West LA merger?

Overlap said:
yes, but, what age level are the Ole & Tudela (looks like U littles)? What will these clubs do when they keep losing their top talent to the bigger clubs as those teams get older (merge or stick with U little?) Don't get me wrong, I'm a fan of teams staying together however, the reality is, the A type parents will always take their kid to what they think is the best option for them (and I don't just mean the kid), I was lucky enough to have my older DD (G98), stick with her team & club until they aged out, she loved her team mates and her team, a few left over their last 2 years for ECNL and they still managed to keep the core together. I'll be honest, there were a few times I didn't think they'd continue. They had a great deal of success on and off the field, all went to very good academic schools, 10 are still playing at the college level, and for the one's that stuck together, it was the most fun watching their growth as players and young adults you could ever wish for your kid. I've seen the changes over the last 2 seasons with my younger DD, age matrix & DA, I'm not a fan at the moment although, I hope it develops US soccer in general. I just think it's going to be a bumpy few more years until it all gets figured out.
Click to expand...

Our oldest teams in 2018 will be 2005s, and if we can't provide top level training, competition, and exposure for them over the next few years, we'll lose our best players -- that's the reality as a smaller, "independent" club. But we were aware of that when we made the choice to start the club last year, and we've taken it as a challenging path rather than a dead end. There are big clubs that do what they do very well, but they don't serve every community -- they're geographically or financially inaccessible to a lot of talented kids. We believe in our brand of soccer (as well as our mission of diversity and inclusivity) and think that, if we can grow it slowly and deliberately, we can be successful with our model.

You're right: this is a really interesting time in US soccer, and there's a lot that needs to be figured out up and down the pyramid. We'd like to think that, as things sort themselves out, there will be room for larger and smaller clubs to thrive. We'll see.

http://tudelafcla.com
 
KJR said:
Our oldest teams in 2018 will be 2005s, and if we can't provide top level training, competition, and exposure for them over the next few years, we'll lose our best players -- that's the reality as a smaller, "independent" club. But we were aware of that when we made the choice to start the club last year, and we've taken it as a challenging path rather than a dead end. There are big clubs that do what they do very well, but they don't serve every community -- they're geographically or financially inaccessible to a lot of talented kids. We believe in our brand of soccer (as well as our mission of diversity and inclusivity) and think that, if we can grow it slowly and deliberately, we can be successful with our model.

You're right: this is a really interesting time in US soccer, and there's a lot that needs to be figured out up and down the pyramid. We'd like to think that, as things sort themselves out, there will be room for larger and smaller clubs to thrive.

Keep doing what you are doing and hopefully the parents aren’t suckered away from you. Sign them up for National League and keep moving up
Click to expand...
 
  • Like
Reactions: KJR
KJR said:
Our oldest teams in 2018 will be 2005s, and if we can't provide top level training, competition, and exposure for them over the next few years, we'll lose our best players -- that's the reality as a smaller, "independent" club. But we were aware of that when we made the choice to start the club last year, and we've taken it as a challenging path rather than a dead end. There are big clubs that do what they do very well, but they don't serve every community -- they're geographically or financially inaccessible to a lot of talented kids. We believe in our brand of soccer (as well as our mission of diversity and inclusivity) and think that, if we can grow it slowly and deliberately, we can be successful with our model.

You're right: this is a really interesting time in US soccer, and there's a lot that needs to be figured out up and down the pyramid. We'd like to think that, as things sort themselves out, there will be room for larger and smaller clubs to thrive. We'll see.

http://tudelafcla.com
Click to expand...

We were once one of the "smaller" clubs, there were only 4 girls teams when we formed a team for my oldest DD U12, way back in the day (G98). I get everything you're saying and agree, to me, it was the best path and no regrets what so ever, just keep focused, keep recruiting the top talented kids at the early age, just know you'll lose a few along the way since parents usually feel the need to get the next best shiny thing. Just stay the course and best of luck!
 
Overlap said:
correct, no go, possible next year however, not likely
Click to expand...
That's basically good news for most of the paying customers at these clubs, in my opinion. I'm sure that a merger would have created a couple of very strong teams in a couple of age groups on the girls' side at least. That would be a boost for a small handful (4-5) really top level players, and for a couple of coaches. Beyond that, I don't really know how mergers like this would benefit any other players or their families. I've been through the same thing with a big club on the other side of LA, and believe me, the feeling of just being a "number" to the club is increased when these things happen. The co-dependence between status-hungry helicopter parents and the overly ambitious mega-clubs they inevitably spawn, to me, is the scourge of youth soccer. The more club directors that resist the urge to become the monster, the better (at least for the consumer).
 
Mystery Train said:
That's basically good news for most of the paying customers at these clubs, in my opinion. I'm sure that a merger would have created a couple of very strong teams in a couple of age groups on the girls' side at least. That would be a boost for a small handful (4-5) really top level players, and for a couple of coaches. Beyond that, I don't really know how mergers like this would benefit any other players or their families. I've been through the same thing with a big club on the other side of LA, and believe me, the feeling of just being a "number" to the club is increased when these things happen. The co-dependence between status-hungry helicopter parents and the overly ambitious mega-clubs they inevitably spawn, to me, is the scourge of youth soccer. The more club directors that resist the urge to become the monster, the better (at least for the consumer).
Click to expand...

That is my personal opinion as well. I really do think what happened is for the best, especially for SMU. They have over 40 years of history, helping to build the brand over the years, it just seemed like such a waste to throw that all away for just a few teams. The reality is, some will always leave, the one's that stick it out will also benefit from an environment where they can keep learning and growing not only as player's but, young adults.
 
RedNevilles said:
Don't let them fool you. I heard it is still going ahead. Seems quite late though
Click to expand...
All three clubs sent out e-mails to their members on Sunday/Monday telling them the merger was off (at least for this year). I suppose it's possible something changed, but you may have heard outdated news.
 
Dargle said:
All three clubs sent out e-mails to their members on Sunday/Monday telling them the merger was off (at least for this year). I suppose it's possible something changed, but you may have heard outdated news.
Click to expand...

correct, all 3 have sent emails to their families, nothing else is possible at this point, play on!
 
I have to disagree with you guys about maintaining the status quo. I get what you're saying, and I used to fully believe in the nice, neighborhoody, continuity vibe, but I believe the arguments for a westside merger far outweigh the arguments against.

(Full disclosure, I'm a former SMU parent, now at TFA, and I pay a lot of attention to west side soccer.)

Here's what I see a consolidated westside club would do:
- Consolidate talent. Most westside A teams are lucky to have half of a decent team, and merging would bring all the talent together. Development is more likely to happen the narrower the gap in talent between the top and bottom players. Makes it much easier for the coach to teach. Everyone is happier.
- Recruiting. Right now there are decent players languishing at Chelsea, FC England, Autobahn Athletic FC, etc. This would make one clear destination for those players to end up. Also, some of those local ballers that left in middle school to try their luck in DA eventually decide against DA, and having a top team in the neighborhood would be an obvious destination. I know lots of high school age kids who finish out their years commuting to successful distant teams.
- Maintaining talent. There are TONS of kids who commute out of the west side. SMU B06 alone have 8 players now at Galaxy, TFA, or LAFC. On the girls side, it tends to be even more, as the demographics of girls soccer skews toward affluent suburban areas. It's going to get even worse, in the 7 years that I've been paying attention I've seen younger and younger kids getting very serious about soccer.
- Roster slimming: There's probably 10% of the players on the three clubs that are roster fodder that could be serviced by (what would now be) the lower level clubs. Take a typical boys age group: There's four teams between the two clubs. A consolidated club could cut the roster bloat and have three decent teams. These kids are generally getting ripped off as it is, and would have a better experience at a different club.
- Coaching. Both SMU and FCLA has a lot of questionable coaches running around that were hired by previous DOCs. They're pretty much all overpaid, as the management of the two clubs believed their own hype about how amazing their coaches are, and competed with each other to retain "top talent". A merger will be a great opportunity to trim the excess coaches, and give opportunities to the handful of coaches who actually know what they're doing (and there are some good ones in the lot).
- Curriculum. By having a bigger club, you can actually have a meaningful curriculum and developmental progression. Coaches will be slotted into their strengths. Some of these guys like teaching younger kids ball skills, some of them like getting high school kids recruited. Run the thing as a real academy, with coaches interchanging at practice, learning from each other. Age groups practicing as a unit, olders vs youngers, etc.
- Fend off the even bigger clubs. You can rail about the growth of clubs all you want, but it's the reality of the situation now. The worry is that by resisting becoming a super club, you make yourself vulnerable to take over by mega club. I'm thinking of RSC, Galaxy, LAFC, Legends or someone could come knocking with sweet-talk about a "path to DA", and all it takes is convincing some clueless well-meaning volunteer club president and the next thing you know, you're a total feeder club. I know Surf was sniffing around SMU a few years ago, so this isn't as far-fetched as you might think. By scaling up, you have a better chance to maintain local control.
- Economy of scale. Goalkeeping coach, equipment, skill clinic, futsal nights, college recruiting resources. All of that become cheaper on a per player basis and therefore achievable.
- College recruiting. By becoming bigger, you can get known to college coaches. As it is now, each of those clubs produces a top team maybe once every four years. It's a massive struggle for the team administrator to get noticed by college coaches. A big club would have consistently strong teams and players.
- Apply for DA status. I think the boy's side is saturated, but a girl's DA on the westside makes a lot of sense. Or ECNL. The boys side could ride the coattails, enjoying the benefit of having better coaches and higher standards.
- Professional management. Can pay for administrators, a treasurer, and a field wrangler.
- Funding players. Right now, at least on the boys side, both SMU and FCLA have a big problem funding scholarship players. Many average boys A teams make a faustian bargin: fund a few outside players at unsustainable levels, ride the success for a year or two, and then either crash, use the success to recruit better local players, or find some well-heeled family to fund those kids. It happens at many age groups. It falls on individual parents and TAs to tape the thing together. You bring in some duffers to fill out the roster and hit the coaches salary, we all know the tricks. I've been one of those TAs, so I know what I'm talking about. It sucks to have to tell a family there's no money for your kid this year. It creates horrible team dynamics, as the wealthy parents feel smug, the middle parents resent the loss of playing time, and the funded families feel everyone's resentment. I don't even want to get into the racial elements to this, but we all know it's there. People always figure a westside team should have plenty of money, and it's true you see a lot of kids hopping out of luxury cars. But there are plenty of kids who need scholarship help on the westside. The trouble is that NONE of those clubs have any coherent plan for how to address it. It just falls to team manager and coach to make it work, and it sucks. By consolidating, you could build a plan for this into the charter. Make it part of the club's DNA. Get away from team specific budgets (nice, clean, simple idea, but its time is up) and run the thing as an academy.
- Field space. Obviously, this is a big issue. It'd be more complicated for sure. BUT: a bigger club would have more muscle and could make life hard for the little guys. Also, it could make more efficient use of space. It would also have way more lobbying power. Gain control of the university high field. And what ever happened to that proposed field next to Samohi?
- Shirt sponsorship. Surely with all the media power hitters on the westside, a big club could sell that jersey space?
- Fundraising. A really successful, high-powered, locally-controlled club that does things right would get people excited to open their wallets. Right now, people are afraid to, because they never know if they'll be jumping ship to the other neighborhood club in a year or two. Similarly...
- Cultural capital. Scratch the surface of any westside team, and you'll find parents who are powerful people in LA. Make a club worth believing in, and you can get their help in opening doors and making things happen...
- Long term strategic thinking: At SMU, we talked about raising a few million bucks to turf a field if we ever had a partnership with a park or school. That'd be easier with a big club. The idea would be: the school or park would have the field weekdays from 8am to 5pm, the club would use it from 5-9:30, and could have three 1.5 hour practice sessions. The club would pay for the turf and maintenance. LAUSD is insane to work with, but a big club might be able to make things happen, or could work with other school districts like Culver City. With fields, you can get into the real money makers, which is tournament hosting.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top