As a parent who pays fees for my child to play club ball, but not at CSC, I would say that a group of 10 to 20 parents per team, each shelling out about $700 for fees (that would be $7000 - $14000 per team each year), do have some say in the club. Sort of like investors in a business who let administrators run the daily operations of the business, but who also are empowered to vote those persons out when they don't use the money wisely.
In the case of CSC, I heard a couple of things recently; 1) the DOC said every club in the state was doing the academy and none of them were letting their U12 teams play up, including CESA (totally false, look at PMSL U13 classic girls); 2) that the academy was in shambles with the kids getting just one coach, a very young inexperienced coach, at training sessions with 30 kids; 3) that the former DOC got into an email ****in' fight with a group of parents and called them idiots.
Is all of it true? I know for a fact some of it is. I do suspect most of the problem came with the academy. The NSCAA created the academy concept three years ago and notified all member clubs of the change. CSC allowed teams U12 and below to play up the previous year. Then last fall they told parents of those rising age groups that the rules had just changed and their children would not be able to play up. Yet the DOC, in an open meeting with all parents of the U12 players, announced that the rising U12 boys and girls teams that had played 11-sided as U11's could play up as a team if they wanted. Problems started when they were required to tryout with U13 and U14 kids. After a week of tryouts they were told that NO ONE would be allowed to play up. Of course, that wasn't totally true; they did allow kids who had played on U12 teams the previous yearthat were true U11 at the time, to play on the U13 teams since they were already established on the team. Then there were U10 players who wanted to play up in the academy on the U11 team but were told they weren't good enough. If so, why were those same boys asked to play, and did, for that same U11 team at the recent James Island tournament? Just seemed to many people that personal dislikes and the desire to assert the authority of the position played a greater role in decision making than the so called 'concern for the kids.'
There are certainly two sides on this issue. BUT, no matter what people say, the clubs are in it for the money, bottom line. If someone starts losing money for the club, directly or indirectly, the issue will eventually get addressed. The older teams didn't get caught in any conflict but the younger teams, the FUTURE of the club, were caught in these battles, and this is most likely where the most controversy existed.
If CSC board doesn't act aggressively and take charge of the club, CSC will soon become CESA's site in Columbia.
