|
|
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 281
corner kick
|
corner kick
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 281 |
sorry futbol,
I will type a bit slower next time.
"Boys, even if it means dying on the pitch, we must win!" Marc-Vivien Foe 1975 - 2003
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 1,457
Hat-Trick
|
|
Hat-Trick
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 1,457 |
nah!!! I should have taken that typing class eons ago....
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 281
corner kick
|
|
corner kick
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 281 |
I know. I've been trying to get my computer set up with the voice program that types as I speak so I can just eliminate the whole typing thing.
"Boys, even if it means dying on the pitch, we must win!" Marc-Vivien Foe 1975 - 2003
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2004
Posts: 117
goal kick
|
|
goal kick
Joined: Mar 2004
Posts: 117 |
Regarding HNISA, that wasn't exactly a "merge". Mt. Plesant did not have any competitive soccer at the time. More like, HNISA had to cede its membership to Mt. Pleasant because the Town of Mt. Pleasant owned the fields. The HNISA board members did not have a choice. For example, Whipple Road field was a nice regulation size field used for a lot of HungryNeck games and practices that was paved to expand the tennis facilities by the Town of Mt. Pleasant.
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 2,256 Likes: 2
Coach
|
|
Coach
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 2,256 Likes: 2 |
Quote:
And Coach Chass... for sure the low country has plenty of talent to make an A, B, C team in the same age group... But as stated by some it is not usually little Johnny that has the issue it is usually mom & dad who think Johnny should be in the A team and not the C and therefore I'll start my own club and bring the one coach who gives me the answer I want to hear...
I agree completely with that. Happens at all levels in all different areas, not just club soccer. In HS it's "I/my kid should be playing varsity" even though the player would get much better experience and development on the field playing JV than riding the bench at varsity. My kid should be in the honors classes, even though he/she obviously scores average at best in CP. Coaching at the classic level, I've seen players and parents get upset because a 16-year-old was placed on a U17 team rather than the U18 when they were obviously talented enough to play at the U18 level. Believe me, I know the scenario.
Still, the A-B-C division within a club wasn't exactly my question. I'll give a specific example to clarify. I don't have a dog directly in this fight, really, so I'm trying to be objective.
Let's say the Charleston-area clubs all decide to unite and field one Challenge team per age group under a single banner rather than competing with each other, so as not to "dilute the talent pool," to use the ubiquitous term. Each club is still allowed to field its own Classic and rec teams, as has been previously proposed.
Focusing on one age level and gender for a moment: In the 2007 fall season, Bridge FA, MPSC and CUSC entered teams in U18 girls' SCSCL competition. Bridge FA 89 Girls Gold listed 14 rostered players, MPSC U18 Girls Elite 16, and CUSC U18 Girls Black 16. That's a total of 46 athletes competing at that level and age group. Let's put these numbers into the unified-team scenario.
For training and playing time purposes, a unified team would probably not carry more than 18 or so players to fill out the roster. Logic would dictate that the best 18 out of the 46 would be chosen for a hopefully dominant, undiluted team.
My question is, in this scenario, what are the options for the remaining 28? Now, by the A-B-C everybody-wants-to-play-up theory, were all 46 necessarily challenge-level material? Probably not. Were more than 18 of the 46 qualified, though? Probably so.
So, what do we tell the ones who don't make the top-18 cut?
-Sorry, you can't compete at this level because we don't have room for you on our squad, and we can't allow another area club to field a team because it would dilute the talent pool. You may be as good as some who made the team, but for numbers' sake you'll have to drop down to Classic anyway. You can't go play Challenge for someone else in the area because we've eliminated those opportunities to make sure all the "best" players wind up on the same team.
-Ok, we have enough talent to form two SCSCL teams within the club, but we're going to make sure we place players so that one team is as dominant as possible, while the other may be left to struggle in the same league. (Example: 2007 CUFC 89 Girls Elite: 8-1-0. 2007 CUFC 89 Girls Palmetto: 2-4-3.)
-Hey, you can always drive up to Columbia and try your luck there.
-Tough break, kid, but we're winning without you, and that's what really matters to us, so we're not particularly bothered.
Other options/thoughts/ideas to make sure deserving athletes--the ones who are willing to pay and work to get training, experience and competition at the highest level--aren't left out of the loop in the process of creating a "dominant" team?
I've got good news and bad news...
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 404
goal
|
|
goal
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 404 |
Your post raised in my mind a question to which I honestly do not know the answer, even as it applies to "my" club. It is this: How many clubs (if any) pay their coaches and/or DOC's for results? By "results" I would include wins, titles, numbers of participants, etc?
I'm not suggesting that there is anything wrong with doing it, if it is done, only wondering about the possibility of potentially conflicting motivations.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 281
corner kick
|
|
corner kick
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 281 |
It depends on the goal of the club. If you are at this level though, making an "elite" team and a second team (aka CUFC) seems to be the theme. Once a player gets to a certain age (an age that will be debated I am sure), college recruiting becomes involved. It should be one of the goals of the club to get their kids into colleges and a good way to do that is to be successful at big tournaments. My no biased response, Chass, would be "how is it fair to the elite player who has to play on a watered down team instead of the 'elite' team?" Just to play devil's advocate.
"Boys, even if it means dying on the pitch, we must win!" Marc-Vivien Foe 1975 - 2003
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 1,521
hat-trick
|
|
hat-trick
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 1,521 |
Chass,
You hit the nail on the head...again!! And think about what has happen here in the lowcountry..Because all the clubs were not unified we have players leaving club A who was a member of the alliance to play for club C who was not a member because the player did not make the elite team so the club that was doing what was best for the elite player by joining the alliance is now losing players to rival clubs because they could play challenge there but yet the player may or may not of been challenge material..
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2004
Posts: 2,427
coach
|
|
coach
Joined: Mar 2004
Posts: 2,427 |
Again, I think with all the talent in the lowcountry among players/coaches that you could field enough elite teams to satisfy everyone, if you have 'the big merger of clubs'. You may even have 2 elite teams at some ages, and definitely and at the very least, one strong elite team and a strong challenge team in the other ages. If its college exposure you seek, the player on either an elite or a good challenge team will be found. College exposure in this state involves a good bit of politics as well. So the players and coaches for both the elite and challenge teams need to be just as active politically, as they are displaying their talents on the field.
Last edited by 2004striker; 01/29/08 03:28 PM.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2003
Posts: 2,170
coach
|
|
coach
Joined: Apr 2003
Posts: 2,170 |
Quote:
Your post raised in my mind a question to which I honestly do not know the answer, even as it applies to "my" club. It is this: How many clubs (if any) pay their coaches and/or DOC's for results? By "results" I would include wins, titles, numbers of participants, etc?
I'm not suggesting that there is anything wrong with doing it, if it is done, only wondering about the possibility of potentially conflicting motivations.
I don't know what the answer is today. When CESA was founded, there was a deep discussion about bonus pay which would include incentives for customer/player satisfaction, growth and the like (never for winning that I can remember, although I'm not religiously against it as long as it was part of an overall set of metrics.) It did not end up occurring.
|
|
|
|
