SC Soccer Forums SCSoccer.com Forums Club Soccer & ODP Youth Southern Regional scores and updates

I just wanted to tell everyone hey from Arkansas. I'm here reffing some games and will be able to catch bits and pieces of some of the games that our representatives are playing in. Post any scores here.

..are you sharing a room with The Beave?

..if so let us know..we'll call for help!

dudeman,
I want to be there when the 'Beave' does one of your indoor games.I will make sure to point you out to him. (Just so you will get some fair calls, of course!)

There are several ways to track the scores. Scroll down to bottom of page. I don't know how they work, but there they are-
http://www.southernregionals.org/

This will take you deeper to the scores/schedules

http://www.usyssouthernregionals.com/index.php?ct=schedules

First Games....

U15 B CESA 2- 4 to N Tx Andromeda Titans 91
DSC 0 - 3 PL E CRSC Carolina Select NC
U19 B Aiken Fire 1-0 S Tx Texans FC

U15 G Cesa 1-1 S Tx TSC Challenge 91

U!7s at noon
U14s at 2

U17G CESA Premier 1-0 TN KFC U17G Crush Force

U17B Bridge FA Gold 1 - 3 AL Vestavia Steamers 89

Congrats to the U-17 Girls.

Chico, did you hit The Flying Fish yet?

http://littlerock.about.com/od/restaurantreviews/fr/flyingfish.htm

U14B Cesa 1 - 2 Ga Concorde Fire
U14G CESA 0 - 2 Ga GSA Phoenix

Please spell out what the SC teams represent (i.e. -- DSC??? Discoveries Soccer Club)??? make sure the average "Joe" can decipher this!

Another 'problem' with club soccer -- not knowing what it stands for!

At least with American Legion baseball, Richland Post 6 means 'Richland County'. Duh!

If I'm reading the results correctly above that means the Sandlapper State was 2-4-1 on the first day of Regionals -- is that correct?

Boys (1-3-0, 5 GF, 9 GA)
U14 (0-1-0, 1 GF, 2 GA)
U15 (0-1-0, 2 GF, 4 GA)
U17 (0-1-0, 1 GF, 3 GA)
U19 (1-0-0, 1 GF, 0 GA)

Girls (1-1-1, 2 GF, 3 GA)
U14 (0-1-0, 0 GF, 2 GA)
U15 (0-0-1, 1 GF, 1 GA)
U17 (1-0-0, 1 GF, 0 GA)

In any other sport that is played, we (SC teams) would adopt "SC" as our team name in Regionals and we would easily accept this as 'our' team ... In Little League Baseball, American Legion Baseball, and AAU Basketball all the teams assume the 'state' name for regional/national competitions since they won that states respective state title ... Maybe our soccer teams could show the same good faith and represent the state and their club "SC (CESA)" for example ... Just seems to be a better way to let the folks back home -- particularly those not familiar with soccer -- what is going on.

You mean.. you don't know exactly what this means?

PL E CRSC Carolina Select NC

PSSSH ..c'mon!

SC BOYS

[U14] CESA 1:2 GA
[U15] CESA 2:4 TX
[U15] DSC 0:3 NC
[U16] BRIDGEFA 2:0 AR
[U17] BRIDGEFA 1:3 AL
[U18] NECSA 0:2 TN
[U19] AIKEN 1:0 TX

2W-5L-0T GF=7 GA=14 W%=29%

PL Premier League
E East
CRSC = noidea just know they are from NC

U16 B Bridge 2 - 0 Ar Fort Smith Express
U16 G CESA 2 -2 PL S NASA 08 Ga

That is PL = Premier League
S= South

U18 B NECSA 0 - 2 Tn TNFC 88Boys Blue
U18 G CESA 0 - 1 La WC NOSA

I do not know what WC is...

SC record
3-6-2

The necsa ambush didn't play TN today...they played Jackson Futbol Club, and they lost 3-2. I saw the first half, and it was 0-0, then later was reffing a girls team from mississippi and the Jackson boy's team was there and told me the final score of 3-2.

I also got to see the first half of the Aiken Fire game, which was pretty uneventful, except that I was informed Goose will miss the rest of the tournament because he is leaving for u20 national team camp and Jamal Geathers is flying in tonight, and missed the first game.

your kind of wrong about the ambush game

U17 B Bridge 4 - 3 PL S Tupelo Ms

Ben the schedule has them playing against Tn and loosing to them 2-0

Jackson FC beat Greensboro 3-2 per the schedule.
U15 G Cesa 1 - 0 Tn SFRC
U17G CESA 1 - 3 Ok HFC 89

Alright, here is my explanation. I was talking to one of the jackson players before the game. I asked him if they were playing south carolina and he said yes. Then later, I asked him what their final score was, and he said 3-2. His shirt was blue (although JFC is green) so I assumed he was the team that played the ambush. Sorry for the confussion. Today, I saw their entire game, and they lost 3-0 to Greensboro, who played with 9 players for 60% of the game. The Ambush gave up a PK at the end of the first half, then two goals in stoppage time.

Aiken Fire had a bad game and ended with a 2-1 loss. I was on the other game in their bracket and the team they beat won 3-2, which I think puts the ambush through with a win? but I'm not sure how the u19s work.

The only team with two wins is the bridge u16s, who should easily pick up a third tomorrow vs. LA

And Goose leaves monday, so my earlier post is pretty much completely pointless, but Jamal did play today.

Aiken is through to the semis -

Tuesday, July 04, 2006
11:30 AM
Game: 0510
Semi Final -
South Carolina
North Texas Under 19 Boys Division
#02

11:30 AM
Game: 0511
Semi Final -
Florida WC
Louisiana Under 19 Boys Division
#03

17 and 15 girls are also in the quarterfinals tomorrow.

This is what I have figured out so far.

2006 US Youth Soccer Southern Regionals

BOYS (7-12-2, .381)

U14 CESA 91 Premier (0-3-0)
lost 1-2 Georgia, lost PL West 0-1, lost 0-1 North Carolina

U15 CESA 90 Premier (1-2-0)
lost 2-4 North Texas, won 1-0 PL North, lost 1-2 PL East

U15 DSC 90 -- PL North (0-2-1)
lost 0-3 PL East, lost 0-1 South Carolina, tied 3-3 North Texas

U16 Bridge FA 89 Gold (2-1-0)
won 2-0 Arkansas, won 2-0 Alabama, lost 0-2 Louisiana, vs. Georgia (Quarterfinals)

U17 Bridge FA 88 Gold (1-1-1)
lost 1-3 Alabama, won 4-3 PL South, tied 1-1 PL North, vs. Georgia (Quarterfinals)

U18 NECSA Ambush (1-2-0)
lost 0-2 Tennessee, lost 0-3 North Carolina WC, won 6-1 Mississippi

U19 Aiken Fire (2-1-0)
won 1-0 South Texas, lost 1-3 Tennessee, won 1-0 Florida, vs. North Texas (Semifinals)

GIRLS (4-7-4, .400)

U14 CESA 91 Premier (0-3-0)
lost 0-2 Georgia, lost 0-3 PL South, lost 2-5 Tennessee

U15 CESA 90 Premier (1-0-2)
tied 1-1 South Texas, won 1-0 Tennessee, tied 0-0 Louisiana, vs. North Texas (Quarterfinals)

U16 CESA 89 Premier (1-1-1)
tied 2-2 PL South, lost 0-2 North Texas, won 3-1 Alabama, vs. Oklahoma (Quarterfinals)

U17 CESA 88 Premier (1-1-1)
won 1-0 Tennessee, lost 1-3 Oklahoma, tied 1-1 North Carolina, vs. North Texas (Quarterfinals)

U18 CESA 87 Premier (1-2-0)
lost 0-1 Louisiana WC, won 2-1 Louisiana, lost 0-1 Oklahoma

no U19 team

11-19-6 (.389) through the Group stage of action.

Just heard that the 16 girls are going through to the quarterfinals too.

Kyle,
Thats semis for Aiken Fire. No quarters for U19.

Alright, a little more on how South Carolina is doing...lets compare all the states success thus far:

Through to the quarters (including u19s):

1. NTX (22)
2. GA (14)
3. NC (9)
4. OK (9)
5. STX (8)
6. SC (6)
7. FL (6)
8. LA (5)
9. TN (4)
10. MS (4)
11. AL (1)
12 Ark (0)

Through to the semis:

1. NTX (2)
2. LA (2)
3. GA (1)
4. NC (1)
5. SC (1)
6. FL (1)

One big issue with the success South Carolina has had, is that the Aiken Fire is the only top seed in their group, and they had to be in order to advance. That leaves quarterfinal matchups at:

U16 Boys:
Bridge FA vs. Concorde Fire Elite (8-0-1 in the premier league)
U17 Boys:
Bridge FA vs. Atlanta Fire United (6-1-2 in premier, last meeting 4-1 AFU)
U15 Girls:
Cesa vs. FC Texas (4-1-2 in premier league west)
U16 Girls:
Cesa vs. Edmund Soccer Club (5-0-0 in premier league north)
U17 Girls:
Cesa vs. Dallas Texans (6-0-1 in premier league west)

benp: Great numbers and insight -- thanks. When you look at the results and denominate by population on an ad hoc basis, it appears to me that the surprises are OK and SC -- although OK has had enough success in the last few years that they really aren't a surprise any more.

The thing that's difficult to show quantitatively is how much the "luck of the draw" figures into reaching the quarterfinals. For example, the CESA U15B Premier team had an incredibly tough draw -- just as the DSC U14B team last year was in a "group of death."

What I find wonderful is how we've gone from in the past simply counting won/lost records, or counting which teams reached quarterfinals, to doing deeper analysis of things like seeding coming out of the bracket. It seems like our expectations for highly competitive soccer in SC are slowly going up as the clubs are providing the opportunities for our most highly ambitious players.

The most surprising thing to me so far isn't how good some NTX or OK teams are, it's how much better the traditional underdogs are getting. SC has undergone wrenching change in the youth soccer environment in the last two years -- and yet it seems clear to me that SC needs to accelerate that progress in order continue to show relative improvement in Region III and nationally.

Every team I've seen so far from SC has shown well. I sat by several Georgia team coaches at the CESA versus DSC U15B game who kept arguing about whether the teams playing were from SC -- they thought they were too good to come from SC. So congratulations to DSC and NECSA for coming out and doing well in their brackets.

Good luck to the teams from Aiken, Bridge, and CESA today in the quarterfinals [and semifinals.]

>>[Hurst66] Chico, did you hit The Flying Fish yet?<<

Not yet. My wimpy excuse: with the temperatures in the upper 90's and so much great soccer and so many recreational opportunities, we've been lucky to find the nearest place to eat before falling into bed each night.

Special Report from Jim Victor at the USYSA Region III Championships.

The U19 Aiken Fire boys team has won their group and has advanced to the semifinals of the USYSA Region 3 Tournament in Little Rock, Arkansas.

The annual tournament for teams that have won their respective state tournaments is being held in Little Rock for the second time in five years. In 2002, the then U15 Aiken Fire won the regional title and advanced to the national championship series, eventually losing in the national U15 championship final 1-0.

The U19 Fire is comprised of players who have played for the team over the years. Included on the roster are:

Eric Baffour (North Augusta HS) - Furman University
William Batson (Richmond Academy) - Colgate University
Rafi Berios (Pope Academy)
Jamal Geathers (South Aiken HS) - Will attend USC
Jordan Gilbert (Aquinas HS) - Clayton State University
Mike Gustavson (South Aiken HS) - USC
Sani Hadziahmetovic (Irmo HS) - Duke University
Gavin Hamilton (Evans HS) - Augusta State
David Hunter (Victory Christian Academy)
Markus Jackson (Richmond Academy) - Yale University
Marquintez Jackson (Richmond Academy) - Will attend Clayton State University
John Odum (Aiken HS) - Presbyterian College
Schuyler Reardon (Aiken HS) - Will attend USC
Parker Rogers (Richmond Academy) - Clemson University
Rob Victor (Aiken HS) - Furman University

The Aiken Fire won their group by defeating the South Texas state champions in the first game by a score of 1-0. Will Batson's direct kick from 20 yards out along the goal line was played low. Eric Baffour "dummied" the ball through is legs and before it reached the far post where Jordan Gilbert touched it in. The South Texan team mounted several attempts to tie the score but was denied by the defense of Gustavson in goal, Odum, Gilbert, Hunter, Rogers and Markus Jackson on defense.

The Fire lost their second game 3-1 to the Brentwood, Tennessee team. Although the Fire dominated play and had numerous chances to score, they could not finish their chances and eventually gave up a late counter attack goal in the final 15 seconds to make the score look worse than it really was. The lone Aiken goal was scored by Jamal Geathers after a throw in by Schuyler Reardon was flicked by Rob Victor and eventually made it's way to Geathers who poked it in.

After two games, all four teams in the group had one win and one tie. An Aiken Fire win in their third game coupled with a South Texas defeat over Tennessee would allow the Aiken Fire to win the group and advance to the semifinals.

Aiken Fire played the Florida state champs from Brandon, Florida in the third game. Brandon had defeated TN (7-0) and had lost (3-2) to South Texas. The game was played end-to-end with both teams knowing that a win was necessary for advancement. With the extremely hot temperatures reaching in the upper 90's the Fire rotated Batson, Hadziahmetovic, Hamilton, Reardon, Rogers, Q. Jackson and even Markus Jackson in the midfield to keep fresh players on the field. Both teams had numerous chances in a game. Some spectators described the match as a "heavy weight fight" with both teams throwing their best offensive weapons only to be denied by missed shots, goalkeeper saves and defensive stops. With 5 minutes to in the Aiken game, the South Texas game was final with South Texas winning 6-2. This set up the perfect scenario for Aiken Fire as a win would get them the top seed in the group based on head to head results with South texas. Aiken Fire had gone to three up top with ten minutes to go to try to get the go-ahead goal. Quality chances by geathers, Baffour and Victor had been either stuffed or deflected by the Florida keeper. As the 90 minutes expired the 4th official announced 5 extra minutes of time would be played. In the 94th minute, Sani Hadziahmetovic stole a pass, layed it off to Reardon who found a streaking Markus Jackson going down the right side. Jackson beat his man and turned into the box where he was knocked to the ground by the defender. The ref called for a penalty kick. Eric Baffour (Iceman) stepped up and promptly placed the PK in the upper right-hand corner to secure the 1-0 victory and put the Aiken Fire into the semifinals of the Southern Regionals for the fourth time in six years.

The Fire will play the U19 Dallas Texans Red in the semifinal at 11:30 on Tuesday, July 4. The Dallas Texans Red are the defending national champions. They are also the team that defeated the Aiken Fire in the U16 Southern Regional final (2003) to deny the Fire back-to-back regional championships. The Aiken Fire had won the Southern Regional at U15.

Aiken Fire will play without Mike Gustavson in goal as "Goose" has been called up to the U20 National Team training camp/games in Canada and had to leave on Monday, July 3 to report to that team.

Since the restructuring of Regionals to add a round (just for money-making), being a quarterfinalist isn't as big as one might seem. Total teams are 12-16 per age group and 8 go through....that's 50% at least....not bad odds. It's not a true measure like the past when only four went through as group winners and your true class was shown.

The State's "elite" club, if correct, has one semifinalist and three others went out in the quarters. Not very good considering there's 12 titles up for grabs and 48 semifinal spots. 1 for 48 isn't a elite club in the region, just in a poor state. What's good for South Carolina still isn't good in the big picture.

Kind of like England in the World Cup. Everyone thinks they are good domestically because foreigners make the top clubs somewhat competitive in Europe. Until, they (just Englishmen) step into the World Cup and are poor.

Kind of like the U.S. in the World Cup. Everyone think they are good in CONCACAF and meaningless friendlies until they step into the World Cup and are, yes, poor.

American soccer people need to be 1) more honest and demanding in expectations and evaluation and 2) more knowledgeable to do this.

South Carolina(and don't count college all-star teams at U19), England and the U.S. weren't good enough in June.

Beezer: I think that your overall point is that South Carolina's "elite" club [I love your use of "scare" quotes!] isn't sufficiently regionally or nationally competitive to win many/any regional finalists positions. No offense -- but you could have looked at RIIIPL-East results and discovered this quite a few number of months ago -- we don't tend to place in the top two in RIIIPL-East. Or you could look at the history of regional champions from SC -- the list is two deep -- and deduced this.

It might be interesting to tackle a more interesting question -- what is the current course, speed, and acceleration of SC soccer with respect to the rest of the region. Are we moving toward achieving more regional finalists and champions faster than the other states or are we falling further and further behind?

What I saw yesterday before I left Little Rock was a SC team that played the #1 ranked nationally ranked team [NTX - Dallas Texans] and lost 1-0 in a heartbreaker that many thought was actually a 1-1 game [literally, the video is being reviewed concerning whether a ball crossed a line.] The Dallas players/parents were estatic and quite poor sports about it all -- I'm pretty sure that they didn't expect an SC team to be quite that competitive.

I read your post and on one hand I'm actually kind of pleased that people's expectations are starting to rise to the point where getting out of bracket with #2 ranked Oklahoma [but not CASL] is considered "not a big deal." I think this is the kind of expectations we should have regarding SC soccer and our "elite" clubs [hey...I used the quotes as well!].

On the other hand, I read your post and wonder what your agenda must be to disregard the improvement that SC appears to be making [ask the NASA/Silverback parents who didn't get out of bracket in another age group against SC, for example].

So, taking your "argument" at face value -- and I agree with your premise that SC wasn't good enough in June to be in the national pool and has never been with only a few incredibly rare exceptions -- what is your prescription for improving the performance of SC in future "June's"?

Beezer,
I think the quarterfinal was set up after Premier league teams were entered. There were never 4 group winners. There were three group winners and 1 wild card. This is still done with the 19's as there are no PL teams.

Who is making the money?

x: I swear -- I walked away from the computer after I posted and then realized I had missed this point entirely and came back just now to discuss the same point and ask the same question!

Beezer: One other point -- that "all-star" team from Aiken -- my kid used to practice with them two years ago before any of them went to college and when we watched them in two of their games in Little Rock it seems to be pretty much the same excellent Aiken Fire players -- why are they not to be considered a regular team -- what are we missing?

Chico: I've numbered some of your dialog for response.

1) Are we moving toward achieving more regional finalists and champions faster than the other states or are we falling further and further behind?

Response: Very slowly forward but with a limit. Individual clubs are doing great, like CESA and in time Bridge FA. However, they need competition from the entire state not just every fourth match every two weeks. Even Premier League is 10-12 matches, over months, which in the development picture isn't enough.

2) What I saw yesterday before I left Little Rock was a SC team that played the #1 ranked nationally ranked team.

Response: Soccer is soccer. A SC will play well here and there against the best. We need day in and day out teams and, more importantly, players competing like this.

3) On the other hand, I read your post and wonder what your agenda must be to disregard the improvement that SC appears to be making.

Response: By no means am I disregarding SC soccer, I live here, coach here, recognize attempts (like CESA, Bridge) and want to help as much as anyone get kids the opportunities some kids are getting in top states/regions.

4) So, taking your "argument" at face value -- and I agree with your premise that SC wasn't good enough in June to be in the national pool and has never been with only a few incredibly rare exceptions -- what is your prescription for improving the performance of SC in future "June's"?

Response: My prescription is to have 1) a committee of top soccer coaches (club, college) to 2) appoint a full-time DOC and then 3) serve as his technical group and work closely in making all soccer/development decisions like league formation, training environments/curriculum and, of course ODP restructuring.

In addition, I believe the ODP pools, in this state, should be year round teams that play under a club (or maybe a SCYSA-formed Columbia club just for that matter) and play Premier League and/or US Club. Does the mean seperating and catering to the elite? YES. Decisions for the majority doesn't develop the minority, the best! You can still have SCYSA leagues for the other clubs/teams and they'll only play one another in State Cup. If the elite teams win, then it should (CESA is now almost doing that). If the elite teams don't win then things are advancing maybe. But this way the best players are guaranteed to play and train together with top coaches.

The most important thing is the top players train, at least, 3 times a week in Columbia (central location) and move around on weekends when there's not matches. With so few top, top players, they need to be in the same environment constantly.

I know this all seems drastic and different, and there's probably a better chance of seeing SCYSA brass (like Mary Bynum) juggling 3 times, but it's needed. Get rid of administrators making soccer decisions and allow that to the best soccer people. South Carolina needs thorough and wholesale change!

Beezer: Great post...I'm going to read it and think about it and respond after a bit...some really thought-provoking ideas!

One other note on the Aiken Fire - a lot of the guys came over and watched the SC CESA U17G versus NTX Dallas Texans - it was great support - best of luck to Aiken today -- win it all!!!

Beezer & Chico -- excellent posts today! Thanks for the dialogue.

Chico:

U19 Aiken? If they are the original team, my bad. I just figured, like all over the country, U19 teams are usually teams where former players bring back new college teammates for one last run. I don't know U19 Aiken that well so if I spoke out of turn, apologies to them.

Money-making? Adding a quarterfinal round and a U14 age group was more enticing for the host city/state association due to extra teams and nights of hotels/income for a bigger kick-back, which host cities/associations do get.

X:

You're right. It was 12 teams (just State Cup winners) with 3 group winners and a WC. Still, 1) only 33% advanced 2) now, more revenue with four more teams per age group AND 3)an age group was added at U14 not long ago. In short, money is a factor.

Congrats, CESA U17G, for a successful season, though it fell short of what you all hoped for. A third-place finish in PLIIIE (with a shot at the #1 spot in the last match), fewest goals allowed in PL, state championship, and a quarter finals loss (1-0) to the #1 team in the nation. Heart breaking at the end, but a joy to watch this ride.

I would like to see a group such as the scsoccer.com super22 train and play together as a team someday. Any thoughts on how such a group might fare in Region play? How might these kids stack up given enough time to actually become a team? (Would this just be ODP without politics?)

>>[purpleandyellow] Congrats, CESA U17G [...]<<

Something kind of interesting. This CESA U17G team lost in the Disney finals to Spirit United Gaels [PA]. Just saw that the Gaels won the region 1 championship and are going to nationals.

CESA's U17G team has been ranked as a top 20 team nationally for a while now...seems to be just a break or two away from being a top 4-5 team.

>>[Beezer] 1) Are we moving toward achieving more regional finalists and champions faster than the other states or are we falling further and further behind?

Response: Very slowly forward but with a limit. Individual clubs are doing great, like CESA and in time Bridge FA. However, they need competition from the entire state not just every fourth match every two weeks. Even Premier League is 10-12 matches, over months, which in the development picture isn't enough.<<

Very difficult to disagree with your point here...it seems spot on.

My only comment would be that what I'm beginning to see is that at least at CESA there's enough "critical mass" so that most teams can get really good scrimmage-level competition from other teams within the club -- with the exception probably being at the oldest boys age brackets. And what I'm seeing are the formation of informal inter-state club alliances that lead to more scrimmaging among more top teams in the region.

However, "more better" soccer in SC is absolutely needed.

>>2) What I saw yesterday before I left Little Rock was a SC team that played the #1 ranked nationally ranked team.

Response: Soccer is soccer. A SC will play well here and there against the best. We need day in and day out teams and, more importantly, players competing like this.<<

Again, agreed...great point.

>>3) On the other hand, I read your post and wonder what your agenda must be to disregard the improvement that SC appears to be making.

Response: By no means am I disregarding SC soccer, I live here, coach here, recognize attempts (like CESA, Bridge) and want to help as much as anyone get kids the opportunities some kids are getting in top states/regions.<<

Absolutely understood...

>>4) So, taking your "argument" at face value -- and I agree with your premise that SC wasn't good enough in June to be in the national pool and has never been with only a few incredibly rare exceptions -- what is your prescription for improving the performance of SC in future "June's"?

Response: My prescription is to have 1) a committee of top soccer coaches (club, college) to 2) appoint a full-time DOC and then 3) serve as his technical group and work closely in making all soccer/development decisions like league formation, training environments/curriculum and, of course ODP restructuring.

In addition, I believe the ODP pools, in this state, should be year round teams that play under a club (or maybe a SCYSA-formed Columbia club just for that matter) and play Premier League and/or US Club. Does the mean seperating and catering to the elite? YES. Decisions for the majority doesn't develop the minority, the best! You can still have SCYSA leagues for the other clubs/teams and they'll only play one another in State Cup. If the elite teams win, then it should (CESA is now almost doing that). If the elite teams don't win then things are advancing maybe. But this way the best players are guaranteed to play and train together with top coaches.

The most important thing is the top players train, at least, 3 times a week in Columbia (central location) and move around on weekends when there's not matches. With so few top, top players, they need to be in the same environment constantly.

I know this all seems drastic and different, and there's probably a better chance of seeing SCYSA brass (like Mary Bynum) juggling 3 times, but it's needed. Get rid of administrators making soccer decisions and allow that to the best soccer people. South Carolina needs thorough and wholesale change!<<

I will say that while I don't have the expertise to critique this...what I really like is that it recognizes that change is needed for SC to offer its best players more opportunities and services.

Looking at the SCYSA board minutes for the last few months, it appears that they are looking at spending a great deal of money to build facilities in the Columbia area. As someone that lives in this area, that sounds great to me -- although I do wonder what all of the paying members of the SCYSA not in the Columbia area think. In any case, perhaps SC only has enough money to offer a single centralized training facility for ODP (unlike Georgia, in which there are distributed training centers run by the state.) That's a problem for drawing in economically disadvantaged kids -- but any change to try to do better would be welcome. What I hope is that the SCYSA can get in and enact better services for its members as quickly as possible.

>>[Beezer] U19 Aiken? If they are the original team, my bad. I just figured, like all over the country, U19 teams are usually teams where former players bring back new college teammates for one last run. I don't know U19 Aiken that well so if I spoke out of turn, apologies to them.<<

Sorry...sometimes I assume that everyone knows about the Aiken Fire -- one of two teams that have ever won regionals from SC. Every kid I saw on the U19 Aiken team I recognized from earlier Aiken Fire teams. This is a great example of a one-off group of kids, parents, and coaches who have done a wonderful job of getting their kids what they wanted from a soccer perspective and they've all built a great team.

>>Money-making? Adding a quarterfinal round and a U14 age group was more enticing for the host city/state association due to extra teams and nights of hotels/income for a bigger kick-back, which host cities/associations do get.

x: You're right. It was 12 teams (just State Cup winners) with 3 group winners and a WC. Still, 1) only 33% advanced 2) now, more revenue with four more teams per age group AND 3)an age group was added at U14 not long ago. In short, money is a factor.<<

I tend to look at money first because of my background. And I do think money is a factor (I'm still honestly trying to figure out where the $40+ a night per player for a hotel room went over and above the hotel's normal rate.)

However, it's my humble opinion that while a factor, the primary reasoning for having two go through per group and adding a younger age bracket was demand from players (and their parents) and a desire to give more teams a chance. But then again, I might just be an optimist here...

>>[who_me?] I would like to see a group such as the scsoccer.com super22 train and play together as a team someday. Any thoughts on how such a group might fare in Region play? How might these kids stack up given enough time to actually become a team? (Would this just be ODP without politics?)<<

The core problem with the Super 22 as an ODP alternative is that it's selected from the perspective of high school play. Please don't get me wrong -- I'm sure that all of these players are wonderful -- but the selection criteria isn't the same as ODP or any other open tryout-based group.

There are truly gifted players -- and I would argue players that are among the top 22 in the state -- who are not on the Super 22 -- either because they play outside of a SC high school league while living in SC, because they chose not to play high school and instead focus on college competition, or simply because their high school teams are not competitive enough.

I keep reading about the "politicization" of ODP and I have to admit that I just don't get it. In my experience, on the girls side, the ODP coaches do a pretty credible job of selection. Yes, you can argue about the girls on the "bubble" (what I consider to be the lower 1/3) as you can with any selection process, but it's really hard to argue with the players that constitute the majority of the team.

Do the best players play in ODP? While there are clear exceptions, from what I've seen the answer is typically "yes" -- again, on the girls side.

I'd personally rather see us do a better job of training within the ODP structure and making it more open in terms of financial aid as a first priority rather than spending a lot of time and energy changing the selection process. But again, I understand that this is just one person's opinion...

Chico My question was badly worded. Your point on the super22 is taken, it was just a list I had been looking at a few minutes earlier. What I was trying to ask for was peoples opinions on how a team comprised of our top SC players with enough time together to play as a team would fare. Are SC top players on par with other states?

Re: Politics (if any)in ODP. I think the perception of a problem stems from there not being a lot of people who know how teams are formed. Add to this that some club coaches are not supporters, others are. Money is also an issue. I don't think there are any back room deals being made, but several posters have implied that we may not be fielding the strongest teams we could. I don't know. I would just like to get to the point a few years from now where kids from Texas are nervous about playing a SC squad.

I've seen SC Boys ODP teams beat NTX, Oklahoma, Florida, Georgia, and NC in Regionals at Alabama. My Sons ODP team made the final of ODP Regionals (beat North Texas, Alabama/Oklahoma, Louisiana, Florida II) and lost narrowly 1-0 to Florida I, who won Nationals. No one wanted to play them, I can assure you.

Again my experience is ODP is not political. I think there was a lot in the past, but once they dumped the club coaches and moved to college coaches, the best players got selected. When it was club coaches, they didn't. So I understand people remember that.

The money and club coach (lack of) support is the other thing. As undoubtedly some players don't come out for ODP. If they do, my experience is they get picked and SC teams do well.

Some interesting things from Region III regionals:

• SC CESA U17G lost their quarterfinals match to NTX Dallas Texans 1-0. NTX Dallas Texans went on to win the Region III championship 2-0 against NC Greensboro.
• SC Bridge U16B lost their quarterfinals match to Georgia Concorde Fire Elite 1-0 in overtime. Concorde went on to win the Region III championship 2-1 over Oklahoma.
• SC CESA U16G lost their quarterfinals match to Oklahoma 2-0. Oklahoma went on to win the Region III championship 1-0 over NTX Dallas Texans.

It appears that the "luck of the draw" wasn't very kind to SC teams this year.

After defeating CESA U17G 1-0, NTX Dallas Texans won 3-0 in the semis and 2-0 in the finals, suggesting a solid showing by CESA. I agree that the draw was a rough path.

http://championships.usyouthsoccer.org/index.php?s=&url_channel_id=35&url_article_id=227&change_well_id=2

The majority of the teams advancing to finals are from the big state of TX. It is difficult to compare our best state club, CESA, to the many Atlanta area clubs, but it would be interesting to see how CESA did in comparison to the comparable club up north, CASL.

CESA U17G defeated CASL during premier league and finished ahead of them in the final standings. CESA U17G tied CASL in regional pool play, advancing out of the group; CASL did not. The confusing thing is that CESA has outperformed CASL in U17G all season, but the CASL squad has remained ranked ahead regionally and nationally.

Here's a quick comparison between CASL and CESA at regionals:

CASL 9 teams
CESA 7 teams

CASL 3 teams advance out of group play
CESA 3 teams advance out of group play

CASL U-14 Boys and U-19 Girls in Finals, U-15 Boys lose in Quarters
CESA U-15 Girls, U-16 Girls, U-17 Girls lose in Quarters

U-14 Boys CASL 1-0 over CESA
U-17 Girls CASL 1-1 with CESA

Gotsoccer.com ranks CASL 17th nationally and CESA 30th nationally.
ESPN ranks the top 15 clubs in boys and girls:
2006 CASL boys 15th CESA boys not rated
2006 CASL girls 15th CESA girls not rated
2005 CASL boys 5th CESA boys not rated
2005 neither girls rated

tommyboy: Great statistics and information!

One note: another way to look at the 2006 regional performance is as follows:

CASL: 2 teams lost in playoffs to Region III winner.
CESA: 2 teams lost in playoffs to Region III winner.

However, that's a quibble -- it's clear from the totality of your statistics that CASL is ahead of CESA. CASL's recreation program is 2X to 3X the size of CESA and CASL has done a great job of penetrating its area in terms of youth soccer.

CASL has the enviable situation of being the only main club in that large metro area, without any competing clubs, as does CESA.They are also 2 1/2 hrs from Charlotte, their main in-state competition. With those results from Regionals, it is clear that CESA is progressing to the level of CASL. But since CESA has far fewer numbers than CASL, the progress has to be based on the specialized training and excellent coaching.

Cab..why do you think that happens?

Are the U-14 Girls a cause for alarm? Are we progressing in that age group? CESA goes 0-3 at regionals and I heard the SC ODP 92 Girls got beat 9-0 yesterday by North Texas at ODP regionals in Alabama.

What's up with this age group? I know that there are some talented players at Mt. Pleasant, CESA, CUFC, Orange Crush and a few on teams in Charlotte.

As I mentioned in previous posts,

1) The ODP program has to be restructured with new personnel and curriculum
2) People like Mary Bynum and other administrators can not be making soccer decisons at all.
3) The player pools from the state have to be playing together year round, from a young age, with top coaches. Bottom line! There are not enough good players.

1) Are we moving toward achieving more regional finalists and champions faster than the other states or are we falling further and further behind?

Response: Very slowly forward but with a limit. Individual clubs are doing great, like CESA and in time Bridge FA. However, they need competition from the entire state not just every fourth match every two weeks. Even Premier League is 10-12 matches, over months, which in the development picture isn't enough.

2) What I saw yesterday before I left Little Rock was a SC team that played the #1 ranked nationally ranked team.

Response: Soccer is soccer. A SC will play well here and there against the best. We need day in and day out teams and, more importantly, players competing like this.

3) On the other hand, I read your post and wonder what your agenda must be to disregard the improvement that SC appears to be making.

Response: By no means am I disregarding SC soccer, I live here, coach here, recognize attempts (like CESA, Bridge) and want to help as much as anyone get kids the opportunities some kids are getting in top states/regions.

4) So, taking your "argument" at face value -- and I agree with your premise that SC wasn't good enough in June to be in the national pool and has never been with only a few incredibly rare exceptions -- what is your prescription for improving the performance of SC in future "June's"?

Response: My prescription is to have 1) a committee of top soccer coaches (club, college) to 2) appoint a full-time DOC and then 3) serve as his technical group and work closely in making all soccer/development decisions like league formation, training environments/curriculum and, of course ODP restructuring.

In addition, I believe the ODP pools, in this state, should be year round teams that play under a club (or maybe a SCYSA-formed Columbia club just for that matter) and play Premier League and/or US Club. Does the mean seperating and catering to the elite? YES. Decisions for the majority doesn't develop the minority, the best! You can still have SCYSA leagues for the other clubs/teams and they'll only play one another in State Cup. If the elite teams win, then it should (CESA is now almost doing that). If the elite teams don't win then things are advancing maybe. But this way the best players are guaranteed to play and train together with top coaches.

The most important thing is the top players train, at least, 3 times a week in Columbia (central location) and move around on weekends when there's not matches. With so few top, top players, they need to be in the same environment constantly.

I know this all seems drastic and different, and there's probably a better chance of seeing SCYSA brass juggling 3 times, but it's needed. Get rid of administrators making soccer decisions and allow that to the best soccer people. South Carolina needs thorough and wholesale change!

Beezer,

I've read all of your posts and I'm familiar with what you say above. I'm looking for some insight regarding this specific age group.

Sounds like you would be in favor of running Super Y teams out of the Columbia area that would be comprised of the best club players in each age group. Good idea allthough there still may be some time & money constraints facing players & parents.

A note on the difficulty of creating stand-alone Super-Y programs these days. In the olden days (2 years ago) it was pretty easy to do this. Now, there are more clubs and teams affiliated with USCS and increasingly the more ambitious/dedicated teams are gearing up for the Super Y regional/national tournament structure if they can't get in the USYSA regional/national tournament structure [due to not winning a state championship or winning RIIIPL-East or not being selected as a wildcard for RIIIPL].

ALL age groups, both genders! It's ignorant for clubs and coaches in South Carolina to think with the "we have it all" mentality.

Men and women, the player pools ARE NOT deep enough to compete CONSISTENTLY and top players have to be together all the time.

A random example here and there doesn't equal improvement and consistency.

Will it happen? No, because that would effect results and income for DOCs.

OUCH!! You hit the nail on the head there..The almighty dollar

I'd like to see a Super-Y team in the Midlands area for summer play -- much like the AAU baseball and basketball teams.

What is the process to get this done? This could be a great tool for summer exposure.

>>[Kevin Heise] I'd like to see a Super-Y team in the Midlands area for summer play -- much like the AAU baseball and basketball teams.

What is the process to get this done? This could be a great tool for summer exposure.<<

You either create a new club or take an existing club and you register it with USCS. You then go through the same process of attracting and selecting players that you do on teams registered with USYSA/SCYSA except that once the team is formed you register the team itself with USCS.

I perceive the difficult thing here given the increasing competition between the club, USYSA/SCYSA schedules, and the USCS schedules to be attracting the players that are ambitious enough to do this and not already involved with a program, team, and/or club in which there would be conflicts.

>>[Beezer] ALL age groups, both genders! It's ignorant for clubs and coaches in South Carolina to think with the "we have it all" mentality.<<

Isn't it equally ignorant to believe that based on demographics alone that a South Carolina-wide state team can compete with the top clubs? After all, Dallas as a metropolitan area has more people than South Carolina as a state. And the top Dallas clubs draw from an area much wider than the Dallas metropolitan area.

>>Men and women, the player pools ARE NOT deep enough to compete CONSISTENTLY and top players have to be together all the time.<<

Using population/demographics to predict competitiveness is an excellent foundation for any type of youth soccer discussion; however, it is extremely limiting if that's the only thing you're using. Basically, if you look at the top youth soccer clubs in the nation, you can find plenty of exceptions -- CASL out of the Raleigh area and ESC/HFC out of Oklahoma City are the most obvious.

>>A random example here and there doesn't equal improvement and consistency.<<

I agree that anecdotal evidence of one team isn't compelling. And yet assuming that the only thing we have to do is to form a statewide team and expect kids to spring up in Charleston and Greenville and Aiken and Rock Hill that are so ambitious with respect to soccer that they are willing to drive 1.5 hours to multiple training sessions per week doesn't seem valid.

In my opinion, if you're going to try to compete with top club teams nationally, the first and foremost thing to do is to increase your foundation of kids playing soccer. In other words, focus on getting more kids involved at the recreation and above level so that over time you can achieve a critical mass of kids that might be willing and able to participate more broadly on any team, regardless of geography, that has the ambition to compete regionally and nationally.

>>[Beezer] Will it happen? No, because that would effect results and income for DOCs.<<

Let me try to recap your argument here; please correct me where I'm missing something. The only way for SC to compete consistently on a regional and national basis is to create statewide teams that train together a lot. The only thing in the way of this are the club DOC's who stand in the way because of their focus on winning and money.

Basically, it's the competitive structure among clubs in SC that is the issue with the individual profit-motive of DOC's causing behavior that is not only ignorant but malicious as well at least at the DOC level.

To fix this, we need a less competitive structure in the state so that we can communally work together for better results at a regional and national level.

Using the ODP structure but changing it significantly to increase competency within that structure is the answer.

Okay...let's get to your specific proposals.

>>1) The ODP program has to be restructured with new personnel and curriculum<<

It seems to me that the ODP program has changed significantly with college coaches taking over most age groups and bringing "next level" training with them. Specifically, are there other personnel being excluded or curricula being ignored that need to be included?

>>2) People like Mary Bynum and other administrators can not be making soccer decisons at all.<<

Specifically, what soccer decisions are being made by the ODP administrators that are the issue?

>>3) The player pools from the state have to be playing together year round, from a young age, with top coaches. Bottom line! There are not enough good players.<<

As I noted before, this is a bit of a chicken and egg problem. You condemn the club/DOC structure on the one hand but you've offered nothing that would increase the depth of our player pool beyond aggregating the best players from the existing club structure and having them train together more. ODP personnel already get tremendous complaints concerning what training [and associated travel] that exists. Isn't the true root cause that we need more players from whom highly ambitious players can arise who are more willing to take on the hardships associated with traveling several hours multiple times per week for training?

One point I think should noted. My daughter has noted SEVERAL times that she and her teammates (a premier league team) feel that they play too few high level matches with consistency. What I heard this year made me recognize that the spring hurts SC club teams heading to regionals, who are already at some disadvantages (such as population of the state as a pool of players). High school play and the college pool were competitive, but the teams were splintered. I feel that our top teams need to play together against top competition throughout the year leading up to regionals; that may put us over the top without any other changes. Teams, at least at the club where my daughter plays, is receiving extremely high-quality TRAINING and preparation, but match play may hold the key. How much impact does a spring club season have on other states' relative success at regionals? Chico, got stats on that? Anyone?

Doesn't Georgia maintain their "classic" season through the spring even though HS ball is being played? Don't they have a "friendly" league during this time to maintain the competition?

They play their classic state championships in May and June for all ages, then they go to regionals...

Ga. has spring friendlies but only for U15 & U16-
http://www.gasoccer.org/team/divsched.asp?o=672&wzb=1&g=3066649&p=0
But Ga. does have a lot more year round tournaments available for its club teams.
http://www.gasoccer.org/org/orgtourntypes.asp?o=672&wzb=1&ccatid=77274
The Super Cup is right before Regionals-
http://www.gsasoccer.com/supercup/

And, a Georgia team, Concorde Fire Elite, just happened to win the U16 Regional.

There are exceptions and most of those are from such large populations with alot of players to choose.

As far as driving 1.5 hours, one-way three times a week? That's not alot considering what's going on around the country. It's the norm and there are alot of players doing at least that to get what they need. There is sacrifice involved.

I agree with better development at younger ages, however, there is always a time when the best can go with the other best to make things the highest level possible. Whether you have 50, 500 or 5,000 players, there is always the top 18-24 that can push each other to the next level. And that needs to start young.

In a state like SC, you have to pull from everywhere. For years, it's always "wait til this generation" or "when they get older." The numbers are always present in youth soccer registration in the U.S. But they are just numbers and not national-caliber quality. Also, there's not enough quality coaches to develop all the numbers.

ODP administrators, at least with the women, pick coaches, when a, and what, meeting is training or a match and what events to do. And, yes, quality coaches are missing. Just look at the list of coaches on the women's side. A DOC with a coaching technical board needs to all that. The administrators just collect money, email, assist tryouts, hotels/travel, etc. That's it. NOTHING soccer related.

As far as the point about enough top competition? Correct. A top pool of players can play Premier League, top tournaments, out-of-state friendlies, State Cup and most of all train with another and play 8 v 8, 11 v 11, etc if the pool is large enough.

It takes a DOC summit to do this and, again, there is too much result and financial-oriented issues for each DOC to give in, even if they know its right. And CESA thinks it has it all but it's not close in Region III and the country on a consistent basis.

I don't CESA thinks they 'have it all.' To the contrary, they are not satisfied and won't be until they first get a Regional title or more. Since SC is so small, the ideal situation would be to have one state high-tier club for each age/gender group, rather than strong regional (upstate, midstate,lowcountry) clubs which efficiently and effectively disperse the talent pool. All the 2nd and 3rd and 4th tier clubs could serve as massive feeders to the state club, with excellent, high-level competition among themselves in state, and maybe beyond. The state club would of course have to meet its requirements to play for the state title, but primarily would travel year round to top tournaments and other challenging friendlies. I know high level Concorde, Forsyth, and CASL teams travel to Surf and Dallas Cups on a regular basis. The 'large metro Atlanta population issue' would be countered with the fact that the state teams would draw from all of the state, making the population issue a moot point. But...no, it will not happen, and not so much because of financial-oriented issues for the DOC, but because of the DOC egos and territorial club issues.

2004striker, Perfectly said!

[Preface: This is getting long; I'm going to break this down into several posts.]

>>[Beezer] There are exceptions and most of those are from such large populations with alot of players to choose.<<

Actually, Raleigh and Oklahoma City are relatively small metropolitan areas; that's what makes them exceptions. What's interesting is what we can learn from the exceptions.

>>As far as driving 1.5 hours, one-way three times a week? That's not alot considering what's going on around the country. It's the norm and there are alot of players doing at least that to get what they need. There is sacrifice involved.<<

As someone who has a daughter who has for the last few years made a 3+ hour round-trip 3-4 times per week, I think that you are glossing over just how few kids in South Carolina are willing to make this type of sacrifice.

I think that your scheme will fail if for no other reason than there are not enough players in South Carolina willing to make this type of commitment. I wish I were wrong about this.

Let's take a current example. If you look at the numbers, whether it be state championships, RIIIPL-East records, region pool players, various players of the year, etc. then it's been obvious for a long time that if you're an ambitious female player you need to be playing in the upstate. Yet the actual number of women deciding to play in the upstate is relatively small. Why? Two reasons: social soccer [I want to play with my friends] and the desire not to commute to train and play.

How will a DOC summit cause more players to be willing to drive 3+ hours several times a week for the best possible training and playing opportunities?

>>I agree with better development at younger ages, however, there is always a time when the best can go with the other best to make things the highest level possible. Whether you have 50, 500 or 5,000 players, there is always the top 18-24 that can push each other to the next level. And that needs to start young.<<

I couldn't agree more with the sentiment that you are expressing. I just don't believe that there exists 18-24 players in each gender and age bracket that are willing to travel 3+ hours several times per week for training and then travel out of state to get competition by playing out of state teams from Raleigh, Atlanta, etc.

>>[Beezer] And CESA thinks it has it all but it's not close in Region III and the country on a consistent basis.<<

Who at CESA thinks that they have it all? I know a lot of folks from CESA and have never spoken to anyone that believes CESA is yet sufficiently competitive in RIIIPL-East across the board, let alone in RIIIPL or nationally.

I think you're confusing the general South Carolina perception of CESA with CESA's opinion concerning itself. Winning state championships is wonderful, and even more wonderful is consistently being a finalists in state championships and earning RIIIPL-East slots, but that is a far different thing than being consistently in the top 2-3 in RIIIPL-East -- which in turn is a far different thing than consistently winning Region III titles and going on to compete and occassionally win nationally.

Now...do I know of anyone at CESA who believes that the best thing we could do is to throw away what they have built to date? No. Do I know of anyone at CESA who believes that a South Carolina state structure is better than a South Carolina/Georgia/North Carolina/Tennessee regional structure [in effect what CESA has today with ambitious players from multiple states joining its teams]? No.

CESA has existed for two years. In that time, it's done well within South Carolina. Also in that time, it has produced teams that have consistently done better in RIIIPL-East play in terms of records and goal differentials. Perhaps more importantly, since CESA was created we've seen the creation of at least two other clubs that are clearly attempting to be more competitive regionally [Bridge and CUFC].

I've got to tell you, if I sat on the board of one of these clubs and the DOC came in and told me we needed to scrap what we had in order to go to a state-wide cooperative approach, I'd tell her/him that she/he was insane unless she/he could tell me how this would work better than what was already in place. Stating you're going to draw from all of South Carolina sounds great until you begin figuring that (a) we're excluding players from other states already in our system, (b) we won't get the players on our borders who play at CSC and elsewhere where good soccer is offered conveniently close by and (c) we don't have 18-24 players willing to travel 3+ hours per week 3 times per week for training in every gender and age bracket.

Apparently the '92 Girls finished strong after a tough first game. Anybody got any details?

Alex Ramsey with the 92 girls is a holdover in Alabama.

Congratulations to Alex. Alex will be a freshman at Rock Hill High School and she will be playing for CESA this fall after a couple of seasons with Charlotte United FC.

Quote:

---

Since the restructuring of Regionals to add a round (just for money-making), being a quarterfinalist isn't as big as one might seem. Totall teams are 12-16 per age group and 8 go through....that's 50% at least....not bad odds.

---

Beezer,
Making the quarterfinals at Regionals may not seem "big" to you but, speaking as someone who has now seen it from both perspectives (once from behind a computer screen, from afar with no child involved, and once on site, up close and personal, with a child involved), making the quarterfinals of Regionals is outstanding , in my opinion. Yes, 50% of the teams in each division do go through to the quarters, but it is not as if they randomly flip a coin to determine which 8 teams these will be! Rather this is decided by 3 tough 80 minute matches (90 minute matches for u17 and older)in near 100 degree heat, against some of the best teams in the region and nation, in which every result counts and in fact, every goal for or against counts. And, although, I can't speak for the other SC teams, I do know that the 7 CESA teams representing SC prepared themselves for this challenge in the weeks leading up to Regionals, with 3-4 practices at least per week, scrimmages on the weekends, and in the last couple weeks, numerous 2-a-day practices. So please do not insinuate that the odds were simply "good" that they'd go through to the quarters anyway. I assure you that if the CESA coaches and players had looked upon it as you do, as 50-50 being good odds and simply took their chances, they would not have been among the 8 quarterfinalists in any division. Their success at Regionals came from hard work, sacrifice, dedication, determination and incredibly gutsy performances against equally tough competitors. I believe that if you had seen the matches that I saw during my 6 days in Little Rock (not just the results on the website), you would think it was a very big deal to make it to the quarterfinals.

Granted the team I'm associated with (CESA u16G) was striving to get even further than the quarters and go on to the semis, as I'm sure the other 2 CESA quarterfinalists were, as well, but the good news on that front is that the gap is narrowing between them and the top-ranked teams that have stood in their way the past 2 years. Specifically,the CESA Premier u16G lost to Dallas Texans Red (currently ranked 5th nationally) in group play 2-0 (after losing to them last year 5-0), and lost to ESC Oklahoma (currently ranked 1st nationally) in the quarters 2-0 (after losing to them 4-0 in the quarters last year). Whereas last year these 2 teams were looked upon by our girls as nearly untouchable, this year the girls were going to the bench at halftime knowing they were in a winnable game. And believe me, Dallas Texans Red's (eventual finalist) and Edmonds SC Oklahoma's (eventual champion)level of play has not declined- the CESA level of play has risen. I heard similar observations about the other CESA teams as well. The CESA u15 girls only lost 1-0 in the quarters to the 8th ranked team nationally, and the CESA u17G lost only 1-0 in the quarters to the top ranked team nationally. It's a tough row to hoe when you're playing eventual winners in the quarterfinals. I'd venture to say that you would have possibly seen a CESA team or 2 in the semis had any of them played anyone other than eventual champions in the quarters.

Quote:

---

The State's "elite" club, if correct, has one semifinalist and three others went out in the quarters. Not very good considering there's 12 titles up for grabs and 48 semifinal spots. 1 for 48 isn't a elite club in the region, just in a poor state. What's good for South Carolina still isn't good in the big picture.

---

I'm afraid your "logic" here is a little off. True, there are a total of 48 semi-final spots but any one team can only expect to claim 1 of them, per division. Thus, SC was 1 for 11, as far as semi-finalists go (SC didn't field a u19G team), not 1 for 48.

Quote:

---

Kind of like the U.S. in the World Cup. Everyone think they are good in CONCACAF and meaningless friendlies until they step into the World Cup and are, yes, poor

---

If you are trying to say that the SC teams that represented at Regionals, including the ones that reached the quarters, are only "good" in SC, and that they are still "poor" regionally and nationally, you are way off, in my opinion.

Congratulations to all the teams that represented SC at Regionals and especially to the CESA Premier u15G, CESA Premier u16G, CESA Premier u17G on their outstanding performances in reaching the quarterfinals!! Also congratulations to the CESA Premier u15G, CESA Premier u16G, and CESA Premier u17G on their new national rankings: 37th, 34th, and 27th respectively!

I would also like to say Congratulations to the CESA DOCs and coaching staff for the successes of their teams at Regionals. Being a first time parent at Regionals, I was so impressed by the organization of the tournament, the venue (best soccer park I've ever seen) and the top-notch level of competition and even reffing! But I was also impressed by the top-notch performance of the CESA coaching staff, and the way they all worked together to encourage the successes of their teams. From the behind-the-scenes weeks of preparing their teams to compete,to the days in advance arrival at Regionals to acclimate and put the finishing touches on their team's preparation, to the at-the-moment-of-truth execution at game time, the CESA coaching staff was on top of their game. Of the matches I saw involving CESA teams (and I did see a lot),there were at least 2, sometimes 3, CESA coaches (including the head coach) on the bench at every game,to encourage, coach and support, as well as help during warm-ups. And that's not to mention the numerous other CESA coaches on hand on the sidelines observing when their schedules allowed. The CESA coaches were up early and to the fields for the first games of the day, and stayed until the very last CESA team had played each evening, as well as managing to take care of their own teams and making sure they were sufficiently prepared for their own games. It was obvious to me that this was a club effort amongst the coaches, not just individual teams that happened to play for the same club. Never was this more obvious than, when it was apparent that goal differential was going to be the determining factor as to which of two teams would advance to the quarters (1 of them a CESA team). These 2 teams were playing different opponents simultaneously on adjacent fields, and one of the CESA DOCs was radioing scoring updates to the CESA bench as the 2 games were progressing, to let the CESA team know how many more goals they would have to score in order to advance. I haven't stopped to research it but I wouldn't be surprised if CESA had more teams at Regionals than almost any other club. I think the CESA coaching staff has done a remarkable job in the last 2 years of taking their teams to a new level of competitiveness, and after watching them in action at Regionals, it's easy to see why. Congratulations on a job well-done.

One more congratulations should go out to the CESA u16G coached by Ralston Moore, who not only made it to the quarterfinals, but won the 2006 REGION III Fair Play award for their division, as well.

In terms of the number of teams that advanced out of group play, SC had 6 of the 88 total. 5 state associations had more and 5 had fewer. Florida also had 6.

SC residents comprise 4.9% of the population of Region III, yet SC teams comprised 6.8% of the 88 that advanced beyond group play.

SC ranks 9th among the 12 R3 states in population but tied for 6th in the number of teams that advanced beyond group play.

If you look at population size as a primary factor feeding clubs with quality soccer players, I'd say SC's showing at the Southern Regionals was not too bad.

Using that "logic," 1-11 isn't something to brag about. And, with Premier League spots, states can have multiple teams in the semifinals so that "48" isn't as far fetched as you explained.

Also, to some other folks, I'm not questioning the work ethic, commitment or professionalism of players, coaches and DOCs. I commend the job they are doing!

HOWEVER, the bottom line is South Carolina is not up to the level, right now, any way you paint the picture. I'm not talking about competing but WINNING. And, those who say it doesn't matter say that because they are not winning at the Region III and National. It's not hard to organize decent level American youth players to compete and keep a match close but can they play consistently well and WIN vs. the best clubs? No.

Dallas Texans and CESA should not be used in the same sentence because of a match or two. As we know, the sun shines on all dogs' places at some time.

The best players need to be with the best players, period! All those examples that came "close" and "did so well?" I'm sure there were other players around the state who could have helped to, not only win, but raise the level.

And, I disagree strongly that players wouldn't travel to be on a hypothetical top team of all the best players. And, if it's true they do not want to travel, then there's an even bigger part of the problem. Alot of the top clubs in the U.S. have a good majority of players traveling 1-2 hours, one-way, three times a week.

It's amazing how people in this state settle, justify and rationalize. We're behind! And, talk to National and Regional ODP coaches about individuals. We have a few one-off examples but they will tell you point blank: South Carolina is behind!

And, those national club rankings? Come on.

And, the statement of the SC showing being poor as way off? I'm talking of objective numbers of the final finishes and you're talking of subjective feelings as a club rep, parent, manager, fan and/or God knows what. American youth soccer at its finest!

[Preface: Before I start, I want to make sure that I make something clear -- I really think that "Beezer" is doing a great service for youth soccer in SC by raising these points. I absolutely think that the concept of "competition versus cooperation" is one that has no single right answer and that one extreme or another is harmful to providing our youth with the best possible services in terms of youth soccer.]

>>[Beezer] Using that "logic," 1-11 isn't something to brag about. And, with Premier League spots, states can have multiple teams in the semifinals so that "48" isn't as far fetched as you explained.<<

Making a comparison against "48" is illogical and misleading unless you expect SC to be able to field teams in all "48" of the after-group matches to which you refer. I thought that others, particularly "Coach P", did a good job of building some statistical frameworks that were both logical and indicative of where SC is.

Beyond the "48", however, your argument was illogical and misleading because you confused a single club's results with the results of an entire state. Here was your statement:

Quote:

---

The State's "elite" club, if correct, has one semifinalist and three others went out in the quarters. Not very good considering there's 12 titles up for grabs and 48 semifinal spots. 1 for 48 isn't a elite club in the region, just in a poor state. What's good for South Carolina still isn't good in the big picture.

---

There have been quite a few posts giving the actual breakdowns of club results from the state, and state results versus other states.

>>HOWEVER, the bottom line is South Carolina is not up to the level, right now, any way you paint the picture. I'm not talking about competing but WINNING. And, those who say it doesn't matter say that because they are not winning at the Region III and National. It's not hard to organize decent level American youth players to compete and keep a match close but can they play consistently well and WIN vs. the best clubs? No.<<

Isn't it fascinating that "It's not hard to organize decent level American youth players to compete and keep a match close..." when in fact South Carolina hasn't been able to do that in the last few decades consistently? It seems pretty hard to me! If you read other state's message boards, what you see is a growing differentiation between CESA and South Carolina -- because if you look at the records and goal differentials, you see a growing differentiation between CESA and other South Carolina RIIIPL teams. And what I see out there is that Bridge, and hopefully CUFC, is also gaining a reputation as a "new-school" South Carolina club, i.e., clubs that more consistently produce competitive RIIIPL-East teams.

>>Dallas Texans and CESA should not be used in the same sentence because of a match or two. As we know, the sun shines on all dogs' places at some time.<<

If your point is that the Dallas Texans are a much better youth soccer club at producing teams that consistently compete and win at the regional and national levels than CESA, then I think you are beating a dead horse -- no one has argued that point. What "sbs" argued is that from what she/he has seen, CESA teams are growing more competitive against the top-ranked teams nationally and regionally.

Both your point and sbs's point seem valid. However, you seem to feel that being competitive isn't a valid criteria for examining not just the absolute ranking of a state (or a club) but also the relative acceleration of a state (or a club). I think sbs would disagree; I know that I do.

>>The best players need to be with the best players, period! All those examples that came "close" and "did so well?" I'm sure there were other players around the state who could have helped to, not only win, but raise the level.<<

I'm sure that there is no club team in South Carolina that has a monopoly on the absolute best players in the state. At the same time, it is clear to competitive players that there are very few teams per age group that are regionally competitive. Thus, if players wish to "play with the best" at their particular age and gender group, the choices are typically pretty obvious.

>>And, I disagree strongly that players wouldn't travel to be on a hypothetical top team of all the best players. And, if it's true they do not want to travel, then there's an even bigger part of the problem. Alot of the top clubs in the U.S. have a good majority of players traveling 1-2 hours, one-way, three times a week.<<

So many assertions, so few facts! First, if players are willing to travel 1.5-3 hours 3 times per week to train, then we'd see many, many more players doing that to play on the few obvious regionally competitive teams in South Carolina (or Georgia, or North Carolina). Take the girls side, for example. Unless I'm mistaken, for the last two years there hasn't been many state champions that weren't a CESA team (I believe that two years ago MPSC won the U13G state championship). Before that the two constituent clubs that formed CESA dominated girls soccer to an extent that regardless of home town, only one girl Gatorade player of the year has not played at a CESA or CESA constituent club since the turn of the century. Does that mean that all or even most of the best girls in South Carolina are flocking to CESA from Columbia and Charleston? Not unless Columbia and Charleston have many fewer "great" players than the upstate. Players, even very good players, choose their club for a variety of reasons. It is not typical that South Carolina has 15-20 players in an age group willing to play 1.5+ hours away from home; if it were we'd see the recent SCYSA ruling that over 50% of players must reside in their home club's district actually have an immediate impact given the dominance CESA and its predecessor clubs have had over the years.

Secondly, please give me a few facts for your asertion that "Alot of the top clubs in the U.S. have a good majority of players traveling 1-2 hours, one-way, three times a week." You could well be correct; however, in my experience the "good majority" of the players don't do this; only a minority.

>>It's amazing how people in this state settle, justify and rationalize. We're behind! And, talk to National and Regional ODP coaches about individuals. We have a few one-off examples but they will tell you point blank: South Carolina is behind!<<

You are again beating on that dead horse. No one has argued whether South Carolina is "behind"; you are confusing location and velocity with acceleration. sbs and others have gotten on and made statements that South Carolina is catching up -- which of course implicitly renders a recognition that South Carolina is "behind." What you are doing is giving a radical solution to the problem (abandon regional/national club ambitions and go to an ODP structure) while others have pointed out that they don't think it will work (e.g., travel times, multi-state solutions versus single state solutions, etc.) or they have stated that it appears South Carolina is accelerating versus the best clubs.

>>And, those national club rankings? Come on.

And, the statement of the SC showing being poor as way off? I'm talking of objective numbers of the final finishes and you're talking of subjective feelings as a club rep, parent, manager, fan and/or God knows what. American youth soccer at its finest!<<

Actually, your "objective" numbers appear to me to be as subjective as sbs telling you the results of two years of scores against the top national teams -- both have to be taken in context.

Bottom line: while I respect your obvious sincerity and passion, I think you're quite a ways from making a reasonable, let alone compelling, case that the best path for South Carolina is to try to organize "super-ODP" teams against metropolitan-based club teams.

Apologies for discussing CESA and South Carolina in the same dialog and confusing everyone. My issue is with the level of South Carolina youth soccer not CESA. They are trying hard.

Chico, as far as competing, SC teams HAVE NOT even been consistently decent to be competitive until now with CESA, Bridge FA and others doing much better jobs in the last few years. Exactly the point.

Some better clubs, some better players and some way to organize to compete a little. Before, that's why it couldn't be done.

Let me simplify:
1) CESA is the best club in South Carolina
2) South Carolina is towards the bottom of Region III in terms of teams and individuals. Region III ODP selections and Region III Championship results show that. Those numbers are finite and objective.
3) I believe, to have consistent teams win in Region III competition, all the best players from the state need to be together. But, if responses from this topic on here indicate SC's view, there's not enough commitment.
4)South Carolina teams in semifinals and finals of Region III Championships is very low no matter what "logic" or "number" you want to use. Again, those numbers are finite and objective.

5)I'm sitting with 3 DOCs (from NC and GA) at the Score at the Shore female event in Greensboro as I write this. Off the top of their heads, they estimate over 75% of their top U15-U18 players travel at least an hour, one-way to training which is 3 times a week. It's not always distance but with traffic it's still very time consuming.

1.5 hours a short distance in traffic vs. 1.5 hours a longer distance in no traffic. Is there a difference?

6) I don't want super ODP teams. Just SC club teams with all the best players. Will it happen? No. Will South Carolina teams win with just talent from an hour or less? No. Is it really unreasonable to say the best need to be with the best because we don't have enough quality to be seperate?

I hope that was simple and logical this time.

>>[Beezer] Let me simplify: [...]
2) South Carolina is towards the bottom of Region III in terms of teams and individuals. Region III ODP selections and Region III Championship results show that. Those numbers are finite and objective.<<

It depends on whether you choose to denominate this with numbers such as population or not [as Coach P demonstrated]. However, if you choose not to denominate, then there's no doubt that SC has a low number of pool selections, region team selections, national team selections, and RIII semifinalists and champions.

>>3) I believe, to have consistent teams win in Region III competition, all the best players from the state need to be together. But, if responses from this topic on here indicate SC's view, there's not enough commitment.<<

I actually believe that you hit the nail on the head here -- that there's not enough commitment. I'm not arguing that people shouldn't be more committed; I've simply been trying to argue that they are not. In addition, as I'll discuss below, there are structural issues with respect to our affiliating organizations and their recent rulings.

>>4)South Carolina teams in semifinals and finals of Region III Championships is very low no matter what "logic" or "number" you want to use. Again, those numbers are finite and objective.<<

Again, it depends on whether you choose to denominate this with numbers such as population or not. If you choose not to denominate, then the count is very low. Even if you choose to denominate, you can find examples that prove what South Carolina clubs and teams could do, but don't.

Let's go further in this. When you look at Oklahoma, you find that they have a much better RIIIPL presence in terms of ODP and championships and the like than you'd expect from their population. Why? Well, it turns out that Oklahoma City and Tulsa both are hotbeds of soccer. These cities are approximately 90 miles apart, and when you talk to parents you find that both cities compete with each other for players. It has resulted in good performance even when compared to wonderful programs like North Texas's Dallas Texans.

However, you need to understand that this is not the model that South Carolina has chosen to enact. Last spring, the SCYSA actually created a ruling that over half of the players from any team in a club must come from that district; thus, having 51% of the players of a team based in Columbia [for example] come from Greenville and Charleston [again, for example] would not be a valid SCYSA team.

The problem isn't only one of commitment, it's also one of top-down structure. It speaks to a strong bias against highly competitive soccer in South Carolina.

>>5)I'm sitting with 3 DOCs (from NC and GA) at the Score at the Shore female event in Greensboro as I write this. Off the top of their heads, they estimate over 75% of their top U15-U18 players travel at least an hour, one-way to training which is 3 times a week. It's not always distance but with traffic it's still very time consuming.

1.5 hours a short distance in traffic vs. 1.5 hours a longer distance in no traffic. Is there a difference?<<

That's fascinating...thank you for sharing this...I absolutely love information like this. Several comments with respect to it:

• My guess is that those DOC's are from Atlanta, Charlotte, and/or Raleigh [totally a guess here].
  
• I've found people in larger metropolitan areas to be more tolerant of time spent commuting than people in smaller areas due to the feeling that they have little choice (at least that's how I've felt when I lived in larger cities.)
  
• I'm not sure if there's a difference between 1.5 hours in traffic versus non-traffic besides the obvious fuel consumption differences; however, there is an actual 50% difference between 1 hour and 1.5 hours and there may (or may not be) an even larger perceptual difference. As an actual example, my guess is that there are kids that are commuting 45-60 minutes to play on the LCSC U17B team coached by Berson. My guess is that those kids, and their parents, view that commute across Columbia very differently than commuting to Bridge or CESA.
  
• Please note that the SCYSA has actually created a ruling at the request of NECSA to prohibit this if that 75% of kids were to come from "out of district." Thus, not only do you have a possible commitment problem, you have a structural problem from the state-based USYSA organization as well.
  

Here's the issue we're both having -- you're preaching to the converted. My kid asked to commute when she was 13. But I've seen, over and over, that many very good players just aren't going to do it. Should they? It's a personal decision -- but I don't see it occurring for the top 20 players in SC in each gender and age group. Could it eventually occur? Sure! But attitudes would have to change quite a bit, in my opinion.

>>6) I don't want super ODP teams. Just SC club teams with all the best players. Will it happen? No. Will South Carolina teams win with just talent from an hour or less? No. Is it really unreasonable to say the best need to be with the best because we don't have enough quality to be seperate?<<

I'm with you. I'd like to see the best players commit the time and energy to go to the best teams within a 100 mile radius of their home. I don't think we disagree on what we'd like to see -- however, I don't see it occurring.

>>I hope that was simple and logical this time.<<

Thanks...absolutely great post!

>>HOWEVER, the bottom line is South Carolina is not up to the level, right now, any way you paint the picture. I'm not talking about competing but WINNING. And, those who say it doesn't matter say that because they are not winning at the Region III and National. It's not hard to organize decent level American youth players to compete and keep a match close but can they play consistently well and WIN vs. the best clubs? No.<<

Even if you were to get the best players all together for an agegroup it isn't a gaurantee that they will win like you think. And when they don't win regionals their first year together they are all gonna be like "well screw this" and then go back to their clubs where they don't have to travel as far for practice. And wouldn't all the other states just figure out that we are getting the best players from around the state and then do the same which would just put us back behind them once again. I just don't think there is a solution to us becoming better than teams like Dallas Texans on a consistent basis.