Let’s talk about town soccer...

[Unregistered]

You are missing the point entirely. Because of your dismissive thinking kids in America from less income will never have equal opportunities. The thinking has to come from the top down. SRI, clubs, town leaders, the burden is not on the parents to fix the inequities it’s from the top. You mention you tube and some kids don’t have internet. Your privledge is showing. If one club would stand up and become more vocal on this it could have a positive ripple affect.

I’m sorry, but I have to argue this also. It’s not dismissive, it’s knowing how things work and looking at it from multiple perspectives. I’m not saying that SRI, club, and town have it exactly right, but I do not agree that at least part of the burden isn’t the responsibility of the parents.

If you want something for your child, there are ways to make it work. It is more a problem of ignorance of not knowing what resources are available in terms of programs across the state. I do agree with someone else’s comment that transportation is a large barrier. Again though, I know many kids who are constant fixtures in someone else’s car.

From volunteering for many years on a town board and attending state meetings, it is apparent that town soccer boards do not want clubs involved with their programs at all. You have towns to blame for that with isolationist thinking...the story is always the same- they are worried that they will lose players to clubs. I’ve sat in meetings where clubs propose partnerships with towns in the past, offering free programs, coach training, help with the admin side, etc. usually they are looking for field access in trade and towns just won’t do it.

As for your comments about my “privilege” because I mentioned YouTube as a source, again, it’s knowing how things work. 86% of households in RI have broadband internet (http://www.planning.ri.gov/documents/census/2019/RI-Census-2020-Outreach-Plan_6-8-2019_Final.pdf). Anyone who falls into that other 14% has access to community programs, libraries etc that would help them access to at least USE of the internet if not securing it for in home access. Government programs offer free cell phones to anyone within certain income guidelines receiving assistance. Go to Walmart and jump on their free WiFi to watch a video. There is always a way. You don’t like that answer? Go to a park or school and watch a team practice and copy what they are doing. It really isn’t that hard.

Don’t even get me started on programs that exist in schools themselves or in community rec centers. Take Project Goal for instance, which services some the neediest students in urban settings, providing free tutoring and homework clubs as part of their access to some of the best soccer coaches the state has to offer. All within a reasonable location. These programs exist, but again, are highly dependent on seeking assistance and working to provide opportunities for your kids.

[Unregistered]

So naive. So a single mom working two jobs has time to watch soccer drills, and got to Walmart for use of computers and WiFi. You aren’t really thinking of everyone. Some kids can’t even afford cleats. Say whatever you want to help you sleep at night.

[Unregistered]

So naive. So a single mom working two jobs has time to watch soccer drills, and got to Walmart for use of computers and WiFi. You aren’t really thinking of everyone. Some kids can’t even afford cleats. Say whatever you want to help you sleep at night.

In the situation you are describing, how is this problem going to get solved any differently from the top down, except maybe by solving poverty from the top down?

[Unregistered]

Now that the contracts are signed and tryouts for club are set club bashing might be on hold until spring recruitment starts again.

Can we get back to the heart of soccer? Towns.
Hoping the COVID break gave everyone perspective.
First off the town leagues need to go back to grade not birth year otherwise the seniors are screwed.
Second, can we get rid of the fake town teams? You know the teams that are under a town name but are really just a bunch of club players hand picked by coaches to give club players extra practice together while dominating the town scene.
And last, can we encourage SRI or whomever to get towns more player development? I’m hearing some towns are adding more practices up to 3 from 2 a week but more practices are meaningless if you are teaching skills and small sided games etc.
Towns can get the Revs, Liverpool, Ravens etc, and other clubs to partner with them and build proper development programs. This will help reach kids in all zip codes and diverse economic demographics. Town soccer should focus a bit leveling the playing field by offering more.

These points have been made before on this forum but quickly glossed over in another TS rabbit hole of fighting over clubs. Or people say who cares it’s only town? Well not every kid can afford club so let’s help with that by developing players in club.

Partnering with premier clubs is the first step in killing a town program. They recruit U8s to play U9 before even allowing the beginning kids to develop at all. Hiring Revs coaches to run clinics (for coaches and players) is a good thing. Maybe Ravens? Haven't checked them out yet. Super Liga has a DOC now, Giovanni Paccini (sp?). The guy is a rock star and is willing to help town coaches. Also ODP Academy is a great way to get the promising kids developing without having to pay $2K and travel far to practice. Finally, some volunteer coaches are better than the B-level premier coaches. Seen it first hand with my kids.

[Unregistered]

Partnering with premier clubs is the first step in killing a town program. They recruit U8s to play U9 before even allowing the beginning kids to develop at all.

Do you mean they recruit players who haven't developed, or they ignore other developing kids?

[Unregistered]

Do you mean they recruit players who haven't developed, or they ignore other developing kids?

They recruit kids who are more physically developed because it's the same old cycle. Physically dominant - more wins - parents see rec as limiting their superstar - used to be at least u12 but then went down to u10 and then to u8.

The fundamental problem with this thread is assuming "town" is the right model. Towns developed because SRI became - like RI in general - a "I know a guy" club. Rules and processes were put in place to protect fiefdoms, build as many teams as possible, protect the premier side (the 3 town rule and primacy of premier over town in application of the "recruiting" rule). ODP was about pay to play because nobody seriously thought it was the way to actually develop "olympic" caliber players (seriously, how many such players make it out of New England, let alone RI, proportionally on high level national teams?)

Towns were important because towns meant team numbers - rec was the money maker for the town program, competitive a nice hook for some more than others depending on the luck of the draw talent in the community - both players and non-professional coaches and administrators. Premiers had their niche. Life was good from the $$ and "the fraternity" perspective.

The goal was to protect the bottom line, not evolve. When creative destruction forces began to brew between the shifting demographics of the youth population (more urban and latino), the rise of other sports like lacrosse in the white suburbs, the rise and proliferation of premier franchises and leagues in MA, and the emphasis on teams vice quality of SL started to threaten all this, SRI just double down and the same fraternity kept in place, maybe shifting a role here or there but new blood and ideas were simply beaten down.

What was missed years ago. Adopting academy style soccer as the standard for all u10 (min u8) play - regionalizing that academy with rec for *all* in the fall at u10 and below, academy in the spring for those wanting the next step, and saving competitive for just u12 and above. Regionalizing town rec at the upper levels so economies of scale could be achieved (really making the old C/D divisions of SL just regional rec leagues).

Building a central facility (where WWIS Quonset) with indoor and turf outdoor.

Out sourcing the state league to reduce conflict of interest - anyone who wanted to run a better league could compete every few years when the "contract" would be put out to bid -- instead of the league being run by a perpetual SRI board member..

Running and expanding on Project Goal to make it a statewide afterschool program, especially for low income families around the state. Promoting futsal more.

Make ODP superselect instead of a jobs program where it takes all who can write the check. This is where an SRI board who don't rely on soccer for all or part of their income and instead could pursue grants to subsidize ODP instead of its history as pay to play white suburban kids.

Lots more with coaching education (missed early adoption of online and video resources).

Plenty of others that long time TS participants know..but if you can't kill the town model because it's just too hard to get adults to put their egos aside - start with mandating all u10 and below soccer has to be rec or Academy (player pool/non fixed roster competitions) to be sanctioned in the state..mandate a minimum level of D license coaches to run an Academy program.

[Unregistered]

They recruit kids who are more physically developed because it's the same old cycle. Physically dominant - more wins - parents see rec as limiting their superstar - used to be at least u12 but then went down to u10 and then to u8.

The fundamental problem with this thread is assuming "town" is the right model. Towns developed because SRI became - like RI in general - a "I know a guy" club. Rules and processes were put in place to protect fiefdoms, build as many teams as possible, protect the premier side (the 3 town rule and primacy of premier over town in application of the "recruiting" rule). ODP was about pay to play because nobody seriously thought it was the way to actually develop "olympic" caliber players (seriously, how many such players make it out of New England, let alone RI, proportionally on high level national teams?)

Towns were important because towns meant team numbers - rec was the money maker for the town program, competitive a nice hook for some more than others depending on the luck of the draw talent in the community - both players and non-professional coaches and administrators. Premiers had their niche. Life was good from the $$ and "the fraternity" perspective.

The goal was to protect the bottom line, not evolve. When creative destruction forces began to brew between the shifting demographics of the youth population (more urban and latino), the rise of other sports like lacrosse in the white suburbs, the rise and proliferation of premier franchises and leagues in MA, and the emphasis on teams vice quality of SL started to threaten all this, SRI just double down and the same fraternity kept in place, maybe shifting a role here or there but new blood and ideas were simply beaten down.

What was missed years ago. Adopting academy style soccer as the standard for all u10 (min u8) play - regionalizing that academy with rec for *all* in the fall at u10 and below, academy in the spring for those wanting the next step, and saving competitive for just u12 and above. Regionalizing town rec at the upper levels so economies of scale could be achieved (really making the old C/D divisions of SL just regional rec leagues).

Building a central facility (where WWIS Quonset) with indoor and turf outdoor.

Out sourcing the state league to reduce conflict of interest - anyone who wanted to run a better league could compete every few years when the "contract" would be put out to bid -- instead of the league being run by a perpetual SRI board member..

Running and expanding on Project Goal to make it a statewide afterschool program, especially for low income families around the state. Promoting futsal more.

Make ODP superselect instead of a jobs program where it takes all who can write the check. This is where an SRI board who don't rely on soccer for all or part of their income and instead could pursue grants to subsidize ODP instead of its history as pay to play white suburban kids.

Lots more with coaching education (missed early adoption of online and video resources).

Plenty of others that long time TS participants know..but if you can't kill the town model because it's just too hard to get adults to put their egos aside - start with mandating all u10 and below soccer has to be rec or Academy (player pool/non fixed roster competitions) to be sanctioned in the state..mandate a minimum level of D license coaches to run an Academy program.

This is obviously a person who knows nothing about town soccer or SRI. The vast majority of Town associations are run exclusively by volunteers. They do not make money. SRI as dysfunctional as it is, also consists mostly of volunteers. To someone who doesn't know better you sound well informed and traveled. To me you sound like a clueless premier coach or a parent who likes conspiracy theories.

[Unregistered]

Do you mean they recruit players who haven't developed, or they ignore other developing kids?

For the vast majority of kids staying in U8 is better for their development than moving up early.

[Unregistered]

For the vast majority of kids staying in U8 is better for their development than moving up early.

You’re likely right, but how does one tell which ones?

[Unregistered]

You’re likely right, but how does one tell which ones?

LOL Very easily for anyone who knows the game but has no financial stake in it. One thing for sure, it doesn't hurt for all of them just to stay in U8 and if they have a good town club, playing up in some games in spring.

[Unregistered]

This is obviously a person who knows nothing about town soccer or SRI. The vast majority of Town associations are run exclusively by volunteers. They do not make money. SRI as dysfunctional as it is, also consists mostly of volunteers. To someone who doesn't know better you sound well informed and traveled. To me you sound like a clueless premier coach or a parent who likes conspiracy theories.

I used to run a town program. Town programs make money on rec; the competitive was necessary because the 3 town rule basically meant you had to have a comp program and SuperLiga thrived on number of teams (the basis for the fee).

They don't make money - my club has 6 figure net worth - just check out the 990s of your town clubs. Of course, much better a decade plus ago before all the forces I mentioned started happening and some of the things that were being discussed (regionalizing some programs, hell, you can't even get two associations in the same town in a couple of places to join forces when it of course made sense from an economy of scale/cost perspective).

Seriously - the SRI board - hands in pockets of different ways to make money. No they don't get a SRI salary (other than the admin person) but um, who runs the league? Who runs ODP?

But your point is part of the problem -volunteers who often are in because their kids (not necessarily a bad reason) but lack the knowledge or skill (or time or humility) to think beyond their little fiefdom and their kids' progress.

Just answer these questions - are basically the same people in charge of "dysfunctional" SRI (previous RI Youth Soccer Association) the same ones who have been in charge or part of the board for 20 years ago?

How smart is a system where the same people are kept in charge when the majority think the association is dysfunctional?

https://990s.foundationcenter.org/990_pdf_archive/050/050419367/050419367_200108_990.pdf (scroll the end)

Of course given SRI ran an almost 20% *negative* operating margin a couple of years ago, why are these same people still in charge?

https://990s.foundationcenter.org/990_pdf_archive/050/050511901/050511901_201808_990.pdf

What was the value of the 3 town rule in competitive soccer? Did that promote better development or just more teams in a league that ran on quantity over quality?

[Unregistered]

I used to run a town program. Town programs make money on rec; the competitive was necessary because the 3 town rule basically meant you had to have a comp program and SuperLiga thrived on number of teams (the basis for the fee).

They don't make money - my club has 6 figure net worth - just check out the 990s of your town clubs. Of course, much better a decade plus ago before all the forces I mentioned started happening and some of the things that were being discussed (regionalizing some programs, hell, you can't even get two associations in the same town in a couple of places to join forces when it of course made sense from an economy of scale/cost perspective).

Seriously - the SRI board - hands in pockets of different ways to make money. No they don't get a SRI salary (other than the admin person) but um, who runs the league? Who runs ODP?

But your point is part of the problem -volunteers who often are in because their kids (not necessarily a bad reason) but lack the knowledge or skill (or time or humility) to think beyond their little fiefdom and their kids' progress.

Just answer these questions - are basically the same people in charge of "dysfunctional" SRI (previous RI Youth Soccer Association) the same ones who have been in charge or part of the board for 20 years ago?

How smart is a system where the same people are kept in charge when the majority think the association is dysfunctional?

https://990s.foundationcenter.org/990_pdf_archive/050/050419367/050419367_200108_990.pdf (scroll the end)

Of course given SRI ran an almost 20% *negative* operating margin a couple of years ago, why are these same people still in charge?

https://990s.foundationcenter.org/990_pdf_archive/050/050511901/050511901_201808_990.pdf

What was the value of the 3 town rule in competitive soccer? Did that promote better development or just more teams in a league that ran on quantity over quality?

I definitely agree that we need new people involved at SRI. Very true there. That said, maybe I'm naive but I don't see a lot of people personally profiting on town soccer. I'm involved with what I think is one of the better town programs but it is a struggle to have enough good volunteers. Often one or two bad coaches or administrators cause more damage than 10 very good ones. Ever since NEP started offering weak divisions like league 1 and league 2, Premier clubs have profited on having B and C teams that they very frequently just get mediocre coaches to babysit and keep the cash flowing to pay their highly licensed admin staff. Not sure how that is helping develop players.

[Unregistered]

I definitely agree that we need new people involved at SRI. Very true there. That said, maybe I'm naive but I don't see a lot of people personally profiting on town soccer. I'm involved with what I think is one of the better town programs but it is a struggle to have enough good volunteers. Often one or two bad coaches or administrators cause more damage than 10 very good ones. Ever since NEP started offering weak divisions like league 1 and league 2, Premier clubs have profited on having B and C teams that they very frequently just get mediocre coaches to babysit and keep the cash flowing to pay their highly licensed admin staff. Not sure how that is helping develop players.

No, people at the local level don't *profit* from the system - but the system is built on pay to play. Again, what was the point of the 3 town rule?

It certainly didn't promote player development - it promoted keeping marginal / low economy of scale town programs afloat and also helped the marginal premier (c'mon remember the landscape before the MA clubs really invaded?) clubs because it prevented some regional consolidation that would have created at least decent "anchor" level competitive teams.

But then, you wouldn't have had those 3rd/4th divisions of Superliga and all the $$.

Changes that should have been made years ago.

Term limits on SRI board participation

Academy style only format at u10 and below (no fixed roster competition events - Academy program just brings a pool of kids and coaches can adjust rosters)

Removal of 3 town rule

Removal of "primacy" of premier club

Promoting Project Goal like after school programs around the state

Linking TOPS soccer with RIIL to have a unified soccer sport (even if say 8 v 8)

Beating WWIS to the punch and forming a soccer complex like the FSA complex in CT - or partnering with Quonset, Champlin/RI Foundations, a WWIS like partner, etc to build a true soccer hub.

Better coaching programs, including decentralizing much earlier if a club/region had a true Academy style program as a pathway for youth coaches.

Following CJSA and others in adopting the silent sidelines program and way better (which would have helped in my mind the thankless task of building a youth referee cadre..)

Better partnerships with RIPCOA and RIIL (or really the soccer coaches association) - as much as school soccer gets panned (and there are issues for sure), it's the pinnacle for the overwhelming majority of youth players.

Lot more that others with more wisdom than me have noted - the first 3 items a decade ago would have gone a long way..

[Unregistered]

Is the 3-town rule still in place?

[Unregistered]

Is the 3-town rule still in place?

No, it's not.