Reply to CCL and Virginia NPL: Make the case

Forum Index » Soccer

Reply to "CCL and Virginia NPL: Make the case"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=RantingSoccerDad]

So tell me this -- if you could toss aside all the egos in an ideal world, would we NOT be better off integrating a lot of this? EDP is doing club-v-club but *only* for clubs that have all their teams at an elite level -- is that not better than CCL or VaNPL? [/quote]

Of course it would be better. But this is not an ideal world. In an ideal world we would not have cancer either.

NCSL (WAGS on the girls side) predated many of these leagues, but we know what has happened there. To remedy this and not repeat history, we need to understand why NCSL/WAGS continues to crumble. [/quote]

NP here. RSD, I agree with your vision for an ideal structure 100%. It would be so much better for kids and development.

To PP, having been around when WAGS and NCSL started their slide, I think there were two primary issues. First, the leadership of the 2 leagues had been there forever. They had a lot of power since they were basically it at the time, and they grew rigid and a bit arrogant. NCSL was still a great league for kids at the time,  because it had a clear and fair system in place where the top 2 (or 3, depending on the division) moved up and down each season. You got to play with all the teams in the DMV at a level that was always appropriate. Contrary to what many claims, we never saw that this structure encouraged bad, win at all cost soccer. Good coaches had their teams playing great soccer, and bad coaches didn't, same as is currently the case in the club centric leagues like Da, ECNL, and CCL. But the leadership was not willing to be flexible on scheduling of games, club passes, etc., and there were a loot of club heads (like Ken Krueger at PWSI) who had a nasty relationship with the league leadership and vice versa. These unhappy club heads were thrilled to stick it to NCSL and WAGS (which had additional problems in that their pro rel was not pure, and they seemed to put teams into the top division bases on favoritism).

Meanwhile, DA started in 2007, and all the clubs who didn't get it freaked out. As discussed on DCUM in other contexts,  they needed to claim that they too had an elite product,  Voila, CCL north. Some of the member clubs probably believed the claims that CCL would be better for development and more convenient for families, but I think the power trip and marketing ploy were more significant drivers.

Now, as then, you'd have to weed out the big egos and find leaders who cared about the downsides of pay to play for families to bring sanity to have a better system for our kids. [/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics