|
|
Joined: Mar 2016
Posts: 253
Corner Kick
|
Corner Kick
Joined: Mar 2016
Posts: 253 |
David,,
I always appreciate your responses. They are always well stated and have a little British humor mixed in... You didn’t hijack a thread!
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2018
Posts: 80
Throw In
|
|
Throw In
Joined: May 2018
Posts: 80 |
Chuck where do you derive your confidence from the above statement? Surely not bc USAMP plays well with others. The active lobbying against other clubs is USAMPs bread and butter.
It would be great if the other coastal clubs said enough is enough. As CASC, GPS, JIYSC, CBSC have found out through experience. The back stabbing and lobbying against clubs won't end unless they stand up to it. That’s the thing though, when it comes to not playing well with others, all of the local clubs save for Cainhoy play these little games with each other. It’s been said on this forum that a group of CPL teams got together to block CBSC from entry into the CPL but as David has attested to, there were never intentions of allowing additional teams into the league and the only changes that were made were some promotion/relegations of teams already in CPL. Prior to this CPL league being formed,, SSC folks would remove any gps tryout signs posted anywhere near SSC “turf”lol. Additionally, any time the elite program was soliciting players, SSC and USA players were threatened. Short story long, all clubs are competing for business, these clubs need customers and on the girls side, the club with the best exposure opportunity is going to get that business. I’m telling you though, if you believe one single club prevented a GPS umbrella club from playing in a US Club sanctioned league, you aren’t seeing how important big GPS is to Charleston headquartered US Club Soccer.
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2018
Posts: 80
Throw In
|
|
Throw In
Joined: May 2018
Posts: 80 |
The bigger question we should be asking at this point and I know this is waay off topic, why is it we have 3 local D1 collegiate programs for girls but how many local kids are on those rosters? Why are their so few? Why aren’t those programs camped out at training sessions? One of those D1 programs mentioned having communication issues with club coaches including not replying to emails and phone calls. Another program was trying to contact the club coach inquiring about a specific player only to have the club coach attempt to talk up another player instead of the player the school was interested in unbeknownst to the parents and player.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2017
Posts: 280
Corner Kick
|
|
Corner Kick
Joined: Dec 2017
Posts: 280 |
Apologies all. I have tried to refrain for a while now about addressing this on the boards. However, I can’t help myself here.
Chuck, I don’t think you can point to where David said there was no intention of allowing additional teams into the league. Maybe he has, but I do not recall it. He has consistently referred people to their own club leadership or US Club Leadership for answers. BTW, good luck getting answers there.
The fact is initial enrollment in the CPL occurred just before CBSC became sanctioned. Surely a coincidence. Do you think if the other clubs wanted CBSC in the CPL, they could have moved the initial application time a week or two? I think we know the answer.
The fact is the CPL had an application online for the Spring. That is not in dispute.
The fact is CBSC applied for the Spring and was denied. The reason given was the schedules were set.
Subsequently, teams were promoted/relegated and the “set schedule” was changed to accommodate them
Not one person here has been able, or least willing, to satisfactorily explain why CBSCs application was denied. CBSC has the fields to play on and more kids/teams than several clubs in the CPL. CBSC has new leadership, so they have hardly had a chance to upset other clubs that much. Why wouldn’t they want CBSC?
And what is the response from some other club supporters when this pointed out? Well, if you can’t argue with the facts, you open the Propaganda and politics 101 playbook and deflect, using conspiracy accusations to undermine those facts.
I’m sure it’s about the kids though. That has to be why. I’ll take my tinfoil hat off now and allow myself to be educated on how its just a misunderstanding and that I have it all wrong.
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2018
Posts: 659
Goal
|
OP
Goal
Joined: May 2018
Posts: 659 |
The bigger question Chuck, is why USAMP tries to eliminate competition like they did when they recently fought tooth and nail against GPS. And as they have for years. As East oak 961 said, we know for a fact what USAMP does. And it makes them bad people, not good competitors. If they have a better product, let the market decide.
[/qoute]
This is completely wrong. Just FYI. This is well known to everyone involved. It may seem odd, but it is what it is. They don't want competition. [/quote]
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2009
Posts: 374
Corner Kick
|
|
Corner Kick
Joined: Apr 2009
Posts: 374 |
"Chuck, I don’t think you can point to where David said there was no intention of allowing additional teams into the league."
Thank you, I was second guessing myself there for a while. Don't recall saying that either. Sorry if something I said might have inferred that, but doesn't sound right.
satus quod perago validus - start and finish strong
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2018
Posts: 659
Goal
|
|
OP
Goal
Joined: May 2018
Posts: 659 |
So Chuck. In sum you are wrong. USAMP did, does, and is doing what they are accused of.
And the USCS-GPS connections are obvious and have nothing to do with USAMPs abhorrent behavior toward other clubs and therefore the kids at other clubs.
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2018
Posts: 80
Throw In
|
|
Throw In
Joined: May 2018
Posts: 80 |
David, apologies I thought the comment came from you regarding the scheduling but it was from Sharkfutbol. Sincere apologies!
@scsoccerfan123d, IRS obvious you’ve been scorned by USA and despite what I say or for that matter anyone else, your holding firm on your opinion and I can respect that but you’ve built up this one club to be this powerful empire capable of manipulating decisions that are being made well above their purview. I can’t remember if you’ve mentioned this already but it sounds like you are a cbsc parent that is being impacted by the club’s current situation. If this is the case and you are searching for a better opportunity that isn’t being provided with your current club, then instead of complaining about this huge conspiracy, look at taking your child to a better option. I don’t profess to know and understand what transpired during the SSC to Battery transition but I do know SSC had two fantastic girls teams that were getting great results vs competition. One of the teams graduated/went to college and the other saw a few players move out of the low country for ECNL or change clubs and the feedback that I got from those folks that moved was due to the slow release of information during the transition along with uncertainty of coaching assignments. I attended a parent meeting there after the changeover and it was a contentious meeting between frustrated parents and an abrasive technical director.
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2018
Posts: 80
Throw In
|
|
Throw In
Joined: May 2018
Posts: 80 |
Apologies all. I have tried to refrain for a while now about addressing this on the boards. However, I can’t help myself here.
Chuck, I don’t think you can point to where David said there was no intention of allowing additional teams into the league. Maybe he has, but I do not recall it. He has consistently referred people to their own club leadership or US Club Leadership for answers. BTW, good luck getting answers there.
The fact is initial enrollment in the CPL occurred just before CBSC became sanctioned. Surely a coincidence. Do you think if the other clubs wanted CBSC in the CPL, they could have moved the initial application time a week or two? I think we know the answer.
The fact is the CPL had an application online for the Spring. That is not in dispute.
The fact is CBSC applied for the Spring and was denied. The reason given was the schedules were set.
Subsequently, teams were promoted/relegated and the “set schedule” was changed to accommodate them
Not one person here has been able, or least willing, to satisfactorily explain why CBSCs application was denied. CBSC has the fields to play on and more kids/teams than several clubs in the CPL. CBSC has new leadership, so they have hardly had a chance to upset other clubs that much. Why wouldn’t they want CBSC?
And what is the response from some other club supporters when this pointed out? Well, if you can’t argue with the facts, you open the Propaganda and politics 101 playbook and deflect, using conspiracy accusations to undermine those facts.
I’m sure it’s about the kids though. That has to be why. I’ll take my tinfoil hat off now and allow myself to be educated on how its just a misunderstanding and that I have it all wrong.
The CPL schedules were for the year when they came out but I believe this has already been stated. I’m not sure what spring registration you are referring but for the 2010s-2007s on the girls side the schedules released in the fall were for the year. As for your comment about why certain clubs didn’t do the cbsc tourneys, again, the schedules were already set including several GPS tourneys and USA as well as a Savannah tournament iirc ( edit that may have been prior to season start)
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2017
Posts: 280
Corner Kick
|
|
Corner Kick
Joined: Dec 2017
Posts: 280 |
|
|
|
|
