Print

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

[Independent]

I agree with you on the need to protect a Rec Cup.   We disagree on a rec team developing and doing well making it, by definition, no longer a rec team.

I almost hate the fact that we might agree on this to large extent.  It would be easier just to demonize you.  But, I never said I was against a rec team developing, or in fact arguing that you could develop to the point the you no longer meet the definition of a rec team.

What I was pointing out was that different Districts/Associations seem to apply the admission criteria differently.  I would hope we could both agree that all the Districts/Associations should interpret or simply apply the rules in a similar fashion.  I guess you might disagree that this (different application of the admission criteria) even happens, but from a philosophical standpoint I would assume you concur.

[Old Dog]

Because most of the teams are not "rec" and for the true rec teams it gets ruined by others that are hell bent on something else.

Which is the heart of why I posed my original question.  My point of view is that there is something about a true Rec Cup that needs protecting; how to protect it, and if you can could ever get agreement on what "it" is, is a another story altogether.

You have some registrars that do a fantantisc job and will hold the line and do things properly. You have others that don't want the BS from coaches and will do what they want so they don't bitch at them. I know of a club that the coach with give the registrar a list of his players and then call his team rec. That is also why some association say if rec you can't play higher then X level. I don't agree with that but I can understand how it might help.

BTW, a true rec team is one controlled by the registrar for the purpose of rostering players to a team. Anything outside of that is not a "REC" team. Rec is a process not a level of play. The registration for a team at the rec level should be left to one person, the registrar.

[Independent]

BTW, a true rec team is one controlled by the registrar for the purpose of rostering players to a team. Anything outside of that is not a "REC" team. Rec is a process not a level of play. The registration for a team at the rec level should be left to one person, the registrar.

Yes, I understand that it is not a level of play.  Again, the question arose because it appears to me that different districts might treat admission to the Rec Cup differently.  One District may allow Rec teams that play up in a Select division to enter, while another may not.  I have never challenged that the team from Dist 3 is not a Rec team. 

[Old Dog]

BTW, a true rec team is one controlled by the registrar for the purpose of rostering players to a team. Anything outside of that is not a "REC" team. Rec is a process not a level of play. The registration for a team at the rec level should be left to one person, the registrar.

Yes, I understand that it is not a level of play.  Again, the question arose because it appears to me that different districts might treat admission to the Rec Cup differently.  One District may allow Rec teams that play up in a Select division to enter, while another may not.  I have never challenged that the team from Dist 3 is not a Rec team. 

Nope we agree that it does happen, I think some associations and districts actual check "rec" status and others just rubber stamp applications.

[EWSoccer64]

Old Dog and Indy have some valid observations, and I do not discount what they are saying. 
I know of an association where the rec teams are formed by the local city club directors, who then gives the completed rosters to the registrar.   The city club directors are supposed to follow the rules and assign kids based on neighborhood schools they are attending (geographic criteria) and vet any special requests.  However, once in a while a city director will be coaching a team in one of the age groups and suddenly there is a powerfully stacked U-9 or whatever team.   To me, that is by definition no longer a rec team.   

[metz123]

I'd like to ask a related question that I hope is not seen as off topic.  Why are teams allowed to play in multiple state cups?
Someone said that this team is playing in the rec cup and the founders cup and I hear it's not the only one.  I also read that teams that lose in the championship cup are then going to go play in the challenge cup.  I think a team should choose which cup they feel they can compete in and where they are qualified to play, and play that cup not multiple state cups.  If you feel you can win the founders cup, then you shouldn't be playing in the rec cup and if you feel you can win the championship cup, you shouldn't have the challenge cup as a safety net when you lose.   

Why wouldn't you want teams to play in multiple cups if they are qualified to do so? Does the EPL tell Man U that they have to choose between the FA, Carling and Champions League cups?

It's not the same.  The state cups are set up to be for different levels of play and while the deffinition of that is being questioned by some i think that you should play in the cup you qualify for and not multiple cups.  First and foremost I would like to see as many teams as possible have the opurtunity to play in a competetive end of the year cup so i certainly wouldn't want to see one team win the founders cup, then win the challenge cup, and then go on to win the champions cup, if that were possible which it is not.  So I also wouldn't like seeing the same team win both the rec cup and the founders cup regardless of qualifying for both. I know there are a large number on this site who want everything condensed so there is just one or two super teams who win everything and all the best players have to play for them because they believe that will get their child a pro contract, but I don't think that helps to promote the game or encourage more players to keep with the game.  If one super team is going to win every cup, the lower teams won't even bother and more players will leave for other sports.  I want everyone to be included and I fear that having teams play in multiple cups will serve to exclude other teams that those sitting on their mighty thrones feel are unworthy. 

Do you understand how the FA Cup, Carling Cup (and even the US Open Cup here in the USA) work? Why is everyone here so interested in exclusion instead of inclusion? Is winning so important that each group wants to exclude any other group out of their cup that might possibly beat them? If so, might I suggest each team organize their own cup that only they are allowed to play in such they are ensured a victory at the end of the cup and nobody's feelings get hurt.

There's plenty of ways to set up state cups such that the cup is organized that you play more and more "like" teams as the cup goes on. Already we are seeing the Challenge cup split up into Gold and silver at most ages.

Personally I'd love to see district level teams playing in the Founders Cup and then the Challenge Cup. I'd like to see a world where winning the Founders Cup gave you a free invitation to play in the Challenge Cup. In the 6 years I've been following WYS state cup play I don't think I've seen a single district team win a Challenge Cup in the top division. I expect I wouldn't see a single rec team win the Founders Cup. In fact I applaud the teams choosing to extend their seasons and go up against competition considered to be "better".

In my perfect world I'd love to see Rec teams playing in the rec cup and the Founders cup, I'd love to see district teams playing founders cup and Challenge Cups and I'd love to see some of the lowest level RCL teams in the founders cup.

In my nirvana I'd like to see an open cup system where US club and US Youth soccer teams could play in the same cup.

[Independent]

Why is everyone here so interested in exclusion instead of inclusion?

I don't see this as a predominant theme in this thread.  The only exclusion that is being advocated (as best as I can tell) is playing down (sandbagging).

[metz123]

It's the predominant theme of this thread.

The whole discussion started because a rec team that plays in a district league is playing in the rec cup. That's not sandbagging. Rec teams are allowed to play in the rec cup, yet everyone wants this team excluded because they are good enough to play district and be competitive.

Others have expressed an opinion that teams shouldn't be allowed to play in both the founders and challenge cup because "if they are good enough to play in the challenge cup, they shouldn't be allowed to also play in the founders cup because it's not the cup they care about and they might win the founders cup even though they don't care about it." Again, The founders cup is the tournament for district level teams. It's not sandbagging to play in it and also play in the challenge cup.

[Independent]

It's the predominant theme of this thread.

The whole discussion started because a rec team that plays in a district league is playing in the rec cup. That's not sandbagging. Rec teams are allowed to play in the rec cup, yet everyone wants this team excluded because they are good enough to play district and be competitive.

Others have expressed an opinion that teams shouldn't be allowed to play in both the founders and challenge cup because "if they are good enough to play in the challenge cup, they shouldn't be allowed to also play in the founders cup because it's not the cup they care about and they might win the founders cup even though they don't care about it." Again, The founders cup is the tournament for district level teams. It's not sandbagging to play in it and also play in the challenge cup.

Sorry, I think you are reading into it something that was not really written.  For the last time, the question is about whether Districts/Associations are applying the rules equally.  Everyone wants them excluded?  Really?  You are building some very big straw men.

[Old Dog]

the question is about whether Districts/Associations are applying the rules equally

NO!

[EWSoccer64]

It's the predominant theme of this thread.

The whole discussion started because a rec team that plays in a district league is playing in the rec cup. That's not sandbagging. Rec teams are allowed to play in the rec cup, yet everyone wants this team excluded because they are good enough to play district and be competitive.

Others have expressed an opinion that teams shouldn't be allowed to play in both the founders and challenge cup because "if they are good enough to play in the challenge cup, they shouldn't be allowed to also play in the founders cup because it's not the cup they care about and they might win the founders cup even though they don't care about it." Again, The founders cup is the tournament for district level teams. It's not sandbagging to play in it and also play in the challenge cup.

Sorry, I think you are reading into it something that was not really written.  For the last time, the question is about whether Districts/Associations are applying the rules equally.  Everyone wants them excluded?  Really?  You are building some very big straw men.
[/quote

Back to this point.  - So far, I have not really seen any evidence that Districts - which is where the conversation started - have been applying their discretion unfairly in regards to cup entries.   Is there a difference in how rec teams are made up between one association and another?   The answer would have to be yes on that.   
How important those differences are, what impact they really have, is something that requires more sober and intense thought.  Back in the day when I was coaching a little rec team, the diferences certainly seemed to be very large and have a great impact.   Now, I am not so certain.
A good starting point would be for the state to issue a memo to all associations outlining the criteria for rec teams to be considered rec teams for state cup play and suggesting that teams that do not meet all of the criteria be directed into a higher order cup.   (Let's see how many people besides TP object to that idea!)

[tripleplay]

It's the predominant theme of this thread.

The whole discussion started because a rec team that plays in a district league is playing in the rec cup. That's not sandbagging. Rec teams are allowed to play in the rec cup, yet everyone wants this team excluded because they are good enough to play district and be competitive.

Others have expressed an opinion that teams shouldn't be allowed to play in both the founders and challenge cup because "if they are good enough to play in the challenge cup, they shouldn't be allowed to also play in the founders cup because it's not the cup they care about and they might win the founders cup even though they don't care about it." Again, The founders cup is the tournament for district level teams. It's not sandbagging to play in it and also play in the challenge cup.

Didn't you once write a (quite persuasive) post about sandbagging that you experienced in a tournament? Don't you see that if a team is too good and entering a tournament on what is essentially a technicality that it is not fair to other teams? I think most people are ok with playing up, but playing down is a different story. As I've said, I think it should be an absolute right to play up in any State Cup. That's codified in the rules in California. But there are also rules determining the minimum cup you can play in based on your regular season league (whether the Hispanic LA Futbol, Bakersfield, Coast Soccer League, the break-off Premier league etc.) Makes sense to me.

[metz123]

Am I personally in favor of teams playing down? No. I've never willingly entered a team into a bracket I thought they would easily win. I personally don't see the benefit. Does that mean I think that the state tournament committees should be in charge of trying to determine who might be potentially sandbagging? No way. They can barely get schedules out.

Would I personally be in favor of some base criteria applied evenly to determine state cup eligibility? Yes, but I'm not going to hold my breath waiting for it to happen.

Am I happy that the RCL just got together and decided to eliminate the rule that used to require teams that finished in the top 16 in state play championship cup? No. IMO that rule helped set at least a baseline for the Championship Cup vs the Challenge Cup. The Challenge Cup already has too many teams playing down due to the ridiculous regional Challenge Cup that the winner goes to. This year it will even be worse. Am I going to cry about it not being fair if one of my teams gets whupped by an RCL A team? Probably :-) but at least I'll go into the state cup with my eyes open to the potential for mismatches (instead of local tourneys where you go in blind, especially for new coaches).

Do I think that district level teams should be allowed to play Founders and Challenge cup? Yes, because a 2 month break between the end of district season and the start of Challenge Cup is stupid. Unfortunately, that's the only path currently provided for district teams to have organized games in January and February before Challenge Cup.

Would I rather see Challenge Cup and Championship Cup moved up to right after the fall season so that all the state cups run concurrently to have teams choose one? Absolutely. It would also let everyone use their various Spring leagues for development purposes.

Is there a whole heck of a lot of room for improvement in setting up some baseline criteria for the state cups to try and make them more balanced? Absolutely. Do I think anything is going to be done about it? Nope...

so we live with the system we have. Without any baseline criteria, I say let any team sign up for the cup that they are eligible for. The last thing I want is to have committees in some back room, trying to determine who is allowed to play in what cup, especially in this state. We've already seen that in the seeding of state cups, we're seeing in in the predetermination of the Gold vs Silver brackets in the Challenge Cup and I'd hate to see it filter to the Founders and Rec cups. Talk about politics, oy...

[tripleplay]

Metz, this is the one thing that state commitees should legitimately be doing! After all, it is a tournament being organized by WYS.

See, e.g., http://www.calsouth.com/en/state-tournaments/


So, e.g. a Washington version might look like: all teams can play up but not lower than:
RCL1, OPL1: Champ (assuming OPL gets dual sanctioned as discussed in another thread)
RCL2, RCL3, State1, OPL2, PSPL1: Challenge (regardless of sanctioning - opt out of the Presidents Cup)
Other teams not playing in Rec divisions: Founders (regardless of sanctioning)

WYS could implement that unilaterally, today. And we'd have a real state cup.

 

[Islander]

Founders Cup at GU15 seems really weak this year. Looks like all the good 96 Select teams have went US Club and aren't eligible.

Not only that but the field has dropped from 26 teams last year to 8 this year.

[ckunited]

I like the Tracyton Tornados to win this weak tournament.

[Islander]

I like the Tracyton Tornados to win this weak tournament.

I'll take Westside Revolution Black   

[metz123]

Metz, this is the one thing that state commitees should legitimately be doing! After all, it is a tournament being organized by WYS.

See, e.g., http://www.calsouth.com/en/state-tournaments/


So, e.g. a Washington version might look like: all teams can play up but not lower than:
RCL1, OPL1: Champ (assuming OPL gets dual sanctioned as discussed in another thread)
RCL2, RCL3, State1, OPL2, PSPL1: Challenge (regardless of sanctioning - opt out of the Presidents Cup)
Other teams not playing in Rec divisions: Founders (regardless of sanctioning)

WYS could implement that unilaterally, today. And we'd have a real state cup.

 

Sure, they could..but they won't. The RCL clubs won't let them do this because it would prevent clubs like Eastside from unilaterally declaring that all their non A teams will play Challenge Cup (despite the fact that many of their second level teams play RCL1 and rank among the top 10-15 teams in the state). They've relaxed the rules around Championship Cup even more this year.

[GuyHollywood]

This is a good and healthy discussion.  I was drawn to the thread because I know a team playing in the semi-finals of the Rec Cup using a guest player.  I was talking with a parent on the team and asked about the guest player.  Their response was that the other parents wanted to win the Rec Cup, so they have all turned the other way.

Reading through this, the quote above is the one that caught my attention, because it is a clear violation of the rules.  A few year back, a coach admitted that he had used a guest player after winning district, but before the state level tournament.  Even though he admitted his error, he was still suspended for over a year.  It's tougher to pull this off with player cards, but a team was able to get by with it last year, just by adding a player card from another team to the player cards for their team.  While the referees were checking that the player had a card, they did not verify that the team name matched on all the cards.  This did eventually catch up with them, but I could see them getting through the tournament without this being noticed, as well.