CITY SC BUYING OUT ANOTHER CLUB

I'm not surprised, but I haven't been following the boys so I have no insight. The reason why I'm not surprised is because last summer I went to a littles boys + girls tournament and it seemed like City had 4-6 boys teams in each age group while other clubs has 1 or maybe 2. It wasn't like that 10 years ago. I have no proof other than my general observations but I'd guess this is happening because of MLSN access with the olders.
What I was told by City directors is that City is more accessible to youngers by putting teams near where people live.

Parents in Socal league won't drive from Lake Elsinore to practice in Murrieta if there is a team in the Lake Elsinore. So now they will have 4 to 5 City SC Southwest socal teams in the same bracket all based in different cities

At the City SC Southwest tryouts my nephew attended they specifically asked what city you were trying out for.
 
City SC Temecula/Menifee/lake Elsinore had more than double the number of teams than MSA.

The head to head win percentage in socal league favored the City teams. Only when kids leave city teams MSA did that change for the olders.

MSA younger teams were dropping in number because City was swallowing up everything around them. The City SC rec program is huge which is where the youngers are being recruited from.

Looks like City SC pissed off someone in the merger because the owners of the rec program ended their contract with City SC and took the league independent forming LAKE SC.

Lake SC has priority for fields in Lake Elsiniore and Canyon Lake.

who is Mosafie??
 
What upside does LA Surf get from becoming City LA?

Seems like they would have to rebrand and geographically what do they add?

LA Surf already has LA Surf Southwest in place which housed their 2007 GA team for a few years.

Is the City brand that strong to take away LA surf in year 7 of their Surf deal?

I will add that these deals take months to put together, seems like Sand and Surf had an inside track on ASPIRE from City...they have only played 1 year in DPL didn't exactly kill it.
 
What upside does LA Surf get from becoming City LA?

Seems like they would have to rebrand and geographically what do they add?

LA Surf already has LA Surf Southwest in place which housed their 2007 GA team for a few years.

Is the City brand that strong to take away LA surf in year 7 of their Surf deal?

I will add that these deals take months to put together, seems like Sand and Surf had an inside track on ASPIRE from City...they have only played 1 year in DPL didn't exactly kill it.
Maybe MLSN didn't want a Surf branded MLSN club + City is the next best thing + MLSN/GA?
 
What upside does LA Surf get from becoming City LA?

Seems like they would have to rebrand and geographically what do they add?

LA Surf already has LA Surf Southwest in place which housed their 2007 GA team for a few years.

Is the City brand that strong to take away LA surf in year 7 of their Surf deal?

I will add that these deals take months to put together, seems like Sand and Surf had an inside track on ASPIRE from City...they have only played 1 year in DPL didn't exactly kill it.
LA Surf Southwest looks to have about 4 teams and the Director has just employed her kids by the looks of things. LA Surf on the girls side are getting worse and worse every year. Maybe they feel like they need a fresh start? I wouldn't know anything about the LA Surf boys side.

We heard the news from our family friends at Sand and Surf. They have now left in the last few days due to the rebrand and were told if they stayed they could be on a GA team but would have to travel to Pasadena.
 
LA Surf Southwest looks to have about 4 teams and the Director has just employed her kids by the looks of things. LA Surf on the girls side are getting worse and worse every year. Maybe they feel like they need a fresh start? I wouldn't know anything about the LA Surf boys side.

We heard the news from our family friends at Sand and Surf. They have now left in the last few days due to the rebrand and were told if they stayed they could be on a GA team but would have to travel to Pasadena.
Very interesting if it goes down.....

IMO dont think the city brand is > than Surf

Would also make 3 City team in

MLS NEXT - City SD, City (LA Surf), Murrieta SA
GA - City White, City Blue, City (LA Surf)

Let the rebranding carousel continue....
 
I'd take the City SC model, leadership, & directors all day over the other.

Well I don't disagree but I think that where things unravel...

Small is easy to upkeep and uphold the standards, when you start to expand and expand too fast that is where you lose quality control on brands.
 
MSA wasn't really a buy out. City SC Temecula had been growing so fast around MSA. MSA was struggling to field younger team. MSA was also on the hook to the City of Murrieta for thousands of dollars monthly for a new soccer complex that will probably never get built. MSA was running out of money and needed a bailout or eventually shut down.

City SC just took them over with probably very little out of pocket.
Ahhh the club soccer grift just like most other grifts in America... Like the Oakland A's MSA went bye bye....
 
Seems like a viable option for those at Sand and Surf for GA opportunities. 1.5-2 hour commute to go 30 miles. The good news is at least you don't drive by another GA club or ECNL club if you take this route.....


Screenshot 2025-05-20 142043.png
 
Seems like a viable option for those at Sand and Surf for GA opportunities. 1.5-2 hour commute to go 30 miles. The good news is at least you don't drive by another GA club or ECNL club if you take this route.....


View attachment 27696
Except that Beach and FRAM are in the South Bay. This creates a whole new program for S&S to recruit players.
 
Last edited:
Except that Beach and FRAM are in the South Bay. This creates a whole new program for S&S to recruit players.
All the best girls at Sand and Surf are already going to Beach and FRAM already....

Wouldn't you just take the 25 min commute to Torrance to Play ECNL for Beach or the 40 minute commute to play GA at FRAM over 1.5 hours for GA?

For the boys side your better playing MLS next for Albion LA or TFA than making that commute to Pasadena.
 
All the best girls at Sand and Surf are already going to Beach and FRAM already....

Wouldn't you just take the 25 min commute to Torrance to Play ECNL for Beach or the 40 minute commute to play GA at FRAM over 1.5 hours for GA?

For the boys side your better playing MLS next for Albion LA or TFA than making that commute to Pasadena.
Yes, I know. As I mentioned earlier in the thread S&S is a casual club and does not attract talent or keep it.
 
All the best girls at Sand and Surf are already going to Beach and FRAM already....

Wouldn't you just take the 25 min commute to Torrance to Play ECNL for Beach or the 40 minute commute to play GA at FRAM over 1.5 hours for GA?

For the boys side your better playing MLS next for Albion LA or TFA than making that commute to Pasadena.
Commuting far and wide is a way of life in socal club soccer- along with the highest gas prices in America, club soccer here demands the most ass in car seat time bar none....
 
All the best girls at Sand and Surf are already going to Beach and FRAM already....

Wouldn't you just take the 25 min commute to Torrance to Play ECNL for Beach or the 40 minute commute to play GA at FRAM over 1.5 hours for GA?

For the boys side your better playing MLS next for Albion LA or TFA than making that commute to Pasadena.
It's still interesting that TFA is the only the club on the boys side with access to higher level teams that serves that downtown triangle from Hollywood to Monterrey Park to North Long Beach. Albion LA seems to be focused now in Long Beach/Torrance (or moving teams to Santa Monica) whereas when they were Laufa they were based at Sotomayor HS and had a club house near the zoo. Area is heavily minority and poor hence why no ECNL teams. Downtown soccer club was doing some great work in the area but on the boys side I think they are still stuck in coast.
 
So, I seen something interesting the other day on another site and was hoping someone would talk about it here. Word on the street was US soccer was going to go to a tier program like across the pond at the pro level and that's why we have been seeing so many clubs buying out and merging together. In the next few years top leagues will no longer be handing out tags you would have to win to move up or bottom two teams in each league would be dropped to lower tier. Girls side (ECNL-->RL-->GA-->DPL/E64-->NPL-->F1-->etc.) the up side they argued was "players would stay more committed to their teams" also "easier recruiting process for national/ collage teams". Not sure if this holds any truth but has anyone else heard of this? I think its a great idea.
 
So, I seen something interesting the other day on another site and was hoping someone would talk about it here. Word on the street was US soccer was going to go to a tier program like across the pond at the pro level and that's why we have been seeing so many clubs buying out and merging together. In the next few years top leagues will no longer be handing out tags you would have to win to move up or bottom two teams in each league would be dropped to lower tier. Girls side (ECNL-->RL-->GA-->DPL/E64-->NPL-->F1-->etc.) the up side they argued was "players would stay more committed to their teams" also "easier recruiting process for national/ collage teams". Not sure if this holds any truth but has anyone else heard of this? I think its a great idea.
Unlikely to happen on the MLS (boys) side for the following reasons:
1. The MLS League itself would need to go to pro rel and that's not going to happen. Too much money to be risked with Rel (see the LA Galaxy which went from the championship team to not even being able to win a single game season to season). You'd have to blow up the salary caps which would topple the finances of most of the system collapsing their giant pyramid scheme. And that financial hit would be severe for clubs which are overvalued right now.
2. The league control whether they pro rel not US Soccer. They couldn't even force MLSN to switch back from birth year to calendar year so the "you can switch if you want" is actually a step in the wrong direction for a unified policy.
3. MLSN exists for one purpose (well two). 1) at the younger levels as a recruiting ground for the MLS academies by concentrating top talent all in one place (Mexico for example casts a very wide net and has scouts at freaking Latino league games in the US), and 2) as cannon fodder for the MLS academy teams (hence why no HS...it's not because of the training but because there's no national high school soccer season and they can't have the academies without scrimmage partners for part of the year). The academies aren't going to be subject to rel.
4. Indeed MLSN is moving in the opposite direction with their stat trackers for U13 and U14 trying to get away from winning and focusing on developmental results. MLS2 was also largely driven as a way for the MLSN teams to more fluidly control their second tiers and allow players to play down. Reason why is the powers that be don't see how you can force coaches from taking short cuts which in soccer cuts against development if they are chasing wins (no build from the back, put the ball over the top into a footrace with the defender, kick it over the GK's head, recruit near the age line, recruit players rather than develop them).
5. The focus with MLS2 seems on moving towards a system where players get pro/rel instead of a club, with MLSN clubs controlling multiple tiers each with a place for players to play. Let's say Albion LA MLSN gets relegated to MLS2...they now either have 2 MLSN2 teams or are forced to relegate the MLS2 as well, a move which likely blows up not just 1 team but 2.
6. We're not having buys outs because of pro rel. We're having them because the smaller clubs (locked out of higher leagues) are having a really hard time of it. For example, just found out my kid's first team (an AYSO United team) and winner of a ton of state cups just folded with most of the players moving over to an MLS2 club next door. They either make satellite deals (so they can advertise access to these higher pathways) or take the buy out. Some of the larger nationwide mega clubs are being driven by dumb VC money. E64 seems pretty much finished BTW.

I can see it happening in ECNL. The MLSN has always been more of a "build it they will come" model while ECNL on the boys side wouldn't let the Eagles have it despite (prior to the arrival of MLS2) it was in the prime area for expansion (players in the area either had to go up to Ventura or drive to Santa Monica to play higher letter league). The long term issue for ECNL is eventually we will have a girl's academy system due to what's happening with the USWNT. IF that happens and ECNL doesn't control it, ECNL is done (hence the hedges against it to make them more college oriented such as by going birth year)
 
All the best girls at Sand and Surf are already going to Beach and FRAM already....

Wouldn't you just take the 25 min commute to Torrance to Play ECNL for Beach or the 40 minute commute to play GA at FRAM over 1.5 hours for GA?

For the boys side your better playing MLS next for Albion LA or TFA than making that commute to Pasadena.
When you put it like that, it sounds like a no brainer really to both. Different name, but still the same directors, coaches, fields and location, you would think.
 
Back
Top