Say bye-bye-bye to Girls and Boys DA

[oh canada]

That is such an inaccurate trope. Right off the top of my head I can think of kids at or committed to the following schools who started at Blues when they were 10 or younger: Stanford, UCLA (3), Santa Clara (2), Colorado, Cal (2), and WSU (2). I can think of more who were at Blues since at least age 11: Stanford, UCLA, Santa Clara, USC (2). And that’s just off the top of my head.

Older kids go to Blues because Blues can help them. Preventing that out of pure jealousy is bad for consumers. If a club wants to keep its kids, be a better club and get more kids to Stanford and UCLA.

A play on logic that some may fall for, but as you know, just because some U10/11 Blues players went on to play D1 doesn't mean that many (or more) of their players in D1 and elsewhere were recruited over at U13/14 and up. Not sure how old your kids are, but it's common knowledge for current u8-u15 families that Blues' parking lot approaches are as frequent as USSF f**k ups. Nobody said anything about "preventing" recruiting. But everyone wins if the clubs are more intent on developing their players vs. luring them over.

PS - the prior reply wasn't really a "trope" at all. "Parking lot approaches" is a trope.

 

[Ellejustus]

A play on logic that some may fall for, but as you know, just because some U10/11 Blues players went on to play D1 doesn't mean that many (or more) of their players in D1 and elsewhere were recruited over at U13/14 and up. Not sure how old your kids are, but it's common knowledge for current u8-u15 families that Blues' parking lot approaches are as frequent as USSF f**k ups. Nobody said anything about "preventing" recruiting. But everyone wins if the clubs are more intent on developing their players vs. luring them over.

PS - the prior reply wasn't really a "trope" at all. "Parking lot approaches" is a trope.

 

[dad4]

The question you’re really asking is whether we should artificially lower the cost of soccer. The free market has decided exactly how much soccer development costs. It is the amount that clubs like Blues, Surf and Slammers charge plus travel costs. I know that because that’s what is actually happening. Youth soccer development is expensive. It is expensive to pay the coaches. It is expensive to rent fields. It is expensive to get enough good competition and training partners in the same place at the same time. Why are you arguing about the price of dope? It costs what it costs.

I see a lot of people like you claiming other people should provide elite training for free, but I don’t see any of you stepping up to the plate and doing it yourselves. It’s always about what other people can do for you for free, followed by frustration when no one ever does. If this is so important to you, go for it @dad4. Quit your job. Be the one who gives your time and money away and tosses your life away just so a girl can play soccer at SDSU instead of just being a student there.

The other thing, which some others have touched on, is that putting money and time into youth soccer as a means of lifting children out of poverty is no different than flushing money down the toilet. If you want to help society, put your money into early childhood education. Why do you want to make kids who have no interest in soccer play it? Why should they play soccer instead of basketball or softball? Play the violin? Join the school robotics team? It seems to me that, among these options, soccer is the absolute worst option of the bunch.

Where did I say training should be free? When was I arguing about the price of dope? Where exactly did I argue for sports as an anti-poverty measure?

Stop putting words in my mouth. First you think I'm some DA hack. Then you think I'm a socialist.

I will say that the club system artificially raises the price of soccer, to the detriment of all players. We don't need out of state showcases, new uniforms every 2 years, plane flights for a game, mandatory hotel stays, or class A licenses. We certainly don't need lawyers on retainer to devise anti-competitive strategies that survive lawsuits. Drop all that garbage and the price falls. Drop the closed league and the price falls further.

Maybe EOTL gets a thinner paycheck. I can live with that.

 

[Penalty Kicks Stink]

Yup, several e-mails and calls in the last 24 hours. A couple on instances of direct contact with the players as well. My girls were cordial and redirected those individuals to reach out to their parents and we had some "friendly" chats.

Told the girls to be wary of anyone talking about "The LIST" and "Goat" and frequently says "Brah / Bro".

Much bigger fish to fry at the moment, but entertaining to read all the comments and interaction among the posters in this thread.

Change is the only constant in club soccer

 

[vegasguy]

Because they have not been exposed to the sport.

That is not true. There are many programs that go to elementary schools and get players out on puggs.. school districts hire them and use it as part.of physical education. I know a club coach who does it as his primary job here in Vegas. He brings flyers for AYSO, NYS and other rec leagues around town.

 

[Dof3]

Where did I say training should be free? When was I arguing about the price of dope? Where exactly did I argue for sports as an anti-poverty measure?

Stop putting words in my mouth. First you think I'm some DA hack. Then you think I'm a socialist.

I will say that the club system artificially raises the price of soccer, to the detriment of all players. We don't need out of state showcases, new uniforms every 2 years, plane flights for a game, mandatory hotel stays, or class A licenses. We certainly don't need lawyers on retainer to devise anti-competitive strategies that survive lawsuits. Drop all that garbage and the price falls. Drop the closed league and the price falls further.

Maybe EOTL gets a thinner paycheck. I can live with that.

It's great that you would be fine if other people earned less than they do. Just as I expect you would be fine if everyone who makes more than you paid higher taxes. Who is "We" in your "we" don't need to fly places to play games? I like that my kid has the experience of traveling with a team to play teams from other states. I would have loved to do that when I was a kid. There is value in that for her and I am willing to work to provide that opportunity in this small window of her life.

Leaving aside all of the things that you mention, do the math. What do your annual club fees work out to be in terms of an hourly rate for your coach(es)? What if you add in the uniforms and gas to San Diego? Recall it costs $10 for a Whopper and fries now because of the minimum wage in California. And I am fine with that because I like hamburgers, they make better fries than I do at home and therefore provide a valuable service that I expect to pay them for. How many times has it been written on this board that what really matters is coach over club? But you think you should get that quality for how much? And if you don't perceive value in that coaching relative to what you are paying, then why is your DD still on that team playing for that coach? How many rich youth soccer coaches do you know? There were no out-of-state travel requirements when my DD was playing on a F1 SCDSL team. And the costs were dramatically less than F1 when she played AYSO. So, generally speaking, was the quality of coaching and competition. Funny how that works. If you CHOOSE for her to play on an ECNL team, then you are eyes open on its cost and you are aware that there are also travel costs. I think movie theaters are overpriced and I prefer to watch that content at home. That doesn't mean I think that YOU shouldn't be able to go to a movie theater if that is what you want to do, or that the people who choose to attend the Stagecoach festival shouldn't be allowed to go because it is expensive and I am not a country music fan. I understand that in other countries and cultures youth soccer participation costs less. In many of those countries, I am quite sure that those who do what you do for a living are making less. And, because the sports options in those countries are far fewer than what is available here, more people concentrate more resources on that particular area of entertainment. OK. Do you want to talk about the quality and availability of other sports in those countries? Is it better there if one wants to be a swimmer? Basketball player? How is the path to play football in Mexico or the Dominican Republic? Right, not so great if the sport you want to play is not the focus of that culture's resources and attention. Trying to cherry pick the cost of some things without taking in the context of other related things is just flawed thinking. You sound like someone living there complaining that they have to pay for their kid to buy a helmet and shoulder pads to play football and they have to drive 3 hours to play another team because not enough people where they live share their value preferences on youth sport selection.

As has also been written on this board more times than I can count, one of the main troubles with the highest levels of youth soccer in the US in recent years has been diluted competition. That is to say there are TOO MANY people willing to pay for the product that you say is overpriced. If the notion that all the great players are not playing soccer in the US because they are priced out of it is to be believed, then why aren't AYSO teams better? Sure, some are excellent. My kids have played against some terrific AYSO teams. Seems like there is an outlet then for kids to play great soccer on inexpensive AYSO teams. OK. So what's the problem? Is it that not enough other people make the same choice to provide a competitive league at the older ages? OK - whose fault is that? Does it have to be someone's "fault?" It would be great if the path to college soccer was paved through high school as it is in football. Football is a money making sport. It makes so much money in fact that, together with basketball, it pays for most all other college sports programs. Soccer is not a money making sport in the US. Not all the way through professional play for women and it is seriously questionable for all but a very few boys. SO, who but you should be paying for your DD to participate in one of several segments of a sport that leads down a financial rabbit hole? Who should be paying for the 13 year old boy from Mexico whose passion in life is to play quarterback to get that chance? Or is it that I should be able to say that he shouldn't be allowed to play because I don't think it is worth it for my kid?

 

[MacDre]

A play on logic that some may fall for, but as you know, just because some U10/11 Blues players went on to play D1 doesn't mean that many (or more) of their players in D1 and elsewhere were recruited over at U13/14 and up. Not sure how old your kids are, but it's common knowledge for current u8-u15 families that Blues' parking lot approaches are as frequent as USSF f**k ups. Nobody said anything about "preventing" recruiting. But everyone wins if the clubs are more intent on developing their players vs. luring them over.

PS - the prior reply wasn't really a "trope" at all. "Parking lot approaches" is a trope.

You make compelling arguments. But, I have a feeling that your analysis is superficial. I also think the mindset that you are advocating is part of the reason many get manipulated by slick talking coaches in track suits.

I think the “late bloomer” and “development” mindset is all part of the hussle. Unfortunately, parents have let dude in the track suit frame the issues and I’m not sure that we’ve thought critically on the issue.

On Netflix, look at the I am Bolt documentary. Beginning at aprox. minute 57.35 and ending at aprox. minute 56.10 Bolt gives his opinion on hard work and late bloomers. I agree with Bolt and challenge anyone to name a world class late bloomer!

So, if we can agree the late bloomer theory is bogus, what’s wrong with the Blues approach? If my kid played club and wasn’t being approached by a club like the Blues I’d be having a talk with my kid letting them know that they don’t have what it takes to play at a higher level. So is the problem the shady coach in the track suit or the gullible parent that thinks they have a late bloomer that just needs development in the right environment with the right coach?

 

[Ellejustus]

You make compelling arguments. But, I have a feeling that your analysis is superficial. I also think the mindset that you are advocating is part of the reason many get manipulated by slick talking coaches in track suits.

I think the “late bloomer” and “development” mindset is all part of the hussle. Unfortunately, parents have let dude in the track suit frame the issues and I’m not sure that we’ve thought critically on the issue.

On Netflix, look at the I am Bolt documentary. Beginning at aprox. minute 57.35 and ending at aprox. minute 56.10 Bolt gives his opinion on hard work and late bloomers. I agree with Bolt and challenge anyone to name a world class late bloomer!

So, if we can agree the late bloomer theory is bogus, what’s wrong with the Blues approach? If my kid played club and wasn’t being approached by a club like the Blues I’d be having a talk with my kid letting them know that they don’t have what it takes to play at a higher level. So is the problem the shady coach in the track suit or the gullible parent that thinks they have a late bloomer that just needs development in the right environment with the right coach?

Most excellent take MacDre. The hussle in the track suit....lol! The jealousy of Blues is crazy.

 

[MacDre]

That is not true. There are many programs that go to elementary schools and get players out on puggs.. school districts hire them and use it as part.of physical education. I know a club coach who does it as his primary job here in Vegas. He brings flyers for AYSO, NYS and other rec leagues around town.

I doubt very seriously if those programs are in schools with a high percentage of African-Americans of British decent. There may me a few Brazilians, Colombians, Panamanian’s etc but they’re “culturally” latino and don’t need exposure to soccer.
I’m actually in the process of starting a nonprofit to address the need. So again, I seriously doubt the veracity of your statement and I challenge you to give clear examples.

 

[MacDre]

It's great that you would be fine if other people earned less than they do. Just as I expect you would be fine if everyone who makes more than you paid higher taxes. Who is "We" in your "we" don't need to fly places to play games? I like that my kid has the experience of traveling with a team to play teams from other states. I would have loved to do that when I was a kid. There is value in that for her and I am willing to work to provide that opportunity in this small window of her life.

Leaving aside all of the things that you mention, do the math. What do your annual club fees work out to be in terms of an hourly rate for your coach(es)? What if you add in the uniforms and gas to San Diego? Recall it costs $10 for a Whopper and fries now because of the minimum wage in California. And I am fine with that because I like hamburgers, they make better fries than I do at home and therefore provide a valuable service that I expect to pay them for. How many times has it been written on this board that what really matters is coach over club? But you think you should get that quality for how much? And if you don't perceive value in that coaching relative to what you are paying, then why is your DD still on that team playing for that coach? How many rich youth soccer coaches do you know? There were no out-of-state travel requirements when my DD was playing on a F1 SCDSL team. And the costs were dramatically less than F1 when she played AYSO. So, generally speaking, was the quality of coaching and competition. Funny how that works. If you CHOOSE for her to play on an ECNL team, then you are eyes open on its cost and you are aware that there are also travel costs. I think movie theaters are overpriced and I prefer to watch that content at home. That doesn't mean I think that YOU shouldn't be able to go to a movie theater if that is what you want to do, or that the people who choose to attend the Stagecoach festival shouldn't be allowed to go because it is expensive and I am not a country music fan. I understand that in other countries and cultures youth soccer participation costs less. In many of those countries, I am quite sure that those who do what you do for a living are making less. And, because the sports options in those countries are far fewer than what is available here, more people concentrate more resources on that particular area of entertainment. OK. Do you want to talk about the quality and availability of other sports in those countries? Is it better there if one wants to be a swimmer? Basketball player? How is the path to play football in Mexico or the Dominican Republic? Right, not so great if the sport you want to play is not the focus of that culture's resources and attention. Trying to cherry pick the cost of some things without taking in the context of other related things is just flawed thinking. You sound like someone living there complaining that they have to pay for their kid to buy a helmet and shoulder pads to play football and they have to drive 3 hours to play another team because not enough people where they live share their value preferences on youth sport selection.

As has also been written on this board more times than I can count, one of the main troubles with the highest levels of youth soccer in the US in recent years has been diluted competition. That is to say there are TOO MANY people willing to pay for the product that you say is overpriced. If the notion that all the great players are not playing soccer in the US because they are priced out of it is to be believed, then why aren't AYSO teams better? Sure, some are excellent. My kids have played against some terrific AYSO teams. Seems like there is an outlet then for kids to play great soccer on inexpensive AYSO teams. OK. So what's the problem? Is it that not enough other people make the same choice to provide a competitive league at the older ages? OK - whose fault is that? Does it have to be someone's "fault?" It would be great if the path to college soccer was paved through high school as it is in football. Football is a money making sport. It makes so much money in fact that, together with basketball, it pays for most all other college sports programs. Soccer is not a money making sport in the US. Not all the way through professional play for women and it is seriously questionable for all but a very few boys. SO, who but you should be paying for your DD to participate in one of several segments of a sport that leads down a financial rabbit hole? Who should be paying for the 13 year old boy from Mexico whose passion in life is to play quarterback to get that chance? Or is it that I should be able to say that he shouldn't be allowed to play because I don't think it is worth it for my kid?

My kid has never played club and was developed in TJ. I have never paid more than $10.00 per month in fees.
TJ also has an Olympic development center to train kids at low to no cost in all sports. My kid has also gone to tournaments throughout Mexico and the flights are often sponsored by Volaris.
I hate the fact that youth sports have been monitized!

 

[Luis Andres]

Tired of seeing all the socialist soccer heads here cry and bicker. They always have an excuse and complaint for everything. They blame others for their own kids downfalls. When the reality is that if their kid was good enough, all the doors would be opened. Start thinking like entrepreneurs and find the ways to make things happen. Get it done. Where there’s a will there’s a way. Maybe the reason why your son or daughter never got far in soccer or picked by the top teams etc is because of your attitudes and outlook on life itself and you pass this on to your children. Look at yourself first before judging others. Quit fucking complaining. Tired of this forum. You guys sound like a bunch of nagging bitches. Came back to write this cause you guys are ridiculous.

 

[SouthBayFutbol]

You are quite welcome. I am not trying to make any point about who should or shouldn’t be allowed back in to ECNL. It is not my decision to make, nor is it yours. ECNL can invite whomever they like so long as it is consistent with their bylaws and member agreements. If they make decisions based on settling grudges, that is their decision.

I have no idea what you’re talking about when you say “doesn’t you’re [sic] theory go out the window...” I am not proposing any theory. However ECNL set up its decision making process is however admission decisions are made. If they provide that only founding members make the decisions, great. If they provide that all members make them, also great. If decisions need to be unanimous or simple majority, great or great. It doesn’t matter what anyone wants ECNL’s bylaws and agreements to say. It only matters what they actually say. If it matters to you that much, read them and feel free to report back. I only know that anti-trust laws can’t get in the way of ECNL’s internal practices because it is not a monopoly. I apologize for taking the fun out of everyone’s non-sense statements about monopolies, and mini-monopolies, massive litigation flying out the window, etc.

I get the feeling you are moving the goalposts a little here.

You go from what comes across as somewhat of a vindictive reason not to add clubs:
"Because the clubs that did all the work and put all the money in have no incentive to let those that didn’t enjoy the benefit of hard work and financial risk taking. Because the clubs that didn’t do the hard work and take the financial risks have no entitlement to anything. Because clubs like Surf, Blues and Slammers have already proven they develop talent and provide value, and they don’t care how much people who aren’t willing to pay for it whine."

To ECNL is under no legal obligation to add teams.

Of course ECNL is under no legal obligation to add teams and does anybody really need to research their bylaws to agree with that? You are stating a fact that no one has disputed. This is, however, about an opportunity to finally get the top teams in Southern California, under 1 platform, to play each other and elevate the league.

I'm sure parents that have been through this process can attest to the importance of your Club's coaches in the recruiting process. They are the link between colleges and players. Those that have a solid reputation and track record of producing top talent will give their players the nod over the coaches that do not.

So unless and until these coaches at top GDA Clubs leave, there will not be this mass exodus of players that many are predicting. A few will certainly leave but those with aspirations will still go to the top clubs in ECNL that have those college connections (LAFC, Surf & Blues). Meaning the ECNL SW stays top heavy with results for 80% of their games being 8-0 instead of 4-0.

Again this is not about entitlement, legal or even moral obligation of anyone. But wouldn't it be nice if the ECNL SW division had: LAFC, Surf, Beach, Legends, Blues, RSC, LAG, Heat FC, Phoenix Rising, Slammers playing against each other every weekend? Tell me how that does not "Raise the Game..."

 

[LB Mom 78]

How will the DA clubs left out of ECNL retain top coaches? I foresee a mass exodus of quality coaches from those clubs.

 

[Ellejustus]

Tired of seeing all the socialist soccer heads here cry and bicker. They always have an excuse and complaint for everything. They blame others for their own kids downfalls. When the reality is that if their kid was good enough, all the doors would be opened. Start thinking like entrepreneurs and find the ways to make things happen. Get it done. Where there’s a will there’s a way. Maybe the reason why your son or daughter never got far in soccer or picked by the top teams etc is because of your attitudes and outlook on life itself and you pass this on to your children. Look at yourself first before judging others. Quit fucking complaining. Tired of this forum. You guys sound like a bunch of nagging bitches. Came back to write this cause you guys are ridiculous.

WTH, where have you been hiding? Drops a bomb!!! Listen Luis, I stayed here and fought the good fight for true goathood. We need to save the top goats from this or the USA Woman's team will be like men and not advance in the future. Girls are so sick of this. Rumor has it many older girls are done with travel soccer ball where everyone and I mean everyone think their kiddo is World class, Premier, Elite, #1 in the world and so on. No folks, their are only about 1% top players and then that gets weeded out to .1%. Someone, please save the goats

 

[methood]

You make compelling arguments. But, I have a feeling that your analysis is superficial. I also think the mindset that you are advocating is part of the reason many get manipulated by slick talking coaches in track suits.

I think the “late bloomer” and “development” mindset is all part of the hussle. Unfortunately, parents have let dude in the track suit frame the issues and I’m not sure that we’ve thought critically on the issue.

On Netflix, look at the I am Bolt documentary. Beginning at aprox. minute 57.35 and ending at aprox. minute 56.10 Bolt gives his opinion on hard work and late bloomers. I agree with Bolt and challenge anyone to name a world class late bloomer!

So, if we can agree the late bloomer theory is bogus, what’s wrong with the Blues approach? If my kid played club and wasn’t being approached by a club like the Blues I’d be having a talk with my kid letting them know that they don’t have what it takes to play at a higher level. So is the problem the shady coach in the track suit or the gullible parent that thinks they have a late bloomer that just needs development in the right environment with the right coach?

The fact that you think if your daughter isn’t “approached” by a “big club” and now you become the authority and telling her she doesn’t have what it takes to play in college? Some “Dad”? You’re a loser man. Repent.

 

[methood]

How will the DA clubs left out of ECNL retain top coaches? I foresee a mass exodus of quality coaches from those clubs.

the will become the ECNL coaches. Every club will now want a “pathway to ECNL”. The circus goes on.

 

[Ellejustus]

I get the feeling you are moving the goalposts a little here.

You go from what comes across as somewhat of a vindictive reason not to add clubs:
"Because the clubs that did all the work and put all the money in have no incentive to let those that didn’t enjoy the benefit of hard work and financial risk taking. Because the clubs that didn’t do the hard work and take the financial risks have no entitlement to anything. Because clubs like Surf, Blues and Slammers have already proven they develop talent and provide value, and they don’t care how much people who aren’t willing to pay for it whine."

To ECNL is under no legal obligation to add teams.

Of course ECNL is under no legal obligation to add teams and does anybody really need to research their bylaws to agree with that? You are stating a fact that no one has disputed. This is, however, about an opportunity to finally get the top teams in Southern California, under 1 platform, to play each other and elevate the league.

I'm sure parents that have been through this process can attest to the importance of your Club's coaches in the recruiting process. They are the link between colleges and players. Those that have a solid reputation and track record of producing top talent will give their players the nod over the coaches that do not.

So unless and until these coaches at top GDA Clubs leave, there will not be this mass exodus of players that many are predicting. A few will certainly leave but those with aspirations will still go to the top clubs in ECNL that have those college connections (LAFC, Surf & Blues). Meaning the ECNL SW stays top heavy with results for 80% of their games being 8-0 instead of 4-0.

Again this is not about entitlement, legal or even moral obligation of anyone. But wouldn't it be nice if the ECNL SW division had: LAFC, Surf, Beach, Legends, Blues, RSC, LAG, Heat FC, Phoenix Rising, Slammers playing against each other every weekend? Tell me how that does not "Raise the Game..."

Yes, but don;t leave out my dd team bro, Strikers!!! I want Beach & Legends in bad. I already wrote Mr Lavers. I'm pissed. I will let you know what he has to say. My suggestion long ago was make Surf Cup in August the fight for 16 spots in the SW ECNL. Two Divisions. I told Lavers this is fair and will help with getting all the division out of socal and get us back to pure competition where teams advance because they win, not politics.

 

[methood]

Most excellent take MacDre. The hussle in the track suit....lol! The jealousy of Blues is crazy.

I don’t think anyone is jealous of blues. Honestly. They have crappy old coaches that get laughed at behind their backs. No one cares for their work.

having said that they’ve done a tremendous job marketing to girls soccer and standing on the shoulders of giants. This has allowed them to walk up to little girls in parking lots and stupid parents think it’s the biggest thing in the world. It sick.

but there ya go...

 

[LB Mom 78]

the will become the ECNL coaches. Every club will now want a “pathway to ECNL”. The circus goes on.

Once the good coaches leave for the ECNL, the good players will follow. This sounds like a death sentence for the DA teams left out of ECNL.

 

[vegasguy]

I doubt very seriously if those programs are in schools with a high percentage of African-Americans of British decent. There may me a few Brazilians, Colombians, Panamanian’s etc but they’re “culturally” latino and don’t need exposure to soccer.
I’m actually in the process of starting a nonprofit to address the need. So again, I seriously doubt the veracity of your statement and I challenge you to give clear examples.

In those schools, there are probably very little African Americans of British decent but there is a number of African Americans in those schools. Why do they have to be of British decent it makes no sense.

I know the schools he is working with because we discuss it. In those areas the income are lower the schools are racially diverse and he is exposing them to soccer. You said They have not been exposed to the sport. They I assume you mean lower income families. I told you that blanket statement is not true and gave you the reason I know this. You can take it or leave it. I don't have numbers exposed or percentages that come to trainings outside elementary pe because we do not discuss it but you make a blanket statement with out any numbers so maybe you statement lacks teeth too.

My kid has never played club and was developed in TJ. I have never paid more than $10.00 per month in fees.
TJ also has an Olympic development center to train kids at low to no cost in all sports. My kid has also gone to tournaments throughout Mexico and the flights are often sponsored by Volaris.
I hate the fact that youth sports have been monitized!

Cost of living in TJ as opposed to San Diego or Vegas. How much does the municipality charge this non club club to pay for lights on the field or for the field and do they require insurance? Does Volaris sponsor a bball team to travel around the country or a baseball team. Comparing soccer from country to country is Fuji Apples and Granny Smith Apples. Both apples but taste smell and look different.

Exposure is one thing. Getting mom and dad to buy into it is another. The percentages of moms and dad no matter what race will lean toward other sports in America.