I spent some of this morning catching up on the message boards (got pulled away by business); thought I'd answer some questions that were asked and/or points that were made -- but didn't think the SSC thread was the place to do it.
I think the tournament stuff is interesting...
______________________________
>>[Coach Chass] So, in this case, when being managed by the folks whose name creates these opportunites also means being managed by the same folks who choose not to participate in them...
...explain to me again how this translates into an advantage to the players?
Forgive me, honored Shibumi-san...my understanding is flawed. <<I have no doubt it's my fault for not competently explaining well enough. You are assuming that the "folks who choose not to participate in them" means the same as "folks who chooose not to participate in them regardless of what club they're associated with and/or what team they are associated with." They aren't the same.
A nationally ranked South Carolina challenge cup state championship team (which is the mathematical mode for CESA's premier teams) is not the same as a team that is struggles to make it past the first round of the South Carolina challenge cup. The former team will expect to go to the Disney showcase (the issue will be the bracket); the latter team would feel fortunate to be invited to the Disney qualifier.
_________________________________________
>>Quote:
[Shibumi] cht: I in no way mean it as a slam on anyone. It's just that a lot of the arguments being made didn't make sense. Trading out what's best for your children in the name of names and colors would be dumb. And since I could construct (and did on this message board) a logical argument for renaming and rebranding, I didn't understand how intelligent and reasonable people could be coming to such a different conclusion.
>>[Coach Chass] I guess that would depend on exactly what parents think is "best" for their children, and what lesson they are trying to teach them. Just because you don't understand the thinking behind something, that doesn't necessarily make it "dumb."<<It is a fact that my not understanding the thinking behind something doesn't necessarily make it "dumb." At the same time, after spending a lot of time and energy soliciting both "facts" and "opinions" leads one to believe that people are acting against the best interest of their children, labeling those actions as "dumb" appears to a valid response. Particularly on a message board in which one is continuing to be engaged in an attempt to understand rational and reasonable motivations.
For example, I would value it a great deal if you would take the opposing position -- that colors and name changes and the like are more important than the services a club renders -- and argue that position. I feel that I could learn from you and that you'd make a position -- which seems murky at best -- much clearer.
>>"Everything we hear is an opinion, not a fact. Everything we see is a perspective, not the truth. " --Marcus Aurelius<<I know that it's fashionable these days to believe that an objective reality doesn't actually exist, that the world is entirely subjective. And certainly at the level of quantum physics, you can make that argument. However, there are actually facts in the world. If you jump off a very high bridge, you have a good chance to die. You can argue against gravity, but in the end gravity is typically going to make you very sorry regardless of how eloquent you are.
While there's an absolute difference between a "fact" and the "truth", it's up to each of us to evaluate for ourselves the difference. I believe that a human being who decides against procuring a better service for a child because of colors or a club name is practicing a mild form of reverse Darwinism. I believe that a human being who decides that they can coach their child better than a professional coach may be right or wrong, but at least that person is acting out of a consistent belief in maximizing what they are doing for their progeny.
______________________________________________
>>[cabj12] Disney definately should be the first priority but going to one tournament is stupid.<<Yes, going to one tournament would be stupid. I know of no CESA team of which a relative of mine ever participated that only went to one tournament.
______________________________________________
>>>[Hatem Ben Arfa] We couldn't find the MESA complex up there a couple of years ago. Did they ever get it finished? Why not call it CESA?<<<>>[cabj12] Cause it was MESA before CESA even existed...and as we know from this thread CESA can't just take over anything they want.<<>[Belligerent] Nice play, Cabby!<Sigh...there's actually a simple answer: the same reason you don't name all of your children "Bob", your dog "Bob", your wife "Bob", your car "Bob, and so on when you're named "Bob" -- it gets confusing.
MeSA is a field complex, CESA is a club, Pearse Tormey/Andrew Hyslop are employees of a club, and so on, and so on, and so on...
