SC Soccer Forums SCSoccer.com Forums Girls Varsity Soccer Poverty, Affluence, and Soccer Success

Having spent my professional career studying the impact of povety and affluence on student achievement (such as test scores with the SAT and PACT), I was prompted by our other discussion concerning allowing private schools to dominate A/AA girls soccer to look at poverty, affluence, and soccer success this year in girls soccer. Food for thought:

School—Poverty Rank (1 = most affluent; out of 209 public high schools in SC)/ Poverty Index

Playoff Finalists

A/AA

CC private
SSC private

AAA

Riverside—2/ 15.84
B-C—85/54.55

AAAA

Dorman—41/ 41.64
Irmo—16/30.7

05/07/06 Rankings

AAAA
Wando—8/23.24
Dorman—41/ 41.64
Lexington—4/16.53
Irmo—16/30.7
Fort Mill—3/16.33
Mauldin—11/24.98
Summerville—32/36.98
Hilton Head—7/22.82
TL Hanna—30/36.53
Dutch Fork—6/21.47

AAA

Riverside—2/ 15.84
B-C—85/54.55
Eastside—12/25.42
Chapin—1/12.1
JL Mann—21/32.23
Myrtle Beach—74/51.12
Greenville—56/47.08
Dreher—52/45.36
Airport—80/53.76
AC Flora—42/42.37

A/AA
BE private
Academic Magnet—5/17.09
SSC private
CC private
Emerald—77/52.45
Woodruff—59/47.62
Waccamaw—20/32.08
Walhalla—50/44.71
West-Oak—N/A
Gilbert—36/38.65

Affluence matters. Look at the listing by poverty index in SC and you see the top soccer schools populating the upper-levels of our rankings and our playoffs. There is a clear correlation, just as with test scores. This must be considered when people say schools need to "try harder" and need to "hire better coaches." Public schools by and large must work with those students who happen to pass through their doors each day. Many schools and coaches are doing outstanding jobs with the populations they are handed; that excellent work often does not translate into success in the ways we measure.

This is absolutely great stuff!

Earlier this year, when CESA and CRSA announced a partnership, there was some skepticism/cynicism concerning why CRSA would be singled out by CESA as a club that was doing a great job serving underserved communities. I think looking at BC and Airport, areas that CRSA serves, shows that it's possible for a club to have a big impact in terms of soccer even under adverse socioeconomic conditions.

Thanks for the comment, Chico. I would agree that B-C deserves credit for some outstanding work, by this data. Airport as well.

If you want the numbers, I should have added, go here; provided by the State Dept of Educ—

http://www.myscschools.com/reportcard/2005/data/

This is fascinating but is it surprising? Soccer is a wealth driven product in this country. We don’t have kids playing in the streets, in parks, and on playgrounds unless they are fully sanctioned by their club (to which their parents have paid fees). While I admit that is a broad generalization, it rings with truth. In Europe, South America, and Africa, kids play for fun AND because they see soccer as a way to earn a living, a way to put food on the table. In the US, kids might see soccer as a way to go to college, but they don’t worry about it paying the bills. I’ll be the first to admit I’d like all my players to play club, and for the most part it isn’t a problem financially. But I often ask myself if I personally or coaches in general are doing enough to help kids play who can’t afford to play the game.

Thanks for the stats.

What's surprising to me is how B-C, with CRSA's help, consistently bucks the trend. I think it's a wonderful example of the impact that youth soccer clubs can have on a community if they want to actively promote and develop youth soccer as opposed to sitting back and being happy with whatever kids come to tryouts.

I agree with both T. and Chico—Not surprised overall, but surprised by (or am in awe of) the schools that overcome the disadvantage of poverty. We might can see with more research that it takes WAY more than trying hard, or hiring a "good" coach. It may take efforts BEYOND the schools, as Chico is suggesting. Club and community in harmony for what is best for all children regardless of the accidents of their births.

B-C is at #85 out of 205, correct? That's still in the top 41% so it's not like they're turning the world on it's side. I think more urbanized areas (Greenville, Columbia, & Charleston) can help negate lower poverty rankings. I think your report is wonderful and tells a lot about South Carolina Soccer.

Lincoln High School(194) is playing in the boys final after they beat Academic Magnet(5) in the Lower State Championship. Excellent work boys!

I was just about to post something in that regard. Regardless of their outcome against CC..Lincoln is to be commended.

Great thread.

I apologize for not getting to the boys side of things; I intended to for the exact reason you noted, T.! Thank you for adding that.

In studying school report cards and what schools fail, I have found that there are critical points of the poverty index that correlate highly with schools that pass and schools that fail. Somthing like a PI of about 86 and above is sure failure for an elementary school, for example. I believe W&E offers a sobering point above, but I think we could determine when the poverty index essentially cripples a school in soccer without the school and community taking steps above and beyond the usual. From that basis, we could see who wants to offer that help for those schools. This would improve the state of soccer acorss the state and everyone would benefit.

I am not very familiar with the club side of things, but I know that our success is based on the club involvement of our kids when they were much younger (OSSOC, I believe). Thanks for the recognition and kind words.

LC, you guys have been the exception and done a job that is to be admired.

Good job purpleandyellow. Another point about the poor rural schools, almost all of the soccer players play football and then basketball for their school before they play soccer. Almost allways the players can not afford to play club due to cost and transportation.

The school where I have taught and continue to help with soccer is rural and we have starters who play soccer ONLY during high school. They either have other school commitments during fall (other sports, cheerleading, etc) or they can't afford club or rec. These facts of rural and small schools, especially those with high poverty, truly separate our soccer programs dramatically.

>>[Whiskey & Easy] B-C is at #85 out of 205, correct? That's still in the top 41% so it's not like they're turning the world on it's side.<<

These guys had to create and run their club from scratch and have continuously been working to offer soccer to kids that otherwise wouldn't be interested. That has apparently offset some socioeconomic disadvantages. That's what's impressive to me.

>>I think more urbanized areas (Greenville, Columbia, & Charleston) can help negate lower poverty rankings.<<

How?

B-C and its yearly competitive program(s) are to be seen as model examples. I would offer any Heise a job as my JV coach anyday. That Smith girl, too.

If clubs don't start from scratch and expand, how do they get started? Surely they do not just appear with a rec team, 4 classics, and a challenge.

Large areas of population allow for greater chances of common ideas...for example club soccer. These large amounts of common interest backed by man power allow for such ideas to come to fruition. CESA didn't exactly start in Williamston, and MLS doesn't have a team in Barnwell. With more people, there are more opportunities. More opportunities create competition. Competition drives prices down. Lower prices allow for lower economic groups to become involved via more affordable options, club scholarships, or donating fellow parents.

I agree with the earlier post that soccer is simply a wealth driven sport, with the few exceptions (BC, which is not a poverty stricken area of Columbia by any means, go two blocks down the road and you have multi million dollar frat houses), you have to be finacially sound to allow your children and family to play club soccer. Typically the high schools with good club feeder programs are the more successfull ones. Driven by wealth!! As also mentioned earlier, soccer in other countries is a way out for a lot of kids. In the US its just a possible free college education. Women's soccer consists of high school, college, and OLYMPIC TEAM. Not much opportunity after college. Football and Basketball on the other hard, are negatively correlated with wealth just like soccer is in other countries. Look at the Rock Hill High, Gaffney High, Marlboro County. Consistantly dominant football and basketball programs at least when I played them, and consistantly bad SAT scores. This is the way out for kids in the US. You can go pro, if you aren't good in school, dominate on the football field, go to college, dominate in college, go to the NFL, get millions and can't count past 100. Soccer is like golf, a liesure sport that is enjoyed by the middle and upper classes of society. Just my opinion though, there are exceptions to every rule.

I feel a long one coming from Chico...probably graphs and pie charts...

...maybe a by-law in there somewhere.

[Preface: I'm actually glad that some folks want to debate something -- although it's sometimes weird and wonderful to see who decides to take what position. In any case, thanks.]

>>[Whiskey & Easy] B-C and its yearly competitive program(s) are to be seen as model examples. I would offer any Heise a job as my JV coach anyday. That Smith girl, too.<<

I'm sure that they'd be honored...but doubt that they'd consider themselves worthy.

>>B-C and its yearly competitive program(s) are to be seen as model examples. I would offer any Heise a job as my JV coach anyday. That Smith girl, too.

[i]>>B-C and its yearly competitive program(s) are to be seen as model examples.<<

If you keep waiting, you won't accomplish much in the meantime, will you?

>>If clubs don't start from scratch and expand, how do they get started? Surely they do not just appear with a rec team, 4 classics, and a challenge.<<

You missed the part about "These guys had to..." If this still isn't clear, think of it this way -- how many youth soccer clubs have you personally started to help your high school program and then spent an enormous amount of time making sure that kids that normally wouldn't play soccer could and would?

Of course, you're not a bad guy for not having done so -- you've got ASA and CESA -- I'm just noting that what they did goes above and beyond.

>>Large areas of population allow for greater chances of common ideas...for example club soccer. These large amounts of common interest backed by man power allow for such ideas to come to fruition. CESA didn't exactly start in Williamston, and MLS doesn't have a team in Barnwell. With more people, there are more opportunities. More opportunities create competition. Competition drives prices down. Lower prices allow for lower economic groups to become involved via more affordable options, club scholarships, or donating fellow parents.<<

I understand; you're stating that it's easier for club soccer to exist within a densely populated area than a sparsely populated one. Understood; can't argue the point. Of course, these guys at various times have had two Lexington select clubs, two Lexington recreation clubs, CSC, CFC, NECSA, and all sorts of recreation programs that they could have just sat back and let handle it. Instead, they built a club and program to address their need.

>>[anonymousjoe] (BC, which is not a poverty stricken area of Columbia by any means, go two blocks down the road and you have multi million dollar frat houses)<<

I've had to allow this one to reverberate in my mind just a bit. But now that I think about it you could not be more correct. Let's ignore the poverty index rankings and everything else and focus on whether there are multi-million dollar structures down the road from an area.

Sigh...

>>[Whiskey & Easy] I feel a long one coming from Chico...probably graphs and pie charts......maybe a by-law in there somewhere.<<

I know that I could have gone on multiple message topics, in multiple threads, and disparaged a bunch of children as future Dairy Queen workers...perhaps using graphs and pie charts...but it just didn't seem right.

My 2 cents on this topic would be this.... which other sports consider their "non-high school" counterpart as superior to the high school game.

For instance....
Football- there is no other football once you enter high school

Basketball- there is AAU... but players do not jump from "AAU to college"... also, you never hear of the AAU team a player came from when he is being recruited... you always hear about his high school...

Baseball- there is Legion ball... however, the same points from basketball pertain to baseball...

Soccer- soccer is the only sport where club is widely considered more competitive than high school... in other sports, coaches and recruiters consider the most competitive games the high school games- a place where it is essentially free to play with the exception of minor physical and insurance fees.

If soccer (in particular US soccer) wants to avoid this label, then college and National Team coaches need to put less emphasis on club and more on high school.

>>[Chapindad] Some of BC's best players play for or played for CSC or NECSA, so I am having a hard time giving CRSA all the credit for BC's success.<<

Who the heck took over Chapindad's account? Who is this? The last time I saw, Chapindad was making selected hit and runs onto this message board but never answering any questions. Dude...is that really you? Are things so lonely over there? [Just kidding -- great to see ya! ]

In any case, once again you're using the strawman fallacy...attributing a position to me that I never took. I never said "all" of anyone's success was attributable to a single entity. You actually quoted what I did say "...with CRSA's help..."

But to get to the meat of your contention, I contend that CRSA does more than any other Columbia club to target kids who normally wouldn't play soccer. The Heise's have posted a bit on what they've done as have others. This builds the foundation needed for other clubs to pick up those kids who through some combination of talent and training are able to take their game to the challenge and premier level. Perhaps you could post a refutation to this contention giving as examples club-wide programs that target underserved kids that other clubs are have.

>>[TVOR] If soccer (in particular US soccer) wants to avoid this label, then college and National Team coaches need to put less emphasis on club and more on high school.<<

I know that you know this...but coaches at the next level are going to put emphasis on the best possible mechanism to identify and select players that might play at that next level. If high schools want to be taken more seriously as a potential selection mechanism, then they need to significantly improve the quality of the product.

How? Well, one way would be to go into the school system and get first-graders playing. One way to do that is in conjunction with youth soccer clubs. But there might be a million other ways. In the end, however, it's pretty much like the USSF "pyramid" describes -- if you get enough kids playing recreation and then offer the right training, the higher levels of competition will take care of itself.

I'd personally love to see more high school coaches get involved with trying to increase the penetration of soccer to all of the youth in their area. I know that a lot of high school coaches put a lot of time into working with clubs; I'd just like to see the high school coaches and clubs work together to figure out how to get ever more kids playing the sport.

Volleyball is a similar dynamic as soccer, FYI. For what that is worth.

Chico-
My point was more along these lines....

If the soccer community continues to feel that the club soccer system (which costs significant money) is the best way to identify good players, then soccer will continue to be labeled as more of an "affluent" sport.

Excellent insight P&Y, but do you think that the problem transcends mere economics? Your post brings to the forefront the issue of “nature vs. nurture” to the soccer scene in a brilliant insight that goes beyond the physical attributes of successful players and teams. And while it’s interesting to see the correlation between higher income schools with successful soccer programs, I find it more interesting to postulate why there is a lack of black players in the game.

First a disclaimer, I have absolutely no data to back this up… this is simply my personal observations. With that said, I’ve noticed that even economically disadvantaged schools with high percentages of blacks, still field teams that are lacking black players. And the majority of blacks that do play the game seem as though they come from area’s outside of South Carolina.

The game of soccer doesn’t have to be an expensive sport. It is the world’s most popular game, especially in economically disadvantaged regions. I believe the problem we have is more of a social issue rather than an economic issue.

Socioeconomic stats are a correlation, thus a MARKER as we look at successful soccer programs. Socioeconomics and race are highly correlated in SC also. Thus, the dynamic is very complicated—more than just money, more than just culture, more than just race. BUT all of these factors matter. The trick is to determine how and why—then to decide if we wish to do anything to address whatever we see as a problem, or as unfair.

TVOR<< My 2 cents on this topic would be this.... which other sports consider their "non-high school" counterpart as superior to the high school game.>>

I believe that if you look into other sports you’ll find a lot of clubs that are superior to their high school counterpart. I personally know a Track & Field club coach that mirrors the environment that we have in soccer. He pulls together the best players in a region and takes them to exclusive track meets primarily for competition with “the best of the best”. He tells me that college recruitment is primarily done at these meets where only clubs are represented, rather then the college coachs going to HS meets.

This is the last year that club teams will be able to scrimmage college teams in all sports. While this is an unfortunate decision by the NCAA it was brought about because of recruitment violations brought on by AAU Basketball. Some AAU teams were putting together fantastic teams and charging admission for the scrimmages with college teams. They then distributed the proceeds to the players… an obvious violation of NCAA intent of keeping players non-professional (I hope this doesn’t start a distraction of the debate of “should college players be paid”).

Face it, if you’re a college coach do you want to drive 2 hours to watch 1 potential recruit playing with 21 mediocre players or would you go to a club tournament where you could watch that same player playing against real competition… and maybe getting the names of some potential recruits that you hadn’t heard about? This isn’t just true for soccer, it’s happening in all the sports you mentioned with the possible exception of Football. And clubs can provide a “funnel” of players for a college where a HS might have a collegiate quality player only sporadically. This provides the club and college a relationship that is mutually beneficial.

Like it or not you’re going to continue to see more emphasis on club sports then HS.

Chico, if you keep quoting and posting, you're going to surpass my #2 ranked post count!


Point made and understood about their club contributions.

If non-high school teams are such a big deal in other sports, then tell me which AAU team did LeBron James play for? Which club volleyball team did Logan Tom play for? Which club track team did Maurice Greene run for? When a baseball player gets drafted, do they mention his Legion team?

College coaches were willing to drive hours to watch LeBron play a high school game... The best football recruit is the Clausen kid from California. All of his hype is based on high school results. Top baseball recruits year in and year out are based on high school stats.

The fact is that soccer, more than any other sport, relys on club results to evaluate players. Playing for top clubs costs money. This leads to US soccer having the stigma.

TVOR << If non-high school teams are such a big deal in other sports, then tell me which AAU team did LeBron James play for?>>
You asked so here goes… This is an excerpt from:
http://www.jockbio.com/Bios/James/James_bio.html


<<Calling themselves the Northeast Ohio Shooting Stars, LeBron and his pals—coached by Joyce’s father—made a splash on the national scene in 1997 by qualifying for the Under/6th Grade AAU National Championships in Salt Lake City, Utah. Two years later they went all the way to the AAU Under/8th Grade final, in Orlando, Florida. The Shooting Stars won their first five games to set up a showdown with the Southern California All-Stars. They lost a heartbreaker, 68-66, but LeBron was the big story with his sparkling play.
By then LeBron, Joyce, Cotton and McGee—the self-proclaimed "Fab Four"—had arrived at a decision. They were a package deal, and pledged to continue their hoops careers together. The foursome settled on Saint Vincent-Saint Mary High School, a parochial school in downtown Akron. Best known for its tradition of academic excellence, SVSM was about to establish a new legacy, with LeBron leading the way.>>

So as you can see LeBron got his recognition from AAU Basketball… thanks for helping me make my point.

And my last post will probably add fuel to the fire of the "private school" controversy that's going on.

Great analysis! I'd like to see a complete table for girls and boys on this matter. It certainly appears that the more affluent an area, the better the chances for top soccer to be played. Kudos to those areas that are getting it done outside of the "upper crust" areas!

Per pupil cost is very misleading since the more poverty in a school, the more likely federal regulations kick in—such as forcing classes to have low student-teacher ratios, thus higher per pupil expenditure. This is complicated, but the raw data are misleading. I could add more if anyone is interested.

We're interested, we're interested....

Bottom line, what do we do to help even the playing field. I have always felt that a wonderful group of players gets left behind in soccer in light of the fact that club soccer is the true base from which colleges recruit.

Let me add two things then:

(1) The amount any school spends per pupil is primarily a reflection of teacher salary as that relates to student-teacher class ratios. In high poverty schools, many students qualify for remedial courses (I am trying to keep the langauge simple; it varies a bit technically on some of this) that are federally funded, which carries restrictions on class size. That said, our impoverished schools show high $$$ spent per pupil because many of the students are in small classes mandated by law, while more affluent schools have twice the number of students per class. That dynamic can effectively cut per pupil spending numbers in half or even 2/3s!

(2) If we look closely at which schools are successful at soccer, three factors are extremely significant:

(a) Affluence (see the beginning of this topic)
(b) Open enrollment (the huge advantage of private schools, and some public schools)
(c) Participation by players with club experience

If we wish to level the playing field (and we should), open enrollment issues and advantages enjoyed by private schools can be addressed easily by the HSL and concerned ADs. Make everyone play by the same rules. Simple enough. For example, classify all schools with open enrollment as AAAA. Problem (b) solved.

(a) and (c) are SOCIAL issues. Chico has weighed in on this issue before. In the bigger scheme of things this soccer issue parallels academic success, and my experience is that we really don't care in our society that those in poverty have huge disadvantages. I would love to be proven wrong. Will clubs and communities work together to encourage all children to play soccer by offering scholarships? That is a start. But high school soccer programs themselves need better money and better field, equipment, etc, and we need to continue to increase the professional level of coaching at the high school level.

Since (a) and (c) take $$$, it will be interesting if we ever make any effort to level the playing field.

Fascinating stuff. Several completely opinion-based comments. As noted, the spending in higher poverty schools on a per-pupil basis is much higher and as noted, a primary reason is lower student-teacher ratios as mandated by governmental fiat. Why is this mandated? Because "the answer" to lower student achievement was decided years ago to be smaller classes. Of course, only once we (and I mean "we" as both individual taxpayers and society in general) spent enormous amounts pursuing this goal was it discovered that the problem is actually much more complex than that. Some (not all) of the people so ardently pursuing "parental choice" in schools do so because of this and other fiascos that have convinced them that we can continue to pour almost infinite amounts into our schools without substantial return. Looking at the amounts spent on education with a corresponding poor rate of return on results tends to be disheartening.

How does this relate to soccer? I have contended for some time that you can't blame high schools for not penetrating underserved communities; instead, local youth soccer clubs must shoulder the responsibility for this. Some people think that the answer to increasing the penetration of soccer into underserved communities is simple -- just lower club and even team fees to zero. However, the cost associated with club soccer in my experience is not typically the greatest barrier to participation. When you talk about 5-6 year old kids, they need a high level of parental support -- and in many underserved communities this is very difficult for two (or one) working parent/guardian to achieve. So techniques have to be created, and more importantly, executed, that augment and supplement this issue. And this is just one of the many issues.

I have greater faith in clubs doing this than I do governmental agencies fixing schools. I believe clubs have a vested interest because increasing its membership base will increase the long-term competitiveness of the club. The trouble is that most clubs only think about appeasing their existing customers instead of thinking about offering the best possible services to future customers.

I would like to believe that the SCYSA, which has as a mission to develop and promote youth soccer to all South Carolina youth, would take the lead in this. However, it doesn't appear as if they are interested. (Note: In their defense, I'm sure that they have a ton of issues with which they have to deal.) Therefore, it's going to be up to several clubs, or even partnerships/alliances of clubs, to invest the time, energy, and money into making this happen.

I believe that the return for clubs willing to do this is a new level of competitiveness in the long-term. And of course, the return for more of our youth involved in athletics has been well documented.

Again -- great subject -- thank you tremendously for raising it.

I don't want to overwhelm the soccer discussion with education discussions, but Chico is correct. The problems and solutions of the education debate are extremely complex. Also, government and bureaucracy mare NOT the answers; however, educators could make many appropriate changes if allowed to run the schools. Now back to soccer.

I believe sports in general and soccer specifically are wonderful for young people, especially females. And I also concur that it is a community/society issue that is much bigger than schools. I have recently taught a college soccer player from England who is baffled by the American connection between school and sport that simply isn't in England. Club soccer is a community dynamic that could offer great benefits to young athletes; as a result, high school soccer would benefit greatly as well.

Two issues need to be addressed. (1) HSL should act now on all issues that would level the playing field (those issues are throughout this message board so I won't reharsh). (2) Clubs can take the initiative to broaden access to club soccer while also promoting to the wider community how these clubs are key resources for that community's children.

sounds like your AD should be fired and your parents should not support such an imbecile!

Do you have proof of this are you just a high school kid shooting off at the mouth at "supposed" things going on?

A comment on dollars per pupil--this is purely a school size issue. Wando has the least money per pupil and Lincoln has the most. Economies of scale: the cost of administration, building upkeep, etc. is higher per pupil when there are very few students and lower when there are many. The "comparable schools" listed by ccsoccerfan are all 3A or bigger. Also, as a failing school three years ago Lincoln has received a lot of state help which inflates these numbers with several extra administrative/specialist positions. The small size and academic hurdles have only been other roadblocks we have had to overcome to be successful--Not only have we been successful on the field, but we have also demonstrated success in the classroom so that we have gone from an "unsatisfactory" rating to "good."

While I am discussing the adversity my team has faced I will bring up a sensitive subject. The racial makeup of my team is unique to any other team we have played in the state, and along with that come some expectations by others which while perhaps unintentional have been unfair. Some coaches and athletic directors have sent clear signals when our team leaves the bus by practically rushing to me to let me know that soccer is a clean game and there will be no tolerance of fouls or rough play--the signal is that my players must be "thugs" that cannot play the game as it should be played. This signal has also come from the predominantly white officiating. While it is hard for a coach to objectively comment on refereeing, over the season it has appeared to me that when my player and a white player are side by side, if the white player falls it is usually a foul and if my player falls it usually isn't. As our team has succeeded and gotten recognition this problem has lessened, but it is another challenge that my team has overcome that most teams do not have to face.

At any rate, my team has earned everything they achieved and I am extremely proud of them.

Thannk you, Lincoln Coach. Excellent contribution to the discussion. You are accurate on your assessment of cost per pupil, as I tried to note earlier. The raw number is highly misleading.

Your school's and team's success are far more than any rating or number. Thanks for your hard work, and let's hope that some day we may all have the racial problems behind us.

This thread may rate as one of the top 10 of the year. Very informative and classy!

W&E—Despite the bickering and natural gravitation toward competitive spirit found on our threads, I believe most of us who love soccer, who love high school soccer, and who love club soccer are genuinely inspired by young athletes and high expectations—and excellence. Many of us wish we could offer these wonderful oppotunities in the most fair ways to as many young people as possible. Let's hope something might get DONE concerning these issues soon.

The support (and sometimes , proximity) of the local soccer club is more important than the affluence of the community in determining the quality of the high school soccer program.

If CESA's best trainers and coaches were to move to the impoverished "I-95 Corridor" and started working with kids in that area, those high schools (some of which don't even have HS soccer teams now) would rise to the top and challenge for state championships.

The athletes are there....they just need to be nourished.

Hurst, agreed...but by that token, you usually find soccer clubs in your more affluent areas. Having a successful club team requires investment by the players...if nothing else, athletes with leisure time to play soccer, who don't have to get part-time jobs or help working parents take care of little brothers or sisters. Unfortunately, many good athletes in less wealthy areas just don't have the money or time to invest in playing club soccer.

I do agree, though, that with the right opportunities and training, athletes from any area can rise to the top...if some of them can do as well as they do without the advantages of feeder programs, you can imagine what would be possible. I just wish it were easier to provide those opportunities to all of the players who would benefit from them.

Hurst
Maybe we can have a "CESA I-95 Corridor" team (or CESA-Florence since it is the nearest "city") like "CESA-Columbia" since CESA has opened shop in Columbia to help the "underserved" kids in Columbia. The Florence FireAnts had better lock down their coaches to extended contracts now!

I wasn't picking on CESA, or knocking them for "Manifest Destiny". I chose CESA in my example because they are the largest and most successful club in the state.

To the rest of the world, soccer is a very inexpensive sport and third world countries are able to compete on the big stage. Here in the US, paid coaching and travel (primarily to get better competition) drive the cost up and skew the playing field. This isn't just the case with soccer.....all club coaches are getting compensated now.

Coach Chass, if we could provide free coaching and free training to the I-95 Corridor, would the level of play improve? You mention that many of these young student-athletes have commitments such as part-time jobs and watching the little ones so that the family can make ends meet....if we are talking basketball and the student-athlete is 6' 10", with point guard skills, could the AAU coach find a way to make it happen? Is it because in basketball in the US, the monetary reward at the end of the rainbow is potentially (or significantly) much greater?

nah man, i can back this up, some of us seniors were with our coach when we went and told our AD what he wanted for our team(keep in mind he did play in the NFL for 9 yrs, i think he knows what to get!!!) i was one of the senoirs, our AD said no to what our coach wanted, and told him what we were going to get, our coach wasnt happy, but he kept his head and didnt say anything!!! and yes, i checked online, those volley ball thowing thingers cost almost 5,000 a piece!!!

socdad,

The timing of a CESA - Florence expansion couldn't be better. The coach of the Florence Fireants, having completed the terms of a very lucrative three year coaching contract, has decided not to renew for the upcoming season. A successor has been named, but if any CESA coaches are interested in taking the job, I'm sure that FSA would gladly match the terms and conditions of the original contract, which was based on free Gatorade and L'il Debbies after every game.

socdad/lurker: CESA-I77?

Hurst, I think you've unfortunately hit the nail on the head...for a lot of people who have no choice but to focus on the tangibles in life, soccer isn't seen as a lucrative investment as much as basketball and football have been. There are plenty of real-life examples of people who have used those sports as roads to fame and fortune. In my own little hometown in SC, I went to high school with Troy Brown (of New England Patriots fame) and returned years later in time to teach his little sister. The effects of his career were obvious in that small town. Just a few miles up the road sits a large estate built by William "Refrigerator" Perry. It's a little harder to find examples of soccer stars sending home the big bucks to support the family, which makes it harder in turn to convince parents to support "following the dream." Soccer, for many people, is still seen as a purely recreational endeavor. I know at my school, I've lost a number of good, promising athletes because they just didn't feel they could make soccer a priority.

The good news is, as we continue to build the sport in this part of the world, we get more attention, more recognition, and more participation. I know that as my own team has fought to become more competitive in our region, more serious athletes have shown interest in joining in. Free or low-cost training and coaching on the club scene could only help that. I think anyone would agree that an athlete who has a foot on the ball year-round has a big advantage over an athlete who only plays during the high school season. And if we can make that training and experience available without a lot of expense, then yeah, maybe we can even change the perception that soccer is just a sport for people with money.

I for one would love to give it a try and find out.

I find it ironic that soccer is as basic as a sport can get equipment wise (cleats, ball, shinguards, goals) but yet we discuss the fact that the affluent areas nuture the most talent.

But football and basketball are the opportunities for fame and fortune for many kids, soccer isn't. Thats what seperates soccer from the rest

BCSD,

Have you ever seen the budget for a competitive youth soccer club? What do you think the largest line item expense is?

BCSD,

Perhaps the dimensions of a field and its upkeep are more difficult to finance than a basketball court. As well, recreation departments probably are thinking year round sports and that gym keeps kids busy 12 months of the year.

This is a subject near and dear to my heart. Let me throw out a hypothetical.....

If there could be a self sustaining non-profit established with the expressed purpose of providing direct support to disadvantaged youth in South Carolina, how would you envision the support being provided. Cash distributions? Paying all expenses associated with the player to the club/volunteers (the child could in general easily travel with a team member if a contribution were made to cover meals/partial hotel/gas, etc.)? Sponser a team or teams? In other words if you had some monies available to try and help a youth or group of youths how do you maximize the impact. The floor is open for comments.

OK folks this is a bump. The above question is for real. How do we enable the program mentioned above to be effective?

I could see the non-profit providing funding to any player (with need) regardless of club, but that the non-profit would have guidelines for the player and the club—such as guidelines that would minimize costs. That would require some effort by the clubs to contribute as well. If the non-profit entered into these agreements with surrounding clubs first, that would possibly encourage other clubs to do the same. Clubs might have ideas for these guidelines already since many give scholarships to players with needs. With the right PR and cooperation among clubs, this seems doable.