Tualatin Hills Fields

[Unregistered]

What you're missing is that we do NOT want to reduce the number of children playing soccer in the Beaverton area either.

Soccer isn't just about Classic - and this is coming from a Classic parent. THPRD is also responsible for supporting the req programs in the area, which are far bigger than the Classic clubs and children playing.

Again - reducing the number of clubs and subsequently reducing the number of children playing is not the correct solution. We should be working to increase the number of fields available for all the children wanting to play.

How long is the rec season?

[Unregistered]

Quite clearly the needs for "southwest Beaverton competitive soccer" are being met. There are several clubs with very good programs for all those interested. In fact, most people feel that there are too many clubs. You statement is obtuse and ignorant. The only effect is in the minds of adults that are uninformed and partisan. Please educate yourself. You are now in the disgusting phase of your vapid argument.

Actually, I am have been a rec and classic parent at Aloha and another other THJSL "classic" club. I have heard both sides to the story. I see both sides!!! I have talked to many parents, coaches and heard the THPRD, THJSL, THUSC and WS stories. I would truly like to see the clubs work together. Would be great if adults and leaders could listen and work together for all the kids. This issues needs to get out to the community. You don't have to read this if you don't want to but this is still the USA, thankfully! But those of us that care, want to hear and think before we choose our clubs and our next vote. I am very thankful for the choice, just thought some ought to hear what is happening. Yes there are fewer fields and more players, but there still needs to be transparency and fair process in the field allocation. This is not just a problem for soccer it applies to other sports.

[Unregistered]

How long is the rec season?

Fall practices start in August, games end in November and Spring practices start in March with games starting in April and ending in June. So about 7 months out of the year. More players in Fall than spring.

[Unregistered]

Actually, I am have been a rec and classic parent at Aloha and another other THJSL "classic" club. I have heard both sides to the story. I see both sides!!! I have talked to many parents, coaches and heard the THPRD, THJSL, THUSC and WS stories. I would truly like to see the clubs work together. Would be great if adults and leaders could listen and work together for all the kids. This issues needs to get out to the community. You don't have to read this if you don't want to but this is still the USA, thankfully! But those of us that care, want to hear and think before we choose our clubs and our next vote. I am very thankful for the choice, just thought some ought to hear what is happening. Yes there are fewer fields and more players, but there still needs to be transparency and fair process in the field allocation. This is not just a problem for soccer it applies to other sports.

If the soccer community does not come together and figure out an answer on their own, one will be forced on it that will likely make no one happy. Rec is very important. The high quality facitilities we have in THPRD are a great community asset. Soccer clubs are important to the development of youth in the area, including those disadvantaged. Figure it out. But when taxpayers foot the vast majority of the bill, those that argue that publically financed facilities are for the elite first are going to have a tough go of it in the court of public opinion.

[Unregistered]

Three things

What you're missing is that we do NOT want to reduce the number of children playing soccer in the Beaverton area either.

Soccer isn't just about Classic - and this is coming from a Classic parent. THPRD is also responsible for supporting the req programs in the area, which are far bigger than the Classic clubs and children playing.

Again - reducing the number of clubs and subsequently reducing the number of children playing is not the correct solution. We should be working to increase the number of fields available for all the children wanting to play.

First the base complaint made by AU is that they are not allowed to use the turf fields at THPRD and that is not "fair" to the tax paying parents in the district. This complaint however ignores that these kids DO have access to the fields through other clubs through a long standing THPRD policy to regulate and control the usage of these fields. It also ignores the financial contribution WST & THUSC made to upgrade field #2 to turf. Maybe if AU offered to turn #3 into turf they would have a leg to stand on but I have not seen that offer made!

Second, the request does not "add" fields or even access but reduces the approved clubs access to those fields, which they currently maximize with up to 6 teams per hour for the 10 month season.

Lastly, reducing the number of clubs, particularly at the Premier level, would NOT reduce the number of players with access to soccer. The most experienced observers of Oregon soccer would tell you that fewer clubs would lead to higher quality coaching of MORE teams thus increasing the access to soccer for kids.

Big clubs have the benefit of having multiple teams in each age group and those teams get to share the better coaching while young coaches get mentoring. Compare this to the thin coaching ranks around the Metro area and you can see how the current model is a disservice to kids and the parents who have to pay for less than the best coaching!

[Unregistered]

Public opinion has voted.

If the soccer community does not come together and figure out an answer on their own, one will be forced on it that will likely make no one happy. Rec is very important. The high quality facitilities we have in THPRD are a great community asset. Soccer clubs are important to the development of youth in the area, including those disadvantaged. Figure it out. But when taxpayers foot the vast majority of the bill, those that argue that publically financed facilities are for the elite first are going to have a tough go of it in the court of public opinion.

The public has voted at the "voting booth" and the result is clear and plain to everyone. The "elite", as you define them in a mocking appearing manner, are the ones that use the facilities for their passion and love of the game. My daughter starting playing rec on school and park fields and then advanced to the best local fields. The best fields reduced injuries due to the level of play. The school and park fields were fine until her intensity and skill increased. She now plays for a PAC-12 school. All of the fields are paid for by taxpayer money. She almost never played on a private field. Remember, THPRD manages fields for schools and even the new Timbers facility. Almost all of the local, Beaverton, fields are scheduled through THPRD. The only problem here is that the DOC at ASC wants his players on certain fields, something even my daughter understands is not realistic or warranted. Please stop posting nonsense.

[Unregistered]

First the base complaint made by AU is that they are not allowed to use the turf fields at THPRD and that is not "fair" to the tax paying parents in the district. This complaint however ignores that these kids DO have access to the fields through other clubs through a long standing THPRD policy to regulate and control the usage of these fields. It also ignores the financial contribution WST & THUSC made to upgrade field #2 to turf. Maybe if AU offered to turn #3 into turf they would have a leg to stand on but I have not seen that offer made!

Second, the request does not "add" fields or even access but reduces the approved clubs access to those fields, which they currently maximize with up to 6 teams per hour for the 10 month season.

Lastly, reducing the number of clubs, particularly at the Premier level, would NOT reduce the number of players with access to soccer. The most experienced observers of Oregon soccer would tell you that fewer clubs would lead to higher quality coaching of MORE teams thus increasing the access to soccer for kids.

Big clubs have the benefit of having multiple teams in each age group and those teams get to share the better coaching while young coaches get mentoring. Compare this to the thin coaching ranks around the Metro area and you can see how the current model is a disservice to kids and the parents who have to pay for less than the best coaching!

Thinking a consolidation of clubs will increase or even maintain player involvement is misguided and there is no evidence to back this up. It is all hyperbole at best.

Consolidation will not change the coaching staff currently residing in Oregon.

You might say there would also be a consolidation of coaches.... which would coincide with the consolidation of teams. Either you have the same number of teams and coaches, which leaves you with the same quality coaching OR you realize a reduction in the number of teams, coaches and players.

Simple logic.

[Unregistered]

Fall practices start in August, games end in November and Spring practices start in March with games starting in April and ending in June. So about 7 months out of the year. More players in Fall than spring.

I'm not sure why communities are providing soccer fields to rec or club teams. Why should the community provide facilities? We moved here a few years ago and where we moved from, the only public fields were parks. Worked there, should work here. The clubs built or bought their own fields. There were no "rec" clubs (really can't understand that concept really - rec by definition isn't involved with clubs and usually involves mom/dad coaches). Club coaches often had teams that practiced away from club facilities and that involved parks or, in the winter time, they rented indoor facilties with the parents footing the bill.

This entire community club setup is a bunch of garbage. You don't need a club to support a community, and vice versa. A club should be set up and accept players from everywhere. And you sure don't need a club for rec soccer players. Rec teams should do what rec teams across the US do, find a park, a backyard, a school playground, ... and practice there, first come, first served. And clubs should secure their own fields. This notion of communities having to provide facilities to soccer teams, be it club or rec, is flat out stupid. Provide general use areas (e.g. parks) that can be used for soccer, lacrosse, football, .... teams.

[Unregistered]

Think it through!

Thinking a consolidation of clubs will increase or even maintain player involvement is misguided and there is no evidence to back this up. It is all hyperbole at best.

Consolidation will not change the coaching staff currently residing in Oregon.

You might say there would also be a consolidation of coaches.... which would coincide with the consolidation of teams. Either you have the same number of teams and coaches, which leaves you with the same quality coaching OR you realize a reduction in the number of teams, coaches and players.

Simple logic.

#1 Look North to Crossfire, Eastside or Washington Premier FC if you need proof of what consolidation can do for competitive soccer. Locally look to OSSA to see what is possible at the older age groups in regards to access. The five member clubs would not be fielding a total of four teams per age! Then look across the Atlantic to see how soccer "clubs" are really run and you will see we are an infant acting like infants when it comes to premier level soccer.

#2 There are a limited number of qualified coaches in the Metro area and there is not a single club with a complete roster for even one sex so when you realize that consolidation would increase that likelihood and then realize the assistants would have first hand experience working with better coaches rather than getting the title head coach regardless of experience you "should" get the idea but you probably will continue to argue that dilution of a limited resource is a good think....typcial Oregonian!

[Unregistered]

Socail contract has limits

I'm not sure why communities are providing soccer fields to rec or club teams. Why should the community provide facilities? We moved here a few years ago and where we moved from, the only public fields were parks. Worked there, should work here. The clubs built or bought their own fields. There were no "rec" clubs (really can't understand that concept really - rec by definition isn't involved with clubs and usually involves mom/dad coaches). Club coaches often had teams that practiced away from club facilities and that involved parks or, in the winter time, they rented indoor facilties with the parents footing the bill.

This entire community club setup is a bunch of garbage. You don't need a club to support a community, and vice versa. A club should be set up and accept players from everywhere. And you sure don't need a club for rec soccer players. Rec teams should do what rec teams across the US do, find a park, a backyard, a school playground, ... and practice there, first come, first served. And clubs should secure their own fields. This notion of communities having to provide facilities to soccer teams, be it club or rec, is flat out stupid. Provide general use areas (e.g. parks) that can be used for soccer, lacrosse, football, .... teams.

So I guess you think we should have toll roads too?

I agree that at some point Premier level clubs should own their own dirt but here in Oregon we believe in investing in the community TOGETHER which is why we have open beaches, great parks and until the past 20 years one of the top public school systems in the nation.

You can go back to the state from which you came if you do not want to throw your pennies into the pot so that every one benefits.

[Unregistered]

So I guess you think we should have toll roads too?

I agree that at some point Premier level clubs should own their own dirt but here in Oregon we believe in investing in the community TOGETHER which is why we have open beaches, great parks and until the past 20 years one of the top public school systems in the nation.

You can go back to the state from which you came if you do not want to throw your pennies into the pot so that every one benefits.

Sorry, but I read that last sentence as "throw your penis into the pot so that everyone benefits" the first time through.

[Unregistered]

So I guess you think we should have toll roads too?

I agree that at some point Premier level clubs should own their own dirt but here in Oregon we believe in investing in the community TOGETHER which is why we have open beaches, great parks and until the past 20 years one of the top public school systems in the nation.

You can go back to the state from which you came if you do not want to throw your pennies into the pot so that every one benefits.

So the communities should build a bunch of hockey rinks then too. We have kids who like to play hockey. I know kids who have to get up at 4 in the morning to practice since we don't have enough hockey rinks.

And "until the past 20 years", yeah, that does us good now.

Pennies in the pot. How f'in stupid. First, it's not pennies. Second, it's how it gets spent. Third, there are lots of parks. Go play rec soccer there. Now go knit me a Coexist bumper sticker.

[Unregistered]

Have to admit you liberal Oregonians do have a lot of nice facilities .... Thanks taxpayers!

[Unregistered]

Who pays for the parks?

So the communities should build a bunch of hockey rinks then too. We have kids who like to play hockey. I know kids who have to get up at 4 in the morning to practice since we don't have enough hockey rinks.

And "until the past 20 years", yeah, that does us good now.

Pennies in the pot. How f'in stupid. First, it's not pennies. Second, it's how it gets spent. Third, there are lots of parks. Go play rec soccer there. Now go knit me a Coexist bumper sticker.

So who who pays for the parks?

Do you know how many fields THPRD manages & schedules in parks & schools? Answer: 10 times more than exist at 158th. Where are the complaints about access to the PCC fields and what about access to other High School turf fields? Opps I mean dumb ass tax payer funded turf fields.

You can go back to watching Faux News now!

[Unregistered]

So who who pays for the parks?

Do you know how many fields THPRD manages & schedules in parks & schools? Answer: 10 times more than exist at 158th. Where are the complaints about access to the PCC fields and what about access to other High School turf fields? Opps I mean dumb ass tax payer funded turf fields.

You can go back to watching Faux News now!

So what are you saying dumb ass? If you are saying that we have plenty of fields and for Aloha to stop their f'in whining , then we are on the same side. However as far as the public funding every need the people have, just answer my question regarding hockey rinks. Why not build a handful more? You are surly against that, because like every other liberal, and far right conservative, you are as hypocritical as it gets. You don't use those, so you don't want the tax payers to fund them. But the hypocrites around here only vote for things they want, not altruistically. F'in hypocrites. Yeah, were liberal and open minded, just so long as you look and think the way we do.