Is SOCAL Soccer League Being Run by the Big Clubs?

[sigmabody]

If bad flight placement was a big issue (and I don't know if it is or is not), it would seem like this would be fairly obvious over time, based on the standings at the end of seasons. I haven't seen this personally, but my visibility set is small; however, this is something for which there should be objective evidence, if it was a big problem.

FWIW, in my limited visibility, there has been more disparity in PSSLU than SoCal, but I think that's mainly just because they have less teams per area. I have no view on how much SoCal is being influenced by large clubs, but at least the flight placement for smaller clubs doesn't seem like a massive problem to me.

 

[RandomSoccerFan]

I'm not clear on what the issue is, related to incorrect flight placement for smaller clubs. Are they having their teams put into lower (easier) flights than would be appropriate, so they are more likely to dominate? Or are they having their teams put into higher (harder) flights than would be appropriate, so they are more likely to be flattened? Seems like this would work itself out pretty quickly, and the team would find the appropriate flight within a season or two - are there circumstances where this isn't happening? And it's more likely to harm a small club than a larger club?

I get the concern that the "clubs have too much power" and "money corrupts fairness", but I think there are many more obvious examples of this harming the soccer world than flight placement? Maybe I'm missing something.

 

[SocalSoccer2307]

I'm not clear on what the issue is, related to incorrect flight placement for smaller clubs. Are they having their teams put into lower (easier) flights than would be appropriate, so they are more likely to dominate? Or are they having their teams put into higher (harder) flights than would be appropriate, so they are more likely to be flattened? Seems like this would work itself out pretty quickly, and the team would find the appropriate flight within a season or two - are there circumstances where this isn't happening? And it's more likely to harm a small club than a larger club?

I get the concern that the "clubs have too much power" and "money corrupts fairness", but I think there are many more obvious examples of this harming the soccer world than flight placement? Maybe I'm missing something.

The main issue I see is not allowing smaller clubs to join into SoCal because board members on the super clubs do not want more competition in the area. The large clubs have board members in SoCal league and are not excluding themselves from voting when they should be. And even if they do, their influence is there pressuring any decisions. SoCal's thinking is why risk letting these people in if it may piss off a 50+ team club with mass influence?

 

[Grace T.]

The main issue I see is not allowing smaller clubs to join into SoCal because board members on the super clubs do not want more competition in the area. The large clubs have board members in SoCal league and are not excluding themselves from voting when they should be. And even if they do, their influence is there pressuring any decisions. SoCal's thinking is why risk letting these people in if it may piss off a 50+ team club with mass influence?

Historically SoCal league justified it by setting minimum standards: a minimum number of teams the club had, minimum field standards etc. when my kid was playing coast he was once sent to a clubs field in the Val which was completely dirt, there was a small pond on one end, A fire hydrant at a corner, and a homeless encampment behind the other goal. The result however has been that a lot of the poorer, mostly Latino clubs in the San Fernando Valley and downtown triangle have disappeared. Clubs with access to more facilities in orange, the west side, or Ontario (where there are better and more fields) were therefore spared but you now see a real dearth of clubs in the poorer areas whereas before there were lots, some of which were winners. The effect is compounded because clubs without access to letter league can’t compete. Ole for example used to be a power house in the Val but now it’s just a feeder club to the letter league clubs for Youngers. The legal issue turns on whether these reasons are pretextual or have been used in a way to thwart competition, or if there’s a legit reason for how it operates. That’s why you are only looking at the tip of the iceberg— what’s happening outside of SoCal league is much more obvious.

 

[Socal-Soccer-Dad]

I’m just going to speculate So Cal made a business decision to not even try to get involved in the letter league carousel at the olders , because they have put up no fight . All the eggs are in the youngers basket where they have essentially ZERO competition

I'm not here to argue but I just want to point out something.

LOTS of competition in terms of choices of leagues at the youngers = people are crying about the fragmented leagues why there are SO many different leagues and how there is no real clear consensus of flight 1, 2, 3..

TOO LITTLE competition due to consolidation of mini leagues into a large league and people cry for lack of choices in leagues??

I don't get it guys. What is the complaint here?

Aren't we complaining at the olders because of TOO many lettered leagues (all the good teams split among ECNL, MLSN, NPL, etc)?
I thought the goal is to have a true consolidation and clear levels... so we aren't dealing with 4 national leagues...

In the same way, we don't actually want CSL and SoCal and other leagues dividing up big clubs... so that now teams have to travel from Carlsbad to Irvine... We want SoCal League to dominate so now there are gazillion clubs within OC or LA or SD and we don't have to travel to Murrieta or Riverside for a league game...

It's not perfect... but we can't have everything guys...