Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's unfortunate, and it's the reality of being an inner suburb club. Coaches are doing pretty well with the constraints, iMO. Just getting the job done at every practice

It is -- and bear in mind that fall is often worse than spring. More daylight hours in spring = more use of unlighted fields = more space.

Jones Branch really helped. I also saw that Cunningham Park was available for VYS this fall, which isn't always the case.

It's actually probably a push. While I agree with the daylight hours comment, soccer gets priority in the fall from the Fairfax County authority that controls fields. It is not a priority sport in the spring. Other sports have priority over soccer.

Anonymous wrote:It's unfortunate, and it's the reality of being an inner suburb club. Coaches are doing pretty well with the constraints, iMO. Just getting the job done at every practice

It is -- and bear in mind that fall is often worse than spring. More daylight hours in spring = more use of unlighted fields = more space.

Jones Branch really helped. I also saw that Cunningham Park was available for VYS this fall, which isn't always the case.

Anonymous wrote:Did you know:

Youth Pickup Soccer
Fridays until Nov 4
Luther Jackson MS
5pm - 6:15pm
Open to U9 - U12 players

nice!

It's unfortunate, and it's the reality of being an inner suburb club. Coaches are doing pretty well with the constraints, iMO. Just getting the job done at every practice

On the main travel soccer thread, someone says that "Vienna is squeezed" for field space -- that's true, and I wanted to ask here if anyone knows of a plan to address the issue. Thoreau isn't open yet, is it? DS practices on a very crowded field right now.

Did you know:

Youth Pickup Soccer
Fridays until Nov 4
Luther Jackson MS
5pm - 6:15pm
Open to U9 - U12 players

I agree. I find that there is really no point in investing club funds into HS rec players. If they want to improve, there are plenty of outside training that they can pay for, work by themselves, and/or in small groups, etc. I believe more resources need to be directed to the younger ages like crossover. It doesn't matter what the score is. If these are the kids that may be playing travel at U9, then they should be given the opportunity for crossover. They get to play with a real referee, goals, 6v6, etc. The experience is valuable. The league has a mercy rule (if a team is up by 5 goals, the team can either pull a player or the other team can add a player) so usually scores are controlled. Coaches need to take the importance away from the score anyway. I understand it's difficult because kids keep score, but coaches need to continue to set some goals for the kids in each game and focus on achieving those goals.

PP ** soccer team (not soccer club) for the entire high school. maybe JV too ...

Anonymous wrote:Just to check -- are ANY House players on their high school teams?

that would be near impossible. ALL the high schools around here (minus some privates) are 2000-3000 kids. there is usually ONE soccer club for the entire school. What type of probability would a rec player have against prob 50 travel players trying out? except for some weird exception (like some awesome player quit travel bc of another better sport) I think close to none.

Just to check -- are ANY House players on their high school teams?

Anonymous wrote:I knew some of the that participated in the program. The program was opened for the U15 - U18 age groups. Some of the house players participated in the Winter training as well. They enjoyed it.

VYS should continue providing free training and extra training like we had in the past (Eddie Lima Era).

Please give me some examples on your comment: "things are generally back on the right track now".

Good board members and technical staff in place.

That said, I think things have gone backwards for upper-age House players with the withdrawal from SFL. Now they have a sad six-team U15-U19 boys league with colossal mismatches.

So with the extra training, does that mean you'd have House players going to training three days a week -- once with Eddie, twice with their teams? I don't see anything wrong with that -- I'm just surprised the families would make that kind of commitment. I'd say they were giving kids false hope of making a high school team, but if they weren't charging for it, then it doesn't matter.

Answering your questions:

What did people get out of the extra training for high school rec players?
There were a lot of kids that enjoyed and learned from the professional trainers, included the rec. coaches.

If we had a choice between free play and extra training for high school rec players, which would you choose?

I would choose both. Free training during Fall and Spring season. Low fee during Winter and Summer season. Like we had in the past before Gunney.

Talking about Gunney, I agree with the comment above. I don't think VYS is back on the track now but is better without Gunney.

I knew some of the that participated in the program. The program was opened for the U15 - U18 age groups. Some of the house players participated in the Winter training as well. They enjoyed it.

VYS should continue providing free training and extra training like we had in the past (Eddie Lima Era).

Please give me some examples on your comment: "things are generally back on the right track now".

The Gunney Era was most distressing. Things are generally back on the right track now.

So I'll ask again -- what did people get out of the extra training for high school rec players? I know a U19 boys coach who can't even get more than eight players to show up for practice.

If we had a choice between free play and extra training for high school rec players, which would you choose?

I agree with the comment above. The entire dynamic has changed. A lot of great families left VYS in the last year. Very disappointing!