SC Soccer Forums SCSoccer.com Forums Club Soccer & ODP SC Region / Club Superiority

On the "MPSC Ice" thread, one of the (many) topics that was raised was "upstate versus lower state" soccer superiority. A few folks had different methodologies for showing whether there was any difference between regions, with some claiming superiority for one region and others saying that there wasn’t much difference.

I began wondering about my own assumptions. I’ve always used anecdotal evidence, coupled with gotSoccer.com point ratings, to support my belief that the upstate was superior (note: I live in the midstate, so this belief at least isn't based on where my home is). However, I decided to spend an hour going back and revisiting my assumptions. Here’s what I did. I took the 2000-2003 challenge cup results from U11 to U18 for the teams finishing first and second. I assigned 2 points to the first place team and 1 point to the second place team. I then grouped the teams into clubs and the clubs into regions. While I have no doubt that I have some relatively minor math errors somewhere, I’ve double checked this and I think that the overall results are pretty solid.

The total of all points were as follow:

Upstate: 104
Midstate: 40
Lower State: 38

Breaking these down into girls and boys results

Upstate: Boys: 57
Midstate: Boys: 23
Lower State: Boys: 13

Upstate: Girls: 47
Midstate: Girls: 17
Lower State: Girls: 29

Of the 93 total points for the boys’ teams, three teams accounted for 65 of those points: SGU (34), GFC (20), and Aiken (11). CSC and NECSA had 6 and 5 points, respectively.

Of the 93 total points for the girls’ teams, five teams accounted for 65 of those points: SGU (19), GFC (17), MPSC (12), NECSA (9), and CGSA (8). Greenwood and SSC had 7 points apiece.

In terms of combined club ranking, SGU led with 53 points followed by GFC with 37 points and NECSA with 15 points. The point total for SGU and GFC actually should have been slightly higher – but I got confused by past mergers with those clubs of DSA (2 points, boys), UGSA (3 points, girls), and Sugar Creek (1 point, girls).

In looking at all of the numbers, one thing I could have done would have been to assign a higher rating for older teams. It appears that GFC (girls and boys) and to a lesser extent Aiken (boys) would be the major benefactor of this and SGU would have been hurt the most by this change in methodology. I could have also assigned a higher rating for more recent wins, but ran out of time to try this.

I'm posting this so that others can take shots and tell me fundamentally what I'm missing with this, and perhaps even show other ways of examining this issue that might show different results.

MC --

Thanks for taking the time to put together a concise snapshot of classic competition in SC over the last 4 years. I don't know much about club organization in the piedmont, but would be interested in knowing if there is much classic soccer presence outside of Metropolitan Greenville -- ie, do Anderson, Spartanburg, Clemson, Easley, Mauldin, Fountain Inn, Pumpkin Town, etc have organized clubs? Thanks.

LPAF

MC, that is some deep _ _ _ _! Thanks for the good information.

By the way, what ever happened to the Mid-State League? My son grew up playing the likes of North Augusta, Rock Hill, Hartsville, Orangeburg, and all the Columbia teams. Is it still in existence? If so, what level (recreation, classic, etc.)?

CF,
As far as I know there is no Mid-State league, unless perhaps you know have a Y-League. Almost all of the teams have either gone to a State League format, or to the premier league. Does anyone else know of any such a league?

Cola is referring to the Sandlapper League, which folded, I believe after the Spring 2003 season.

For the mid-state (actually state-wide), there is the Premier League (Region 3 East), the Challenge League (SCSCL) and the state-wide Pelham Masonic League (PMSL). In the fall, PMSL runs "A" and "B" divisions for U-11 thru U-14 and has "Classic" level divisions for U-15 thru U-18. In the spring, U-11 thru U-14 will have SCSCL and PMSL divisions. Don't know of any localized mid-state leagues.

You can check www.hotstat.com for standings, results and more on all 3 leagues.

No doubt that at present GFC and St Giles are the 2 top programs right now. They have benefitted from stability and professionalism at the top. Congratulations to Andrew and Pearse.

I am optimistic that Mt Pleasant (for one)has
put together a structure (and the right people)
to build a program for the future - after a few years of lack of direction. I went to Challenge league site as well as Pelham site and the younger teams from the Lowcountry ranked very high in fall season.

What Lowcountry has to deal with is the fractured # of clubs in a relatively small geographic area . Those darn bridges! I think this is what LPAF was aluding to in his post.

I agree that this approach doesn't really reflect gains that are being made by some of the clubs in our state. The weakness with this type of approach is that it shows "velocity" and not "acceleration".

For example, in the midstate, the merger of CSC/CFC has seemed to bring together a critical mass of coaching talent and players and from my perspective they are really accelerating. This is wonderful news in my book -- the midstate, and particularly the Columbia area, badly needs a club to step forward and increase the level of competition on a continuing (and not just one-off) basis.

Once you get past the intra-state competition, the sad fact is that SC is still ranked incredibly low (girls: 40 out of 50, source: gotSoccer.com). I'm hoping that we get a lot more acceleration from all of the clubs in the state so that we can really move up from the basement.

I believe the teams get to choose which division they play in. I do know that a team has to declare, by a specified date, whether they play SCSCL (Challenge) or PMSL (Classic) in the spring.

I think stability is the key to any club to get traction. St. Giles and GFC have had that for a number of years. CSC and NECSA are setting up in the Mid-State. Lower state is still contending with three clubs which is one two many. I know that the SCYSA has tried to discourage that easy formation of new clubs so that Coaches and parents can't just start up a new club because they get mad. Of course I say all that and even the host of this site starts up his own club instead of working with the other two.

Why doesn't gotsoccer.com show the state cup as a tourney but it shows other tournaments after that? Just wanted to know. And another thing what are the three clubs in lower state? I am not aware of them all.

Here are some of the Charleston area clubs ( just the ones with at least 1 classic team):
Mt Pleasant
Carolina Girls
James Island
Summerville
Charlestowne Soccer Club
Goose Creek

I bet I have even missed a few.

Myrtle Beach has:
OSSOC
Coastal

Beaufort County:
Beaufort
Hilton Head

Chapindad --

On the girls side of things Charleston area upper echelon soccer is divided among 4 teams, counting the Summerville Soccer Club, James Island, MPSC and Carolina Girls. The most successful lowcountry girls' teams over the last few years have been formed by blocks of talented players who decided to move away from their traditional club in favor of a highly qualified coach from a neighboring club.

lpaf

What do you learned soccer watchers in Charleston think would be the ideal set up? 2 clubs? 1 club? In my opinion I think Cola would be best served by 2 clubs.A westside (CSC/Lex/Chapin) and an eastside(Northeast/Congaree/downtown) club setup.I know some want 1 club in Columbia, but that won't happen any time soon.Your thoughts?

S1 --

Your post came in ahead of mine but the thinking is the same.

Another thing besides the question of the bridges that geographically affects the lowcountry is the 180 degree rule. If you draw a line from Edisto Island to Awendaw and use this as the diameter of a circle centered more or less on the peninsula of Charleston, almost all participating soccer players come from the north west half of the circle.

lpaf

BDad11,
As I sit here watching some sailboats out in the harbor, I will attempt a grand solution for the Lowcountry.
We have a natural leader for a consolidation in our National Champion Professional team - Charleston Battery. The Charleston Battery could sponsor 1 (possibly 2) teams in each age group ( and sex) at the highest level of state wide competition available. They could hire the coaches, sponsor the uniforms, and provide some fields for just these limited # of teams. Their base of operations on Daniel Island is quickly becoming the center of the greater Charleston metropolitan area ( geographically speaking).
Since the Battery has no geographical territory to speak of, it could argue that its player selection would be unbiased.
The local clubs could continue to run their own recreational leagues, in house programs, and possibly sponsor a team at the classic level (not challenge) or American Cup level if there was the player demand. There would have to be operating agreements between all the clubs and the Battery
that the elite players would be fed to the Battery.
In exchange, the Battery would provide pro players and coaches to help in develop training sessions on a broader level.

problems to overcome:
1- Pride, Ego, Turf - whatever you want to call it.
2- If successful, they do not have field capacity at their training facility for a large # of teams.
More fields in this area would be needed. Possibly teams could rotate practice time and game field availability based upon this magical harmonious relationship between the feeder clubs.
3- Historical opposition to this type of idea is that Battery did not want to risk alienating possible season ticket holders when the kid gets "cut". In fact, I think the contrary would happen. Battery would have more exposure and everyone would aspire to be part of a "Battery" Team.

Isn't this vaguely similar to how International clubs run youth programs?

A couple of nice posts swimmer. I think you're right in saying that the organization at the top has to be in place for a club to be successful. I said that earlier when I said that soccer guys need to be making the soccer decisions, but I was called an East German for making that idiotic comment so I'll tread, but tread lightly. The clubs in Greenville are also in fairly small markets, so a priority is on keeping a professional staff and attracting the best players from all over the state. The problem of fragmentation occurs throughout the state. In Spartanburg alone there are three clubs. In Greenville you have GFC, St.Giles and smaller clubs such as Foothills, Clemson, Team Mutiny,Greer etc .. There is also little margain of error in Greenville because the environment is very competitive, so each club has to always be on top of its game.

That's good stuff Mark.

I'm not making a judgement one way or the other but we sometimes get so caught up in the having to have the best team or club (seems most want to use winning as a measure of that). The quality of a club is more than winning and the size of the club. I've seen posts berating Mark Berson for not having more SC "local" players on his team (which I personally wish he did) and yet many of us wish clubs were combined locally or even at the state level or at least "recruit" statewide. So eventually you could at some point with a "local" club team with few players from the local area that wins all its games and now you have the best club in the state? I'm not sure that will make club soccer as a whole better in SC. We may have a couple of elite teams which would consist of a small number of top players but what does that due to participation in the sport itself. I'm afraid many of the other players drop out of playing the sport because they feel like second class citizens. If we push our programs to be at the "professional" level then the overall sport of soccer may suffer. Just something to think about.

Common' Dex, I didn't call you an East German. What I said, I think, was that very authoritarian athletic organizations can be very efficient and win with consistancy, ie. the East Germans in the cold war period. This was in the context of my suggestion that parents could have a useful voice in team decisions. Water under the bridge.

I haven't had much useful to say here because I'm not a club person. I have great respect for the professionals, coaches, parents and others who put in the hours upon hours needed to keep the clubs running and improving. My focus is undoubtably self serving and short sighted but remains a bottom up approach. My daughter, her team, her club.

In looking at Mark's analysis of the last four years it seems clear that GFC and SG have come up with a more successful formula for consistantly producing classic soccer champions and runners up than the other clubs of the state, though clubs in every region seem able to produce this same product at different times. The list of serious competitors extends statewide, though not with the same frequency.

R2's idea that a very restricted number of very elite teams may not best serve the broader interests of soccer in SC is a fertile field to plant thoughts in and see what they grow into.

Have a great second half of the weekend, everyone.

lpaf

Mark --

Another theoretical way to analyze overall success in soccer in South Carolina is to assume that clubs and coaching have little to do with state cup victories, but rather raw demographics drive the overall picture. By this I suggest that it is not unreasonable to assume that an area of 500k population should produce twice as many State Cup championships as an area inhabited by only 250k people.

For testing purposes I decided to use Greenville, Richland and Charleston counties as the center points of analysis and take the three most populous contiguous counties as the "surrounding area". (US census data http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/45/45045.html) This may not be a perfect model but serves as a reasonable starting point for discussion.

Rounded to a reasonable Saturday night level of math this yields the following:

Greenville, Spartanburg, Anderson, Pickens = 925k

Richland, Lexington, Sumter, Newberry = 684k

Charleston, Berkeley, Dorchester, Georgetown = 612k

With this in mind we would expect the Greenville metropolitan area to produce around 1.5x as many State Cup victories as the Charleston area given exactly equal club organizational skills (and roughly the same differential for metro Columbia).

I recognize that GFC and SGU outperformed this model, but would suggest only that they are aided not only by a solid club organizational structure but also by the fact that the upstate has a lot more kids to draw upon to form their upper echelon teams. Add to this the recruitment phenomenon for club play and the pendulum swings even further in the Piedmont's favor.

Food for thought.

lpaf

Not to knock the Aiken Fire (they are a very good team) but the GFC 85 Black boys have a cumulative record for the last two seasons of 12-3-1 in premier league. The won the league last year and came in second this year. Both of these teams have been very competitive the last few years.

Also, the GFC 85 Black girls won the premier league this year.

That would be at least 3 teams in the top 2 of their respective age groups. That is 3 out of 8 age groups that we had a team in the top 2.

It could be better depending on how the U14 do in the spring.

LPAF and soccer Taxi-
Using population numbers and statistics to try and justify a lack of quality in the lower and midstate clubs in absolutely bullocks, or shall I say, B.S.
Yes, the upstate has more children. Does that necessarily mean that more kinds are playing soccer? Its not numbers, its quality. You can have a billion kids playing soccer, but if they aren't commited to being better, then it doesnt matter if you are comparing them to a smaller city more dedicated players.
Another thing to take into consideration, probably more important than my last fact, is that players from the lowerstate and midstate travel to the upstate to play with St. Giles and GFC. Are they part of the upstate population? No, but they are looking for quality clubs. It is understood all over the state that places like Charleston and Columbia don't have the best clubs; therefore, better (or smarter) player from those areas choose to play for the upstate. Your excuses are ridiculous. Population is a poor excuse for having poor clubs. If the local clubs were more organized, then these players wouldn't have to travel 1-4 hours to play. But they do, and its not because of a mere population gap.
If you do research and tell me that there are more kids, ages 11-18 playing classic competitive soccer in the upstate who actually live there compared to the lower state, then I would back down. But there aren't such statistics, because the only people who would use them are lowerstate and midstate people who can't accept that people from their own areas are leaving to play for the upstate clubs. Lame excuses, folks. Lame.

sccrstd18,

I actually agree totally. You are making my precise point. As I said, "the fact is that the upstate area is not better demographically, just better organized." I DID mean that the Greenville/Spartanburg area is better organinized club wise. I also intended to point out that numbers-wise, Columbia/Aiken/Augusta HAS the talent, they just can't get their act together.

I really think it is silly to have so many clubs in one area around Columbia and Aiken. I can think of at least 6 or more in the area, all trying to pull talent together. What you end up with is a lot of mediocre teams with a few good teams sprinkled in amongst them. When you think of a huge city like Raleigh/Durham that really only has two clubs - the behemoth CASL that is 8000+ players strong, and TFC, also very strong, you know why the Raleigh area consistently fields national championship teams.

SOccer Taxi-
I'm sorry I misinterpreted your post; apparently we are both on the same page, unlike some people on this thread who are using population for lack of a better excuse. I couldn't agree more with you. If the Charleston/Columbia area were to come together, then maybe a strong club would result; however, with headstrong club directors who want to be the best without any of the resources that the upstate has, the lowcountry and Columbia will get nowhere.

I agree that there are too many clubs in Cola/Aiken area. Too much division of the talent pool. But Aiken/NECSA/CRSA/CSC/Lex. will never merge. One club has decided to step forward and not wait on a merger: ColumbiaSoccerClub. Midlands area players need to give CSC a fresh, serious, new look in the spring and next fall.They now have eight great fields and now 2 with lights, paved parking and a clubhouse/consession is almost finished. Under Eddie Crosby's direction and other exceptional coaches, that club will do great things on the field in the next few years in many age groups. They are drawing players from Aiken, Sumter and Myrtle Beach. From the Field of Dreams: "if you build it, they will come."

One thing to consider in the upstate/lowerstate debate is the demographics as well as population. The better soccer players tend to come from more educated and financially secure families. The upstate has the upper hand there. The lower state tends to be more rural and less educated.

Now, y'all can get off your high horses, I didn't just call the lowcountry a bunch of stupid hicks. There are plenty of affluent, well-educated people in the lowcountry. Just making a point about the overall makeup of the population.

AND I did NOT say that all soccer players are spoiled rich kids!

Paruthed-
Isn't it sad that everytime you make a point you have to justify your intentions so that you don't hurt they're little feelings? It's sad that no one can give their opinions on an opinion-based board because all you-know-what will break lose. Someone's always feeling offended, aren't they

Wow - 23 posts on a topic before it started going downhill with teen aged chest thumping. Is that a record?
Even Dexter and I were able to have a reasonable exchange of ideas. Dexter - not only does a club need a good director but also a strong organizational support structure ( i.e. parents and boosters). I think, in fact, the reason MPSC sank for a couple of years was that everyone wanted the club director to take care of everything without any oversight or support.
Not knowing a lot about GFC or St Giles , are there Board of Directors at those clubs?

LPAF - insomnia strike over the week end? 2:00 am posts?

Swimmer. There is a board in place at both Giles and GFC. One question I have about the structure of Mt. Pleasant is the DOC. How much time does Lundy have to put in to the program? I know he is very busy with the college and his camps. Is there anyone else in place there? Also, isn't MPSC governed over by the Rec. Department in Mt. Pleasant and if so how does that work?

The population argument I think is pretty lame. It is utterly pointless to include Sumter and Newberry as a source of players for Columbia. Newberry does not have one classic team and Sumter has 1 boys and 1 girls team. The same goes for Georgetown, Berkley, Pickens, and Anderson. The earlier post was right on about demographics- you can forget about the population in rural areas of counties adding to a pool of players. The population of Charleston in 2002 was 98,785. Greenville was 56,181. Mt. Pleasant was 53,096, Spartanburg 39,068.

That was a weak take.

4soccer: What a great post. I’ve never read a post that has so much with which I disagree and at the same time so much with which I agree. Let’s start with the disagreement – that’s usually more fun. After hearing for years how much facilities matter, I absolutely don’t believe it any more. I can give you two anecdotal reasons for this – the best facilities in the state are arguably Lexington’s soccer complex – and Lexington is for the most part a bleak and balkanized collection of four (4!) clubs of which the “classic” clubs continue scrabbling toward mediocrity. GFC’s facilities are not at all impressive – and yet they continue to produce outstanding teams.

I think it’s great that CSC is building more fields, lighting them, paving, and the like. But that’s icing on the cake. CSC is the best hope for Columbia area soccer because it merged with CFC and now has by far the best coaching staff in the area – people like Savitz, Fredericks, Crosby, and so on. You could have stone fields and great coaches and you’d still draw players.

I hope the folks at CSC (and I’m not affiliated with CSC in any way – I’m just someone who would like to see SC not be ranked #40 out of #50 or so in terms of US soccer) make sure to spend more money and time recruiting more great coaches rather than focus solely (or even primarily) on facility improvements. Because what CSC needs the most right now is depth – the ability to field more than a few teams capable of winning state championships – rather than the ability to field just a handful of very good teams. And from my experience, players are drawn to coaches/teams – not to facilities.

I love these arguments oriented around demographics – I think that there is a lot of interesting conjecture being posted. Okay – let’s talk about population demographics. If we take a look at counties where there are major population centers, the “big three” are of course Greenville, Columbia, and Charleston. Here’s a first cut at some demographic data for these and also take the highest populations and densities in counties that are close to these metropolitan areas that might represent populations from which to draw:

Greenville:
Greenville County: 380K people, 479.3 people/square mile (SC, rank#1)
Spartanburg County: 254K people, 312.9 people/square mile (SC, rank #4)

Columbia:
Richland County: 321K people, 423.9 people/square mile (SC, rank #2)
Lexington County: 216K people, 308.2 people/square mile (SC, rank #5)

Charleston:
Charleston County: 310K people, 337.9 people/square mile (SC, rank #3)
Dorchester County: 96K people, 167.7 people/square mile (SC, rank #11)

Okay – someone brought up brought up education and financials. These tend to be rather strongly linked. Here’s some financial information for these counties in terms of median family income and SC county ranking:

Greenville County: $50K/family (SC, rank #4)
Spartanburg County: $45K/family (SC, rank #9)

Richland County: $50K/family (SC, rank #6)
Lexington County: $53K/family (SC, rank #2)

Charleston County: $47K/family (SC, rank #7)
Dorchester County: $50K/family (SC, rank #5)

Note: I didn’t include Beaufort County in with Charleston to try to keep this simpler – but it’s probably worth noting that Beaufort County is ranked #1 with a median family income of $52K/family.

But what about the target population, people younger than 18? Here’s how these areas stack up with each other:

Greenville County: 93K, 118 people/square mile
Spartanburg County, 63K, 78 people/square mile

Richland County: 78K, 103 people/square mile
Lexington County: 56K, 80 people/square mile

Charleston County: 74K, 80 people/square mile
Dorchester County: 28K, 48 people/square mile

So, what are my opinions based on this data? First, the financial argument doesn’t really hold – despite most people’s perception, the Charleston area has a higher median family income than most of the state and the Columbia area has a higher median family income than the Greenville area (of course, you can go to a higher level of granularity and look at all sorts of trends here). Second, in terms of population and density, a case can be made that the Charleston area has fewer players under 18 from which to draw than the midstate on both an absolute and a square mile basis – even when you abandon looking at regions and you just look at dominant counties contributing to a metropolitan area (note: my simplified numbers using only two contributing counties still shows a roughly 1.5X overall population difference and a roughly 1.5X density difference and thus agree with LPAF's broader population analysis). The Columbia and Greenville areas are very close.

Does this then mean that it comes strictly down to population draw? I honestly don’t think so. If it did, then the Columbia area would have many more state championships. I think the Charleston area, for example, could be a regional and national force if a single club made the investment in coaches. But that’s just my opinion. What these demographics don’t show is that the 16-18 players who constitute a top team in any club are difficult to define in any median or average way – these 16-18 players are by their nature unusual if they are among the best. So I think that what is paramount once you get to some critical threshold (which I’m guessing that Charleston, Columbia, and Greenville has) is the club and the coaches of that club. But then again, that’s just my opinion.

Excellent work again Mark. I think you are dead on. In the final analysis, it does come down to club organization and coaches.

You gotta be a statistician

Great post Mark....I have to agree with those that said coaching and not facilities are the reason for successful clubs. Just look at Summerville....Clark Brisson was brought on 3 years ago and the coaching staff he's assembled has proven successes....the U11, U13, and U14 boys teams are all very competitive and will certainly be top teams at cup time. The 13's and 14's are drawing players from all over the state including Myrtle Beach. They are competing in top tournaments (Jefferson Cup, Germantown Invitational, CASL, Virginia Beach Columbus Cup)against teams that can draw up to 300 kids for tryouts (CASL, Richmond, Potomac etc). In the spring the then 13's lost in the final to the SGU Santos and now have beaten them twice in the fall season. The current 13's are two time state cup champions and I expect they will be right there again this year. The U11's, made up for 10's and 11's have easily won many of their tournaments, frequently playing in the U12 divisions. I believe that if you have a successful team, players will come.

Players will also follow their coach - case in point: MPSC U15 girls followed their coach to SSC (I think one did not), Paul Conway's U15 girls have followed him from SSC, to Carolina Girls and now, I understand to MPSC.

I seem to remember too...Wando, Bishop England and Porter Gaud boys and West Ashley girls all winning the high school state championships this past spring. I'm sure someone will correct me if I'm wrong.

I think there are hotbeds of good soccer all over the state - what needs to happen is that we all start supporting one another instead of arguing who is best. I don't see any mega clubs popping up anytime soon - there are too many egos out there (as someone else pointed out). We can theorize all we want and come up with statistics to support just about any opinion (How to Lie with Statistics - great read!).

Players and parents are smart - they know where to go.

Soccermom

Here is another thought for comments. Why not creat two or three Challenge Clubs in the state and all the rest play Classic or Rec? Even though we have 8-10 teams typically playing challenge at most ages, there aren't enough coaches or players for more than 3 good teams state wide...
Look at the first round scores, in some cases 2nd round too, of State Cup and try to convince people they should have played Challenge.
The Classic and Rec could have much greater emphasis, be less costly for the majority and still offer the opportunity of Challenge to the top players or those that develop.
These Challenge clubs would begin to compete favorably in the Prem League and in major ournamenrs nationally.

Bob

BobF,
I think my proposal for the Battery would have the LowCountry covered.

Mark Campbell,
Just a few comments on your comments on my last post. My main point was not to say that just great facilities can make great teams and clubs. I do agree with you about Lexington. That is a club that needs to merge so that those great fields can get some quality players on them.
I used the 'field of dreams' comment as a weak attempt at some form of light soccer/baseball analogy. (Actually they are 'lighting the lights'
for the first time tonite in a Coaches v. U-15 to U18 players game.) My main point was that CSC is determined to provide the players at that club with not only great coaches, but good facilities, etc. It all comes down to organization and determined club leadership. Why else would small club Aiken have had great success with the Fire, if it were not for Rhodes determination and organization? CSC has a young, dynamic leader in Crosby and big things are ahead for that club from U10 girls/boys to U18 boys/girls.

This is as much fun as "Does West Ashley have to forfeit" from the Girls High School Soccer forum last spring and summer but without the drama. I doubt it will be good for 159 posts, but we'll see.

lpaf

Soccermom, your memory is not quite right.

Wando HS boys did not make the finals in the spring, losing to Irmo 4-1 in semis; Irmo won finals over Northwestern.

Bishop England also failed to capture the title; they lost in the finals to Chapin.

Almost forgot......the Bishop England girls....they did win a title.

That brings up another interesting comparison.....why do upstate clubs dominate while HS titles are evenly split amongst the lower, mid and upper districts?

Irmo4 --

I was going to write to say that Soccermom had just mistakenly moved the BE state championship from the girls column to the boys, but you were quicker on the keyboard. It's worth pointing out that both BE and West Ashley girls' teams were repeat state champiions (2002 and 2003).

lpaf

Time just wizzes by at amazing speeds....I think it was 2002 those teams won.....but at any rate - the high schools do have more equal successes....interesting.

Soccermom

Irmo4Now-
To answe your question, I believe that high school teams are evenly split compared to club teams because an overwhelming number of players travel outside their own distrcts to play club, especially the more talented teams. They are so good because they have good players that travel o go to practice, whereas high school teams consist of students at that particular high school.

Lexington will never be a true club because the facilities are owned by the county and not a club. And I know the people that work for the county have no interest in classic. They are very happy with the Rec. program. The classic is just tolerated but not encouraged.

I agree with Bdad11 that NECSA and CSC could worked together to cover the mid-state for soccer. Allow natural selection to take care of which is the best team for each age group.

I also agree that good coaching makes the team and CSC is putting together a very young energitic coaching staff. Eddie Crosby is doing a great job. The worst mistake CSC made was a few years ago when they tried to use name drops to drawal players and not actions. Parents saw right through the smoke and mirrors.

Chapindad: I have several, very respectful, questions concerning your last post. Please don't take anything I'm saying as disagreement; I'm simply trying to understand. I've gone on record now for the last year with my admiration for CSC/CFC -- so we're certainly not in disagreement on that. I'm going to use excerpts from your post to try to put my quesions in context.

>>Lexington will never be a true club because the facilities are owned by the county and not a club. And I know the people that work for the county have no interest in classic. They are very happy with the Rec. program. The classic is just tolerated but not encouraged.<<

I'm certainly not arguing with you about the quality of Lexington's four clubs, and in particular the two classic clubs. But here's what I'm wondering. It's true that Lexington has county fields controlled by a huge number of clubs put together in a bureacracy called LUSA. But given that there are two classic clubs devoted only to classic soccer, why would it matter who owns the fields? To put this another way, who cares what the county government thinks as long as the two classic clubs have field access? Isn't the success or failure of the Lexington classic programs completely the responsibility of the two classic clubs?

To put this another way. If I had to start a regionally/nationally competitive club right now, I'd rather do so with guaranteed field access provided for free than have to devote resources into building those fields. I'd then take the resources and devote them into building the best coaching staff in the state.

What am I missing?

>>I agree with Bdad11 that NECSA and CSC could worked together to cover the mid-state for soccer. Allow natural selection to take care of which is the best team for each age group.<<

I think what Bdad11 actually wanted was one club, but wanted to see as a compromise, intermediate step two clubs, with a series of mergers led by NECSA on one-half and CSC on the other half [which makes sense since these are the two largest clubs in the area].

I believe that CSC is the best hope for competitive regional and national soccer in the area. And I applaud the steps that the club is taking in terms of coaching staff and resources. But I think it's pretty important to note that in 2003, CSC yielded only one state championship team and that came from the CFC side. The merger with CFC paid huge dividends -- not just in the short term with respect to winning state championships but with respect to increasing the quality and level of the coaching staff. The point of Bdad11's message [and if I'm wrong, I hope you or Bdad11 or anyone will correct me] was that he'd like to see a consolidation of clubs and thus resources.

I don't think that SGU and GFC and MPSC are stationary targets -- they're getting much better very fast and are emerging into the regional and national arena with more breadth than any Columbia area club has had for years. As a fan of SC club soccer, I'd like to see CSC continue making non-incremental leaps [e.g., mergers]. Because the more quickly we in the Columbia area can become competitive on an intra-state basis, the faster we can begin helping the state in terms of competing on a regional and national level.

>>I also agree that good coaching makes the team and CSC is putting together a very young energitic coaching staff. Eddie Crosby is doing a great job.<<

I know from your past messages that you know this, and I'm sure that Crosby is doing great things, but I'd also give Frederick a big part of the credit. I'm aware that the U-16B team was second in the state this year -- but there was some history there with past success. Frederick took a team with little history and won.

Chapindad,
It would be great if NECSA & CSC would work together or even merge. For instance, both U-16 boys Columbia teams were in the semis at challenge cup. If the best of those 2 teams were combined then Celtic would not now be 2003 state champ. But it will never happen.......
Also, I am not aware of what you were saying about CSC a few years ago. I do know that under Crosby, who became DOC last spring, the program has taken off under his leadership. You just have to meet him to see and hear his determination and passion, for not just soccer, but the overall development of the players based on their character, attitude and work ethic. CSC should do very well in all age groups from U10 boys/girls to U18 boys/girls in the coming spring and next fall.

Not a comment on the pros and cons of a CSC/NECSA merger as a whole, but just a comment concerning 4soccer's comment about the U16 boys.

I watched the semi-final match in Summerville (my son plays for the NECSA team). I am not sure that a merger would do anything for either of these teams.

The CSC team, on average, is probably made of better individual athletes. I thought the NECSA boys might not have been as athletic, but played better team ball.

I'm not sure adding two or three of the NECSA boys would make the CSC team better and I think adding CSC boys to the NECSA team would likely interfere with the team chemistry.

Again, not to say I would be opposed to a merger, I just don't think these two teams would benefit.

Just my opinion.

To clarify my earlier post, Yes I believe columbia would be better served by merging clubs on the eastside together, and the westside as well.I see Necsa struggling to field teams in the older boys age groups and I see congaree struggling to field teams that are mediocre.It just seems logical that the eastside of cola can only support 1 club that can field competitive challenge level teams .Take the u16b for example. Necsa and Congaree fielded 4 teams for this age bracket.Taking the best remaining players from Congaree,along with the Ambush players, and the Congaree players who migrated over to CSC.I believe you would have a premier level team without any question.I see this possible in other age groups as well.At least fielding strong challenge teams in each age group would be a possibility.
On the westside CSC seems to be aggressively following the GFC/SGU model.Having a quality coaching staff and enough fields to play and practice are the sound foundation of a strong club.By merging Lexington in with CSC you would get more top notch facilities and a rapidly growing population with a soccer friendly demographic.Lexington would seem to be a sleepng giant in the production of top soccer talent.

Players and parents know where the best situation for their child is. I believe that a good coach and a strong core group of players will draw other players from other clubs to that team.There is no reason Columbia can't field at least 1 team capable of being a good premier level team in each age group.

This is just my opinion.Note I don't even live in Columbia though I have a child playing on a Columbia team.

How do we explain the success of the Aiken Fire? A small market club with almost exclusively local players who dominate the powerhouse upstate clubs consistantly over the last 3 years. Is this just a pig in a python?

lpaf

Tom, I believe your analysis of the U-16 teams to be pretty accurate, however let me offer a perspective from the individual player. For the player that wants to play at the highest level and possibly play college soccer the best opportunity for exposure to college coaches is in the Premier League and quality tournaments. For the U-16 boys in SC only St Giles and CSC offer that opportunity. It will be the same again next year at the U-17 level when most of the players will be in 11th or 12th grade, the years they need the most exposure. If they adopt the wait to next year mentality it would be 12 months before they would have a chance to make the state finals and 21 months before they would play their first premier match. So for the individual player the decision is to increase their chances for college exposure or remain at the status quo.

R2:

I think you are absolutely correct. Every individual player (and his or her parents) have to make a decision on what is best for them.

For us, the decisions are easy. I don't think my son's college path includes soccer (except for fun).

Speaking for me (and not my son or anyone else connected with his team), I am not sad that we are missing the Premier play. Less time on the road for me.

R2 is right. The junior and senior years (U17,U18)are the prime years that college coaches begin to look at prospects. I know premier play involves more from the player and the parents. But it is only for a short time and that is the best chance for the player to be seen by coaches at premier games, where there are usually U-18 games on the next field or sometime that same day. The high level tournaments(Jefferson Cup, Atlanta Cup, Raleigh Shootout, Tampa Cup) are also where they will be seen. I doubt too many college coaches go to Myrtle Beach, Columbia, Greenville, Charleston tournaments.
Thomas P.,
You said you were sorta not too disappointed that you did not make it to premier league this year. You know the team could have declined to play and then it would be the 3rd place team.

I'll go on record as being 1 Necsa Ambush parent that is very disappointed that the semifinal ended the way it did, and the Ambush was denied Premier League play.I guess driving an hour to practices has desensitized us to travel hardships.I would relish the chance to see our team play at the highest level.I think this would be a great experience for the kids and I suspect once there, the Ambush parents would take delight in watching their sons compete at that level.

As for Premier League play being seen by college coaches, I'M sure this is true , but I feel if a player is capable of playing somewhere at the next level , he will get that opportunity.Overhearing parents of older players talk, it seems unless you are a regional caliber player, you have to recruit the colleges harder than they recruit you anyway.

Good luck to CSC and St Gile's next season in Premier League.

As I said, I was only speaking for myself.

I believe Aiken Fire made it 4 strait titles this year? correct me if im wrong.

Rectifier --

You are, of course, right. Aiken Fire has won the state championship for four (not three) years in a row. What interests me here is how such a small club can produce such a powerful, dominating team, and do it with talent that doesn't have to come in from all over the state. I follow the girls' side of SC soccer much more than the boys, and did not buy into the "GFC and Saint Giles are clearly better than the rest of the state" until Mark set out the last four years' stats in this topic. On the girls' side there is room for debate if you go on a club by club basis, but on the guys' side the trend is undeniable.... except for the Aiken Anomaly. I'm interested in how Aiken has been able to pull this off in the face of undeniable club superiority by the upstate clubs (as described by most of the posters here) and an overwhelming demographic disadvantage.

How does a small club win big? Can other smaller clubs compete effectively or do we have to move to two superclubs in each of the three major metropolitan markets -- Greenville, Columbia and Charleston?

Thanks for input from any source.

lpaf

A quick divergence into boring demographics:

Did anyone else do a doubletake at the quoted (but undoubtably true -- the Greenville Chamber of Commerce so attests) statistic floated for City of Greenville population of 56,181 souls. If ever there has been a more misleading snapshot of a vibrant metropolitan area I have yet to see it. I'm still struggling with the concept of how the "rural" areas of Greenville county (population 386,693) don't contribute to the prowess of GFC and Saint Giles, yet these teams draw quality players from all over the rest of the state.

A long time ago, when he was still alive, Charles Schulz wrote a Peanuts comic strip that ended with the punch line "It's better to be healthy and rich than sick and poor." As applied to SC classic soccer, as I see it, it's good to have solid club structure and the best demographics in the state.

lpaf

Personally, I have observed that the major tournaments are much more effective for college recruiting than Premier league (at least on girls side). Rarely at a Premier league game did more than 1 or 2 local college coaches attend. Of course, premier League gives you better regular season competition which helps you get better which helps reach your goal but in and of itself it is not a major college recruiting tool (for girls).

LPAF: Re: The "Aiken anomoly".

I'm not familiar with Aiken, because, like you, I tend to focus on the girls' side of SC soccer. However, looking at the data, it seems as if Aiken has had the core of an extremely good team that has progressed each year for the last three years (U-17B 2003, U-16B 2002, U-14B and U-15B 2001). Of course, in 2000 Aiken was state champions in U-17B and runner up in U-15B, so for the four year period the theory that "it was just one great set of kids" only holds over a three year period.

Of course, Justin Rhodes deserves a tremendous amount of credit -- from what I hear he is a fantastic coach. I think that's the heart of all of this -- a great coach anywhere can make a huge difference -- largely regardless of demographics.

Statistics can sometimes do a good job of handling the big picture, but the more granular the situation the more anomolies you tend to find. Here's a case in point - in the last four years Lexington's girls classic club (which has been roundly critized in this forum by me and others) has had more state champions in the girls area than CSC and CFC combined (2 versus 1). Now -- does this mean that Lexington's girls club is better than CSC/CFC's club on the girls' side? I think not -- as almost everyone I know thinks not -- even the coaches in the Lexington club send their daughters over to CSC/CFC to play. What occurred were that there were a few coaches from the Lexington side who were extremely talented. It's worth noting that none of the state championship coaches from Lexington coach in that club anymore.

Bottom line: if I were to start a club, I might skimp on a lot of things -- but I'd make sure that I spent as much as possible and worked as hard as possible on getting the best coaches -- because that in my opinion trumps everything else.

Justin Rhodes took over a very good Aiken Fire team that had not quite caught a 3-time state champion SGU team in that age group from U11-U13. He recruited players from Georgia, the Columbia area, and a key player from N Augusta (Eric Bafour) that obviously filled in the missing pieces in the U14 season. I am not aware of the changes after that, except for the addition of Jamal Geathers, who gives the Fire, with Eric, a 1-2 punch up top that is probably as good as any in the nation. The Fire have maintained their edge ever since.

MC, my dealings with Mr. Rhodes does not endear him to me, so I don't view him as a "great coach". It seems to me you make very valid points concerning girls soccer, but that boys soccer is not your forte'.

Many boys coaches at the club level are lauded for their on-field success after taking over programs built by others (one at NECSA comes to mind).

The Fire is a very good team and have brought great notoriety to S.C. club ball, but Rhodes is the lesser part of that equation. If all coaches housed the "star players" then many others could be successful as well.

Folly,
Greenville County is a huge one geographically. It stretchs southward to Laurens County and to the north all the way to North Carolina. Aside from Greenville, Mauldin,Simpsonville, and Greer very little soccer comes from other parts of the county. I know it is surprising the population of Greenville- one would think it would be much higher.

The last take on Aiken was right. Justin came in and filled in some holes on that team, but he did not do it all locally. I think 5 or 6 kids on that team are from Georgia. When you're national runnerups you can draw pretty much anybody you want.

Cola Fan: You're absolutely correct, I know almost nothing about boys soccer -- but I do try to learn and I do appreciate what you wrote. I wouldn't know Justin Rhodes if he slapped me. And I'm sure that he's irritated and angered a lot of people along the way of winning for so many years in a row.

But let me ask you a question: another person posted that this guy took over a team that wasn't winning state championships and has not only won in the state but also had a lot of success both regionally and nationally. What else should this guy do to be appropriately labeled a "fantastic coach"?

I've read with great interest the debate and conversation on this subject. I've tried to make notes and relay my thoughts on this, so please bear with me as this is lengthy.

I too, would like to see more collaboration to form top level teams in the Columbia market to compete at the regional/national level as well as a return for smaller, community clubs to retain the initial purpose for classic league soccer as it was defined perhaps a decade ago -- to offer better training and development of players that could not get that kind of attention at the recreational level.

I believe that CSC has positioned itself as a major player in the future of the state's club soccer structure with the key component -- field control. Now that they have their complex in full swing, they have now been able to concentrate on recruiting and retaining viable coaches that always carry the promise of attracting the top level players. I believe that Eddie Crosby is truly committed to the overall advancement of the Columbia Soccer Club and what it can offer the premier players in the metro area.

I also feel that the first push for these "super teams" should come at the U14 or U15 age group and really not much before that period. I think the other clubs in the capital city (Congaree Rapid, Lexington, NECSA, etc.) could continue as developmental grounds based on community and geo-centric ties. CSC could continue to field challenge/classic level teams as well in those upper age groups to fulfill their duty to their local players that don't make those elite teams. These clubs could also continue to field high school aged teams that wish to play club soccer, but are not quite good enough to play for the elite teams.

From a high school coach's perspective, which I admit forms 90% of my opinion, this is the basic makeup for most of our teams. Only a few selected areas of the state enjoy prep teams made up of several premier league or ODP level players. The majority of the teams are comprised of players that like/love to play the game and are average overall in ability. That's what makes it such a challenge/reward at the high school level, when you're forced to do your very best with the hand that you are dealt! I would encourage capable players to tryout and play for the "regional/premier" teams because that makes my high school component that much stronger. The ones that don't make those teams or have the ability/means to compete at that level would still have the option to play on their local clubs "community based" teams. I do not believe the "B" teams that are formed by many of the larger clubs are as beneficial as those in the local clubs based on my players' experiences that have tried that avenue. For some reason, the "B" level labels those teams and they are often overlooked within that club (coaches, etc.) as the second-rate team in that age group, whereas those players on a local club often become the "bigger fish in smaller pond" and at least have an opportunity to lead and contribute to a team rather than play on a second-fiddle squad.

While I endorse a move for the Columbia area's top players to gravitate towards CSC and the opportunities that they can offer, I also think that we should push for a restructuring of the rest of the classic league soccer populous.

The top-talent teams usually only number 5-8 across the state (rarely are there examples of 10 true statewide level teams in a given age group) and generally are dominated by the super clubs: CSC, GFC, MPSC, NECSA, SGUSC. I believe that 70-80% of the players that make up the rest of classic league soccer should return to regional play (Upper State / Mid-District / Coastal) or at least a refined alternative to PMSL and SCSCL. Many of the "challenge" level teams often just become cannon-fodder for the high powered teams due to overzealous team expectations, club/parental/player prestige, etc. I think that teams should have to qualify for the different levels of play and perhaps limit the number of SCSCL teams to 8, perhaps in a qualifying tourney the first weekend of August each year. Along with the 2 premier teams, you have 10 elite teams in the state. With this number, you easily have a minimum of 14 games simply by playing each member twice and you can always downsize this match number to 8-12 should you wish or pending the number of playing dates. At any rate, the quality of the matches would increase as each match's importance.

This would allow for the majority of the classic level to return to more teams and generally there are 5-10 teams in a given geographical region across the state which makes for easy play within a more appropriate proximity. (I still cannot figure out why 10 year-olds from Charleston should have to play in Greenville for "quality" matches twice on a Saturday). Simply play their regional league schedule and compete in tourneys to augment the schedule -- much like the high school arrangement. Friendlies would also be encouraged amongst the local clubs to supplement the schedule should teams wish. Also, this would allow for the return of true regional tourneys (i.e. Mid-District Tournament) which always gave teams a purpose and reward for their efforts and brought closure to the fall season.

I would also like to see more alignment of the high schools pertaining to the local clubs and their affiliations. I have long admired youth baseball's "American Legion" system, in which certain schools only played with certain American Legion sponsored Post teams. This fosters community spirit and gives a solid pool of players in terms of numbers and often in ability to form very competitive teams. This could be accomplished in this arrangement based on a Columbia area model of schools with fairly close attendance similarities:

Lexington Soccer Club -- Batesburg-Leesville (2A), Gilbert (2A), Lexington (4A), White Knoll (4A)
Congaree Rapid Soccer Association -- Airport (3A- in '04), Brookland-Cayce (3A), Dreher (3A), A.C. Flora (3A), Swansea (2A)
Columbia Soccer Club -- Chapin (2A), Columbia High (2A), Dutch Fork (4A), Irmo (4A), Ballentine/White Rock will open soon
NECSA - Richland Northeast (4A), Ridge View (4A), Spring Valley (4A), Blythewood will open soon

As I stated earlier, these are simply some thoughts, but I have given much thought to several of the posts that have been made on this board concerning this subject. Regardless of opinion on my take, it will take the sincere shedding of egos to make any of the aforementioned work or any semblance of reader-revisions come to fruition.

Kevin Heise
Boys Soccer Coach, Brookland-Cayce High School
Director of Coaches, Congaree Rapid Soccer Association

Mark-
I know that you are disappointed with the Lexington Classic girls club but the club is truly trying to move forward. Maybe some of the information that you have received or perceived is not necessary the truth, however you are intitled to your opinion.
The statement in your post,"even the coaches in the Lexington club send their daughters over to CSC/CFC to play" is very misleading. Of the club's 20 coaches, one Assistant Coach's older daughter plays on a CSC team while the youngest daughter remains with a Lexington team. So you see it isn't "all the coaches".
The Lexington club has taken many steps in reaching their goal. One of which is adding Alan Riches to their coaching staff.
Progress has been slow, however it is moving forward.

One other comment about Rhodes. He is indeed a great boys coach and has recruited great players.
But his organization and discipline are his main attributes to success. He does not succeed just because he has great players. They have to be molded into a successful team, and he has done that with the Fire. But beyond that, he coached the Aiken Burn U17 girls to undefeated season in challenge and the final 4 in state cup.
Kevin,
I just wish other DOCs had your cooperative spirit of seeking what is best for Cola area soccer, and that you endorse CRSA players in their attempts to achieve the premier/elite level of play. As you said, when those guys come back to join your high school team they will be much better prepared to excel at the high school level.
CSC has started to strive for the best level of play among premier/challenge players, while still keeping a real focus on the fun and enjoyment for its U10 to U14 players. It is a thrill to watch the joy and excitement in the U10 players when they score a goal or even just take the field. Cola. area soccer would greatly improve and be enriched if all the clubs NECSA/LSC/CSC/CRSA would reach a common understanding or cooperative spirit, through some form of merger/consolidation/collaborative efforts. Just acknowledge what you can and can't do as a club. But will it happen????
I would love to see at least CRSA and CSC make the first step because I know their respective DOCs, Crosby & Heise, have such vision and appreciation for what it takes to produce the most competitive teams at all levels. If some form of consolidation does not take place, then GFC and St. Giles will continue to dominate in the overall levels; but even more, if MPSC and SSC ever hook up you will see yet another formidable club down in the low country.

Breezin: Thanks for writing -- I'm actually happy that someone is attempting to take a position defending the club. I admire your courage in taking what appears to be a minority position on this board. I kind of wish I had the anonymous screen name that many do when I get into things that some might say are "heated" -- but at the very least it should encourage me to be careful of what I say. I wrote this and then debated with myself for a long time before posting it -- but I think that the subjects under discussion while specific to the Lexington club could at the very least throw some light on what I see overall in South Carolina as a relatively weak club structure.

As you note, I am disappointed in the Lexington Classic girls club -- not angry, not bitter, just disappointed. I'm obviously not the only one on this board - as someone noted, it seems that Lexington County is demographically a "sleeping giant" with respect to soccer -- but the operative term here is "sleeping".

This isn't personal or spiteful. One of my children was fortunate enough to be on both challenge cup state championship teams the club has earned and she had some truly wonderful coaches in the club. We've never had a playing time, monetary, or any other specific issue with the club in terms of my children.

What I want to do is to take a moment and go through your message step-by-step so I make sure not to miss anything in your note.

>>I know that you are disappointed with the Lexington Classic girls club but the club is truly trying to move forward.<<

I'm not sure what this means. If you mean that the club has meetings and talks a lot about getting better, then I believe you; I'm just not sure how this is different than anyone else and how this will produce a highly competitive club. If mean that the club is taking specific steps to compete at the highest levels at the state, regional, and national levels -- i.e., benchmarking the best clubs in the state and nation and taking hard steps to reach this level -- then I'd like you to spell this out as well.

>>Maybe some of the information that you have received or perceived is not necessary the truth, however you are intitled to your opinion.<<

What you might want to do is to take everything I've said or anyone else has said, and specifically refute it. What you read on any message board is the tip of the iceberg -- you can be certain that when parents get together and talk that you'll only hear more of this type of thing.

For what it's worth, given that I financed their 4v4 league this summer and have provided services from companies I control on a gratis basis -- you can rest assure that if I have trouble perceiving the truth, then others might as well -- so it might be worth the time to clarify any of the many misperceptions that may exist.

I raise my involvement to let you know that I'm not someone who stood on the outside throwing stones -- I've actually tried to help. I hope the club can recover -- but with 4+ years with children in the club, what I see are the same issues keep cycling through.

>>The statement in your post,"even the coaches in the Lexington club send their daughters over to CSC/CFC to play" is very misleading. Of the club's 20 coaches, one Assistant Coach's older daughter plays on a CSC team while the youngest daughter remains with a Lexington team. So you see it isn't "all the coaches".<<

I never said "all the coaches" -- and if I mis-implied that every coach, with every child, did so -- then I apologize. In fact, "daddy-ball" is rampant at the club particularly at the younger ages -- which makes sense given the all-volunteer structure of the club. I have tremendous respect for everyone who gives their time and resources to try to help in this.

At the same time, it's important to note that the coach you're talking about has an older child playing at the college level who went to CFC. It's also important to note that one of the two state championship coaches who left to go to CFC also has daughters there. Finally, one other very good coach left the club a few years ago to go to CFC and took his daughter. I'm also not including assistant coaches who have left and put their children at CSC/CFC. Again -- I apologize if I misled anyone -- but I believe the situation is a bit more dire than the one case which you call out.

>>The Lexington club has taken many steps in reaching their goal. One of which is adding Alan Riches to their coaching staff.
Progress has been slow, however it is moving forward.<<

I think it's wonderful that the club hired an A licensed coach but the club did so only after unexpectedly losing the second of those coaches that won the club its second state championship. Portraying this as a proactive as opposed to reactive move is a bit misleading. However, I sincerely hope that the club will use this resource not just with one team but to help the club restructure its operations from the highest point to the lowest point.

But let's get at the bottom line of your post -- that progress is moving forward slowly but it is moving forward. You could be right -- and I honestly hope you are -- but I and a lot of other folks don't see it. In fact, the club seems to be in a slow motion state of denial about the issues that face it. I've seen many of the better players abandon the club -- and I've spoken to parent after parent who have said the things to me that I'm saying here.

At the same time, I think that the club could salvage all of this by having a clear mission of what it wants to accomplish and then operationalizing it. Look -- it's okay if a club decides it doesn't want to play at the highest level -- I'd have a lot of respect for a club that wanted to win in the classic league only and forthrightly put forward that this was all it was going to do and made it happen. What I want for SC soccer, to be competitive at a regional and national level, is ***NOT*** what everyone wants -- and I completely respect that. But I think that it helps everyone when clubs decide what it is that they do want, and then do what it takes to achieve it -- rather than muddling through.

Kevin, please remember the private schools in Columbia as well. Cardinal Newman and Ben Lippen are solid soccer programs. Hammond and Heathwood Hall are improving with good coaches!

Breezin, Mr. Riches did a poor job at USC with the women's team and is now coaching club soccer solely. His playing D3 soccer in West Virginia (way behind S.C. in soccer) is just like intramurals.

4soccer, Mr. Rhodes is a Quantico Marine and it shows on and off the field (that's not always a good thing). Nothing more to be said.

MC, central Richland County needs to be included with your thoughts about Lexington County, because this area has always been ignored by NECSA and at the time Irmo SC, Chapin SC, Lexington SC, and had to form Midlands!

I guess the Brazilians are wrong when they gather outside without any adults in sight to play soccer. Their parents don't drive hours on end to practice and games. How dare they? They're probably ranked #1 in the world at soccer, but would you really want to live there?
My point is-soccer is what it is. In SC and everywhere. I'm glad Mia wasn't from SC! She would have never made it! How can we be ranked higher in soccer versus education? That's the better question. No amount of driving, switching clubs or paying coaches is going to make a child something they are not. If the talent is there and it's meant to be, then it will happen. I've known some coaches who knew a great deal about soccer, but were not very nice people. Others were great and able teachers-in life and in soccer. We control our children's soccer lives because we can. Unlimited funds/time are being spent on maintaining control. Our kids start out the same, in REC and loving it. Then somewhere along the way, "they" decide how talented they are and ask to play club ball (and they want to try out for clubs way across town, with kids they don't know). With so much exposure to soccer on TV and parents who played, it's only natural. Pretty soon they want to travel very far from home 3 days a week to play on that "best" team. We of course only relent because our kids are so insistent. Soccer makes no difference in our adult lives, right? It's not us who want them to be state champs-it's them. Amazingly they seem to know at a young age, to be the best you have to spare no expense in time or money. The lesson of playing the hand you are dealt is mute. Enough sarcasm-I digress.
My point is this-does my child love soccer? Yes, and I'm trying to keep it that way. I don't care if she doesn't want to play for the best team, best coach, best club. I will encourage her to be around the people that will help her be a better person, not just a better soccer player. If it costs her that shot at the national team, so be it. She will be committed and play her hardest. She will look back with fond memories, and if she wants to continue to play, it will be for her and only her.

quote:

---

---

I know it's only rock and roll, but I like it!

Good post glimmer,
It is so true that it is up to the youth, in any sport, to attain or enjoy what they desire most out of their sports participation. I have seen many skilled players with rotten, selfish attitudes who fail to reach their potential because they refuse to be a team player. The coaches refuse to address the attitude problems because it may make the player less motivated. The best a parent can do is to love and nurture our kids whether they play or not, win or lose, premier or rec. The child should be able to look back to his/her youth and say that they made great friends in sports and had lasting relationships, whether they were successful on the field or not. But we are a competitive nation and so participants in sports must make sure that the competitive spirit has limits. Young people can succeed and reach their goals with their skills, abilities and a competitive spirit, but they must allow their sports experiences to mold their character most of all.

Akein's coach Justin i would not say is a great coach. I would say he is a great recruter. He went out a got the necessary players to have a good talent pool. Some people see it as wrong b/c we got soo many players from Georgia, and labled it a SC team; but everyone wants the best players on their team no matter where they are from.

It is clear that GFC and St. Giles are the best two clubs in the state. I dont know why everyone is attempting to find the reason with all the statistics, just except that fact. There isnt really a club in the state that can, overall, challenge these two. CSC prob would have the best shot b/c they are rebuilding their program very well.

As for the midstate merger proposal, I dont know much about the midstate but when DSA and Golden Strip merged in the upstate there wa one main reason for it happening. Bruce Talbot was the director for DSA, there was no way that Andrew and Bruce would split power in order to create a great club. However once Brue left too got to CASAL it opened a door for a merger. I would have said it never would have happened but Bruce's job offer at CASAL changed everything. So you never know what can happen in the midstate. I suggest that one club try to get a powerful team together at one age group in the midstate with the purpose of winning a State Cup. This could provide a example for other teams to follow, if they do well.

Also im very dissapointed that i have missed out on so much of this topic. I mean, me, FDR, missing out on all this alphabet soup. DSA, GFC, CSC, MPSC, CASAL, STGU, NSCAA. Might as well talk about the AAA, CCC, NRA, TVA...
Sorry about some of th spelling, im in somewhat of a hurry.