Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No no… keep going. Regardless the damage was done at fvu.

The ironic thing is that FVU feeder clubs are not the strongest this year (with the minor exception of perhaps Valor ... crazy I know!) Also, McLean is doing a better job of keeping there top U12 players from leaving like the 2013 girls did... will they keep them all... probably not, but I wouldn't expect a mass exodus. So what that creates is the perfect storm for the top team 2014 girls from GFR. They are a strong solid team and have no alliance or pathway and there is a local ECNL club in need of 2014 talent. I think a vast number of these girls could make FVU. It's a step up from a broken up RL team and way better than that miserable commute over the bridge.

Is the 2014 girls team hoping there is some magical pathway that allows them to both stay together and play at a higher level? That makes no sense. Isn’t this the age where a lot of teams break up due to some kids making higher level leagues? The only places this doesn’t happen are clubs where the top team is ECNL, GA, or MLS Next. You can’t get upset that a few players are being looked at by an ECNL team. That’s just how this works for the clubs that too out at RL. You lose a few of your best players and if your kid isn’t good enough to make the higher leagues have to figure out whether to stay or maybe find a better RL team if you think yours will be too depleted.

This is kind of a bizarre response. The point being made is that the local ECNL club is a legit option for many of the GFR girls. It's an open ID session and something they could explore.

Yes I understand, no need to say it again. I’m sure they have already thought of this. Just seems like some people posting here are acting like it’s not normal for a few players to be considered for a higher level opportunity before open tryouts, like the whole team is supposed to get that opportunity together. But that’s not how it works even at the clubs with so called pathways, and some (most?) will always end up “left behind” on the RL team.

I don’t think that poster has a DD on this team, at least currently.

Who cares?

This is a very simple solution for everyone involved. If you felt like your DC was left out and not "coach blessed" for closed consideration at BSC, then go to an Open ID. I think people who did get the "coach blessed" look at BSC have been screaming to you all, "Go to an Open ID session if your DC is good enough!" Well, here's a golden opportunity. FVUs geographical footprint is perfect for GFR families... it's an Open ID session (that was luckily delayed due to snow)... the competition is well within reach for these GFR girls... what more could everyone ask for? It solves everyone's problem. If your DC doesn't make FVU, then perhaps GFR RL is fine. But if they do make it...

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No no… keep going. Regardless the damage was done at fvu.

The ironic thing is that FVU feeder clubs are not the strongest this year (with the minor exception of perhaps Valor ... crazy I know!) Also, McLean is doing a better job of keeping there top U12 players from leaving like the 2013 girls did... will they keep them all... probably not, but I wouldn't expect a mass exodus. So what that creates is the perfect storm for the top team 2014 girls from GFR. They are a strong solid team and have no alliance or pathway and there is a local ECNL club in need of 2014 talent. I think a vast number of these girls could make FVU. It's a step up from a broken up RL team and way better than that miserable commute over the bridge.

Is the 2014 girls team hoping there is some magical pathway that allows them to both stay together and play at a higher level? That makes no sense. Isn’t this the age where a lot of teams break up due to some kids making higher level leagues? The only places this doesn’t happen are clubs where the top team is ECNL, GA, or MLS Next. You can’t get upset that a few players are being looked at by an ECNL team. That’s just how this works for the clubs that too out at RL. You lose a few of your best players and if your kid isn’t good enough to make the higher leagues have to figure out whether to stay or maybe find a better RL team if you think yours will be too depleted.

This is kind of a bizarre response. The point being made is that the local ECNL club is a legit option for many of the GFR girls. It's an open ID session and something they could explore.

Yes I understand, no need to say it again. I’m sure they have already thought of this. Just seems like some people posting here are acting like it’s not normal for a few players to be considered for a higher level opportunity before open tryouts, like the whole team is supposed to get that opportunity together. But that’s not how it works even at the clubs with so called pathways, and some (most?) will always end up “left behind” on the RL team.

I don’t think that poster has a DD on this team, at least currently.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No no… keep going. Regardless the damage was done at fvu.

The ironic thing is that FVU feeder clubs are not the strongest this year (with the minor exception of perhaps Valor ... crazy I know!) Also, McLean is doing a better job of keeping there top U12 players from leaving like the 2013 girls did... will they keep them all... probably not, but I wouldn't expect a mass exodus. So what that creates is the perfect storm for the top team 2014 girls from GFR. They are a strong solid team and have no alliance or pathway and there is a local ECNL club in need of 2014 talent. I think a vast number of these girls could make FVU. It's a step up from a broken up RL team and way better than that miserable commute over the bridge.

Is the 2014 girls team hoping there is some magical pathway that allows them to both stay together and play at a higher level? That makes no sense. Isn’t this the age where a lot of teams break up due to some kids making higher level leagues? The only places this doesn’t happen are clubs where the top team is ECNL, GA, or MLS Next. You can’t get upset that a few players are being looked at by an ECNL team. That’s just how this works for the clubs that too out at RL. You lose a few of your best players and if your kid isn’t good enough to make the higher leagues have to figure out whether to stay or maybe find a better RL team if you think yours will be too depleted.

This is kind of a bizarre response. The point being made is that the local ECNL club is a legit option for many of the GFR girls. It's an open ID session and something they could explore.

Yes I understand, no need to say it again. I’m sure they have already thought of this. Just seems like some people posting here are acting like it’s not normal for a few players to be considered for a higher level opportunity before open tryouts, like the whole team is supposed to get that opportunity together. But that’s not how it works even at the clubs with so called pathways, and some (most?) will always end up “left behind” on the RL team.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No no… keep going. Regardless the damage was done at fvu.

The ironic thing is that FVU feeder clubs are not the strongest this year (with the minor exception of perhaps Valor ... crazy I know!) Also, McLean is doing a better job of keeping there top U12 players from leaving like the 2013 girls did... will they keep them all... probably not, but I wouldn't expect a mass exodus. So what that creates is the perfect storm for the top team 2014 girls from GFR. They are a strong solid team and have no alliance or pathway and there is a local ECNL club in need of 2014 talent. I think a vast number of these girls could make FVU. It's a step up from a broken up RL team and way better than that miserable commute over the bridge.

Is the 2014 girls team hoping there is some magical pathway that allows them to both stay together and play at a higher level? That makes no sense. Isn’t this the age where a lot of teams break up due to some kids making higher level leagues? The only places this doesn’t happen are clubs where the top team is ECNL, GA, or MLS Next. You can’t get upset that a few players are being looked at by an ECNL team. That’s just how this works for the clubs that too out at RL. You lose a few of your best players and if your kid isn’t good enough to make the higher leagues have to figure out whether to stay or maybe find a better RL team if you think yours will be too depleted.

Who said anything about being upset or not being good enough? FVU could easily recruit a solid team from GFR over their feeder clubs with the exception of Valor. GFR + Valor + McLean = strong team.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No no… keep going. Regardless the damage was done at fvu.

The ironic thing is that FVU feeder clubs are not the strongest this year (with the minor exception of perhaps Valor ... crazy I know!) Also, McLean is doing a better job of keeping there top U12 players from leaving like the 2013 girls did... will they keep them all... probably not, but I wouldn't expect a mass exodus. So what that creates is the perfect storm for the top team 2014 girls from GFR. They are a strong solid team and have no alliance or pathway and there is a local ECNL club in need of 2014 talent. I think a vast number of these girls could make FVU. It's a step up from a broken up RL team and way better than that miserable commute over the bridge.

Is the 2014 girls team hoping there is some magical pathway that allows them to both stay together and play at a higher level? That makes no sense. Isn’t this the age where a lot of teams break up due to some kids making higher level leagues? The only places this doesn’t happen are clubs where the top team is ECNL, GA, or MLS Next. You can’t get upset that a few players are being looked at by an ECNL team. That’s just how this works for the clubs that too out at RL. You lose a few of your best players and if your kid isn’t good enough to make the higher leagues have to figure out whether to stay or maybe find a better RL team if you think yours will be too depleted.

This is kind of a bizarre response. The point being made is that the local ECNL club is a legit option for many of the GFR girls. It's an open ID session and something they could explore.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No no… keep going. Regardless the damage was done at fvu.

The ironic thing is that FVU feeder clubs are not the strongest this year (with the minor exception of perhaps Valor ... crazy I know!) Also, McLean is doing a better job of keeping there top U12 players from leaving like the 2013 girls did... will they keep them all... probably not, but I wouldn't expect a mass exodus. So what that creates is the perfect storm for the top team 2014 girls from GFR. They are a strong solid team and have no alliance or pathway and there is a local ECNL club in need of 2014 talent. I think a vast number of these girls could make FVU. It's a step up from a broken up RL team and way better than that miserable commute over the bridge.

Is the 2014 girls team hoping there is some magical pathway that allows them to both stay together and play at a higher level? That makes no sense. Isn’t this the age where a lot of teams break up due to some kids making higher level leagues? The only places this doesn’t happen are clubs where the top team is ECNL, GA, or MLS Next. You can’t get upset that a few players are being looked at by an ECNL team. That’s just how this works for the clubs that too out at RL. You lose a few of your best players and if your kid isn’t good enough to make the higher leagues have to figure out whether to stay or maybe find a better RL team if you think yours will be too depleted.

Anonymous wrote:No no… keep going. Regardless the damage was done at fvu.

The ironic thing is that FVU feeder clubs are not the strongest this year (with the minor exception of perhaps Valor ... crazy I know!) Also, McLean is doing a better job of keeping there top U12 players from leaving like the 2013 girls did... will they keep them all... probably not, but I wouldn't expect a mass exodus. So what that creates is the perfect storm for the top team 2014 girls from GFR. They are a strong solid team and have no alliance or pathway and there is a local ECNL club in need of 2014 talent. I think a vast number of these girls could make FVU. It's a step up from a broken up RL team and way better than that miserable commute over the bridge.

No no… keep going. Regardless the damage was done at fvu.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:From the outside, while this coach may have a COI in terms of coaching at both clubs (and [b]why did GFR agree to that in the first place??), the first job of a youth coach is to develop players, not to keep a team together. Therefore if he thinks these kids can compete at the next level, he should tell them so. If he knows a club/ coach that he thinks would be a good fit, all the better.
Again, why GFR has a person who also coaches at BSC is beyond me to figure out, but I don't think encouraging a player to try the next level if he thinks they are ready is inherently terrible.

But the old ED agreed to it, not sure what the new one will do. Assuming he's on an annual contract like everyone else.

Don't think the old ED could have done anything on the COI without board approval. Ask the board to answer the question as to why the club agreed to the COI.

Neither the EDs nor the Board needed to do anything because there is no conflict. Just because you personally don't like it doesn't mean there is a conflict.

Just like there was no conflict when they were at FVU before that. It is good for the club to have coaches of this caliber.

Maybe it has something to do with why they are no longer with FVU…

+1001

Nope, not even close

You’re right. It’s +1,000,000,001

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:From the outside, while this coach may have a COI in terms of coaching at both clubs (and [b]why did GFR agree to that in the first place??), the first job of a youth coach is to develop players, not to keep a team together. Therefore if he thinks these kids can compete at the next level, he should tell them so. If he knows a club/ coach that he thinks would be a good fit, all the better.
Again, why GFR has a person who also coaches at BSC is beyond me to figure out, but I don't think encouraging a player to try the next level if he thinks they are ready is inherently terrible.

But the old ED agreed to it, not sure what the new one will do. Assuming he's on an annual contract like everyone else.

Don't think the old ED could have done anything on the COI without board approval. Ask the board to answer the question as to why the club agreed to the COI.

Neither the EDs nor the Board needed to do anything because there is no conflict. Just because you personally don't like it doesn't mean there is a conflict.

Just like there was no conflict when they were at FVU before that. It is good for the club to have coaches of this caliber.

Maybe it has something to do with why they are no longer with FVU…

+1001

Nope, not even close

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:From the outside, while this coach may have a COI in terms of coaching at both clubs (and [b]why did GFR agree to that in the first place??), the first job of a youth coach is to develop players, not to keep a team together. Therefore if he thinks these kids can compete at the next level, he should tell them so. If he knows a club/ coach that he thinks would be a good fit, all the better.
Again, why GFR has a person who also coaches at BSC is beyond me to figure out, but I don't think encouraging a player to try the next level if he thinks they are ready is inherently terrible.

But the old ED agreed to it, not sure what the new one will do. Assuming he's on an annual contract like everyone else.

Don't think the old ED could have done anything on the COI without board approval. Ask the board to answer the question as to why the club agreed to the COI.

Neither the EDs nor the Board needed to do anything because there is no conflict. Just because you personally don't like it doesn't mean there is a conflict.

Just like there was no conflict when they were at FVU before that. It is good for the club to have coaches of this caliber.

Maybe it has something to do with why they are no longer with FVU…

+1001

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:From the outside, while this coach may have a COI in terms of coaching at both clubs (and [b]why did GFR agree to that in the first place??), the first job of a youth coach is to develop players, not to keep a team together. Therefore if he thinks these kids can compete at the next level, he should tell them so. If he knows a club/ coach that he thinks would be a good fit, all the better.
Again, why GFR has a person who also coaches at BSC is beyond me to figure out, but I don't think encouraging a player to try the next level if he thinks they are ready is inherently terrible.

But the old ED agreed to it, not sure what the new one will do. Assuming he's on an annual contract like everyone else.

Don't think the old ED could have done anything on the COI without board approval. Ask the board to answer the question as to why the club agreed to the COI.

Neither the EDs nor the Board needed to do anything because there is no conflict. Just because you personally don't like it doesn't mean there is a conflict.

Just like there was no conflict when they were at FVU before that. It is good for the club to have coaches of this caliber.

Maybe it has something to do with why they are no longer with FVU…

It's not.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:From the outside, while this coach may have a COI in terms of coaching at both clubs (and [b]why did GFR agree to that in the first place??), the first job of a youth coach is to develop players, not to keep a team together. Therefore if he thinks these kids can compete at the next level, he should tell them so. If he knows a club/ coach that he thinks would be a good fit, all the better.
Again, why GFR has a person who also coaches at BSC is beyond me to figure out, but I don't think encouraging a player to try the next level if he thinks they are ready is inherently terrible.

But the old ED agreed to it, not sure what the new one will do. Assuming he's on an annual contract like everyone else.

Don't think the old ED could have done anything on the COI without board approval. Ask the board to answer the question as to why the club agreed to the COI.

Neither the EDs nor the Board needed to do anything because there is no conflict. Just because you personally don't like it doesn't mean there is a conflict.

Just like there was no conflict when they were at FVU before that. It is good for the club to have coaches of this caliber.

Maybe it has something to do with why they are no longer with FVU…

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:From the outside, while this coach may have a COI in terms of coaching at both clubs (and [b]why did GFR agree to that in the first place??), the first job of a youth coach is to develop players, not to keep a team together. Therefore if he thinks these kids can compete at the next level, he should tell them so. If he knows a club/ coach that he thinks would be a good fit, all the better.
Again, why GFR has a person who also coaches at BSC is beyond me to figure out, but I don't think encouraging a player to try the next level if he thinks they are ready is inherently terrible.

But the old ED agreed to it, not sure what the new one will do. Assuming he's on an annual contract like everyone else.

Don't think the old ED could have done anything on the COI without board approval. Ask the board to answer the question as to why the club agreed to the COI.

Neither the EDs nor the Board needed to do anything because there is no conflict. Just because you personally don't like it doesn't mean there is a conflict.

Just like there was no conflict when they were at FVU before that. It is good for the club to have coaches of this caliber.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:From the outside, while this coach may have a COI in terms of coaching at both clubs (and [b]why did GFR agree to that in the first place??), the first job of a youth coach is to develop players, not to keep a team together. Therefore if he thinks these kids can compete at the next level, he should tell them so. If he knows a club/ coach that he thinks would be a good fit, all the better.
Again, why GFR has a person who also coaches at BSC is beyond me to figure out, but I don't think encouraging a player to try the next level if he thinks they are ready is inherently terrible.

But the old ED agreed to it, not sure what the new one will do. Assuming he's on an annual contract like everyone else.

Don't think the old ED could have done anything on the COI without board approval. Ask the board to answer the question as to why the club agreed to the COI.

The board doesn't have anything to do with anyone's employment but the ED. My understanding was that the jobs at BSC were something that NM and ML sought out after the "rogue" board fired them/terminated the TF contract at GFR and then everything went haywire with that and GFR tried to hire them back to save a max exodus from occuring but at that point they'd already taken the BSC jobs so the newly reinstated ED agreed to it because he felt bad about everything that happened with the (now Riverbend) ML takeover.