Your commentary speaks of the clubs who are not happy with the current model working collectively to create change. When they unite as a grassroots network around the ideas you have suggested, the clubs are not fighting the system or waiting for permission to reform it. They are taking action to build a better, higher-retention model that serves 100% of the families.
Again of given you 3 clubs by names where that could have happened. There’s nothing stopping clubs putting teams in CSL now and offering it. If it were viable economically they’d do it. But CSL can’t even compete with SoCal let alone the letter leagues. It’s economics. You can wish it all you want but if it were viable the market would produce it.You have been on this forum a long time and have a large number of postsThe example of one team being successful but ultimately picked off is support for the idea that those unhappy with the current options need to band together and create the better option. If 100 clubs/teams/coaches repeat the Conejo example it will first be much harder to pick apart and it would be impossible for the success to be ignored. There is no doubt that playing on quality fields is preferable, but that should not come at the cost of the frustration highlighted over and over again on this Forum. Having an open access platform, that's independent, has rules to maintain the integrity of games, where the results on the field determine where you play - rather than politics. That seems like a better option. When clubs, coaches and teams unite as a grassroots network they don't need to fight the system or wait for permission to reform it. They create the opportunity to build a better, higher-retention model that serves 100% of our families - not the 2%.
Southern California is the biggest and most successful soccer market in the US. The shear size of the population means there will be demand for different experiences, some will hate the travel others as you say will like it. But the overwhelming view of parents today is sport costs too much, expects too much travel, and they fear speaking out for fear their kids will be punished or kicked off the team. Without trying to undermine the current model, clubs, coaches and teams not happy with the current option(s) need to come together and create the better option. The vast majority of clubs and coaches are not satisfied by the current system but they are not.
How do you measure one league vs another? There are currently at least 12 plus leagues in the market?
Private equity is a bit of a canard. The absurdity of club dues is driven by 3 major factors: salary inflation, the costs of field rentals (esp those of a certain level of quality and available for lighted practices) and insurance. You want it substantially cheaper you have to revert to the good old CSL days and the ayso united model: volunteer daddy coaches, volunteer refs, fugly grass fields with the homeless encampment. We have a real life historical example here too: the valley used to be littered with small Latino clubs that performed like explosion…my son played for one of those clubs…practice was in the grass filled fields in van nuys park lit by portable light (not the rented fenced with fixed lighting ones where surf was practicing).
I don’t need to. The market does it for me. Econ 101
The examples you share are real and the costs outlined add up, but clubs will compete with one another based upon the experience they can deliver, and the cost will be evaluated based upon the value they deliver. But not all clubs who play on great fields or claim to have the best coaches have great retention of families - some well known clubs rotate as much as 35% of their members each year. Likewise clubs who have to work with less pristine facilities or choose to use non paid coaches are not always inferior. Given the size and diversity of the Southern California market you are going to have a full variety of clubs, coaches with unique values offering different experiences. The ultimate measure of success is retaining players, if the experience is good, if the value promised is delivered, and the coach is doing a great job, the parents will stay. Each club, coach and team has to create an its own team culture and offer value to the family worthy of the costs being charged. Creating a conversation about why a club is relevant is a missing piece for many teams today, if everyone is selling the win and college pathways, everyone looks the same and the nice fields and paid coaches might appear to be the better option.
Yet you claim one league is better than the other. I agree market dynamics is the ultimate test, will families pay for what your selling, but the frustrations being shared on this forum are not just economic it looks and sounds like clubs and coaches sharing their dissatisfaction with the current system.
I never said that. I never made such a normative statement. I only pointed out mlsn dominated the higher end market. You are confusing the normative should with the descriptive is. You are committing what they call the moralistic fallacy. The other fallacy is that just because something x is broken we should go back to y. That’s Chestertons fence. There’s a reason y fell apart. You aren’t going to put it back together. The way forward is to find a way that side steps or evolved the issue, not winding back the clock. Finding the former is hard, so people prefer to preach the latter. But preaching is easy.
Well we have a real life economic example of this too. The valley used to be filled with small clubs playing on fugly fields. They don’t exist today. They’ve been gutted. The market spoke.
If we all just believe in rainbows and moonbeams anything is possible.
We just didn’t wish hard enough I guess….
Sometimes a pendulum swings back hard the other way. People are tired of fake prestige leagues and want a merit based system.We just didn’t wish hard enough I guess….
1. There’s no evidence of that. Coast is still kicking along. We’ll see how many people kick the doors down of ayso select
Do you know how much club insurance is?
What you are getting at is this - CSL (run by Cal South) - was a league - not dictated to by clubs. Clubs got sick of this - they formed Socal (with most of the board being ECNL heavy hitters, travel agents, and controlling big faciliites for tournaments) - the results have turbo charged the costs to all families - and created a more chaotic landscape with new letter leagues competing with the traditional ECNL on the girls side. MLS Next will win any arms race on the boys side.
