Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Given that this was the second year in a row that the fields at issue have been unplayable for this tournament,

Not sure what you mean by that. I don't recall having any field issues with the tournament last year.

At their best the fields are TERRIBLE. Can we stop defending Bethesda charging $1000 for kids to play on thick grass, poorly drained, poorly drawn, uneven Polo fields?

Lets start there. Muldoons should only serve as the backup, emergency plan fields, not the primary fields.

No one's defending them...just pointing out facts. The fields were not unplayable last year.

As a technical matter, games were played on those fields last year, so I guess you are correct that they were "not unplayable." However, we saw numerous games at Summer Hill last year where portions of the field were nothing but mud, and that was by the third morning game on Saturday. One of the fields that morning was basically all mud from midfield to the penalty area of one side, and nearly the entire width of the field. The ref followed play from the sideline, as he did not want to slip in the mud. Yes, games were still played on these fields, but they were so muddy that they were not safe for the players or the ref, and equating what was played on those fields to "soccer" is like equating one of those sand soccer games at the beach to a soccer game played on grass or turf. (Maybe we found a new way for BSC to market its tournament at Muldoons/Summer Hill: "Premier Mud Soccer Cup").

Nobody is saying the fields last year were as bad as they were this year, but the fields were a mess last year, and games should not have been played at many of them.

Some of the girls teams that played on those fields were McLean's top team and Arlington, and neither McLean's top team nor Arlington were in the Premier Cup this year for those age groups. McLean instead chose to go to the Girls Junior Showcase tournament in NC the week before Premier Cup. Hmmm. I wonder if there is any link between their experience last year and their decision not to attend Premier Cup this year . . . Even BSC's leadership group should be able to figure this one out.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Given that this was the second year in a row that the fields at issue have been unplayable for this tournament,

Not sure what you mean by that. I don't recall having any field issues with the tournament last year.

At their best the fields are TERRIBLE. Can we stop defending Bethesda charging $1000 for kids to play on thick grass, poorly drained, poorly drawn, uneven Polo fields?

Lets start there. Muldoons should only serve as the backup, emergency plan fields, not the primary fields.

No one's defending them...just pointing out facts. The fields were not unplayable last year.

Their best condition makes them only playable for picnic, pickup soccer. They are never playable for $1000/team. That is the fact. They are not soccer fields, they are fields.

They Are. Not. Fit. For. Soccer. Ever.

That's ridiculous.
In good conditions, the fields are fine, at least when they're mowed low. My kids have played hundreds of games there over the years, and while I hate going all the way out there, and I hate how quickly they degrade in the rain, it's decent most of the time.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Given that this was the second year in a row that the fields at issue have been unplayable for this tournament,

Not sure what you mean by that. I don't recall having any field issues with the tournament last year.

At their best the fields are TERRIBLE. Can we stop defending Bethesda charging $1000 for kids to play on thick grass, poorly drained, poorly drawn, uneven Polo fields?

Lets start there. Muldoons should only serve as the backup, emergency plan fields, not the primary fields.

No one's defending them...just pointing out facts. The fields were not unplayable last year.

Their best condition makes them only playable for picnic, pickup soccer. They are never playable for $1000/team. That is the fact. They are not soccer fields, they are fields.

They Are. Not. Fit. For. Soccer. Ever.

We are playing on the Olney fields this weekend. How are they?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Given that this was the second year in a row that the fields at issue have been unplayable for this tournament,

Not sure what you mean by that. I don't recall having any field issues with the tournament last year.

At their best the fields are TERRIBLE. Can we stop defending Bethesda charging $1000 for kids to play on thick grass, poorly drained, poorly drawn, uneven Polo fields?

Lets start there. Muldoons should only serve as the backup, emergency plan fields, not the primary fields.

No one's defending them...just pointing out facts. The fields were not unplayable last year.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Given that this was the second year in a row that the fields at issue have been unplayable for this tournament,

Not sure what you mean by that. I don't recall having any field issues with the tournament last year.

At their best the fields are TERRIBLE. Can we stop defending Bethesda charging $1000 for kids to play on thick grass, poorly drained, poorly drawn, uneven Polo fields?

Lets start there. Muldoons should only serve as the backup, emergency plan fields, not the primary fields.

Anonymous wrote:

Given that this was the second year in a row that the fields at issue have been unplayable for this tournament,

Not sure what you mean by that. I don't recall having any field issues with the tournament last year.

Has BSC said anything about refunds, even partial, to teams that only were able to play one or two games?

Anonymous wrote:The people who complain at length about the shortcomings of the tournaments are the same people who would be the first to complain if there weren't a fall tournament for Johnny and Sally to play in the seventh division at U11. I'd venture to guess than most of the same people have never volunteered for one of these tournaments. They can't comprehend what actually goes into the organization of a successful tournament.

As for the field conditions, has anyone noticed that this area has experienced one of the wettest autumns on record? Soccer is an outdoor sport and there are only so many turf fields to go around. Do people really think that there are dozens of turf fields just sitting unused on any given weekend?

One of my boys is scheduled to play in Bethesda Tournament this weekend and hope they cancel. I'd enjoy the weekend off and keeping my core temperature above the hypothermic state, unlike last weekend.

Give me a break. First, a lot of these complaints are coming from BSC parents, and BSC requires all of its parents to volunteer for the tournaments for each team your kid plays for, so if you have multiple kids, your volunteer time is greater. Some may spend only 90 minutes or so volunteering per kid, others spend multiple hours per kid.

Second, the complaints about field quality have nothing to do with which team your kid plays for. All U14 and U13 teams played on the crappy grass fields that people are complaining about, and that is true for parents of girls on ECNL teams, as well as parents of girls on non-ECNL teams. The same was true for the teams at U12 and below, as the "top" teams from Loudoun, SAC, MD United, BSC, etc. had to play on poor grass fields, just the same as girls on the other teams from those clubs.

Third, the primary complaints about the fields at issue -- Polo Grounds, Summer Hill, Muldoons, etc. -- is that they are not designed for soccer or other sports played by kids. Their primary purpose is for polo. Soccer should not be played on these fields. Full stop.

Lastly, your statement about the lack of fields for this tournament is simply not true. There are dozens of grass fields designed for soccer (or other sports) and turf fields that could have been available for a tournament at this time of year. Most club and school teams are done with their seasons at this time of year, and their fields were available for use. I literally drove by 4 of them on the way back from one of our daughter's games this past weekend, and all of those fields were empty. And that is not even counting the fields in VA. BSC scrambled to get access to some of the VA fields (e.g., Nike Park), but I am guessing with a little more legwork, they might have been able to get access to some of the numerous turf fields in Arlington. And did anyone at BSC think to ask some of the other clubs who were attending the Premier Cup whether, given the bad weather, BSC could play some of the games at their respective fields? MD United, SAC, Loudoun, etc. all had multiple teams in this tournament at the U14 and younger years, and all of them have access to real soccer fields that, I am guessing, were available for games given that most of the club teams were participating in the Premier Cup.

I get the logistics and cost of getting access to fields, and how hard it is to schedule and re-schedule games as bad weather arrives. However, as you have said, this has been the wettest Fall on record, so it is not like this should have caught anyone unprepared. And everyone at BSC knew that the fields at issue were in very poor shape in late October. Yet it seems like, instead of developing a contingency plan for this year's Premier Cup, the people in charge at BSC just crossed their fingers and prayed that the fields would miraculously dry out.

Given that this was the second year in a row that the fields at issue have been unplayable for this tournament, what is most disappointing is not the cancellation of games this past weekend (and, I am guessing, this coming weekend for the boys), but rather the fact that nobody at BSC has tried to secure better fields for the U14 and under boys and girls who participate in this tournament. As has been said by others on this thread, clubs will not come back to the Premier Cup as a result of their experience this year and last year, and BSC will lose the revenue previously generated from those teams. BSC needs to make a decision about whether they are content to continue to offer a substandard product or whether they are willing to make some changes and make this tournament a "premier" one.

The people who complain at length about the shortcomings of the tournaments are the same people who would be the first to complain if there weren't a fall tournament for Johnny and Sally to play in the seventh division at U11. I'd venture to guess than most of the same people have never volunteered for one of these tournaments. They can't comprehend what actually goes into the organization of a successful tournament.

As for the field conditions, has anyone noticed that this area has experienced one of the wettest autumns on record? Soccer is an outdoor sport and there are only so many turf fields to go around. Do people really think that there are dozens of turf fields just sitting unused on any given weekend?

One of my boys is scheduled to play in Bethesda Tournament this weekend and hope they cancel. I'd enjoy the weekend off and keeping my core temperature above the hypothermic state, unlike last weekend.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:GO SOUTH FOLKS......Richmond's Cap Fall Classic and CASL are solid tournaments.

Richmond is such a pit. One year the hotel rep there stole my credit card and people there charged it up with fat shakes and alcohol. Then, when my daughter was too injured to attend she refused to refund the rooms rented for the weekend despite getting plenty of notice. The tournament organizer ended up refunding it but what a freak show.

What is a 'fat shake'?

Seriously? Potomac and Bethesda tournaments use all the same fields, including soccerplex for both (for older ages). Younger ages at both are at Muldoon, Summerhill and Polo Fields. Everything said about the Bethesda tournament can be said about Potomac’s. I think fees for Potomac’s tournament are similar to Bethesda’s.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I don't know what the rationale was for including so many teams but development was not a major part of the discussion.

Tournaments have nothing to do with development. They are huge fundraising events for the hosting clubs. That's it. The motivation to provide a good experience is only because it's a competitive market. With the sheer number of tournaments being offered now, teams have many options. But it is all about making money, and there's nothing wrong with that. The clubs are non-profits, so after paying the operating expenses (including sometimes professional tournament directors), they have to pour that $$ back into the clubs.

Where does it go? Some goes for training and equipment, which offsets costs for the players. A lot of it also goes into field improvement, including providing funding for more turf fields, many of which have been paid for by public-private partnerships between soccer clubs and local governments.

It would take a lot of bake sales and car washes to come close to the amount of money that can be raised from a tournament with hundreds of teams playing $900-1200 each.

And yet Bethesda has been having this tournament at Muldoon's for years. Exactly what field improvements have been made form the money?

Muldoons is fine if the weather holds. When it gets rainy everything falls apart. It’s also used all season long for league games.

Former BSC parent

Another BSC parent here, and I disagree that Muldoons is fine. If dry, I get what you are trying to say, but Muldoons is simply not meant for soccer, even when it is in its best condition. It is consistently the worst field that our kids play on for soccer, and you always hear opposing teams' parents talk poorly about the field quality. As others have noted on this thread, the ball rarely rolls true, which makes it incredibly difficult for kids to dribble or connect passes. You frequently see possession lost because of a bad bounce, and we have seen very "soft" goals scored by balls that take terrible bounces over a keeper's hands. Our BSC teams usually play much better soccer on "away" trips when they are on fields that are meant for soccer and not as lumpy as Muldoons.

I echo the sentiment from an earlier post that I have never understood why the U12 and under BSC teams play on such a sub-standard field, while MSI teams and other similar teams play their games at the SoccerPlex, which is superior in every way to Muldoons/Summer Hill and is a much closer drive for nearly all of the kids on BSC rosters.

As for the tourney, BSC should have been aware that Muldoons was in bad shape due to all of the rainouts in September, the condensed number of games played at Muldoons during October, coupled with the additional rain in October and November. Those fields were in as bad a shape as I have ever seen them in late October, and BSC parents were talking at that time about how there was no way the fields would be playable for the boys and girls tournaments in November. As this thread has illustrated, this has not been a good week or so for the club's reputation, and it is embarrassing for those of us with kids in the program. Hopefully BSC fixes some of these issues for next season and next year's Premier Cup.

Youth sports is all about making money, not spending it.

Has anyone played in the Potomac tournament ? They rent fields at the Soccer Plex.

http://www.potomacsoccer.org/Default.aspx?tabid=578492

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I don't know what the rationale was for including so many teams but development was not a major part of the discussion.

Tournaments have nothing to do with development. They are huge fundraising events for the hosting clubs. That's it. The motivation to provide a good experience is only because it's a competitive market. With the sheer number of tournaments being offered now, teams have many options. But it is all about making money, and there's nothing wrong with that. The clubs are non-profits, so after paying the operating expenses (including sometimes professional tournament directors), they have to pour that $$ back into the clubs.

Where does it go? Some goes for training and equipment, which offsets costs for the players. A lot of it also goes into field improvement, including providing funding for more turf fields, many of which have been paid for by public-private partnerships between soccer clubs and local governments.

It would take a lot of bake sales and car washes to come close to the amount of money that can be raised from a tournament with hundreds of teams playing $900-1200 each.

And yet Bethesda has been having this tournament at Muldoon's for years. Exactly what field improvements have been made form the money?

I think BSC helped pay to put in the turf fields ar Wooten and Montgomery.

And Walter Johnson.

They can also rent private school fields- Stone Ridge, Holy Child, etc etc

Anonymous wrote:GO SOUTH FOLKS......Richmond's Cap Fall Classic and CASL are solid tournaments.

Richmond is such a pit. One year the hotel rep there stole my credit card and people there charged it up with fat shakes and alcohol. Then, when my daughter was too injured to attend she refused to refund the rooms rented for the weekend despite getting plenty of notice. The tournament organizer ended up refunding it but what a freak show.