# Surf back in Presidio



## sdklutz (Apr 30, 2018)

http://goalnation.com/san-diego-surf-sc-to-play-in-presidio-soccer-league/


----------



## espola (Apr 30, 2018)

What was the vote tally?


----------



## Carlsbad10 (Apr 30, 2018)

espola said:


> What was the vote tally?


Will be interesting to see the vote when the Presidio minutes are published.  Last year Surf was rejected, 17-26-2 with the ballots being destroyed.  So much for transparency.


----------



## outside! (Apr 30, 2018)

While Surf certainly dug their own hole, it is in the best interest of all the young players in the county (Surf and non-Surf) to allow Surf to play locally.


----------



## espola (Apr 30, 2018)

outside! said:


> While Surf certainly dug their own hole, it is in the best interest of all the young players in the county (Surf and non-Surf) to allow Surf to play locally.[/QUOTE?
> 
> On what do you  base that conjecture?


----------



## broshark (Apr 30, 2018)

Surf's lower teams aren't having the same success keeping kids at the club - this will serve their recruiting machine well.


----------



## outside! (Apr 30, 2018)

espola said:


> On what do you base that conjecture?


Lower teams should travel less. With more teams in the county, there should be less travel for everyone. Not that adding Surf to Presidio has much of an effect on top level teams, but even top level teams should only travel when it makes sense.


----------



## Fact (Apr 30, 2018)

It is sick that the Presidio DOC simpletons let them in after rejecting them last year.  What is the difference between last year and this year that warranted a change in voting? I am not saying that they should not have been allowed in last year although they did deserve it based on their superiority comments.  But what changed?  Is it the use of the Polo Fields, that they have been punished enough or that most DOCs have small brains that cannot remember what happened last week?  And why because one club had a loser coach involved they were told not to even bother applying for Presidio?


----------



## Fact (Apr 30, 2018)

outside! said:


> Lower teams should travel less. With more teams in the county, there should be less travel for everyone. Not that adding Surf to Presidio has much of an effect on top level teams, but even top level teams should only travel when it makes sense.


Lower level and younger teams should travel less, you are right. But those players should play at a local club that did not pull all their teams out of Presidio at the last minute under the guise that Presidio was weak. In reality they pulled all teams because they did not like the new player and coach poaching rules of Presidio.

And if it is good for lower level teams, why even vote on whether to allow a club in Presidio?  Why not let them all in?  The answer is that DOCs do not care about kids, they care about $ (keeping their territory) and getting revenge on other coaches they do not like.


----------



## GKDad65 (Apr 30, 2018)

broshark said:


> Surf's lower teams aren't having the same success keeping kids at the club - this will serve their recruiting machine well.


Extended the B2004 try outs to the olders this month.  They can't fill the second "NPL" team in that age group.
Gotta love competition.


----------



## outside! (Apr 30, 2018)

Fact said:


> Lower level and younger teams should travel less, you are right. But those players should play at a local club that did not pull all their teams out of Presidio at the last minute under the guise that Presidio was weak. In reality they pulled all teams because they did not like the new player and coach poaching rules of Presidio.
> 
> And if it is good for lower level teams, why even vote on whether to allow a club in Presidio?  Why not let them all in?  The answer is that DOCs do not care about kids, they care about $ (keeping their territory) and getting revenge on other coaches they do not like.


I agree with what you are saying, but the facts are that last year a bunch of kids traveled for soccer when they could have played more locally. While what Surf did when the pulled out of Presidio was BS, there are plenty of other DOC's that spout plenty of BS as well. In my opinion it is in the best interest of the younger players in the county that Surf be allowed back into Presidio.


----------



## Fact (Apr 30, 2018)

Fact said:


> Lower level and younger teams should travel less, you are right. But those players should play at a local club that did not pull all their teams out of Presidio at the last minute under the guise that Presidio was weak. In reality they pulled all teams because they did not like the new player and coach poaching rules of Presidio.
> 
> And if it is good for lower level teams, why even vote on whether to allow a club in Presidio?  Why not let them all in?  The answer is that DOCs do not care about kids, they care about $ (keeping their territory) and getting revenge on other coaches they do not like.





outside! said:


> I agree with what you are saying, but the facts are that last year a bunch of kids traveled for soccer when they could have played more locally. While what Surf did when the pulled out of Presidio was BS, there are plenty of other DOC's that spout plenty of BS as well. In my opinion it is in the best interest of the younger players in the county that Surf be allowed back into Presidio.


Can you answer my second paragraph?


----------



## outside! (Apr 30, 2018)

There are some common sense requirements for being admitted to Presidio that Surf easily satisfies, while many of the startups do not.


----------



## espola (Apr 30, 2018)

It appears that some think that Presidio teams will benefit from playing against Surf's lower level teams in League play.  Let that sink in a while.

Perhaps some have forgotten (or did not know) how Surf bullied the league and their opponents off the field.


----------



## outside! (Apr 30, 2018)

I didn't forget anything about how Surf has bullied the league and their opponents. That does not change the fact that a bunch of little kids are not to blame for any of it. Should Presidio never let Surf back in?


----------



## Fact (Apr 30, 2018)

outside! said:


> There are some common sense requirements for being admitted to Presidio that Surf easily satisfies, while many of the startups do not.


What are those common sense requirements? My argument is why vote at all for clubs/coaches in good standing (i.e. are
current on all their fees to Presidio).


----------



## Fact (Apr 30, 2018)

espola said:


> It appears that some think that Presidio teams will benefit from playing against Surf's lower level teams in League play.  Let that sink in a while.
> 
> Perhaps some have forgotten (or did not know) how Surf bullied the league and their opponents off the field.


You start on a good point but then lose me. How exactly did Surf bully the league and opponents?


----------



## espola (Apr 30, 2018)

outside! said:


> I didn't forget anything about how Surf has bullied the league and their opponents. That does not change the fact that a bunch of little kids are not to blame for any of it. Should Presidio never let Surf back in?


The little kids don't have to play for Surf.


----------



## Fact (Apr 30, 2018)

espola said:


> The little kids don't have to play for Surf.


And that is the point. After they made there exit from Presidio, families of younger kids and lower division players started to stay at other clubs. This is the only reason that they want back in.$$$$


----------



## outside! (Apr 30, 2018)

Should Presidio never let Surf back in?


----------



## Fact (Apr 30, 2018)

outside! said:


> Should Presidio never let Surf back in?


I asked my question first. What are the common sense requirements for why they should be let back in?

Also I am just asking why they were rejected last year but this year they are in?  What changed.

Finally their are plenty of kids from San Diego that should play locally but won’t have that opportunity. I heard GPS kids will be traveling.  What about Nomads? Why are the kids at Surf more entitled?

To answer your question, if Presidio DOCs want to keep their market share/niche at younger ages, no Surf should never be let in. I however believe that every team and club should be let in as long as they meet their field and financial responsibilities as well as not having any lapses in looking at for the welfare of children.


----------



## espola (Apr 30, 2018)

outside! said:


> Should Presidio never let Surf back in?


Years before they bailed out of Presidio, they pulled the same shit-don't-stink exit from CSL.  Should CSL never let them back in?


----------



## outside! (Apr 30, 2018)

Fact said:


> Also I am just asking why they were rejected last year but this year they are in?  What changed.


It does seem a bit fishy. My guess is that Surf has something Presidio wants, or somebody got paid off. Don't expect to see any transparency on the voting from Presidio. The issue with other clubs having to travel is an issue caused by the clubs, not Presidio.


----------



## fantasyfutbol (Apr 30, 2018)

Fact said:


> I asked my question first. What are the common sense requirements for why they should be let back in?
> 
> Also I am just asking why they were rejected last year but this year they are in?  What changed.
> 
> ...


----------



## justneededaname (Apr 30, 2018)

outside! said:


> I didn't forget anything about how Surf has bullied the league and their opponents. That does not change the fact that a bunch of little kids are not to blame for any of it. Should Presidio never let Surf back in?


It is not blaming the kids at all. If the parents don't want to drive, they can play somewhere else. The only ones who were hurting the kids were the parents. There are plenty of other options around Del Mar. Surf were a-holes when they left and they should never have been let back in.


----------



## coachrefparent (Apr 30, 2018)

Surf begged to be let back in last year (and likely this year) because their lower level teams that are really bad got their a$$es handed to them to the tune of double digit to 0 blowouts. Parents paying  thousands for the sticker and gear were not happy to travel and get trounced. I've spoken to many of them.  These teams are just there to pad the bottom line, and have no business charging AYSO players what they do. The teams often played in the Mayors (ie. recreational level) bracket at state cup.

But now they're back, and they can collect these huge fees, and the parents can be happy again to win games at AA-B and AA-C, with the sticker proudly displayed on the overpriced SUV.


----------



## Fact (Apr 30, 2018)

outside! said:


> It does seem a bit fishy. My guess is that Surf has something Presidio wants, or somebody got paid off. Don't expect to see any transparency on the voting from Presidio. The issue with other clubs having to travel is an issue caused by the clubs, not Presidio.


It is the fishy part they I am questioning. What changed?

But as far as the travel issue, it was caused by Surf  voluntarily pulling their teams out of Presidio AFTER parents paid for the season. And the issue of not being let back in last year was caused by their flippit comments about a lack of competition when they left.  Parents that chose to stay at Surf only have themselves to blame for the travel when there are plenty of good clubs nearby and most kids travel pretty far just to get to Surf.

However I believe that any coach that can bring even 1
team should be allowed to play in Presidio if it truly is about the kids.


----------



## timbuck (May 1, 2018)

“I feel the addition of the Presidio League, which will become another fantastic *pathway* for our players alongside SCDSL, NPL, ECNL and the DA, will allow us to better achieve our mission of training and developing players to fulfill their fullest potential.”


There’s that word again.  You can’t read an article about youth soccer without “pathway” being mentioned at least once.  It’s becoming more common than “development” these days.

How many clubs have teams in multiple Fall  leagues?  (Not including DA or ECNL)


----------



## broshark (May 1, 2018)

timbuck said:


> “I feel the addition of the Presidio League, which will become another fantastic *pathway* for our players alongside SCDSL, NPL, ECNL and the DA, will allow us to better achieve our mission of training and developing players to fulfill their fullest potential.”
> 
> 
> There’s that word again.  You can’t read an article about youth soccer without “pathway” being mentioned at least once.  It’s becoming more common than “development” these days.
> ...


Most.  Force, Sharks, Cbad, Express, SDSC all had Presidio and SCDSL last year.


----------



## watfly (May 1, 2018)

timbuck said:


> There’s that word again.  You can’t read an article about youth soccer without “pathway” being mentioned at least once.  It’s becoming more common than “development” these days.


I cringe every time I hear "pathway".  The only pathway is your kids own ability and commitment.


----------



## coachsamy (May 1, 2018)

timbuck said:


> “I feel the addition of the Presidio League, which will become another fantastic *pathway* for our players alongside SCDSL, NPL, ECNL and the DA, will allow us to better achieve our mission of training and developing players to fulfill their fullest potential.”
> 
> 
> There’s that word again.  You can’t read an article about youth soccer without “pathway” being mentioned at least once.  It’s becoming more common than “development” these days.
> ...


Timmy I was thinking about you when I read that! And whala! You point it out! Thanks for pointing out these frauds and their fancy words.


----------



## coachsamy (May 1, 2018)

Surf should never be allowed back in Presidio! Presidio lost any luster it had because when Surf yanked their best teams(Surf used to have their top teams play Premier if they qualified) and took them north, that created another exodus from Carlsbad, Sharks, Rebels, SDSC, SDFA, etc. up north and left Presidio as the laughingstock of club soccer. 

I really wonder what are these idiotic DoC's that allowed Surf back thinking? Whatever decent talent they have in their club now will be lured to sip the Surf Kool Aid, teams will start to break apart even more by the egocentric parents that want the right to bear the coveted Surf sticker on their cars as they can "brag" in their social circles how their child greatly improved an AA-C bottom Surf team into the greatness of SDDA Flight 2! And the worst part is that these DoC's will see revenue lost because people will now flock to Surf! 

I hope that a PATHWAY to a bronze level jamboree at Polo fields is worth bringing these people back!


----------



## outside! (May 1, 2018)

I am not a Surf homer, but Surf has also done some positive things for San Diego soccer. The Oceanside soccer complex comes to mind. They are not going away anytime soon.


----------



## espola (May 1, 2018)

outside! said:


> I am not a Surf homer, but Surf has also done some positive things for San Diego soccer. The Oceanside soccer complex comes to mind. They are not going away anytime soon.


Surf built the Oceanside fields?  I did not know that.


----------



## coachsamy (May 1, 2018)

espola said:


> Surf built the Oceanside fields?  I did not know that.


The Surf Sports guy did! Whatever his name was.


----------



## coachsamy (May 1, 2018)

outside! said:


> I am not a Surf homer, but Surf has also done some positive things for San Diego soccer. The Oceanside soccer complex comes to mind. They are not going away anytime soon.


The biggest switch and bait ever done! That place although it has nice playing fields is nothing of what was originally proposed.

I have a good question for you or anybody that defends Surf. Name at least one player that Surf develop and is a National Team player. Even better yet, that is a starter in MLS.


----------



## outside! (May 1, 2018)

coachsamy said:


> The biggest switch and bait ever done! That place although it has nice playing fields is nothing of what was originally proposed.
> 
> I have a good question for you or anybody that defends Surf. Name at least one player that Surf develop and is a National Team player. Even better yet, that is a starter in MLS.


Would you rather play in Lancaster? I for one do not and am happy to play in Oceanside.


----------



## Fact (May 1, 2018)

outside! said:


> I am not a Surf homer, but Surf has also done some positive things for San Diego soccer. The Oceanside soccer complex comes to mind. They are not going away anytime soon.


Please do not give them credit for this.  The City of Oceanside owns the land. They sent out an RFP to Developers. MC's group won the contract by over promising and under delivering, and is a separate entity from Surf Soccer Club.  There were other developers lined up to build the project but did not win the RFP, probably because their proposals were more in line with reality.  Nothing special, just a business deal.  I am sure Espola will fill us in on all the details.


----------



## Fact (May 1, 2018)

outside! said:


> Would you rather play in Lancaster? I for one do not and am happy to play in Oceanside.


You have gotten completely off track from the original question.  Why was Surf denied membership in Presidio last you but voted in this year?  Also, why are they deserving of any other club? What are these "common sense requirements" that you think entitles them?


----------



## espola (May 1, 2018)

outside! said:


> Would you rather play in Lancaster? I for one do not and am happy to play in Oceanside.


I enjoyed those weekend trips to Lancaster, and San Bernardino, and Pomona, and (not quite so far) to Capistrano.  The times we played State tournaments in San Diego were just boring by comparison.


----------



## outside! (May 1, 2018)

I am not crediting Surf for building the fields. I am crediting them (I believe it is "Surf Cup Inc." or something as opposed to Surf the club) with taking good care of the fields and getting many soccer competitions there including State/Nat Cup and the GDA Summer showcase. Surf Cup Inc. would not exist if not for Surf the club, so indirectly Surf has helped to bring large competitions to SD county thereby minimizing travel requirements for many SoCal families.

I don't think discussing fields is completely off track. I would not be surprised if it is one of the things that makes Presidio willing to let Surf back in. One of the other "common sense requirements" are things like being able to pay the bills. I think Surf can pay it's bills while some of the startup clubs may struggle with that.


----------



## espola (May 1, 2018)

outside! said:


> I am not crediting Surf for building the fields. I am crediting them (I believe it is "Surf Cup Inc." or something as opposed to Surf the club) with taking good care of the fields and getting many soccer competitions there including State/Nat Cup and the GDA Summer showcase. Surf Cup Inc. would not exist if not for Surf the club, so indirectly Surf has helped to bring large competitions to SD county thereby minimizing travel requirements for many SoCal families.
> 
> I don't think discussing fields is completely off track. I would not be surprised if it is one of the things that makes Presidio willing to let Surf back in. One of the other "common sense requirements" are things like being able to pay the bills. I think Surf can pay it's bills while some of the startup clubs may struggle with that.


The payments to Presidio aren't all that much.


----------



## outside! (May 1, 2018)

espola said:


> I enjoyed those weekend trips to Lancaster, and San Bernardino,


You are one of the few that enjoyed traveling to Lancaster, although I read Chuck Yeager liked it. At this point, we have done enough soccer travel and are happy anytime the kids can play in the county.


----------



## outside! (May 1, 2018)

espola said:


> The payments to Presidio aren't all that much.


Field rentals are part of the expenses as well.


----------



## espola (May 1, 2018)

outside! said:


> You are one of the few that enjoyed traveling to Lancaster, although I read Chuck Yeager liked it. At this point, we have done enough soccer travel and are happy anytime the kids can play in the county.


If you have any reason to believe your kid may play in college, Lancaster may someday seem like a local stop.


----------



## espola (May 1, 2018)

outside! said:


> Field rentals are part of the expenses as well.


The clubs my kids were on must have been lucky - no field rental fees unless you had to turn on the lights.


----------



## Fact (May 1, 2018)

outside! said:


> Field rentals are part of the expenses as well.


Please explain. Field rentals to Presidio for what? Every club is required to have their own fields or at least prepay for the use of another field.


----------



## Fact (May 1, 2018)

outside! said:


> One of the other "common sense requirements" are things like being able to pay the bills. I think Surf can pay it's bills while some of the startup clubs may struggle with that.


Without looking at their financials you do not know who is able to pay their bills. Both big and small clubs over expend.  Moreover, it is not like the old days were clubs could rack up big bills to Presidio.  Ref fees are paid at the fields directly to the refs. So again, I am not sure what fees they can pay that other clubs could not pay.  Plus whenever there is an issue, bonds are always an option.


----------



## outside! (May 1, 2018)

Clubs need to supply fields. That usually means the club is paying rental fees to someone. If the club fails to keep up on the rental fees, it can impact league play.


----------



## Fact (May 1, 2018)

outside! said:


> Clubs need to supply fields. That usually means the club is paying rental fees to someone. If the club fails to keep up on the rental fees, it can impact league play.


 Can you give me one example of this impacting league games for that particular season?


----------



## outside! (May 1, 2018)

Nope. That does not mean that clubs having difficulties supplying fields has not impacted league play.


----------



## Surfref (May 1, 2018)

Fact said:


> Can you give me one example of this impacting league games for that particular season?


Oh Jesus!!!  Would you stop?  This seems like one of those old JaP vs Espola threads except you are both JaP and Espola.  Presidio and the Presidio clubs let Surf in this year.  Who really gives a crap if Surf plays in Presidio, CSL, SCDSL?  The parents will put their kids where they want and pay what they want.  It really does not matter who paid for what field, rents or gets free fields, or likes traveling to Lancaster, Surf is back in Presidio and no amount of bitching on an online soccer forum will change that fact. 

I for one am glad to see Surf back into Presido/SDDA since it means more opportunities to referee at the nice smooth Polo fields instead of some crappy cow pasture in the East County or South Bay.


----------



## clubfees (May 1, 2018)

coachsamy said:


> The biggest switch and bait ever done! That place although it has nice playing fields is nothing of what was originally proposed.
> 
> I have a good question for you or anybody that defends Surf. Name at least one player that Surf develop and is a National Team player. Even better yet, that is a starter in MLS.


Not defending Surf, but couldn't  you  ask that  question  to a  majority of clubs, large and small, and get the same answer?


----------



## Fact (May 1, 2018)

Surfref said:


> Oh Jesus!!!  Would you stop?  This seems like one of those old JaP vs Espola threads except you are both JaP and Espola.  Presidio and the Presidio clubs let Surf in this year.  Who really gives a crap if Surf plays in Presidio, CSL, SCDSL?  The parents will put their kids where they want and pay what they want.  It really does not matter who paid for what field, rents or gets free fields, or likes traveling to Lancaster, Surf is back in Presidio and no amount of bitching on an online soccer forum will change that fact.
> 
> I for one am glad to see Surf back into Presido/SDDA since it means more opportunities to referee at the nice smooth Polo fields instead of some crappy cow pasture in the East County or South Bay.


As you know you can ignore me. Generally Outside has good comments but today I think someone has taken over this account.  He makes huge leaps in logic for the basis to let Surf into Presidio,  such as Surf meeting "common sense requirements" that other clubs can't meet, that the issue with other clubs having to travel is an issue caused by the clubs, that Surf is responsible for the Socal Complex, that they are more likely to pay their bill to Presidio, field rental expenses are somehow paid to Presidio or then if a club does not keep up on the field expense it will impact league play.

If you look at my post #21 I say that Surf should be let in as well as all other clubs that meet minimum requirements without a vote.  I also challenge the statement that Outside and E did not answer about Surf bullying the league and their opponents.  I just hate gossip and would rather people stick to facts or just say it is their opinion.


----------



## coachsamy (May 1, 2018)

clubfees said:


> Not defending Surf, but couldn't  you  ask that  question  to a  majority of clubs, large and small, and get the same answer?


Corona played for Aztecs and Nomads, Cherundolo played in Nomads, and Arriola played in Rangers, and since they are overriding the Ariel wave, add Albion as well. 

Surf is the role model to emulate for any youth sports organization that wants to make millions of dollars without any measurable results. And please don't give me the whole college placement. The only thing they have done for youth soccer is have one of the best tournaments in the nation, and its getting very watered down too.


----------



## broshark (May 2, 2018)

coachsamy said:


> Corona played for Aztecs and Nomads, Cherundolo played in Nomads, and Arriola played in Rangers, and since they are overriding the Ariel wave, add Albion as well.
> 
> Surf is the role model to emulate for any youth sports organization that wants to make millions of dollars without any measurable results. And please don't give me the whole college placement. The only thing they have done for youth soccer is have one of the best tournaments in the nation, and its getting very watered down too.



How long do players have to be at a club before they can take credit for their development?


----------



## espola (May 2, 2018)

coachsamy said:


> Corona played for Aztecs and Nomads, Cherundolo played in Nomads, and Arriola played in Rangers, and since they are overriding the Ariel wave, add Albion as well.
> 
> Surf is the role model to emulate for any youth sports organization that wants to make millions of dollars without any measurable results. And please don't give me the whole college placement. The only thing they have done for youth soccer is have one of the best tournaments in the nation, and its getting very watered down too.


The tournament was so good that knowledgeable Surf insiders split it out as a separate entity under their control years ago.


----------



## espola (May 2, 2018)

broshark said:


> How long do players have to be at a club before they can take credit for their development?


That underscores the weakness of the boys PDA program from the start.  By initially supporting only teams for older players, they avoided the hard work of actual development and (at least in the San Diego area) forced those clubs to either rely on their present older boys teams or to attempt to recruit the best local players (you  know - the ones who had "developed" at other clubs).


----------



## coachsamy (May 2, 2018)

broshark said:


> How long do players have to be at a club before they can take credit for their development?


Enough to play and show its potential. Is this question related to Albion?


----------



## silverstreak (May 3, 2018)

broshark said:


> How long do players have to be at a club before they can take credit for their development?



No one club I have seen has the total package to develop a player properly.....my DD's have developed greatly playing for different clubs and coaches in both team and guest atmosphere....I don't want any club claiming her development....ONLY themselves for keeping an open mind and learning from all their surroundings and all the hard work they put in for themselves.


----------



## broshark (May 3, 2018)

silverstreak said:


> No one club I have seen has the total package to develop a player properly.....my DD's have developed greatly playing for different clubs and coaches in both team and guest atmosphere....I don't want any club claiming her development....ONLY themselves for keeping an open mind and learning from all their surroundings and all the hard work they put in for themselves.


This is the correct answer.  Great players tend to be great players no matter where they start.  Eventually, players want to play with others of the same or better talent, and those players tend to meet up at clubs like Surf or Blues in SoCal.  It just is what it is.   The idea that these clubs are somehow less than what they claim because they don't develop players is nonsense.


----------



## coachsamy (May 3, 2018)

broshark said:


> This is the correct answer.  Great players tend to be great players no matter where they start.  Eventually, players want to play with others of the same or better talent, and those players tend to meet up at clubs like Surf or Blues in SoCal.  It just is what it is.   The idea that these clubs are somehow less than what they claim because they don't develop players is nonsense.


You still haven't got a name yet? Because Surf haven't got one yet. 

My point is that for all the "prestige" and so called accolades that Surf claims, they haven't develop or place an elite player to a professional club or an adult national team. 

To give Surf some credit they do put some great teams together but so do Albion, Carlsbad, CVFC and Sharks, and Rebels is starting to catch up


----------



## surfertwins (May 3, 2018)

coachsamy said:


> You still haven't got a name yet? Because Surf haven't got one yet.
> 
> My point is that for all the "prestige" and so called accolades that Surf claims, they haven't develop or place an elite player to a professional club or an adult national team.
> 
> To give Surf some credit they do put some great teams together but so do Albion, Carlsbad, CVFC and Sharks, and Rebels is starting to catch up


Rachel Buehler?


----------



## surfertwins (May 3, 2018)

coachsamy said:


> You still haven't got a name yet? Because Surf haven't got one yet.
> 
> My point is that for all the "prestige" and so called accolades that Surf claims, they haven't develop or place an elite player to a professional club or an adult national team.
> 
> To give Surf some credit they do put some great teams together but so do Albion, Carlsbad, CVFC and Sharks, and Rebels is starting to catch up


Mia Fishel on the current U17 National team?


----------



## mkg68 (May 3, 2018)

Luca de la Torre plays for Fulham and the MNT
Brian Iloski plays professionally in Poland
Justin Fiddes MLS
Rachel Buehler - WNT Hall of Fame
AJ Soares - MLS
Corey Baird - USMNT, MLS
Alexis Velela - USL
Anthony Wright - EPL
Ryan Guy - MLS
I'm sure I'm missing quite a few. 

And not to mention all of the National Team players that continue to be developed from Surf. Catarina Macario, Marley Canales, Sunny Dunphy, Mia Fishel, Madison Mercado, Taylor Kornieck, Julie Doyle, Bianca Ferrera, the list goes on and on. This was from a quick google search. 

Surf was named the top club in the nation for producing top college recruits for the past two years: http://www.topdrawersoccer.com/club-soccer-articles/sd-surf-win-16-img-girls-recruiting-title_aid38836

For Chrissakes, at one point SD Surf had 5 of the starting 11 players on the U18 USWNT. That's unheard of.

I'm not a huge fan of everything they do, but in terms of producing top players, there is no one close to Surf.


----------



## fantasyfutbol (May 3, 2018)

coachsamy said:


> Corona played for Aztecs and Nomads, Cherundolo played in Nomads, and Arriola played in Rangers, and since they are overriding the Ariel wave, add Albion as well.
> 
> Surf is the role model to emulate for any youth sports organization that wants to make millions of dollars without any measurable results. And please don't give me the whole college placement. The only thing they have done for youth soccer is have one of the best tournaments in the nation, and its getting very watered down too.





mkg68 said:


> Luca de la Torre plays for Fulham and the MNT
> Brian Iloski plays professionally in Poland
> Justin Fiddes MLS
> Rachel Buehler - WNT Hall of Fame
> ...


Whoa!  You just blasted the demogorgon..I mean... CoachSammy back to the upside down world!  Having Surf back in Presidio has CoachSammy in such a highspeed wobble it reminds me of those parents of the August/September babies after the switch to birth year.


----------



## coachsamy (May 4, 2018)

mkg68 said:


> Luca de la Torre plays for Fulham and the MNT (
> Brian Iloski plays professionally in Poland
> Justin Fiddes MLS
> Rachel Buehler - WNT Hall of Fame
> ...


Got me there with Buechler and DeLaTorre. Macario and Canales I knew of both of them and they should carry the senior team unless Macario chooses to be next Marta in Brazil.


----------



## coachsamy (May 4, 2018)

fantasyfutbol said:


> Whoa!  You just blasted the demogorgon..I mean... CoachSammy back to the upside down world!  Having Surf back in Presidio has CoachSammy in such a highspeed wobble it reminds me of those parents of the August/September babies after the switch to birth year.
> 
> View attachment 2526


I haven't laugh so  hard in days!


----------



## fantasyfutbol (May 4, 2018)

coachsamy said:


> I haven't laugh so  hard in days!


We need more good sports like you on this forum coach!


----------



## Copa Del Mar (May 8, 2018)

I don’t want to use the name but on the girls (2000) side there’s at least one that went wire to wire from U8 BCF.  She plays on a South American National TeAm and is heading to Stanford

BW also on the 2000 team came over at U10 and is in the USNWT program and heading to the University of AZ

There are many more like that at Surf as well,..  but they came over at u12 or later so not technically developed at Surf. 



coachsamy said:


> The biggest switch and bait ever done! That place although it has nice playing fields is nothing of what was originally proposed.
> 
> I have a good question for you or anybody that defends Surf. Name at least one player that Surf develop and is a National Team player. Even better yet, that is a starter in MLS.


----------



## Copa Del Mar (May 8, 2018)

broshark said:


> How long do players have to be at a club before they can take credit for their development?


Come over before 12 or 13


----------



## Copa Del Mar (May 8, 2018)

surfertwins said:


> Mia Fishel on the current U17 National team?


She came over at U13

Gabe developed her st CSC. That is fact


----------



## broshark (May 9, 2018)

Copa Del Mar said:


> Come over before 12 or 13



I see.  So no development after U12?  Somebody should tell the folks at DA and ECNL that they're wasting their time.


----------



## Surfref (May 9, 2018)

Copa Del Mar said:


> Come over before 12 or 13


One of my DD old club teammates who is currently playing D1 college soccer did not even start playing club until she was 12.  She played AYSO, softball and volleyball up until she was 12 and decided, with a nudge from her parents, that soccer was going to be her only sport.  I am positive that AYSO did not develop her into the player she is today.


----------



## timbuck (May 9, 2018)

Surfref said:


> One of my DD old club teammates who is currently playing D1 college soccer did not even start playing club until she was 12.  She played AYSO, softball and volleyball up until she was 12 and decided, with a nudge from her parents, that soccer was going to be her only sport.  I am positive that AYSO did not develop her into the player she is today.


You don’t think playing and having fun had anything to do with her Development and love for the game?


----------



## broshark (May 9, 2018)

timbuck said:


> You don’t think playing and having fun had anything to do with her Development and love for the game?


Lol.  Then wouldn't every team and every league be responsible for developing players?  In which case the entire discussion about clubs like Surf not developing players jumps the shark completely.


----------



## timbuck (May 9, 2018)

broshark said:


> Lol.  Then wouldn't every team and every league be responsible for developing players?  In which case the entire discussion about clubs like Surf not developing players jumps the shark completely.


Consider the shark jumped.  I would say that every coach, teammate, opponent and referee play a part in a players development.


----------



## broshark (May 9, 2018)

timbuck said:


> Consider the shark jumped.  I would say that every coach, teammate, opponent and referee play a part in a players development.


In which case it simply can't be said that Surf and other larger clubs don't develop players.


----------



## surfertwins (May 9, 2018)

Copa Del Mar said:


> She came over at U13
> 
> Gabe developed her st CSC. That is fact


Gabe is a foot work specialist..  That is a fact!


----------



## coachsamy (May 9, 2018)

Fact said:


> It is sick that the Presidio DOC simpletons let them in after rejecting them last year.  What is the difference between last year and this year that warranted a change in voting? I am not saying that they should not have been allowed in last year although they did deserve it based on their superiority comments.  But what changed?  Is it the use of the Polo Fields, that they have been punished enough or that most DOCs have small brains that cannot remember what happened last week?  And why because one club had a loser coach involved they were told not to even bother applying for Presidio?


I think you nailed on the head. It seems like the use of Polo Fields for tournaments was part of the bribe to let them in.


----------



## coachsamy (May 17, 2018)

I wonder who were the 32 clubs that voted to let Surf back in... I wonder if Surf agreed a no poaching clause to members that voted for reentry.


http://presidiosoccer.com/documents/minutes/general_minutes/gmm_201804.pdf


----------



## timbuck (May 17, 2018)

Does SCDSL or Coast publish their meeting minutes?


----------



## outside! (May 17, 2018)

coachsamy said:


> I wonder who were the 32 clubs that voted to let Surf back in... I wonder if Surf agreed a no poaching clause to members that voted for reentry.
> 
> 
> http://presidiosoccer.com/documents/minutes/general_minutes/gmm_201804.pdf


There were 43 clubs in attendance, 8 not in attendance and the total number of votes for and against Surf was 50. Did some of the clubs that were not in attendance vote by proxy?


----------



## Fact (May 17, 2018)

coachsamy said:


> I wonder if Surf agreed a no poaching clause to members that voted for reentry.


Come on Samy, you know better than that. Or at least if they agreed to that, they are not going to honor it.


----------



## Fact (May 17, 2018)

outside! said:


> There were 43 clubs in attendance, 8 not in attendance and the total number of votes for and against Surf was 50. Did some of the clubs that were not in attendance vote by proxy?


Great point. I highly doubt that each club remembered to give a proxy.  Curious results.  If you look at the geographic locations of the 3 clubs that were voted in, one in far south SD, one in central SD and one in north SD.  With roughy the same number of votes for each, voting does not look like it was based on fear of competition from neighboring clubs.  I would love to know what they told SD Barcelona in response to their request for information under the Open Discussion section.  I am going to have to ask around. Please PM me if you know.


----------



## coachsamy (May 17, 2018)

Fact said:


> Great point. I highly doubt that each club remembered to give a proxy.  Curious results.  If you look at the geographic locations of the 3 clubs that were voted in, one in far south SD, one in central SD and one in north SD.  With roughy the same number of votes for each, voting does not look like it was based on fear of competition from neighboring clubs.  I would love to know what they told SD Barcelona in response to their request for information under the Open Discussion section.  I am going to have to ask around. Please PM me if you know.


I'll ask some of my contacts around to see if any of them have any 411 on this. But yes it does seem odd that the 3 clubs voted in were around the same votes and they have something to offer (Fields/Facilities).

SWSC - Galway Downs
Surf - Polo Fields
Fut7 - Futbol Factory


----------



## Fact (May 17, 2018)

coachsamy said:


> I'll ask some of my contacts around to see if any of them have any 411 on this. But yes it does seem odd that the 3 clubs voted in were around the same votes and they have something to offer (Fields/Facilities).
> 
> SWSC - Galway Downs
> Surf - Polo Fields
> Fut7 - Futbol Factory


Offer the Futbol Factory to whom?

Last year Surf only got 17 votes in favor. 32 is a big turnaround. Interesting that last year they quickly voted to destroy the ballots and this year they did not. But I am not sure the significance. 
Looking at Strikers, they are still listed as SWSC. So I am not sure the purpose in keeping them out of Presidio. Also where is SD Barcelona's teams going to play?  Forcing kids to travel so far for games simply because they want to stay with a particular coach is wrong. All the DOCs and Presidio should be ashamed of themselves.


----------



## Fact (May 23, 2018)

Fact said:


> Offer the Futbol Factory to whom?
> 
> Last year Surf only got 17 votes in favor. 32 is a big turnaround..


Obviously field use played into them getting in Presidio.  Even the Rebels are using the Polo Fields for their tournament this year. I love it when votes can be bought.


----------



## coachsamy (May 24, 2018)

Fact said:


> Obviously field use played into them getting in Presidio.  Even the Rebels are using the Polo Fields for their tournament this year. I love it when votes can be bought.


Took you this long to figure this out?


----------



## Fact (May 24, 2018)

coachsamy said:


> I'll ask some of my contacts around to see if any of them have any 411 on this. But yes it does seem odd that the 3 clubs voted in were around the same votes and they have something to offer (Fields/Facilities).
> 
> SWSC - Galway Downs
> Surf - Polo Fields
> Fut7 - Futbol Factory





Fact said:


> Offer the Futbol Factory to whom?





Fact said:


> Obviously field use played into them getting in Presidio.  Even the Rebels are using the Polo Fields for their tournament this year. I love it when votes can be bought.





coachsamy said:


> Took you this long to figure this out?


I knew other were using the Polo Fields but surprised Rebels are using it. I did not know their tournament was even big enough to need a place like that.  Unfortunately same shitty refs they high from out of the country that you cannot even have a conversation with.

But you still have not answered the question of why the Futbol Factory would be a benefit large enough to other clubs that they would vote for the new DS7 club? And I thought you were going to check around about the voting?


----------



## GunninGopher (May 24, 2018)

Fact said:


> ... Unfortunately same shitty refs they high from out of the country that you cannot even have a conversation with...


San Diego County Soccer Referee association is doing Rebels cup for the second year in a row. I don't know who they had assigning it prior.


----------



## Fact (May 24, 2018)

GunninGopher said:


> San Diego County Soccer Referee association is doing Rebels cup for the second year in a row. I don't know who they had assigning it prior.


Good to know. In years past they cut corners and used refs with questionable credentials.  I believe there was a thread or 2 on the old forum about the inferior refs which included a lack of cards.


----------



## coachsamy (May 24, 2018)

Fact said:


> I knew other were using the Polo Fields but surprised Rebels are using it. I did not know their tournament was even big enough to need a place like that.  Unfortunately same shitty refs they high from out of the country that you cannot even have a conversation with.
> 
> But you still have not answered the question of why the Futbol Factory would be a benefit large enough to other clubs that they would vote for the new DS7 club? And I thought you were going to check around about the voting?


The owner of the FF agreed to let local clubs to continue to rent space for practice/special events at the FF. Plus people are not worry DV7 making a huge impact. Their Kool Aid  factor is not that sugared up and I haven't confirmed that every kid is free as long they are member. 

I asked a few people and they are hush hush about the whole thing other than saying that Surf is being apologetic about the actions and arrogance of the past regime. Nobody would budge when I asked about the fields, player poaching, etc.


----------



## Fact (May 24, 2018)

coachsamy said:


> The owner of the FF agreed to let local clubs to continue to rent space for practice/special events at the FF. Plus people are not worry DV7 making a huge impact. Their Kool Aid  factor is not that sugared up and I haven't confirmed that every kid is free as long they are member.
> 
> I asked a few people and they are hush hush about the whole thing other than saying that Surf is being apologetic about the actions and arrogance of the past regime. Nobody would budge when I asked about the fields, player poaching, etc.


The Futball Factory would rent it out no matter what, that is good
business.

As for the last regime at Surf being responsible for their past attitude is a farce.  Collin did not do this. It was THIS regime right when they rose to power. Way to blame the guy that built the good reputation for the club that they then  dumped.

I don’t think you can find anyone more arrogant than Bryan.


----------



## coachsamy (May 24, 2018)

Fact said:


> The Futball Factory would rent it out no matter what, that is good
> business.
> 
> As for the last regime at Surf being responsible for their past attitude is a farce.  Collin did not do this. It was THIS regime right when they rose to power. Way to blame the guy that built the good reputation for the club that they then  dumped.
> ...


That just tells you how things goes around in the club soccer community. At the end of the day is their problem and they will have to face the consequences of letting them in, or rip the benefits of Polo Fields or beating up on E and F teams of Surf. 

I just wish that these people have a little bit of self respect and dignity. I wonder if NG voted against it since there is no Albion at Man City this weekend.


----------



## Surfref (May 24, 2018)

Fact said:


> I knew other were using the Polo Fields but surprised Rebels are using it. I did not know their tournament was even big enough to need a place like that.  Unfortunately same shitty refs they high from out of the country that you cannot even have a conversation with.
> 
> But you still have not answered the question of why the Futbol Factory would be a benefit large enough to other clubs that they would vote for the new DS7 club? And I thought you were going to check around about the voting?


Not this year.  Rebels are using SDCSRA for their refs so you get a lot of refs that work College, Surf Cup, DA, ECNL and the SD adult leagues.


----------



## Fact (May 24, 2018)

coachsamy said:


> That just tells you how things goes around in the club soccer community. At the end of the day is their problem and they will have to face the consequences of letting them in, or rip the benefits of Polo Fields or beating up on E and F teams of Surf.
> 
> I just wish that these people have a little bit of self respect and dignity. I wonder if NG voted against it since there is no Albion at Man City this weekend.


I’ve been there for meetings but not an official vote like this. Are they written?   I bet they just use hands like they do for everything else so you can see who voted for who.  I am sure the new clubs wait outside during the vote but if you have a friend in the room...


----------



## outside! (May 24, 2018)

coachsamy said:


> That just tells you how things goes around in the club soccer community. At the end of the day is their problem and they will have to face the consequences of letting them in, or rip the benefits of Polo Fields or beating up on E and F teams of Surf.
> 
> I just wish that these people have a little bit of self respect and dignity. I wonder if NG voted against it since there is no Albion at Man City this weekend.


Field availability is a constant headache for clubs, so the being able to use the Polo fields for tournaments is probably what changed.

While the new management at Surf was certainly arrogant when they withdrew from Presidio, the old management had its problems as well.


----------



## Trisoccer (Jun 1, 2018)

Looks like the Surf are using their leverage to push two teams into each SDDA flight 1 seeding. Two teams each in the 2010, 2009, and 2008. Given, their first level teams are deserving, the second surf teams for 2009 and 2008 didn’t make it out of bracket play in the 2018 Governor’s cup! Does that say something regarding the quality of teams that played in SDDA flight 1 last year? What happen to the placing of 1st and 2nd place teams in flight 2 from last year moving up to flight 1 for this year? Will have to see if this trend occurs in the older flights.


----------



## Fact (Jun 1, 2018)

Trisoccer said:


> Looks like the Surf are using their leverage to push two teams into each SDDA flight 1 seeding. Two teams each in the 2010, 2009, and 2008. Given, their first level teams are deserving, the second surf teams for 2009 and 2008 didn’t make it out of bracket play in the 2018 Governor’s cup! Does that say something regarding the quality of teams that played in SDDA flight 1 last year? What happen to the placing of 1st and 2nd place teams in flight 2 from last year moving up to flight 1 for this year? Will have to see if this trend occurs in the older flights.
> 
> View attachment 2715
> 
> View attachment 2714


Do you have a link? I do not see it up yet on the Presidio website.


----------



## Trisoccer (Jun 1, 2018)

https://2018sdda.affinitysoccer.com/tour/public/info/accepted_list.asp?sessionguid=&tournamentguid=FCDE1B3D-ABB2-4C7D-96AB-37C5920A2A10


----------



## broshark (Jun 1, 2018)

Trisoccer said:


> Looks like the Surf are using their leverage to push two teams into each SDDA flight 1 seeding. Two teams each in the 2010, 2009, and 2008. Given, their first level teams are deserving, the second surf teams for 2009 and 2008 didn’t make it out of bracket play in the 2018 Governor’s cup! Does that say something regarding the quality of teams that played in SDDA flight 1 last year? What happen to the placing of 1st and 2nd place teams in flight 2 from last year moving up to flight 1 for this year? Will have to see if this trend occurs in the older flights.
> 
> View attachment 2715
> 
> View attachment 2714


You're being a big rough on them.  The Surf 2009's just won Man City and will literally destroy every team in SD but Galaxy SD.  Their second team will do just fine.  Why don't you let a few games play out before you start crying?


----------



## Trisoccer (Jun 1, 2018)

Sorry to insult your intelligence and I don’t like to discriminate against low IQ people, but you missed the point of the post. The first level Surf teams are legit in most cases, but the Surf second level teams are at best Presidio material rather than flight 1 team. There are more deserving flight 2 teams than the second tier Surf teams for flight 1.

Let me break it down to your level.

Surf team one= Good

Surf team two= Bad


This link may help you in the future: https://www.teachyourmonstertoread.com/


----------



## broshark (Jun 1, 2018)

Trisoccer said:


> Sorry to insult your intelligence and I don’t like to discriminate against low IQ people, but you missed the point of the post. The first level Surf teams are legit in most cases, but the Surf second level teams are at best Presidio material rather than flight 1 team. There are more deserving flight 2 teams than the second tier Surf teams for flight 1.
> 
> Let me break it down to your level.
> 
> ...



Let me correct you a bit.

Surf team one - best in SDDA 1 by far
Surf team tw0 - not last in SDDA 1, guaranteed

How's that?

Before you give it a go, you should look at how few 2009 SDDA 1 teams even played State Cup last year, Presidents or Governors.  Liverpool wasn't the worst team in SDDA 1 last year and also failed to get out of the first round in Governors.  Express, Rebels 2nd team and a few others didn't play at all.

In addition, the best teams in Presidio's top division (there was no SDDA 2 for 2009's last year) were mainly 2010 A teams.  So who do you think should fill the 09 spots?  

I appreciate the reading help, but you might want to see if they've got on for logic too.


----------



## Trisoccer (Jun 1, 2018)

Ok, Mario

Again, no issue with the first teams, Surf first 2009 team is legit but will be challenged by Albion South that has reloaded which they narrowly beat in president’s cup by one goal, Rebels with your former prodigy, and Atlante SD Barcelona.

Second tier Surf 2008 team successes against SDDA flight one teams: Surf 2008 2nd team in Albion showcase lost to SDSC Orange 9-0. It will be like that for them all season in the SDDA 2008 flight 1, they may not even score a goal all season!

Face the facts, the Surf 2nd teams do not deserve flight 1 status and is only the result of the club’s treachery!


----------



## broshark (Jun 1, 2018)

Trisoccer said:


> Ok, Mario
> 
> Again, no issue with the first teams, Surf first 2009 team is legit but will be challenged by Albion South that has reloaded which they narrowly beat in president’s cup by one goal, Rebels with your former prodigy, and Atlante SD Barcelona.
> 
> ...


I'm talking 2009. 

And no, Rebels wasn't even the 4th best team in SDDA last year, and that's true even after their new addition (who's on what, his 4th team in 2 years?) came on board.  They couldn't touch Albion, Albion South (your star's former team) or Galaxy SD at the end of the year.  I'd also point out that the kid you mention was fairly benign against real competition last year, regardless of which team he was on.  While he's a great player, he wasn't even the most effective player on Albion South and they weren't any worse for the wear after he left. 

I'll ask the question again though.  If Rebels had 2 teams in SDDA 1 last year at 2009, why not surf?  Who else should be there?  I'm down to consider specific teams, but like I said, the best Presidio teams were 2010 A teams playing an age up so there's not really even a pool to choose from.  To be honest, Galaxy SD could (and probably should) easily have 2 teams in SDDA 1 as well.  Maybe Sharks?  Maybe SDSC's top team?  Who else?


----------



## Trisoccer (Jun 1, 2018)

Mario, Let’s stay focused here! Try to stay focused!

You keep harping on the 2009 but the bigger issue here is tier 2 Surf teams in flight 1 based on club leverage rather than a skill set. We will just have to see how it all plays out, Surf 2nd teams getting hammered in league play and a wasted game for flights 1 teams.


----------



## carla hinkle (Jun 1, 2018)

Where did you find that link? I only see 2017 info on the Presidio &  websites ... also doesn't it seem odd that SDDA 2009 boys only have 8 teams/1 flight, but SDDA 2010 boys have 14 teams?


----------



## coachrefparent (Jun 1, 2018)

carla hinkle said:


> Where did you find that link? I only see 2017 info on the Presidio &  websites ... also doesn't it seem odd that SDDA 2009 boys only have 8 teams/1 flight, but SDDA 2010 boys have 14 teams?


You probably have to be logged in as an administrator.


----------



## carla hinkle (Jun 2, 2018)

I don't think it's complete yet, if you click on some groups they have zero teams...I bet it is still in progress.


----------



## fantasyfutbol (Jun 3, 2018)

Trisoccer said:


> Ok, Mario
> 
> Again, no issue with the first teams, Surf first 2009 team is legit but will be challenged by Albion South that has reloaded which they narrowly beat in president’s cup by one goal, Rebels with your former prodigy, and Atlante SD Barcelona.
> 
> ...


Triggered a bit?? This is gonna be a fun year.  So many salty parents...


----------



## Fact (Jun 3, 2018)

fantasyfutbol said:


> Triggered a bit?? This is gonna be a fun year.  So many salty parents...
> 
> View attachment 2722


As always, another worthy comment from the wannabe coach.


----------



## coachsamy (Jun 4, 2018)

So Surf comes back and gets to put 2 teams in each top flight of Presidio/SDDA? My observation is that each announce bracket is composed of 2 teams of Surf, Albion, Carlsbad and Rebels, plus fillers from here and there. 

Whatever happened to Sharks, Hotspurs, CVFC, Nomads, Poway, etc. not having top teams in the Ulittles?


----------



## broshark (Jun 4, 2018)

Trisoccer said:


> Mario, Let’s stay focused here! Try to stay focused!
> 
> You keep harping on the 2009 but the bigger issue here is tier 2 Surf teams in flight 1 based on club leverage rather than a skill set. We will just have to see how it all plays out, Surf 2nd teams getting hammered in league play and a wasted game for flights 1 teams.


Lulz.  If you want to tag me as a Surf coach, go with Keith, the guy who coaches the 2009's (last year too).  Mario only coached a handful of the kids on that team now (and the best kid came from LAGSD).

Surf with 2 teams next year will be fine.  If the second team gets exposed, I'm guessing they'll not have the same opportunity the next year.


----------



## Surfref (Jun 5, 2018)

coachsamy said:


> So Surf comes back and gets to put 2 teams in each top flight of Presidio/SDDA? My observation is that each announce bracket is composed of 2 teams of Surf, Albion, Carlsbad and Rebels, plus fillers from here and there.
> 
> Whatever happened to Sharks, Hotspurs, CVFC, Nomads, Poway, etc. not having top teams in the Ulittles?


There was a time when Surf teams made up 6-7 of the 10 teams in the top G18 flight.   That was also when Surf only had 2 teams at each age level.  At least there are only two Surf teams in those younger brackets now.


----------

