Bathos, I'm going to take a shot at this, knowing that the haters will jump in later so if you wish to continue this discussion you can always PM me later.
I seem to recall WSYSA helping SYSA kick out all the smaller independent clubs. Is this incorrect? Were they kicked out or did they become part of Seattle United? I can't answer this one.
The WSYSA is made up of associations, and so seems to generally act in their interest above that of clubs, and grants power to associations, not clubs. Is this incorrect? You mention, for example, that the association (I forget which one) might choose to pick another club over Westsound FC. The association then is the one with the power, not the club. The association is the member, but should be the administrative layer, not the soccer layer so I disagree, their interest should be in working with the clubs to meet the needs of the kids in their location. I guess I just view it differently...I sit on a club board right now and don't see our association as a conflict, but as a place for our club to reside and work with.
Clubs have been merging a lot. I can't think of any association starting or allowing a new club, although I'm sure there must be a few examples, it seems the trend is towards larger and fewer clubs. But it is still the clubs making the merging choices, so not sure what the point is?
Seamless soccer is the development principle the WSYSA is using, and seamless soccer works better when you've got one association/club coordinating it, rather than multiple clubs with possibily conflicting self interests. Is this incorrect? I don't agree, seamless soccer is simply a term meaning that we should be making it easier for a player to be able to play at what ever level that player wants or needs and remove the barriers that might be preventing this from happening. So you could accomplish this with one club or 10 clubs, doesn't matter because the issue isn't the clubs, it's the rules.
You seem to disagree that the WSYSA isn't encouraging their associations to have larger and fewer clubs. Are you saying they don't care, they are, or they're not? I think the state has made it clear that they should have fewer associations and that fewer clubs might be more beneficial in some areas, but not necessary. So it still comes down to the local area to decide.
I really am asking these questions out of wanting to know, not trying to make a point.
Well, maybe a little point...
I think the WSYSA (association based) and the RCL (club based) are in an inherent conflict and that the WSYSA recognizes it. I think they see clubs, in general, as somewhat contrary to the seamless soccer development model and would rather shift power to associations or at least to one club within an association. So, I'm asking these questions to see if I'm way out in left field (which happens a lot) or if I'm as perceptive and smart as I like to think I am. I think you are starting with the wrong assumption, but not sure. The associations have always, always been the members of WYS, not the clubs. They do not see the clubs as contrary to seamless soccer because the clubs are the bodies that run soccer for the associations. Yes, there are many bigger clubs who would like to be the only club in their area because they would like the $$$ that would come from that. But the truth is that this isn't necessary in the seamless soccer model. I think the biggest mistake is that people see the snapshot of "today" and assume that "today" is what the state wants as the model, but nothing could be further from the truth. For instance, if you truly understand the Regional Club concept, it isn't what you see today. We're still in a transition, a very painful one for sure, because the clubs who said they wanted this role, don't want to accept the role as it was created. We will always need the other clubs to serve the majority of kids who are not the "national" caliber type of players.
My bias, just so we can dispense with the passive aggressive snark; I'm in a small club that was kicked out by SYSA. However, I think there's a lot of value in the seamless soccer model (it's done great things with the rec. programs here), I'm just frustrated at how SYSA has insisted it be the exclusive development model. On the other hand, I also think having the seamless soccer WSYSA model along with the option of US Club serves everyone, so I'm not really worked up about it. I hear you, hard for me to comment since I wasn't there, but you're correct, if you take a step back and see the idea (seamless soccer) and ignore the corniness of the name and can understand the transition we're in today, then you can understand why the rhetoric you hear doesn't make sense, but I do understand why people feel the way they do because they haven convinced themselves that the "plan" is for these Regional Clubs to be the only ones standing, even though it's never been the plan to begin with.
Author
Topic: Why WSYSA - RCL Monopoly Doesn't Work (Read 2551 times)