Is it true?

[Unregistered]

You would be correct in extracting that I know you are not a Stars parent. The way you structured your post is entirely inconsistent with being a Stars parent, and if you were a Stars parent critiquing your own club your post would have looked much different. Also makes no sense for a Stars parent to pile on when you see the daily barrage happening already. What would be the point. But write a few more paragraphs with your high IQ and we'll have some additional data to make sure we are making a fair assessment of what clbu you are affiliated with.

BTW, LMAO, would you, as a Stars parent, also appreciate if parents with other clubs would more openly dissect their own clubs? Have you seen some good examples of this?

Too bad your are responding to someone other than he or she who made the original point.

Damn it sucks that posters are rwquired to be registered in this forum, doesn't it?

And the original point still stands. Why don't the Stars have a bigger proportion of their players participating on their top teams at high school age? Any Stars supporters want to go for an answer to that question? Or will you continue with your quips to avoid an answer?

[Unregistered]

You didn't answer the questions. Provide a little more niformation demonstrating that you are really a Stars parent and we can get right back on topic.

And just in case you are a "new" Stars parent, let me assure you that the allegation that Stars have made their name based on recruiting players from other clubs has been alive and well for the past 5-6 years.

Actually alive and well since the beginning of time. Just ask any club or coach that lost players to the Stars. Feel free to start with MB of the Hamlets who holds a grudge to this day.

[Unregistered]

I would like to know how many on the Bolts U14 started with the Bolts U10

If you want an answer to that question, start your own thread and quit attempting to divert attention from the original inquiry concerning the Stars.

[Unregistered]

If you want an answer to that question, start your own thread and quit attempting to divert attention from the original inquiry concerning the Stars.

To remind you of the OP

Someone mentioned that one of the Stars HS age teams have only one player that was with the club at U10. The rest of the kids are players that started out with other teams. If that is true for this one team, is it true for the others ?

My assumption is "OTHERS" applies to other teams and/or clubs.

[Unregistered]

Players migrate to the best teams as they get older and seek better competition and stronger teammates (note that I did not say "better coaching"). The attraction of Stars, Scorpions (when they were at their peak), NEFC (emerging), etc. is that they seem to supply the competition and exposure that the very top players demand.

So the top players join the top teams, and they displace players who might have been in the program and playing for the top team since u-little. Those players either move down or out, and displace other players. What's so hard to understand about this process?

Lower level clubs don't attract top players, so the displacement process doesn't apply nearly as much to them. And, they can rightly claim that their teams stay intact longer. That doesn't make them great developers of talent; it just means that they're not destinations for top players.

As one would expect, the parental influence is huge in all of this. As little Mia gets to be U14 or U15, mom and dad get more nervous about finding the right exposure. So they jump. No one is going to travel massive distances to join a mediocre team. But really good players do it routinely, and when they do they create turnover.

That has always been the MO of the Stars and many other clubs like them, but in the past they have still remained loyal to a core group of players that started out their club experience with them. It appears that is no longer the case. The question is why is it no longer the case? As previously mentioned even professional clubs who play at a much higher level seem to show a little more loyalty to their players who have come through their program. The funny thing is, the change really hasn't resulted in any more team success than previously and I might even conclude that the older teams saw more success.

[Unregistered]

The greatest compliment Stars can be given is the amount of attention directed at them on this site. Geez, they must be some combination of the Green Bay Packers, Boston Celtics, and Yankees all rolled into one. The obsession with this club is off the charts.

And I don't know how many of their players from U10 and U12 are still with them. Are the percentages dramatically different than other clubs? And as a poster suggested, does this have to do with the most attractive clubs attracting the most players rather than middling clubs that have more stable rosters over time?

[Unregistered]

Too bad your are responding to someone other than he or she who made the original point.

Damn it sucks that posters are rwquired to be registered in this forum, doesn't it?

And the original point still stands. Why don't the Stars have a bigger proportion of their players participating on their top teams at high school age? Any Stars supporters want to go for an answer to that question? Or will you continue with your quips to avoid an answer?

Oh, so YOU are NOT a Stars parent? Is that correct? Just a normal, everyday Stars hater?

[Unregistered]

That has always been the MO of the Stars and many other clubs like them, but in the past they have still remained loyal to a core group of players that started out their club experience with them. It appears that is no longer the case. The question is why is it no longer the case? As previously mentioned even professional clubs who play at a much higher level seem to show a little more loyalty to their players who have come through their program. The funny thing is, the change really hasn't resulted in any more team success than previously and I might even conclude that the older teams saw more success.

Thanks btdt. You had me at "the funny thing is." Now we're going to play the loyalty angle for a few hundred posts here and a few more threads. Should be enough to take us right into Fall.

[Unregistered]

Thanks btdt. You had me at "the funny thing is." Now we're going to play the loyalty angle for a few hundred posts here and a few more threads. Should be enough to take us right into Fall.

Once again you are barking up the wrong tree. Can't help it if you have more critics than you want to accept.

[Unregistered]

So is THIS the Stars-specific post that you claim was not Stars-specific?

And, btw, interesting how there is no mention here of being an Stars parent...only a disparaging remark about "obnoxious Stars supporters."

I wrote that post, not the person who you are replying to. And yes, I am a Stars parent making the point that the fact that you can not step back and objectively discuss the issues makes you an obnoxious Stars parent, very much like those who get criticized by other club parents.

Stars has been a great club, but the inability to recognize issues within the club will hold the club back from continuing to advance. Or maybe not. Maybe there are enough willing parents who will take their daughters to the club and pay the fees without question. Experience tells me though that eventually it does catch up with a club.

[Unregistered]

To remind you of the OP


My assumption is "OTHERS" applies to other teams and/or clubs.

I wrote the opening post. "Others" refers to other teams within the club, not other clubs in Massachusetts.

[Unregistered]

Once again you are barking up the wrong tree. Can't help it if you have more critics than you want to accept.

Except I don't have more critics, at least as far as Stars are concerned. I have nothing to so with Stars.

[Unregistered]

I wrote that post, not the person who you are replying to. And yes, I am a Stars parent making the point that the fact that you can not step back and objectively discuss the issues makes you an obnoxious Stars parent, very much like those who get criticized by other club parents.

Stars has been a great club, but the inability to recognize issues within the club will hold the club back from continuing to advance. Or maybe not. Maybe there are enough willing parents who will take their daughters to the club and pay the fees without question. Experience tells me though that eventually it does catch up with a club.

I'm not an obnoxious Stars parent, in part because I am not a Stars parent at all. Now that's the funny thing. You ARE a Stars parent and I'm not. Your kid is on a B team, right?

Oh, and btdt, back to the old 'if you take a step back" routine?

[Unregistered]

btdt, what chapter will this thread be in for your book?

[Unregistered]

That has always been the MO of the Stars and many other clubs like them, but in the past they have still remained loyal to a core group of players that started out their club experience with them. It appears that is no longer the case. The question is why is it no longer the case? As previously mentioned even professional clubs who play at a much higher level seem to show a little more loyalty to their players who have come through their program. The funny thing is, the change really hasn't resulted in any more team success than previously and I might even conclude that the older teams saw more success.

I think that the "lack of team success" that you're asserting may be partly due to the fact that the destination club system is at work in other regions as well.

The other thing at play here is the fact that there are so many more u-little club teams than ever before, so the chances that a core group of 7 or 8 really talented players convening in one spot at age 9 is really unlikely. They're all over the place, and may take longer to find their way to the top teams. I know that, in our particular town, when my daughter was U-9 and first considering club soccer, there were only 2 choices that made any sense. Today, (just a few years later) a similar player in the same town would have 4 or 5 legitimate options for getting involved in club soccer. So, I would expect the roster turnover at the top teams of the top clubs to continue going forward. BTW: I don't consider this a problem - just reality.

Moaning about the lack of club loyalty or team stability is like pining for "the good old days" - not terribly productive. Or, it's really just a new strategy - an excuse to start another attack on a club like Stars. Take your pick.