Valeo

[Guest]

Thank you for providing a little bit of context as to why things are the way they are. It helps a little and is the kind of information I was looking for when I asked above why they had fallen off. Some additional thoughts on your points:

1. Yes, there's bad management all over club soccer, but for some reason Valeo seems to have a reputation for being particularly bad.
2. Don't agree that the comparisons are silly. They are one of the clubs selected for full MLS. If they chose a smaller footprint, that's their choice, but they still have to compete with the other MLS clubs (boys anyway).
3. This to me is the key point and I'm guessing you're right. It seem like they never really recovered from losing both their boys director and girls director in 2020, and the players, teams and coaches they took with them.
4. Interesting comment about the culture. Exactly what is it about their culture that is unique? I doubt it will matter to a buyer anyway. The buyer will buy it for the location, the facility and the MLS Next patch and quickly install its own culture. Existing coaches and players who don't like the new culture will leave. No different from any other club.

Valeo is setup like an academy would be everywhere else in the world. It isn't about the parents, or about college soccer, or about creating great teams. Its about creating a small number of elite players. The reality is that there aren't enough kids (or especially parents) for whom this is the right style. The best young players get a great technical education and then get sick of losing. Plus players from Newton, Needham, and Wellesley are much more likely to want to go to a great college than attempt to pursue a professional path.

I assume Valeo maintains the MLS status because of their core principles of play. As far as JB, he's a nice guy and a good coach but he is about winning, not playing from the back, etc. Whether Surf and attract and keep enough young male talent to remain viable as a club without any of the top level leagues is very much an open question. For example Bolts and IFA each have 4-6 teams better than the Surf Navy teams at each age group, and both train in the same areas as Surf and Valeo.

[Guest]

Surf is more organized but the football is much worse on the boys side.

I'm not sure it's true that the football is worse. Maybe a little, but probably not that much. Hard to tell how Valeo's MLS teams are doing, but it doesn't seem like they're doing great from comments on here and heard on the fields. NAL teams are really struggling compared to their competition. Surf boys is obviously not at the top level of NEFC, IFA, Bolts and Revs, but it is a decent second level option at some ages. And if Surf got the NAL that Valeo has, I could see it elevating their boys program even more. If Surf had NAL without MLS it might be a little weird especially around here, but not unheard of. There are a lot of unknowns (to outsiders like me) that could make it a nonstarter, but the Surf-Valeo or Scorpions-Valeo merger is an interesting idea.

[Guest]

Valeo is setup like an academy would be everywhere else in the world. It isn't about the parents, or about college soccer, or about creating great teams. Its about creating a small number of elite players. The reality is that there aren't enough kids (or especially parents) for whom this is the right style. The best young players get a great technical education and then get sick of losing. Plus players from Newton, Needham, and Wellesley are much more likely to want to go to a great college than attempt to pursue a professional path.

I assume Valeo maintains the MLS status because of their core principles of play. As far as JB, he's a nice guy and a good coach but he is about winning, not playing from the back, etc. Whether Surf and attract and keep enough young male talent to remain viable as a club without any of the top level leagues is very much an open question. For example Bolts and IFA each have 4-6 teams better than the Surf Navy teams at each age group, and both train in the same areas as Surf and Valeo.

Thanks for this context, it definitely helps offer some level of an explanation. I don't know if I agree with the premise though. The Valeo teams I have seen don't seem any more technical than any other club. If you were asking me, I'd point to Bolts and IFA teams as showing me more technical skill than Valeo. And for Valeo to have a program policy or philosophy of teaching the technical aspects, it would really have to be established by a director at the top and enforced down through the coaching staff. Who this technical master at Valeo who is setting program policy that is more technical that what is being taught and coached at other clubs? CS? I'm not seeing it. As for JB, I can't comment on his own coaching style, but I don't see any program philosophy at Surf that instructs a direct style instead of playing from the back. From what I see, each coach puts in his own style and that includes plenty that play from the back (or at least try to). Yes, Bolts and IFA (and to a lesser extent NEFC) all have multiple strong teams at every age. But 4-6 better than Surf isn't accurate. There's almost always one better IFA and Bolts team, and sometimes 2 or maybe even 3, but 4-6 is unfair. Two or three is in keeping with the leagues they play in. Bolts, IFA, NEFC are in MLS and NAL. Surf's top teams are in EDP, where those other clubs would put their 3rd (or lower) teams. I think the point above was that it Surf had MLS and NAL like Valeo does, it would change things along those lines.

[Guest]

I was told last week that Valeo tends to focus on their top (MLSN) teams at the expense of lower teams. It's hard to verify what their first teams are like without the MLSN standings available these days, but their two NAL teams playing this fall are both 0-7-0 going into this weekend. 2011 has scored only 4 times in 7 games and has a GD of -31. 2010 has put in 6, but has a GD of -32. Wins and losses and GD aren't everything, especially if they are focusing on development at the expense of wins at these younger ages, but those are some rough looking figures. For their sake, I hope their MLSN teams are flat out dominant.

[Guest]

Bolts is losing the space on the UMass Mount Ida campus, due to campus expansion. They might be a good prospect to merge with Valeo.

[Guest]

Bolts is losing the space on the UMass Mount Ida campus, due to campus expansion. They might be a good prospect to merge with Valeo.

Wow, I hadn't heard that. Seems like it would be a big hit for them to lose that location. I think they have some kind of arrangement at the new New Balance facility in Brighton, but Brighton is a lot tougher to get to for a lot of people.

[Guest]

LOL at how someone asked what happened to Valeo and the response is not really any kind of answer but instead, "Meh, they should just merge and go away." Not a great sign.

[Guest]

Their MLS teams are weak too

[Guest]

Valeo has always been disorganized with tryouts, communication etc, My kids are in college (boy) and hs (girl) and we checked them out several times since their location would have been convenient but never really thought they were all they were cracked up to be.
They used to be a bit unique with their focus on technical training however other clubs put those type is sessions in their mix. Valeo started out with boys programs. They would have whole age groups rather than just teams training together. At one point they brought in Kia McNeil now the Brown Coach to run some girl programs. My daughter did a clinic and the guys ran it and had Kia make a brief appearance. I thought it was a lost opportunity for them to not use Kia to the fullest extent possible to bring girls in. They had a relationship with the Revs pretty early on. Most (if nit all) of the kids they put on promo material who advanced to the Revs came from a group of local kids who came in together with a parent coach so I’m not sure how much credit Valeo deserved there.

Their latest downfall seems to have come from coaches such as BL on the girls side and JB on the boys side taking multiple whole teams to new clubs,

[Guest]

I must admit I was skeptical about moving from ECNL to NAL (with another MA club) and it was proven when I found out Valeo was in the league - further proven by the results I'm reading about. Really depressing. Also have family in NY with a club that was admitted to NAL & has never had a sniff of the highest levels. The whole MLS Next pathway has become a joke almost overnight.

[Guest]

I must admit I was skeptical about moving from ECNL to NAL (with another MA club) and it was proven when I found out Valeo was in the league - further proven by the results I'm reading about. Really depressing. Also have family in NY with a club that was admitted to NAL & has never had a sniff of the highest levels. The whole MLS Next pathway has become a joke almost overnight.

Watered down crap

[Guest]

I must admit I was skeptical about moving from ECNL to NAL (with another MA club) and it was proven when I found out Valeo was in the league - further proven by the results I'm reading about. Really depressing. Also have family in NY with a club that was admitted to NAL & has never had a sniff of the highest levels. The whole MLS Next pathway has become a joke almost overnight.

[quote/]Watered down crap[/QUOTE]

Oh, good here come the Stars ECNL cheerleaders from the clouds in a thread that has nothing to do with them. I'll take the bait. Yes, Valeo seems to be a drag on both MLS and NAL. That is sort of what got this thread restarted.

But anyone claiming MLS isn't the top league and NAL isn't second around here is pushing an agenda. Not sure why ECNL would even bother pushing it at this point, but here we are. Let's look at the facts. Is MLS watered down compared to last year. Well, yeah, they expanded and gave a bunch of new clubs full pathway. So it's just math. You add teams and add players, you're watering down by definition: You know what else, though? It's still better than ECNL in these parts. Stars is the only ECNL club left around here and here's how their top teams are doing (per rankings app):

2011: 18
2010: 8
2009: 10
2008: 4
2007: 4
2006/05: 9:

So basically Stars is behind most of the local MLS teams almost every age. The 07 and 08 teams are their highest ranked ('07 is still behind still behind Revs, IFA West, and Bolts/'08 is still behind Revs, Bolts and NEFC), but 07 and 08 are older teams that probably formed well before MLS expansion and the NAL formed just this year. Younger ages like 2011 might be indicating where things are headed. The dropoff from the older ages ndicates that 2011's jumped ship to the new NAL instead of driving to NY every weekend. That team would end up somewhere in the middle of the NAL standings. Their results against NAL teams and EDP teams in tournaments this fall aren't great either.

So basically, older ages would be middle bottom of MLS, younger ages would only be middle of NAL. And the trend isn't looking great. There are some pretty talented EDP kids noticing that their league is a little lower on the totem pole this year and looking to move to NAL. It's only year 1 of NAL and a fair number of clubs and players didn't make the move for year 1. Wouldn't be shocked to see an influx for next year, including from ECNL families tired of the travel.

OK if we get back to trying to figure out what happened to Valeo instead of making this about you?

[Guest]

[quote/]Watered down crap

Oh, good here come the Stars ECNL cheerleaders from the clouds in a thread that has nothing to do with them. I'll take the bait. Yes, Valeo seems to be a drag on both MLS and NAL. That is sort of what got this thread restarted.

But anyone claiming MLS isn't the top league and NAL isn't second around here is pushing an agenda. Not sure why ECNL would even bother pushing it at this point, but here we are. Let's look at the facts. Is MLS watered down compared to last year. Well, yeah, they expanded and gave a bunch of new clubs full pathway. So it's just math. You add teams and add players, you're watering down by definition: You know what else, though? It's still better than ECNL in these parts. Stars is the only ECNL club left around here and here's how their top teams are doing (per rankings app):

2011: 18
2010: 8
2009: 10
2008: 4
2007: 4
2006/05: 9:

So basically Stars is behind most of the local MLS teams almost every age. The 07 and 08 teams are their highest ranked ('07 is still behind still behind Revs, IFA West, and Bolts/'08 is still behind Revs, Bolts and NEFC), but 07 and 08 are older teams that probably formed well before MLS expansion and the NAL formed just this year. Younger ages like 2011 might be indicating where things are headed. The dropoff from the older ages ndicates that 2011's jumped ship to the new NAL instead of driving to NY every weekend. That team would end up somewhere in the middle of the NAL standings. Their results against NAL teams and EDP teams in tournaments this fall aren't great either.

So basically, older ages would be middle bottom of MLS, younger ages would only be middle of NAL. And the trend isn't looking great. There are some pretty talented EDP kids noticing that their league is a little lower on the totem pole this year and looking to move to NAL. It's only year 1 of NAL and a fair number of clubs and players didn't make the move for year 1. Wouldn't be shocked to see an influx for next year, including from ECNL families tired of the travel.

OK if we get back to trying to figure out what happened to Valeo instead of making this about you?[/QUOTE]


ECNL for boys is dead in MA. We all know that by now

[Guest]

I posted the original comment about NAL - I'm not with Stars, but with a club that moved from ECNL to NAL. I wanted to share my impression of Valeo joining NAL as an example of a) how a once strong club now could weigh down a theoretically strong league and b) how NAL is definitely not going to be the equal of the previous ECNL (which is what I was sold). Yes, it's the #2 league in MA.

[Guest]

I posted the original comment about NAL - I'm not with Stars, but with a club that moved from ECNL to NAL. I wanted to share my impression of Valeo joining NAL as an example of a) how a once strong club now could weigh down a theoretically strong league and b) how NAL is definitely not going to be the equal of the previous ECNL (which is what I was sold). Yes, it's the #2 league in MA.

For sure NAL isn't the equal of ECNL yet, but ECNL is a top tier league in different ecosystem. It should really be compared to MLS, not NAL. Comparing to NAL isn't really apples to apples (even though clubs like yours definitely took liberties in the spring selling it that way). Still, I'd give NAL time. It's only in its first year. Might see some movement of some of the top players in ECNL, ECRL and EDP over to NAL. At least at the 2010 and 2011 levels playing this fall, there are some solid teams and a lot of strong players in those leagues. Some decent teams (or at least decent players) at those ages from Bolts RL, NEFC South (old Legacy), Liverpool, RI Surf, WUP, IFA West . . .

NAL should looking at adding some of the stronger teams in those leagues and move the NY teams to a different conference.

And yes, Valeo is a drag on the league. No way around that. Which brings us back to the point of this thread . . .