Thanks tremendously for posting, Mr. Heise. A few, very respectful, questions. Please forgive me up front for any and all of my ignorance that I display.

>>I certainly support a club that would offer the highest caliber players an opportunity to compete against the state and region's best teams.<<

It�s kind of a Mom and apple pie thing though, right? Everyone would �support� it; the question is whether people think it�s an important enough thing to actually proactively do something about.

My real question to you, however, is why you aren�t screaming for this to occur and trying daily to make it occur? You are involved in coaching high school soccer in this area; wouldn�t such a team be a great boon to you and other high school coaches? If it would be a boon, and you�d win from it, why wouldn�t you be striving to make it happen rather than dismissing it?

There was an article in an Anderson paper recently concerning dual participation between upper state high schools and the Greenville Futbol Club. I believe you posted the link in another group on May 5. It was amazing to me the advantages that the high school coaches gained from advanced club play � I was particularly blown away by the fact that the GFC had a girls team playing against Clemson, South Carolina, Wake Forest, etc. This is certainly the top 3%-5%.

>>It's the other 95% of the kids that I'm concerned with.<<

Why? With NECSA�s fields, and the new Lexington fields, with the overwhelming focus by clubs on this 95%, and with your role as a high school coach taking the best players available you�re your district for your high school team, why are these the kids that you�re concerned with? Is there something that isn�t being done for recreational soccer players that needs to be done that isn�t being done?

>> [�deleted material concerning CMSA and it�s two major problems: getting players from existing teams and fields�]<<

I completely agree with this after corresponding with others in this thread; it is clear to me that this concept of �centralized club� is flawed. I know others don�t agree with me here, but that�s the best conclusion I�ve been able to draw. And it�s also clear to me that without fields controlled by a club that has as a primary mission competing at a state, regional, and national level, that this is not feasible.

>>Until all the key members of the clubs coordinate an effort to work together and secure facilities for a mega-clubs use, I think much of this is simply wishful thinking. Sorry gogogoal and Shibumi.<<

Respectfully, I think that this coordination is wishful thinking. It�s been tried before and failed, as you eloquently noted previously, and no one has as yet figured out how to make this work as a win/win for the �local club� and �meta-club�. It seems to me that this means an existing club or a new club would have to handle it.

The GFC and St. Giles model seems appropriate; as opposed to failures such as the CMSA, this model can be demonstrated as working. They appear to quite unapologetically be trying to have a club that does a great job supporting the �top 5%�. They are represented quite disproportionately in state leagues; and I know I see them in some of the best out of state tournaments as well.