SC Soccer Forums SCSoccer.com Forums Club Soccer & ODP Bridge FA

The Bridge Futbol Alliance, (Bridge FA), is a reality in the low country.
Recently this concept was tested with two teams playing in the TFC Friendlies in Fayetteville, NC, in the middle to latter part of February. Last weekend, the first competitive tournament was entered with a U14 team (Bridge FA 90s) playing up in the U15 age group at the Beach FC Spring Classic held in Va Beach. The team was rostered under US Club Soccer for this tournament. This team, comprised of players from the Coastal Attack 90's, former Mount Pleasant Patriots, SSC Sporting, SSC Rapids Blue, and SSC Rapids White, were the Champions of the rain shortened tournament, with a goal differential of 14-1. There were two complete games with a 10-0 goal differential, and then a shortened, 15 minute half semi, score 4-1, and finally a PK only final which was won 4-1. Both the TFC Friendlies and the Spring Classic have had very positive results. Excitement is high as we begin to truly pool the talent in the low country.
Bridge FA, is a new and separate club, formed as an alliance with other low country soccer clubs. Currently the James Island Youth Soccer Club, and the Summerville Soccer Club have formed the alliance, and discussions are continuing with other area clubs. The concept of Bridge FA is that it will become the low country "challenge" level club. Bridge FA will begin operations with the Fall 05 season. Tryout dates and locations are being finalized. Watch for additional information.

Bear,
Is this a complete merger of SSC and JIYSA? MPSC is not a part of the merger?

Striker,

This is not a merger of any clubs. Each area club retains their identity, and exists to serve their local players in rec and classic play.

The basic concept is this, alliance member clubs will not field challenge teams, but rather challenge level players will play for Bridge FA.

MPSC currently is not a member of the alliance. However, MPSC players were members of all 3 of the teams that have competed under the name Bridge FA, to date. Discussions, however, are continuing with MPSC, to bring them into the alliance.

A significant amount of time and effort has gone into this, and with tryouts less than two months away, it is time to begin to publicize this accomplishment.

So the highest level players will play for Bridge FA? Will you have teams in the premier league as well? I guess that will depend on how they do in the fall. But if some teams already qualify for premier league for next fall, will they be moved under the Bridge FA name? Sounds like a great concept. Hope it works for you! (Cool name, too!)

I'm really confused. It's a separate club that will just have challenge teams? That means that all of the alliance teams are feeder teams to Bridge? Why just not merge?

Striker,

Yes, the highest level players, from alliance member clubs, would train with the highest level players from the area, and play for Bridge FA. To say that Bridge FA will or will not have premier teams in the fall, requires too much speculation at this point. The mechanisms are in place which allow Premier teams to move clubs, as has happened before.

CornerFlag,

Yes, it's a separate club that will only field challenge teams. As far as the way you state feeder teams, that's one way to look at it. Another way is for a common training syllabus for a much larger group of players, therefore, developing all area players. One answer on the why not merge is, the multiple business models between the area clubs lead to items which can't be overcome.

I know you may not be able to say before tryouts, but what age/gender teams do you anticipate fielding for fall season? And who will be the coaches?

Bridge FA will field teams from U13 to U18, boys and girls, where the numbers and ability allows.

Just as there is a pool of players which are currently dispersed among clubs, so are coaches/trainers currently dispersed.

Do you think you will get MPSC to join in due to their recent successes on the field? It does sound like that concept may work in Cola. Some players have been reluctant to move from NECSA to CSC, and vice versa or from CRSA to CSC. Some reasons given for the reluctance have been distance and just don't like 'that club over there'. But with a separate and new challenge/premier club of all the best in Cola., then maybe there would be less reluctance to switch clubs. You could even have coaches from the several classic clubs also coach a challenge/premier team in the new club and still remain affiliated with their classic club because the level of play would be different. OK area clubs, take a look at Bridge FA..........
Cola.'s new club could be called Capital Futbol Alliance (CFA) or Capital Soccer Alliance (CSA).
YES!!!!!!! It will work!!

I guess the rest of the state will have to get to work to catch up with the BRIDGE.Who is the decisonmaker for the new superclub.

Who exactly is the director of this new club? How are coaches selected for these teams? Will these teams train at one local area or will they train at the alliance clubs? any talk of getting the Battery involved with this?

Actually Undertaker, the upstate has already done their thing with CESA. It's Columbia that needs to do something.

Finally! It appears that SC youth soccer is starting to move out of the dark ages! First CESA now Bridge FA. This is a wonderful concept and works well if run properly. US Club Soccer is the perfect venue for this. I know I pointed this out in past postings; the Alliance Football League (outside of Cleveland) ran a program just like this. The teams were called the Northern Ohio Alliance and drew from all the member clubs of the league. Players stayed with their regular club team and continued to train and compete, however for those players that were seleced for the Alliance team, they trained once a week as a team, and then would compete at a regional level. We had a great exeperience. I hope this concept takes off and I look forward to following this program.

Striker,
Very positive discussions are taking place with MPSC. Most coaches would probably agree that even the successful teams have room for talented players. As successful as MPSC teams have been, with a couple of players in particular age groups, they would be more competitive on a larger stage.

Undertaker,
There is an executive board in place made up of people from the clubs in the alliance.

Lowerstate,
Each director of the alliance member clubs have a position on the coaching board at Bridge FA. Coaches will be selected by the coaching board. Teams will train at alliance member clubs, based on individual team makeup. Many options for support are being looked at.

OPG,
Bridge FA doesn't completely match your Ohio example. Right now, yes Bridge FA will only be competing under US Club Soccer, and players remain rostered with their local clubs. However, after tryouts in May, these teams will be rostered under SCYSA, and compete in the SCSCL, beginning Fall 05. Some teams may remain dual rostered for other benefits that apply. But you're right, US Club Soccer does provide an avenue to at least test the concept, and in some cases get other teams together.

Bridge FA is a great idea, and you canb count on me for the try outs of the upcoming U-15s...would write longer but i gotta go!

Bear,

What will be the cutoff between Bridge and the old clubs? For example, will Bridge have a structure similar to CESA (Premier, Challenge, Classic or A,B, and C teams) or will Bridge field only one team per age group per sex. Will the cutoff be that only Bridge teams play in the Challenge (and Premier if applicable) league no matter how many teams they have and the old club teams play PMSL?

Bear,
I know you love all these questions coming at you, but here are some more......
Players can be dual-rostered since they are registered with 2 separate associations: US Soccer and SCYSA? What are the expenses like for a player? Does he/she pay for 2 teams? I gather that after this fall the players will move to one premier-type team and not continue to be dual-rostered? Or am I totally confused? OPG said in Ohio that players train and play with a club team(I assume challenge) and then if selected for an alliance team, they compete at a regional level. I don't know if that would work in SC, but it is interesting to consider. Is this the way Bridge FA functions?

ConerFlag,

The Bridge structure is different than the CESA structure. As I said earlier, Bridge FA will field teams where numbers and ability allow it. Currently this is considered to be a maximum of 2 teams per age group, per gender. So Bridge FA will have an A & B team, or gold and red, or something to distinguish between the two.

To be a full alliance club member, with a seat on the executive board, and a position on the coaching board, the club agrees to not field challenge (or premier if applicable) teams. Member clubs would then field classic teams, and play PMSL.

I don't really like the connotation of "the old club teams". Many people would probably agree that there are some players on some of the current "challenge" teams, that may be better suited to be playing "classic" soccer. There are many reasons for this, player ability, commitment level, want to play with a "local" team, etc.. PMSL, SCSCL, and the Premier League are all "competitive" soccer leagues. All of these leagues have State, Regional, and National Championships. So not playing on a "challenge" team with Bridge FA, does not keep a player from playing competitive soccer, and striving to represent his/her club at a National Tournament. However, playing on a Bridge FA team will allow for further development because the player will be training and competing with a full squad of players at the same higher level.

The goal of Bridge FA is to unite the top players from the respective clubs with the formation of teams, and provide opportunities for those players to train and compete together.

Presently each club in the area does a good job of training in the recreation and classic areas. However, when each club then tries to field the most competitive teams and play challenge, competing against each other for both players and coaches, you end up with a dispersed talent pool, of both players and coaches. If you have 4 or 5 of the top players from each club, (more if warranted by ability) then you have a more competitive top tier team(s), therefore, you can now truly provide the full service spectrum of player development in the area. Individually soccer clubs strive for player development. Only united will the low country clubs be able to provide full service player development.

Within the present models in the low country, we don't really have a system to fully develop this top tier player. These players then supplement with ODP, or driving long distances to other clubs, and jumping team to team, to fill this void.

Bridge FA is a cooperative attempt to recognize this, and move away from it. Uniting the top players, and coaching staff, will add stability to the soccer landscape in the low country, while increasing the competitiveness of these teams in other regional competitions.

Striker,

Not picking a fight here, but why do you not think the format that I discussed would not work in SC? The point that I've tried to make in the past, and am still advocating here is that the major metro area in SC do not have the player base to support several clubs/teams that want to compete at a higher level. For those players that want to compete at the next level, there is no alternative but ODP. We dilute the talent by having a number of clubs all trying to go to the next level, but not necessarily the talent to do so. However, if this talent was pooled, I think that these alliance type clubs can compete at the next level.

It sounds like from Bear's previous response to me that those players on the Alliance team would only play for that team/club and not maintain any affliation with their "home" club.

Striker,

Actually, these questions are exactly what I was hoping to get. This forum being open and all, others will be reading, and probably have the same questions.

Tough answer to write, but I'll give it a go.

Dual rostering, is allowed because of the two different organizations, and does not automatically imply dual team fees. There is a slight increase, $14 per player, to be rostered with US Club Soccer. Actual player fee structure has not been finalized.

Beginning with the Fall 05 team formations, it is anticipated that each Bridge FA team will also be rostered with US Club Soccer. There simply are multiple reasons to do this which make sense, too many to really to discuss like this. So while this one team will be dual rostered, it will be one team with one set of fees.

The Ohio model does not match Bridge FA. Bridge FA will compete in SCSCL or Premier as appropriate, and supplement with friendly/tournament play. The dual rostering helps with the friendly and tournament play. The Ohio model under US Club soccer is very similar to ODP with USYSA, and Super Y, where players are on a club team and then move to another team for specific training and competitions. This is where the difference is with Bridge FA, in that these players will play for Bridge FA, either in USYSA, or US Club Soccer competitions. Bridge FA is already a US Club Soccer club, and anticipate being a SCYSA organizational member very soon.

The Ohio model as presented by OPG in my opinion is very similar to ODP, but under a different sanctioning body. Something that I don't really want to get into with this discussion, as it gets beat to death routinely.

Bear --

Has CUSC been involved in your discussions?

lpaf

ODG,
We are in total agreement that the talent pool is too dispersed and and has been diluted far too long, among the too many Cola clubs; such that a strong club like CESA might flourish in Cola. I have been screaming for a local merger long before GFC & St. Giles even thunk it! My comment about the alliance not working here is that you indicated that you play on a regional level as an alliance team. Maybe I don't understand that well enough. Did you mean to compete for regional titles or play teams in regular season on a regional basis? Sorta like premier league, huh?
If thats what you mean, then yes it will work here, but.........
I also don't understand another thing Bear just said.....that they do not field challenge or premier teams. Then who do they play? There is no league? Are they playing to advance to US Club Championship? (I know I ask dumb questions, but it is the result of too many head balls in my youth)

2004,

Ok this has happened in greenville and now in charleston.....what are you prepared to do about it in Cola....you lead the charge every time this type of talk comes up.....what has to happen to make CUSA or what ever you call it?????


Just wondering ....

It is called either CSA - Capital Soccer Alliance or CFA - Capital Futbol Alliance! (Sorta took the name from the great CASL club). As I have stated before, when I hit the lottery next week, I will buy prime land in Cola., build quality fields and they will come.........
Do you want to be my assistant, Shearer? We can sit back in the exclusive box suite above the main soccer stadium and consume mass quanities of the Brown Ale while watching our locals beat down Concord Fire, CASL and CESA!

LPAF,

Yes, CUSC has been involved in the dicussions. Their participation lately has not been as great as it once was. Many of the people in the discussions have other jobs.

Striker,

In our area, basically 4 clubs, JIYSC, CUSC, MPSC, and SSC field challenge teams. Not all of these clubs have challenge teams in all age groups/genders. I haven't done any real analysis, but our assumption is that having 2 challenge teams in any gender age group would not decrease the overall number of teams in the SCSCL by a large number.

The US Club Championship is totally separate from league play. It is anticipated that Bridge FA will have some teams particpating in this years US Club Championship tournament, which takes place in the summer.

As a general note, no one down here won the lottery, and no one donated a tract of land to build new fields, and yes players playing for Bridge FA are still linked to the member clubs.

(PS I had 0 head balls in my youth.)

Striker,
I have to add now however, I got a little nervous when we attracted LPAF and Shearer to the discussion. I've admired their work........from a distance.

You admired their work? Don't pay them attention. They follow me around wherever I go. They are just like sheep!

Striker, how many times have we had this discussion. I still don't think the Columbia area has reached the critical mass necessary for the change to occur. I seriously doubt anything could possibly happen in 05 even if the sentiment to merge was there. tryouts are less than 60 days out.However, another year of butt whippings like the midlands recieved last year at the state cup might spur a change. I still see NECSA as the wild card. I believe CSC would entertain merger talks, but I don't see NECSA as being on board as of yet. I could be wrong but I just don't see it.

Its no more merger talk, Bdad. Its a whole new ball game! Its a separate advanced club, like BridgeFA, so that all the little social clubs in town can remain intact. Read about the Bridge FA.....Its gonna finally work this time...I am gonna sell my house and car, have a few doughnuts fundraisers, and finance the rest. But.....no egos or bleach blonde hair allowed.
Which do you prefer - CSA or CFA?

Baah.

lpaf

Ok.....I now have the new club hierarchy determined for CSA :
lpaf- Cabinet Minister of Soccer Parking (like sheep)
Bdad- Cabinet Minister of Public Restrooms
Shearer- Of course, Cabinet Minister of Consessions and all Brown Ales.
Bear - Special Advisor to help avoid screw-ups
Two Heises - Cabinet Ministers on Stats
He Hate ME - Cabinet Minister of Security
MC - Cabinet Minister on Player Development
Sexual Grapefruit - Cabinet Minister of Soccermoms over 30
Corner Flag - Cabinet Minister of Soccermoms under 30
(Still working on coaches)

I feel honored to be entrusted with such a position of responsibility.In reality this only adds duties in the public domain to what I already manage in private.

In seriousness, this might be approaching things from a slightly different angle, but it seems it will still require the blessing of the various clubs to make it work. I can't see many kids leaving these clubs without at least some tacit blessing by the respective coaches/DOC's.

I'm honored also, however, now that BDad pulled it back to a more serious point.

Yes this requires the blessings of the clubs, hence, the term throughout "alliance club member". Additionally, yes it requires the DOC's. In the low country, as probably was the case in CESA, it was the DOC's that began the push to get it done. Once the DOC's thought they had something that would work, others were brought in to assist with the "implementation planning". It was the implementation planning that really brought this to fruition.

My general note appears to have been missed, go back and take a look at it. We can talk about that one more later.

2004s --

The others on this thread may not know about your experience organizing the Red Neck League. Go for it.

If you go with CSA could the teams be the Rebels, Beauregards, Jacksons, etc?

lpaf

BAAH Too.....maybe we are clones lpaf......

Shearer --

Shearer... shearer... somehow your name even makes me think of sheep. Clones, yes.

lpaf

Bear --

Sorry to have briefly sidetracked what is a very interesting idea. I currently have three daughters/step daughters playing on CUSC teams at the classic/challenge/premiere level. Some type of umbrella upper level club structure has always seemed like a good idea. JIYSC has all but abandoned the higher level girls' programs, to the benefit of CUSC (formerly CGSA). I think CUSC would have to be included to make this work. Then you have to send missionaries east of the Coopah with the gospel...

lpaf

The geographic location of the Columbia clubs is similar to that of Charleston. The Charleston area clubs are separated by a greater time and traffic difference than St Giles and GFC were in Greenville. Columbia is very similar. The big three, CSC, Lexington, and NECSA could very well use a similar or the exact model that Bridge is using. Also remeber that in general, the more serious and dare I say better soccer players (and parents) tend to be much more acceptable to travel greater distances for their child to be on a team, or play at a higher competitve level(Premier League). A rec player or parent is much less likely to take a 30-45 minute ride to practice or games three times a week. This is a good plus for the alliance.

This also brings up a very intersting scenario for Columbia. Right now, CESA does take some Columbia area or mid-state players for their teams. They would like to have more, and with the recent sucess of CESA is state cup, they might get it. It appears that Bridge will be the lowerstate answer to CESA, especially if they get MPSC to join in. This will give serious Columbia players two choices, each only about an hour and a half away, to go to if things don't work well for them in Columbia. If Bridge starts stealing away some of the titles and premier league slots from CESA, and the midstate for that matter, the Columbia area will start losing talent.

I don't want to change this thread to start talking about Columbia, I just wanted to make a few points to why Bridge seems like a good idea at this point.

I want Sexual Grapefruit's position!

Will MPSC kids be lured to Bridge FA? (Love the name by the way!)

Striker,

Just to get back to your question/statement. Yes the Ohio model (can't beleive I'm using that term) was structured for regional premier level play and national level tournaments (Dallas, Richmond, etc). And just so everyone knows, I'm not a native Buckeye ("this is how we did it back home"), I was sentenced there for a few years.....

LPAF,

I enjoy the sidetracks also. Further, I know your personal situation, in that I had the opportunity to speak to Stella last night. (Happened to be "working" over there) Yes, the Bridge group would like CUSC to be involved. There are issues there that aren't suited for this forum. However, within the current arrangement, JIYSC, is now ready to move into the competitive girls area. Maybe we should have an off line discussion. Missionaries have been sent east. The 3 teams that have played under Bridge FA to date, have all had eastern players.

CornerFlag,
You are correct on most of your points. Geographically similar, and somewhat equal distance. I happen to hail from the same locale as the Dude, so I'm familiar with the geographics/demographics of the 3 clubs you mention. Further, I think this model would work up there also.

Hammer,
As stated previously, Bridge FA is attempting to unite the low country's top players, and coaches. If this new club fits what players/parents desire, then the players will migrate to the Bridge. The word "lure" is very much like that "R" word that we need to stay away from. Open tryouts are in May, on several days, at several locations.

OPG,
Sorry if you don't like the tag I put on it, but we had to use something to distinguish between all of the various things. I understood what you were saying, and the point I'm trying to make is that there is enough dispersed talent in the low country to unite and not only compete in local leagues but travel to these other prestegious regional and possibly national tournaments, and be successful. Some SC teams have already been successful at the Columbus Cup in Va Beach, the Jefferson Cup, Richmond, and CASL Shootout in Raleigh, and I'm sure there are others. And this was with dispersed talent. Just imagine the potential if we pool the talent.

Has anyone seen or heard from MC? I miss his profound wisdom. He may still be in a drunken stupor from the CESA Lovefest!

Bear,

No problem with the model name, I actually got a chuckle out of it! I think what you are doing is great and I hope the program is a success.

Just a brief comment on this post from Bear:
'Yes this requires the blessings of the clubs, hence, the term throughout "alliance club member". Additionally, yes it requires the DOC's. In the low country, as probably was the case in CESA, it was the DOC's that began the push to get it done. Once the DOC's thought they had something that would work, others were brought in to assist with the "implementation planning". It was the implementation planning that really brought this to fruition.'

This alliance concept or any other type or fashion of merger, semi-merger or club collaboration will not work in Cola. because only one DOC (at CSC) was interested, at one point, in any discussions of any joint efforts to improve Cola. soccer. I went back and found this post from 2 years ago. One of my too many rants here in the forum. This one was in response to my friend, Shearer who said to just relax after the CESA merger:
'Once again........Shearer my friend............too much brown ale!!
Relax? Relax?
That is all they have been doing in Cola. for 4-5 years while GFC and St Giles dominated state club soccer. And now they are continuing it with CESA -only better and stronger! Relax? Are you one of the many in the midlands area that want convenient, social soccer, in which everyone (parents & youth)play in their neat little clubs, as long as its not too serious and doesnt interfere too much with the social life. Columbia is a large enough area that serious soccer players should not have to drive to Greenville or Low-country for serious soccer. (A word here about MPSC and CSC - with CESA winning all championships, I believe that MPSC had more runnersup (4)in state challenge cup than all other state clubs combined. MPSC went from 1 premier team to 4. I believe CSC had 3 teams in premier this past season, and now has none. MPSC, therefore, may be considered the 2nd best overall club in SC.) I said it almost 2 yrs ago in this forum -that if Cola. area clubs do not act and merge, then St. Giles & GFC will merge one day and dominate; and next it will be low country teams with maybe Myrtle Beach merging into a super power. But thats ok Cola., just relax and have fun as Shearer says. Can ANYONE offer a plausible explanation as to why Cola area clubs don't desire to merge??

As Bear stated Bridge FA began because the DOCs wanted it. Why don't we want it here?

MC last seen on the girls board analyzing the relative strength of some NC HS programs.

lpaf

Can't help but think that the OSSOC boys 88 team that was essentially a "district" team got this whole trend started in the low country. They were a blend of Myrtle Beach, McClellanville, Mt. Pleasant and Summerville players. They are in fact the team that has been to State Challenge Cup final for four years in a row and are now registered with MPSC. Five years of success speaks for itself...I applaud the powers that be for finally seeing the light...Bridge FA is a great concept!!

As I write this I know it's risky, because the last thing I want to do is argue with a supporter. You're right about several things in your post, and most importantly Bridge FA is a great concept!!!!!!

One of the things that Bridge FA will do as I said earlier is provide stability in the low country soccer landscape. Perhaps some saw your team and realized that this was the way to go. But if I understand the history correctly, this team was primarily a MPSC team that went to OSSOC, and last year came back to MPSC. Kind of like what I said about players hopping club to club in search of the right environment.

Given the success that this team has had, it would be great for them to become a part of Bridge FA, since they already demonstrate the district nature. With what you have read up to this point, is there anything that would prevent this team/these players, from trying out for Bridge FA?

The team that went to Va Beach last weekend, was also a "district" team, and as I said, had players from various clubs but lived in the Mrytle Beach area, McClellanville, Mt. Pleasant, James Island, Summerville, Beaufort and Aiken. Within this pool was 12 ODP participants. The low country has always had the talent, and now they have the structure to pull it together.

Bear, I have no arguement with you. But I do want to clear something up. My son played with the OSSOC 88's from the time he was U-9 thru U15. This was a team comprised originally entirely of MB players. At U-10 we incorporated some McClellanville players with much success..even tho we trained separately. At U12, with MB and McClellanville players, we were still having much success and were in final four at State Cup. At U13, 2 players fom MPSC joined our team..we made finals at State Cup. At U14...another MPSC player joined us as well as a Summerville player...by this time we were training in McClellanville twice a week...a 1 1/2 hour drive for MB players.. We won State Cup and had a fabulous time at Regionals. Now we're playing in Premier league. At U15..more players from MPSC, and another player from Summerville...still training at McClellanville, MB players have dwindled to 4. Make State Finals, playing in Premier league again. U16...the team makes a move to MPSC...My son drops off the team...Traveling for premier league is hard enough...having to travel 2 hours to practice for a 15 year old is over the top. All this to say...no..it was not a MPSC team gone awry...it was an effort on the part of many people to bring together the best talent on the coast where the 88's were concerned. Parents with serious players recognized where the best coaching and development was happening. My personal opinion is that we should look at what is best for our kids..regardless of club loyalty. You ask me if there is anything preventing this team from trying out for Bridge FA...well...anything I would say would be purely speculation. So I'll leave it at that. Best of luck...I think you are on the right track. The Coast definately has the talent...we just have to pull it together!!

Bear - I personally commend thsoe that are working on the Bridge FA concept and development! I wish you the best of luck in this endeavor.

It reminds me of CMSA (Columbia Metropolitan Soccer Association) that was started back in the early-mid 90s with the intent of offering a separate entity for the elite players via working with the existing clubs in the Midlands.

Unfortunately, there was not enough interest from a couple of key clubs to keep the momentum, but in the 2-3 years of CMSA's true existence, it proved to be a great development tool for Columbia area kids.

I'll keep my fingers crossed that Bridge FA will be a success!

MBSOC,

Thanks for the clearing. There's always more than is "widely" known.

To further expand on your comment, "it was an effort on the part of many people to bring together the best talent on the coast where the 88's were concerned. Parents with serious players recognized where the best coaching and development was happening." Bridge FA will provide this for all age groups, U13-U18, so individual groups of parents won't have to do it in the future. Not only is it intended to pool the players, but also the coaching, therefore, adding stability under an organizational structure, where all clubs, parents, and most importantly, players, have the potential of playing with the best, and being trained by the best.

Kevin,
I think I said somewhere that I was familiar with the Columbia area. I honestly think the model that we are putting in place down here would also work in Columbia.

>>[Cornerflag] This will give serious Columbia players two choices, each only about an hour and a half away, to go to if things don't work well for them in Columbia.<<

Respectfully, have you seen any mention or discussion from anyone about Bridge attempting to attract anyone other than highly ambitious low country players? I ***am not*** criticizing Bridge; I think it's incredibly important when you start any entity to have a focused vision. But as the parent of a midstate soccer player, I've read all of the Bridge material on this message board several times to understand if Bridge is attempting to be a solution for the highly ambitious soccer player who doesn't live in the low country -- and I don't see anything that would make me suspect that this is the case.

2004striker: I think that you confuse "drunken stupor" with my normal, less than intelligent, state. It's a favorable comparison, however, and I thank you.

My requested comments:

1) Great name; very Charleston oriented but with a meaning that could extend beyond that. Logo design will be interesting.

2) As someone who hopes to see South Carolina become more competitive regionally and nationally, my hat is off to those doing the heavy lifting to try to change the SC status quo.

3) On the girls side at least, not having MPSC and CUSC as full participants makes short-term success problematic. Getting MPSC [first priority] and CUSC [second priority] would seem to be a critical inflection point of success for Bridge for the next several years.

4) Long term, the incredibly strong focus on the "low country" or coastal regions surrounding Charleston has the underpinnings to be a very strong strategy if you can increase youth participation rates at the same time; U.S. coastal areas are projected to show tremendous growth over the next 10 years.

Demographics are the engine that propel good clubs to become great clubs, and allow good teams to become great teams. Demographics here implies not just numbers of kids, but also kids with an interest in soccer, and parents willing to and financially able to support these interests. I am, and always have been a proponent of local soccer and community focused clubs. I live on James Island and take pride in driving by the JIYSC fields on any given afternoon or weekend and seeing the fields full of young people learning the sport, dedicating their effort to becoming better players. But small or medium community driven clubs can not, as a rule, support the upper level play of Premier or Challenge league soccer. Exceptions exist, but remain exceptions.

I think an umbrella organization such as Bridge FA is a solid approach to how to harness the demographic power of the lowcountry and yet maintain local club structure -- a federation of clubs supporting upper level play in a combined fashion. Swimmer 1 proposed a similar idea a couple of years ago with the idea of a Battery sponsored umbrella club.

I agree with Chic0 that Bridge FA will not be fully effective unless it extends across all the major Charleston/Summerville area clubs. I disagree as to which club, MPSC or CUSC, should be the priority club next. Bridges, like Rome, are not built in a day. Mount Pleasant, for a variety of reasons I think, is not ready to make a commitment to the Bridge FA concept. But CUSC can and would bring the girls side of the equation into equilibrium with the strong boys programs of Summerville and the solid rec orientation of James Island. Every effort possible should be made to bring CUSC and the expertise DOC Andy Grist has to offer to the Bridge FA table.

lpaf

lpaf: I certainly bow to your knowledge of youth soccer in the coastal areas and believe that you understand much better than me what is possible and probable in terms of the next set of moves. The reason that I stated that I would prioritize MPSC [on the girls side] is simple: last year they achieved state championships in the U11, U12, and U14 age groups. Thus, to an ignorant person with absolutely no knowledge of the inner workings of coastal area youth soccer, the prioritization went to MPSC because of the developing strength of their younger program coupled with several high finishes this year in some of the older groups. However, as you note, I'm sure that there are reasons that this prioritization is impractical in terms of execution.

I dont know where to post now that we have 2 sites on Bridge FA! That shows you the level of interest for high level soccer among low country soccer fans. So I posted this message on both sites: (you don't have to read both, unless you just like to hear me rant!) -
I applaud the new Bridge FA concept and club. I am a midstate soccer fan too, Chico and I desire to have teams from this area play at the highest level possible. But with Bridge FA I foresee (and I have been humbly ranting about this for 2 years) that quality club soccer in Cola will cease to exist...... I know CSC is doing a great job seeking area players to field quality teams, but they need more interest from the other area clubs in order to compete with CESA and now with the 'new lowcountry' concept for quality soccer. We may have 2 Lovefests to contend with at the conclusion of state finals! The level of talent and coaching is diluted with the too many area clubs in Cola. With all the facilities in place here at LSC,CSC,CRSA,NECSA (at least 20 quality fields), with all the quality coaching in place, with 4 financially sound small area clubs, and with enough quality players in Cola. and surrounding areas; what is now needed is quality leaders to take the next and final step forward. A Cola. merger of some type is no longer a risk or rocket science. It has been done and done well at CESA and I foresee that it will be successful at Bridge FA. There are too many merger successes to mention here; but when one occurs, just look at the results: CESA took all, as in ALL, the state titles after 1, as in ONE year. In Atlanta Concorde Fire was formed in 2003 with merger between Concorde and Atlanta Fire clubs. After only 1 year, the new club sent 6 state championship teams to the regional finals. CASL, our capitol counterpart, has achieved much success after it mergered all Raleigh area efforts to seek the highest level of play. With a merger of efforts here, Cola. could also organize a large quality national tournament on par with Atlanta Cup or Raleigh Shootout. That would be a financial success for the city and be an avenue to obtain club grants or other funding.
It can be done Cola. area soccer fans......
If something is not done within 2 years, the level
of club play here will not warrant fielding any challenge teams, let alone a premier one....
Or do you want adequate, nice, social, convenient soccer in Cola?

Chic0 --

Bridge FA should vigorously pursue both MPSC and CUSC ties. If neither of these clubs can be brought into the picture this year then the greater Charleston area's girls picture will remain as splintered as it is today, but with a new club still working to consolidate things at the upper levels. If either MPSC or CUSC joins then Bridge FA would have a strong position for attracting the best girls' talent from the hold out club, eventually.

lpaf

Good Luck to Charleston.
Going to keep my new years resolution and not talk about any other mergers until after they happen

A couple of editorial comments, since there were no real specific questions:

Are low country players/parents the only ones that read this message board?

Discussions are still taking place with Mt Pleasant, and to a lesser degree, CUSC.