>> [futbol(soccer)] Chico, I know the decision you made.... you have in the past posted what I believe to be objective threads.... Can you provide me with rationale as to why this would be good for the state and all the players not the top 18 at each age group.<<
Why is this good for the state?
The state is a big place. I'm going to first recast your question in terms of why I think this is good for the Columbia area.
At this time, Columbia-area clubs offer what I term the "myth of choice." Why is it a myth? If I have a kid that wants to play regional- and national-level soccer, there is no choice because no club offers this across multiple age groups and genders. If I have a kid that wants to play social soccer, there is no choice -- the "local" club is where all his friends are and the local club typically has a monopoly on the "local" fields. If I have a kid that doesn't have the skills to play on the "A" team but has a lot of ambition, I typically can't get the level of coaching/training on the "B" team that the "A" team gets so my kid falls farther behind.
I used run a business within a large company. One of the industries we had as customers were banks. Banks then had (and many still have now) financial models based on the theory that once you acquired a customer, that the "switching cost" to go to another bank were so high that you could afford to treat that customer relatively poorly and still retain the customer.
I believe that there is an analogy here with youth soccer clubs. I don't find most youth soccer clubs to be focused on offering additional and better services to its customers...and I believe that the basis for this is that the "switching costs" are relatively high because of the local monopoly on fields and the social interaction once a team is formed. There are certainly counter-examples of this (note: I rather admire what I perceive to be the CRSA model -- offer a high school feeder program and focus on increasing the penetration of soccer in the immediate community -- and if you have more ambitious kids and/or teams then help them make a decision as to whether to go to a club playing at a higher level.)
I believe that CESA will offer a different model of a youth soccer club than any Columbia has yet seen. As such, I think that more Columbia-area players and parents have the chance to get a "real" choice rather than the "myth of choice". You could also make the argument that this will cause Columbia area clubs to have a knee-jerk reaction and do something (e.g., merge, partner, etc.) to provide better services. The problem is that these same clubs haven't done anything significant in the last 18 months; so I can't predict what if anything will change for the better -- but I guess we can always hope. But I have to admit that I've grown a bit skeptical of Columbia-area soccer -- for example, even if CSC and NECSA did some type of knee-jerk merger at this point, it's not clear to me at all that they would be doing so to offer superior services instead of simple fear that they might lose even more ground to the CESA and thus better "circle the wagons." I'd actually rather see CESA and CSC merge because I think it would accelerate offering more and better services to more Columbia youth. But I'm sure that many would find horror in that as well.
Now...back to your original question. Why do I think this is better for the state? Because if I'm a parent in Columbia, or Aiken, or Augusta, or Rock Hill, or Charleston -- I have a shorter driving distance for superior services. Also because I believe that CESA is more focused on increasing the penetration of soccer -- and I want to see improvement in all soccer in the state.
