These "building a better product" and "improving services" statements are mindboggling. Look at what the club has done in its short history! They've 1) gotten the best coaches 2) have most of the best players 3) have numerous Premier teams and SCYSA/US Club titles and 4) have three nice places to train in Summerville, James Island and Daniel Island.
It's not utopia where a Manchester Meadows complex will pop up immediately for the club in the exact central location for every player. Is there room to grow at the Bridge FA? Of course.
But Bridge FA is by far good enough that a player looking for a higher level and more opportunity would benefit more then staying in a place offering a lower level on a picturesque facility. Who cares what you're playing on, and where, if the ones around you and coaching you are sub-standard.
I'm not perpetuating anything but stating the fact that everyone tries to hide and pretend doesn't happen. Because clubs object and say "they don't need it," the best players that are members of clubs who oppose the Bridge FA will be recruited because 1) that's what they deserve for development and 2) that's what is best for the elite club that is trying to improve it's "service." Because if the team is better and results ate better then the service is deemed better. Simple fact of perception in youth soccer.
Try to act the right way, first, which the Bridge tried and then act the needed way, second, which I'm sure the Bridge will do now. The takeover chat is absurd considering the concessions the club offered in structure, coaching, team formation, programs, etc.
Again, if they have good fields and have the top coaches and have most of the top players, then what "products" and "services" are people looking for?
