|
|
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 640
goal
|
goal
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 640 |
Let me clear up a few things. It seems the CESA folks want to find a conspiracy behind every corner.
I have the up most respect for Andrew and the way he handles things. Since being on the SCYSA board I have become to respect him even more as a business man and a soccer coach. My implication about everyone following him, has nothing to do with him being a soccer coach but being a great business man and leader, by not allowing parents or coaches to distract CESA from its goals of providing soccer to the youth in the upstate. Leadership like that is needed at all the clubs to help things come into line. I watched as Chapin Soccer first and then CSC, one or two parents where able to distract the entire club with complaining and stirring up things. Both those clubs had a hard time letting loose the bad apple for the greater good of the club. Andrew seems to able to make those business decisions.
Chico I am going to quote everything and to the detail because I do not have time. But I do not think CESA has done anything wrong with the formation of CESA-Columbia or else I would have reported. I only wanted to qualify the distinction between a training site and a fully formed and nothing more. I only made the scenario to help GSDad understand the difference between a club leaving and a parent leaving, again nothing more.
Fields at hard for EVERY club in the Midlands.
I said fractured only to supply a reason why CESA-Columbia might want to merge with CUFC and not Lexington. Nothing more. Competition is great for the Midlands but it is factual that CESA-Columbia will be pooling from some of the same players as CUFC because they are about 6 miles from each other. I thought the word "if" was showing I was trying to supply a fictional scenario to help explain my statement. I find scenario sometimes help with understanding but it was fictional and nothing else.
Chico, I have no bias against CESA or you. We have sparred over the years but it seems that you took it very personal at some point. I apologize to you and your family for anything that I may have said that you felt harmful enough to always attack me before trying to understand the context of what I am writing. I feel that information is good for the greater community but being attacked at every turn makes it hard.
Here I go again!
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2003
Posts: 2,170
coach
|
|
coach
Joined: Apr 2003
Posts: 2,170 |
>>Chico, I have no bias against CESA or you. We have sparred over the years but it seems that you took it very personal at some point. I apologize to you and your family for anything that I may have said that you felt harmful enough to always attack me before trying to understand the context of what I am writing. I feel that information is good for the greater community but being attacked at every turn makes it hard.<<Very, very, very respectfully...what follows is a short list of statements you've made in this thread which are factually incorrect or appear to use hypotheticals to advance an agenda (I've used a bold font to highlight specific sections of these statements.) - You really only have 2 coaches with the CESA-Columbia group; Eddie and Chris. All the others listed are just names to put on the site.
- And finding fields and coaches in Columbia is always a problem, which will happen if CESA-Columbia grows to just 5-6 teams.
- The greatest strength at CESA and St. Giles before that was that they could have 2 quality teams at any level and train them both as the Elite team.
- CESA-Columbia is a fully independent club that has its own by-laws and board members or at least is suppose too.
- CESA managers will have put a lot of time and money into CESA-Columbia by the time it finally gets past the one or two teams.
- The entire club, all 16 teams could merge with CUFC and there is nothing CESA could do about it. This is a very big difference, especially if CESA seeded CESA-Columbia with a lot of money in order to grow the program, purchase fields and add lights. Then all that goes to CUFC during the merger.
How do I indicate to you that you are factually incorrect or are using hypotheticals to advance some agenda in a manner which will meet your criteria for an open and honest debate regarding the issues you raise? Is in the fact that I question your motivations? Heck -- let's question my motivations...more on this at the bottom of the page. Let me again ask specific questions -- and I don't mean these questions personally -- I mean them as respectful questions in a debate on ideas -- and the questions arise directly because of your posts on this thread... - How much time do "CESA managers" put into CESA-Columbia? How much money?
- When was Columbia "unfractured" from your perspective? Is the Greenville-Spartanburg-Anderson metropolitan statistical area "fractured" or "unfractured" from your perspective?
- Do you know anything about the CESA-Columbia board structure that leads you to the conclusions you reached concerning CESA-Columbia potential mergers?
- Do you have specific information regarding CESA seeding CESA-Columbia with a lot of money, or any money at all? Or are you simply hypothesizing? If this is simple hypothesizing, what is your motivation for doing this? Why are you posing hypotheticals about one club but not another?
My guess is that you're not going to answer these questions...although I really hope you will in the spirit of an open and honest debate given the subjects that you have raised. Now, you can ascribe my even asking you a question, or calling out a factual mistake or a hypothetical that seems to advance an agenda, as something "personal" -- however, you might want to ask yourself if I'm the only one -- or even in the minority -- in taking what you write and wondering if the factual mistakes and club-specific hypotheticals are indicative of some unstated motivation. With respect to my motivations and possible biases -- within the Columbia area, although I don't have a child that plays in that area, I support with my time and resources two clubs: CRSA and CESA-Columbia. I support these two clubs with my time and money because I believe in what they are doing in terms of their trying to increase the number of kids playing youth soccer and their being "open" clubs that allow all kids to train at the club regardless of what club that kid is rostered on. I don't support these clubs "versus" any other club; I'd gladly support with my time and resources other Columbia clubs if I saw them doing what these two clubs do in that regard.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2003
Posts: 2,170
coach
|
|
coach
Joined: Apr 2003
Posts: 2,170 |
One other comment in all of this. I know that you have invested time and resources into helping youth soccer in South Carolina with the SCYSA. You are absolutely to be commended for this; most people only care about their child and don't step forward to help in the broader sense.
When you think of the points I raise and the questions I ask as "personal", consider the following...
CESA-Columbia appears to be allied quite tightly with SOAR -- which represents 600+ kids who are not registered by the SCYSA. Have you considered what a leader at CESA-Columbia might think reading what you've written in this thread? Do you perceive that you've increased or decreased the chances of CESA-Columbia ever attempting to use its influence to get those kids into the SCYSA?
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 351
corner kick
|
|
corner kick
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 351 |
CESA-Columbia has justed posted their teams and will be fielding 7 teams this fall from U-9 to U-15.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 60
throw in
|
|
throw in
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 60 |
Can you tell where the majority of these kids are being drawn from? ie CUFC CRSA etc
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 351
corner kick
|
|
corner kick
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 351 |
I think some from both as well as some from SOAR.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 640
goal
|
|
goal
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 640 |
Quote:
One other comment in all of this. I know that you have invested time and resources into helping youth soccer in South Carolina with the SCYSA. You are absolutely to be commended for this; most people only care about their child and don't step forward to help in the broader sense.
When you think of the points I raise and the questions I ask as "personal", consider the following...
CESA-Columbia appears to be allied quite tightly with SOAR -- which represents 600+ kids who are not registered by the SCYSA. Have you considered what a leader at CESA-Columbia might think reading what you've written in this thread? Do you perceive that you've increased or decreased the chances of CESA-Columbia ever attempting to use its influence to get those kids into the SCYSA?
I do not think anything I type would have any impact on whether a league would go with SCYSA or not. I will always be happy to talk to anyone man to man if they have any questions in my ethics or where I stand on issues. Reading a message board and making critical league decisions based on the assumptions and assertions of a message board would be irresponsible to say the least.
If anyone from SOAR or any league wants to discuss the benefits of SCYSA then please send me a private message and I will be happy to meet with you face to face and discuss why SCYSA would be a benefit and logical step for you. I think SCYSA is a great organization with a lot of people that care only about the organization as a whole.
Here I go again!
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 640
goal
|
|
goal
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 640 |
Quote:
- You really only have 2 coaches with the CESA-Columbia group; Eddie and Chris. All the others listed are just names to put on the site.
- And finding fields and coaches in Columbia is always a problem, which will happen if CESA-Columbia grows to just 5-6 teams.
- The greatest strength at CESA and St. Giles before that was that they could have 2 quality teams at any level and train them both as the Elite team.
- CESA-Columbia is a fully independent club that has its own by-laws and board members or at least is suppose too.
- CESA managers will have put a lot of time and money into CESA-Columbia by the time it finally gets past the one or two teams.
- The entire club, all 16 teams could merge with CUFC and there is nothing CESA could do about it. This is a very big difference, especially if CESA seeded CESA-Columbia with a lot of money in order to grow the program, purchase fields and add lights. Then all that goes to CUFC during the merger.
Lets go through your list on my statements.
- According the CESA-Columbia website: http://www.cesa-columbia.com/Who%20We%20Are%20-%20Coaches.html.
They have 9 coaches listed on their official (not mine) website. Four of them are USC coaches and should as I suspect working on coaching their teams during the fall and not FULL time for clubs teams, and two of those are goal keeper coaches. Andrew and Pearse are in Greenville and I am sure provide great help in developing a training program for the club but can not be actively training full time a club team in Columbia. That leaves Jim, Chris and Eddie. I did not see Jim the first time so I did miss him and should have been 3 coaches. But they had one team last year. How many coaches did you expect to have for one team? I read they have 7 teams this year, then they should have 9 coaches on staff this year. This was not a bash at CESA-Columbia but pointing out a fact, only because everyone was trying to compare coaching a cesa-columbia to CUFC and I was just point out that it is apples and oranges. I did not see you comment to correct anyone for being bias on the statements about all the bad coaches at CUFC. They have 32 coaches, I am sure that they may have a few coaches that people don't like, but that just goes with the territory when you have that many coaches and your club is 1.5 years old.
- This is just from personal experience of being on the board at Chapin Soccer, being involved with PGSA, CFC, and the board at CSC. At every club it was a fight to find lighted fields and filling all the coaching spots. Especially when I was as Chapin Soccer and had CSC 7 miles from us and using Crook Creek for our fields. This again was no bash of CESA-Columbia but just a fact of something that they will have to overcome from my personal experiences.
- Again. I thought I was giving St. Giles and then CESA a compliment. I am sorry if you found treating all teams as equals to be insulting. I personally get upset when I watched the old CSC treat teams as an "A" and "B" and expect less from the "B" team and train them as such. I always thought CESA's training everyone on a equal level as being a positive. If that is insulting then I take it back and promise never to say it again.
- CESA Managers was probably not very clear. I meant that Jim, Andrew, Pearse and Eddie as CESA managers would have a lot of time and work put into CESA-Columbia just to get all the logistics set in starting a new club. Again, I am a little confused in why this is an insult. I figured that putting in hard work to grow your club was a good thing. But again I with draw this statement if it insulting to Jim, Andrew, Pearse and Eddie that they might have some work to do.
-
Quote:
CESA-Columbia is a fully independent club that has its own by-laws and board members or at least is suppose too. It is possible that the parents from CESA-Columbia could decide to disassociate themselves from CESA and merge with CUFC, Lexington, or CRSA and there is nothing CESA could do about it. I would be surprised if it ever did happen but it is important to understand the difference between the extension or training site and a fully independent club.
So I do not believe, as I said in an early post, that CESA-Columbia would ever do anything but the CESA vision. I was only trying to create, what I thought, as a scenario in where CESA-Columbia might would turn against its roots and join a rival club.
Dictionary:
Scenario: A plausible description of how the future may develop, based on a coherent and internally consistent set of assumptions about key relationships and driving forces (eg, rate of technology changes, prices). Note that scenarios are neither predictions nor forecasts.
I made some very big assumptions. My intent was to provide a statement that might would be in the thinking on the board in the far future if it made such a bold moves. My intent was not meant for current thinking here or anywhere. I just trying to explain the difference between a club leaving a team or player leaving, nothing else.
From GSDad
Quote:
Any team from any club could decide to do the same. If all the parents/kids on any CUFC, Lexington, or CRSC team wanted to leave their current club and play at a different club they could and should do that. That's exactly what happened at CSC/CUFC and why Cesa-Columbia ever got started. If other teams/players are dissatisfied with the goings on at their present club they are capable of doing the same. Not many clubs will turn down a successful ready-made team with good players and excellent chemistry.
Next time I will wait longer and see if you don't provide a better explanation on facts so that I do not insult you or anyone else that might be reading the message board. As I reread the statement I can see how you might confused it as as assertion and not as a future possible thought pattern of a board member. I feel that my experiences being on several boards allows me the ability to have some understanding into the dynamics and thought patterns that MIGHT occur on any soccer board. I stress the word MIGHT because I am not as nearly as smart as you and as such wrong at times.
One last thing:
Quote:
John: Respectfully, you are an official with the SCYSA. CESA-Columbia is a member in good standing with the SCYSA. Don't you need to at least try to appear to be unbiased?
I think you may want to get to know me personally before you question my ethics on the site. I do not believe I have questioned your ethics. But I do find it interesting that when I was trying to praise Andrew's leadership but people took it wrong they made the following quote:
Quote:
Chapindad—I find the implications about Andrew H (and the running of CESA) to be irresponsible and misleading—I have the highest regard for him as a person and a coach—My child respects and loves him for what he has contributed to her life—I have felt completely free to express myself to him and he has always responded fairly and professionally when I have—even when we have disagreed—
I know this is a discussion board of opinions, but we should monitor ourselves on some issues related to specific people—If you meant nothing negative—accept my apologies for misunderstanding—
But when you question my ethics, then it is okay and not irresponsible and misleading. Seems to me there is a double standard.
Here I go again!
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 854
brace
|
|
brace
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 854 |
Your comment did seem to be a cloaked criticism wrapped in something like praise—but I stated I could be wrong—If I am—I apologize—but too many people on here like to speak about CESA while having no direct experience—I have experience with CESA—and refrain from speaking about Cola stuff—though I have an opinion—
Where is my double standard? None exists.
"Living well's the best revenge." r.e.m.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2004
Posts: 2,427
coach
|
|
coach
Joined: Mar 2004
Posts: 2,427 |
I don't have a dog in this fight (as Chico does), yet I wonder if the dramatic increase in CESA-Cola teams (from 1 to 7), may be due in part to some disenchantment already, with the merger of 2 clubs in Cola. Is there still a pervasive atmosphere of old NECSAism and social soccer in the new club?
|
|
|
|
