Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

Yes, Great plan

6 (30%)

No, we need a new plan

14 (70%)

Total Members Voted: 20

[2 CENTS]

Vote yes, if you are in favor of:

Restricting access to the highest level of play to do damage to players, families and clubs. Not having access will cause an exodus of players, increasing their travel time and breaking up teams/ friendships (and) the elimination of revenue stream damages the financial stability of other clubs.

Dual affiliation through a Regional Club charter.  providing protection from their members for the designated Regional Clubs, but maintains control over the local association. The members voted to change direction in the SU/ECFC situation, this is precisely the type of situation we are trying to avoid with the proposed Regional Club charter approach, members voting.

Removing WYS dedication to democratic member associations controlled by players and coaches operating at a local level.

This will eventually lead to Seamless soccer.

Vote No, if you would like a new plan.

[EWSoccer64]

Heaven and Hell both know that I am not a fan of the state Plan, but I do not think that you accurately characterized it.    And apparently the feeling at the highest level of the state is that if we now go the total elimination of the PDL, then they will all bolt to USCS, leading to further player loss and more chaos.  Even if I disagree with that analysis, it is a factor that has to be considered.

[2 CENTS]

Heaven and Hell both know that I am not a fan of the state Plan, but I do not think that you accurately characterized it.    And apparently the feeling at the highest level of the state is that if we now go the total elimination of the PDL, then they will all bolt to USCS, leading to further player loss and more chaos.  Even if I disagree with that analysis, it is a factor that has to be considered.

The points made are from their own document (Resolution 1 PDL meeting document).

[Left Foot]

Heaven and Hell both know that I am not a fan of the state Plan, but I do not think that you accurately characterized it.    And apparently the feeling at the highest level of the state is that if we now go the total elimination of the PDL, then they will all bolt to USCS, leading to further player loss and more chaos.  Even if I disagree with that analysis, it is a factor that has to be considered.

The points made are from their own document (Resolution 1 PDL meeting document).

Can you point us to that doc? 

[Feldercarb]

Restricting access to the highest level of play to do damage to players, families and clubs. Not having access will cause an exodus of players, increasing their travel time and breaking up teams/ friendships (and) the elimination of revenue stream damages the financial stability of other clubs.

Now, read this again.  Is this poster most interested in the PLAYER, or the club and team?  Yes, Top (5-10%) will migrate.  Teams and revenue will be affected that is a given, but is that player or club/team centric?  

Affecting friendships is a different question.  Yes teammate may split, but if a friendship can't withstand a team switch it wasn't much of a friendship anyway, was it?

That leaves travel time... I'm a parent and know about added travel and it is a pain in the ass!  Under the plan there should be reasonable (although admittedly added) travel for most to RCL clubs.  

We say it is about the kids.  Do the kids care about old teams (what about the rec teams they left?).  Do they care about revenue? Can they keep up true friendships on their own?  Do they care if mom and dad have to take an additional .5 to 1 hour three days a week to achieve their dream?  Probably not.  

Now... who is for the KIDS?

[poolboy]

dude every 3-4-5 years it seems that another layer of bs gets applied and not always for the better but always w/ a compromise. i'm just amazed.

[ltg]

last i knew, any kid can try out for any team.  if they make it, that's their team, if they don't, there is another try out for a different team.  this is not exclusionary.

[Left Foot]

last i knew, any kid can try out for any team.  if they make it, that's their team, if they don't, there is another try out for a different team.  this is not exclusionary.

It is exclusionary based upon income right now. The market constraints will likely cause increased prices which will further exclude kids based upon income. Maybe the state could start a large scholarship fund? LOL

[2 CENTS]

And apparently the feeling at the highest level of the state is that if we now go the total elimination of the PDL, then they will all bolt to USCS,

The state should call their bluff, let them go private.
All they need to do is disassociate themselves from their associations. Create their own private companies and leagues, charge whatever they want, write their own rules, exclude whomever they want (the 3play model). Then the state could adopt something like the SU model at each association to compete against them. It sounds like they are trying to start something that is for the good of the entire association not just the Premier club.

It is not in the best interest of WYS to grant them more power to continue colluding for their own interest.

It would be interesting to see how many would bolt under these circumstances.