SC Soccer Forums SCSoccer.com Forums Club Soccer & ODP U13 and up challenge league Fall 06

Coach P: Respectfully, when we're talking about analyzing clubs, we have to pay attention to what the club itself says about itself. CUFC calls its teams "Elite", "Challenge", and "Classic." At U15 and above, every team playing in the challenge league is an "Elite" or "Challenge" team.

Isn't it somewhat logical to believe that the average "Elite" or "Challenge" team of the second largest club in the state would be strong in challenge league?

Look -- it's not like CUFC is doing poorly across the board. The U18G Elite team, for example, is doing much better in RIIIPL-East play than the typical South Carolina team. CUFC has some fine teams. It's not a specific team or teams that are being questioned; it's the club as a whole. The fundamental questions in my mind are trying to understand what's going on and trying to understand what could be done better.

I was only responding to the post that I quoted which was referring to an individual team: "...noone would field a team in the highest league if you did not feel you could win."

Ah, Chico......What's in a name? That which we call a rose?.......

Maybe we should get rid of the Elites and the Premiers and go to colors. What would happen if a CUFC team and a Bridge team finished ahead of a CESA team in a certain age group......and took the Premier spots? Would that CESA Premier team then be playing in Challenge the following season? Wouldn't that be a misnomer?

Coach P I respectfully disagree...

Every club in the state has development as a goal for its players. But development is both age and skill specific.

I agree you should play competetive teams to develop the players knowledge and skill but it should be done in the right environment.

If I followed your logic then Bridge 94 Gold should should be playing with the 92s simply because they will be challenged more.

Getting physically, technically and tacticaly beaten every game does not promote learning and most of all enjoyment of the game. A coach should not only challenge their team, but then also provide success. After all we should be teaching that learning to play the game well will result in enjoyment of a job well done, a win, etc.. This should be presented by a coach to his parents at the beginning of the season.

You cannot learn to win without learning to lose, but you only learn one thing if you always lose.

So it would seem to me that a better strategy may be to place them in challenging tournaments or scrimmages/friendlies and provide opportunity for success elsewhere.

Lastly by U15 (probably U16 for girls) those who will play at the highest level have already develop their interest and the technic and basic tactics necessary to play the game well. At this time higher level players are introduced to speed of play and mainly team tactics in attacks /formation/defense, etc.

So placing two teams in the highest league available simply because you have the numbers makes no sense unless the capability to compete exists. Therefore a choice was made to place teams in the league.

CESA and Bridge, to my knowledge do not place teams in the highest level unless they can compete. The results show in chart. Even their B teams are high competetive teams.

Thou art thyself, though not a Montague.

In its first year, CESA had teams in the same age and gender group playing premier -- one a CESA Premier team, another a CESA Challenge team. CESA has a Premier team playing both Premier and Challenge leagues this year. It's not a bijective mapping. Teams compete at the highest level that they possibly with the baseline described by the name.

There seems to me to be a whole world of difference between that and the argument that a "Challenge" team would be playing in the classic league. If I'm a parent and my kid plays in "Challenge", I expect a certain level of competition and if I get more I'm thrilled. If I get less, then I start thinking I was misled.

Lexcoach,
I don't really disagree with your points from a club perspective. Our decision was one made at a single team level and I still believe it was the right one.

We have scrimmaged a couple of the Classic teams and winning by a landslide does not help our development.

AHHHH!!! I know those decisions well. Good Luck with your season.

Chico;

So reading between the lines which is it a) challenge and Elite level players who are not being trained to their potential by CUFC (HUMM CESA-Columbia) or b) classic level players who are just being mislabeled as challenge teams.

Hurst ...maybe we should name the leagues by colors that way we can keep the names.

Otherwise I think I will be forming an elite premier titanium challenge team to play in the fall of 07.