. Arlington is not the only place where tax dollars are used to build parks and fields. I would argue it's worse in McLean - where the club has drawn millions from the membership to build fields without county help - after years of long time McLean kids paying extra for fields your kid can come to tryouts, take their spot, and play on those fields.

Yep. McLean may have the two best coaches in the area in Clyde Watson and Ken Krieger, but the politics in that club make the House of Representatives look like a hippie commune.

What's sad is the whole thing has become a big business as opposed to having anything to do with the kids or the communities, and so many parents just buy into it. To go an out of town club to play travel soccer on the 3rd or 4th team in your age group is stupid.

Yep. Lots of snake oil being sold.

Anonymous wrote:Arlington, Loudoun, PWSI, Bethesda, and a few others may recruit to a limited degree, but really the reason other players go there is because that is where a lot of the best coaches are. If you are paying for travel soccer and committing the time and resources to it, you want the best experience for your kid - and want them to learn the most they can. In the past 3-5 years Arlington and Loudoun have made a concerted effort to draw in better coaches so it should be no surprise that kids are being drawn there. This is where the difference is between that group and Vienna - they all want to look out for their local players, but there is no reason for playing in vienna aside from the concenience of you live there. They can say they are "community focused" all they want, but the fact is there is nothing there to attract anyone outside the community (or even many inside the community).

Arlington does work to train and retain their players and offering multiple teams in an age group is to try and give an opportunity for as many players to play at their appropriate level. I hear the same "zip code restriction" discussions come from other high income area clubs and it really is an ugly argument.

As for the fields - it is a wash. If you play in arlington yes you are on Arlington fields. If you join a team in Fairfax county, you are on Fairfax county fields, etc. Arlington is not the only place where tax dollars are used to build parks and fields. I would argue it's worse in McLean - where the club has drawn millions from the membership to build fields without county help - after years of long time McLean kids paying extra for fields your kid can come to tryouts, take their spot, and play on those fields.

I get that you are frustrated. But take some solace in the fact that you have immediate access to one of the three best run nova clubs with great facilities, great coaches, and all competition levels.

What's sad is the whole thing has become a big business as opposed to having anything to do with the kids or the communities, and so many parents just buy into it. To go an out of town club to play travel soccer on the 3rd or 4th team in your age group is stupid.

Arlington, Loudoun, PWSI, Bethesda, and a few others may recruit to a limited degree, but really the reason other players go there is because that is where a lot of the best coaches are. If you are paying for travel soccer and committing the time and resources to it, you want the best experience for your kid - and want them to learn the most they can. In the past 3-5 years Arlington and Loudoun have made a concerted effort to draw in better coaches so it should be no surprise that kids are being drawn there. This is where the difference is between that group and Vienna - they all want to look out for their local players, but there is no reason for playing in vienna aside from the concenience of you live there. They can say they are "community focused" all they want, but the fact is there is nothing there to attract anyone outside the community (or even many inside the community).

Arlington does work to train and retain their players and offering multiple teams in an age group is to try and give an opportunity for as many players to play at their appropriate level. I hear the same "zip code restriction" discussions come from other high income area clubs and it really is an ugly argument.

As for the fields - it is a wash. If you play in arlington yes you are on Arlington fields. If you join a team in Fairfax county, you are on Fairfax county fields, etc. Arlington is not the only place where tax dollars are used to build parks and fields. I would argue it's worse in McLean - where the club has drawn millions from the membership to build fields without county help - after years of long time McLean kids paying extra for fields your kid can come to tryouts, take their spot, and play on those fields.

I get that you are frustrated. But take some solace in the fact that you have immediate access to one of the three best run nova clubs with great facilities, great coaches, and all competition levels.

I don't care if the kids come from the town that matches their jerseys.

I do care that my tax dollars built these beautiful multiuse fields and sports besides soccer can't get practice times.

I do care that rec can't get decent practice times.

Arlington doesn't need 4 teams in an age group or imported teams. Arlington can have a good quality program without going to this extreme.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
To some extent, that's true. But when you take it to extreme, you breed quitters. "I left Club X because the coach made me work hard" is the precursor to "I quit a good job because my boss made me work hard."

I'm not the poster you were replying to immediately above, but wanted to respond to this point. I've never heard of a situation in which someone left Club X and switched to a new club because a coach made him work too hard. In that case, they just quit travel soccer. Most of the reasons kids commonly switch clubs are ones that I'd think most of us would respect in the job context: Kid is not being challenged and has ambitions beyond what the current team or club can help with; coach doesn't recognize kid's abilities and is promoting less talented people over him; or kid prefers a different soccer community or style of play.

If a child has little talent, and is club-hopping because he has parents who are delusional about his abilities, that's one thing, but I don't think that's very common at the older age groups.

I am the poster that they responded to and I agree. These kids work way harder than you can imagine and love every minute of it. The Arlington team we play against is the best team in the area, it is beyond good. I can't believe that is a problem.

Again, it's not saying Arlington players don't work hard. It's really not even about Arlington. It's about the culture of club-swapping and having teams that aren't representative of the municipality on their shirts (or, in the case of the OP's point, the municipality that built all the fields).

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
To some extent, that's true. But when you take it to extreme, you breed quitters. "I left Club X because the coach made me work hard" is the precursor to "I quit a good job because my boss made me work hard."

I'm not the poster you were replying to immediately above, but wanted to respond to this point. I've never heard of a situation in which someone left Club X and switched to a new club because a coach made him work too hard. In that case, they just quit travel soccer. Most of the reasons kids commonly switch clubs are ones that I'd think most of us would respect in the job context: Kid is not being challenged and has ambitions beyond what the current team or club can help with; coach doesn't recognize kid's abilities and is promoting less talented people over him; or kid prefers a different soccer community or style of play.

If a child has little talent, and is club-hopping because he has parents who are delusional about his abilities, that's one thing, but I don't think that's very common at the older age groups.

I am the poster that they responded to and I agree. These kids work way harder than you can imagine and love every minute of it. The Arlington team we play against is the best team in the area, it is beyond good. I can't believe that is a problem.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
To some extent, that's true. But when you take it to extreme, you breed quitters. "I left Club X because the coach made me work hard" is the precursor to "I quit a good job because my boss made me work hard."

I'm not the poster you were replying to immediately above, but wanted to respond to this point. I've never heard of a situation in which someone left Club X and switched to a new club because a coach made him work too hard. In that case, they just quit travel soccer. Most of the reasons kids commonly switch clubs are ones that I'd think most of us would respect in the job context: Kid is not being challenged and has ambitions beyond what the current team or club can help with; coach doesn't recognize kid's abilities and is promoting less talented people over him; or kid prefers a different soccer community or style of play.

If a child has little talent, and is club-hopping because he has parents who are delusional about his abilities, that's one thing, but I don't think that's very common at the older age groups.

Fine -- then substitute "the coach made me play left back" or "the coach wouldn't let me skip practice so I could go to lacrosse practice." (Seriously, that's an issue some places.) Or "the coach doesn't recognize that I'm the next Landon Donovan."

Back to Arlington: The funny thing is that it's already drawing from a large population. I've seen people on this board say Vienna (population 16,370) is underachieving. Population of Arlington: 224,906. Surely they can find 18 kids per age group that can hold their own in CCL, NCSL or WAGS.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sure, and this thread has really evolved to where it's about more than just Arlington. It's all the CCL clubs (Arlington, Braddock Road, Annandale, Stoddert, McLean, SYA, Loudoun, Potomac, a couple more) and a few others.

And part of the issue is that CCL is built on a basic lie. They say it's about building from within rather than recruiting. That's obviously NOT true.

And part of it is the question I've put in bold. Unless, you're a really exceptional player, why is that the first priority? Why not just play for your local club and see how it does? And if you're a college or pro prospect, maybe supplement with ODP or a Super-Y team in the summer?

Accepting players from other clubs is not limited to CCL clubs. Every club will accept a player that’s good enough for their top team. For example, earlier in this thread, VYS was held up as a community-first team but VYS policy is that if a player is good enough for the A team then the player gets an offer, even if that means a long-time VYS player gets pushed down to a lower team or even house.

As for recruiting, some clubs recruit more than others and how successful they are depends on what they have to sell. Many clubs don’t have much to offer. And some clubs are shameless about recruiting individual players and whole teams (cough*Annandale and FC Virginia*cough).

As for why players move, most of the time it’s not because the player was recruited. Often players move because they want more competition, better training or their parents’ ego needed a boost, and they don’t need someone whispering in their ear to make that decision. As for where top players try out, it’s pretty clear which clubs in the DC area have the highest aspirations and all of those clubs are either in ECNL/Development Academy, CCL or the new VPL. So top teams don’t have to actively recruit because top players want to play for the best teams. In my experience, it’s often the next tier of teams and clubs that recruit because otherwise no one would not consider them as an option.

Are CCL and VPL really a draw (and is VPL actually up and running yet)? I know that clubs trumpet the fact that they belong to CCL, but I'm guessing that families haven't flocked to Potomac and FC Frederick (for example) so they can say their kids play CCL. I'm guessing most probably don't even know there is a difference between CCL and NCSL/WAGS.