>>[HappyDaddy] [�] Some may think it silly to suggest that a club might have, shall we say, dual purposes in putting together an event like the combine. Others may think it's perfectly fine to use an event like the combine to recruit. You know what - those would be perfectly reasonable opinions to hold. They don't happen to be mine though. If you want to "debate" the substance of the issues, I'm happy to do that.<<
I don�t think that it�s �silly� to assign selfish motives to any club nor to raise the point that these clubs aren�t altruistic. If you had been that specific originally, I doubt anyone would have found any humor in the situation.
I believe that CESA thinks that by holding the combine that they are able to selfishly help their club by helping kids. I don�t think that there�s any altruism involved; I think that there�s a strong belief that the best way they can grow their club and achieve higher degrees of success is to put kids first.
I don�t think that anyone thought that when CESA has its open CAP program that they weren�t recruiting players into their club. Even when some people, and even clubs, complained about it being �open� and thus a violation of recruiting rules and the SCYSA ruled it was a non-SCYSA program and ignored it � I thought most people got it that it was something that was good for youth soccer.
I don�t think that anyone thought that when CUFC put up billboards that they weren�t recruiting players into their club. Even when those billboards were placed in strategic locations around other clubs, I didn�t hear a big deal made of that � because I think that there was an overall feeling that CUFC was doing something that was good for youth soccer.
I don�t think that anyone thought that when CUFC sponsored high school teams with banners in their stadium, or when CUFC sponsors high school tournaments, that they aren�t recruiting players into their club. I think that there was an overall feeling that CUFC was doing something that was good for youth soccer.
I don�t think that when Bridge joined the USSF Academy program that they weren�t trying to offer something that was �better� than other clubs could offer and thus recruiting players into their club. I think that there was an overall feeling that Bridge was doing something that had the potential to help youth soccer. By the way, given the massive changes I see in USYS�s ODP and in the level of involvement kids are able to achieve even from a state as small as South Carolina, it�s hard for me not to cheer Bridge and the USSF for shaking up what many see as a moribund, political, and deeply flawed system.
My problem is that there is a vocal minority on this message board that make a big deal out of everything any club does except for their own club and ascribes the worst possible motivations for any actions taken. Your problems with Bridge, and with CESA, and yet your inability (or unwillingness) to view your own club�s actions in the same light are the reason that you were fodder for humor.
I personally find the recruiting rules stupid; but I understand that they are not in place to help parents or children but instead to help the clubs which are the voting and paying constituencies of the SCYSA. I find it equally stupid for people to complain about open programs by which all kids can benefit. But I do understand that there are people out there who don�t find either opinion stupid � and I don�t object to that. I just object to the blatant hypocrisy of not being able to understand that it doesn�t matter if your child�s club does something or another club does something � that your opinion should be formed not by the actor but by the action. If you want to be loyal to something, be loyal to concepts and ideas that might help children in our state � and not to clubs.
