can’t write about Alexandria Soccer

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I mean it is USA soccer, pay to play. The best kids don't get a chance in our system.

If you are good, people will find you. And 40% of the kids in our club are on aid. Is it even close to ideal or fair? No. Is it difficult? Yes. Is it impossible? No.

It would seem to reason that if clubs and their complicit or checked out boards weren’t ridiculously overcharging for their ‘nonprofit’ services, fewer kids would need aid and many more would probably participate. But hey, turn a blind eye to this because it’s USA soccer. Clubs don’t care about the kids, they care about the clubs (which is the permanent staff’s wallets rather than the 1099 coaches).

Right. I think you are turning a blind eye to reality. It’s useless arguing with people who think money simply grows on trees. Who would fund this alternative system? Why doesn’t it already exist? Do you think It would be better to charge less but offer no aid? These are the same arguments people have had for decades about college tuitions. A lot of people have thought about this before you. What do you propose other than people working for free?

Are these the thought people who came up with paying the director 3 times the market rate? It seems like there are some instant savings right there - like pay the market rate that every other club is paying. There are lots of alternative approaches you just have to get out of your self-reinforcing bubble. Circular, absolutist arguments like lower costs result in no aid, people work for free, etc... demonstrates that whoever is framing the justification is more concerned about preserving the status quo than thinking about the problem. That’s simply lazy. Ironically, I would think that paying someone 3 times the market rate could be justified if that individual can deliver the same soccer club experience at 1/3 of the cost. If I’m to believe some of the posts on this forum, the delivered service is not resulting in teams competing at this highest youth levels, nor does it seem to be a stepping stone to collegiate opportunities, and finally it doesn’t appear to be cheaper. I’m not familiar enough with its house program to comment on that aspect, but perhaps that is 3 times ‘better’ than competing clubs. If that is the case, than that would be model worthy of shopping around. It seems that the most likely scenario is the people running this club, both on the oversight and director level, don’t fully understand the youth soccer market. This is common in smaller community programs across the country. When these clubs try to grow beyond the community-focused recreational programs to something bigger, they often do so without doing their research first. A couple of years into this growth they usually figure out how far off the rails they’ve gone. Some continue down that path thinking they are different and unique, but usually run into significant legal issues. Others just close down and let another option move in. A select few try to fix the problem, but that usually means those who created the problem have to first admit they messed up - egos and reputations tend to get wrapped up into that situation and that makes it very rare. It will be interesting to see where this club ends up.

[Anonymous]

Nobody cares

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Nobody cares

Maybe, maybe not i really care about u12 state cups...