Let's start from the top with the proper context.

>>[HappyDaddy] [...] I have to wonder why Tormey and Hyslop couldn't advise SSC on how to do better at what it wants to do, without making it CESA-Charleston. If their motivation is to improve the quality of youth soccer in South Carolina, and at SSC in particular, why does it necessarily have to involve importing the CESA "brand?" There may be perfectly good reasons that it does, they just aren't apparent to me.<<

>>[HappyDaddy] [...] I remain interested in knowing why achieving the stated goals (improving the performance of SSC) requires the identity change. Your response didn't really answer that.<<

>>[Shibumi] [...] My further guess is that they believe that there are a number of ways to effect change and that SSC must change to be successful. Finally, my last guess is that they believe that the best and fastest way to effect that change involves more than consultancy but includes operational change and branding.

Here's the part of my response where I tried (and clearly failed) to respond:

[... being a] consultant doesn't translate into true strategic and tactical change -- the only thing that translates into that is executive leadership that is willing to introduce change into organizations in which different results are desired. It's my guess that they know this -- but it's just a guess...<<

Consultant came from your term "advise" in your first sentence; I theorized that they believed they had to do more than advise (or in my parlance, consult.) I theorized that they believe that the best and fastest way to effect change involves operational change and branding.

Now...what you want is a specific response to one phrase of one sentence in your posting, to wit:

>>[HappyDaddy] [...] why does it necessarily have to involve importing the CESA "brand?<<

I'll guess one more time. My guess is that they are requiring a rebranding for the same reasons any company does; to signal externally and internally a different set of values, operating procedures, etc. and to leverage the name recognition and accomplishments associated with any past brand (in this case, "CESA".) In other words, I'm guessing that it's their belief that this is the fastest and best way to effect the change.

None of my guesses are based on anything other than what companies typically do. And all of my guesses are worth what you pay for them. Are my guesses viable for this situation? Yes. Are the accurate for this situation? I have not a clue. But you asked for perfectly good reasons, so I thought I'd provide you the typical reasoning behind name changes in companies, products, services, or concepts.