Anonymous
10/13/2024 20:07
Subject: Re:Field hockey clubs feedback
Anonymous wrote:Can anyone share insight on Wolves vs Next level.? Seems many 14u players left Wolves for Next Level. Is coaching better? What about 16u?
The coaching is better at Next Level. They have better results at the big tournaments. Overall these clubs don't well at RCCs, NITs, etc. I would think about Freedom if you want to be on a competitive team.
Anonymous
10/13/2024 20:02
Subject: Field hockey clubs feedback
Anonymous wrote:+1. We have seen former HUSEL players at several different teams, especially at the older ages. Could someone please spill the tea?
I’ve heard of issues at Husel for years, pretty much since they broke off of Rampage because that was shady. The most recent issues I’ve heard are: lack of player development, favoritism, a director that hold grudges and has threatened to ruin players, and a lack of recruiting support.
A bunch went to Wolves, a couple went to Freedom, probably a couple to a few other clubs. Others are talking about leaving.
Anonymous
10/13/2024 17:23
Subject: Field hockey clubs feedback
+1. We have seen former HUSEL players at several different teams, especially at the older ages. Could someone please spill the tea?
Anonymous
10/13/2024 14:41
Subject: Field hockey clubs feedback
Anonymous wrote:I have gone through this conversation a few times over the years and wanted to share my thoughts on the clubs and what I have seen over my years in this world...
Husle: Several other coaches do not care for Husle becasue of the way they formed, breaking off from Rampage. They have produced some strong players and competitive teams, but your daughter needs to have a thick skin because the coaches consistently have a reputation for being tough. Two of their most accomplished (and college-committed players) just left them for another club after being with them for years.
Xtreme: Someone said they are not competitve, but I have seen their players compete at high Nexus levels and be very skilled as high school players. I beleive they have very strong and kind coaches (Kate Stribbling) and seem to be one of the only clubs in our area who host summer clinics with college coaches. I think they appear to be a nurturing club.
Wolves: Many players have made a run to Wolves lately so their rosters are large. Not sure what this means for playing time or who gets to go to what tourneys. Head of the club is rumored to be well connected with college coaches, but do college coaches want club directors puching their players on them? I don't know. I think the club is strong now because of all of the recent transfers over the last two years, but prior to that I did not think of them as a stand out.
Metro: Club Director is not well liked by many in the field hockey world and have heard numerous horror stories about how he treats his players -- e.g. calling last minute practices at far away locations and expecting your child to be there are playing time will suffer. Having said that, his older players are really good (the CeCes, Jaydens, etc). U16 recently had a mass exodus, finally deciding they had had too much of the director.
Mustangs: Many of the players a part of the Metro exodus went to Mustangs/Perfect Performance to basically start the club. And now basically all of those players have left. Check out their coaches and do your research. Perfect Performance has been trying to get in the field hockey game for a while, so maybe it will get better. Disorganization and communication seem to be problems.
Hammers: Formerly Rapids. I put this club into the category of Xtreme. They go to all of the "right" tournaments and can be really competitive or not at all. Seem to have good success when they can grow a team, and they give their girls chances at the lower levels to develop. But players think they need to leave for Metro/Husle, so Hammers seems to be a farmer club for other teams, which by the way almost all of the players who left Hammers for Metro and Husle have in turn left Hudle or Metro becuase the coaches are too much. Hammers coaches and commissioners are solid and they seem to be able to procure space in NOVA/Leesburg when no one else can.
Freedom: Very strong club, but recently merged with another club (Storm?) and now there are more players and the club is trying to manage the growth. Coaches seem strong and the club usually has a high national rank.
Next Level: Likable club with knowledgable director. Most seee to love Welma and I have heard only a few negatives. Have participate in events with them, and the experience has been good. Just review the number of players at your age group and evaluate what playing opprtunities exist.
Warhawks: No comment only because I have not encountered much with them.
If I had to pick a "favorite" based on stability, player development, and normal coaches: Xtreme, Freedom, Hammers, Next Level
Middle Ground (could go either way): Wolves, Mustangs
Would Caution Against: Husle and Metro
Why did so many players leave Husle? Why did most of them go to Wolves?
Anonymous
10/13/2024 14:28
Subject: Field hockey clubs feedback
Anonymous wrote:Personally I’m not sure I understand what kind of player would thrive at Jackals. They oddly don’t seem to be well suited to either superstars or developing players.
For almost every club in town I can envision who might be a good fit and thrive in that environment. Jackals has felt like the exception to that rule.
Can you say more about this? Thanks
Anonymous
10/13/2024 13:25
Subject: Re:Field hockey clubs feedback
Can anyone share insight on Wolves vs Next level.? Seems many 14u players left Wolves for Next Level. Is coaching better? What about 16u?
Anonymous
10/13/2024 11:47
Subject: Field hockey clubs feedback
Personally I’m not sure I understand what kind of player would thrive at Jackals. They oddly don’t seem to be well suited to either superstars or developing players.
For almost every club in town I can envision who might be a good fit and thrive in that environment. Jackals has felt like the exception to that rule.
For almost every club in town I can envision who might be a good fit and thrive in that environment. Jackals has felt like the exception to that rule.
Anonymous
10/13/2024 11:12
Subject: Re:Field hockey clubs feedback
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:What about Jackhals? Anyone familiar with this club?
Very young starter elementary program and a bit disorganized. One coach who seems good seems to coach all levels
I heard the coach is great but overall the club is disorganized and not great with communication. Can anybody shed more light into what’s going on with the Jackals?
They have never been great. Seems like all you need to know is in this thread. Why would you knowingly go to a club that is disorganized and lacks communication?
The closest club isn’t always the best choice.
That’s really helpful.
Anonymous
10/13/2024 09:54
Subject: Re:Field hockey clubs feedback
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:What about Jackhals? Anyone familiar with this club?
Very young starter elementary program and a bit disorganized. One coach who seems good seems to coach all levels
I heard the coach is great but overall the club is disorganized and not great with communication. Can anybody shed more light into what’s going on with the Jackals?
They have never been great. Seems like all you need to know is in this thread. Why would you knowingly go to a club that is disorganized and lacks communication?
The closest club isn’t always the best choice.
Anonymous
10/13/2024 09:20
Subject: Re:Field hockey clubs feedback
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:What about Jackhals? Anyone familiar with this club?
Very young starter elementary program and a bit disorganized. One coach who seems good seems to coach all levels
I heard the coach is great but overall the club is disorganized and not great with communication. Can anybody shed more light into what’s going on with the Jackals?
Anonymous
10/12/2024 16:19
Subject: Re:Field hockey clubs feedback
Anonymous wrote:What about Jackhals? Anyone familiar with this club?
Very young starter elementary program and a bit disorganized. One coach who seems good seems to coach all levels
Anonymous
10/12/2024 16:08
Subject: Re:Field hockey clubs feedback
What about Jackhals? Anyone familiar with this club?
Anonymous
10/09/2024 21:36
Subject: Field hockey clubs feedback
^my goodness this is spot on.
Anonymous
10/08/2024 17:28
Subject: Field hockey clubs feedback
I have gone through this conversation a few times over the years and wanted to share my thoughts on the clubs and what I have seen over my years in this world...
Husle: Several other coaches do not care for Husle becasue of the way they formed, breaking off from Rampage. They have produced some strong players and competitive teams, but your daughter needs to have a thick skin because the coaches consistently have a reputation for being tough. Two of their most accomplished (and college-committed players) just left them for another club after being with them for years.
Xtreme: Someone said they are not competitve, but I have seen their players compete at high Nexus levels and be very skilled as high school players. I beleive they have very strong and kind coaches (Kate Stribbling) and seem to be one of the only clubs in our area who host summer clinics with college coaches. I think they appear to be a nurturing club.
Wolves: Many players have made a run to Wolves lately so their rosters are large. Not sure what this means for playing time or who gets to go to what tourneys. Head of the club is rumored to be well connected with college coaches, but do college coaches want club directors puching their players on them? I don't know. I think the club is strong now because of all of the recent transfers over the last two years, but prior to that I did not think of them as a stand out.
Metro: Club Director is not well liked by many in the field hockey world and have heard numerous horror stories about how he treats his players -- e.g. calling last minute practices at far away locations and expecting your child to be there are playing time will suffer. Having said that, his older players are really good (the CeCes, Jaydens, etc). U16 recently had a mass exodus, finally deciding they had had too much of the director.
Mustangs: Many of the players a part of the Metro exodus went to Mustangs/Perfect Performance to basically start the club. And now basically all of those players have left. Check out their coaches and do your research. Perfect Performance has been trying to get in the field hockey game for a while, so maybe it will get better. Disorganization and communication seem to be problems.
Hammers: Formerly Rapids. I put this club into the category of Xtreme. They go to all of the "right" tournaments and can be really competitive or not at all. Seem to have good success when they can grow a team, and they give their girls chances at the lower levels to develop. But players think they need to leave for Metro/Husle, so Hammers seems to be a farmer club for other teams, which by the way almost all of the players who left Hammers for Metro and Husle have in turn left Hudle or Metro becuase the coaches are too much. Hammers coaches and commissioners are solid and they seem to be able to procure space in NOVA/Leesburg when no one else can.
Freedom: Very strong club, but recently merged with another club (Storm?) and now there are more players and the club is trying to manage the growth. Coaches seem strong and the club usually has a high national rank.
Next Level: Likable club with knowledgable director. Most seee to love Welma and I have heard only a few negatives. Have participate in events with them, and the experience has been good. Just review the number of players at your age group and evaluate what playing opprtunities exist.
Warhawks: No comment only because I have not encountered much with them.
If I had to pick a "favorite" based on stability, player development, and normal coaches: Xtreme, Freedom, Hammers, Next Level
Middle Ground (could go either way): Wolves, Mustangs
Would Caution Against: Husle and Metro
Husle: Several other coaches do not care for Husle becasue of the way they formed, breaking off from Rampage. They have produced some strong players and competitive teams, but your daughter needs to have a thick skin because the coaches consistently have a reputation for being tough. Two of their most accomplished (and college-committed players) just left them for another club after being with them for years.
Xtreme: Someone said they are not competitve, but I have seen their players compete at high Nexus levels and be very skilled as high school players. I beleive they have very strong and kind coaches (Kate Stribbling) and seem to be one of the only clubs in our area who host summer clinics with college coaches. I think they appear to be a nurturing club.
Wolves: Many players have made a run to Wolves lately so their rosters are large. Not sure what this means for playing time or who gets to go to what tourneys. Head of the club is rumored to be well connected with college coaches, but do college coaches want club directors puching their players on them? I don't know. I think the club is strong now because of all of the recent transfers over the last two years, but prior to that I did not think of them as a stand out.
Metro: Club Director is not well liked by many in the field hockey world and have heard numerous horror stories about how he treats his players -- e.g. calling last minute practices at far away locations and expecting your child to be there are playing time will suffer. Having said that, his older players are really good (the CeCes, Jaydens, etc). U16 recently had a mass exodus, finally deciding they had had too much of the director.
Mustangs: Many of the players a part of the Metro exodus went to Mustangs/Perfect Performance to basically start the club. And now basically all of those players have left. Check out their coaches and do your research. Perfect Performance has been trying to get in the field hockey game for a while, so maybe it will get better. Disorganization and communication seem to be problems.
Hammers: Formerly Rapids. I put this club into the category of Xtreme. They go to all of the "right" tournaments and can be really competitive or not at all. Seem to have good success when they can grow a team, and they give their girls chances at the lower levels to develop. But players think they need to leave for Metro/Husle, so Hammers seems to be a farmer club for other teams, which by the way almost all of the players who left Hammers for Metro and Husle have in turn left Hudle or Metro becuase the coaches are too much. Hammers coaches and commissioners are solid and they seem to be able to procure space in NOVA/Leesburg when no one else can.
Freedom: Very strong club, but recently merged with another club (Storm?) and now there are more players and the club is trying to manage the growth. Coaches seem strong and the club usually has a high national rank.
Next Level: Likable club with knowledgable director. Most seee to love Welma and I have heard only a few negatives. Have participate in events with them, and the experience has been good. Just review the number of players at your age group and evaluate what playing opprtunities exist.
Warhawks: No comment only because I have not encountered much with them.
If I had to pick a "favorite" based on stability, player development, and normal coaches: Xtreme, Freedom, Hammers, Next Level
Middle Ground (could go either way): Wolves, Mustangs
Would Caution Against: Husle and Metro
Anonymous
09/25/2024 16:12
Subject: Field hockey clubs feedback
My bad. I see it now!