SoCal Elite - exit stage left

[dad4]

That's not what this is though. It's an agreement not to hold tryouts during a window. They are free to solicit each others players at will during the window.

The problem with this type of anticompetitive analysis is that agreements between competitors become illegal only if they restrict competition. If the effect is pro-competitive (again, from a market perspective, not from 1 individual consumer), then there isn't an issue. In this case, the argument is that it prevents players from being left without a team mid season or during state cup because other players are off looking for new clubs. Hypothetical: Say there's a mega club that's gobbling up a bunch of smaller clubs so a league adopts a rule that a club can have no more than 2 teams per tier. The mega club complains this limits their rise to dominance. The argument against it is it's actually pro competitive because it prevents the mega club from forming a monopoly and gives the consumers options. That's why your argument, when applied to new clubs, who might be locked out of Surf and Slammers is clever. As applied to Surf and Slammers it's mediocre, because it falls into this type of competition analysis.

You used to complain when I went into your balliwick with COVID. How come you now waxing lyrical on competition law? I guess turnabout if fair play.

It sure looks like an agreement that club B won't solicit club A customers until after club A has had time to sign contracts.

Am I missing something?

 

[N00B]

It sure looks like an agreement that club B won't solicit club A customers until after club A has had time to sign contracts.

Am I missing something?

It seems there is an agreement between the league and their customers (clubs) that standardize ‘open’ tryout windows… Similar to collegiate signing windows.

The customers of the clubs (parents/players) are open to solicit other clubs and sign with them at any time, so long as they fulfill any financial obligations to the club their leaving and/or get approval to transfer from the DOC.

To @dad4’s point. Club A can sign their players at any time and Club B can sign any player at any time, only if contact is initiated by the player/parent, not recruitment activities of Club B or related parties outside of the tryout window. (I don’t believe advertising tryout dates that comply with the tryout window are violations of this policy)

All other league players, CalSouth, ECNL/RL, E64, GA, MLS/EA, Non Affiliated Rec Programs, etc. are all open season all year long to SoCal clubs and that’s the bucket SoCal Elite now finds themselves in.

 

[Grace T.]

It sure looks like an agreement that club B won't solicit club A customers until after club A has had time to sign contracts.

Am I missing something?

As n00b points out the players are free to leave as long as they’ve fulfilled their obligations.

the claim we were discussing here was from solcal elite. It’s hard to say SoCal elite has a competition claim because it’s in the same boat as all the other clubs. It hasn’t been disadvantaged relative to the other clubs.

but now you’ve suggested that the clubs will repressure their own members to sign instead of looking elsewhere before tryouts begin (btw that behavior you suggest might also be occurring at SoCal elite which would mean their hands are tainted too). That’s a consumer claim, however, not a competition claim brought in state antitrust, restraint of non compete (since it’s the club bound by the restraint), or unfair competition. The main way the consumer gets a remedy under those theories is if the state ag, doj or ftc bring a claim on behalf of the consumers after launching a lengthy and costly investigation (been through a ton of those in several different countries and states) Otherwise you are talking consumer protection actions against the clubs (not the league since they aren’t in privity of contract with the league). That’s not competition law and not in my wheelhouse so I can’t comment.

 

[Grace T.]

As n00b points out the players are free to leave as long as they’ve fulfilled their obligations.

the claim we were discussing here was from solcal elite. It’s hard to say SoCal elite has a competition claim because it’s in the same boat as all the other clubs. It hasn’t been disadvantaged relative to the other clubs.

but now you’ve suggested that the clubs will repressure their own members to sign instead of looking elsewhere before tryouts begin (btw that behavior you suggest might also be occurring at SoCal elite which would mean their hands are tainted too). That’s a consumer claim, however, not a competition claim brought in state antitrust, restraint of non compete (since it’s the club bound by the restraint), or unfair competition. The main way the consumer gets a remedy under those theories is if the state ag, doj or ftc bring a claim on behalf of the consumers after launching a lengthy and costly investigation (been through a ton of those in several different countries and states) Otherwise you are talking consumer protection actions against the clubs (not the league since they aren’t in privity of contract with the league). That’s not competition law and not in my wheelhouse so I can’t comment.

Btw the point you are referring to goes to the issue of “standing”. It would be hard for SoCal elite to make a claim on behalf of consumers particularly if it is doing the same behavior as the other clubs (pressuring parents to sign before tryouts). If not from the government the consumer would have to sue directly (California does allow limited claims for indirect buyers in various instances under the Cartwright act…not sure about the others) but theres quite a few hurdles to jump and getting together things like class actions are complicated. Again haven’t done anything on the consumer side of things, it’s complicated and outside my wheelhouse.

 

[whatithink]

All other league players, CalSouth, ECNL/RL, E64, GA, MLS/EA, Non Affiliated Rec Programs, etc. are all open season all year long to SoCal clubs and that’s the bucket SoCal Elite now finds themselves in.

I'd assume that any club in SoCal that also has teams in the letter leagues can have tryouts for those letter teams outside any SoCal windows and can sign any SoCal player any time they want (to the letter leagues). The SoCal players in turn can dump a SoCal team and move to a letter team any time they want and ignore any of the existing transfer constraints up to and including being of good standing and/or getting DOC sign off

a. The consumer test is a market test. Here there is no increase in the price or narrowing of choices in the market because all the clubs are in the same boat. I just don’t see the economic impact to the overall market.

The premise that all clubs are in the same doesn't seem to be correct, to me, as a lot of those clubs have plenty of toes in other leagues and can have tryouts and recruit outside any SoCal windows for those leagues.

Each league has its own sacrosanct transfer policy, seemingly oblivious to the fact that they are not the only show in town. Any player, it seems to me, can move between leagues, ignoring those policies (& club colluding or driving this) providing the registering entity (that the player is registered with) doesn't conflict - or even if it does!

 

[crush]

I'd assume that any club in SoCal that also has teams in the letter leagues can have tryouts for those letter teams outside any SoCal windows and can sign any SoCal player any time they want (to the letter leagues). The SoCal players in turn can dump a SoCal team and move to a letter team any time they want and ignore any of the existing transfer constraints up to and including being of good standing and/or getting DOC sign off

The premise that all clubs are in the same doesn't seem to be correct, to me, as a lot of those clubs have plenty of toes in other leagues and can have tryouts and recruit outside any SoCal windows for those leagues.

Each league has its own sacrosanct transfer policy, seemingly oblivious to the fact that they are not the only show in town. Any player, it seems to me, can move between leagues, ignoring those policies (& club colluding or driving this) providing the registering entity (that the player is registered with) doesn't conflict - or even if it does!

I have a question for @Grace T. Let's say you learned from past experience not to pay in full and do monthly payments instead, to make sure coach honors his side of the agreement. Let's say this particular coach turns out to be a big fat liar, manipulator and just mean and did not honor his side of the deal and you want to pull your child midway. The question is: I guess I have unpaid bill and no league will take dead beat father for not paying his bills before he takes off, so the question is: what are my remedies?

 

[Grace T.]

I'd assume that any club in SoCal that also has teams in the letter leagues can have tryouts for those letter teams outside any SoCal windows and can sign any SoCal player any time they want (to the letter leagues). The SoCal players in turn can dump a SoCal team and move to a letter team any time they want and ignore any of the existing transfer constraints up to and including being of good standing and/or getting DOC sign off

The premise that all clubs are in the same doesn't seem to be correct, to me, as a lot of those clubs have plenty of toes in other leagues and can have tryouts and recruit outside any SoCal windows for those leagues.

Each league has its own sacrosanct transfer policy, seemingly oblivious to the fact that they are not the only show in town. Any player, it seems to me, can move between leagues, ignoring those policies (& club colluding or driving this) providing the registering entity (that the player is registered with) doesn't conflict - or even if it does!

Yeah which is why I wondered previously if one way clubs get around the rule is by advertising tryouts for the letter leagues and then sending kids down for SoCal that don’t make the cut (“next year they’ll move up for sure if they can prove themselves”). But in any case SoCal transfer rules do put a restraint on transfers to those teams which are also members of SoCal league…it does require the former club to be paid in full. But again that’s primarily a consumer complaint outside my wheelhouse not a claim SoCal elite (which has its own letter league and runs letter league tryouts) can bring.

I have a question for @Grace T. Let's say you learned from past experience not to pay in full and do monthly payments instead, to make sure coach honors his side of the agreement. Let's say this particular coach turns out to be a big fat liar, manipulator and just mean and did not honor his side of the deal and you want to pull your child midway. The question is: I guess I have unpaid bill and no league will take dead beat father for not paying his bills before he takes off, so the question is: what are my remedies?

ooff thats a complicated one way outside my wheel house. A lot depends on what the contract says, what the cancelation policy is, what the collection policy of the club is and what the coach did wrong. The answer is very different if say the coach sexually harassed your dd v the coach didn’t give my dd the playtime she deserved.

 

[crush]

The answer is very different if say the coach sexually harassed your dd v the coach didn’t give my dd the playtime she deserved.

I hear ya and see your point that their can be extreme reasons why a player would want to look for greener pasture. Let's take "Play Time" for $500 Grace T. "I want to leave because no playtime, even though I paid to have my dd play." Sounds like sour grapes on the service, right? Let's dig a little. What if coach verbally promised play time and to be starter if you pay in full right now and sign (spots are filling up, I have only 2 spots left and I'm only taking 18), ((lied & actually took 20 for extra $$$$)) but later, after you pay in full, coach adds extra privates to the mix to secure and guarantee not only play time, but his recommendations to any U of your choosing, as long as it's not UCLA.

 

[Grace T.]

I hear ya and see your point that their can be extreme reasons why a player would want to look for greener pasture. Let's take "Play Time" for $500 Grace T. "I want to leave because no playtime, even though I paid to have my dd play." Sounds like sour grapes on the service, right? Let's dig a little. What if coach verbally promised play time and to be starter if you pay in full right now and sign (spots are filling up, I have only 2 spots left and I'm only taking 18), ((lied & actually took 20 for extra $$$$)) but later, after you pay in full, coach adds extra privates to the mix to secure and guarantee not only play time, but his recommendations to any U of your choosing, as long as it's not UCLA.

The law on oral contracts and when they can modify written contracts is complicated and very fact specific such as what does the written contract says. They spend an entire month on first year contracts on this point. You'd have to consult an individual attorney to review the specific situation and facts on a case by case basis.

There is an old saying, though, I'd share with you: "If it isn't in writing, it's not worth the paper it's written on."

Also bear in mind just because something is "legal" doesn't mean it's "moral" or "ethical".

 

[Jamisfoes]

I have a question for @Grace T. Let's say you learned from past experience not to pay in full and do monthly payments instead, to make sure coach honors his side of the agreement. Let's say this particular coach turns out to be a big fat liar, manipulator and just mean and did not honor his side of the deal and you want to pull your child midway. The question is: I guess I have unpaid bill and no league will take dead beat father for not paying his bills before he takes off, so the question is: what are my remedies?

Socal league rule says a player is free to leave a club before July 1, club fee paid in full or not doesn't matter. You will be able to get your player card transfer to the new club.

 

[aong cangkol]

I have a question for @Grace T. Let's say you learned from past experience not to pay in full and do monthly payments instead, to make sure coach honors his side of the agreement. Let's say this particular coach turns out to be a big fat liar, manipulator and just mean and did not honor his side of the deal and you want to pull your child midway. The question is: I guess I have unpaid bill and no league will take dead beat father for not paying his bills before he takes off, so the question is: what are my remedies?

Most payment plan (from 4 clubs that I have received offer from) is structured so you paid off annual fee in 6 months. Contract starts in March so if you pull your kid in September you have to fight for a refund from the club. Almost impossible I think. Maybe better luck calling the credit card for fraudulent charges.

 

[Jamisfoes]

In November, Liverpool advertised a rec program/tournament that you have to tryout to be on the team. I thought that was a creative way to cheat the system. I don't see them get in trouble for that.

 

[Jamisfoes]

In November, Liverpool advertised a rec program/tournament that you have to tryout to be on the team. I thought that was a creative way to cheat the system. I don't see them get in trouble for that.

But it's hard to pin them down on that. They've always had a rec program and it's not their job to check and make sure everyone that shows up isn't already on a club team.

 

[BIGD]

Cal South announcement today on IG welcoming Socal Elite to the Cal South Family.

 

[socalkdg]

Cal South announcement today on IG welcoming Socal Elite to the Cal South Family.

Just saw that on Facebook as well.

 

[ColdPizza]

It was expected....even soccerparentlife on IG called it...

 

[Action Jackson]

SoCal elite has been gunning and seemed likely to secure admittance into ea1 up from ea2. They’ve also been lobbying to get a mls next spot. Their younger program is in full recruitment mode right now and the success of some of the other teams seems to be bringing people out. They’ve gone quite a long way from being a disorganized shell of separate teams and getting coordinated such as in play philosophy and keeper training. If true getting kicked out of SoCal (particularly after a team won the national championship) would be a huge blow to that effort. You better have the goods though because if it’s untrue such a rumor might do damage to a lot of teams right now. They are on track to be one of the next big things if they can keep the success and recruitment going and are fierce competition for players with some other solid clubs nearby.

You know the reasons by now.

 

[Action Jackson]

Wouldn't be the first time on this forum that a poster comes in with an emotional outburst, but is not ready to share any facts.

I am never wrong.

 

[Action Jackson]

Maybe this is how CSL makes a comeback??? SoCal Elite teams seem to be pretty strong and CSL is practically devoid of strong teams

CSL is not going to make a comeback unless one of the Big 10 in SoCal get angry with SOCAL and move to the CSL. Unlikely the next 5 years...unless....

...the transparency issues inside SOCAL's budget comes out clean and trouble free. I am not ready to offer a whisper on this, but it is coming.

 

[Action Jackson]

...violaton of probation..." What was that about?

There is a lot more here than the tryout policy violation! A lot more.

 

[Action Jackson]

Socal league rule says a player is free to leave a club before July 1, club fee paid in full or not doesn't matter. You will be able to get your player card transfer to the new club.

The player card doesn't transfer.