SC Soccer Forums SCSoccer.com Forums Club Soccer & ODP Clubs Earning Respect

[Preface: I've taken this to a more appropriate area of the board.]

>>[The Fan] LCSC club sometimes doesn't get the respect that they have earned.<<

Help me out here; what respect has LCSC "earned?"

I'm aware that this is a somewhat inflammatory question; however, I'm not asking to try to make a point but rather so that someone out there can tell me the answer. In other words, please treat this as an honest question rather than my trying to disparage the club -- I believe that there very well might be things going on I don't understand here.

I am aware of a team or two that has "earned" respect over the years; I am at this time unaware of what the club as a whole has done to "earn" respect.

To put this another way -- ignoring that every now and then Lexington has a group of team-oriented parents and players that get together and do whatever it takes to field a very good team -- what has and/or is the club doing for all of the teams and players in the club such that the task of those team-oriented parents and players is made easier?

What is the club doing to try to grow the sport of youth soccer?

What is the club doing to reach out to areas such as Gilbert, Swansea, etc. and try to create a more compelling set of services that would attract more kids?

About as much as Discovery in York Cty!

"When the facts change, I change my mind. What do you do, sir?" John Maynard Keynes

Recently came across something that gave me the hope that a new day might be dawning at LCSC. This link gives the tryout material for LCSC. [Note: This is not the easiest to find material and can't be referenced directly by URL on their web site; thus I pulled it off and placed it in a linkable location.]

Several interesting notes:

• LCSC has entered the "licensed coaches" war begun by CUFC with a vengeance -- stating it has the most highly qualified coaching staff in the midlands and calling out having 4 A licensed coaches.
  
• LCSC really put an emphasis on focusing on the player as a distinguishing feature of the club.
  

Interesting stuff...

Chico,

Chico,

Yes your question can open up a dialogue that wars could be fought over. However, I am going to answer that question in general as a parent of Club players. There seems to be a bias among high school coaches, in general, very strongly against Club soccer in this state. I feel that this is a power struggle from the high school coaches because they, in general, know that coaching wise they can't offer the same quality of coaching to their high school teams. Thus, it appears to be easier to puff out their chests and try to make life miserable for the players that participate in Club and Club sponsored events.

It is my opinion that these referenced (remember, in general)should be VERY thankful to the clubs for supplying the high schools with quality players that actually know how to play the game. But they just can't seem to do this.

Now, to answer your question not specific to any one club, a Club offers team practice averaging 3 times a week from August to December with certified and devoted to soccer and it's advancement coaches. These guys live and breathe their soccer and share the love of the game with these kids almost year round. The players have specific training - they have team practice and the GK's have a separate training session just for GKing. I do not know of a high school that does this, but if there is kudos to them!!! Another huge benefit of Club soccer is that the aspect of playing as a team is pushed very hard by the Clubs and the coaches. I actually challenge anyone who loves soccer to go watch a high school soccer match and I assure you, you will know who has played Club and who hasn't JUST by watching the field.

It would be ideal if we could get the resisting high school coaches to come off their high horse and actually work with the Clubs in their area AND to quit punishing the Club players when they have a Club event!

I think that most high school coaches in 2007 are also involved in club soccer or either have been in the past. Don't know of much resistance between the two areas. What's your angst ntheno?

My point is that there are some "old school" (for lack of a better word) coaches in this state that do very much resist working with Clubs. The ones that lose out in this situation are the kids who aspire to play college level ball. These kids and their families know that the exposure to the college coaches is through their Club, NOT high school. If both entities worked together in entirety, soccer in this state would benefit greatly.

Congrats to Colubia United FC for engaging High School programs by sponsoring the "Clash of the Carolinas" All-Star Games. That's a glaring example of a Club Earning Respect.

>>[ntheno] There seems to be a bias among high school coaches, in general, very strongly against Club soccer in this state.<<

I don't know of any high school coaches who are biased against youth club soccer. I do see a case-by-case situation in which different high school coaches allow participation in club spring events.

>>I feel that this is a power struggle from the high school coaches because they, in general, know that coaching wise they can't offer the same quality of coaching to their high school teams. Thus, it appears to be easier to puff out their chests and try to make life miserable for the players that participate in Club and Club sponsored events.<<

Let's take this from the high school coach's perspective. Their job is to represent the team, not the individual player. Thus, when a player wants to blow off a practice or a game, the coach has to be concerned with the team first and the individual player second. From the player/parent perspective, it's about the individual first and the team second. It's these two perspectives that can put a high school coach and a player/parent at odds.

Do certain high school coaches handle this situation better than others in trying on a case-by-case basis to optimize the good of the team and the good of the individual? Absolutely.

So what does a player/parent do if they feel that their coach is "unfair?" There are three options: talk the coach into your position, accept the coach's decision, or quit. That's it.

What I like about this is that this is typically the option in the "real world" of employment when you have a boss with whom you disagree. Helping the player understand that these are the only three options, and then helping the player deal with the situation, is pretty much all that you can do.

While it's easy to see both sides of this, I'll state one strong opinion -- this is the reason we need clubs in South Carolina offering a full range of spring events -- so that players (and parents of players) have options.

>>[ntheno] My point is that there are some "old school" (for lack of a better word) coaches in this state that do very much resist working with Clubs.<<

Agreed.

>>The ones that lose out in this situation are the kids who aspire to play college level ball.<<

Only if they choose to play high school and is a member of a club that has only events that directly conflict with high school practices and games.

This is one of the reasons that if your kid wants to play college ball, that you want that kid to be a member of a club that offers many opportunities to play during the spring instead of just one or two.

Conversely, the kid should have enrolled in CESA CAP. It's an open program and there are enough events such that you can find one which doesn't conflict with a high school practice or game.

>>These kids and their families know that the exposure to the college coaches is through their Club, NOT high school.

99% agreed. I would note, however, that there have been Division 1 coaches at some of the Lexington girls games, however (e.g., Auburn.) But you're right 99% or more of the time.

>>If both entities worked together in entirety, soccer in this state would benefit greatly.<<

Agreed.

>>[Manchester] Congrats to Colubia United FC for engaging High School programs by sponsoring the "Clash of the Carolinas" All-Star Games.<<

Sounds great!!! I missed that announcement; could you provide a pointer to it?

>>That's a glaring example of a Club Earning Respect.<<

Well...for good and bad...I don't think that there's another club in the state any more tightly linked to high school soccer than CUFC. Another very different way of doing things than Bridge or CESA -- and different is good in that different competing approaches can yield different and better results.

Chico,
Thanks for your views and I am very pleased that this can be discussed calmly. The CAP program is an invaluable resource for those wanting to play college soccer and was utilized. However, there were several occasions where the players were put in a pickle b/c of hs coach saying they couldn't miss a weekend practice. The other HUGE issue is that ALL hs juniors interested in college soccer should be involved in the CAP program! And I am sorry to say but there are coaches that will not promote this program.

You made alot of very valid arguments and supported them well also. The issue at hand involving 1.talk coach into your way of thinking 2. doing what the coach says or 3. quit is very difficult when a child wants to play for his hs team. Are you suggesting that Club players NOT play HS soccer? Interesting thought.

Ahhhh...and I stupidly have my browser set up to go directly to the message board! Thanks! And congratulations to CUFC and to the high school league.

>>[ntheno] [...] The CAP program is an invaluable resource for those wanting to play college soccer and was utilized. However, there were several occasions where the players were put in a pickle b/c of hs coach saying they couldn't miss a weekend practice.<<

Understood. Absolutely don't know what to do about that one other than the player has to choose what she/he likes more -- playing high school or going to that CAP event.

I've heard of coaches threatening to get rid of players who miss a practice to do something else. I've also heard of coaches "fining" players (e.g., playing time) for missing practices. And I've heard of coaches who don't mind a couple of missed practices.

>>The other HUGE issue is that ALL hs juniors interested in college soccer should be involved in the CAP program! And I am sorry to say but there are coaches that will not promote this program.<<

It would be great if all high school soccer coaches promoted CAP, ODP, and any other program to highly ambitious players. However, it's not the job of the high school coach to promote the program; it's the job of kids interested in playing college to understand it.

If you don't feel the folks at CESA are doing a good job of getting the word out about CAP, you should tell them and let them know any thoughts you have regarding marketing and promoting it better.

>>You made alot of very valid arguments and supported them well also. The issue at hand involving 1.talk coach into your way of thinking 2. doing what the coach says or 3. quit is very difficult when a child wants to play for his hs team. Are you suggesting that Club players NOT play HS soccer? Interesting thought.<<

Yes...it's always difficult to want two conflicting things. It isn't uncommon, either for kids or for adults.

I am stating that there are only three options open, and one of those options is not playing high school. Before I went to that step, I'd try discussing it in detail with the high school coach. But at some point the discussion ends and there are two options: do what the coach says or stop playing for the coach.

Again thanks Chico. I do understand what you are saying about it not being the coach's reponsible to promote a program like CAP or ODP, my point was that they should support and endorse fully a child's desire to participate.

And as for: "But at some point the discussion ends and there are two options: do what the coach says or stop playing for the coach", the parent in me comes out in full candor and wants to ask "who is ultimately responsible for this child and thus entitled to make the decisions that are best for the child?" This mostly likely makes no sense in the mind of a coach but it is assuredly asked silently by parents of any child playing a HS sport when an opportunity presents itself for the betterment of the child and a HS coach says no. Just food for thought! Thanks!

It's a small move but I like it and respect it..
SSC classic tryouts will be free!! That's right no charge..
Good job!! Summerville

I believe CUSC also has no charge for tryouts.

Swansea has a club-Lower Lexington-and they are competitive. They have u-11, u-15, u-16, and u-18. In fact, the Girl's high school coach and assistant coach run the U-15 team (not on their high horse) comprised of girls from gilbert, pelion, and swansea.

I don't remember Coach Gerth being a coach for that club. I'm not aware of her being a coach for any club.

She doesn't the coaches from Swansea do.

Many high school coaches coach in the clubs.

Chapindad,
I understand that tryout fees are not a money making venture..
When you look at how much tryout fees are compared to what you spend in training fees and registration..it is a minimal costs..I know in the past that the tryout fees went to pay the trainers that ran tryouts..
I just think that this is an area where there should be no charge to the parents because in the end we want these kids to choose our or your club over the rest..right?
As far as trying out at different clubs....competition has driven us to this..Our child always tries out for two or three clubs and then she picks the best situation for her

coldhardtruth,

Not all players have the talent to try out for several clubs, and pick which premier team is the best fit. Seems to me, the only reason to try out for several teams is to have a fall back option in case your child fails to make their team of choice.

sweet feet, WOW, what a rude thing to say. There could be many reasons for trying out for different teams and would vary by clubs and age groups and individual players. Your scenario could be one of many. To assume that is the reason is one of the meanest, most negative posts I've seen here.

Soccer05
Sorry you took my post that way, What would be the reason to always try out for several teams ?

Sweetfeet,
I just received our fourth flyer from a soccer club letting us know when tryouts are..And for the fourth time in a row the dates are exactly the same as the other three...Do you only shop at Wal mart?..Talented? Every club wants your child to tryout for them first..Most clubs offer all levels of soocer why assume my child plays premier? My child actually looks at more than winning as a choice to join a team..If my posts came across as arrogant..then you took it the wrong way..I do feel that you should not limit your choice to one no matter what level a child plays..

sweet feet, if you did not intend malice, I apologize.
I don't think you would "always" try out for more than one. In our age group, we have more and more players who are moving to other clubs or as they get older they decide to pursue other things. Our club may not have enough players to field a challenge team and is why we are trying out for two teams for the first time in six years.
In our area BFA is a great idea, but until all the clubs get together, you may have a team one year and not the next. There's also the kid that makes a premier team and may choose to play on another team because of playing time. There are high school coaches that are coaching club and can only have a certain # of the same players. You could be a better player but not make it because of the #'s rule and positions needed. Or making the club team with the high school coach could keep you from playing varsity until Junior year. Other issues are that clubs are not announcing until after tryouts who the coach will be, practice field locations and even which club will field the team.
I know some clubs are more united and organized than this and would not have these issues, which may be why these situations are not known to you.
Again, sorry, if I took it the wrong way.

CHT - we've received five. One from a club two hours away. Where are they getting our info from?

Soocer05,
I see we are in the same area...and you are correct!! It all comes down to numbers here in the lowcountry..Lots of things come in to play down here...Same senario happen to us when BFA started..Up until that time we only played for one club..So you received your CUFC flyer today too? I think we get all these because our kids are registered within the state for soocer..You should see the crazy places we get fliers from for summer camps..Sorry about the numbers again within your club maybe one day all these clubs will be on the same page..

I have never figured out the reason to charge a child or children to try-out. I think clubs should do everything in their means to get any and all kids to try-out for the differnet levels. I think having a fee limits certian Kids from having the opportunity to try-out. After 10+ years being around and active in club soccer i think the Focus on development has been lost and most clubs have become a Business.

My big problem with paying for tryouts is it seems that the coaches already know who they want on the team and who they don't want on the team (with just a couple of exceptions). So to charge $30 for everyone when they are really only looking at a few is.....(you fill in the blank).

Some might call that supporting the club and ultimately youth soccer in south carolina. You could actually consider it more of a contribution than the dues, league fees and uniform fees which are self serving in a way.

I agree with Soccer16, the nominal fee clubs charge for tryouts is put right back in the soccer community.

Sure, some might view it as supporting the club. Others might resent that because they already support the club in a variety of ways (volunteering, donations , etc.) I believe that if more of the parents realized what went on with the tryout process, they would a little bit upset at the fee. Like someone else said, shouldn't the goal be to get more to tryout? So to me, the club is just "taking" this money because some players have no shot at making a team and the coaches know it.

So the problem isn't really the fee but the "tryout process"? Yes the goal should be to get as many as possible to tryout but the club must protect itself in some way against mass tryout and then rejection by selected players. Who controls the process anyways the players or the club? By the club requiring a small fee to tryout they are recouping some of their risk exposure as it relates to the club as a whole. I would expect most clubs to return feedback on reasons a player was not selected for the team. But yet again most of the big clubs are trying to serve all levels of soccer by having the various levels offered so they will be working with most to take those skills to the next level.

Let me try to explain the fees this way. There is currently a structure in place where a child can play soccer and not pay a tryout fee. This structure is built to provide soccer to the largest audience possible while trying to keep costs low for the players. It is called recreational soccer.

Club soccer on the other hand is meant for the select few players that want to enjoy a more demanding soccer environment and are willing to pay the high costs involved in bringing it to them. They want to have qualified coaches, more practices, and greater competition to name a few. All these things take a very heavy financial commitment from the club and the player. The club is a lot of times forking over loads of money before they collect a cent from the players. There are many logistical reasons for this; such as ordering uniforms, t-shirts, locking in coaches, land fees, soccer equipment and on and on. If the club waited for the money to be collect by all the parents then the season would be over before they could afford anything. Now that you realize a club has to prepay all these items then you can make the leap that they would like to know in advance how many players they will be fielding. Locking in the coaches is one of the biggest expenses for a club and also one of the hardest things to do. To top it off parents and players are asking clubs to tell them who the coaches are 3 months before tryouts even start for every team. So how does a club know how many players are actually looking to play and provide the financial commitment and not just signed up for the heck of it because it was free? How does a club know how many coaches to lock up? Is it fair to ask a coach just to wait to see if there is work, or does the coach have a reasonable expectation that the club will do its best to make sure they have a team to coach? So the fee is earnest money for the club. It is really a very small fee, when you consider the cost of club soccer, to keep people from presigning up to 10 different clubs with the intention of only showing up for one or none at all, which happened a lot when we had free try-outs. The other clubs being a backup just in case little Salley or Johnny doesn't make the "A" team. This helps the club to better organize the distribution of players, coaches, and field usage.

kdlsc: I am curious to what volunteering at the club level you have done.

I am afraid that you nailed it Chapindad, club soccer is about the select few who are willing [and can afford] to pay the high cost of playing at these rarified levels. I agree that tryout fees are probably necessary, and inconsequential, in the current club scheme. But this is a sad thing.

Soccer16,

"By the club requiring a small fee to tryout they are recouping some of their risk exposure as it relates to the club as a whole."......What? The club would fold if what, they were overrun with players trying out? I don't get it.


Chapindad,

"It is really a very small fee, when you consider the cost of club soccer".......so that makes it right?

"to keep people from presigning up to 10 different clubs with the intention of only showing up for one or none at all, which happened a lot when we had free try-outs. The other clubs being a backup just in case little Salley or Johnny doesn't make the "A" team."....what about the shoe on the other foot? How about when coaches, DOC's and club officials demand a commitment from a player right there on the field, immediately after the tryout? Or the phone call you receive as soon as you get home, saying Sally or Johnny has until 10 PM to give a commitment or the spot is forfeited and they move down to the next person on the list.

Needless to say, I have little sympathy for clubs during tryout week. They make a ton of dough from the tryout and then they pressure kids and families so that they can "protect their resources".

(After tryouts.....clubs are cool )

Chapindad,
Excellent post, totally agree.
Hurst66,
I disagree, my child has never been asked or pressured to make a commitment after any tryout. (my child has played premier since the age of 8).

What Hurst refers to is an extremely common tactic in Charlotte, where the competition to roster "A" teams is intense. Offers are commonly made on night 1 of 2 or 3 day tryout processes and committments are expected on the spot, or the offer is withdrawn.

SC doesn't have this......yet. But as Clubs from parts of the state start to....ahem....recruit....from other parts of the state, I would expect this practice to start to rear its head here also, as a response to the increased competition.

Hurst,

Can't blame the Clubs as the parents are just as much to blame.

I find the whole concept of recruiting to be distasteful. Taken to its logical conclusion, SC would end up with one "super club" that fielded the only regionally competitive teams from our state. It seems to me that youth soccer is best served by having a number of clubs with competitive teams. While the dilution of the talent pool will necessarily mean that not every club will field excellent teams in every age-group, that is preferable to having one (or two) dominant clubs poaching the cream of the crop from every area of the state.

I don't think it possible to stop recruiting. I just wish the club leaders would display more concern for the vitality of youth soccer in general than for the "glory" of their club.

HappyDaddy,

Depends on your motivation. If you are a parent and you want your kid to get a full-ride to an SEC or ACC Division I university, you want ONE club in the state that will allow your kid the best training and the opportunity to succeed at the regional/national level.

If your motivation is less than what I have described above....then yes, you probably want to see competitive balance among clubs so at least your kid can get some competitive in-state games. (You also want your kid to receive decent training/coaching).

HappyDaddy,

Your post brings several different points, that when put together could be in conflict with each other.

Demographics of our state have been used numerous times to explain the lack of continual success when attempting to field "regionally competitive" teams. In short, my understanding is that in order for our state to produce regionally competitive teams, the boundaries for that team needs to extend beyond the geographic locality of that particular club, and gather players from around the state. I don't have the details for this, but there have been numerous threads about it.

It's these same demographics that cause the perceived problem of lack of competitive teams within the state. There is a small and finite number of players that have both the ability and desire to play on these regionally competitive teams. Ability here for me includes both the on the field ability, and the other factors, travel time, cost, etc. It is unfortunate that a player may have the technical ability and desire, but can't achieve that opportunity due to the other factors. So yes, there is the possibility that when clubs attempt to form these regionally competitive teams, and players migrate from their local clubs, then the local clubs and the statewide league may not seem as competitive. Again, there is a finite number of players that are in this group.

Without getting into a debate about the merits of and cost associated with the ODP system, it provides amplification of the demographics. Typically when ODP tryouts occur, SC considers is a big success to have 50 or so players. During the tryout process it becomes evident that not all 50 have the same ability level. So taking that in context with a team roster size of 16, out of this ODP group, you could theoretically field 3 teams, that "should" be regionally competitive, or at least the 3 top teams in the state. I believe the statistics prove that SC may produce 1 regionally competitive team out of that group. However, there are anomalies with that also. The NC ODP process has upwards of 200 players at tryouts. Using the same math, they theoretically could produce 12 regionally competitive teams, however typically they have 3 or 4 teams that in general are regionally competitive.

It can be said there are 4 levels of soccer within SC, although only 3 are defined. Recreation, Classic, Challenge, and RIII. Within this structure, opportunities exist for a player to find the right fit where ability and desire are a match for the requirements of that division.

So while you view recruiting as distasteful, and often times it may be, alternatively there can be some good in it. For example, if there is a player playing on a Classic team, but others see that player as having the ability to play on a Challenge team, if they are not informed of having the ability to move to the different level, then they may not reach their individual potential. There are some very good coaches/club directors out there that would point that out to the player, however, in the competitive environment that clubs are in, many will not. That notification then has to come from external to that players current team/club.

As for the "glory" of the club. That's a result of the competitive environment. No different than in the business world. Each organization strives to provide services for a sector of the market, but not all are going to have that capability, and some will do it better than others.

To limit the ability of clubs to service all sectors of the market, in my opinion, limits the vitality of youth soccer in general. When a sanctioning body takes steps to achieve parity, then, the benefits to the individual player is lost. Individual players are members of clubs, then placed on teams, and clubs are members of a sanctioning body. Teams are not members of clubs. To artificially attempt to keep SC clubs from forming regionally competitive teams, holds back a segment of the population, and severely limits individual choice and opportunity.

HappyDaddy,

Sorry for the long reply, which was directed more at your general comment, and being prepared while your post was put in. However, within the long reply is a nugget about the "recruiting".

HappyDaddy:

One premier club/team per age group will be the only way for SC to win regional and national titles—and thus the best of the best for individual players—

It is about what the goals are for SC—but to find the best team and players—one dominant club/team is the way to go—

I think the Super Club idea is best for everyone—players, teams, SC, soccer overall—

we have a big daddy and a happydaddy.with club coming again just call us all broke daddy.

To be clear, I don't think recruiting is a bad thing.....and most of what is going on is "soft" recruiting. Mass mailers, personalized invites to tryouts, etc. There are more than a couple of clubs in SC starting to actively do this....it is not a 1 or 2 club thing.

It offers choice to parents and players and thats a good thing.

p&y,

I don't think you can say that one super club is the best solution for everyone....even if you feel that club provides services for every level, from premier through rec.

Again, parents and players have different motivations, expectations, resources, etc.

I think I can, Hurst66, because a Super Club will NOT eliminate other clubs and rec programs that meet the needs of those others.

Now, if a Super Club somehow eliminates all other club and rec opportunities—that would of course be bad. That will not happen.

SC soccer suffers from too much fracture and diluted pools of players. As clubs have consolidated and elite teams formed, I have seen MANY players benefit greatly at all levels of ability and wants/needs of parents.

brokedaddy42, are you going to change your handle again?

how is the ankle coming? with hs over now......you know we're practicing tonight, right? your daughter is missed!!!

Broke Daddy, Big Daddy and HappyDaddy all need avatars. Can't tell a player without a graphic illustration.

A super club will benefit the top 10-12 players. Players 13-25 will probably suffer somewhat. Not sure that it matters or impacts kids past player 25.

For a state the size of SC, if competing on a regional basis is important, then this is probably the only way to consistently do so.

I'm sorry—How in the world would a Super Club in SC cause anyone to "suffer"???

Club mergers and an inevitable Super Club would (and has) created a much larger range of opportunities for ALL players along with creating for the first time in SC on any real scale a CHANCE to be regionally and nationally competitive ALONG with being competitive within the state.

With the traditional set up in SC—many small clubs all over the place—the BEST any player has to shoot for is to win state among a pool of teams that are competitive ONLY within the state. THAT hurts players and soccer in general.

The Super Club can hurt the competitive balance in the state. Within the state.....bad. Outside the state....good (16 players get a shot at national recognition).

How many 4A girls teams can say they have a legitimate shot at winning the state championship this year? Six, eight? That's exciting.

How many girls U-18 teams have a shot at winning the state cup every year? One? (yawn).

What's good for the goose ain't always good for the gander.

So to avoid being boring, we need to LOWER our goal (to state success ONLY, not regional or national success) in order to create more "exciting" state cups among diluted and mediocre teams?

Ok, "suffer" maybe is too strong a word. But in the status quo of top level SC soccer there are usually 2 teams that are very good. Once in a blue moon 3 teams.

So there are 22-33 starters playing a ton of minutes on a team that will get them into a competitve R3PL, Disney, CASL Shootout type environment. They may not win....but they can get in and compete.

A super club/super team.....will cut that number of kids in half. The half that make it will go to Disney with the expectation of winning. The half that doesn't make it, won't go to Disney or WAGS anymore.

The half that doesn't make it will take a step backward from a competitve perspective. If "suffer" is too strong or emotional....so be it. But the reality of the situation is what it is for those kids. Denying it doesn't change it.

I'd still be in favor of it tho....the benefits to the top kids outweigh the disappointment to the next segment of kids.

Where is Chico?

i may go yell at the PA announcer at the ft mill game tonight.

P&Y,

It would be nice to have state competition AND regional competition like NCYSA has. But we don't.....

Which is why I like the idea of the super team. We don't really have good competition at the highest level in this state to begin with.....why not consolidate it at say U15?

HD,

I understand.....but we're talking about consolidating at U15 or so. If we were talking about U12 or 13 I'd agree with you. U15 is another matter.

And besides.....its a 1 year deal right? Kid doesn't make it at U15, bust your arse and come back at U16 to try again.

I don't think its bizarre at all. In fact, this is simply a microcosm of what ALREADY happens at CESA Premier and Bridge Gold and CUFC Elite today. There are kids currently on the top teams who used to be on the top team, got put on the "B" team, worked their way back to the "A" team.

I would hate it for my son or daughter if they wanted to play at the highest level and becasue of this....they couldn't. But I also kind of see it as being inevitable. Eventually it happens to every kid who loves the game and wants to keep climbing....but is told they aren't good enough. My son wants to play D1 soccer....and then professionally in Europe. You think thats going to happen? Who am I to say no? But realistically....he's going to hear no sooner or later. Whether its at 14 or 15 or 16...its still no.

I'm not advocating that we dumb-down the process, or go backward. It's certainly a positive thing to have a super club in the state where the best can go and be recognized and challenged.

My point to p&y is that there are casualties (that's life).

When Mary Jones and Susie Smith leave the Low Country Soccer Club to go across the state and play for Mauldin United, they leave behind the third best player on the LCSC team, Debbie Johnson. While this is a great move for Mary and Susie, because they are now going to get to compete at the highest level, it's not a great thing for Debbie and the rest of her teammates. The team is now weaker. Debbie may not develop to her potential because her two best teammates are no longer there for her to practice and play with. Of course Debbie could have went to MU too, but for whatever reason she didn't (finances, time, loyalty...)

It's great that the option is there for kids who truely have the ability, the means and the desire to get better. I wouldn't recommend "banning super clubs".

Just don't tell me it is great for everyone and that there are no negative implications.

HAH!!!! Like that hasn't been done before!!!! Gotta love the Lady Jackets!!

referring to brokedaddy42 yelling at the fort mill pa announcer tonight.

I wanted to make clear that I wasn't suggesting that there be any limitations on the club for which any particular player can play. It ought to be up to the kids and their parents to determine which place is the best fit for them. Rather, I would like to prohibit solicitations from clubs to players beyond written notice of tryouts.

If a "super-club" develops (which it won't) well, so be it. What isn't ok in my book is the practice of affirmatively seeking out players from other clubs and enticing them to leave.

Good luck policing that one HD.

As Chico, p&y and others have previously pointed out, by U-15 the best players often start gravitating to one team. That would be your "super team", not necessarily the same "super club".

From "suffer" to "casualties"—wow—serious overstating of something that I believe would not happen.

And if someone doesn't get to go to Disney (and MOST never will) or WAGS (lucky them!), those players will have OTHER tournaments, right?

Why is there an argument that a Super Club would obliterate all other opportunities? There will be no casualties and no one will suffer with a Super Club. No one. A Super Club ADDS another option at the highest level; it doesn't take away a thing.

OTHER opportunities could also mean LESSER opportunities. If you don't think a team/kids suffer when they lose their best players to a super club you must have your head in the sand.

Social Darwinism.

I'm not a social darwinist—AND I do NOT think a player suffers when he/she is on a team that loses its "best" player.

No head in the sand either.

If the ten best players in an age group are on ten separate teams, I think EVERYONE is losing in that scenario. If those ten are on ONE team in the state and raise the bar for what is the best in that state, then EVERYONE wins.

Hurst66: I do regret sounding argumentative with you about this since I agree with where your heart lies. I love all players at all ability levels. However, I don't agree about what helps and/or hurts that range of interests and abilities.

p&y, no offense taken...all in the spirit of good discussion.

If we had the best 10 coaches/trainers in the southeast US, coaching 10 different U-17G club teams in South Carolina, would you still see the need for the 10 best players to come together on one club? Or can we reserve that for ODP?

i'd want the best players playing for the best coach—:)

and then i'd want that best coach to be gracious enough to share her/his expertise with all other levels of players as well—

but that is a much harder scenario—and i've never seen ODP as a good choice for anyone—but that's another thread. . .

P&Y,

C'mon on. A team from the lower part of the state is a R3PL caliber team, playing in Disney, etc. An upstate team fits the same bill.

Coaches and players decide to merge in order to form a super team. 1/2 the kids make it....1/2 the kids don't.

Do you really think the kid that went from a starter playing at Disney to being a starter on a watered down remnant of a team that competes at the St Patricks Day tournament in Columbia.....feels like all is well and good?

Call it what you want..its real. And in SC its still worth doing.....just don't think its win win. Someone always loses.

Nope.

One super club in SC? Most coaches and trainers are all for this..Imagine bringing the best players together..a coaches dream because they usually have no dog in the fight..Parents of players playing at that level have no problem with it until their child is no longer on the team.. I think that it can be a good idea as long as the level of training does not diminish just because some players did not make the premier team..If the idea is to put together the strongest challenge or premier team in the state then the same idea should apply to classic play..

Yeah cht, good idea!

Let's whittle it down to one team per classification. One premier, one challenge, one classic. We would only need three paid coaches and one paid DOC in the state, everybody else could play rec.

Cost to the parents/players of these three "state teams" would be $4,000 per year (unless you find a sponsor).

That'll work.

Hurst,
You missed the point...It's not about fielding one team..It's about making sure that the level of training does not drop off because it's just classic..Of course at the higher levels there would be fewer teams but a super club should also field strong classic and rec teams so these kids can have the chance to move up thru the system..
Once they start counting the money that's coming in...you will see a whole crop of elite teams and this super club would only fix the competitve level of soocer for now..It would not touch the root cause of the problem with S.C. soccer

One thing that I have advocated for years in competitive youth soccer is a more open roster system. If a club has multiple teams in a given age group, allow a pooled roster and movement from week-to-week from the 2nd team to the 1st and vice versa. And the same between the 3rd and 2nd teams, etc. This way, if a player doesn't make the top team at tryouts (a one shot deal), they can still earn a chance to move up during the season. And if a player does well at tryouts but doesn't show the committment during the season, they can be moved down. With this system, the players would be motivated to perform their best from week-to-week and they could get opportunities to develop themselves through play at a higher level.

With the electronic/internet capabilities available today, rosters could be easily submitted to the league authorities on a weekly basis. A computerized system could verify eligibility using player numbers.

I know you guys are wondering what I'm smoking if I think USYSA/SCYSA will ever adopt this type of system. But, hey, one can dream, can't he?

Coach P. In a perfect world your logic would and should work effectively. Unfortunately what you would have would be some strong, very responsible and committed players in Team "A". (But, unfortunately, probably not the "strongest" team)

I applaud you guys kicking this idea around. At some point, we are going to have to appoint/elect club leaders whos only agenda is what is truly best for the kids.

That is the number one obstacle that SC clubs has to negotiate before truly great things can happen.

We participated in the SCYSA Publix State Cup this weekend. Tourney was well run and weather was PERFECT!

I have one observation in regard to parents though. One of the team's we played parent's were overheard by OUR team saying that "our team" was a pushover team. That comment hurt some boys feelings and was completely unnecessary. Later, during the game, there were more very negative comments made in regard to our players and coach from the opponents parents. This was a terrific match and both teams played their hearts out. My issue is that parents cannot live through their children and name call the other team.

Any ideas on how to stop this behavior at games politely?

Thanks