Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Arlington should be applying for boys ecnl

That would be a smart move, but I am not sure Arlington would do it.

Boys ECNL is afterthought for girl ECNL. It does not even match up with NPL, or EDP.
The top clubs would never considerate Boys ECNL. Even Alexandria does not want to join Boys ECNL.
Only lower level or smaller clubs (or whoever kicked out from Boys DA) join boys ECNL. .. such as...

It is silly to argue that ECNL won't be challenging enough for Arlington's top teams. Braddock Road ECNL boys, for example, beat Arlington Academy 7-1 in the OBGC cup. Also, Arlington only has boys DA in U13 through U15 and after U15 the boys end up without strong league competition.

Uninformed post. The teams you're talking about are 03s - u17s. Do you know how many of that Arlington 03 team were on Arlington's DA team when they were U15? Zero.

Arlington's boys DA teams are very competitive with other DAs. None of them would even waste their time scrimmaging a BRYC team in their own age group.

But isn't that the point? You can't build a strong club around only 3 age groups. If the best players leave the club after U15, it is not a good thing. The majority of Arlington 03 DA team are on ECNL teams now. Arlington's top U16 team, which was in DA last year, also lost to an ECNL team in the same tournament. Of course, having a DA is great for marketing and recruitment, but when you have DA for only 3 years, and then the best players leave for other clubs, you have to wonder if the short-term fix is worth it.

The fix is easy. Expand the age groups for Arlington.

This assumes there is a problem. The DA isn’t there for clubs. It’s not there for parents. It’s there for elite talent. There is not more elite talent now than there was before, so expansion of the number of spots seems unnecessary. They are shifting DCU’s location, not reducing the number of DA spots. The point of the feeder DA clubs in this area is to funnel elite talent to DCU. Non-DCU talent that is really elite does not have to play at Arlington to get a scholarship, and none at that age are pro prospects if they are not already DCU or overseas. Move on and get over it. The real fix - if one were really necessary — is to create DAs outside a single youth club affiliation. And USSF certainly should not invest more in DA at a club that does not develop young talent as well as it should.

Actually, I think what you are saying is irrelevant to the other post. The other post is saying that if those DA teams that Arlington has are competitive, then Arlington is doing a good job and should be given more age groups. They shouldn't be limited to force them to DCU. I've heard a lot of complaints about DCU, so what if they aren't doing it right? Are they entitled to players as a default?

I don't think anybody is entitled to anything. But that is the way the boys DA system is currently structured. And frankly, what the other posts is saying about Arlington itself sounds awfully entitled to me. Doing a good job? Where were those players originally developed? Most of them are imports. How many go to DCU from Arlington after Arlington DA develops them further? Some facts here would be useful if they actually support the Arlington as developmental club hypothesis. Anybody watching youth soccer on the boys side knows this is a ludicrous proposition in the pre-DA age groups.

I think we have to look at the DA teams in isolation, as some players may come to Arlington for the DA. When players reach a certain age, the better players move to higher level leagues. That part isn't wrong. I'm just saying that the concept of never allowing them to expand in order "funnel" players into DCU is poorly conceived and may be against the player's best interests.

I agree. Ultimately, I don't think there should be anything for boys DA in this area other than DCU, Bethesda and Baltimore Armour, with legitimate, annual tryouts where deserving kids with absolutely elite talent have a shot at a roster every year. There is absolutely no reason for more DA rostering given the state of boys talent and development in the area. Clubs can do whatever clubs may do. If you want cohesion, consistency, and YOY development, then why not focus more on strengthening clubs than diluting them through spotty DAs? And in that world, if Arlington is so wonderful, people will go there without DA designation. But others can choose to remain at other places whose coaches, development philosophy, location, and leagues may be more attractive.

+1

^ You mean well and I thought you were going somewhere but -for the love of god- you do not get it. Competitive teams at the younger ages with the LARGEST player pool by far of any other Club in the DMV. It's all physicality based. It's NOT development which is the point of youth DA. They still will take kids developed elsewhere in the older age groups. This is by no means an argument for keeping them.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Arlington should be applying for boys ecnl

That would be a smart move, but I am not sure Arlington would do it.

Boys ECNL is afterthought for girl ECNL. It does not even match up with NPL, or EDP.
The top clubs would never considerate Boys ECNL. Even Alexandria does not want to join Boys ECNL.
Only lower level or smaller clubs (or whoever kicked out from Boys DA) join boys ECNL. .. such as...

It is silly to argue that ECNL won't be challenging enough for Arlington's top teams. Braddock Road ECNL boys, for example, beat Arlington Academy 7-1 in the OBGC cup. Also, Arlington only has boys DA in U13 through U15 and after U15 the boys end up without strong league competition.

Uninformed post. The teams you're talking about are 03s - u17s. Do you know how many of that Arlington 03 team were on Arlington's DA team when they were U15? Zero.

Arlington's boys DA teams are very competitive with other DAs. None of them would even waste their time scrimmaging a BRYC team in their own age group.

But isn't that the point? You can't build a strong club around only 3 age groups. If the best players leave the club after U15, it is not a good thing. The majority of Arlington 03 DA team are on ECNL teams now. Arlington's top U16 team, which was in DA last year, also lost to an ECNL team in the same tournament. Of course, having a DA is great for marketing and recruitment, but when you have DA for only 3 years, and then the best players leave for other clubs, you have to wonder if the short-term fix is worth it.

The fix is easy. Expand the age groups for Arlington.

This assumes there is a problem. The DA isn’t there for clubs. It’s not there for parents. It’s there for elite talent. There is not more elite talent now than there was before, so expansion of the number of spots seems unnecessary. They are shifting DCU’s location, not reducing the number of DA spots. The point of the feeder DA clubs in this area is to funnel elite talent to DCU. Non-DCU talent that is really elite does not have to play at Arlington to get a scholarship, and none at that age are pro prospects if they are not already DCU or overseas. Move on and get over it. The real fix - if one were really necessary — is to create DAs outside a single youth club affiliation. And USSF certainly should not invest more in DA at a club that does not develop young talent as well as it should.

Actually, I think what you are saying is irrelevant to the other post. The other post is saying that if those DA teams that Arlington has are competitive, then Arlington is doing a good job and should be given more age groups. They shouldn't be limited to force them to DCU. I've heard a lot of complaints about DCU, so what if they aren't doing it right? Are they entitled to players as a default?

I don't think anybody is entitled to anything. But that is the way the boys DA system is currently structured. And frankly, what the other posts is saying about Arlington itself sounds awfully entitled to me. Doing a good job? Where were those players originally developed? Most of them are imports. How many go to DCU from Arlington after Arlington DA develops them further? Some facts here would be useful if they actually support the Arlington as developmental club hypothesis. Anybody watching youth soccer on the boys side knows this is a ludicrous proposition in the pre-DA age groups.

I think we have to look at the DA teams in isolation, as some players may come to Arlington for the DA. When players reach a certain age, the better players move to higher level leagues. That part isn't wrong. I'm just saying that the concept of never allowing them to expand in order "funnel" players into DCU is poorly conceived and may be against the player's best interests.

I agree. Ultimately, I don't think there should be anything for boys DA in this area other than DCU, Bethesda and Baltimore Armour, with legitimate, annual tryouts where deserving kids with absolutely elite talent have a shot at a roster every year. There is absolutely no reason for more DA rostering given the state of boys talent and development in the area. Clubs can do whatever clubs may do. If you want cohesion, consistency, and YOY development, then why not focus more on strengthening clubs than diluting them through spotty DAs? And in that world, if Arlington is so wonderful, people will go there without DA designation. But others can choose to remain at other places whose coaches, development philosophy, location, and leagues may be more attractive.

We agree on a lot, except some details. DCU is not a good DA. It survives because it is an MLS Academy. I think it would send an interesting message by revoking their DA. Force them to partner with another non-MLS Academy. uS Soccer has done that in the past.

And if Arlington has competitive teams at the younger ages, then that is an argument in favor of keeping them. In fact, maybe they should be the club DCU is forced to partner with and treat Arlington's DAs as partner teams.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Arlington should be applying for boys ecnl

That would be a smart move, but I am not sure Arlington would do it.

Boys ECNL is afterthought for girl ECNL. It does not even match up with NPL, or EDP.
The top clubs would never considerate Boys ECNL. Even Alexandria does not want to join Boys ECNL.
Only lower level or smaller clubs (or whoever kicked out from Boys DA) join boys ECNL. .. such as...

It is silly to argue that ECNL won't be challenging enough for Arlington's top teams. Braddock Road ECNL boys, for example, beat Arlington Academy 7-1 in the OBGC cup. Also, Arlington only has boys DA in U13 through U15 and after U15 the boys end up without strong league competition.

Uninformed post. The teams you're talking about are 03s - u17s. Do you know how many of that Arlington 03 team were on Arlington's DA team when they were U15? Zero.

Arlington's boys DA teams are very competitive with other DAs. None of them would even waste their time scrimmaging a BRYC team in their own age group.

But isn't that the point? You can't build a strong club around only 3 age groups. If the best players leave the club after U15, it is not a good thing. The majority of Arlington 03 DA team are on ECNL teams now. Arlington's top U16 team, which was in DA last year, also lost to an ECNL team in the same tournament. Of course, having a DA is great for marketing and recruitment, but when you have DA for only 3 years, and then the best players leave for other clubs, you have to wonder if the short-term fix is worth it.

The fix is easy. Expand the age groups for Arlington.

This assumes there is a problem. The DA isn’t there for clubs. It’s not there for parents. It’s there for elite talent. There is not more elite talent now than there was before, so expansion of the number of spots seems unnecessary. They are shifting DCU’s location, not reducing the number of DA spots. The point of the feeder DA clubs in this area is to funnel elite talent to DCU. Non-DCU talent that is really elite does not have to play at Arlington to get a scholarship, and none at that age are pro prospects if they are not already DCU or overseas. Move on and get over it. The real fix - if one were really necessary — is to create DAs outside a single youth club affiliation. And USSF certainly should not invest more in DA at a club that does not develop young talent as well as it should.

Actually, I think what you are saying is irrelevant to the other post. The other post is saying that if those DA teams that Arlington has are competitive, then Arlington is doing a good job and should be given more age groups. They shouldn't be limited to force them to DCU. I've heard a lot of complaints about DCU, so what if they aren't doing it right? Are they entitled to players as a default?

I don't think anybody is entitled to anything. But that is the way the boys DA system is currently structured. And frankly, what the other posts is saying about Arlington itself sounds awfully entitled to me. Doing a good job? Where were those players originally developed? Most of them are imports. How many go to DCU from Arlington after Arlington DA develops them further? Some facts here would be useful if they actually support the Arlington as developmental club hypothesis. Anybody watching youth soccer on the boys side knows this is a ludicrous proposition in the pre-DA age groups.

I think we have to look at the DA teams in isolation, as some players may come to Arlington for the DA. When players reach a certain age, the better players move to higher level leagues. That part isn't wrong. I'm just saying that the concept of never allowing them to expand in order "funnel" players into DCU is poorly conceived and may be against the player's best interests.

I agree. Ultimately, I don't think there should be anything for boys DA in this area other than DCU, Bethesda and Baltimore Armour, with legitimate, annual tryouts where deserving kids with absolutely elite talent have a shot at a roster every year. There is absolutely no reason for more DA rostering given the state of boys talent and development in the area. Clubs can do whatever clubs may do. If you want cohesion, consistency, and YOY development, then why not focus more on strengthening clubs than diluting them through spotty DAs? And in that world, if Arlington is so wonderful, people will go there without DA designation. But others can choose to remain at other places whose coaches, development philosophy, location, and leagues may be more attractive.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Arlington should be applying for boys ecnl

That would be a smart move, but I am not sure Arlington would do it.

Boys ECNL is afterthought for girl ECNL. It does not even match up with NPL, or EDP.
The top clubs would never considerate Boys ECNL. Even Alexandria does not want to join Boys ECNL.
Only lower level or smaller clubs (or whoever kicked out from Boys DA) join boys ECNL. .. such as...

It is silly to argue that ECNL won't be challenging enough for Arlington's top teams. Braddock Road ECNL boys, for example, beat Arlington Academy 7-1 in the OBGC cup. Also, Arlington only has boys DA in U13 through U15 and after U15 the boys end up without strong league competition.

Uninformed post. The teams you're talking about are 03s - u17s. Do you know how many of that Arlington 03 team were on Arlington's DA team when they were U15? Zero.

Arlington's boys DA teams are very competitive with other DAs. None of them would even waste their time scrimmaging a BRYC team in their own age group.

But isn't that the point? You can't build a strong club around only 3 age groups. If the best players leave the club after U15, it is not a good thing. The majority of Arlington 03 DA team are on ECNL teams now. Arlington's top U16 team, which was in DA last year, also lost to an ECNL team in the same tournament. Of course, having a DA is great for marketing and recruitment, but when you have DA for only 3 years, and then the best players leave for other clubs, you have to wonder if the short-term fix is worth it.

The fix is easy. Expand the age groups for Arlington.

This assumes there is a problem. The DA isn’t there for clubs. It’s not there for parents. It’s there for elite talent. There is not more elite talent now than there was before, so expansion of the number of spots seems unnecessary. They are shifting DCU’s location, not reducing the number of DA spots. The point of the feeder DA clubs in this area is to funnel elite talent to DCU. Non-DCU talent that is really elite does not have to play at Arlington to get a scholarship, and none at that age are pro prospects if they are not already DCU or overseas. Move on and get over it. The real fix - if one were really necessary — is to create DAs outside a single youth club affiliation. And USSF certainly should not invest more in DA at a club that does not develop young talent as well as it should.

Actually, I think what you are saying is irrelevant to the other post. The other post is saying that if those DA teams that Arlington has are competitive, then Arlington is doing a good job and should be given more age groups. They shouldn't be limited to force them to DCU. I've heard a lot of complaints about DCU, so what if they aren't doing it right? Are they entitled to players as a default?

I don't think anybody is entitled to anything. But that is the way the boys DA system is currently structured. And frankly, what the other posts is saying about Arlington itself sounds awfully entitled to me. Doing a good job? Where were those players originally developed? Most of them are imports. How many go to DCU from Arlington after Arlington DA develops them further? Some facts here would be useful if they actually support the Arlington as developmental club hypothesis. Anybody watching youth soccer on the boys side knows this is a ludicrous proposition in the pre-DA age groups.

I think we have to look at the DA teams in isolation, as some players may come to Arlington for the DA. When players reach a certain age, the better players move to higher level leagues. That part isn't wrong. I'm just saying that the concept of never allowing them to expand in order "funnel" players into DCU is poorly conceived and may be against the player's best interests.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Arlington should be applying for boys ecnl

That would be a smart move, but I am not sure Arlington would do it.

Boys ECNL is afterthought for girl ECNL. It does not even match up with NPL, or EDP.
The top clubs would never considerate Boys ECNL. Even Alexandria does not want to join Boys ECNL.
Only lower level or smaller clubs (or whoever kicked out from Boys DA) join boys ECNL. .. such as...

It is silly to argue that ECNL won't be challenging enough for Arlington's top teams. Braddock Road ECNL boys, for example, beat Arlington Academy 7-1 in the OBGC cup. Also, Arlington only has boys DA in U13 through U15 and after U15 the boys end up without strong league competition.

Uninformed post. The teams you're talking about are 03s - u17s. Do you know how many of that Arlington 03 team were on Arlington's DA team when they were U15? Zero.

Arlington's boys DA teams are very competitive with other DAs. None of them would even waste their time scrimmaging a BRYC team in their own age group.

But isn't that the point? You can't build a strong club around only 3 age groups. If the best players leave the club after U15, it is not a good thing. The majority of Arlington 03 DA team are on ECNL teams now. Arlington's top U16 team, which was in DA last year, also lost to an ECNL team in the same tournament. Of course, having a DA is great for marketing and recruitment, but when you have DA for only 3 years, and then the best players leave for other clubs, you have to wonder if the short-term fix is worth it.

The fix is easy. Expand the age groups for Arlington.

This assumes there is a problem. The DA isn’t there for clubs. It’s not there for parents. It’s there for elite talent. There is not more elite talent now than there was before, so expansion of the number of spots seems unnecessary. They are shifting DCU’s location, not reducing the number of DA spots. The point of the feeder DA clubs in this area is to funnel elite talent to DCU. Non-DCU talent that is really elite does not have to play at Arlington to get a scholarship, and none at that age are pro prospects if they are not already DCU or overseas. Move on and get over it. The real fix - if one were really necessary — is to create DAs outside a single youth club affiliation. And USSF certainly should not invest more in DA at a club that does not develop young talent as well as it should.

Actually, I think what you are saying is irrelevant to the other post. The other post is saying that if those DA teams that Arlington has are competitive, then Arlington is doing a good job and should be given more age groups. They shouldn't be limited to force them to DCU. I've heard a lot of complaints about DCU, so what if they aren't doing it right? Are they entitled to players as a default?

I don't think anybody is entitled to anything. But that is the way the boys DA system is currently structured. And frankly, what the other posts is saying about Arlington itself sounds awfully entitled to me. Doing a good job? Where were those players originally developed? Most of them are imports. How many go to DCU from Arlington after Arlington DA develops them further? Some facts here would be useful if they actually support the Arlington as developmental club hypothesis. Anybody watching youth soccer on the boys side knows this is a ludicrous proposition in the pre-DA age groups.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Arlington should be applying for boys ecnl

That would be a smart move, but I am not sure Arlington would do it.

Boys ECNL is afterthought for girl ECNL. It does not even match up with NPL, or EDP.
The top clubs would never considerate Boys ECNL. Even Alexandria does not want to join Boys ECNL.
Only lower level or smaller clubs (or whoever kicked out from Boys DA) join boys ECNL. .. such as...

It is silly to argue that ECNL won't be challenging enough for Arlington's top teams. Braddock Road ECNL boys, for example, beat Arlington Academy 7-1 in the OBGC cup. Also, Arlington only has boys DA in U13 through U15 and after U15 the boys end up without strong league competition.

Uninformed post. The teams you're talking about are 03s - u17s. Do you know how many of that Arlington 03 team were on Arlington's DA team when they were U15? Zero.

Arlington's boys DA teams are very competitive with other DAs. None of them would even waste their time scrimmaging a BRYC team in their own age group.

But isn't that the point? You can't build a strong club around only 3 age groups. If the best players leave the club after U15, it is not a good thing. The majority of Arlington 03 DA team are on ECNL teams now. Arlington's top U16 team, which was in DA last year, also lost to an ECNL team in the same tournament. Of course, having a DA is great for marketing and recruitment, but when you have DA for only 3 years, and then the best players leave for other clubs, you have to wonder if the short-term fix is worth it.

The fix is easy. Expand the age groups for Arlington.

This assumes there is a problem. The DA isn’t there for clubs. It’s not there for parents. It’s there for elite talent. There is not more elite talent now than there was before, so expansion of the number of spots seems unnecessary. They are shifting DCU’s location, not reducing the number of DA spots. The point of the feeder DA clubs in this area is to funnel elite talent to DCU. Non-DCU talent that is really elite does not have to play at Arlington to get a scholarship, and none at that age are pro prospects if they are not already DCU or overseas. Move on and get over it. The real fix - if one were really necessary — is to create DAs outside a single youth club affiliation. And USSF certainly should not invest more in DA at a club that does not develop young talent as well as it should.

Actually, I think what you are saying is irrelevant to the other post. The other post is saying that if those DA teams that Arlington has are competitive, then Arlington is doing a good job and should be given more age groups. They shouldn't be limited to force them to DCU. I've heard a lot of complaints about DCU, so what if they aren't doing it right? Are they entitled to players as a default?

The problem for soccer here is clubs don't want to be "feeders". There is no reward for that. Overseas, it functions differently. Clubs know they are feeders and that their best players will and should move on to higher levels.

^ it starts by having consistent, continued coaching education, a philosophy/developmental plan among the different stages/ages and looking in terms of long-term of development of the individual, actually investment in the players. Not looking at 9/10 year old solely in ways to maximize team winning over development. Training sessions planned each week. Club working on same thing each session in each age group, even if tiered by ability in each age group. Team Movement not every 12 months, bout based on development which is not linear. It’s a model very hard to follow at a traditional travel club which is why USSF began pulling Club, non-MLS affiliated clubs out of the umbrella. The infrastructure cannot support the system. But, I don’t know what the answer is. I sometimes think we are better without DA and let American kids come from a variety of different places and consolidate leagues (there are way too many) with pro/rel by age 13. The DA system clearly isn’t working.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Arlington should be applying for boys ecnl

That would be a smart move, but I am not sure Arlington would do it.

Boys ECNL is afterthought for girl ECNL. It does not even match up with NPL, or EDP.
The top clubs would never considerate Boys ECNL. Even Alexandria does not want to join Boys ECNL.
Only lower level or smaller clubs (or whoever kicked out from Boys DA) join boys ECNL. .. such as...

It is silly to argue that ECNL won't be challenging enough for Arlington's top teams. Braddock Road ECNL boys, for example, beat Arlington Academy 7-1 in the OBGC cup. Also, Arlington only has boys DA in U13 through U15 and after U15 the boys end up without strong league competition.

Uninformed post. The teams you're talking about are 03s - u17s. Do you know how many of that Arlington 03 team were on Arlington's DA team when they were U15? Zero.

Arlington's boys DA teams are very competitive with other DAs. None of them would even waste their time scrimmaging a BRYC team in their own age group.

But isn't that the point? You can't build a strong club around only 3 age groups. If the best players leave the club after U15, it is not a good thing. The majority of Arlington 03 DA team are on ECNL teams now. Arlington's top U16 team, which was in DA last year, also lost to an ECNL team in the same tournament. Of course, having a DA is great for marketing and recruitment, but when you have DA for only 3 years, and then the best players leave for other clubs, you have to wonder if the short-term fix is worth it.

The fix is easy. Expand the age groups for Arlington.

This assumes there is a problem. The DA isn’t there for clubs. It’s not there for parents. It’s there for elite talent. There is not more elite talent now than there was before, so expansion of the number of spots seems unnecessary. They are shifting DCU’s location, not reducing the number of DA spots. The point of the feeder DA clubs in this area is to funnel elite talent to DCU. Non-DCU talent that is really elite does not have to play at Arlington to get a scholarship, and none at that age are pro prospects if they are not already DCU or overseas. Move on and get over it. The real fix - if one were really necessary — is to create DAs outside a single youth club affiliation. And USSF certainly should not invest more in DA at a club that does not develop young talent as well as it should.

This. This is a big reason they were taking it away from Clubs that run teams (have a large number of non-DA teams) independently of DA. The Clubs aren't developing bottom to top consistently or with any thought. Win, toss, repeat--is not developing individuals to be successful by 18/19. They are getting kids in as teens--but they are coming from many different places and have not been raised through a true academy system.

What is a true academy system

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Arlington should be applying for boys ecnl

That would be a smart move, but I am not sure Arlington would do it.

Boys ECNL is afterthought for girl ECNL. It does not even match up with NPL, or EDP.
The top clubs would never considerate Boys ECNL. Even Alexandria does not want to join Boys ECNL.
Only lower level or smaller clubs (or whoever kicked out from Boys DA) join boys ECNL. .. such as...

It is silly to argue that ECNL won't be challenging enough for Arlington's top teams. Braddock Road ECNL boys, for example, beat Arlington Academy 7-1 in the OBGC cup. Also, Arlington only has boys DA in U13 through U15 and after U15 the boys end up without strong league competition.

Uninformed post. The teams you're talking about are 03s - u17s. Do you know how many of that Arlington 03 team were on Arlington's DA team when they were U15? Zero.

Arlington's boys DA teams are very competitive with other DAs. None of them would even waste their time scrimmaging a BRYC team in their own age group.

But isn't that the point? You can't build a strong club around only 3 age groups. If the best players leave the club after U15, it is not a good thing. The majority of Arlington 03 DA team are on ECNL teams now. Arlington's top U16 team, which was in DA last year, also lost to an ECNL team in the same tournament. Of course, having a DA is great for marketing and recruitment, but when you have DA for only 3 years, and then the best players leave for other clubs, you have to wonder if the short-term fix is worth it.

The fix is easy. Expand the age groups for Arlington.

This assumes there is a problem. The DA isn’t there for clubs. It’s not there for parents. It’s there for elite talent. There is not more elite talent now than there was before, so expansion of the number of spots seems unnecessary. They are shifting DCU’s location, not reducing the number of DA spots. The point of the feeder DA clubs in this area is to funnel elite talent to DCU. Non-DCU talent that is really elite does not have to play at Arlington to get a scholarship, and none at that age are pro prospects if they are not already DCU or overseas. Move on and get over it. The real fix - if one were really necessary — is to create DAs outside a single youth club affiliation. And USSF certainly should not invest more in DA at a club that does not develop young talent as well as it should.

This. This is a big reason they were taking it away from Clubs that run teams (have a large number of non-DA teams) independently of DA. The Clubs aren't developing bottom to top consistently or with any thought. Win, toss, repeat--is not developing individuals to be successful by 18/19. They are getting kids in as teens--but they are coming from many different places and have not been raised through a true academy system.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Arlington should be applying for boys ecnl

That would be a smart move, but I am not sure Arlington would do it.

Boys ECNL is afterthought for girl ECNL. It does not even match up with NPL, or EDP.
The top clubs would never considerate Boys ECNL. Even Alexandria does not want to join Boys ECNL.
Only lower level or smaller clubs (or whoever kicked out from Boys DA) join boys ECNL. .. such as...

It is silly to argue that ECNL won't be challenging enough for Arlington's top teams. Braddock Road ECNL boys, for example, beat Arlington Academy 7-1 in the OBGC cup. Also, Arlington only has boys DA in U13 through U15 and after U15 the boys end up without strong league competition.

Uninformed post. The teams you're talking about are 03s - u17s. Do you know how many of that Arlington 03 team were on Arlington's DA team when they were U15? Zero.

Arlington's boys DA teams are very competitive with other DAs. None of them would even waste their time scrimmaging a BRYC team in their own age group.

But isn't that the point? You can't build a strong club around only 3 age groups. If the best players leave the club after U15, it is not a good thing. The majority of Arlington 03 DA team are on ECNL teams now. Arlington's top U16 team, which was in DA last year, also lost to an ECNL team in the same tournament. Of course, having a DA is great for marketing and recruitment, but when you have DA for only 3 years, and then the best players leave for other clubs, you have to wonder if the short-term fix is worth it.

The fix is easy. Expand the age groups for Arlington.

This assumes there is a problem. The DA isn’t there for clubs. It’s not there for parents. It’s there for elite talent. There is not more elite talent now than there was before, so expansion of the number of spots seems unnecessary. They are shifting DCU’s location, not reducing the number of DA spots. The point of the feeder DA clubs in this area is to funnel elite talent to DCU. Non-DCU talent that is really elite does not have to play at Arlington to get a scholarship, and none at that age are pro prospects if they are not already DCU or overseas. Move on and get over it. The real fix - if one were really necessary — is to create DAs outside a single youth club affiliation. And USSF certainly should not invest more in DA at a club that does not develop young talent as well as it should.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Arlington should be applying for boys ecnl

That would be a smart move, but I am not sure Arlington would do it.

Boys ECNL is afterthought for girl ECNL. It does not even match up with NPL, or EDP.
The top clubs would never considerate Boys ECNL. Even Alexandria does not want to join Boys ECNL.
Only lower level or smaller clubs (or whoever kicked out from Boys DA) join boys ECNL. .. such as...

It is silly to argue that ECNL won't be challenging enough for Arlington's top teams. Braddock Road ECNL boys, for example, beat Arlington Academy 7-1 in the OBGC cup. Also, Arlington only has boys DA in U13 through U15 and after U15 the boys end up without strong league competition.

Uninformed post. The teams you're talking about are 03s - u17s. Do you know how many of that Arlington 03 team were on Arlington's DA team when they were U15? Zero.

Arlington's boys DA teams are very competitive with other DAs. None of them would even waste their time scrimmaging a BRYC team in their own age group.

But isn't that the point? You can't build a strong club around only 3 age groups. If the best players leave the club after U15, it is not a good thing. The majority of Arlington 03 DA team are on ECNL teams now. Arlington's top U16 team, which was in DA last year, also lost to an ECNL team in the same tournament. Of course, having a DA is great for marketing and recruitment, but when you have DA for only 3 years, and then the best players leave for other clubs, you have to wonder if the short-term fix is worth it.

The fix is easy. Expand the age groups for Arlington.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Arlington should be applying for boys ecnl

That would be a smart move, but I am not sure Arlington would do it.

Boys ECNL is afterthought for girl ECNL. It does not even match up with NPL, or EDP.
The top clubs would never considerate Boys ECNL. Even Alexandria does not want to join Boys ECNL.
Only lower level or smaller clubs (or whoever kicked out from Boys DA) join boys ECNL. .. such as...

It is silly to argue that ECNL won't be challenging enough for Arlington's top teams. Braddock Road ECNL boys, for example, beat Arlington Academy 7-1 in the OBGC cup. Also, Arlington only has boys DA in U13 through U15 and after U15 the boys end up without strong league competition.

Uninformed post. The teams you're talking about are 03s - u17s. Do you know how many of that Arlington 03 team were on Arlington's DA team when they were U15? Zero.

Arlington's boys DA teams are very competitive with other DAs. None of them would even waste their time scrimmaging a BRYC team in their own age group.

But isn't that the point? You can't build a strong club around only 3 age groups. If the best players leave the club after U15, it is not a good thing. The majority of Arlington 03 DA team are on ECNL teams now. Arlington's top U16 team, which was in DA last year, also lost to an ECNL team in the same tournament. Of course, having a DA is great for marketing and recruitment, but when you have DA for only 3 years, and then the best players leave for other clubs, you have to wonder if the short-term fix is worth it.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Arlington should be applying for boys ecnl

That would be a smart move, but I am not sure Arlington would do it.

Boys ECNL is afterthought for girl ECNL. It does not even match up with NPL, or EDP.
The top clubs would never considerate Boys ECNL. Even Alexandria does not want to join Boys ECNL.
Only lower level or smaller clubs (or whoever kicked out from Boys DA) join boys ECNL. .. such as...

It is silly to argue that ECNL won't be challenging enough for Arlington's top teams. Braddock Road ECNL boys, for example, beat Arlington Academy 7-1 in the OBGC cup. Also, Arlington only has boys DA in U13 through U15 and after U15 the boys end up without strong league competition.

Uninformed post. The teams you're talking about are 03s - u17s. Do you know how many of that Arlington 03 team were on Arlington's DA team when they were U15? Zero.

Arlington's boys DA teams are very competitive with other DAs. None of them would even waste their time scrimmaging a BRYC team in their own age group.

Yeah, I'm sure the kids who wanted to play DA left when they aged out. They would have stayed if there had been an option.