SC Soccer Forums SCSoccer.com Forums Club Soccer & ODP SC Challenge Cup

One thing that hasn't gotten much discussion with respect to the challenge cup results are the expectations with respect to each club.

For example, I was disappointed in CESA for not increasing their year-over-year number of finalists. I do believe that South Carolina soccer is measurably getting better and that CESA holding its level of performance in this area meant that the club did better, but in my opinion given the CESA goals of regional and national competitiveness they have to find ways of getting better faster. And while I was incredibly impressed with the sweep in the younger age groups last spring in terms of championships, I was disappointed that the club only secured four of the eight championships this year. Another disappointment was the club not exceeding the RIIIPL-East win/loss percentage average.

Is my disappointment "fair"? Absolutely not. I just had high expectations for the club. In my opinion, CESA is head and shoulders above any club in South Carolina -- I just want it to be even better. Winning an RIIIPL-East title and having 5 challenge teams make it to the semi-finals were part of some wonderful achievements.

I'm wondering what folks from other clubs, in particular CUFC and Bridge, thought in terms of their expectations. (Note: It would be great to hear from other folks at other clubs -- the problem is that at most other clubs people seem focused almost entirely on one or two teams instead of the club itself.) I know that before the season started there were those that expected much more parity this year; since that didn't occur, is there disappointment, acceptance of the status quo, overwhelming joy, or what?

Chico,

I agree with on the statement that CESA as a whole is head and shoulders above any other club in South Carolina. There is no doubt that their leadership and staff are top notch. On the girls side, there is no doubt that CESA is dominant. 3 out of 4 championships clearly shows that, but on the boys side, I believe that the parity is showing a little more. When you look at 4 different clubs winning a boys championship, that shows no dominance by anyone.

I am not wanting to dispute the power of CESA. I actually think that others are trying to bring together better players because of CESA's dominance. This may not be a club direction, but is definitely happening with individual teams.

The one thing that I think makes a big difference is the attitude of the clubs concerning the behavior of their players when representing the club. When my boys played with GFC, the expectations were high to not bring embarassment to the team/club while representing the club. This included tournaments (at hotels, fields...). I think having the deeper pool of players helps this because of competition for playing time, but not having as many players shouldn't allow the ethics of the program to slip. I have heard many coaches say that they are not the parent, they are the coach. I believe that many people mold and shape children as they grow and a partnership between the parents and a coaches can be invaluable.

Once again, I agree with you about the dominance of CESA, but I think that it is the open thinking of the leadership, their willingness to do what it takes to get better and their ability to let the coaches and coaching directors run the soccer side while the administration is done by the board. CESA (GFC was this way also) is the only club I have seen where the decisions for the teams are not driven by the desires of the people that volunteer to help the club.

From Day 1 of the CESA merger (my child came from St Giles), I have been impressed with and proud of the PROFESSIONAL quality of CESA. I think, as RCates noted, that is the reason CESA has had so much success. On the girls side this is emphatically the case. In fact, our girls complain that the parents are TOO quiet even during the matches. This comment was made as well by a ref at a tournament. Coaches coach, directors direct, and parents parent.

I was pleased that Bridge fielded a 15 and 17 group on the girls side this year..I think both finished third..It's not a championship but it's a start...Boys side has to be somewhat of a letdown after last year..As much as I would like to see this club grow in size..It is going to be a difficult task when you have clubs within twenty miles of each other that will not join the alliance...A few players seem to trickle over from MPSC and CUSC but to me..not nearly enough..Two examples of this was last spring at districts Bridge U13b and MPSC U13b both lost while playing at the same time and location and this past weekend we had Bridge U17G and MPSC U17G playing against each other for third and fourth place..These players need to be together.I would like or my expectation would be that players that live around twenty miles apart to come together and train..

Chico,
Don't be so hard on the club! You indicated that 5 Challenge level teams made it to the semis, and some may have made the finals. That is a true sign of the overall quality of CESA -not just attaining a few state championships and a PL championship. Given that the U17G final had 2 CESA teams is a prime example of the total quality of the club. Maybe some of those Challenge girls should have made the Premier team during tryouts....I don't know. I would much rather be involved with a club that considers every single boy or girl on the field, no matter the level of soccer, as someone who can contribute to the success of their club in their own respective manner. I would much rather be involved with a club that has say 4 or 5 state titles, and 5 Challenge teams in the semis; than a club that has 8 state titles, yet has no other successs at any lower level. That is the real sign of a quality club.

Chico,
what teams won Championships this past weekend? I can not find a complete listing of the Championship and finalist teams. Can you help a brother out?

"For example, I was disappointed in CESA for not increasing their year-over-year number of finalists."

Chico, what the heck would Jack Welch say about this!! Sounds like incrementalism to me......

"Coaches coach, directors direct, and parents parent"

now there's an idea...

>>[Steve] "Coaches coach, directors direct, and parents parent"<<

That's not Columbia-area soccer as I know it! Here it many times seems to be "Parents dictate, threaten, and micromanage, coaches suffer" or something along those lines.

>>[Big Daddy] Chico, what the heck would Jack Welch say about this!! Sounds like incrementalism to me......<<

Mea culpa, mea culpa, mea maxima culpa.

And yet the problem is that in trying to set a goal for state finalists when you have 75% of them gets to be tough. I think that 100% is a great "stretch" goal but the nature of soccer, and the "one and done" system of the state cup, makes that very, very tough to achieve. So I fell back to incrementalism to try to explain my disappointment.

The core reality of looking at only "in-state" goals is that with my CESA hat on I'd like to see CESA achieve higher finalists counts (i.e., have their premier and challenge teams in the finals as in the competitive U17G match). This is tough to do as well; this year CESA only had it occur in one age group/gender. But I like talking about and differentiating "in-state" goals versus "regional" or "national" goals because I think it gets you thinking more about the club as a whole and not just the "Premier" teams.

Again, I have high expectations for CESA. The truth is that getting five "Challenge" teams into the quarterfinals was a big accomplishment. But the club got six in last year, and of the 32 slots I was hoping to see a lot more challenge teams this year. To do this, CESA is going to have to be more consistent in terms of winning in the South Carolina Challenge League so that they get more favorable, and less intra-club, early seeding.