# SD Surf putting youngers in sdda/presidio?



## seesnake (Feb 14, 2017)

I had heard this might be a possibility. Any information?


----------



## Technician72 (Feb 14, 2017)

We've heard the same information from friends on the younger teams.


----------



## MakeAPlay (Feb 14, 2017)

I think that it is a good thing.  Why have the younger teams travel anyway?


----------



## coachrefparent (Feb 14, 2017)

Makes sense since Surf played in the Mayors (rec) division at State Cup.


----------



## SocalSoccerMom (Feb 14, 2017)

Would be a good move for Surf as it will save the club cost and parents time


----------



## Kicknit22 (Feb 14, 2017)

Wow!  I guess it's true that everything DOES come around full circle.  I think this would be great for San Diego's youngers


----------



## Round (Feb 14, 2017)

Sure, all of that.

Doesn't anyone remember why Surf left and what they said?  Presidio is spine less, I think there is an aesops fable or two that are pertinent.

Surf is only doing it so they can make money,  bad economics now for them.


----------



## Supermodel56 (Feb 14, 2017)

Round said:


> Sure, all of that.
> 
> Doesn't anyone remember why Surf left and what they said?  Presidio is spine less, I think there is an aesops fable or two that are pertinent.
> 
> Surf is only doing it so they can make money,  bad economics now for them.


Very interesting but how is it bad economics now for them to make the switch back? Or bad Econ to stay in SCDSl?


----------



## tugs (Feb 15, 2017)

Probably received a lot of complaints from parents for having to drive their u-littles for games in Camarillo, Calabassas, etc...  Plenty of good teams down/around SD.  For once logic prevails.


----------



## rainbow_unicorn (Feb 15, 2017)

tugs said:


> Probably received a lot of complaints from parents for having to drive their u-littles for games in Camarillo, Calabassas, etc...  Plenty of good teams down/around SD.  For once logic prevails.


I doubt any younger Surf teams had to travel THAT far since SCDSL is usually divided into north/south divisions.  However, I do understand that staying local in SD is a better drive than going up to south OC.


----------



## seesnake (Feb 15, 2017)

When do you figure they might get the final approval from Presidio to be included for Fall?


----------



## Sunil Illuminati (Feb 15, 2017)

Well, did you really think there wasn't going to be any repercussions for those folk who set up Silverlakes Showcase?


----------



## Sped (Feb 15, 2017)

Surf will likely put some of their lower-ranked teams back in Presidio because it's easier for the kids and because Surf only recognized how important the local league was as a recruitment tool at the younger ages.  I thought I also heard that they agreed to jump back in once Presidio and the Surf Cup folks agreed to let the league use the fields.


----------



## Sped (Feb 15, 2017)

tugs said:


> Probably received a lot of complaints from parents for having to drive their u-littles for games in Camarillo, Calabassas, etc...  Plenty of good teams down/around SD.  For once logic prevails.


This didn't really happen since almost all of Surf's games were in SD or South OC.  If anything, this is a problem SD teams in CSL had to deal with.


----------



## Sped (Feb 15, 2017)

coachrefparent said:


> Makes sense since Surf played in the Mayors (rec) division at State Cup.


2 or 3 boys' teams in the 07/08 age range is probably not indicative of much.  From what I've seen, they had about as many teams in the President's finals as they did in the entire Mayor's draw.


----------



## espola (Feb 15, 2017)

Sped said:


> 2 or 3 boys' teams in the 07/08 age range is probably not indicative of much.  From what I've seen, they had about as many teams in the President's finals as they did in the entire Mayor's draw.


Years ago the youngest Surf boys teams were usually near the bottom of league and tournament standings.  Then after the recruiting machine had been working for a few years, they got better.  But that was years ago, before Surf had the attraction of an Academy team at the top of their ladder to draw in candidates.


----------



## coachrefparent (Feb 15, 2017)

Sped said:


> 2 or 3 boys' teams in the 07/08 age range is probably not indicative of much.  From what I've seen, they had about as many teams in the President's finals as they did in the entire Mayor's draw.


I agree, other than that Surf means that you could be playing in the rec league, or a the highest level, much like most other clubs. I know some Surf parents that spend over $5,000 a year to have their kids play for Surf, and their kids play in lower divisions than most Matrix teams. But be sure, they have a sticker on their car.


----------



## Supermodel56 (Feb 15, 2017)

coachrefparent said:


> I agree, other than that Surf means that you could be playing in the rec league, or a the highest level, much like most other clubs. I know some Surf parents that spend over $5,000 a year to have their kids play for Surf, and their kids play in lower divisions than most Matrix teams. But be sure, they have a sticker on their car.


Where do you get $5k/year? just curious... that seems pretty outrageous... and at youngers? And hehe, if I paid that much damn right I'd put that sticker on my car! =)


----------



## Kicknit22 (Feb 15, 2017)

Supermodel56 said:


> Where do you get $5k/year? just curious... that seems pretty outrageous... and at youngers? And hehe, if I paid that much damn right I'd put that sticker on my car! =)


Expensive damn sticker!


----------



## Round (Feb 15, 2017)

Supermodel56 said:


> Very interesting but how is it bad economics now for them to make the switch back? Or bad Econ to stay in SCDSl?


Good economics to come back.  It was bad enough when they first made the switch,  then the number of players per team at the younger ages, hard go pay for the travel and coaches with less players.

Surf doesn't have the best history with the leagues,  I doubt they will change.  Half of there u13 and above teams mat end up in ecnl or da anyway.


----------



## JackZ (Feb 15, 2017)

Supermodel56 said:


> Where do you get $5k/year? just curious... that seems pretty outrageous... and at youngers? And hehe, if I paid that much damn right I'd put that sticker on my car! =)


"Kids", two kids can easily be 5k a year; one kid will easily run ya 2k in club dues + $500 team dues for referee fees, tournaments, etc.


----------



## fantasyfutbol (Feb 15, 2017)

Why did Surf stop playing in Presidio in the first place?  Anyone know the story?


----------



## Sped (Feb 15, 2017)

coachrefparent said:


> I agree, other than that Surf means that you could be playing in the rec league, or a the highest level, much like most other clubs. I know some Surf parents that spend over $5,000 a year to have their kids play for Surf, and their kids play in lower divisions than most Matrix teams. But be sure, they have a sticker on their car.


At what ages do Surf teams play below "most Matrix teams"?  In fact, find me a girls' team at any age at Surf that plays at a division lower than most Matrix teams.

Note - not a knock on Matrix.


----------



## Eusebio (Feb 15, 2017)

fantasyfutbol said:


> Why did Surf stop playing in Presidio in the first place?  Anyone know the story?


Maybe someone else can chime in who knows more of the details, but when I was there during the switch they sold the parents on "better competition" in SCDSL and the ability to easily club pass players to different teams. 

On the boys side, in the u12-u14 age groups there was arguably stronger competition at the Flight 1 level and the club pass in theory was appealing to help players move up the ladder.

But in actuality, the Flight 2 & 3 levels in SCDSL offered identical competition to those found in San Diego (Presidio). And at the younger age groups, San Diego already provided plenty of competition even at the Flight 1 levels. Also instead of the club pass being used to reward hard-working "B" team players or give struggling "A" team players more playing time, it was used to basically place ringers on the lower level teams. For example, you'd see star "A" team players being club passed to Flight 3 "C" & "D" teams to help get results. Not exactly development.

As for the politics, I believe at the time Surf was looking to heavily support SCDSL. SCDSL had rules that were very "super-club" friendly and allowed rapid expansion. For instance, SCDSL allowed an unlimited amount of teams in a single age group and the DOC could place their own teams in whatever flight they want (it wasn't until a few years later an approval committee was setup after mass abuse). It's why when you look at a single bracket in SCDSL, it's possible to see 4 Strikers teams, 2-3 Surf teams, and 3-4 Pats teams. It wasn't unusual to see a 14 team league from just 3-4 clubs. 

SCDSL basically allowed these clubs to create new teams on the fly at try-outs. 80 players at try-outs? Attempt to make a strong flight 1 team, then divide the rest into 3-4 teams and throw them in a flight 2/3 SCDSL league == Profit. 

My guess the return to Presidio has to do with the Polo Field deal. They had to show continued use of the fields by San Diegans as a whole and not just a handful of rich north county families. Having the younger Surf teams play in regular Presidio league games means more local teams and players will actually get to set foot on the Polo Fields. Also, with DA starting even younger, I think Surf is having less use for SCDSL Very soon SCDSL will be a third tier league behind DA and ECNL.


----------



## rainbow_unicorn (Feb 15, 2017)

Eusebio said:


> Very soon SCDSL will be a third tier league behind DA and ECNL.


Yes, for U14 and older.  But for U13 and younger SCDSL will still be the premier league.  Perhaps Surf is only moving their younger youngers (i.e. U10 and younger) back to Presidio?


----------



## Round (Feb 16, 2017)

fantasyfutbol said:


> Why did Surf stop playing in Presidio in the first place?  Anyone know the story?


It has been almost 4 years, but I believe they did it abruptly, and we're not real nice about it.
-claimed Presidio had anti-competitive policies
-competition in SD was not good enough 
-something about SDDA, can't remember what.


----------



## ESPNANALYST (Feb 16, 2017)

Round said:


> It has been almost 4 years, but I believe they did it abruptly, and we're not real nice about it.
> -claimed Presidio had anti-competitive policies
> -competition in SD was not good enough
> -something about SDDA, can't remember what.


It was a beautiful letter CC wrote basically saying that Surf had no competition in SD and the anti competition paragraph was huge. 
I had heard last year lower level C teams were coming back which actually makes sense and is good for all involved.


----------



## *GOBEARGO* (Feb 16, 2017)

Eusebio said:


> It's why when you look at a single bracket in SCDSL, it's possible to see 4 Strikers teams, 2-3 Surf teams, and 3-4 Pats teams. It wasn't unusual to see a 14 team league from just 3-4 clubs.


This is misleading. Yes you could have 4 Strikers teams, but most times, other than sharing the same uniforms, the clubs are from different areas


----------



## fantasyfutbol (Feb 17, 2017)

What are other teams doing for the Spring? Any new leagues out there?  Presidio spring league?


----------



## Socal United (Feb 17, 2017)

ESPNANALYST said:


> It was a beautiful letter CC wrote basically saying that Surf had no competition in SD and the anti competition paragraph was huge.
> I had heard last year lower level C teams were coming back which actually makes sense and is good for all involved.


It was also the fact that they refused to adhere to the new recruiting rules put in place when SDDA was formed.


----------



## Striker17 (Feb 17, 2017)

Socal United said:


> It was also the fact that they refused to adhere to the new recruiting rules put in place when SDDA was formed.


What are those? We actually have those?


----------



## Round (Feb 17, 2017)

Socal United said:


> It was also the fact that they refused to adhere to the new recruiting rules put in place when SDDA was formed.


That was the anti-competitive part.  Maybe that letter should be read out loud by the the current Surf girls Doc at the next Presidio meeting?  Funniest or saddest thing about Surf people is how they move around or disappear so much.  

It's for the kids.


----------



## Supermodel56 (Mar 10, 2017)

Haven't seen any posts on this recently so was wondering if anyone had any new news - is it a done deal? Doesn't look like they'd see nearly as much competition in in SDDA... (not intended as a knock)


----------



## SoccerFan4Life (Mar 10, 2017)

Sped said:


> This didn't really happen since almost all of Surf's games were in SD or South OC.  If anything, this is a problem SD teams in CSL had to deal with.


I applaud it because last year we had to drive our 7 year old daughter all the way down to San Diego from North Orange County.  2 hour drive in the morning and 3 hour drive back in the evening.  Makes no sense to drive so much with so many other local teams around us.   The two primary reasons why parents drop out of club or never join: 1. Money   2. Driving far distances.


----------



## seesnake (Mar 10, 2017)

Supermodel56 said:


> Haven't seen any posts on this recently so was wondering if anyone had any new news - is it a done deal? Doesn't look like they'd see nearly as much competition in in SDDA... (not intended as a knock)


I am wondering the same thing. What's happening with this? 

Also, in my experience SDDA provides some very high competition but it is uneven. Actually a really good league considering the sheer volume of teams in San Diego who are included who simply don't or can't participate all around socal- I'm thinking particularly of the central and south county teams.


----------



## fantasyfutbol (Mar 27, 2017)

"The Cal South Board voted at the November 19th, 2016 meeting to not allow age 7 or younger players to play competitive soccer for the 2017 – 2018 season unless they played competitive the prior season"---This is from the Presidio league monthly meeting. This means 2010's will be allowed to play if they played competitive last year, which should be pretty much all the 2010's. 

Also it appears Surf was not allowed to rejoin the Presidio league. Can anyone verify that?


----------



## espola (Mar 29, 2017)

fantasyfutbol said:


> Also it appears Surf was not allowed to rejoin the Presidio league. Can anyone verify that?


I didn't know that Surf had completely dropped out of the league, but their rep is not present in any of the Presidio meeting minutes for the last couple of years.  Do they owe a backlog of fees or something?


----------



## RSFAtt01 (Mar 30, 2017)

fantasyfutbol said:


> "
> 
> Also it appears Surf was not allowed to rejoin the Presidio league. Can anyone verify that?


Any update?


----------



## NumberTen (Jul 5, 2017)

They were not allowed to return.
https://www.soccernation.com/surf-soccer-club-attempts-presidio-return/


----------



## NumberTen (Jul 5, 2017)

Lots more detail in this thread:
*Script Flip: Presidio Rejects Surf*


----------



## coachrefparent (Jul 5, 2017)

Sped said:


> At what ages do Surf teams play below "most Matrix teams"?  In fact, find me a girls' team at any age at Surf that plays at a division lower than most Matrix teams.
> 
> Note - not a knock on Matrix.


More boys than girls, but the following "highly competitive and accomplished youth soccer players" played in Cal South's Mayor (aka Recreational ) Division: 
F4

IE SURF B08 BARBIERA WEST

G4

Anaheim Surf - B2008 Viviano

O2

SD Surf Academy Boys (Kavanagh) 2008

P3

IE SURF B08 URBANO J

Q2

SD Surf Academy Boys (Whiddon) 2008


 B3

Murrieta Surf B07 Blue

 F4

IE SURF B07 PETERS

K3

SD Surf Academy Boys (Huerta) 2007


B4

Anaheim Surf - B2006 Viviano


D3

IE SURF G08 URBANO J

J2

Murrieta Surf G08 Black


E4

Murrieta Surf G07 White


F2

IE SURF G06 PARK


----------



## espola (Jul 5, 2017)

TCD said:


> Why are you lumping all the Surf affiliates in your attempt to bash San Diego Surf teams level of play? This post is about San Diego Surf, not I.E., Anaheim, Murrieta, etc.


Are you suggesting that they just bought the name?


----------



## LASTMAN14 (Jul 5, 2017)

espola said:


> Are you suggesting that they just bought the name?


It's a franchise. Like Slammers, Strikers, Galaxy etc. They potentially reap the benefits of the name and recieve structural support to launch the club, etc.


----------



## coachrefparent (Jul 5, 2017)

TCD said:


> Why are you lumping all the Surf affiliates in your attempt to bash San Diego Surf teams level of play? This post is about San Diego Surf, not I.E., Anaheim, Murrieta, etc.


Sorry, here's the list of "highly competitive and accomplished youth soccer players" that were too good for Presidio, some of which are (understandably) sick of losing by double digit shutouts in season after driving to Orange County, that played in Cal South's Mayor (aka Recreational ) Division*: 
SD Surf Academy Boys (Kavanagh) 2008
SD Surf Academy Boys (Whiddon%) 2008
SD Surf Academy Boys (Huerta) 2007

*Per parents of said teams. 
% Whiddon's older boys also get blown out by lowly AA-B Presidio teams.


----------



## espola (Jul 6, 2017)

TCD said:


> I don't understand what your point is? Isn't this thread about San Diego Surf/Presidio League?


I am shocked!! at the suggestion that all those other "Surfs" don't practice the same level of training and administration (to put it politely) as the mother church.


----------



## clubfees (Jul 6, 2017)

coachrefparent said:


> Sorry, here's the list of "highly competitive and accomplished youth soccer players" that were too good for Presidio, some of which are (understandably) sick of losing by double digit shutouts in season after driving to Orange County, that played in Cal South's Mayor (aka Recreational ) Division*:
> SD Surf Academy Boys (Kavanagh) 2008
> SD Surf Academy Boys (Whiddon%) 2008
> SD Surf Academy Boys (Huerta) 2007
> ...


One of those 2008 teams had a kid who did kartwheels after every goal he scored.  Coach did nothing.


----------



## rainbow_unicorn (Jul 6, 2017)

clubfees said:


> One of those 2008 teams had a kid who did kartwheels after every goal he scored.  Coach did nothing.


Maybe the keeper started it?


----------



## SahaNC (Oct 5, 2017)

Round said:


> It has been almost 4 years, but I believe they did it abruptly, and we're not real nice about it.
> -claimed Presidio had anti-competitive policies
> -competition in SD was not good enough
> -something about SDDA, can't remember what.



I had heard that the Surf left Presidio because the league frowned on them for poaching players from other local clubs. The surf considered that anti-competitive. Times have changed and almost all clubs steal player these days so it's normal practice. Any way I think the mighty Surf realizes that the competition is not that much better outside of San Diego.


----------



## SahaNC (Oct 5, 2017)

Supermodel56 said:


> Where do you get $5k/year? just curious... that seems pretty outrageous... and at youngers? And hehe, if I paid that much damn right I'd put that sticker on my car! =)


Actually its more like $2,500 for the little ones after fees. That's still pretty expensive sticker, but if it makes your kid feel like a million why not.


----------



## coachrefparent (Oct 5, 2017)

SahaNC said:


> I had heard that the Surf left Presidio because the league frowned on them for poaching players from other local clubs. The surf considered that anti-competitive. Times have changed and almost all clubs steal player these days so it's normal practice. Any way I think the mighty Surf realizes that the competition is not that much better outside of San Diego.


Surf left Presidio because they said the competition wasn't good enough. Then Surf realized how much money they could make charging $2,500 for rec-level kids that they put on teams with the name "Academy." Problem was, these "Academy" teams were recreational level, got beat to a pulp in Coast, and played State Cup (so the kids could get sweatshirts), in the recreational Mayors level. 

Parents and kids didn't like losing all the time by double digits after driving up to OC. So after badmouthing Presidio on the way out, they came slinking back to get these money machines, errr academy teams, games that were local and at their level. Presidio said, no thanks.


----------



## Monkey (Oct 5, 2017)

tugs said:


> Probably received a lot of complaints from parents for having to drive their u-littles for games in Camarillo, Calabassas, etc...  Plenty of good teams down/around SD.  For once logic prevails.


Tugs is right.  Especially at the younger ages and especially for girls, there were less teams.  So at least when Surf left, SCDSL at for example the Girls U8 teams, there was no division for south, north, east ...teams.  Some mediocre U8 and U9 teams wound up driving way past the OC.

The move was generated by Presidio's new rules on poaching players and coaches.  At that time Surf had just started to grow again (because they were not sure if they were going to be able to continue using the Polo Fields some age groups only had 1 team until the issue was resolved).  I think the biggest concern was actually poaching coaches since Presidio had restricted coaches moving to a new club from coaching the same age group.  The player poaching rules did not change that much within Presidio since CalSouth had their own rules.

However, the way Surf presented it to parents (after they paid for the season) was that it was done for the players (i.e. better competition).  Everyone knew this was a joke since their best teams at the older ages already played SCDSL and their lower teams were getting killed in Presidio.


----------

