SC Soccer Forums SCSoccer.com Forums Club Soccer & ODP GFC and St. Giles Merge!

I fall into a.foley's camp here. Greenville has two historically significant and strong clubs. Why consolidate into one? Why do away with the character and tradition of two clubs in order to produce a superclub? Would the GFC 85 Boys team be a better team for such a merger? Don't the best players (at least at driving age and beyond) already auto select the stronger of the two clubs and migrate to it? And don't forget the lesson of business "mergers" -- there are no mergers. The stronger business always assimilates the weaker and its culture prevails at the other's expense, no matter what the press clips say.

lpaf

ps: I remain, probably, the least well informed person on this board to pass judgement on a GFC - St. Giles merger, and, to be honest, don't actually care what my piedmont comrades decide to do with their clubs.

pps: "reductio ad absurdium" ... I like that.

Bet its called GFC

Lpaf, Raleigh doesnt need any help with their program! They are incredible as they are. This GFC/St.Giles merger could produce teams on par with CASL. If you look at the St. Giles website there is a letter from the president saying that the club does not have the funds to complete a building project. So part of the decision must be money, but the main purpose as stated in the news article is to improve overall classic program. The merger will also make the high school teams even better because all the area high school players will be trained at one club. This will also result in kick-ass club teams in all levels. I also saw where there was a bigtime merger of 4 strong clubs in Va. http://www.restonfc.com/news.php?id=22
Its the thing to do Columbia!!! So, like Nike, just do it!

I doubt it will be called GFC or St.Giles because then it would appear that one club is taking over the other. Any thoughts about what you think it should be named?

From what I understand, the new club will be called Upstate United.

The new club will actually be called Greenville United. I misstyped it in my last post.

Folly:
It appears that the thread on syntax and vocabulary has run dry, so maybe you could begin a new one on logic. For someone who doesn't care about the comrades in the Piedmont, the nouns GFC and St. Giles resonate throughout your posts-"The lady doth protest too much."

Foley: You are most certainly in the dark on this specific subject. Being as such, perhaps you could refrain from your dispersions on something you know nothing about.

Folly and Foley: soccer does indeed acquaint strange bedfellows. Funny stuff.

As BobF said yesterday, nothing is accurate unless it comes from people involved in the merger. I do not claim that anything below is accurate – it’s all just some of my opinions based on following GFC and St. Giles for a while and now being the parent of a GFC player. This is an in-context response to the excellent points that a.foley and lpaf raised in some earlier messages.

>>[a.foley] With respect to all those involved I prefer to see competition between clubs rather than the whole merging rivals thing.<<

You mean South Carolina clubs, right? I understand this preference with respect to South Carolina only; but I’m not sure I understand it if you’re talking about region III let alone nationally. I’ve attached a ranking of the top 20 boys and girls clubs that Soccer America just put out – and there are 2 clubs from Georgia, 1 club from North Carolina, and 0 clubs from South Carolina.

>>[a.foley] What are the practical reasons behind this move? Is it facility and coach based or [as I suspect] financially more sound for the topmen??<<

I’m not sure what “topmen” means. Since the boards are unpaid volunteers, the only “topmen” would be the director of coaches, right [or am I missing something]? I think that this means Hyslop at GFC and Tormey at St. Giles. But these guys are front-line coaches – I believe that both have quite a few teams that they coach as well as handling the director of coaching responsibilities. So are these the “topmen” to whom you are referring?

Why would you think that the boards would consider a merger just to financially benefit these two people? And if these guys just wanted more money, it seems from their biographies that they have the credentials to go to Atlanta, Charlotte, or somewhere else where they’d probably get a big salary bump.

Personally, I hope that this merger would result in more pay for coaches and additional highly qualified coaches. I live in Lexington, where we have what are arguably the best facilities in the state – and it’s my opinion [as I’ve stated on this message board multiple times] that the critical item for club success has almost nothing to do with fields and almost everything to do with the coaches.

>>[lpaf] Greenville has two historically significant and strong clubs. Why consolidate into one? Why do away with the character and tradition of two clubs in order to produce a superclub? <<

My guess would be for the same reason that companies merge: to be able to quickly scale and to realize cost savings. The scaling could be associated with more recreational and classic players, more fund-raising, and more regionally and nationally competitive teams. The cost savings could be associated with coach/team ratios, overhead payment, and the like – it’s just a matter of doing a pareto analysis of costs and then working on the costs that add the least value. Of course, the reason I can post is because I have no information concerning this – so this is just a guess.

>>[lpaf] Would the GFC 85 Boys team be a better team for such a merger? Don't the best players [at least at driving age and beyond] already auto select the stronger of the two clubs and migrate to it?<<

I don’t know if the GFC U-18 boys or girls team would be any better immediately – I know that the GFC U-18G team already draws from multiple states as well as from the Columbia and Charleston area. But I would think that a real motivation would be to broaden the number of competitive teams and to bring the demonstrated strengths of St. Giles younger teams together with GFC’s older teams. And since most highly competitive clubs tend to be fanatical about the “developmental pipeline” associated with recreation and U-11 and under classic, I would think that this would be a focus as well. If this is the thinking, then the theory would be that you’d be able to more consistently have even stronger U-18 teams – as well as stronger teams at U-17, U-16, and so on.

>>[lpaf] And don't forget the lesson of business "mergers" -- there are no mergers. The stronger business always assimilates the weaker and its culture prevails at the other's expense, no matter what the press clips say.<<

Okay – I think that is absolutely a valid and key point. I’ve participated in lots of business mergers, and the operationalization of the merger is the heart of the matter once you get the strategies worked out. An early test as to successful operationalization is to see what the key intellectual property [in the case of a soccer club, the DOC’s and coaches] does. If you see coaches, particularly the top coaches with the most success, abandon the combined club then the merger will fail – what you’ll see over time are lots of small clubs pop up in the upstate. However, if the coaches can work together toward a common set of goals, then you could have something that South Carolina currently doesn’t have – a club that is competition in region III consistently with multiple teams at once.

I’ll give one other, more personal, observation. In the last few months, I’ve been able to observe first-hand GFC in action – my daughter began training there in the last quarter of 2003. The work rate of the coaching staff of GFC is absolutely amazing – these people are out there almost all of the time and run an incredibly open and intensely challenging training environment. In addition, I’ve seen GFC consistently over the years make decisions that are player-based rather than club- or team-based – in other words, I’ve seen GFC make training and coaching decisions based on what’s best for the player instead of worrying about specific team competitiveness. If this merger occurs, I think that this is one of the most important things that can be brought forward to both. As a parent, this is the attribute to which I’ll pay the most attention.

Attachment:
_________________________
Soccer America announces top 20 boys and girls youth soccer clubs in America

The criteria for determining ‘America’s Best Youth Clubs’ was success in the US Youth Soccer National Championships since 2001, the number of players who went on to national and US Youth Soccer ODP regional teams last year, and a survey of college coaches on the best clubs at developing and showcasing players.

“Soccer America’s acknowledgement further solidifies US Youth Soccer’s position as the leader in providing player development opportunities through such as programs as the US Youth Soccer National Championship Series and the US Youth Soccer Olympic Development Program,” said Jim Cosgrove, executive director of US Youth Soccer.

“It is still the youth game at its highest level that drives our sport,” said Lynn Berling-Manuel, CEO and publisher of Soccer America in reference to the magazine’s focus on youth clubs “the game that continues to drive soccer in America.”

Girls Top 20 Club/State Association
1. Bethesda [Maryland]
2. San Diego Surf [California -South]
3. PDA [New Jersey]
4. Sereno Golden Eagles [Arizona]
5. Dallas Texans [North Texas]
6. Laguna Hills Eclipse [California - South]
7. Colorado Rush [Colorado]
8. Michigan Hawks [Michigan]
9. Pleasanton Rage [California - North]
10. Busch [Missouri]
11. Slammers FC [California - South]
12. Challenge [South Texas]
13. Carmel United [Indiana]
14. HBC [Eastern New York]
15. Gwinnett SA [Georgia]
16. Colorado GSA [Colorado]
17. SC Blues [California - South
18. D'Feeters [North Texas
19. Eclipse Select [Illinois]
20. Dallas Sting [North Texas]

Boys Top 20 Clubs/State Association
1. FC Delco [Eastern Pennsylvania]
2. Chicago Magic [Illinois]
3. Irvine Strikers [California - South]
4. CASL Elite [North Carolina]
5. Concorde Fire [Georgia]
6. La Jolla Nomads [California - South]
7. Dallas Texans [North Texas]
8. FC Sockers [Illinois]
9. Houston Texans [South Texas]
10. So Cal United [California - South]
11. Sereno Golden Eagles [Arizona]
12. Colorado Rush [Colorado]
13. Michigan Wolves [Michigan]
14. Vardar [Michigan]
15. PDA [New Jersey]
16. West Kendall Optimist [Florida]
17. Scott Gallagher [Missouri]
18. Oakwood [Connecticut]
19. Solar [North Texas]
20. Bethesda [Maryland]
20. Potomac Cougars [Maryland]

WOW! That is earth shattering news about St. Giles and GFC. Good luck to all involved, but I have a feeling that some people are going to feel they have had their toes stepped on. Not surprising, because it happens when a merger takes place. But, when you are talking about volunteers and unpaid people on the Board of Directors, I'm sure some will not go along.

This eventually begs the question that 4soccer has asked, 'what happens in Columbia?' There's a fragmented soccer community in the capital city and some clubs are there for practical reasons, while others have been setup as self serving entities. Does Columbia have anyone on the par of a Charlie Slagle like CASL has? I ask, because looking around at the locals involved (see below) and I would say 'no'.

Columbia Soccer Club
Congaree Rapid Soccer Association
Lexington County Girls Soccer Club
Lexington Recreation Soccer Club
Lexington Soccer Club
Northeast Columbia Soccer Association

Some serious questions need to be asked about the purpose and growth speculation of a "merged soccer community" in Columbia and more importantly those that perceive themselves as the movers-and-shakers must be able to answer those questions! It will certainly be interesting, because if no movement takes place I think you will see the dominance of club soccer to the upstate become permanent.

Dexter --

You must know you cut me to the quick with your above post. And I don't refer to your perfidious innuendo about me and a.foley sharing the same bed -- we've never even met, though out names are stangely similar... No, I refer to your perfunctory dismissal of my Syntax and Vocabulary topic found elsewhere on this board but seldom visited. I had certain limited hopes when I started it that have not been fulfilled. My vision was a sort of virtual "parking lot" that two disagreeing posters could meet in to hash out differences in their understanding or interpretations of words and sentence structure. This way such discussions could be moved out of their cluttering positions on the the other various boards and centralized in the Syntax and Vocabulary arena. I'd hope to read comments such as "Meet me on the Syntax and Vocabulary board you dimwit and I'll teach you a thing or two about infer and imply!" Unfortunately this fertile ground has lain fallow, abandoned like a Dennis Kucinik bumpersticker. You rub salt in my wounds to bring it up here. So there.

lpaf