Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Hopefully, you emailed the club the names of those 5 Red team girls that could not string together passes against 2 white teams players and they were not elected for GA. Being so familiar as you are with the team and all . . .

Oh no, they got offers.

They did really well at the sprints at id session.

Please tell me you are kidding. I believe this for U9 Arlington but would-be DAs? C'mon.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Hopefully, you emailed the club the names of those 5 Red team girls that could not string together passes against 2 white teams players and they were not elected for GA. Being so familiar as you are with the team and all . . .

Oh no, they got offers.

They did really well at the sprints at id session.

Anonymous wrote: And you know this how? Offers were confidential and are rolling . . .

No sprints at the final 2 ID sessions

Anonymous wrote:
Hopefully, you emailed the club the names of those 5 Red team girls that could not string together passes against 2 white teams players and they were not elected for GA. Being so familiar as you are with the team and all . . .

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Mo is the next stop on the conveyor belt of a flawed end product. Arlington looks for the easy way out by keeping their fingers crossed that they have enough "elite" players (who are BFS - bugger faster stronger) than most peers - simply based on numbers. When you have a squad like that anyone can coach and it makes the coach look good with Ws but little development. Cracks show as they get older.

So I know some 08 players at Arlington are unhappy with the lack of skill training and no expectation of technical play. That type of system works for some players but not for others. I have seen players regress to the point where they stop moving to space after a pass because they know the ball will rarely be passed back. How many times will you try a give and go if the other player never passes back? In the spring an hour and 1/2 practice was 55 minutes of conditioning work and four touches on the ball...at u12?

Before the pandemic I know two parents who contacted Mclean to attend a practice but got no call back. I guess MU calls you back, maybe it’s that simple?

Arlington 08 played McLean 08 this past season and looked much better technically than McLean. I would say Arlington possessed the ball 75% of the time. So I'm not sure this argument carries over. At least not in the 08 age group. At the 08 age group I've been able to watch almost all of the teams play within the past year. Here is my prediction of teams and how they will perform.
1. VDA
2. Loudoun
3. Arlington
4. BRYC
5. McLean
6. FCV

I am very familiar with Arlington red and it is not a technical team. They do not at this time have the skill set to play possession. The team’s strength is physical play and athleticism. They have problems passing and fielding balls. I watched a practice in the late fall where the red team played possession against the white team. It was 5 red team players against 2 white team players. The red team had great difficulty putting 3 passes together. The coach mixed up the groups and the same thing would happen. I noticed it because the coach was getting frustrated. Over a 15 minute period their high number of passes was 4. You see this consistently in practices and games. There are girls who are frustrated by this.

The team does well against less athletic, smaller teams. If a team has similar athleticism and size, you know what’s happens. Mclean 08 green lost to Arlington blue. As for your list Arlington is 5th or 6th in the state and 4th or 5th in NoVa. This knocks them out of the top brackets of larger tournaments. They are not crushing it in the lower bracket, so it’s probably the right placement.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Mo is the next stop on the conveyor belt of a flawed end product. Arlington looks for the easy way out by keeping their fingers crossed that they have enough "elite" players (who are BFS - bugger faster stronger) than most peers - simply based on numbers. When you have a squad like that anyone can coach and it makes the coach look good with Ws but little development. Cracks show as they get older.

So I know some 08 players at Arlington are unhappy with the lack of skill training and no expectation of technical play. That type of system works for some players but not for others. I have seen players regress to the point where they stop moving to space after a pass because they know the ball will rarely be passed back. How many times will you try a give and go if the other player never passes back? In the spring an hour and 1/2 practice was 55 minutes of conditioning work and four touches on the ball...at u12?

Before the pandemic I know two parents who contacted Mclean to attend a practice but got no call back. I guess MU calls you back, maybe it’s that simple?

Arlington 08 played McLean 08 this past season and looked much better technically than McLean. I would say Arlington possessed the ball 75% of the time. So I'm not sure this argument carries over. At least not in the 08 age group. At the 08 age group I've been able to watch almost all of the teams play within the past year. Here is my prediction of teams and how they will perform.
1. VDA
2. Loudoun
3. Arlington
4. BRYC
5. McLean
6. FCV

Anonymous wrote:Arlington is not an elite club and has never attracted elite players. It is a place to get a start and then move on.

Anonymous wrote:Can someone tell me what is wrong with Mo? We decided to stay because of his reputation.

Anonymous wrote:Can someone tell me what is wrong with Mo? We decided to stay because of his reputation.