These are excellent responses and help shed some light for me.
@Cainhoy thank you for being more forthright and supporting what others here were suggesting: that the decision has less, if anything to do with the Battery, and more to do with the league and its support etc...
@Mysonsdad, no offense at all. My son son plays on an SSC White team that is young and did fairly well overall (split with GPS NASA Maroon).
I agree, the SSC teams were weak, and I have discussed some of the reasons for that in another thread. Suffice to say, it was not run in a modern developmental model. Instead, the same father may have coached the same group of kids for several years. Teams were tied to specific coaches and the politics were dreadful. I was certainly exploring the move to NASA, but time is a HUGE consideration for me personally.
The history of the two clubs from your point of view is interesting. I am not sure SSC staff would see it see the same way, but I never asked because it really did not matter to me. My son was on a good team with a great group of kids and parents, visibly improving, so I had every reason to be happy.
I am actually not as concerned about the DI and MP locations. I have no delusion that my son is the next Modric or Scholes. I think it will be a while before they make inroads in player development East of the Cooper, but I may be naive. I just want my son to continue to have the opportunity to continue playing similar teams. I don't want to start over at new club, but we'll see. At least NASA costs less.
