|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2008
Posts: 22
bench
|
OP
bench
Joined: Oct 2008
Posts: 22 |
SSC and JIYSC both had competitive teams at the 95 age group. Maybe the unhappy players from the MPSC 95 girls should be looking into that avenue if they are wanting to change teams.
How about this for a solution for the 94 girls... combined the Bridge and MPSC best girls making one team. Each seasonal year swap club names to make both the Bridge and MPSC DOCs happy$$$
Or how about both MPSC and Bridge girls form a team with the Daniel Island club?
Anyone else with ideas to help with the Low Country 94 girls? Or is it okay to continue to lose our best talented girls to CESA.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2008
Posts: 11
bench
|
|
bench
Joined: Oct 2008
Posts: 11 |
Would you send your unhappy MPSC 95 to,
A) JIYSC 95 who is loosing their coach due to parental
involvement
B) SSC 95 who had their coach fired by the club
C) DISA 95 who had 1 goal all season
D) CUSC/ST ANDREWS REC DEPT?
Why do we keep looking to clubs who do not have facilities or support staff?
If you do not have fields you cannot practice much less play.
It is about the Girl's not the DOC or Club.
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 20
bench
|
|
bench
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 20 |
Whoa....are you saying Kevin is gone from SSC????
I don't know the guy from James Island, I think he was new this year.
I know DISA struggled this fall, I wonder what those players will do for the spring...come back???
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 8
bench
|
|
bench
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 8 |
Quote:
A) JIYSC 95 who is loosing their coach due to parental
involvement
As Mark Twain put it....The reports of my death have been greatly exaggerated.
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 2,256 Likes: 2
Coach
|
|
Coach
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 2,256 Likes: 2 |
Quote:
D) CUSC/ST ANDREWS REC DEPT?
Nothing negative to say about CUSC except just to call the full name in all caps? Considering the other potshots, I'd call that quite the recommendation.
I've got good news and bad news...
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 2,256 Likes: 2
Coach
|
|
Coach
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 2,256 Likes: 2 |
Quote:
The negative of the solution is not only are you displacing some of the u13 girls but are you really creating a competative team or just putting a team together to keep every player at MPSC?
Here's just a thought, and it's based on certain assumptions that may or may not be true...again, non-affiliated.
Just by observation, many Challenge teams that are hurting for numbers actually consist of partly "true" Challenge players and partly Classic-level players who are asked to play up in order to fill out roster spots. Having two teams in age groups that close together (U14 and U13) would mean that these two teams would be splitting Challenge-level players who could play effectively on the same team.
By combining the U13 and U14 teams, it would be possible to put all of the "true" Challenge players together to form one competitive squad. Since MPSC also fields Classic teams, the Classic-level players from each team who would be "displaced" could in actuality be placed on a Classic team at an appropriate level so that they can be competitive and have a fulfilling, highly developmental season as well. Both teams would be more uniform in talent level, and both would have an opportunity to be successful.
There may be a dozen reasons why this may not work out, but it seems like something to consider.
I've got good news and bad news...
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 2,256 Likes: 2
Coach
|
|
Coach
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 2,256 Likes: 2 |
Quote:
I have a vested interest to field the best competitive team in this age group for the Low Country and try and compete at the Challenge Level. I would not say that MPSC fielded a competitive team this or last Season at the challenge level. I believe I used the term soccer professionals and the "knock" was not just directed at MPSC but I would include Bridge and SAA DOCs for not working together in the best interest of all these 94 girls.
I think everyone on some level wants their team to be the best competitive team in their grouping. Winning is a heckuva thrill. Still, these are 12 to 14-year-olds who are still developing as players...does there really need to be all that pressure for them to be the "best competitive team in their age group for the Low Country" right now, or is it more important to think about what they might grow into, given time and opportunity, by the time colleges start looking at them later? The conditions that produce the most wins at 13 aren't always the ones that produce the best players at 18.
I've got good news and bad news...
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 190
goal kick
|
|
goal kick
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 190 |
Quote:
I know DISA struggled this fall, I wonder what those players will do for the spring...come back???
My thought is that they will drop down to classic.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2008
Posts: 22
bench
|
|
OP
bench
Joined: Oct 2008
Posts: 22 |
Quote:
Quote:
By combining the U13 and U14 teams, it would be possible to put all of the "true" Challenge players together to form one competitive squad. Since MPSC also fields Classic teams, the Classic-level players from each team who would be "displaced" could in actuality be placed on a Classic team at an appropriate level so that they can be competitive and have a fulfilling, highly developmental season as well. Both teams would be more uniform in talent level, and both would have an opportunity to be successful.
I like this idea....seems like a win win situation for all. What a great idea placing players at the level they belong to help in their development. 
Doesn't look like this is the path that MPSC is going. MPSC will keep all thier U14 players together and bring up enough U13 players to fill a U14 Challenge team. MPSC will then combined the remaining U13 players from their two U13 teams to make one.
Could be some unhappy parents and players for those on the bubble and not selected for the U14 team. 
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 1,521
hat-trick
|
|
hat-trick
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 1,521 |
It's a competitive sport...nothing wrong with that
|
|
|
|
|
|
