sbs:
From what I gather, it seems to me that kids in the Midlands need to look no further than Lexington, Congaree and CESA-Columbia. It's more than a mere thought, but actuality, that a player can get comparable if not better training at some of those listed clubs above.

The Piedmont district saw gains in their membership b/c of the leadership and direction taken by the clubs there within. Those clubs tend to be more inclusive, especially CESA. They (CESA) recognize the importance of each level and pay professional detail and attention to those, thus the noticed increase in #'s. IMO they're in the process of making that happen with the staff and program of their CESA-Cola branch. Possibly, you'll see an influx in the number of players (especially girls) choosing that club as a viable option for development this fall or spring even?

sbs,
if you think no one went somewhere else because of not making the team they want then you are mistaken.or maybe it is my imagination.

i will add that i think some are coming back

futbol(soccer): I don't know what "purged" meant in this -- although my guess is that you're right in your conjecture concerning the tightening of requirements and the law of unintended consequences.

Hurst66: More than 300 kids lost in the midstate district, so with 5 teams that's 60 per team -- you guys carry deep benches!

Both the coastal district and the midstate district saw losses in the hundreds. I personally think the root cause is probably a combination of stricter coaching requirements and a lack of active recruiting in the younger age groups -- combined with growth in non-SCYSA leagues. But that's just an opinion; I have no facts with which to back that up.

I know I harp on it a lot -- but I see absolutely no evidence of any concern, let alone well-conceived and designed programs, to increase the number of kids playing soccer by the SCYSA. But I've been beating that dead horse now for several years...

Steve: I wish I could get the registration numbers for YMCA, AYSO, USCS, etc. -- but I don't know how. I think your theory is a good one.

I believe that for everything except premier and challenge, that opportunities are rife for ***ANY*** organization to come in and offer alternatives to the SCYSA -- and/or for the SCYSA to change its policies and work hard to attract more kids into its affiliated programs.

Steve

Ot was interesting to read your expectations on the growth of Cesa-Columbia with better coaches and larger numbers. Could you elaborate on this with more detail. It was my understanding that Cesa-Columbia only managed to field one team this year.

gamecock44: Once again you have somehow managed to manipulate data in order to reinforce your agenda at denouncing anything positive about CESA-Columbia. I have reread several of your postings on many topics and, while there is weak attempt to hide it, a clear anti CESA-Columbia tone is evident. I do not know why you would have this and I may of course be wrong but that is how it reads. I simply do not have the time to make as many comments as you do but i can tell from reading yours that you probably never played or coached soccer. % points, Standard Devation, Variances etc have and never will be used in converstations or debates with true soccer lovers and understanders.

Sound familiar?

Chico- Please correct me if my understanding of the amount of CESA Columbia teams is incorrect.

No bias against Cesa here just need to keep the board balanced whenever I get chance. read my post on the cesa website thread about my thoughts in improving the level of sc soccer. Which is of course what we all want right?

More seriously, I tend to agree with "gamecock44" in the sense that CESA-Columbia appears to be spending most of its efforts on collaborating with the non-SCYSA recreation group SOAR (600+ players, right?) and working with younger age groups.

SCYSA-registered players in the Columbia area are dominated by CUFC (the second largest club in the state), Lexington, and CRSA (Lower Lexington is very small as well.)

I do think that "Steve" has a great point regarding non-SCYSA alternatives, particularly in the Columbia area. Between SOAR, the YMCA's, and the Lexington recreation clubs there are a huge number of non-SCYSA-affiliated kids out there. I've spoken to a few folks about that -- they can't see any possible benefit to joining the SCYSA given the expense and bureacracy.

So in the end, if Columbia-area soccer is to grow in terms of SCYSA registered players, I think that it's the current SCYSA clubs that will have to lead the way. The question is why these clubs would continue to affiliate their recreation and classic (not challenge or premier) players with the SCYSA when there are less expensive and less bureaucratic alternatives.

gamecock44: I was just kidding by taking one of your posts where I had quoted numbers and substituted "CUFC" and "CESA-Columbia."

You could be dead right about the number of teams at CESA-Columbia; I don't know the answer. Whether it's 1 team or 5 teams, however, it's a drop in the bucket compared to CUFC, Lexington, and CRSA. The SCYSA midstate numbers are going to rise or fall based on what these clubs do -- not on what CESA-Columbia, SOAR, the YMCA's, or the Lexington recreation clubs do.

Chico

Without knowledge of boards decsions of which affilation to be with I think the advantage to the SCYSA would be that any coach with ambition will always want be involved in the state cups. Once again i say that is why it is important that as parents we choose to put our trust in coaches with integrity and respect for the game and more importantly our children. In the current arms race taking place in our state coaches may forget their role. i pose the question who is the better coach. He who manages to gather the best 15 players in any given age group regardless of local or he who improves the level of a team and players by coaching?

44,
I'll be happy to elaborate. Again, we (my family) were in town visiting friends who were attending the MLK camp hosted by SOAR/CESA-Columbia. They were attending and asked if our kids would like to join theirs. We took them up on it and were pleasantly surprised to see that there were over 70+ kids out there having a blast (mine included). Plus, from what I'm hearing on this message board, SOAR has a recreation base well over 500+. I'm not claiming to be Einstein, but you do the math. The with organization, structure, support and professionalism coming from SOAR/CESA its just seems like a matter of time until others see the unique opportunities this alliance poses for youth soccer in the Midlands of SC. SOAR is a family oriented, faith-based organization that shares a goal and vision of outreach through the vehichle of sport. CESA-Columbia, too, offers an inclusive atmosphere by which players from any age or ability level can have an opportunity to learn and grow in a cost-effective manner and progression. It's a very similar concept we've been exposed to here in the Lowcountry with the Bridge, S'ville and JI. Finally, I'm not sure of the # of teams CESA-Columbia actually had. That too me is irrelavant. You've gotta start somewhere, right? And the last time I checked...Rome wasn't built in a day either...

Faith-based, or Christian-oriented youth clubs are really gaining in popularity in York County. ROAR (Rock Hill) and Victory Christian (Fort Mill) are expanding rapidly and are now attracting hundreds of kids to their soccer programs.

Ironic that a few years ago, the Charlotte Eagles (a Christian-based professional soccer organization) decided to get out of the business of fielding competitive (NCYSA) club teams. Certainly now, at least at the rec level, faith-based soccer is on the rise.

I can't speak for any other clubs, or officially, but from knowing a lot of the developmental kids at Mt. Pleasant and my involvement with the club, I know a few of the concerns of people who have left, or seriously considered doing so, the sport or club.

Of the players, aside from kids simply losing interest, the parents'/players' main concerns were a program change at the club, increased costs (usually no desire to pay for a child who's not 100% committed to three tournaments + fees), and coaching changes.

As for coaches, I know some teams lost true licensed coaches due to a club decision to use Coerver full time for some levels instead of having coach-run practices (the ones I know, including myself are all at least "D" licensed), so coaches weren't asked back for the next season. I know that some coaches were getting frustrated too with lack of communication between the club and themselves such that some considered finding another club or quitting--whether they did or didn't, I have no idea.

Like I said, I can't say anything about any other clubs or even if this has any effect on the number drop in the grand scheme of things, but this is stuff I've noticed here in Mt. P.

Hurst66: Isn't it interesting that not a single faith-based soccer organization has chosen to affiliate with the SCYSA? (Note: If I'm wrong on this, I hope someone will point that out.) A few years ago I looked at the costs -- and I'd guess the reason that the SCYSA isn't that successful with many recreation organizations is that AYSO and USCS are so much less expensive and so much less bureaucratic.

I believe the Greater Columbia YMCA's numbers have been pretty steady in downtown Columbia, with between 900-1000 players each season. Enrollment at the Lexington and Irmo branches has been a good bit lower, but there has been more growth. Most are between u6 and u12. Enrollement drops of sharply after that. The Y has its own insurance, and is not SCYSA affiliated. I doubt they believe it to be cost effective. Also, the Y coaches are not licensed, and requiring even minimal licensing requirements would wreak havoc. However, the Y has stepped up training with clinics etc. lately.

One Saturday morning last fall I had a chance to observe several CUFC Polo Road rec games and the level of play was similar to the Y's. The fields were a little bit nicer and of more appropriate size, but the level of play and coaching seemed similar. Overall, it appeared that CUFC did a good job for its rec level players. Still, I think these rec leagues would do well to move towards some uniform training curriculum, although the SCYSA framework may be a little too cumbersome.

Coach P: I don't have the data -- and I could be wrong -- and finally, even if I did have the data, I'd have to get permission because at the time I was collecting and analyzing it on behalf of a club doing affiliation planning.

However, here's what I vaguely remember. AYSO was less attractive than USCS because AYSO cost more and had a 50% playing rule. AYSO was closer to USYSA/SCYSA on registration fees but the supporting fees brought it in lower. USCS was the lowest priced option. Also, both AYSO and USCS tended not to nickel and dime clubs to death with all sorts of fees for coach passes, DOC passes, inter-state travel (not a big deal on recreation, of course), and the like. Tournament costs were tremendously different between SCYSA and USCS with USCS being much lower. The registration costs associated with USCS were ***much*** lower -- the need for a paid registrar with USCS was virtually non-existent while it's a really tough job with SCYSA/UYSA because of the requirements for registration. As I remember, the insurance options were about the same -- but I'm not an insurance expert and their were others that looked at that.

In recreation, a $10 registration fee is big because it represents such a relatively high proportion of the overall fees paid to the club. And of course, recreation tends to be resource intensive because of the number of players -- in other words, you take in more than 10X less than select but your field space requirements aren't 10X lower.

I personally think that all of recreation needs to move away from the SCYSA -- not because those folks are bad, but because we need an absolute rock-bottom lower priced option that we can pass along to the clubs that they can pass along to kids and lower the barrier to entry for recreation as much as possible. Then again, the truth is that I don't think registration fees for recreation are the limiting factors here -- I think what is needed is for some affiliating organization to take those fees and invest them back into growing the sport.

FYI

US club soccer
http://www.usclubsoccer.org/main.aspx?sec_id=15&guid=6fe34b1f-1ed3-45ea-994a-279cde3d2523
cost are:
Registration fees for the 2006/2007 registration year are as follows:

Competitive players, U12 and above: $16/player
Competitive players below U12: $12/player
Recreational players: $8/player
Staff: $10/staff

I believe the U12 and up has gone up from $14

Chico,
It just seems to me that there must be other reasons besides cost that are keeping these primarily rec-based clubs away from SCYSA. The annual registration fees of $8 for U6-U8 and $10 for U9 and above do not seem horribly out of line with the non-SCYSA-affiliated organizations. The other SCYSA costs you mentioned are for Select teams.

The bureacracy and paperwork required could very well be an issue. Philosopical differences may be another. Any other reasons why these clubs avoid SCYSA? The costs for recreation alone just do not seem that much different to be the primary reason.

If anyone is interested in checking out the specific SCYSA fees, their Registrar Fee Sheet is availble on their web site at http://www.scysa.org/downloads/Forms_RegistrarFeeSheet0506.xls

Chico & Coach P,

Don't you think the "religious hook" appeals to some of these people? Their children may have never been involved with an SCYSA club.....and as first-timers they have chosen to go with a faith-based organization.

Yes, I think that is a big motivator for the faith-based organizations.

There are, however, non-faith based groups that have also chosen to avoid SCYSA. The girls rec club in Lexington is one example. The YMCA is another unless you classify it as faith-based because the C stands for Christian. When I, as a first timer, registered my daughter for U6 YMCA soccer 12 years ago, I certainly did not view it as faith-based.

Recently, I've spent some time with faith-based sports organizations. My perspective on them is that regardless of the specifics of the faith to which they adhere, that they have a powerful attraction based on their focus on character.

In my experience, the folks at the "real" faith based organizations view the YMCA as a non-faith-based alternative.

At their request, I've spoken to several faith-based organizations about affiliation. I could not recommend the SCYSA to any of them (although I did lay out the SCYSA as an alternative). Is that due to my belief that the SCYSA isn't doing enough to grow youth soccer? In part, but only in part.

An affiliating organization has to bring value beyond insurance to the table (since most offer insurance). The SCYSA doesn't bring much differentiation to the table at the recreation level, and it requires a lot of hoops to be jumped through, and in the long-term it is more expensive (i.e., not just per-player registration but tournaments, nickel and diming, and the like). In addition, I've now seen the organization act in ways I considered to be "bad faith" with regard to making decisions based more on politics than on the bylaws and rules and regulations of the organization. If the SCYSA were out there actively trying to grow the sport, I'd be recommending them to anyone and everyone for the good of the game. I can't do that at this point.

I don't think any of the rec groups in York COunty have any affiliation. I think they are all pretty much independent.

Springs, RH Parks and Rec, Tega Cay Rec, Roar, etc......none of them are SCYSA or AYSO or anything like that.

Tega Cay is SCYSA for classic and challenge.....but I doubt they register their rec kids.

I guess if I'm an "Athletic Director" at Leroy Springs or Gold Hill Y or soemthing like that....my question to SCYSA would be what value do you offer me? If I have to pay $8 per kid or whatever to register.....what do I get for that? Pls don't say insurance.

Saw a lacrosse practice going on at Springfield MS the other day......is that CLub or school?

I guess my question is.........lacrosse is starting to show up here and compete with us for field availability. Perhaps this is a reason for numbers decline.

Lacrosse says they are affiliated with Fort Mill HS but I don't know how? I don't think there is a high school lacrosse league in South Carolina.

i had heard they were going to have one at ft mill.no facts to it,just a rumor.

Lacrosse is not a sanctioned sport by the S.C. High School League for 2006-07.

S.C. Lacrosse Youth League

I guess I was wondering who was using the fields there. I picked Lil' Daddy up from hoops practice the other day and they were having at it on the new football field.

With the lack of soccer fields up here....access to big, flat, green space is precious.

Thanks Kyle.....I don't see FM listed.

My daughter's high school has had boys and girls lacrosse clubs for at least 4 years.

The Charleston area has a Lacrosse club that travels the state playing other clubs....Just like club soccer but even a smaller crowd

hurst,
what i get from my wife is that it is some kind of complex/club type of thing.she has a few kids playing and that is what they are telling her.

While it may have a "light touch" in its sports programs, the YMCA definitely considers itself "faith based".

LeGrazie: Several ignorant questions regarding the YMCA programs. (1) What is the extent of the training coaches receive? (2) Is any part of that training "faith" or "character" oriented? (3) Is soccer/character training mandatory?

I've got absolutely no experience with YMCA-based programs; thus the ignorant questions.

Speaking of faith-based organizations: Crosby Assumes Dual Roles with CESA-Columbia and SOAR