LOL - There,s going to be 3 rival clubs at Newton Athletic Park now - SFC , CCB & BC TIGERS/PUFC unless the City instructs BC TIGERS to set up at Tom Binnie . These 3 clubs combined would make powerhouse BCPL teams in all age groups.
BCSPL Franchise @ NAP - Pros/Cons ?
- Thread starter LFC
- Start date
LOL - There,s going to be 3 rival clubs at Newton Athletic Park now - SFC , CCB & BC TIGERS/PUFC unless the City instructs BC TIGERS to set up at Tom Binnie . These 3 clubs combined would make powerhouse BCPL teams in all age groups.
With all due respect, no single clubs owns NAP. There could be 100 clubs based out of Surrey - there are not 100 NAP's. It's not the cities job to ensure they all get along. Every sporting club in Surrey has equal access to the fields available for rent applicable to their sport. Also, there's nothing stopping a group of friends from going down to the City in August and renting space on NAP on some day in January right in the middle of usual soccer practice time. If a user-group wants access to a field all they have to do is ask. The city then only need to divvy up that access equally if multiple groups request access.
Pretty easy to sort out actually. 3 user groups apply for access to NAP. All 3 groups provide the same "service." The city simply need look at a field map of lit and unlit fields, then divide them up accordingly depending on light and field conditions. Ie, if there are 3 full grass fields, each gets 1. 3 turf, each gets 1. If one club has less registrations and thus need less time you adjust the schedule so that the other 2 clubs can access the fields equally in the time vacated by the smaller club.
By this I am referring to regular youth practice times. Game time access probably can't be exactly equal, especially when you start taking into account the university and local adult teams.
City has to be held responsible for putting two rival clubs in one park. Did anyone expect anything different?
LOL - There,s going to be 3 rival clubs at Newton Athletic Park now - SFC , CCB & BC TIGERS/PUFC unless the City instructs BC TIGERS to set up at Tom Binnie . These 3 clubs combined would make powerhouse BCPL teams in all age groups - wonder what name they could use if allowed into BCPL ??
LOL - There,s going to be 3 rival clubs at Newton Athletic Park now - SFC , CCB & BC TIGERS/PUFC unless the City instructs BC TIGERS to set up at Tom Binnie . These 3 clubs combined would make powerhouse BCPL teams in all age groups - wonder what name they could use if allowed into BCPL ??
4_the_kids
Active Member
- Oct 20, 2015
- 312
Field and I believe club house access are granted and divided up based on size of clubs, for example if CCB had 200 teams and SFC had 100 and PUFC had 50 , CCB would be granted 57% of available field time., SFC 28% and PUFC 14%. City decided what fields etc.. For example GAC runs out of Hjorth Road which had 2 turfs but they only get one turf allocation the second is shared with SU and other clubs..
easoccer
Established Member
- Aug 27, 2015
- 862
So I think we need to file the paperwork to host a club at South Surrey Athletic Park then. They have one club while Newton has 3? Why do they all need to be in Newton, certainly the city can tell the clubs to go there. Regardless. I'm done caring. All clubs are the same. There isnt one better than the other as far as I'm concerned. Having my kids spread over 3 clubs I can safely say they all have skeletons in the closet. Anyone saying otherwise is not very smart.
Exactly.
- Thread starter
- #28
LFC
Active Member
- Aug 23, 2015
- 314
Great post and a great insight into the unique soccer community of Newton . Language , accessing club websites for info , email communication & lack of knowledge of the structure of soccer is a very common problem in the community. These types of parents will do whatever the coach says whether its in the best interest of their child or not.
Many of these parents also work 6 days a week and rely on rides from other parents to take kids to training games etc. Taking kids to play BCSPL in Cloverdale or South Surrey is not easy where both parents are working til late 6 days a week.
- Thread starter
- #29
LFC
Active Member
- Aug 23, 2015
- 314
easoccer , 100% agree with your post
- Thread starter
- #30
LFC
Active Member
- Aug 23, 2015
- 314
SU & CMF dominate the boys BCSPL and Coastal & Mountain do well in the girls. These 4 clubs have a lg player base and a deep talent pool. The other 4 BCSPL franchises are fairly weak in comparison and the top Newton/Surrey boys Div 1 teams are prob stronger than those teams.
Wow. That's, uh.....a grandiose statement. One that isn't true.
Top MSL teams *might* be competitive with the bottom four BCSPL teams....maybe. In some years/divs the bottom BCSPL team has been very poor and in those cases there may be div 1 teams that could compete with them....but almost definitely still not better.
4_the_kids
Active Member
- Oct 20, 2015
- 312
agreed, please do not over rate the teams in Newton. Also look deep and ask how these teams succeed, what style of play to they use, are they actually developing players or riding a star as far as it takes them... I will stereotype here, but most strong Newton teams have 1 -3 very good players they ride all the way, play kick and run or very physical styles ,do not develop other players. Maybe not all of them but with such an emphasis on winning the coaches coach to win at any cost , period.
I also agree fix the crap, build a program, show you can work with other and buy into the BC Soccer and CSA LTPD. Learn to play by the rules instead of trying to change the rules to suit best....SFC was closest in this, Paul Bahia has done many wonderful things, has connections with and coaches for Coastal BCSPL , and still he struggles to get community buy in., hands get tied at board meetings, new groups taking over etc..
Also BCSPL is boarder-less because if we truly make high performance teams no one club is big enough or has enough elite talent to make up a complete team. . SU teams are made up of SU, GAC,Langley United, and players from Newton or other areas... Coastal is Coastal, Delta, Ladner, Tsawwassen, players in Newton and other areas.
It is my opinion that even if there were a franchise in Newton there is not enough talent to support them , it would only water down the level play for what is suppose to be the top level, the best of the best... As it is arguable half the teams in Metro should be in Div 1 and so on, teams play up to high cause clubs want to be offering the full spectrum.
SoccerMom
Member
- Jan 27, 2016
- 30
Sterotype is an understatement. All teams everywhere have 1-3 players that stand out. I am pretty sure this is not just at Newton.
PS. This is at all levels also.
easoccer
Established Member
- Aug 27, 2015
- 862
Kick and run at rec level is viable for sure and its a style of play like any other. There is nothing wrong with playing the penetrating pass frequently if your team make up is such that it leads to the best chance of success. I will also say that at d1 or metro its pretty hard to utilize because players and coaches can identify the target and mark or make adjustments for it. If you cant then what does that say about your team.
I will say that I have noticed a difference this year with my kids at other clubs and those coaches do seem to offer equal time, regardless of outcome, as opposed to our experience at newton. Of course this doesnt mean that there arent fair coaches at newton.
I will say that I have noticed a difference this year with my kids at other clubs and those coaches do seem to offer equal time, regardless of outcome, as opposed to our experience at newton. Of course this doesnt mean that there arent fair coaches at newton.
Great post. I deleted a bunch simply to streamline my response. I agree with the part I deleted.
I saw this exact case this weekend. CCB parked the bus. They were big and strong. They bashed the ball up to the fast centre forward at every opportunity and won 2-1. This is because the opponent, who dominated possession about 70-30(!) couldn't break down the double decker bus parked on the 18. It was ridiculous. The team that lost was quite a bit smaller thus couldn't get quite in behind, nor create space. CCB worked hard, give them credit. They didn't allow the opposition space. But the better team definitely lost.
In all my years, which is limited of course as well to just the age groups I've been involved with, I've only come across one CCB team that played a truly technical game. And credit to them they played wonderful. They won everything in the province that year - at Div 1 level. I emailed the coach, club, and thanked the players for a great game after they beat us 2-0. It was excellent. They are the very rare exception in my limited experience (meaning every year I am not watching every CCB team from u13-u18! Just the CCB teams in my own league). Their coach had an amazing approach too - every mistake he asked the players to problem solve, not just critique them.
Can other teams/clubs be accused of not developing the whole team and not playing a technical game? Absolutely. This isn't unique to CCB, it's just on a grander scale with CCB because it's such a big club. They have such a large player pool CCB should definitely have two dominant, technically sound MSL-level teams, and their Div 1 teams should also be strong technical teams. But for whatever reason that style of play is not being developed, encouraged, or sought it appears. It's a shame because from my example above it's clear that CCB can play some wonderful soccer if they so choose.
Every team, everywhere, pro and amateur are in this position. Where would Barca be without Messi-Neymar-Suarez.....
but CCB teams, on a grander scale, play a less technical game than the talent in their club should be playing.
At the rec level teams are not being coached to kick and run for the most part - I assume. It's just default because the players and coaches are less technical. It happens, and shouldn't be critized. But for the stronger D1+ teams, it shouldn't be the case. Those teams should be winning through technique, not size and kicking. But many D1 and MSL teams are rec, in the way they approach the game. This is the reality until such time as we have a true pyramid leading to a professional team, and a system that plays compensation fees to youth programs from pro teams for signing their youth players.
4_the_kids
Active Member
- Oct 20, 2015
- 312
Yes since the majority of the scoring comes through the front players the perception is they are the team, but where would Messi, Neymar and Suarez be with out the likes of Alba, Alves, and Iniesta feeding them them ball? It is those secondary quality players that most teams in lower mainland are missing...kick and run makes up for that lack of talent in a way i guess, more of just get the ball to those players ...I get why especially when putting winning as the primary objective... the measurement of success shouldn't be how many wins it should be how many player go on to higher levels of play..
My point was the there simply isn't enough talent developed in the entire lower mainland to support additional elite or high performance teams.