SC Soccer Forums SCSoccer.com Forums Club Soccer & ODP Charleston Battery SC now Charleston SC

I think Chuck was referring to the Coastal league games, that were longer in duration but fewer in quantity.

There are a few things that are not entirely correct here.

First- this isn't a merger.

Second- I'm not sure where you are getting your JI info but it is incorrect. They have never wanted to distance themselves from GPS and from what I understand, they are more than happy with the relationship they have with GPS. Unless GPS goes completely belly up because of this current crisis, I would expect an even closer relationship down here with them and JI.

From what I can see, the main players in GPS's 'issues' have since left, although a few are hanging around the area...

Fair point, I thought I had read that in here regarding JI wanting to distance themselves from JI.

There may have been some internal back and forth but I would expect healthy debate.

I think the main concern now is whether GPS makes it through this, which looks promising with things starting to open and clubs making plans etc., but who knows.

This has been a pretty crazy time and predicting the future seems more difficult than ever.

Just guessing here but I see it this way

CSC gains access to better games situations

GPS probably gains access to some field space

JIYSC continues to respond the benefits of the current GPS relationship

All three will look to form mutually beneficial opportunities

Some interesting things in the letter:

[Quote] The alliance will be open to all local clubs [\quote]

[Quote] Q. Will our teams still compete in the same leagues?

A. We cannot say for certain which teams will be placed into which leagues, but we will still have access to the leagues we participated in this year. We also expect access to several new league options and hope to make those announcements soon. We will continue to operate the Coastal PDL as the state league for U8-U12 players in the Charleston area. [\quote]

[Quote] We also will not be charging players a tryout fee [\quote]

lets really take a look at this re-branded battery club, using their letter to families.

"we've been working very hard over the last few months to bring the Lowcountry soccer community together."

--- this is a complete 180 from their original position. taking clubs over was their game when it started. when some local clubs tried to get ecnl/npl, a certain someone went up the chain at us club to "hound" ecnl reps to prevent it. i would argue they have actively worked to divide and fragment the local soccer community.


"We believe in creating and supporting an environment where the contributions and input of each individual club is valued equally, and where clubs work together to provide the best possible soccer opportunities for our players."

--- This was already done with CPL. I am surprised you didn't use the term "like-minded" in the letter. From day one some cbsc supporters (look at this forum) have bashed CPL, yet now you want to work together? Or do you just want to prevent the progress CPL has made?

"As a reminder to all of us, this is why we do what we do. It's why we started the club three years ago,"

--- the club was started to help fulfill a usl requirement for usl pro teams, to sell tickets for the pro team, and to make money. it needed numbers quickly and ssc was first to fall to it. once cbsc realized they were not going to make headway against gps and surf (usamp) they started the CPDL and tried to push a new agenda. the pro club has since separated from them and taken the name away. why is that? because it was bad business.

The bottom line is that this "alliance" is a reaction to gps, surf, CPL, and many other changes in lowcountry soccer. ji have fields, so they have bargaining power (although the City would likely renege that deal at bayview if they could)

you need to look at the motivation behind each move. it is usually driven by one or more of the following:

- pride
- money
- job security
- admins or coaches with a son or daughter who "needs" to play on the top team

Please reexamine why you do what you do.

Not sure what you are talking about with your ECNL comment. CBSC has no one in a position of power, say as a league director, to keep any other club out of the league. Feel free to elaborate.

Still chuckling at the notion that CPL was somehow meant to be inclusive. I personally bashed it for the sole reason that it wasn't. Some clubs joined bc they felt they'd be left out if they didnt join. Perhaps those clubs realize they have nothing to fear anymore.

Time's running out on men high on maintaining legacy and low on creating opportunity

#DecencyNotLegacy
#GrowTheGame

Well yeah. I would hope all clubs would change and adapt with the times and current landscape. That's not a bad thing.

Charlie, I think a lot of your post is off-base.

You said "--- this is a complete 180 from their original position. taking clubs over was their game when it started. when some local clubs tried to get ecnl/npl, a certain someone went up the chain at us club to "hound" ecnl reps to prevent it. i would argue they have actively worked to divide and fragment the local soccer community."

You are entitled to your opinion, but this is the first I have heard or seen mentioned that CBSC attempted to take over ANY clubs. Nor have I heard about them attempting to prevent ECNL/NPL from anyone.

CBSC, nor any other club, has to try to prevent ECNL from coming to the Lowcountry, as there isn't a club that meets their desired criteria (history, # of players, and fields). As for the NPL, the only attempted lobbying against a club obtaining NPL that I am aware of was by the only club in the LC to have an NPL slot is alleged to have tried to block another LC club from gaining an NPL slot. That was not CBSC.


You quoted and replied thus:

"We believe in creating and supporting an environment where the contributions and input of each individual club is valued equally, and where clubs work together to provide the best possible soccer opportunities for our players."

--- This was already done with CPL. I am surprised you didn't use the term "like-minded" in the letter. From day one some cbsc supporters (look at this forum) have bashed CPL, yet now you want to work together? Or do you just want to prevent the progress CPL has made?"

Are you serious. What you fail to point out was that the CPL was deliberately created to exclude CBSC. To say otherwise is either patently dishonest or to be completely bereft of the facts. The CPL goes against the spirit of inclusion and support. I have bashed the CPL personally because of its exclusionary practice against 9 year olds from some clubs all so that a few clubs (read adults) could protect their fiduciary self interest.

Additionally, you assume that CSC will apply to be in the CPL. It is not stated. You also assume they would be admitted. No one knows if they would be. Finally, you ignore their statement of continuing to run the Coastal league. Thus IF they did enter the CPL, it would be a fraction of their teams.

BTW, what progress has the CPL made?

Finally, you said:

"--- the club was started to help fulfill a usl requirement for usl pro teams, to sell tickets for the pro team, and to make money. it needed numbers quickly and ssc was first to fall to it. once cbsc realized they were not going to make headway against gps and surf (usamp) they started the CPDL and tried to push a new agenda. the pro club has since separated from them and taken the name away. why is that? because it was bad business."

There was NOT USL requirement to form a club. There still isn't. Only professional division 1 clubs (re: MLS) have that requirement. SSC didn't 'fall' for anything. They were unhappy with the failure to modernize as a club and were bleeding players to GPS. They needed to change and their board decided the CBSC offer was the best of several.

Given that the CPL clubs deliberately excluded them, the CPDL seems less an agenda and more a necessity. The fact they decided to use a game/training format more common in Europe as opposed what we usually see is a choice. Opinions are divided on whether it is a better format.

Last, the pro club separated as a business decision. You can ask Rob Salvatore or Mike Kelleher yourself (I have). They both quoted people that were told by other clubs to not actively support the senior team. It does not matter if that was only a few people. That is the message they heard and Rob made a decision.

Finally, your quotes seem to be about the club but directed at me as though you I might be in an official capacity.

"I am surprised you didn't use the term "like-minded" in the letter" (I didn't write the letter, nor have input)

"Please reexamine why you do what you do." I will try to reflect on that.

I do agree with the motivating factors you cited.