SC Soccer Forums SCSoccer.com Forums Club Soccer & ODP One Club in Columbia

With all this talk about one club in columbia what will it take to make this happen?
Who wants this to happen? Can we compete with GFC if we do?

What does GFC offer ttha clubs in cloumbia do not? Why would a kid/parent drive to greenville to prctice when they have clubs here?

all what talk?... no, i doubt it will happen. the girls have already attempted to create an all-columbia team with cfc and it has been less than successful, to say the least.

i'm not sure why players travel to greenville to play. especially when there are already quality programs in columbia. i dont think that the fact that some players travel to greenville discredits any of the players or teams in columbia either. a football player (or any athlete) that leaves college and gets drafted to a team far away from home isnt neccessarily any better than the player that stays and plays close to home.

I can answer for some of the reasons that a parent would drive to Greenville to play for a team.

1. Looking for a club with organization and less politics about who makes and plays for teams.
2. Better training. There are a few good trainers in Columbia. The problem is that it is a side job or secondary job. Greenville has made the commitment to training. Ever wonder why Greenville trains every team 3 times a week and every team my sons have ever been on in Columbia only train twice a week. Anyone would be impressed by the organization of practices that occurs at the Ridge Rd fields in Greenville on Mon, Tue, Wed and Thurs every week. If you don't believe it, just go and look.
3. Exposure in big tournaments. Greenville is invited to tournaments that clubs in Columbia can't even get a team into but once every 5-6 years.
4. Commitment by players. It seems that maybe Columbia has too many distractions. Players can't seem to commit to a team/sport for even 4 months. None of the teams that we have been involved in can manage to get all of the kids to practices and games.
5. Commitment by parents. I don't know how many times over the last 8 years I have heard "I don't want to drive that far to practice". This wasn't to Greenville. This was from Lexington-Irmo, Irmo-Northeast or any combination of these. None of these are more than 30 minutes apart. For most (not all) of the parents, it is all about convenience. Can I get my son/daughter to practice in 5 minutes. Up until u17/u18, the kids can't get get themselves to practice.

Everyone is knocking the coaches, DOC's and boards, but don't you think that they all want the best players on their teams. Until the parents wake up, merging clubs/creating superclubs will never work. Club mergers and superteams in SC are not convenient. We do not even have enough players to have 2 great teams in one age group in SC. In Atlanta (which has a population greater that SC), a great team may be convenient. It may also be 1 to 1 1/5 hours away in Atlanta. I am not sure that we have enough committed & qualified (did everyone notice the combination of qualities) coaches in the area to handle these merged teams. A lot of the quality coaches are also the DOC's at these clubs and want the best players for themsleves. If that is the case, you just lost the commitment to the merger of teams.

Wake up parents, if you and your children want to play on a better team, then make the commitment (both of you). This does not necessarily mean go to Greenville, but make a few sacrifices in the short term for the long term gain. It may mean that you go to practice and actually STAY and watch, not drop them off and go do something else. Anything worth having is worth working for.

RCates

Thank you for your upfront answer! I myself often wondered why in the hell would a kid drive to Greenville to play but now I have a better understanding! The one thing I disagree with however is that just because the staff is full time at GFC doesn't mean that they are more committted thatn the staffs here in Cola! I mean they do nothing but train teams but there are plenty of great coaches that are truly dedicated here as well!
With that said your point is well taken and thanks for your response!
Shearer

Shearer -

I agree with you that there are some committed coaches in the Columbia area. Some of the committed coaches also happen to be excellent trainers, but some are not. Part of the committed part I was talking about was taking soccer in the Columbia area to a higher level. As long as the individual club's DOC's performance (and ultimately pay) is judged by only that clubs performance, then there will always be the determination to hold onto any good player.

Another aspect of committment by the DOC's is the education of the coaches and the training/evaluation of all of the players in their club that should be done. I realize that these people have families, but to be a DOC at a club takes a lot of time. Being a DOC is at a minimum a time consuming part time job. The DOC should be involved with the training of all of the teams. Over the years, I haven't seen alot of the DOC's of the local clubs out watching the teams that they don't actually coach in their club at games. A true DOC should be visible and available to the members of their club. Everytime I attend GFC games, I see Chris Barrett, Andrew Hyslop, Brian Mills, Russell Shelley or Jim Rinker also there in support (unless they are coaching somewhere else). When I watch St. Giles games, I almost always see Pearse Tormey, Carlos Osario or David Minihan there also supporting the teams. When I watch GFC vs. St. Giles games, it is unusual if all of the club's coaches (sometimes a dozen or more)aren't there in support if available. This is because they care about all of the teams in the club, not just the one(s) that they coach.

I do believe that Eddie Crosby at CSC will bring a new outlook to soccer in this area. With his youth, training ability and love for the game, I see big things ahead for him. Unfortunately, as he shows people outside the Columbia area these assets, don't be surprised that other clubs come calling. Charleston, Greenville, Augusta, Aiken, etc..... are always looking for qualified people to add to their program or to lead a part or all of their program.

go go goooal,
Why do you feel that CSC would not attract Sumter area kids due to distance. We have three kids traveling to GFC to play already. The distance is not a factor to players who are serious about playing on top quality teams. A merger would help all players from the columbia, Sumter, etc. areas. Distance will not matter to those would would make the teams anyway. There are many advantages to a merger and CSC seams to have an edge in being the club that others would merge into. The smaller clubs would still be abkle to operate they would just do it with out the elite players from each age group. That would only result in 3 or 4 players from each age group from each club. The merger would be great for all of Columbia not just the Irmo area kids.

I'm a staff coach at CSC and have followed this merger topic for sometime now. Here are some points that people need to realize before merger talks arise. First CFC (all girls club) have come under the CSC umbrella. So for girls soccer the only club that can rival the number of girls playing is Lexington (and thats only in its youth rec. ranks not select team.. god forbid if they ever got organized they would surely dominate girls soccer in the midlands). So from a girls merger stand point its happened. However it was more CFC joining CSC not merging...very smart on both sides part b/c it makes for easier organization. Secondly from the boys stand point...a merger MAY not be the best working idea. Reason being is CSC is not going to give up its complex it has worked hard to develop and is getting ready to get better soon, (lights, paved parking, concession stand w/bathrooms, etc) just to make a merger. Whats is going to have to happen is players from other clubs are just plain and simple going to have walk over to CSC and leave their club. If players/parents make the commitment (and we have many that do) to come to Ballentine park to play, sooner or later others will come too. Mergers don't have to happen to make a club bigger and better, people just have to come and play. Eddie Crosby has many great plans for the club, some of which have already happend in a very short time (CFC). In addition he has brought new coaches in as well, some people know them, others who are just getting started but have tremendous desire and potential to be great...we just have to give them a chance. A & B teams are also something that CSC is going to be doing this year. In years past either there were not enough players or there were not enough coaches do more teams so players were cut and sent to other clubs to play. That will no longer be the case this year. Third and last point, CSC is not GFC. GFC has tons of players in their club, they are a differnet animal. We don't and can't look at others clubs and try to copy what we can't be. CSC can only aim to be as successful. In time the club will attract more players and coaches & then compete on a more even playing field. But when a club has enough kids trying out to make 3 teams in each age group, it gives them leverage and tons of talent to pull from and until CSC has that many kids trying out, the club will have to do things its own way and not GFC's way. Bottom line....a merger MAY not be the best way....player/parents will have to make the commitment to come to CSC..leaving egos behind b/c not everybody's kid is Pele like most think...and coaches from other clubs come join bring players with them. This would be the fastest and easiest way to make a more talented midstate soccer club.

Chris Christian
CSC Staff Coach

I think Chris Christian is correct. A merger is not the only way for more competative teams to form in the Midlands. The CSC plan is to become the dominant club, just by being bigger and better than everone else. If they do, then a merger is irrelevant for the families that play there. I don't think anyone can argue with the analysis.

If it means more kids playing better soccer, I wish CSC luck. Really.

GGG, I don't take Chris' comments personally. I don't read them as cocky or arogant or anything else. I think what he says is just a matter of stating the facts. Their perspective and plans are natural for a large club with fields and coaches.

Just means that every other club (individual parents and players also) has to make a decision whether to join CSC, do what it takes to compete with them on that level, or settle for being second tier. I think there are very valid arguments for taking any one of these three paths and I don't think that any one of them is "wrong". Just depends what your goals are and how much time, energy and money you are willing to spend.

CSC idea is not negative. Its realistic. Again why does a merger have to happen? CFC realized this and came and joined and by the way, we DO share our fields. Do you really think we don't want the best club? Sorry you feel the way you about CSC.

Christian, this is not a personal thing against CSC, only my too passionate thoughts! I apologize. My comments are not against CSC, yet they are made in support of attaining a strong, competitive, but representative soccer club through development of one central club. Yet, it will take a long time for CSC to grow into a soccer power. My opinion was that by having one central club, you would have a more representative Cola. community soccer club. It will take a long time before NECSA/CRSA players/coaches decide to 'walk on over (en masse) to Ballentine to play.' I know that I am out here on my own with this merger/consolidation business, but I still believe that a merger now of combined efforts will better serve the Cola. soccer community in the years ahead. NECSA,CRSA,LSC are strong, vibrate, involved clubs now. They will not remain so. A merger now with CSC would combine strong coaching and exceptional organization and involved parents. Since it will obviously not occur, the forecast will be that CRSA, NECSA will slowly cease to produce competitive teams, as it loses players/coaches to CSC. They will become on par with LSC, which may be acceptable to some. Yet, I wish CSC well in its endeavor to do it alone. Just don't beat us smaller clubs up too badly on your way to the top.

CSC wil never get a cent of mine again.One BIG RIPPOFF taught me & about 7 other parents that lesson!!!!---------- MESSAGE to DAMON HUBERT--Apply for the U-18 CRSA position-The majority of that team could be your old Dreher JV team & you could bring your U- 18 Sumter guys.That would be the most competitive mid-state U-18 team. --On the other hand, I would love to see a Coulumbia merge of this U-18 group with CSC-NECSA-LEX & CRSA but it's probably too late for this year.

What was the CSC "big ripoff" to which you refer?

Would not discuss that on this board but the Pres. of CSC and their VP of boys soccer & their Treas. are aware- with not a response from either!

Guys have you not read anything Spoton writes? Everything is a"ripoff" for him and his kids! NOTHING is ever good enough for him/her and the kids! It is always next year etc!!!! Just let the kids play ans shut up!

Chris

I hear you but not everyone wants to have to drive out Ballentine for sessions and games!!!1 Good luck and best wishes
shearer

My last comment on this merger stuff (that will not happen) is that it is quite apparent that CSC is totally committed to fielding the best teams possible in all ages. With Crosby as DOC, you can see the passion and direction he has for that club. CSC will soon draw the best from CRSA and NECSA, if not this year, then the next. As Tom P. commented, "it is not essential that there be a complete and total merger of clubs....," but I cannot see NECSA, CRSA putting in the time/resources/efforts to compete on the higher level that CSC strives for. NECSA & CRSA may survive; yet their respective clubs will only be a shell of their former selves and only on par with LSC. How do NECSA/CRSA propose to compete against the plans/efforts of CSC?

csc HAS EXCELLENT COACHES.IT'S A $$$$$ THING.

How do CSC fees compare with NECSA/CRSA?

[Warning: Long posting...]

I've read these message boards with interest for quite a while; it was this thread that got me interested enough to register for an account so that I could post. I've been involved in a relatively minor degree in youth soccer programs in multiple states in large cities, and have seen the same issues repeated over and over again. Here's what I perceive to be the case. Clubs can be categorized into two groups: those that want to compete at as high a level as possible and those that do not. Parents can be categorized into two groups: those that care enough to seek out the best team (which is often, but not always, the best coach) for their child and those that do not.

If we constrain our discussion only to clubs that care about competing at a high level, and parents who care enough to seek out the best team, then the discussion becomes simpler. Clubs are organizational structures that should exist solely to service teams (although all too often the bureacracy of the club structure is such that the officials of the club get this reversed). Parents don't care about clubs; they care about teams. Thus the club exist as a mechanism for acquiring and retaining the best coaches. This is often oriented toward pay, but it can also be oriented toward other, more intangible benefits (e.g., flexibility, freedom, etc.).

What often happens in places with more of a mature soccer program is that the number of clubs a community supports is ever-changing, where a great team can spawn a new club or where clubs are merging because of resource inadequacies (e.g., players, money, fields, etc.)

What CSC seems to be doing is representative of this. CFC, which appears to have been founded with the idea of highly competitive girls soccer, merged in order to take advantage of greater resources (note: this is my understanding -- if I'm wrong, please enlighten me). I'm sure that there is going to be a fallout as some parents decide they don't want to drive to Ballentine; however, rather than being a problem this is healthy in that it is a further segmentation of parents into those that care enough about children playing at a higher level of competition and those that do not.

Thus, I think that what "spoton" says about it being all about coaches and money is -- pun intended -- spot on. And I think what "GGG" is asking about how the other clubs plan to compete is also spot on and is the optimal and best reaction in order to make soccer more competitive in this region. Rather than trying to force a "central planning" mentality onto the region (much akin to the former USSR model... ) the competitive model seems to be the best for forming an infrastructure in which the best coaches can form teams and the best teams can learn how to compete nationally.

Many of the hard feelings and confusion occur because clubs and parents aren't willing to confront the actual category in which they reside -- in other words, they want the best teams without paying (either in terms of money or time) or they want a "rec-plus" program that hovers between true recreational play and true competitive play.

I'm not intimately familiar with NECSA and CRSA; however, I do not believe that they are in danger of descending to the level of the average of the four (4!) clubs that are loosely referred to by some as the "LSA" unless they get confused about whether they are trying to be "rec-plus" or whether they truly want to be competitive.

Shibumi:

Welcome to the "conversation". I think your analysis is exactly correct.

I believe many, many families fall into the category of folks who really only want "rec-plus" soccer. Families are pulled in so many directions these days. Many just can't commit the time and resources to a truly competative soccer situation. Doesn't mean that they don't care about soccer or care about the quality of their child's team, just that it is not at the very top of their priority list.

Just as some very talented recreational players who COULD play on a classic team, CHOOSE not to, I think there will be many players who COULD play for CSC but will choose not to.

The reasons why players choose not to play for a more competative team include convenience; where their friends play; or some dislike for the competative team's club, coach, etc. There are lots of reasons why very good players might choose to continue playing at clubs other than the most competative. And that is ok.

Same reasons why the soccer landscape is so fluid. Takes very little for a player or group of players to change teams, change clubs, form new clubs, etc.

In general, a case can be made that more clubs is better for soccer as a whole. The more clubs there are, the more chance for parents to shape the club to meet their specific needs.

All of this having been said, I am still willing to talk about a merger or formation of a new club. A new club that fields ONLY challenge cup teams, leaving existing clubs to handle recreation and classic cup teams (basically "rec-plus" could have some advantages if the details could be worked out.

Good post Shibumi. The point I made about NECSA/CRSA becoming very average clubs, was made for 2 reasons: 1)CRSA has no young teams at all and therefore, no ongoing development of players. 2)NECSA has average,younger teams, but when the best players begin to migrate towards CSC, then the talent level will slowly drop off. It will be very difficult to compete with CSC with its superior resources and mission to produce the best teams throughout all age groups. When you are able to provide exceptional training and instruction from U-10 on up, then naturally you will produce the best teams as the players advance in your program. I would rather see the combination of efforts now, so as to avoid the slow demise of talent in NECSA/CRSA. By sharing resources, talented coaches, fields, organizational skills now, a more unified and focused soccer program for Columbia will result.

Go Go

What exactly do you want? CRSA?NECSA together? Are you just anti csc? You keep changing your positionand your facts are not correct!!!! Ask Kevin if CRSA if falling out! I don't understand what you are looking for? Just wondering what you want

If you care to reread all my posts on this subject, you will see that I have consistently sought for a combination or merger, if you will, of all our clubs and all our efforts to produce the very best club we can in Columbia. If I am anti anything it is the constant division of talent that has prevailed for far too long in Columbia. I didn't say that CRSA or NECSA for that matter, were falling apart. They are vibrant and important clubs today. I was only forecasting their respective futures. As I now see CSC's mission, I would hope that NECSA/CRSA could combine efforts and resources now with CSC, so they could enjoy some of the success that CSC will reap..... to be a part of a time when the clubs put all their hard work into one basket. If it were to happen, we could take GFC and St. Giles by next spring in a majority of age groups. That is the mission that the SOCCER GODS have bestowed upon me.......

They way I see it CSC is the only club besides Lexington with real facilities. they also have the DOC that will make sure they progress in ALL stages of CLUB soccer! I am sure if you ask Heise what is goal for CRSA is to have a place for his High school players to get better! CSC is on its way and if you want to be at that level then play at CSC if not than other clubs are viable choices as well! I am sure that NECSA and CRSA will have some very good sides this fall. Just remember what goes up must come down!!!!!!

If all the talent at BC and Dreher are Freshmen the why don't they all play for CRSA? Isn't that what CRSA is there for? Is it the coaches Faclities or what? I don't understand why you would drive out to Northeast or Irmo when you could play on a pretty good team right here in Downtown Columbia?

I'll have a steak sandwich too,Mr. Underhii.From Cogburns DOWNTOWN!

This thread started with the question "What does GFC offer that clubs in Columbia do not? Why would a kid/parent drive to Greenville to practice when they have clubs here?" and the last post posed the question "I don't understand why you would drive out to Northeast or Irmo when you could play on a pretty good team right here in Downtown Columbia?"

The answer to both of these questions appears to be because there are parents and/or players who, for whatever reason, want their children to play on the best team and are willing to sacrifice resources to make that occur. There are also parents and/or players that want to play competitively but do not wish to sacrifice the same level of resources to make that occur. Finally, there are parents and/or players that want to play recreationally.

During the time that this thread has been in existence, CSC and CFC have announced a merging of resources in order to better accomplish playing at a higher level. What GGG has continued to state, consistently and emphatically, is his/her concern that other clubs will be "left behind". GGG's solution for this, and stated consistently and emphatically, is to merge clubs into a single "meta-club" such that all resources may be applied to this issue.

While I disagree with GGG's "meta-club" solution as the optimal path, it does at least acknowledge the issue of that there are clubs that appear to be more serious about competing at a regional and national level than others. Repeatedly, it is asked why people would drive greater distances to play at one club when another is closer. Again, the answer lies in the "mission" of the parent and the matching of that "mission" by the club.

For the group of parents and/or players that wish to compete regionally and nationally, what is desired is a club that is willing to step up in terms of resources. GGG wants NECSA/CRSA to either merge with CSC or to step up and commit the resources to compete at a regional and national level alone.

Here's what I think some (not all) folks are missing in this thread: driving distance to practice is a rather trivial committment compared to many that need to be made if you want to compete regionally and/or nationally. You have to be willing to pay for the best coach possible. I know that many people on these message boards coach and have children playing -- but what you want are professional coaches (in much the same manner that most do not want a part-time brain surgeon poking around in your head with a stick). This costs money. You want to have the team playing in the best tournaments in Florida, Georgia, North Carolina, Alabama, Tenessee, Virginia, etc. against the best teams. This costs money and even more importantly for many, a major amount of time and energy. And so on...

Some of the absolute worst clubs have one or more teams willing to make this happen. And some of the best clubs have teams that are not willing to make this happen.

To make a decision that teams in the Columbia area are not competitive with those of the Greenville area because of the overall size of the talent pool overlooks, in my humble opinion, the more basic challenges that face any team or collections of teams (i.e., a club) - the willingness of parents and/or players to make the sacrifices necessary to play at a regional and national level.

GFC and St. Giles are not focused on winning against SC teams -- they are focused on winning against some of the best teams in the region and nation (e.g., Norcross, Tophat, Quest -- just from the Atlanta region). For those of you that have seen teams at the level of Norcross play, you recognize that while there is certainly a deeper level of talent, that this is a side-effect less of the talent pool than it is a side-effect of the committment by parents and/or players.

Okay -- enough rhetoric -- let me bottom line this. CSC is a wonderful start and seems to be trying to do the right thing. I don't perceive anyone on this thread as "anti-CSC" -- I just perceive that there are people who wish that their "more local club" had more of a CSC mindset. The short answer to those people: vote with your feet -- tell your "more local club" that you're switching to CSC, or forming a new club, if they can't get their act together in terms of competing regionally and nationally. Trying to make clubs merge will typically give you the lowest common denominator of those clubs; the only way this is avoided is if clubs internally decide that they want to play and win at a high enough level such that they decide to merge on their own for selfishly competitive reasons.

One last note concerning Lexington. It's amazing to me that I read all of these shots at Lexington month after month without anyone coming to its defense. But then again, it's completely understandable. For those of you that lust after the fields that Lexington has, realize that Lexington, while field rich, is club poor in that the four (4!) clubs that squabble over those fields are all over the map. Lexington is a disaster at the club level -- the embodiment of a cautionary tale that parents should tell their children about before going to bed to make sure that when they become adults that they never allow to occur again. And while some Lexington teams are certainly very good on a state level, this is more a matter at this time of individual coaches and parents/players rising up and fighting the club rather than a club itself. It should be noted, however, that rather than merging the Lexington clubs I think that the right answer is to help the clubs that are actively and at least somewhat competently trying to become more competitive (i.e., the boys classic club) rather than trying to force some type of merger that would possibly drag all of the clubs down to the level of the girls classic club. In my opinion, you don't fix things like the girls classic club of Lexington by altering it or merging it -- you blow it up, salt the earth, and either create something new or switch over to a club that wants to be competitive (e.g., CSC).

BRAVO!!!!!!!!
BRAVO!!!!!!!!
THE LEADER OF THE SOCCER GODS HAS SPOKEN AND SPOKEN VERY WELL! I knew there was some intelligent life on the Cola. area soccer planet!
I don't know what the heck you are talking about regarding the Lex. girls program....blow it up? and salt the earth? They just need to play tennis...
However, thank you for sharing your thoughts and wisdom regarding this non-merger/merger issue. Even though you did not intend to do so, Shibumi(is that Latin for SOCCER GOD?), you have caused me to re-think my notion of an all out merger.....and rather to focus more on the concept that one club can possibly get the mission accomplished (CSC). Maybe I was thinking that clubs would be more cooperative and forward-thinking on this issue, and would see the great benefits for the PLAYERS. THE PLAYERS.....not the coaches; not the parents; not the associations; not the DOCs. The players play the game.....they get to have all the fun and joy at playing the 'most beautiful game'..they get to smell the grass and mud and dirt....smells that will last a lifetime...they get to experience the life long friendships and grasp the memories of their participation. We will see how it will progress..Will soccer in Cola. be the same in 2 yrs? in 5 yrs.? in 10 yrs.?
Only the SOCCER GODS know.......

It is great to hear everyone's opinions and so forth but the real question has not yet been answered! What can be done to help COlumbia compete with GFC and ST Giles? I hear all the talk and so forth but talk is cheap! Oh well another fall of greenville dominance!!!!!!

shearer

Shearer--- You had toooooo much of the brown ale!!!!!!!!!! Can you not comprehend any of the posts? These are called ideas........ thoughts.... The brown ale must have your mind as muddied as a southern soccer field in March...
There have been many attempts here to pursuade or conjole the local associations to get off their respective a$$e$, and come to terms with the future of soccer in the area....and the only one that appears to have stepped forward is CSC. So the answer to your question right now is--CSC.
I only would like to see all clubs unite... LSC,CRSA,NECSA,CSC...so that we could compete at all levels and age groups with St. Giles & GFC.
It will take a while for CSC to accomplish that alone, but I feel they are on the right track. By becoming a truly competitive soccer program in the state and region, we (Cola.) would make soccer stronger statewide---GFC and St. Giles would be better programs as well, as a result of our mutual competitiveness.... But no one, except CSC, has made an attempt to attain this competitive status.
No more on this topic for me.....my thoughts are having no impact and my massive brain needs some rest..........

go go go go go jump off a bridge!!!!!!! You just answered my question to the fullest! All this is IS talk! Nothing will ever happen to merge b/c it has to be something new not CSC!!!!!! Look how GFC did it all new!!!!! CSC is not the answer here! Untill ALL the clubs want to form one club in cola the talent will be split!!!! Oh well GFC/st.giles rep us just fine at regional anyway! And since they will have the higher level of play guess who will win the hs state championships as well?

I'm going to take each line that can be responded to and attempt to respond so that I can learn from you folks.

>>All this is IS talk!<<

Yes, it's a message board. The best you're probably going to do is to discuss and to learn.

>>Nothing will ever happen to merge b/c it has to be something new not CSC!!!!!! Look how GFC did it all new!!!!! CSC is not the answer here!<<

Why does it have to be something new? You seem very, very certain that CSC is not the answer; could you explain in detail why CSC is not the answer?

CFC was something new; and it couldn't marshall the resources it wanted so it merged into CSC. So something new doesn't seem to necessarily be the answer, does it?

>>Untill ALL the clubs want to form one club in cola the talent will be split!!!!<<

I think that this is the heart of the matter in your argument, correct? Without a single club representing Columbia, GFC and St. Giles can't be beaten, right?

Okay, let's imagine that nothing matters but the talent pool from which you draw. 2000 census numbers for urbanized areas show Greenville with a population of 302,194 and Columbia with a population of 420,537. Thus, with 2 clubs, Greenville draws on roughly 150K. Columbia should then be able to support 2 clubs and win all of the time, or 3 clubs and be very competitive.

However, using this analysis, there's no way to beat Atlanta since it has a population of 3,499,840 and thus can always consolidate into just a few clubs and draw from a greater population.

I understand that you disagree with the theory that a competitive, regional/national oriented club environment in an area can beat a single, centrally planned club environment in that same area. And certainly there has to be a limit with respect to the number of clubs a given area can support. However, respectfully, population draw as the single most important attribute for soccer competitiveness might not be the end-all-be-all theory that is going to make Columbia-area soccer ascendent.

THE SOCCER GOD has spoken again!!!!!!!
I did not know that CSC & CFC have basically merged. Will they still retain separate names?
I am sure that CSC's mission will first be to take on GFC/St.Giles; then hopefully try to compete with CASL and Atlanta teams. Does anyone know how the player fees compare among CSC, NECSA,CRSA and the other state clubs in ATlanta/CASL? I know CRSA is about $300 a season w/o uniforms and NECSA is probably the same. I don't know CSC fees.

{Warning: another long post}
Mr. Underhill, to answer your post about why someone from downtown would drive to Ballentine to play for CSC, I'll give you my perspective. (My son played 3 years at NECSA, 2 years at CRSA, and the last year at CSC and plans on playing again at CSC)
He wanted to be on a team that could compete for a state title and play at the highest level (Region Premier League). For his age group the team that had the best talent and opportunity to achieve this was CSC. He has enjoyed playng for every team he has been on and never felt lacking for a quality coach at any club. Tripp and Kevin do a great job at their clubs and Eddie has and will at CSC also. My son started at NECSA because it was closer than Irmo and CRSA was just beginning to come on line (my decision). He moved to CRSA to play with his school friends (his decision). Every time he moved it was a tough decision on his part. And he finally moved to CSC (his decision) for a chance at playing at the highest level.
Other than his first year (classic) I have let him make his own decision on where and if he wanted to play. These kids are intelligent and the ones who have competed against each other know who the best players are in their age groups. (despite what they sometimes say about each other on the posts). I believe if the parents would support what their kids wanted to do, then the kids who truly have the "fire in their belly" to compete at the top level will migrate to the team that has the best chance for achieving their goal. For me, carpooling for a 30 minute drive to Ballentine is a small sacrifice to pay for my son trying to achieve a goal(no pun intended). (I might reconsider my stance on that if he comes to me tonight and tells me he wants to play at GFC or St Giles, so far I've been lucky)
One club in Columbia whose sole purpose is to compete at the highest level sure would make it easier for the kids who want to achieve that goal. But we the parents have not achieved that yet.
So on your post about why don't all the kids from BC and Dreher play together to form a good team for CSRA, the facts are to be on a great team from the Columbia area you need the kids from Irmo, Chapin, the Northeast, and downtown to achieve this. At his age group the CSC team has the most core talent.
As for the cost at each club, there isn't much difference in the basic fees, except the better teams usually play in more and better tournaments and obviously those tournaments cost more.

Semi-warning---Semi-long Post...
R2,
You gave a great real-life example about what a lot of folks have been discussing on this topic of one Cola.club/merger/no-merger/etc., etc.....
Once your child reaches a certain level of play they may need more challenges/opportunities to excel and they want to be where the best play.
So......what do players/parents want???? A nice, convenient environment for fun soccer, average soccer or high-level soccer??? Parents, do you want a club that is minutes away so you can drop of the kids and run the errands and go work out or visit with a friend? Or an exceptional club that is a mere 30 mins away.....compared to a drive 1 1/2 hours to Greenville?? I know what I want to see...... , (as I have stated much too often in this forum...) But there are too many divisions of thought and wants and needs on this subject for there to be a meeting of minds among the 4 area associations......Unless, of course the SOCCER GODS intervene......
So, where are we now on this highly interesting, stimulating discussion??
In examining the area clubs:
LSC is basically a slim notch above rec. play.
NECSA is able to handle Coastal clubs for the most part and Mid-district clubs(Discoveries,Aiken,CRSA)and play average ball in state tournaments.
CRSA is able to compete successfully with average teams from its district and Coastal clubs and also play average ball in state and out-of-state tournaments.
CSC is a different animal altogether...They easily handle Coastal and Mid-district clubs and also compete very well with GFC/St.Giles teams.
I make this brief comparison to say that there is a clear choice available for the area soccer players ---
1)LSC with nice fields and lots of playing time
2)CRSA with more competitiveness, yet average play and great coaches/organization
3) NECSA with even more competitive play, reasonable success, yet a more social, political environment.
4) CSC with great coaches/organization, fields, exceptional competitiveness/mission, yet the club with the most commitment of time and resources for players/parents.
I cannot say anymore on this topic (of course I have said that many times before!). So let the games begin....... maybe,just maybe, as this fall season progresses there will be tangible face to face discussions among the associations about the future of area soccer and their respective clubs.......

SHIM

WELL DONE!!! I got sidetracked there for a moment! Thanks for putting my mind back in it! Youa are CORRECT!!!!

R2
Thanks for he inside info! I can see your point on playing at he higher levels! I would like to see the BC and Dreher Freshmen play together!

Ok this is going no where the debate over the better clubs and the coaches. In my experience every coach thinks he better then every other coach. And at the same time one child will like a coach while another child won’t. So there is no point in arguing over the coaches because in each eyes they are the best.

As far as clubs go each club serves it’s own purpose. I think it is great that CFC and CSC are merging. That brings back all the girls teams that CSC had. I know the clubs in Columbia and I will say this about them. They each have separate goals they are trying to obtain. CFC and NECSA trying to be the biggest and the badest. CRSA is trying to be available to give the BC and Dreher players a place to play while becoming better for the high schools. And the Lexington Clubs while they had struggled in the past are becoming a little force. The boys have competitive State levels teams and have organized very well. And the girls Have just recently reorganized and are rebuilding what years of being held back has caused (they will surprise some people). The mission of the girls and boys club has been to service the Lexington area players that want to advance in soccer. And that has been done rather well. So it isn’t one club that is better then others it is different clubs serving purposes that they have had all along.

I think that the CFC Idea was a good one just carried out wrong and tried to be forced down on everyone. I would love to see one club that had the region level teams for u-14 and above. But the better clubs wont exist with out the other clubs producing knowledgeable players. This is because we know what the rec programs give us and that is less then desirable.

I also applaud the clubs that aren’t joining into this club bashing. So for all the lex clubs and necsa thank you.

Soccerdude – I’m honestly confused. Please help me understand.

I understood the goals of CSC and NECSA as you stated it and it makes sense; they want to be at minimum a state soccer power. Great! So we can judge them on their overall standings in the state.

As you described CRSA I understand it to be a farm and training system for the BC and Dreher players. Okay…I guess I can kind of understand that.

But what completely has me baffled is your description of the goals of the 4 clubs in Lexington. You state

>>The mission of the girls and boys club has been to service the Lexington area players that want to advance in soccer.<<

The trouble here is that this goal is so ambiguous that I can’t figure out what it means. Does this mean that Lexington clubs should be judged on the transition of Lexington recreation players to internal Lexington classic players? That makes some sense. But what of the two Lexington classic clubs? Are they judged by how many players move from Lexington to CSC/NECSA – since CSC/NECSA are the clubs that are “biggest and baddest? Of course, it could mean the Lexington players that move to GFC, St. Giles, or other “biggest and baddest” clubs as well.

Or is the Lexington goal include all of that and also include trying to be competitive at a state, regional, and national level so as to support those players capable and desirous of doing so? If so, then how does the Lexington goal differ from the CSC and NECSA goal?

I’m not trying to dismiss what you’re saying – because I think that there is something truly wonderful in the concept of clubs having goals. If each club in the Columbia area truly has a specific goal/mission that Columbia-area soccer will be much better. The trouble I have is when these soccer clubs have such ambiguous missions that no one can really tell what the mission is – and of course can’t tell if the club is succeeding or failing in its mission.

So could you please explain in more detail the Lexington mission or missions, and how we can judge the success or failure of the clubs in Lexington?

WARNING - Extremely long post

Until today I had not read these current thread's on the "One Club" issue because I got kind of burned out on this topic a couple of years ago. But I made the mistake of starting to read these posts today and spent several hours on it.

These thoughts have reminded me of a proposal I made in the form of a Powerpoint Presentation in December 2000. Maybe it's time to dust it off.

I could not find a way to attach a Powerpoint file to this message board, so I am cutting and pasting it as unformatted text.

This was a proposal for an Alliance where all the girls' clubs would work together to field premier (Challenge level) teams at each age group from the entire Columbia area while still fielding classic level (rec+) teams at the local level. Since writing it I came to believe it was too idealistic. But if enough people want this type of thing, maybe....

Take a read at this and see what you think, poke holes in it, throw it out, or use what may be helpful.

It was targeted at girls clubs, but the concept should be applicable to boys and girls. Also, note that it was written nearly 2.5 years ago and some terms are no longer accurate. For example, the Challenge League was not around yet and the choices at the time for girls was the Statewide League or the Midstate League.

Here it comes...

December, 2000

CASA: COLUMBIA AREA SOCCER ALLIANCE

Proposed as an alliance of the following pre-existing clubs (girls only):
- Chapin Soccer Association (CSA)
- Columbia Soccer Association (CSC)
- Northeast Columbia Soccer Association (NECSA)
- Lexington County Girls’ Classic Soccer Association (LCGCSA)
- Palmetto Girls’ Soccer Association (PGSA)

Purpose:
Cooperative effort to field the most competitive teams at each age group and provide the highest level of player development

Local Boards:
- Selected by each pre-existing club
- Appoint representatives to the CASA Board of Directors (2 from each local club)
- Responsible for all aspects of local organization including local Classic level and recreational teams from within the specific geographical area

CASA Board:
- Composed of 2 representatives from each local organization (CSA, CSC, NECSA, PGSA, LCGCSA)
- Officers appointed from and by these representatives: President, VP, Secretary, Treasurer, Registrar, Director of Coaching, Administrator, etc.
- Affiliate with SCYSA under a new club number
- Responsible for selecting coaches, trainers, and managers for the CASA Challenge Teams
- Responsible for coach and player development for CASA Challenge teams
- Responsible for setting fees and other fundraising for Challenge team expenses

CASA: Local Geographical Areas:
CSA – Chapin and the surrounding area
CSC – Northwest Richland County, Lexington County North of Lake Murray (exclusive of the Chapin area)
NECSA – Northeast Richland County
PGSA – South and East Richland County
LCGCSA – Lexington County South of Lake Murray

CASA Challenge Teams
- One team at each age group selected from entire CASA area
- Coaches chosen by CASA board of directors
- Play in Statewide League and competitive tournaments
- Compete for the SCYSA Challenge Cup

Local Classic teams
- One or more teams at each age group selected from girls within each local area (CSA, CSC, NECSA, PGSA, & LCGCSA)
- Coaches chosen by the local board of directors
- Play in Mid State League and in-state tournaments
- Compete for the SCYSA Classic Cup

Challenge Teams:
- Two-Fold Purpose:
1. Provide the highest level of competition and training for player development
2. Develop teams that are competitive at the regional level
- Composed of a select group of players from across the Midlands of South Carolina

Classic Teams
- Purpose: Provide classic level competition, coaching, and training for as many players as possible at an intermediate level of commitment
- Formed in each local area at each age group or combination of age groups
- Age groups should be combined when there are not enough players in a local area (i.e. U11 & U12, U13 & U14, etc)
- Local organizations should refrain from combining teams from different local areas

Player Selection:
- Tryouts will be held within each local area for each age group (U11-U19)
- Tryout dates will be staggered so the Challenge coaching staff can participate in each area
- Each age group tryout will be jointly conducted by the Challenge and local Classic coaching staffs
- Girls will be selected by the Challenge coaching staff for the Challenge team or invited to a second, centralized tryout, if necessary.
- Girls not chosen for the Challenge team will be candidates for the local Classic teams.

There are other benefits of having one club in the area but that could also be realized with inter-club cooperation such as an alliance. Examples:
- Volume buying power to get better prices for uniforms and equipment
- Corporate sponsorships of an alliance would be more attractive to companies than with separate organizations.
- Fields and other facilities could be acquired cooperatively.
- etc., etc....

[Warning: Long post…but one in which I try to lay out the argument…I promise to try my best to post more tersely and concisely about this subject in the future…]

Coach P: thank you for this incredibly wonderful message and thank you for taking the time to read and post. I think that you are in the “informed majority” with respect to one big “meta-club” (whether it’s virtual or physical) and that I’m in the minority – and in the case of me, it’s probably the “ignorant minority”.

The arguments for mergers and central planning are often very compelling. And there are absolutely cases in which they work. However, in my experience, these are the minority of cases. The primary advantage of mergers and central planning is the concept of synergy: what one wag in the late 1990’s called “1 + 1 = 3”. This synergy is typically broken down into supplier-side efficiencies (e.g., greater buying power), internal efficiencies (e.g., less money for administrative tasks and more money for the doers (e.g., coaches)), and market-side efficiencies (e.g., greater market share translating into stuff like greater pricing power). As you note, the buying power would be increased, uniforms, field rentals, etc. Internal efficiencies probably are not much of a factor with volunteers and the like doing administrative work, but it could be better. And market-side efficiencies should be increased because each corporate entity is approached once and is more likely to donate because of a bigger player base.

I mentioned once the USSR as a straw man of how badly central planning works. I admit, it’s a bit hackneyed to use this example. But the corporate world is littered with examples of why mergers and central planning don’t work as well as people think that they would. Just a few examples range from AOL/Time Warner, Compaq/Digital, AT&T/NCR. I’m not saying that mergers never work; just that it’s more of the exception than the rule (note: obviously, with my beliefs, I do not and will not own HP equity at this time!)

Here’s what people often miss: it’s typically much easier to work in, lead, manage, and buy from a smaller focused organization with a clear goal/mission than it is to do the same in a larger organization with competing constituencies and factions and an unclear or disagreed upon mission/goal. The term “much easier” is beguiling because you can measure saved supplier costs but it’s more difficult to measure the costs of increased complexity.

However, I think that there’s an even more important factor at play here. As many people have stated, the central concept should be about serving players. What we’re discussing in this thread for the most part is supporting those players and their parents that are in the minority – that care passionately about winning on a state, regional, and national level. These players and their supporting parents are willing to sacrifice resources to play for the best team and the best coach. This is the reason that I’ve stated often that at least for these types of players and parents that the coach/team is the central issue and that the club exists only to serve these coaches as the embodiment of the team. In some clubs, the boards exist to serve the players; what I am arguing is that this model changes when the constituency is highly competitive players and supporting parents and instead the boards have to exist to serve the coaches. The coaches have to then serve the players and parents; otherwise, the players “vote with their feet” and leave.

The highly controversial analogy that I can make concerns the current vouchers issue. The two most widely discussed views on vouchers are that they will take away from badly needed public school revenue versus that they will introduce a much needed element of competition in public schools and give students/parents more control because of choice.

My position on this is probably rather clear given the position I’ve taken on soccer clubs. But I don’t want to argue vouchers; instead, I want to just use this as an analogy for what I’m trying to present. I would rather have an existing club (if possible) or a new club (if needed) clearly define that they have a goal/mission of being competitive at a state, regional, and national level and that everything else that they do is in service of that mission. Does this mean that recreation or recreation+ programs couldn’t be supported? Absolutely not; instead, it means that these programs would be run in service of player development to accomplish the mission/goal of the club.

I’ve seen people talk about the current clubs and DOC’s and existing coaches not sharing players and the like. But the truth is that for the type of highly competitive players and their supporting parents that you need to achieve this type of mission, the issue is not the club or DOC or existing coach; instead, it is whether a player/parent becomes convinced in their own “selfish best interest” that they should move to a different coach/team. Bluntly, the players/parents are already in control at this level of competition; the clubs are not.

What I believe needs to be done is rather than attempt to coerce area players/parents into playing on a centralized team, instead offer the player/parent a better and more differentiated product in the form of better coaches and thus better teams. Of course, better coaches will cost resources; but I believe that there is a largely untapped market that is willing to pay more for a better product (i.e., a better coach and team). And please note, as I’ve stated before, I do not believe that the use of the term “better coach” means our existing coaches are bad; I think that the provision of greater resource to our existing coaches is a wonderful first step to having “better coaches”.

To all of you who are tired of this subject and believe that it’s just talking and that nothing will be done differently – well, you could be right. However, in this competitive model, we do not need all of the clubs to cooperate; we need either one existing club to establish our mission/goal or we need to create a new club. Either is okay with me.

So, in all seriousness, does anyone know where one might find at least 20 acres and as much as 100 acres that is far enough out of Columbia to be reasonably priced ($2000 to $5000 per acre)?

WARNING?WARNING!! ---Excessive thoughts from a fervent, passionate soccer fan---
This is my absolute last, final post/comment on this topic!! (Yeah right!) Many great ideas and thoughts have been proposed on this merger/non-merger issue and I applaud all who are making the efforts to at least create the discussion that has never occurred to this extent in an open forum. There is obviously much interest/desire that something be done about the local soccer environment in Cola and surrounding area. And at least that interest is conveying the notion that we no longer want the status quo which produces basically the same results among the clubs year after year. As a staunch, fervent supporter of the type of central system in effect at CASL and other clubs, I believe that the one club approach will greatly provide much for a lot of players; whether they are Rec, Classic,Challenge, Premier. This system will not harm or adversely impact on the vibrant Rec leagues in the area. NECSA/CSC/LSC and others will still be involved in Rec programs and the development of players who may subsequently move to the more advanced system of play offered by the central club. Or, you can have a program like CASL, which encompasses all divisions of play, including Rec. Their club presents all levels of play to suit any player. And aren't we about the size of Raleigh?? This fall may be a good barometer for any future discussions of possible 'mergers' as CSC is stepping forward and out into the community with a new, energetic DOC, which proposes to produce some of the best teams in the state. If CSC succeeds this fall, do the other clubs NECSA/CRSA/LSC join with them in the Spring? Or do the better players at CRSA/NECSA begin their trek over to Ballentine to play with the best? Or do CRSA/NECSA stay put and just continue to produce reasonable, average teams? If CRSA/NECSA just stay put in their own little soccer worlds,(after the better players leave for CSC), then they will truly not be competitive with CSC, and possibly not competitive with Aiken and Charleston/Coastal teams. I do believe that the end result of a merger/one club venture would produce: 1) consolidation of soccer resources/coaches/training/instruction. 2)high level state/regional teams 3) higher level, more skilled players for their respective high school teams 4)A more unified, less fractional approach to soccer development in Cola area.
Or, do I have to create my own ONE MAN MERGER and take on all comers on the pitch 11 v.1? Of course by that time, maybe there will be a mercy rule in place and I will have to play 11 v. 1 for only a half!!!

I have read with much interest the debates that have been presented here concerning a "larger, more centralized club" in Columbia.

I certainly support a club that would offer the highest caliber players an opportunity to compete against the state and region's best teams. But that only accounts for maybe 3-5% of the players in a given age group. It's the other 95% of the kids that I'm concerned with.

The "old" Columbia Metropolitan Soccer Association (CMSA 1993-95) idea was to have the local clubs (NECSA, Irmo, Chapin, Congaree, Trenholm, Lexington, etc.) train/develop the average players, while CMSA would take the top-level players in Columbia and compete at the highest level possible.

This partially worked as not all clubs were willing to "give up" their top players and try to compete with lesser players. Also, many of the smaller clubs couldn't afford to lose 2-3 players off their individual teams and keep their teams intact due to numbers.

Another point that dogged CMSA was the inability to secure a field/facility for training and match play. Most fields in the area are governed by recreation commissions and are reluctant to open up much use (or control) to classic league soccer clubs. I think the fact that CSC and NECSA have soccer facilities at their disposal (due to hard work and commitment) give them the biggest advantage in the Columbia region.

Until all the key members of the clubs coordinate an effort to work together and secure facilities for a mega-clubs use, I think much of this is simply wishful thinking. Sorry gogogoal and Shibumi.

Wishful thinking is right,Kevin.Speaking of wishful thinking,heard any more about Damon Hubert for the U-18s?That could be the superior mid-state team.

Dreaming and wish-ful thinking is where it has to all begin...... You have to dream and imagine the possibilities for the future of club soccer in Cola.

Thanks tremendously for posting, Mr. Heise. A few, very respectful, questions. Please forgive me up front for any and all of my ignorance that I display.

>>I certainly support a club that would offer the highest caliber players an opportunity to compete against the state and region's best teams.<<

It’s kind of a Mom and apple pie thing though, right? Everyone would “support” it; the question is whether people think it’s an important enough thing to actually proactively do something about.

My real question to you, however, is why you aren’t screaming for this to occur and trying daily to make it occur? You are involved in coaching high school soccer in this area; wouldn’t such a team be a great boon to you and other high school coaches? If it would be a boon, and you’d win from it, why wouldn’t you be striving to make it happen rather than dismissing it?

There was an article in an Anderson paper recently concerning dual participation between upper state high schools and the Greenville Futbol Club. I believe you posted the link in another group on May 5. It was amazing to me the advantages that the high school coaches gained from advanced club play – I was particularly blown away by the fact that the GFC had a girls team playing against Clemson, South Carolina, Wake Forest, etc. This is certainly the top 3%-5%.

>>It's the other 95% of the kids that I'm concerned with.<<

Why? With NECSA’s fields, and the new Lexington fields, with the overwhelming focus by clubs on this 95%, and with your role as a high school coach taking the best players available you’re your district for your high school team, why are these the kids that you’re concerned with? Is there something that isn’t being done for recreational soccer players that needs to be done that isn’t being done?

>> […deleted material concerning CMSA and it’s two major problems: getting players from existing teams and fields…]<<

I completely agree with this after corresponding with others in this thread; it is clear to me that this concept of “centralized club” is flawed. I know others don’t agree with me here, but that’s the best conclusion I’ve been able to draw. And it’s also clear to me that without fields controlled by a club that has as a primary mission competing at a state, regional, and national level, that this is not feasible.

>>Until all the key members of the clubs coordinate an effort to work together and secure facilities for a mega-clubs use, I think much of this is simply wishful thinking. Sorry gogogoal and Shibumi.<<

Respectfully, I think that this coordination is wishful thinking. It’s been tried before and failed, as you eloquently noted previously, and no one has as yet figured out how to make this work as a win/win for the “local club” and “meta-club”. It seems to me that this means an existing club or a new club would have to handle it.

The GFC and St. Giles model seems appropriate; as opposed to failures such as the CMSA, this model can be demonstrated as working. They appear to quite unapologetically be trying to have a club that does a great job supporting the “top 5%”. They are represented quite disproportionately in state leagues; and I know I see them in some of the best out of state tournaments as well.

I wanted to re-post an earlier post I made on this subject because for some reason all the responses here indicate that the 'central club monster' only will be for a small percentage of players 3-5 %. That is NOT it at all. The central club will benefit all players: rec, classic, challenge, premier. Or, you can have a club that does not include rec. and let them continue their successes on their respective levels at Trenholm Park, NECSA, CSC,LSC, etc. NO ONE wants to do this for one simple reason-- the respective club egos. No one wants to 'give up' their neat little, comfy club for the benefit of Cola. area-wide soccer. Some comments have said that CSC would not cooperate and participate in central club because they are now establishing their own 'monster club', and will just wait til all other clubs join them in 'their quest' for the best soccer. I have even heard that CSC plans to use CRSA,NECSA and some other area fields for training and practice in order to accomodate their city or east-side players. So....either you join in CSC's quest or you develop your own. Assuming that CSC is gonna 'do their own thing', then what about CRSA/NECSA/LSC considering a merger (sorry for that dirty merger word). You would then have access to many fields/facilities for training. I am sure NECSA/CRSA players would not mind traveling once a week to Lexington for training/instruction and then train another day or two on their area fields. NECSA/CRSA need practice fields desparately. They are there...... waiting at LSC. I believe NECSA/CRSA would consider a 'merger' with LSC rather than just falling in line with CSC because there appears to be some degree of dislike for that 'famous Irmo attitude' and bleached hair. I don't believe there is that much dislike for LSC.
So......
NECSA/CRSA/LSC PLEASE consider the possibilities.
Cola. area could easily support two strong clubs in Cola., just as Greenville does with St. Giles and GFC.
I will stop now and wait for all of you to shoot down this proposal...yet again. Oh..and one last comment to Shibumi. I do believe that the more competititive you make Club soccer in Cola., the more successful high school teams you will have in your area. Imagine if you had a few players play on a premier team and that competition they face; and then they return in the spring to play high school ball. They will be dominate players. But if those players play average, satisfactory club ball against average state teams, they will possibly be average high school players. They will not have attained their maximum potential.
Prior Post follows:
May 05, 2003 09:14 AM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
WARNING?WARNING!! ---Excessive thoughts from a fervent, passionate soccer fan---
This is my absolute last, final post/comment on this topic!! (Yeah right!) Many great ideas and thoughts have been proposed on this merger/non-merger issue and I applaud all who are making the efforts to at least create the discussion that has never occurred to this extent in an open forum. There is obviously much interest/desire that something be done about the local soccer environment in Cola and surrounding area. And at least that interest is conveying the notion that we no longer want the status quo which produces basically the same results among the clubs year after year. As a staunch, fervent supporter of the type of central system in effect at CASL and other clubs, I believe that the one club approach will greatly provide much for a lot of players; whether they are Rec, Classic,Challenge, Premier. This system will not harm or adversely impact on the vibrant Rec leagues in the area. NECSA/CSC/LSC and others will still be involved in Rec programs and the development of players who may subsequently move to the more advanced system of play offered by the central club. Or, you can have a program like CASL, which encompasses all divisions of play, including Rec. Their club presents all levels of play to suit any player. And aren't we about the size of Raleigh?? This fall may be a good barometer for any future discussions of possible 'mergers' as CSC is stepping forward and out into the community with a new, energetic DOC, which proposes to produce some of the best teams in the state. If CSC succeeds this fall, do the other clubs NECSA/CRSA/LSC join with them in the Spring? Or do the better players at CRSA/NECSA begin their trek over to Ballentine to play with the best? Or do CRSA/NECSA stay put and just continue to produce reasonable, average teams? If CRSA/NECSA just stay put in their own little soccer worlds,(after the better players leave for CSC), then they will truly not be competitive with CSC, and possibly not competitive with Aiken and Charleston/Coastal teams. I do believe that the end result of a merger/one club venture would produce: 1) consolidation of soccer resources/coaches/training/instruction. 2)high level state/regional teams 3) higher level, more skilled players for their respective high school teams 4)A more unified, less fractional approach to soccer development in Cola area.
Or, do I have to create my own ONE MAN MERGER and take on all comers on the pitch 11 v.1? Of course by that time, maybe there will be a mercy rule in place and I will have to play 11 v. 1 for only a half!!!