Yeah, I got the joke. I'm dense, but not that dense.

Did Tripp win any state championships with a girls team? I don't think so, but then, I'm not a student of Miller-history, so I could be wrong.

I won't argue with your statistics (although I must confess that I have not taken the time to study them in detail--preferring generalities).

I do have a question about your statistics--which I believe has been raised by someone else, but I don't remember the answer. How do your numbers factor in girls who started with a Midlands club and them moved to an upstate or lower state club for their last year or two? In the statistics, how does the Midlands club get credit for developing that player's basic skills, etc.? Seems like a difficult issue to deal with in the statistics.

I'm not saying this makes your statistics invalid, just asking the question.

Finally, "what strategies"? Since you are begging, a bad canine habit, I'll try to shed some light.

I certainly can't answer for ALL Midlands clubs. I can tell you what I know about NECSA's strategies while I was on that board. Also, keep in mind that there may have been other, more specific things that people were doing that I may not have been aware of or may not now remember. Finally, remember that I am talking about a tenure that ended three years ago. I really am not the right person to talk about what has happened since or what might happen going forward.

What we basically tried to do for the girls program included the following:

1. Provide the best facilities we could, made available on an equal basis with boys teams.

2. Provide the best coaches we could, at pay scales based on the same criteria as boys coaches--ie, if they had the same credentials, we paid them the same.

3. Provide occaisional, additional training opportunities with outside trainers.

4. Provide other fun and challenging opportunities, like scrimages against boys teams and international playing opportunities--against teams from Germany.

5. We had a board-level VP whose mission was to oversee and develop the girls program.

6. We tried to listen to coaches, parents and players to learn how we should improve things.

7. We tried to help smaller clubs around the Midlands to develop and grow by allowing them to play in our recreation league, thus increasing the number of girls overall in the Midlands.

8. We provided "scholarships" to girls that could not afford the fees--done at the recreation and classic levels--to the extent that we could afford to do so.

If anyone else can add to this list, I would appreciate the help.

How effective were we?

For thousands of recreation and classic girls, I think we did a very good job and they had very satisfying soccer experiences.

I think we were particularly successful at the recreation level. Not the "handful of elite players" mentioned in #4 of your theses. This success would only be measured indirectly by your statistics.

Clearly, for some girls, we did not do enough. Some girls--I don't know how many--went to play in the upstate or lower state. Others left NECSA to go to CFC or other Midlands clubs. We certainly were not "everything to everyone".

Whenever girls left, we would try to assess the "why" to determine whether we needed to make changes. I don't think we ever ignored departures.

The folks that started CFC thought they could do a better job for girls--and I applauded their efforts. I do not know what CFC's strategies were. You could, I believe, ask Heather. Also, I don't know why they did not survive. But they certainly did not.

I hope this gives you some of what you are looking for.