Crufa

[Unregistered]

but as witnessed already this year in ODP, they have doubled the training sessions and length of each and deleted an out of state tourney to increase training instead.

They deleted the out of state tournament because the ODP fees have increased and parents didn't want to pay additional charges (especially for a lousy Utah tournament). I don't even believe the Utah friendlies are going on this year at all. They almost cancelled the Friendship Cup due to low numbers and this year they are charging the Oregon kids $100.00 fee for the tournament because of it.

Boys will be taken care of because of the Timbers. I hope something positive will happen for the girls as well.

[Unregistered]

They deleted the out of state tournament because the ODP fees have increased and parents didn't want to pay additional charges (especially for a lousy Utah tournament). I don't even believe the Utah friendlies are going on this year at all. They almost cancelled the Friendship Cup due to low numbers and this year they are charging the Oregon kids $100.00 fee for the tournament because of it.

Boys will be taken care of because of the Timbers. I hope something positive will happen for the girls as well.

Portland Reign will hopefully come through with what it has proposed to offer for the girls side of things. Cross your fingers, we have hopes for a our developing Women's soccer team to eventually become a professional program.

[Unregistered]

Portland Reign will hopefully come through with what it has proposed to offer for the girls side of things. Cross your fingers, we have hopes for a our developing Women's soccer team to eventually become a professional program.

I hope so! Go Rain!

[Unregistered]

I Hear what you're saying, but this screams out recreational soccer. You need to be part of an athletic development team outside of the U.S. and more specifically outside of soccer in the U.S.

Don't you think it's strange that the 2nd more played sport in the U.S. is soccer, but it's not even on the top 5 most popular sports? YOU DON'T GET THE GAME. You make complete sense and are very logical. This kind of model is FUN, but will not produce the top talent for the state or the country. It will prevent kids from being the athletes they need to be to receive scholarships in colleges and/or a professional job as an athlete.

Travel the world, tell me what you see. There's a reason why baseball in the U.S. is even being surpassed by small, relatively, underdeveloped countries in the world. You're cultural understanding of development is very small sided and is a "give everybody a chance" model. Hindering the elite...... If your best players are all spread out.... this will dilute the talent, not allowing them to train together or push each other - "as iron sharpen iron." This brings down the level of the top teams and evens the playing field for other teams to compete - overall lowering the standard at which teams could and should be playing at. Never truly having the opportunity to have a standard high enough to be push to come something that could've been.

Small club = "fun for all", "chance for everybody", "different flavors for different tastes"

Look at the development programs at Ajax.... proven development programs.... then tell me how this fits with your ideology. After doing your research - look at what is going on with the development, if you can call it that, with the multiple club creations in Oregon. Let's talk some more when you get a chance to honestly become educated on the other side of the argument. CRUFA, NEU, OSA were selfish in creating their clubs. Westside and THUSC should merge. LO, SS, WUSC, Sherwood, Tualatin, all should merge. I'm only talking about competitive soccer. They all should have their own individual community based recreation programs.

First off, I don't know if your condescending tone is sarcasm, or if it truly represents who you are, but lose it. All of my remarks above were related to highly competitive teams. You want "iron on iron" you need to let the teams play at the highest level possible. Footwork development is only a small part of a soccer player's growth. An elite player has to learn to lead, needs to learn field strategy, and needs to learn without taking direction from a coach. The best way to accomplish that development is splitting them over many teams. The teams play each other and drive progress upward. This way you also don't lose "elite" players as 12-18 on a team. There is always time to develop a superteam to travel to tournaments etc...but regular development requires a multiclub model. You reference Ajax's academy, the reality you are ignoring is in Europe everykid plays soccer. Before school, during school and afterschool they play. By the time a player makes it into the Ajax system they have played far more soccer than most American kids ever will. Yes Ajax absolutely knows how to teach, so does Barcelona, Madrid, Milan, and Manchester. There are hundreds of teams in every country that feed into these elite teams. Maybe some day America will become as dominated by soccer as the rest of the world, I would hope with your all-knowing perspective you would be able to see the difference.

[Unregistered]

First off, I don't know if your condescending tone is sarcasm, or if it truly represents who you are, but lose it. All of my remarks above were related to highly competitive teams. You want "iron on iron" you need to let the teams play at the highest level possible. Footwork development is only a small part of a soccer player's growth. An elite player has to learn to lead, needs to learn field strategy, and needs to learn without taking direction from a coach. The best way to accomplish that development is splitting them over many teams. The teams play each other and drive progress upward. This way you also don't lose "elite" players as 12-18 on a team. There is always time to develop a superteam to travel to tournaments etc...but regular development requires a multiclub model. You reference Ajax's academy, the reality you are ignoring is in Europe everykid plays soccer. Before school, during school and afterschool they play. By the time a player makes it into the Ajax system they have played far more soccer than most American kids ever will. Yes Ajax absolutely knows how to teach, so does Barcelona, Madrid, Milan, and Manchester. There are hundreds of teams in every country that feed into these elite teams. Maybe some day America will become as dominated by soccer as the rest of the world, I would hope with your all-knowing perspective you would be able to see the difference.

Not sure what you two are really arguing about, but this last comment is contradicting. Sounds like a parent of a kid that had a bad experience. Grass is always greener isn't it?!

[Unregistered]

If your best players are all spread out.... this will dilute the talent, not allowing them to train together or push each other - "as iron sharpen iron." This brings down the level of the top teams and evens the playing field for other teams to compete - overall lowering the standard at which teams could and should be playing at. Never truly having the opportunity to have a standard high enough to be push to come something that they could have been.

With your great wisdom, please shed some light. Keeping the discussion very simple let's talk about perceived greatness. If you choose an arbitrary measure of talent and rank teams from 1-10. A single great team may be a 9 and everyone else around them 4 or 5's. If you spread talent maybe you create a league of 7's. The super team in the first example will be seen as extraordinary. They gap teams by 4-5 points. This is perceived greatness. You can't actually objectively measure the skill, so you compare it to everyone else. The falseness in this approach is if the surrounding teams are 1s, the great team may be a 5 or a 6. This is not as good as the league of 7s. There is perceived but not real greatness.

[Unregistered]

Not sure what you two are really arguing about, but this last comment is contradicting. Sounds like a parent of a kid that had a bad experience. Grass is always greener isn't it?!

If you read the posts on what these two are talking about, you'd perhaps understand what they are actually talking about. Instead you just seem to throw in your 'assumption' comment. In fact there are quite a lot of parents out there with a bad experience -- if that is the only assumption that you wish to make yor comments on.
But in reality what it boils down to, is that some of us are quite happy with having a monopoly dictate our life, and some of us believe in more freedom of choice and thus perhaps an opportunity for more of the kids out there getting to play in the competitive (premier) leagues.

[Unregistered]

Honestly the worst soccer experience my daughter has had

Last season was her 1st year of competitive soccer (several years of rec) and it was the worst for her. The CRUFA coaches are disorginized, unsupportive and border on disrespectful. They favor the girls that were on their rec teams and disregard the others. They tell players they are not good preformers and that is why they can not play but do not work with them or train them to be better. they allow parents to be the assitant coaches which of course favor their girls. She will not go back to this team and if there was a way I would file a complaint. Very disappointed that this has happened only only hope this does not sour her on the idea of playing soccer. Fair warning to those parents who are looking into this as an option. I would much rather pay more of a fee then to have ever experience this again.

[Unregistered]

Also had a terrible year

Came from ESUFC, and got what I paid for. Coaches were terrible, training terrible and it showed on the field.

We will be moving back to ESUFC, it cost more but in this case you get what you pay for.

[Unregistered]

Did you just move to the Portland area last week ? Take a look at NEU & OSSA (to name just a couple others).

Each of these are two are founded on different types of "parent" programs, but they were created for the greater good of both their clubs and players they effect and both have had a positive impact for all that are involved.

I hear what your saying and your grammatical syntax is wonderfully written, but your message needs some serious thought next time you sit down to spew it in an open forum.

The two examples you site are just the opposite of your point. They represent the merger of talent, not the division.

[Unregistered]

[QUOTE=Unregistered;518641]The Contrarian view is that a better model is to have teams spread across many clubs, and have the teams at a certain level play each other. This involves travel, but if individual development is the primary focus, kids will grow more in a model where they play other same level teams from different clubs.
QUOTE]

Bull... Players develop and grow by playing and training with and against PLAYERS of equal or greater ability. Not by playing equally weak teams once or twice a week.

You see that even in the charter programs like ODP where there are so many that come out each year that could be good players but don't have a clue because they don't get training and competition they need to develop. Good athletes with no clue of the game. You feel for these kids.

[Unregistered]

[QUOTE=Unregistered;545741]

The Contrarian view is that a better model is to have teams spread across many clubs, and have the teams at a certain level play each other. This involves travel, but if individual development is the primary focus, kids will grow more in a model where they play other same level teams from different clubs.
QUOTE]

Bull... Players develop and grow by playing and training with and against PLAYERS of equal or greater ability. Not by playing equally weak teams once or twice a week.

You see that even in the charter programs like ODP where there are so many that come out each year that could be good players but don't have a clue because they don't get training and competition they need to develop. Good athletes with no clue of the game. You feel for these kids.

You are correct, but you are arguing the wrong side of the street. If you create a super club, with it's five teams, ranked A,B,C,D,E and this comprises all of the elite players in an age group, who do they play? The A team will stagnate.

If however you blend these into five distinct teams, the teams will play at a fairly even level, and drive each other upwards. For the top players on each team, they will need to develop leadership, tactical awareness, and a creativity as far as how to beat a more or less equal team.

[Unregistered]

Sorry

[QUOTE=Unregistered;545823]

You are correct, but you are arguing the wrong side of the street. If you create a super club, with it's five teams, ranked A,B,C,D,E and this comprises all of the elite players in an age group, who do they play? The A team will stagnate.

If however you blend these into five distinct teams, the teams will play at a fairly even level, and drive each other upwards. For the top players on each team, they will need to develop leadership, tactical awareness, and a creativity as far as how to beat a more or less equal team.

Good point if you want to remain mediocre. The best need to play and practice with the best. It is the only way to develop elite players. Why do you think US Soccer wemt to an academy system. Players need to be developed and they are not going to be unless they are challenged.

[Unregistered]

Crufa

I am a parent of 3 children in CRUFA. It was founded after a club in Ireland in trying to allow development of children of all economic status. It is a collaboration of the 5 recreational clubs in the greater Eastside and supports those clubs by sponsoring camps and coach trainings. It is run by Coaches not parents! We have highly qualified coaches who have trained and coached Championship teams. CRUFA does not take children away from there community clubs. CRUFA does have classic competitive for those 5 clubs and anyone else who wants to play for them. Recreational soccer is great but if your child wants to progress on then Classic competitive soccer is where they need to go.
If you look at the fall team scores CRUFA teams did very well! We even have a team going to
Regional' s in Salt Lake UT. Our winter teams struggled. The U18 boys team was filled with However our U16 boys who struggled did take 2nd place in the directors cup. Most of the boys were playing up in age as well.

CRUFA is grass roots and of course will have its critic's but what club doesn't. Eastside is unaffordable to a lot of families who have talented players who would like to see their players develop. Seriously Eastside has its critics as well I have heard many complaints about Eastside and there needs to be an option for parents. I would say keep your eyes open I believe CRUFA will make its own statement in play. They won't be charging their families to line there own pockets to do so!

[Unregistered]

Crufa-- go away!!!!

By the time you add up the costs - Fall, Spring, 2 winter camps, they even charged $5 a pop for keeper practice, it's not much cheaper than Eastside. They nickel and dime you at the same time they are telling you how much CHEAPER they are. Some of their coaches are great, some are not. They went thru the whole Spring season with 6 to 8 different teams or groups practicing at the s."me time on ONE feild. Our coach said "It's just spring season.'
It might not be important to him, but it cost us $300 and a lot of time. He just did not seem to care much and it showed.