WHAT???? No Region IV or V girls on this list???? That is just unbelievable to me. According to my sources, the Region IV and V representatives did not even show up for this meeting. TELL ME IT ISN'T SO? If you were there, were you in the bathroom when the names of the players in Region IV and V were brought up? The girls that were nominated from the Region IV and V schools ....Dutch Fork, Irmo, Spring Valley and Richland NE deserved to be at least considered. There are several girls that were ALL-State selections last year, and certainly if looking at their stats, should have been on the ALL-STATE team this year. It is rather a coincidence that the committee members for these Regions....White Knoll (David Lloyd) Blythewood (Tony King- rumors here) Aiken (Ron Johnson-just resigned) did not have any nominations to be voted on, so is that why they didn't show up or were there other reasons? But what about Spring Valley (Steve Lea)? Did you not come to at least fight for your own players?
I am not at all trying to take anything away from the other committee members. You showed up, and fought for the players on the teams in your respective Regions. Good for you! I just wish that the coaches from Regions IV and V had taken their selection for this committee seriously, and if they couldn't make it, at least get a substitute to represent them. I am appalled and disgusted!
In my opinion...This is NOT a true ALL-STATE team.
Wow! If my Math's correct: 16 of the 18 players chosen were from schools with coaches on the Committee. ????
What happened to R4 and R5 reps?
Mary the committee was very disappointed with the Columbia coaches not showing up for such important meeting. Some of us gave up a whole day traveling and working on the committee to get this right. We did look at the players nominated and some committee members did play Irmo, Dutch Fork and White Knoll during the season. I agree, when we have coaches from the Region IV and V it makes it much easier to compare a forward from Dutch Fork and one from Wando for example. I agree that some players were left off the all state roster – but not just from Columbia. I know of one player that was not even nominated from our Region and should have been on the all state team.
I think we as coaches have the obligation to nominate these players; we have the obligation to attend this meeting to carefully select the best players that were nominated. We also have the obligation to go back to our teams or our players and tell them why they did or did not make the all state team. I shared this with my committee and I thought we worked very hard to make sure we spend some time on this. The committee took two hours to look at each player. We discussed and compared players. We looked at stats, we looked at previous accomplishments, how they impacted each team, what was the competition they played against, compared players from one team to another. But you are right, had we had some coaches from Columbia the votes at the end to select a player might have turned out much different.
I was told,it looks like incorrectly,that the coaches from a specific school could not petition for their players that were nominated..at least that is what was said last year.Is this true?? And I agree that is extremely sad that the Columbia coaches did not feel the need to turn up at such an important meeting. Congrats to the girls that did make it,but too bad for those that were nominated and then had no one to turn up and speak on their behalf.
One more note...what process is used to select the coaches that are supposed to participate in these selections?
Loves to Play:
1. Coaches talk about each player in their region. For example Wando coach gave us lots of insides on her players that we did not know prior to the meeting. Petition might be a strong word.
2. Not sure how we get this honor each year.
are you saying that no Lexington player was even nominated? This surprises me. We had a great season with a ton of talented girls.
It is ashame we finished tied for 1st and don't get any recognition! oh well
These were the coaches in attendance:
Class 4A Girls (9)
Coordinator - Josef Lorenz, Dorman
R1 - Craig Joyner, T.L. Hanna
R1 - Ryan Roseberry, Westside
R2 - Kevin Czar, Mauldin
R3 - Kelsey Geary, Clover
R3 - Cesar Robles, Northwestern
R6 - Jimmy Watson, Sumter
R7 - Shannon Champ, Wando
R8 - Bob Polk, Summerville
These were how the players were divided
All-State team- 5????- WANDO PLAYERS
4????- MAULDIN PLAYERS
3????- DORMAN PLAYERS
2- TL HANNA PLAYERS
1- HILLCREST PLAYER
1- SUMMERVILLE PLAYER
1- FORT MILL PLAYER
I realize that it must be a hard job to go over other teams players and try to compare them with the "Powerhouse Teams" players of these other regions, but if you look at the results and the coach that showed up? Also, just curious, how the 4 Mauldin players were chosen for the team, but were not even on the list of 34 All-State nominees. Did Coach Czar just bring his 4 nominations into the meeting, and say by the way, these are the girls I want on the All-State team. Their names not being on the list, how were they even considered? Not trying to take away from those players being worthy, just how does the process not work for every team involved?
Wando: 5 of their 5 nominations on the All-State team....and you said it yourself, that Coach Shannon mentioned some things about these players that you might not have known. There should be some limit to how many players a team should have on the list.
Like I said in my original post...I believe that the coaches that attended the meeting did their job. It is obvious...Wando 5 for 5, Mauldin 4 for 4 ( I assume since their players were not even posted on the list), TL Hanna 2 of 4, Summerville 1 of 2, and Dorman 3 of 2 (How is it that you have 3 players on the team, when only 2 were nominated?)
Not sure what happened with the top two scorers in 4-A (According to Individual stats) not being on the All-State Team...would love to hear how that discussion went. Just wonder what stats you guys were looking at????
Like I said on my original post...I am appalled and disgusted!!!! Even more so now that I have really looked at who made it versus who was at the meeting. Shame on you David Lloyd, Steve Lea, Tony King, and Ron Johnson!!!!
There is NO WAY you can convince me that these Region VI and V players were given more than 2 seconds of consideration without a representative there.
....and 1- CLOVER
(very well-deserved I might add)
just curious as to how Irmo a fourth spot finisher in their region got so many nominees? no disrespect to them but without a rep. from our region there, how did they get so much love??
Mary,
Last post here since I spend more time on this then preparing my team for the playoffs.
The list you received was not the complete list. Some nominations were late getting in and we received an updated list on Sunday morning. We had about 10 more players that were not on the list. Speaking just about mine - I nominate all three players as outlined by the rules and regulations of SCSoccer.
Limits on how many players from a team are not the answer.
Coaches nominating and following up on the obligations is one way. Having coaches to represent you area is another answer.
You would need to take that up with Coach Fryland...the coach is who nominates the players.
I just printed off the last list posted on SC Soccer, and that is what I based my post on. No one would have been able to do their homework on 10 players just nominated...OH BUT WAIT...their coaches were in attendance, so there wouldn't have been a need.... since you could give insight into any of those last additions. Gee, if only everyone had that opportunity!
Thanks for your comments and clarification on that...
Like I said before...you did your job.....
doesn't change the fact that those Region IV and V coaches DID NOT do theirs. They will have alot of disappointed players, coaches and parents to answer to.
Yes, and I am going to say it one more time.....
Without every region being represented there is NO WAY
in my opinion that this is a true ALL- STATE team.
Why should coaches have to show up to fight for their players to be all state? Because the coaches that show up get their players in?
What kind of process is this? Think about it..
My daughter's coach thought enough of her to nominate her and she knows she has the respect of her fellow teammates for what she has brought to the team..
I guess that's all the reward she needs..Respect from her peers
That was my point. The question was-why weren't any Lexington players nominated..it would be up to the coach to nominate them-right?? My daughter was also nominated and she appreciates what that meant,whether she was chosen or not.
It is..what it is..Four or five players from one team..Please..
"These were how the players were divided
All-State team- 5????- WANDO PLAYERS
4????- MAULDIN PLAYERS
3????- DORMAN PLAYERS
2- TL HANNA PLAYERS
1- HILLCREST PLAYER
1- SUMMERVILLE PLAYER
1- FORT MILL PLAYER "
IS THE NAMES LISTED ANYWHERE
The current process for selecting these players is flawed. There really needs to be a change for the sake of the players. Must say congratulations to those who did make the list!
USC,
The list is at the top of the forum..SCHSSCA and then just look for the thread..It was posted today
Congratulations to the SEVEN ALL-STATE players from CESA 92 Girls Premier.
What jumped out to me was that, for 4A/3A girls, only five defenders out of 36 players were selected.
That's not a statement about any of the names selected. But it seems that a team on the field is usually made up of 36% defenders, but the All-State selection only selected 13% defenders. So it seems, just based on those numbers, that there is a heavy bias towards offense and points, not necessarily impact.
Quote:
What jumped out to me was that, for 4A/3A girls, only five defenders out of 36 players were selected.
That's not a statement about any of the names selected. But it seems that a team on the field is usually made up of 36% defenders, but the All-State selection only selected 13% defenders. So it seems, just based on those numbers, that there is a heavy bias towards offense and points, not necessarily impact.
After looking at most of the scores this season it seems about right that the play makers took home most of the All-State honors. There were only a handful of schools with a shut down defense. Anyway, congratulations to all HS players that worked hard and played for there respective schools.
Quote:
After looking at most of the scores this season it seems about right that the play makers took home most of the All-State honors. There were only a handful of schools with a shut down defense.
And it's also probably normal in all sports at all levels. Just one of this things that jumped out at me as I looked down the list.
Quote:
Anyway, congratulations to all HS players that worked hard and played for there respective schools.
Ditto!
Originally, I was just trying to make my point about the fact that the Region IV and V coaches did not bother to show up or get an alternate for this VERY important ALL-STATE committee meeting. Now upon further investigation, I do have some additional points to make. Dorman Soccer: you said that additional nominees were brought to you at the meeting. The deadline for nominations to be in was May 13, at 6pm. The 34 nominees posted on the website SCSoccer.com was posted as of 5/15/10 @ 12:53pm. So if those 10 additional players were added that morning, and were in by the deadline, why were they not posted by 5/15/10 @ 12:53pm when the last update was done. Also,
I am sorry but there are plenty of schools that have multiple players worthy of making an All-State team. To have 3 schools (WANDO-5, MAULDIN-4, and DORMAN-3 take 2/3 of the allotted players for the All-State team is just ridiculous...oh, and by the way, those players had coaches that were on the committee, and showed up. So, for you out there that don't understand the importance of having someone show up to give some "insight" as to why certain players should be on this team, that should make it perfectly clear. There is NO WAY that a coach in Wando, Dorman, or Mauldin is going to know that your player in Dutch Fork, Irmo, Spring Valley, etc is worthy of being on the All-State team. They may have heard a name or two, and even had a coach call and speak about a player, but when it comes down to choosing one of their players, or one in a Region where there is no one to speak up ( because they are not there)for them, there is no doubt which one they will choose. There are just too many players in the State for every coach to know about. Yes, it is an honor to be nominated...blah, blah, blah, but it is more of an honor to be chosen. Always has, and always will be! I hope everyone that reads this is getting the message, and that if nothing can be done to correct this year's voting, at least let's not let this happen again next year....especially, you Region IV and V coaches.
Kind of interesting that the out of town coaches bothered to attend the meeting and not the local ones.
Mary, I feel your pain but after going over the list a couple times everyone chosen was deserving of the award. The deadline issue I do have a major problem with. But I will say one more time the girls on the list are all very deserving and congratulations to players, coaches and parents.
Sweet,
I don't think it's a matter of who was chosen but how they are chosen..
None from Stratford, James Island, or West Ashley???
Congratulations to all players, coaches, and parents!!
The system may be flawed if it is so heavily dependent on an individual team's coach to nominate and be present at a meeting. Notice the lack of Eastside girls in the nomination list. Maybe next year they could do it similar to showcase tournaments or player id processes. It would require additional paper work and tracking but you would truly get the top players for the high school season identified. During the season a coach submits names/numbers of the opposing team who they felt were outstanding/all state material during the game. I would suspect by the end of the season you would have a list of a lot of repeat names identified by all different coaches. This would be the nomination list. The nomination committee could then narrow the group down from there but every player would have had an opportunity to be nominated if they played a game and the nomination would have been judged on the current high school season which I think is suppose to be the basis of the selection. The nomination committee could look at the data and the players whose names were chosen game after game by opponent coaches would likely truly be impact players. This would give the girls whose coach wasn't present or didn't do the paperwork to nominate a chance for the data to speak for itself. It would give the girls who maybe don't play club soccer and therefore have possibly more name recognition in the state an equal chance of being chosen.
I would guess Mary would be happy to volunteer to facilitate the paper work.
If I were a coach at the meeting and walked away with three,four or five all state players..I don't know if I would be proud of myself or ashamed of what I done..I would like to think the latter..
scwame,
Region 4 & 5 AAAA players were nominated. It's just that none of those regions' coaches who were named to the committee showed up to represent those players' interests.
I agree with Mary's statement. It is not the fault of any of the coaches there. How are you suppose to vote on players you know nothing about except what the coach wrote in the comment section of the nomination form? You can't, so you then vote for all of the players that you have more knowledge of. It is the fault of the region representatives' for NOT SHOWING UP! That not only looks bad on themselves but the entire region. The ones that get punished for it are the girls that were nominated and a lot of them were All-State worthy. At least would be in the conversation. It is just poor representation of the regions that didn't show and would love to know WHY the coaches were not there??? If you have some come up, cool but make sure some one goes in your place.That way at least our girls would be supported. This affected a lot of girls and just hope there is some explanation that was more important than honoring our girls for all of their hard work all season long. Just Rubish
Obviously, there is a feeling that "some" of these girls should not be on the list. It is a shame that this list is now "tainted" by the "process" or "lack of a meaningful process" in this case.
All "tainted" except for the two that did not have a coach present...Hillcrest and Fort Mill. They made it on their own........ unless they too fall into the other large subset of the list... the CESA connection.
Quote:
None from Stratford, James Island, or West Ashley??? Congratulations to all players, coaches, and parents!!
Not sure a 9-11 Stratford team or James Island (outscored 20-0 by Wando) had any all-state players. Maybe all-region or all-Lowcountry, but not all-state.
Also, all this bickering about Irmo not getting any players picked makes me ask how "deserving" is a team that gets knocked out in the first round and finished fourth in their own region? Who from Irmo should have been all-state ahead of those selected? Why?
I don't know why some of the coaches in Columbia didn't show up, but another question is why aren't some the other coaches members. According to the http://www.scsoccer.com/forum/showflat.php?Cat=0&Number=126894&an=0&page=0#Post126894 link with SCHSSCA members, the only Irmo coaches registered are Mike Mauldin, Paul Armstrong, and Denny Sago. I believe Mauldin JV coached at DF this year and Armstrong isn't coaching. Sago is a boys asst. coach. I don't even see Phil Savitz listed, but that has to be a mistake. I don't see any Dutch Fork coaches listed either. Maybe that has something to do with it?
I have stayed quiet and let you vent so far but now you are crossing the line by claiming the girls on the team are not deserving and the list is tainted. NOTHING could be further from the truth. Every player on this list plays at the highest level in High School and club. We committed ourselves to picking the 18 best players in this state. Yes it is unfortunate that nobody from Regions 4 and 5 were there but the girls we picked very much deserved the honor. So go ahead and say anything else you want because it is a free country but I really don't want anybody to slam the girls on the team. I have seen most of them play first hand and they are special.
Quote:
Obviously, there is a feeling that "some" of these girls should not be on the list. It is a shame that this list is now "tainted" by the "process" or "lack of a meaningful process" in this case.
All "tainted" except for the two that did not have a coach present...Hillcrest and Fort Mill. They made it on their own........ unless they too fall into the other large subset of the list... the CESA connection.
Quote:
Also, all this bickering about Irmo not getting any players picked...
Can you quote the bickering you are referring to? I don't see it in this thread.
Quote:
I don't know why some of the coaches in Columbia didn't show up, but another question is why aren't some the other coaches members. According to the http://www.scsoccer.com/forum/showflat.php?Cat=0&Number=126894&an=0&page=0#Post126894 link with SCHSSCA members..
The Region 4-AAAA and 5-AAAA representatives on the committee that did not attend the meeting (Lloyd, Johnson, King, & Lea) are on the SCHSSCA members list you referenced
Quote:
I don't see any Dutch Fork coaches listed either. Maybe that has something to do with it?
Mike Mauldin is a Dutch Fork coach who is on the list and he served on the All-Star games selection committee.
All "tainted" except for the two that did not have a coach present...Hillcrest and Fort Mill. They made it on their own........ unless they too fall into the other large subset of the list... the CESA connection.
Again, the coaches present at the meeting voted for the players that they were most familiar with. Hillcrest as a member of Region 2 and Fort Mill as a member of Region 3 HAD representation at the meeting.
The biggest problem is that the coaches most familiar with the Columbia girls simply didn't bother to show up. This is a very sad statement when they were local and the out of town coaches made the effort on behalf of their regions.
You can knock the process, but you can't knock the girls that made the team.
You can express your disappointment with 12 of the 18 girls selected being from just three teams......but let's take a look at those three teams. Sure the coaches of those three teams were present, but those three schools have been absoultely dominant this year. Actually, those three schools have been dominant for the past three years.
Wando, Mauldin and Dorman haven't lost to anybody else in the state.......except eachother. You can criticize them for not "sharing/spreading the wealth", but you can't criticize them for not selecting the best players.
Stratford, James Island, West Ashley, Lexington, Dutch Fork, Irmo, Aiken, White Knoll......I'm not dissing you, and congratulations on fine seasons, but the three best players that didn't make the 4A All-State team, all might play for the Big 3.
Becca Lisson (Wando), Sarrah Tuggle (Mauldin) and Becca Miller (Dorman) would all get my vote ahead of anyone else added to the team.
The system isn't perfect, it's not even close to perfect. If the "Columbia Crew" showed up for the meeting, I'm not sure their players should have been chosen based on them "kicking and screaming". Do we want politics to decide who gets these honors?
There's got to be a better way, but I haven't figured it out yet.
I don't feel that this is an issue of individual players that did or did not make the team. The issue is that over 250 student/athletes from Regions 4-AAAA and 5-AAAA did not have any representation at the meeting although two coaches from each of those regions were named to the committee.
Never slamed a single player..Are they deserving? I would say so..Are there players deserving that are not on the list..I would say so also..NO team should have three,four or five players represented with the talent out there..Don't look at what the teams have done..Look at what the players have done..It's the process that bothers me..When you look at those involved and those that are picked..We belittle the award because everyone knows how it is done..I don't think it was an accident that the list of coaches was listed after the players that were chosen..You want to do it this way? You think this is fair? One school..one player..Pick the best of the three or four..Is this fair? It's just as fair as the process is now.
I feel that I am in the minority of coaches that can say they had the honor of playing Wando, Dorman (twice), and Mauldin (twice) this season. From what I saw from those three teams during our matches, I have no thoughts of the players not being deserving. You look at what those three teams have done in terms of their records this year:
Wando 24-0-2 (Enough Said with that record)
Maulding 23-2-0 (Guess Who their only two losses were two? Wando and Dorman. Also Beat Dorman Twice)
Dorman 20-2-0 (Lost against Mauldin twice and beat them once)
All Three teams play a tremendous schedule and have done amazing jobs with their teams. Lets please stop complaining about how many players they had that made it and start congratulating them for the amazing seasons they are STILL HAVING!!!
Congratulations to the 18 young ladies that have recieved this honor and thank you to the coaches that did all the behind the scenes work and took on a very tuff and time consuming task in order to honor our states best lady soccer players.
List of coaches was published before the players were selected. I knew who was on the committee.
I didn't say they weren't deseving... on the contrary, I think it is a HIGHLY talented selection of players. I too have seen most of them play.
I say "tainted" because of all the talk that is going on. It is truely a shame to have this talented list of players scrutinzed due to the process by which they received this honor.
And, sorry, just a little jab at CESA... no harm intended.. they are great players.
Quote:
If the "Columbia Crew" showed up for the meeting, I'm not sure their players should have been chosen based on them "kicking and screaming". Do we want politics to decide who gets these honors?
I don't think it's just a matter of politics. If the Region 4 & 5 coaches had shown up, at least the committee could have heard more about their players' accomplishments and worthiness to be considered, even if they weren't selected. This would be a completely different discussion if those coaches had shown up.
You called them the "Columbia Crew", but they also represent Aiken, North Augusta, Orangeburg-Wilkinson, Lancaster, Rock Hill, and South Pointe.
Maybe larger schools should get a first team, second team and perhaps a third team or honorable mention selection process. Or perhaps THAT would only ignite further craziness.
As long as "people" are involved, you will never get the "politics" out of the process.
"I love mankind; it's people I can't stand"...Linus (via cartoonist Charles Schultz)
Quote:
Quote:
If the "Columbia Crew" showed up for the meeting, I'm not sure their players should have been chosen based on them "kicking and screaming". Do we want politics to decide who gets these honors?
I don't think it's just a matter of politics. If the Region 4 & 5 coaches had shown up, at least the committee could have heard more about their players' accomplishments and worthiness to be considered, even if they weren't selected. This would be a completely different discussion if those coaches had shown up.
You called them the "Columbia Crew", but they also represent Aiken, North Augusta, Orangeburg-Wilkinson, Lancaster, Rock Hill, and South Pointe.
I agree, a voice would have been nice.
Didn't include RH/SP/Lanc in my "Columbia Crew" reference (geographically) since none of their coaches were on the committee.
I don't care if regions 4 or 5 were a no show..Our coach did not attend either..It's the process..A player should not be left out because his or her coach could or would not attend..So the others throw his/her players under the bus..
High school has become club ball? All the players have to move to go to the same school in order to receive an award?
You called them the "Columbia Crew", but they also represent Aiken, North Augusta, Orangeburg-Wilkinson, Lancaster, Rock Hill, and South Pointe.
Coach P
I was at the selection meeting and can speak for the last three on your list (Lancaster, RH,and SP) As far as the remaining Aiken, NA, and OW it would be hard for me to believe that they have players more deserving than Wando, Mauldin, and Dorman.
4-A All State Player award...not team award..Bust those teams up and do they look as good?
That's what alot of good players are faced with..
Quote:
You called them the "Columbia Crew", but they also represent Aiken, North Augusta, Orangeburg-Wilkinson, Lancaster, Rock Hill, and South Pointe.
Coach P
I was at the selection meeting and can speak for the last three on your list (Lancaster, RH,and SP) As far as the remaining Aiken, NA, and OW it would be hard for me to believe that they have players more deserving than Wando, Mauldin, and Dorman.
I agree, but at least they deserve to have their Region's representative attend the meeting.
No argument there Coach....
Sounds like the boys side is having the same issues..
If this is the process we choose to live with..Don't nominate players if you are not planning on attending the meeting..
Quote:
All "tainted" except for the two that did not have a coach present...Hillcrest and Fort Mill. They made it on their own........ unless they too fall into the other large subset of the list... the CESA connection.
So I guess the system works, two top quality players made it without there coach present, Just so you know, there is no love lost between CESA and HS soccer.
All the more reason to let high school honors be high school honors without inserting anyone's favorite club into the discussion.
Quote:
All the more reason to let high school honors be high school honors without inserting anyone's favorite club into the discussion.
Problem is all of the top players play club ball. With the HS talent at an all time high a non club player has zero chance of picking up an award.
Closest approximation of truth that I can see...there is really no possible way for all "deserving" players in the state to be represented on an 18-player all-state team. I understand the argument that it seems unfair for multiple players from the same teams to get the honor while no players from other schools are picked. Limiting the number of players per team would solve this, certainly. On the other hand, the argument could also be made that it would be unfair to penalize a highly deserving player for being a member of a team full of highly deserving players...do you tell the third or fourth choice from, say, a Wando team, "Well, if you played for any other team in the state you would have gotten the honor, but since you happened to play on the same team as these other players, you're out?" Doesn't seem fair to the individuals either. Seems the All-State placement is intended to recognize the individual players, not teams or schools.
Does representation at a meeting make a difference? If all other things are equal or close to equal, certainly. The best any committe can do, though, is to try to make sure all of the players selected ARE worthy of the honor within the scope of the committee's knowledge--not to definitively say that they are MORE worthy than any other players, and certainly not to say that the players not selected are NOT worthy.
Point remains...club flag-waving doesn't need to enter into a high school awards discussion. Everyone knows what everyone knows...let high school have its season.
What's to goal of the 18 player All-State team? In theory is the idea that these 18 are the team that would represent the state if there was such a competition?
Coaches have to be invited to attend, you can't just show up and have a vote. The SCHSSCA selects who attends. Maybe they need to take a hard look at who they ask in the future. I'm sure there are plenty of coaches that would show up if given the opportunity!
Quote:
Quote:
All the more reason to let high school honors be high school honors without inserting anyone's favorite club into the discussion.
Problem is all of the top players play club ball. With the HS talent at an all time high a non club player has zero chance of picking up an award.
I don't think anyone would question that the club players are top players. I think what we are saying here is that "club" accomplishments are not part of the equation when "discussing" All State high school player selection on this board.
As usual, CESA has to get their "plug" in. Not sure why a few CESA parents feel the need to always do that. It rubs people the wrong way. The CESA bashers are more about the attitude of a vocal few, not the club's number of wins.
Hurst66 was spot on that more players from Wando, Mauldin & Dorman could be on the team. I'm sure there are players from many schools that could be on the team, but they only get to choose 18. I would not want that job.
To those of you criticizing the schools with the higher # of players selected....should the coaches consider leaving off a well deserving player because there are "too many" from one team? It takes more than one coach to vote a player in, so your bias theory doesn't hold.
Back to the original complaint....Regions IV & V should've had representation at this extremely important meeting.
I will not complain about the girls who made the "All-State team". All of the girls nominated made a commitment to to their respective school programs to attend practices, train hard, and represent their schools in a professional manner. What makes me mad is you have coaches who for some reason did not make that same level of commitment to their team and players, or for the other teams and players in the region that they should have been representing. If for some reason a coach couldn't attend, find a replacement. I don't care if a coach was retiring, resigning or whatever.....they had a commitment that they failed to complete. If they wanted to be out of the picture, find a replacement who would atleast show up and represent the athletes nominated.
I'm just curious, but let me ask this, was a reminder sent out lastweek to all of the coaches on the commitee about the meeting? If so, a red flag should have went up when these coaches didn't respond. If they did respond, did anyone try contacting them by cell phone to see where they were?
You have to be a member of SCHSSCA to be on a committee. A lot of coaches are not members! It is very easy to become a member of SCHSSCA.
I know of a coach on the boys side that had NO CLUE he was on the all-state committee..never informed byt the schssca..and was told by another that his name was listed on scsoccer..he had prior engagments and could not attend the meeting
my question is who picks the coaches to represent the committtee? i know in other classes, some of the regions were not represented in 2a and 3a
A few issues with all this.
1.) Which club a player played for should not have anything to do with making ALL State. It is supposed to be what that player did during the high school season.
2.)You can't tell me or anyone reasonable, that there were 0 kids from the midlands area that did not deserve to be on the 4A all state team. Dutch Fork, Blythewood, Spring Valley, White Knoll, Lexington and Irmo all finished in the top 15 in 4A (except Irmo).
3.) The coaches that did not show up for the meetings should never be assigned to be on a committee again or rewarded with coaching all star games--unless a valid reason was given before hand--and they still could have found a replacement or notified Coach Heise and I am sure he could have found a replacement.
4.) No one is questioning the talent of those selected. But to say that there were 0 kids from the midlands area that deserved to be on the team is just not correct. Congrats to those that did make it.
5.) Wando, Dorman, Mauldin--all are great teams. The difference between these 3 teams and teams ranked 4-15 in 4A is that they have 11 great players on their team (at least). But that does not mean the 2-3 players from teams 4-15 in 4A should not be considered or picked.
6.) a limit per team might not be a bad idea...North/South all star game is 2 per team, The Clash all star game is 2 per team, should All state not be 2 per team? Maybe 3?
Quote:
The 2010 SCHSSCA All-Star Games & All-State Committees have been released on the SCSoccer.com main page at SCSoccer.com.
If you have been selected to represent your region/area and cannot attend, please contact me at kheise@sc.rr.com
Committee members are expected to "do their homework" on nominated individuals and to represent your region/area in the best possible manner. Please come prepared.
This was posted on the SCHSSCA forum on April 3. Was no other notice sent to the coaches who were selected? So if they don't read the message board or don't read the SCHSSCA forum, then they would not know they were selected. Shouldn't they at least have to accept their position before being expected to attend?
There was a boys' coach that was on the committee that did not know he was on the committee until someone told him it was on the message board; so they are not notified through email or phone calls..he was not present
Also, our region was not represented in the meeting so no one could fight for our players who were nominated...and 1 of them is a committed junior..
it just seems it is always the same teams and same coaches;
yes, ALL these kids deserve the recognition; but it seems nothing changes in who is representing the committees...these kids could be on it with other coaches represented too
why can't there be a 1st team, 2nd team, and 3rd team-other states do that...we all know there are more than 18 players that are that good in the state...some play in crappy regions, some play on crappy teams, and never get recognized for who they are as a player b.c they don't play on certain teams or in certain regions
The best teams have the best players..I can agree with that but if I take those four or five all staters and moved them to different teams..What then? They don't stand out so much now do they? Don't pick players based on their teams but on their ability to impact their team whether they are 25-0 or 14-14..
Quote:
There was a boys' coach that was on the committee that did not know he was on the committee until someone told him it was on the message board; so they are not notified through email or phone calls..he was not present
Also, our region was not represented in the meeting so no one could fight for our players who were nominated...and 1 of them is a committed junior..
it just seems it is always the same teams and same coaches;
yes, ALL these kids deserve the recognition; but it seems nothing changes in who is representing the committees...these kids could be on it with other coaches represented too
why can't there be a 1st team, 2nd team, and 3rd team-other states do that...we all know there are more than 18 players that are that good in the state...some play in crappy regions, some play on crappy teams, and never get recognized for who they are as a player b.c they don't play on certain teams or in certain regions
I've served on this committee before but not for several years. Back then it was mandated that you had to fill out a true starting 11 and then choose seven other players. That does not seem to be the case now. We asked then why we couldn't have more than one All-State Team, but that was what the SCACA parent organization dictated, so we went with honoring the best 18 we could identify.
I counted more than 50 coaches present at the meeting in the All-State thread. I understand you have to be a member of SCACA and the SCHSSCA to be considered for the All-State Committee. If a coach is not a member of those organizations then it's pretty obvious that the coach doesn't consider that his/her profession and is just there to pick up a check like club coaches do. From being around the game a long time there are a lot of I's to dot and T's to cross when it comes to high school athletics. You can't just roll the ball out there, scrimmage for an hour and a half while talking on your cell phone, and then calling it a day. This is a full time commitment and quite honestly some just aren't cut out to do so.
The SCHSSCA has made it quite obvious that this message board and the scsoccer.com web site are its main methods of information for their organization. For a coach, parent, or player to not be familiar with these outlets is just poor and outside of physically spoon-feeding needy adults I don't know what more could be done to make it as easy as possible for the coaches.
But just like ODP, Select, etc., players not chosen will find a reason to complain instead of looking in the mirror and realizing that they've just got to be better. If their coach was on the All-State Committee and not present at the meeting then that is where the questions should be asked. If a coach did not nominate his/her players then ask that coach directly because no one else would know why a player(s) were not nominated.
Quote:
The SCHSSCA has made it quite obvious that this message board and the scsoccer.com web site are its main methods of information for their organization. For a coach, parent, or player to not be familiar with these outlets is just poor and outside of physically spoon-feeding needy adults I don't know what more could be done to make it as easy as possible for the coaches.
I don't know how they can be expected to read the forum when they don't even submit their schedules and scores. One of the coaches that did not show up has an incomplete record showing on the scoreboard. He did not submit his schedule or scores to scsoccer.com. The fact that he did not get the info and did not show up for the meeting should have been predictable.
How can you appoint someone to such a higly visible committee position without at least knowing that they are willing and available to serve?
This looks like the Who's Who of Dorman, Mauldin, Wando. Slapping Pirate Hats off!
All the more reason to have one gender playing in the fall and the other in the spring. One coach can take care of both teams.
I find it odd a coach who is 6-35 for 2009 and 2010 gets to help pick all state players. Politics are at play in all things.
"What we have here...is a failure to communicate"
6-35?!?!?!?! I'm confused. I'd like to say a question. Has this person not been shown a pick slip yet?
So let's blame it on all the coaches that did not show up to fight for their players..Does it give the coaches there the right to pad the squad with their players?
Two wrongs make it right?
I hear about strength of schedules and I find some further down the page of selections that had so-so seasons with schedules that would be considered hard?
One common denominator..Their coach was there..That's it..
Quote:
Congratulations to the SEVEN ALL-STATE players from CESA 92 Girls Premier.
Why does someone always have to bring a club into a discussion about High School?? Well done on the Free promotion. Lame!
Quote:
The best teams have the best players..I can agree with that but if I take those four or five all staters and moved them to different teams..What then? They don't stand out so much now do they? Don't pick players based on their teams but on their ability to impact their team whether they are 25-0 or 14-14..
CHT...we are usually on the same page,but this time I disagree. I don't see the names listed, but you take any 5 players from Wando and put them on another team and not only do they still stand out, but the team you move them to is in contention for region, lower state and state. You can't have much more impact than that. These 5 players would probably stand out all the more because they are no longer on the same team with 16 other really good players.
Don't think so..Not enough supportting cast..You don't even know what team I would move them too..
In soccer..It does take a village..
Never seen one really good player carry a girls team without support..
Quote:
Don't think so..Not enough supportting cast..You don't even know what team I would move them too..
In soccer..It does take a village..
Never seen one really good player carry a girls team without support..
What team are you talking about? I coached in the lower state for 20 years and always found it interesting how Summerville always had a player or two wind up all-state but outside of 1 or 2 teams they had always seemed to make early exits in the playoffs (of course their coach was always at the meeting). Wando is the only true soccer power down here now. Lexington had a good team but still a little young. Interesting to see what team five players from Wando wouldn't have that kind of impact on this season.
Oh, now I get it. You meant move ONE, not all five to one team. I wasn't thinking that direction since girls rarely move in ones.
It would depend on which team you move them to and if that team really just needs a fast forward, goalie, etc. There are several teams in the lowcountry that have a good supporting cast.
If you look over the years, it is very rare a girl gets all state without her TEAM winning 12 or usually 14 matches. This is an individual award and not a team award. But those who pick are usually the winners so... I just can not believe if an Enzo type player were at, say a Laurens or a Goose creek (no offense), they would get no play in the press, because the team did not win.
To the winners go the spoils. Region II got what 9 all state players, with Riverside and JL mann moving in well, will it be more than 2/3 of the all state team? From one region?
I think myself and others just don't understand how an All-State committee can pick an All-State team without committee members from ALL PARTS of the state... I am not talking about picking coaches to be involved and those coaches not showing up! But shouldn't each region (as recognized by the SCHSL) or each geographical region at least be represented! Why does one region get four coaching representatives, but another region get ZERO!!???!!!
Quote:
I think myself and others just don't understand how an All-State committee can pick an All-State team without committee members from ALL PARTS of the state... I am not talking about picking coaches to be involved and those coaches not showing up! But shouldn't each region (as recognized by the SCHSL) or each geographical region at least be represented! Why does one region get four coaching representatives, but another region get ZERO!!???!!!
I disagree! I think we all know that there are certain pockets of the state that are simply better at soccer than others. Why should a 50-goal scorer from Podunk High get an all-state player when the schedule they played in was sub-500 or their 'prestigious tourney title' was in the Lady Azalea/Chrysanthemum/Dogwood Classic?
Only players that achieve at the highest levels against the best competition should be all-state. There are other all-star teams -- i.e. All-Region, All-Area, etc. that should recognize the 'other' players, but not All-State.
As for those bashing the club aspect, though I agree a girl that plays for at an Academy or Premier level is an accomplished player, I still feel that girl should have to produce at the HS level in some very proficient manner. Maybe if she plays at a relatively weak school, that coach should feature their team in a better tourney to showcase his girl against the best teams -- i.e. the Viking Cup.
There seemed to be one nominee the last four years who has been awesome for her high school team, but never exposed (in four years) to high level outside-the-region competition. I put that on her coach as much as anything for not giving her the opportunity on a grander stage.
I don't think some regions (SCHSL or geographical) should have any representation at the meetings because they simply don't play the quality of soccer present elsewhere. It's just a fact. If those areas want to change their perception then it should be their duty to change the product.
You don't see Clemson or Carolina football getting All-Americans every year do you? Generally only when they out-excel the Alabamas, Florida States, Texas, Southern Cals of the gridiron world. Same is true for a lesser high school program. It should be earned, and oftentimes that means the entire program, not just the solo wonder-kid.
As another poster stated, "To the victor goes the spoils."
Quote:
If you look over the years, it is very rare a girl gets all state without her TEAM winning 12 or usually 14 matches. This is an individual award and not a team award. But those who pick are usually the winners so... I just can not believe if an Enzo type player were at, say a Laurens or a Goose creek (no offense), they would get no play in the press, because the team did not win.
To the winners go the spoils. Region II got what 9 all state players, with Riverside and JL mann moving in well, will it be more than 2/3 of the all state team? From one region?
If you look on the 3A All-State team, Nina Morales from Midland Valley made it. She played on the boys team at Midland Valley. The team went 6 - 9 this season. They were no "Riverside or Wando." The committee obviously took the time to look at her stats and comments about the player. It looks like she made a good impression on the boys and girls coaches in 3A. Congratulations to her!!!
Quote:
Quote:
The best teams have the best players..I can agree with that but if I take those four or five all staters and moved them to different teams..What then? They don't stand out so much now do they? Don't pick players based on their teams but on their ability to impact their team whether they are 25-0 or 14-14..
CHT...we are usually on the same page,but this time I disagree. I don't see the names listed, but you take any 5 players from Wando and put them on another team and not only do they still stand out, but the team you move them to is in contention for region, lower state and state. You can't have much more impact than that. These 5 players would probably stand out all the more because they are no longer on the same team with 16 other really good players.
Well if that is the case, then why did Dutch Fork have players left off. They didn't need a player(s) from Wando to share the Region championship or play for the lower state championship.
Well if that is the case, then why did Dutch Fork have players left off. They didn't need a player(s) from Wando to share the Region championship or play for the lower state championship.
You will have to ask the DF coach about why his players were left off. It doesn't seem logical with their standings.
Maybe with any one of the All State players, DF wouldn't have to "share" a region championship.
Quote:
Quote:
Congratulations to the SEVEN ALL-STATE players from CESA 92 Girls Premier.
Why does someone always have to bring a club into a discussion about High School?? Well done on the Free promotion. Lame!
Wow, you can't be serious, name a single time Enzo and his Disc teammates, oops I mean Northwestern HS teammates were not mentioned in the same breath. It was always it's the DISC players.
Quote:
Don't think so..Not enough supportting cast..You don't even know what team I would move them too..
In soccer..It does take a village..
Never seen one really good player carry a girls team without support..
On the other hand, CHT (Devil's advocate, you know me) you could show examples where one or two impact players can make a HUGE difference in a team's overall performance and record, and in my opinion, showing how much their individual contribution has affected the team would be one of the best arguments for including them in an All-State team regardless of team standing. Gotta agree with WormBurner...separate them from the #1 team, they might actually stand out more as individuals; it's harder to spot a diamond in a pile of diamonds.
As for whether they could look as good and get the job done on a less powerful team without the high-caliber supporting cast--hey, send me a couple of them and let's see what happens.
That's a good one..Did anyone else see that table spin around real fast? I guess someone could show you that but you would still lose the argument if you're not there..
Quote:
The best teams have the best players..I can agree with that but if I take those four or five all staters and moved them to different teams..What then? They don't stand out so much now do they? Don't pick players based on their teams but on their ability to impact their team whether they are 25-0 or 14-14..
Devita did that on a relatively weak team an got POY. Mauldin had four players on Allstate in 2009 and Czar was not on the committee. Irmo got two last year and their coach was on the committee. I don't think they even made the play-offs. If they did they did not go far. Heck, Mauldin and Dorman probably had couple more that could have been selected.
Bottom line The Columbia coaches should have been there. What coach would vote for someone he or she has never seen play, over players of his/her own that are deserving? Anyone complaining on this site would do the very same thing if they were in the same situation.
Quote:
If you look over the years, it is very rare a girl gets all state without her TEAM winning 12 or usually 14 matches. This is an individual award and not a team award. But those who pick are usually the winners so... I just can not believe if an Enzo type player were at, say a Laurens or a Goose creek (no offense), they would get no play in the press, because the team did not win.
Stephanie DeVita managed to be identified despite playing on a less than stellar team. Did she put up numbers against Dorman, Mauldin and Spartanburg? Heck no, she didn't have the supporting cast.
But.....somebody noticed she could play.
Quote:
Quote:
There was a boys' coach that was on the committee that did not know he was on the committee until someone told him it was on the message board; so they are not notified through email or phone calls..he was not present
Also, our region was not represented in the meeting so no one could fight for our players who were nominated...and 1 of them is a committed junior..
it just seems it is always the same teams and same coaches;
yes, ALL these kids deserve the recognition; but it seems nothing changes in who is representing the committees...these kids could be on it with other coaches represented too
why can't there be a 1st team, 2nd team, and 3rd team-other states do that...we all know there are more than 18 players that are that good in the state...some play in crappy regions, some play on crappy teams, and never get recognized for who they are as a player b.c they don't play on certain teams or in certain regions
I've served on this committee before but not for several years. Back then it was mandated that you had to fill out a true starting 11 and then choose seven other players. That does not seem to be the case now. We asked then why we couldn't have more than one All-State Team, but that was what the SCACA parent organization dictated, so we went with honoring the best 18 we could identify.
I counted more than 50 coaches present at the meeting in the All-State thread. I understand you have to be a member of SCACA and the SCHSSCA to be considered for the All-State Committee. If a coach is not a member of those organizations then it's pretty obvious that the coach doesn't consider that his/her profession and is just there to pick up a check like club coaches do. From being around the game a long time there are a lot of I's to dot and T's to cross when it comes to high school athletics. You can't just roll the ball out there, scrimmage for an hour and a half while talking on your cell phone, and then calling it a day. This is a full time commitment and quite honestly some just aren't cut out to do so.
The SCHSSCA has made it quite obvious that this message board and the scsoccer.com web site are its main methods of information for their organization. For a coach, parent, or player to not be familiar with these outlets is just poor and outside of physically spoon-feeding needy adults I don't know what more could be done to make it as easy as possible for the coaches.
But just like ODP, Select, etc., players not chosen will find a reason to complain instead of looking in the mirror and realizing that they've just got to be better. If their coach was on the All-State Committee and not present at the meeting then that is where the questions should be asked. If a coach did not nominate his/her players then ask that coach directly because no one else would know why a player(s) were not nominated.
Old Gal,
Great post. Need to hear from you more often. Nice to see both reasonable and logical thinking......very good.
Quote:
Back then it was mandated that you had to fill out a true starting 11 and then choose seven other players. That does not seem to be the case now.
That was my reason for asking about the lack of defenders on the teams. In fact, only one defender on the entire 3A list.
I think the four no show coaches should apologize to every player from their region that was nominated for all state. If you were discussed and voted down you can accept that but to not get a fair chance because someone didn't do their job is hard to take.
Quote:
Quote:
The best teams have the best players..I can agree with that but if I take those four or five all staters and moved them to different teams..What then? They don't stand out so much now do they? Don't pick players based on their teams but on their ability to impact their team whether they are 25-0 or 14-14..
Devita did that on a relatively weak team an got POY. Mauldin had four players on Allstate in 2009 and Czar was not on the committee. Irmo got two last year and their coach was on the committee. I don't think they even made the play-offs. If they did they did not go far. Heck, Mauldin and Dorman probably had couple more that could have been selected.
Bottom line The Columbia coaches should have been there. What coach would vote for someone he or she has never seen play, over players of his/her own that are deserving? Anyone complaining on this site would do the very same thing if they were in the same situation.
FYI - Irmo DID make the playoffs last year, but ran into the Wando wall in the second round.The players selected last year were well deserving of that honor, as are the players this year! As far as I am aware, none of us on this post played one minute of one match! Until we do, let's hold our tounges and congratulate these fantastic athletes! There is a tremendous amount of talent out there that did not even receive a nomination. The players selected should be proud of their selection as should the players nominated. Congratulations to all these fine young ladies and good luck in the future!
If she can't produce against the big schools, why would she be named POY? She couldn't produce because she didn't have a cast of players? That goes back to it being a team award rather than the individual award.
Quote:
Congratulations to the SEVEN ALL-STATE players from CESA 92 Girls Premier.
The reason these girls from the CESA team were selected for the All-STATE team is that they are competitive with the best Under 17 players in the country. They are dedicated players and play the best teams at their age group on a national basis. They play all the year round, give up their weekends and public holidays to play and therefore hone their considerable skills. This team includes girls from Wando, Mauldin, Riverside, Eastside, Woodruff and elsewhere. The teams they play against have players on the national team.
To my knowledge the team have played games, or have still to play games against are the very best teams outside of SC including teams who are prepared to meet them in places located in Florida, Texas, New Jersey, Louisiana, and Washington State They are is still scheduled to play top national teams before the Fall. High School soccer and club soccer cannot be isolated from each other and of course, the best players are those dedicated to the game.
its easier to put a less skilled player on defense and teach them the ropes,this allows the coach to move a more skilled player up to concentrate on scoring.Alot of the freshman are club player that start out on defense,but move up to a different position as a soph.Then another fresh. will hopefully step into a starting defense position.At least thats how it works for our h.s. program.Plus everybody knows you dont get any respect when you play defense!!They do the dirty work and usually dont get the credit!!
Quote:
its easier to put a less skilled player on defense and teach them the ropes,this allows the coach to move a more skilled player up to concentrate on scoring.Alot of the freshman are club player that start out on defense,but move up to a different position as a soph.Then another fresh. will hopefully step into a starting defense position.At least thats how it works for our h.s. program.Plus everybody knows you dont get any respect when you play defense!!They do the dirty work and usually dont get the credit!!
I guess that's one way to do it. Our program puts skilled players on defense and moves them into scoring positions by teaching them to attack out of the back.
I know several players in the list who play multiple positions during the course of a game depending on where they may be needed at the time especially those who play on teams with less depth. So, some players listed as forward or midfielder may spend nearly as much time during the year as defenders. However, you don't seem to see the F/D or M/D in the All State lists.
Actually, I've never liked "defender" as identifying a position. Should be forwards, midfielders, and backs. After all, when possession changes to the other team, aren't they ALL supposed to be playing as defenders?
Quote:
Actually, I've never liked "defender" as identifying a position. Should be forwards, midfielders, and backs. After all, when possession changes to the other team, aren't they ALL supposed to be playing as defenders?
I agree with this 100%. When we have the ball we have 11 attackers, when the opponent has the ball we have 11 defenders.