SC Soccer Forums SCSoccer.com Forums Club Soccer & ODP Pounding Theses Into the Red Door

pretty ricky: I do that a lot, sorry if it was inconvenient, I thought I was exhibiting signs of attention deficit disorder and moving on to another subject before this one had played out so I deleted it after a couple of minutes hoping no one had yet seen it. I'm pretty sure it will reappear in a few days. Again, sorry.

well, i will put my notebook away until then. thanks. but, you can trust me. i won't reveal the contents of the post!

Dang..... missed it by this much!!! (in agent SMART voice)

Striker:

OK. We disagree.

Chico:

1. I [read emphasis] do not expect to change the results. Except when I'm in the middle with a whistle, I'm on the sidelines now.

The folks who are in the new club will have the challenge of making the girls programs stronger. I believe they are dedicated to accompishing this goal. I'm as curious as you are as to HOW they accomplish this.

2. Your view of the board is correct--they set policy and the directors make the day-to-day decisions.

However, my assumption is that the board will hire the directors. As a result, they may not CONTROL how things work, but they certainly INFLUENCE how things work.

If, as a board member, you have an interest in a stronger Midstate girls program AND you have influence, stands to reason that the directors will pay attention to the girls side of things.

thomaspietras: As always, thanks tremendously for the response.

1. I acknowledge that my grammatical structure was less accurate that it could have been; I should have stated "If nothing changes, how can we expect to see changes from these results?" Nevertheless, it sounds like both of us are eager to understand how this occurs. The first step, however, might be the recognition (not by you...but by the club(s) themselves) that there's been a problem in the past. So far, it seems like everyone believes everything has been hunky dory in the past with respect to the girls side.

2. I do understand and agree with the differentiation between control and influence that you assert. What I've found in my experience is that the ultimate influence I have as either a manager or a board member is with respect to whom I hire and the structure of the organization itself. I think that's what a lot of folks are looking at and making judgements on. The simple fact that specific board members have children that play in certain genders (or age brackets, or levels of competition, etc.) isn't really a great guideline for me in terms of making judgements with respect to the potential efficacy of the club.

Chico:

"The first step, however, might be the recognition (not by you...but by the club(s) themselves) that there's been a problem in the past. So far, it seems like everyone believes everything has been hunky dory in the past with respect to the girls side."

Not sure who you are including in "everyone" or how you have concluded that these folks believe that everything has been "hunky dory". I assume that you are basing this on discussions with SOME people and your perception that the clubs have not been doing enough (and therefore that they believe there is no problem).

Over the years, I think a lot of people have believed that the Midlands girls programs (all of them) could have been better. I certainly remember discussions with people on the NECSA board and in the NECSA membership regarding ways to improve the soccer experience for girls.

One thing we did (which I cannot take credit for) was to make our U19 recreation program co-ed. This was an attempt to keep more girls (and boys) in the sport (in rec, the numbers fall-off dramatically after about 14). There certainly were other efforts.

After CFC was originally formed, CFC, NECSA and CSC had discussions about a possible combining of programs from all three clubs. At NECSA, we did a survey of parents of girls. The people who responded to the survey were split almost 50/50 on whether to pursue a merger. With no clear consensus, we decided not to pursue a merger.


I guess this is a long-winded way of saying that I believe there has been a recognition over the years that the girls programs could be improved. One can certainly argue about the steps taken, results, etc., but I don't believe that there has been a failure to recognize or admit to a problem.

As far as your ability to make judgements with respect to the potential efficacy of the new club--I would suggest that the only way to really do so (at this point in time) is to pick up the telephone and talk to Savitz and/or Miller and/or Tryon. I understand the implications of what I'm suggesting. I absolutely believe, though, that people of goodwill (and I believe that everyone I've mentioned falls into this category, including you, Chico)can put any past disagreements aside and can "talk through" things "for the good of the game".

I understand that others may disagree. I'm OK with that.

>>[thomaspietras] Not sure who you are including in "everyone" or how you have concluded that these folks believe that everything has been "hunky dory". I assume that you are basing this on discussions with SOME people and your perception that the clubs have not been doing enough (and therefore that they believe there is no problem).<<

Yes, I was basing it on both word of mouth, response to this kind of data on this message board, even the initial reaction by past board members of constituent clubs that "My own opinion is that soccer players are soccer players and as long as a club focuses on serving soccer players, the gender issue will be irrelevant."

>>Over the years, I think a lot of people have believed that the Midlands girls programs (all of them) could have been better. I certainly remember discussions with people on the NECSA board and in the NECSA membership regarding ways to improve the soccer experience for girls.<<

If gender is irrevelent, why were you having these discussions? I'm not trying to "pick your post apart", I'm trying to figure out what appears to be a sudden 180 degree shift in your perspective.

In any case, I wasn't actually asking whether people thought that girls midlands programs "could be better." There's no doubt that with that vague a phraseology that close to 100% of people believe that. The questions are whether there's a recognition that girls soccer in the midlands (at least by every benchmark I've yet heard of or found) lags far behind other regions of the state and the what tangible, visible, things are being done or planned to improve girls soccer.

This isn't an abstract question. People are making decisions concerning tryouts in just a few months. People are talking to each other at high school games asking these questions.

>>As far as your ability to make judgements with respect to the potential efficacy of the new club--I would suggest that the only way to really do so (at this point in time) is to pick up the telephone and talk to Savitz and/or Miller and/or Tryon. I understand the implications of what I'm suggesting. I absolutely believe, though, that people of goodwill (and I believe that everyone I've mentioned falls into this category, including you, Chico)can put any past disagreements aside and can "talk through" things "for the good of the game".<<

When folks are too busy to distribute and/or publish information, I'm not going to burn their time by calling them and asking for more information than they've publicly released -- it's a fool's errand to a fool's end. Each club has to decide how to disseminate information and how much they want to disseminate -- just as each person interested has to decide to try to discover information. At this point, the preferred method seems to be "word of mouth." I use this message board to ask questions I get asked at almost every high school or college pool game -- and to ask questions I get via PM's, e-mail's, or telephone calls.

I realize that some of the topics that are raised on this message board are uncomfortable. And there's no doubt in my mind that there are those that would prefer this kind of dialogue not exist. I'm okay with that.

Again, thank you for engaging in this dialogue.

"If gender is irrevelent, why were you having these discussions? I'm not trying to "pick your post apart", I'm trying to figure out what appears to be a sudden 180 degree shift in your perspective."

First, let me say that I don't have daughters, so perhaps my perspective is not the same as yours.

That having been said, I do think gender is irrelevant and to treat girls as if gender is relevant is not treating them fairly. They are soccer players. Period.

We were having "discussions" and trying to "fix things" for the girls programs, not BECAUSE they related to girls (ie. not because of gender) but because they were underperforming programs. Just as we had "discussions" when there was an underperforming age group on the boys side.

I think my perspective has been consistent.

It is easy to say (paraphrasing): if "they" don't want to share information, I'm not going to chase them down.

Doesn't seem like a very effective way to get answers. If I want an answer badly enough, I call the person most likely to have the answer.

Think how efficient it would be if you picked up the telephone, talked to Savitz, and then posted the responses here. You could save EVERYONE a lot of time, with very little effort on your part. Or not.

>>[thomaspietras] [...] We were having "discussions" and trying to "fix things" for the girls programs, not BECAUSE they related to girls (ie. not because of gender) but because they were underperforming programs.<<[/i]

Thank you for the very straightforward answer. I understand your perspective and am heartened that someone, sometime, somewhere, found something related to midlands girls programs to be underperforming.

I believe that your underlying belief system may lay at the root of why Columbia area girls soccer has underperformed; but that's just my opinion and I absolutely respect your right to take your position.

Here's my position. Talk is cheap. One of the best known and more successful girls coaches in the midlands is Heather Frederick. I think that the position she takes in all of this is more indicative of the seriousness of the merged club with respect to girls soccer than anything else I know.

Most people that do not have daughters playing soccer can not see the difference between the boys and girls.Girls that want to play at a high level in SC have to work harder at finding training to fit their needs.Most of the trainers work with just boys...My daughter trains from time to time with boys teams to get the action she is looking for.My daughter is on the ODP team and from what I can tell there is very little mid-state girls trying out and playing.I have heard every excuse in the book from directors saying girls just play to be social or they move on to other things.I am sure this is true for some but the same could be said about boys.I have a girl and a boy playing soccer and I can tell you that it came alot easier for my son and thru her work ethic my daughter is making her way...even though it's the hard way!!