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

[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.

>>[Beezer] >>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.<<

>[cabj12] 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.<

You're right that there are no guarantees -- and furthermore you're right that there would be kids who would get discouraged. My only comment here is that clubs that invest in remote training (e.g., CESA in Asheville, Bridge in Myrtle Beach, etc.) are less prone to being hurt by this and open up more choices in our communities.

>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.<

One "advantage" SC has as a small state is that it's geograpically small. It's going to be difficult for Texas and other states to match simply because they are geographically large.

I think Beezer was onto something when he talked about commute time being 1+ hours in the major metropolitan areas in Georgia and North Carolina. It seems to me that because in those areas there are more players, that you have a higher raw number of players willing to make that type of sacrifice. I don't think the issue is one of travel as much as it is one of not having the numbers of kids at our foundation such that at the elite levels we have kids willing to sacrifice as much as other kids -- at least at this time.

>I just don't think there is a solution to us becoming better than teams like Dallas Texans on a consistent basis.<

You could be right...but looking at what sbs said and looking at the last two years of results in RIIIPL-East...it does appear to me that South Carolina is getting better faster than the rest of RIIIPL-East. Is it fast enough/good enough? That's the question...

Regarding the 1+ hours commute time. It's not just GA and NC. It's happening here now with CUFC and I'm sure it also happens with CESA and BridgeFA. We have players that live out past Chapin and will be traveling over an hour to practice once per week in the Northeast area. Likewise, players that live in Elgin traveling to Ballentine. There have always been a few of these, but it's going to be a regular thing in Columbia now with CUFC. I have to believe that it's the same at CESA and BridgeFA.

To build the competitive teams I keep reading about in this thread...It seems to me that the Columbia area would be the place to start..It's about an hour and a half from most clubs in the state and I think more parents would make that drive instead of three hours to Greenville..If we can agree on this then the next question is how do we get the most competitve players and coaches from the most competitve club to travel to Columbia a couple a days a week? It would be a hard sell to convince those that this would be in soccer's best interest in South Carolina when they already have the strongest club in the state

>>[Coach P] We have players that live out past Chapin and will be traveling over an hour to practice once per week in the Northeast area.<<

Why only once per week? I heard that there's at least one practice in Ballentine as well, but where does the third [or fourth, or whatever] practice occur each week?