Quote:

It was 7 players (that's as few as the officials will allow) and the coach asked for no mercy. With a new facility and a win or two already on the season, it is hoped that a few humbling experiences will bring out the "want to" and desire to find a fall soccer team.



1. Does anyone know if the Greer coach asked for "no mercy" in the Wade Hampton game? My daughter's team had a similar score against Greer last year (again, minimum number of players on field at end), and she said the coach at that time made the same request of her team as the Laurens coach made of TL Hanna last week.

2. Most of the discussion on these scores has been focused on the responsibility of the dominant team to avoid the blowout. I agree that a dominant team, even if asked to show "no mercy", should still strive to provide "experience" for the weaker team in a sporting manner (restrictions, etc.).

However, does a weaker team share in the responsibility of avoiding a blowout? Perhaps more important, do the coaches and those developing schedules for struggling programs (not sure who develops league schedules) have a responsibility to maybe go a little further in scheduling some matches where the weaker teams will not only avoid the blowout but will have a greater opportunity for success?

I have a great deal of respect for those players of teams like Greer and Union County. I would say that they display a greater love for the game than many who would probably hang up their cleats after so many lopsided losses. However, Greer and Union County play in arguably one of the strongest AAA regions in the state, II-AAA. As "developing" programs they are going to be playing against the odds in almost every region game they play. They play every other team in the region twice... except one. As two teams that could really use an opportunity to play on a little more level playing field, why do their schedules not include "Greer vs. Union County"? Perhaps the posted schedules do not include all of their matches, but they include no pre-season scrimmages or non-regional matches.

If these are "programs in development" where are the developmental parts of the schedules? If these are programs concerned with the morale of the players and their love for the game, where are the non-region games against teams of similar strength? Laurens plays in a tough AAAA region, but with a goal of developing the program the schedule includes matches that provide the players with opportunities to play "straight up", not packed in or with restrictions placed on the opposing team. They may not win, but they may be competitive.

My point is this, and I make it with all due respect for the players of Greer, Union County and other "struggling" teams around the state, many of whom are struggling just to find that first goal scored of the season. If the schools and coaches of these "developing" and "struggling" programs do not make the effort to provide real opportunities to develop the competitiveness of the teams, can we keep placing the sole responsibility of avoiding blowouts on the dominant teams of the various regions? Year after year with the same teams?

If an honest assessment of a program's goal is to provide a less than varsity level of support and development for the players, perhaps the players' love for the game will find greater satisfaction through a junior varsity schedule. (No disrespect intended for the many fine junior varsity programs out there.)