SC Soccer Forums SCSoccer.com Forums Club Soccer & ODP Lowcountry Finally United

All of this talk of mergers and referencing certain clubs as the benchmaark begs the question: What qualifies as a successful merger? Performance? Variety of Programs/Services? Signed/Committed Collegiate Players? Qualifed Staff?

Respectfully returned, I don't think it's a straw man at all, if you listen to a lot of the things that have been said by folks from this area.

Take Bridge, for example. (Just one example, and I have nothing against Bridge or its concept.) Seems the idea behind its formation was to create an opportunity to form an elite series of teams to be highly competitive under its banner. However, to listen to the talk, apparently there have not been enough athletes flocking to the banner to make it as dominant as some hoped. The complaint I often hear is that the other area clubs, by "stubbornly" and "egotistically" insisting on continuing their own competitive-team offerings, are not supporting the concept of a unified dominant team. Nor are Bridge supporters the only ones to vocalize such things.

My point is, if the majority of stakeholders want to unify under a large competitive banner, it will happen naturally, through choice--it shouldn't be necessary to ask other clubs to shut down their offerings in order to make it happen. And even if clubs in the area actually want to effectively merge and combine their resources--instead of, as someone mentioned earlier, the attitude of "we need to unite under one banner--MY banner," then I still don't see the sin in still having a separate entity offering opportunities for competitive soccer for any who, for whatever reason, don't choose the large club as the best fit for them.

So--I agree with what you say; you're looking at the situation from the perspective of what people SHOULD be asking for. What I've heard people ACTUALLY asking for, though, is for the Lowcountry's versions of Foothills, CFC, LCSC and CRSA to stop insisting on offering competitive teams, because every talented athlete that goes to those types of clubs is effectively robbing from the talent pool of our potential CESA-style juggernaut.

All I'm saying is, offer the opportunity, yes...but don't begrudge those who choose to make other choices as well. Athletes come to CESA and CUFC because they believe those are their BEST choices to get what they want and need--not because someone convinced CFC and LCSC to stop offering alternative competitive-level teams.

And that's the way it should be.

40% Club Organization
35% Variety of Services/Programs
25% Qualified Staff
20% Facilities (but with the above 3, you can play in dirt)
20% Performance (but this happens naturally)
____
100 %

Question for you lowcountryumitedsoccer...Say you decide to go to CESA and tryout but are put on the second or even third team..Will you be happy with this decision and make those trips to Greenviile or will you look elsewhere?
The point that I am trying to make is that it is alot easier to make a challenge team when we have 25 or 30 players trying out..Go to Greenville and some age groups they have at least three or possibly four teams at one age..That's alot of players to beat out of sixteen spots..
What I am saying is sometimes small has it's advantages for some players..You get the training but don't have to beat out 50 or 60 players

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.

Coach Chass,
Say you have a player that had played challenge soccer for two years and has been selected by SC coaches to play on the ODP team for the last three years but yet this player is a freshmen..Do you place the player on the varsity or JV?

Depends. Are you asking from my personal perspective, based on the team I coach now, or from an overall perspective?

In my world, that player would certainly be on varsity. I don't have many (translate: any) players on varsity that could exceed those qualifications, and such a player would definitely be an asset to the varsity squad and earn plenty of field time.

On the other hand--if I'm coaching a team that is fairly well stacked with challenge players who are older, more experienced, and have earned their PT on the field, and I know that the freshman you refer to probably won't get a lot of game time, then why waste all that talent sitting on the bench?

It's not so much about a player's absolute qualifications as it is about how he/she compares to the rest of the team, not only in ability, but in how well they mesh with the other players who depend on each other. If a group of players has come up through the ranks together, play well with each other, and have a great group dynamic, it may not be doing the one player justice to be separated from that group and moved up without any of the supporting players he/she is used to working with. It may be better wait and move them all up together so that seamless group dynamic stays intact.

Lots of variables...most of which revolve around not only the talent of the individual player, but the composition of the teams surrounding her. I can't give one absolute answer to that...but I can say I'd love to have that player! :-)

Thanks for your insight...

Right answer!!

Like many other things, there is an absolute and a relative quality to the question/answer.

Our corporate attorney told me once that a running joke in the legal profession is that a lawyers two favorite words are "it depends".