Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:shout out to VA revolution in lower division NCSL with those untapped GAL-level players

A quick look at their girls teams shows mostly division 2. I wouldn't consider that "lower division" but yeah, it's still NCSL. I saw their U-15 (or maybe it was U-14?) team play in McLean and they weren't bad.

U-11 Division 1
U-12 Division 2
U-13 Division 2
U-14 Division 1
U-15 Division 2
U-16 Division 2
U-17 N/A
U-19 N/A

They’re winning divisions. They’re winning tournaments too. And they’re winning against their local neighboring clubs. Seems like people’s arrogance will turn into “fake” surprise when they’re surpassed by a 3 year old club. Talk about being woke.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:shout out to VA revolution in lower division NCSL with those untapped GAL-level players

A quick look at their girls teams shows mostly division 2. I wouldn't consider that "lower division" but yeah, it's still NCSL. I saw their U-15 (or maybe it was U-14?) team play in McLean and they weren't bad.

U-11 Division 1
U-12 Division 2
U-13 Division 2
U-14 Division 1
U-15 Division 2
U-16 Division 2
U-17 N/A
U-19 N/A

Anonymous wrote:I think Metro would turn out to be a fine CCL or NPL club. Maybe this merger is a step in that direction. It would be best for all involved.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:shout out to VA revolution in lower division NCSL with those untapped GAL-level players

A quick look at their girls teams shows mostly division 2. I wouldn't consider that "lower division" but yeah, it's still NCSL. I saw their U-15 (or maybe it was U-14?) team play in McLean and they weren't bad.

U-11 Division 1
U-12 Division 2
U-13 Division 2
U-14 Division 1
U-15 Division 2
U-16 Division 2
U-17 N/A
U-19 N/A

At this rate Metro will be the next power house club

"Power house club"? I don't know about that but everybody's gotta start somewhere.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:shout out to VA revolution in lower division NCSL with those untapped GAL-level players

A quick look at their girls teams shows mostly division 2. I wouldn't consider that "lower division" but yeah, it's still NCSL. I saw their U-15 (or maybe it was U-14?) team play in McLean and they weren't bad.

U-11 Division 1
U-12 Division 2
U-13 Division 2
U-14 Division 1
U-15 Division 2
U-16 Division 2
U-17 N/A
U-19 N/A

At this rate Metro will be the next power house club

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:shout out to VA revolution in lower division NCSL with those untapped GAL-level players

A quick look at their girls teams shows mostly division 2. I wouldn't consider that "lower division" but yeah, it's still NCSL. I saw their U-15 (or maybe it was U-14?) team play in McLean and they weren't bad.

U-11 Division 1
U-12 Division 2
U-13 Division 2
U-14 Division 1
U-15 Division 2
U-16 Division 2
U-17 N/A
U-19 N/A

Anonymous wrote:shout out to VA revolution in lower division NCSL with those untapped GAL-level players

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So it looks like Metro just added another "partner club" in VA Revolution. Not sure what to make of that.

It’s said that a drowning man reaches out for others to pull down with him. I’m not a fan of the idea, but it may apply in this case.

Anonymous wrote:So it looks like Metro just added another "partner club" in VA Revolution. Not sure what to make of that.

Anonymous wrote:So it looks like Metro just added another "partner club" in VA Revolution. Not sure what to make of that.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:LOL, yes they beat Arlington 2nd team. Huge accomplishment, rofl.

Arlington first team is kind of a joke...so

We keep hearing on the boys side how the first teams are not as good as the second teams at Arlington across a number of ages below u15. Maybe we should not focus on results so much.

That sounded unlikely to me so I just checked quickly. The Arlington U14 first team has a 9-0-1 record in ECNL and sits alone in first place. The second team has a 4-2-1 record and is mid-tableish in CCL (to be fair it's probably a bit better than mid table on a points per game basis, but has played fewer games than most of the other teams). Still it looks like it would be pretty hard to argue that the second team is better, or even close to, the first team based on their records.

Where did you hear this?

Arlington parents, among others. What about the other age groups?

U14 1st team ECNL 9-0-1 2nd team CCL1 4-2-1
U13 1st team ECNL 4-5-1 2nd team CCL1 2-4-1
U12 1st team CCL1 6-0-1 2nd team CCL2 8-0-0
U11 & below - no data.

In general it is extremely unlikely that a second team is better than a first team. That means that at least one, and probably both of the following have to be true:

1. They have picked the wrong kids for the top team. Not just mixing up the kids who are of roughly equal talent at the top of the second team/bottom of the first team because that wouldn't change much. But putting the best ones - the ones that should be easiest to pick out - on the second team and/or the ones at the bottom of the second team on the first team.

2. The second team coaching is significantly better than the first team coaching.

The alternative explanation - silly parent - is far more likely.

Shouldn’t you be comparing girls team for metro, not boys?