Four District Youth Soccer 2017/18

[LosBlancos]

Damn, that's a really depressing read. It's such a shame that it's this way. Seeing my son and his team compete in Italy at the U11 age, the gap technically is not huge. It was more the spacial awareness, shielding and vision that was the bigger difference. Athletically our kids were definitely stronger and fitter. I can see the gap between different coaches and their affect on players learning to deal with no time and space. Our current coaches spend most practices on 2 touch possession games at high pace and intensity that has made a massive difference on my sons awareness and calmness on the ball. It seems too many coaches in Canada can get their accreditation and the knowledge level of parents on how to play the game prevents them from questioning some of these supposed pro coaches and their actual quality. Also what some of the TDs get is utterly shocking.

 

[Total -Base]

LosBlancos it'an easy fix if clubs would spend twenty minutes to really think. Local soccer is going to mega clubs thinking that better players will get better in few years. The way I see it it will make no change. Reason is mega clubs playing small clubs and winning 7 zip will not develop better players. Kids will only develop if they go to 5 star youth tournaments where the will lose half of the games and win half of the games, where they will play against bigger strong skilled and smarter players. Playing tear two soccer produces tear two players.
Most coaches are parents and only coach to protect their kids. More than half of the kids should be in lover level soccer yet patents hold them up in higher level where they look out of place. Old Metro select program, was fine. Starting HPL really does nothing for local soccer. District kids get shafted by coach parent sending boddy kids to tryouts.Good team formed from four clubs would give them HPL teams above average game and for most beat them.
Going to Mission 9 am to play a gold game is nothing but hog wash the same goes for Mission to came to West Van, what four&.
playing against Abbi teams and Langley teams is as good.
Both going to US for one 5 star tournament will teach them more in one weekend than playing here for two years. By playing high pace teams across the line will teach our kids what it takes to get there. BC is spending money on many coaching schools yet maybe two three kids make it to high level USA schools soccer programs. UBC and SFU can only take two young players each a year, where do rest play?
We must first put in BC Pro League where players get paid minimum $40 000 rest will take care of it self. People would come out and support the league. Feeder system would be step two. All this that BC Soccer is doing is for nothing. It's really destroying youth soccer.

 

[TKBC]

Ea Sports, who makes the annual fifa games, and who charges kids millions on microtransactions in the game, who is also based locally, should fully fund the league since their name is on it.

Have always wondered what EA contributes to the league. Have never received an answer.

 

[Total -Base]

TKBC I really don't know what the heck they do. Most of thing that get changed in youth soccer are buy the guys that never played the game. Most of it based on Hockey format. In my opinion we should play from March till November like rest of the country. This way we would train kids that only play soccer. As it is now half of the kids use soccer for shape for other winter sports. BC Soccer collects money from each kid, the more the better. Very few things get changed. AS of late they have added HPL to kill Metro Soccer in fact less kids in any district get developed. Parents are paying for very little development. Running and gunning leads to total fail force and for most driving all over the lower mainland. Five years of HPL will cost them 25000 dollars for each child or more. In my opinion way over cost for local coaching development. The only way to be as good as rest of the world if we bring coaches to teach our kids next step. As is our kids get over looked in any high level USA soccer program. Only few guys from across Canada end up in USA collages.
Guys like you and other parents need to speak out what you would change to improve what we have now.

 

[TKBC]

BCSPL wasn't created "to kill" Metro. It was created to provide a way to streamline our resources, so the "top" players and coaches could be centralized. This is the right decision/theory. I say BCSPL should be adjusted, but the current 8 club format does make sense. The alternative is a promotion-relegation system, which I disagree with. How would I adjust BCSPL? You touched on it. The cost. First and foremost has to be addressed. I agree, $25k for 5 years of BCSPL is inansity considering the outcomes are university soccer, which a kid can get playing metro or gold for the fraction of the cost. And in the end, once kids are going to university soccer then soccer is no longer their top priority (for the most part - some kids do move on to pro soccer, but that's an extreme rarity).

One way costs can be reduced is figuring out exactly what the name sponsors (Caps and EA) are actually financially contributing. I don't get it, nor does anyone else it seems. Every kid in BC can chip in $1 from their registration to help fund the league. Put a cap on coach honorariums. The amount I've heard makes me ... well, you can fill in the word of your choice. It's not child-centered, to say the least.

How would I adjust the league? Remove Thompson and Victoria. Have them create BCSPL-like leagues in their own region. 6-8 team leagues, with same/similar standards as BCSPL. Have them under the same umbrella - same web page, agreement for the same standards etc. Then twice a season bring together an "all-star" team from Thompson and Victoria to play the BCSPL lower mainland teams in tournaments (rotate location - year 1 lower mainland, year 2 Victoria, year 3 lower mainland, year 4, Okanagan so on and so forth). Think of the cost savings for everyone - and it's much more child/family-centered in the approach.

All that said, many are hearing/rumbling about "big" changes next year. Some theorize metro will be folded into BCCSL and become it's top tier. Will it's name change? Will standards be set for that? No one knows. Good decision though to get Metro under the same umbrella as everyone else. Will BCSPL have it's own tier 2? Don't know. But most BCSPL teams have a metro team, so they could all move under BCSPL and become BCSPL2 with their set of standards. They'd have to find another couple clubs to join that league unless Victoria and Okanagan can develop a 2nd tier team. Would this create overlap between BCSPL2 and Metro with regards to ability? Yes. But that's OK. That's a more localized league than BCSPL so kids can choose to play on a good standard of team closer to their home, and/or more cost-efficient for their family.

But beyond those changes, am hearing of a couple other major changes that are being put in place nationwide. Standards and guidelines for all provinces. Nothing concrete. Hopefully works out getting the best with the best, including coaches and players!

 

[Total -Base]

TKBC thanks for pointing out what they plan in future. There is many things wrong in my opinion. Force all in to mega clubs or stay the old system with more smaller clubs. Costs to go to Victoria and Nanaimo is far farce by our government, way way over cost. Island needs is own program. Kelowna ,Penticton and Kamloops is just gas cost, two three SUV is OK.
As far as Metro going to Costal program that's OK. I am all for club soccer. As it is now small clubs loose big against mega clubs.
Nor big clubs nor small clubs develop the way it's now. As far cost for HPL level it really is over priced for the type of development. Most kids play five years yet only one or two make it to Div one soccer in college from eight teams. Few get local University level rest end up in Beer Leagues.
Strength of players and willingness to tackle full out lacks. High pace high preasure is just not there. I call it two-thirds soccer. We lack one or two gears to reach what young men can do across the line in US.
Even if we do all those steps BC Soccer and local clubs plan, really does nothing for our kids. When they get to U 18 there is no paying jobs do to lack of development. Net result forget soccer and move on. We must have Local Pro clubs forget MLS League. We must think of our children forget paying their kids and giving them pay jobs.
Man with our a proper head ins nothing but gas bag full of beans you know the final result. There is far many guys in districts ho need to move on to golf, nothing results in nothing.
I went to watch youth game small club vs mega club let me tell you in a year or two all those kids from small club will quit soccer for more reasons than bad scores. Soccer of 8-2 does not develop kids. It just tell parents to pull out their kids to save them from stress caused by stupid board reps..........
Italy should have fired their coach, guys would have gone to Russia this summer, they did not fire a guy it is reason why their rebuilding and madness starts now. Our local soccer has no leader, net result we have no pro league. Third world countries have better program than we do. Forget paper work, start a pro league and youth movement, in five years we can play any country with pride.

 

[TKBC]

TKBC thanks for pointing out what they plan in future. There is many things wrong in my opinion. Force all in to mega clubs or stay the old system with more smaller clubs. Costs to go to Victoria and Nanaimo is far farce by our government, way way over cost. Island needs is own program. Kelowna ,Penticton and Kamloops is just gas cost, two three SUV is OK.
As far as Metro going to Costal program that's OK. I am all for club soccer. As it is now small clubs loose big against mega clubs.
Nor big clubs nor small clubs develop the way it's now. As far cost for HPL level it really is over priced for the type of development. Most kids play five years yet only one or two make it to Div one soccer in college from eight teams. Few get local University level rest end up in Beer Leagues.
Strength of players and willingness to tackle full out lacks. High pace high preasure is just not there. I call it two-thirds soccer. We lack one or two gears to reach what young men can do across the line in US.
Even if we do all those steps BC Soccer and local clubs plan, really does nothing for our kids. When they get to U 18 there is no paying jobs do to lack of development. Net result forget soccer and move on. We must have Local Pro clubs forget MLS League. We must think of our children forget paying their kids and giving them pay jobs.
Man with our a proper head ins nothing but gas bag full of beans you know the final result. There is far many guys in districts ho need to move on to golf, nothing results in nothing.
I went to watch youth game small club vs mega club let me tell you in a year or two all those kids from small club will quit soccer for more reasons than bad scores. Soccer of 8-2 does not develop kids. It just tell parents to pull out their kids to save them from stress caused by stupid board reps..........
Italy should have fired their coach, guys would have gone to Russia this summer, they did not fire a guy it is reason why their rebuilding and madness starts now. Our local soccer has no leader, net result we have no pro league. Third world countries have better program than we do. Forget paper work, start a pro league and youth movement, in five years we can play any country with pride.

What I said isn't fact. These are rumours.

 

[4_the_kids]

It is clear there is a need for 2 streams of soccer. BCSPL was created as part of the High Performance stream which included Provincial HP teams and Whitecaps academy at the top. This is the right direction , there is a room if not a need for change though.
If you talk to parents, coaches, directors , or read this forum you will see two mentalities exist and conflict each other. You have the those that truly understand player development pathways ( we can argue all day if the quality in the pathway is god enough) and those with the more traditional / recreational mentality. There is nothing wrong with either approach other than they conflict at some point , which is why the need for two streams.
I have been advocating for the HP stream to include Metro and Gold 1. The 6 BSCPL franchises would get 1 Metro and 1 Gold 1 team, each district would then get 1-2 additional Metro and Gold 1 team, how many would depend on the size of the district. This in theory would improve the talent at Metro and Gold 1 as it would reduce the total number of teams at this level, with more competitive tryouts and such. Each District would determine which clubs would get the additional teams ( preferable a district controlled or collaboration of some sort). Costs, program quality and other details would roll from there, set by either BC Soccer or CSA. The HP stream is for committed players with goals greater than college soccer even if that is the end result for some. Soccer is the primary sport or sport of choice.
The recreational stream would included Gold 2 to Bronze 2 , there would still be excellent talent in this stream , just with less commitment required.

 

[Krutov]

We can restructure leagues until we are blue in the face but we need to evaluate each team in each age group to see if these clubs can field a competitive team each year. If we want competitive balance in BCSPL and Metro then clubs should not just get a team get these levels year after year. I have included a graphic of the current standings for the U15 boys Metro division.


So this SF SGU team "may" have a game every 6th week that would qualify as competitive. There are 5 teams in the BCSPL at this age that have "500" or less records in the stats that are available. My guess is that this SF SGU team would be sitting comfortably mid to upper table in BCSPL. I have found this data from a quick glance at the standings.

In a different age group I was involved with a Metro team for 3 years that did not have the quality to take one of the coveted Metro spots. I had meetings with our TD and other higher ups explaining we should not be there but was told we will never get the spot back if we don't keep it. For what it is worth a very very qualified coach took over my team and a season and a half later they have roughly 7 wins total in 30+ games. At this same age and club the BCSPL team has finished last or very near the bottom in each of its 5 years as well. The club is just not competitive at this age level and should not have spots where other clubs could field a more qualified team.

I know this is very hard to try and fix as it would take people actually caring. We can name leagues all we want but with the above sample posted and the lack of leadership from the association to make tough decisions.

Maybe if you cannot win a third of your games in consecutive years you lose your spot??

 

[TKBC]

It is clear there is a need for 2 streams of soccer. BCSPL was created as part of the High Performance stream which included Provincial HP teams and Whitecaps academy at the top. This is the right direction , there is a room if not a need for change though.
If you talk to parents, coaches, directors , or read this forum you will see two mentalities exist and conflict each other. You have the those that truly understand player development pathways ( we can argue all day if the quality in the pathway is god enough) and those with the more traditional / recreational mentality. There is nothing wrong with either approach other than they conflict at some point , which is why the need for two streams.
I have been advocating for the HP stream to include Metro and Gold 1. The 6 BSCPL franchises would get 1 Metro and 1 Gold 1 team, each district would then get 1-2 additional Metro and Gold 1 team, how many would depend on the size of the district. This in theory would improve the talent at Metro and Gold 1 as it would reduce the total number of teams at this level, with more competitive tryouts and such. Each District would determine which clubs would get the additional teams ( preferable a district controlled or collaboration of some sort). Costs, program quality and other details would roll from there, set by either BC Soccer or CSA. The HP stream is for committed players with goals greater than college soccer even if that is the end result for some. Soccer is the primary sport or sport of choice.
The recreational stream would included Gold 2 to Bronze 2 , there would still be excellent talent in this stream , just with less commitment required.

This is also my belief. A 3 tiered "competitive" stream. Each having standards attached that teams must meet to field a team at their respective level. Have a closed top tier (BCSPL) so as to have better quality control, but some movement of teams in the 2nd and 3rd tier.

Then a rec stream. Yes there are competitive silver teams. There's always one that causes a few surprises to gold teams in cup play....but if they do well they can apply to move to gold the following year or their players can move on to a gold team if they are selected.

I agree the 2nd tier should be bigger than the top, but still minimal. 12 teams? The 6 lower mainland BCSPL "b" teams plus 1 district rep for the other lower mainland districts (Surrey would have an argument for 2, which I'd probably agree with - Coquitlam might also have an argument for 2 metro level teams. But then other districts might not get a team, there's always 2-3 that are way out of their depth - though I haven't checked this years standings for either gender or any age).

 

[TKBC]

We can restructure leagues until we are blue in the face but we need to evaluate each team in each age group to see if these clubs can field a competitive team each year. If we want competitive balance in BCSPL and Metro then clubs should not just get a team get these levels year after year. I have included a graphic of the current standings for the U15 boys Metro division.

View attachment 97
So this SF SGU team "may" have a game every 6th week that would qualify as competitive. There are 5 teams in the BCSPL at this age that have "500" or less records in the stats that are available. My guess is that this SF SGU team would be sitting comfortably mid to upper table in BCSPL. I have found this data from a quick glance at the standings.

In a different age group I was involved with a Metro team for 3 years that did not have the quality to take one of the coveted Metro spots. I had meetings with our TD and other higher ups explaining we should not be there but was told we will never get the spot back if we don't keep it. For what it is worth a very very qualified coach took over my team and a season and a half later they have roughly 7 wins total in 30+ games. At this same age and club the BCSPL team has finished last or very near the bottom in each of its 5 years as well. The club is just not competitive at this age level and should not have spots where other clubs could field a more qualified team.

I know this is very hard to try and fix as it would take people actually caring. We can name leagues all we want but with the above sample posted and the lack of leadership from the association to make tough decisions.

Maybe if you cannot win a third of your games in consecutive years you lose your spot??

I heard that Guildford team smashed a BCSPL playoff team 7-1.

 

[TKBC]

We can restructure leagues until we are blue in the face but we need to evaluate each team in each age group to see if these clubs can field a competitive team each year. If we want competitive balance in BCSPL and Metro then clubs should not just get a team get these levels year after year. I have included a graphic of the current standings for the U15 boys Metro division.

View attachment 97
So this SF SGU team "may" have a game every 6th week that would qualify as competitive. There are 5 teams in the BCSPL at this age that have "500" or less records in the stats that are available. My guess is that this SF SGU team would be sitting comfortably mid to upper table in BCSPL. I have found this data from a quick glance at the standings.

In a different age group I was involved with a Metro team for 3 years that did not have the quality to take one of the coveted Metro spots. I had meetings with our TD and other higher ups explaining we should not be there but was told we will never get the spot back if we don't keep it. For what it is worth a very very qualified coach took over my team and a season and a half later they have roughly 7 wins total in 30+ games. At this same age and club the BCSPL team has finished last or very near the bottom in each of its 5 years as well. The club is just not competitive at this age level and should not have spots where other clubs could field a more qualified team.

I know this is very hard to try and fix as it would take people actually caring. We can name leagues all we want but with the above sample posted and the lack of leadership from the association to make tough decisions.

Maybe if you cannot win a third of your games in consecutive years you lose your spot??

It's such a difficult scenario. There are upsides to a locked BCSPL - which I agree with but also see the reasoning for opening it up. There are downsides to both systems. Should a team that finishes bottom be relegated? No, because maybe most of their games are 2-1, 4-2, 3-2....1-0....close competitive games. But if they lose every game 5-0....not really much of an argument for them retaining their spot. Especially if it's over 3 or so years.

A suggestion that will go nowhere - it's not my idea but it is one that I agree with - don't start BCSPL until the u16 age group. District-based league until then. Then at u16 you can pretty easily identify who has been strong in that age group over u13-14-15 and award them the BCSPL spots to create an 8-team league. There is always a first and a last, but most likely the last place teams in that scenario will be more competitive. If they get smashed maybe a team can make an argument to replace them for u17. u18 should be u21 anyway IMO, but I guess that's a totally different argument.

 

[4_the_kids]

We can restructure leagues until we are blue in the face but we need to evaluate each team in each age group to see if these clubs can field a competitive team each year. If we want competitive balance in BCSPL and Metro then clubs should not just get a team get these levels year after year. I have included a graphic of the current standings for the U15 boys Metro division.

View attachment 97
So this SF SGU team "may" have a game every 6th week that would qualify as competitive. There are 5 teams in the BCSPL at this age that have "500" or less records in the stats that are available. My guess is that this SF SGU team would be sitting comfortably mid to upper table in BCSPL. I have found this data from a quick glance at the standings.

In a different age group I was involved with a Metro team for 3 years that did not have the quality to take one of the coveted Metro spots. I had meetings with our TD and other higher ups explaining we should not be there but was told we will never get the spot back if we don't keep it. For what it is worth a very very qualified coach took over my team and a season and a half later they have roughly 7 wins total in 30+ games. At this same age and club the BCSPL team has finished last or very near the bottom in each of its 5 years as well. The club is just not competitive at this age level and should not have spots where other clubs could field a more qualified team.

I know this is very hard to try and fix as it would take people actually caring. We can name leagues all we want but with the above sample posted and the lack of leadership from the association to make tough decisions.

Maybe if you cannot win a third of your games in consecutive years you lose your spot??

Its unfortunate there isn't more player movement. Perhaps we just look at HP as tier 1 through 3 and bottom two and top two move up after Remembrance day or year end.
Top Metro teams should be challenging the premier cup not the A cup . Perhaps once a metro team does well in that challenge eyes will open...

 

[TKBC]

Maybe if you cannot win a third of your games in consecutive years you lose your spot??

The counter to that is - who is to say the team that replaces them will do any better or be anymore competitive? Possibly can be decided by placement-game scenarios, cup competition?

 

[Krutov]

The counter to that is - who is to say the team that replaces them will do any better or be anymore competitive? Possibly can be decided by placement-game scenarios, cup competition?

I think for teams that would like for instance a Metro spot and their past record supports it they challenge for a spot with games played until Thanksgiving. You can then make your leagues based on those games. If one team challenges then they play a 4 week tournament from the previous seasons standings. Top 3 teams get a Metro spot after that. This would take out the TD's or administrators from holding onto spots just because it looks better for their club. In my case I am sure my team would have been "relegated" and many players would be much happier playing at the level they should be at and not filling a roster of players playing well above their level.

How we promote Metro or relegate BCSPL teams that get crushed by Metro teams is whole other puddle of mud. If our desire is the best play the best this must be fixed.

 

[TKBC]

I think for teams that would like for instance a Metro spot and their past record supports it they challenge for a spot with games played until Thanksgiving. You can then make your leagues based on those games. If one team challenges then they play a 4 week tournament from the previous seasons standings. Top 3 teams get a Metro spot after that. This would take out the TD's or administrators from holding onto spots just because it looks better for their club. In my case I am sure my team would have been "relegated" and many players would be much happier playing at the level they should be at and not filling a roster of players playing well above their level.

How we promote Metro or relegate BCSPL teams that get crushed by Metro teams is whole other puddle of mud. If our desire is the best play the best this must be fixed.

Absolutely has to be addressed.

Every year a team will be in a division where they are out of their depth - at every level amateur to pro this happens - but that we are so stuck and locked into set divisions is a problem. Then on top of that player movement within clubs is highly restricted/restrictive.

That said, I am really stuck with what to do about BCSPL. I definitely agree with 6-8 team tier 1 BCSPL. Should those be the same 6-8 clubs like now? I can see the merit in doing that certainly. I can also definitely see the argument in a top metro team having an argument to get into that league. Maybe BCSPL sticks with the same 6-8 teams u13-15. Then at u16 there is a competition where the "bottom" 2 BCSPL playoff against the top 2 metro (total records over 3 years) to get into BCSPL? I dunno, I can definitely see metro teams "stacking" to get into BCSPL via the "back door" this way, and I can see those "losing" BCSPL players simply jumping ship to those metro teams that took their spot to stay in BCSPL.

Not an easy scenario. Hearing the structure of who gets into what league is being addressed but have heard nothing concrete.

 

[Total -Base]

All of you guys bring out many good points. One point that all over look is child development. BC and club members keep on forming new leagues to confuse people but mostly to make money on kids. There is only forty to sixty kids in BC top level in five factors. Rest are tear two players, some lack size some speed some skill and game read. BC and rest of the boards are going about it in total backwards move. Kids are moving from team to team like pucks in a hockey game. My take on this is for BC to form a selection or a group of coaches from outside of local soccer to select the best kids in any age group from U12 on. Take them to US Tournaments to play against the best. Local soccer should be club run forget HPL and Metro. Use club system to develop kids as they do south of US and in Europe. Kids are getting shafted not by BC soccer but by the club directors that never played a game of soccer. As far as Caps that is pro club only thinking how to make money, they really do not do a thing for development of our kids, most of the guys are out of Province or out of Country like rest of the Pro clubs in US and rest of the World.
It will take a guy that knows the game to change all this. To go and play a game in Victoria at U12 is a joke that costs fifteen hundred per team. In my opinion waste of money. Island kids should pay pro coach from Mexico to come up and teach soccer. In tow years we would have ten more kids in top level. Same for kids in upper BC. There is no way small club can play high level soccer against four club selected kids. It is a total waste of time money and lack of development and most of all trying to win at all cost forgetting development of children.
Each child can be developed in time, but program must be done in a soccer way not in mom and dad babysitting.
Twenty years ago we head twenty guys Canadian on White caps today we have four maybe five yet we think we have done better job in development. We are just giving jobs to old boys club to teach soccer nothing more. Five grand to play in HPL. Trip to Alsalvador to train for four months will cost less yet player will learn four times more than here. We all must stop and think what we are doing to our kids. In a less that three four years you will see clubs pulling out of district soccer and playing in a house development with out going all over the BC for no proper reason. BC soccer does what boards vote on. No one can really blame them. District reps need kick in the ars.

 

[Krutov]

Not an easy scenario. Hearing the structure of who gets into what league is being addressed but have heard nothing concrete.

The problem is with who is addressing the problems. If it is the same people that have created what we have now we will continue to be stuck in a loop. In my scenario of actually playing games and see who has the better team and players it takes the decisions out of the hands of club administrators and TD's who want to save their jobs. Dare I say we borrow a bit from hockey and have someone independent evaluate at the higher levels to select the teams ? Possible take $1000.00 bucks from the coaches paychecks to pay for this?

 

[TKBC]

The problem is with who is addressing the problems. If it is the same people that have created what we have now we will continue to be stuck in a loop. In my scenario of actually playing games and see who has the better team and players it takes the decisions out of the hands of club administrators and TD's who want to save their jobs. Dare I say we borrow a bit from hockey and have someone independent evaluate at the higher levels to select the teams ? Possible take $1000.00 bucks from the coaches paychecks to pay for this?

The problem with determining league placement based on wins-losses is coaches begin (or more so) coaching merely to win and not develop. So that model doesn't work, and it's how we got to where we are now. We've gone from one extreme to another. Neither is acceptable.

My "middle ground" for that is a closed BCSPL for the 6-8 franchises (I think Okanagan and Victoria should not be in BCSPL - they can do their standards based league in their region and then put together an All-Star team to join the showcase tournaments and other tournaments) for u13 intake, u13-u15. Then after those 3.5 seasons calculate the records of those teams and determine who should be playing off against the metro teams over the same period of time who had the best overall records. You'll still get coaches coaching to win in that scenario at times, but generally over 3 seasons you are getting a pretty good idea of who the best teams are. One-off winning seasons says little to nothing. We can all recall a team that came together, totally dominated for a season, then either totally disappeared or dropped down to a mid-table position for the following seasons. Imagine that team who dominated, moved up and then got slaughtered because what they were doing wasn't sustainable to begin with. We can all also recall a team that was bottom of the table and not competitive then go on a great run to end a season, or significantly climb the table in the coming seasons because they had parents, coaches, and players with the right intentions and focus.

My understanding is Jason DeVos is directing a nationwide policy. He has been meeting with reps from every province for over a year now to develop something that works for everyone - and I suspect will be then adapted as needed within a region. For example, Lower Mainland can't run a league exactly the same as Okanagan (with respect to divisions and tiers). But there are aspects that can be dictated as a universal requirement.

I don't know anything more than that - which clearly isn't much to begin with! lol.

 

[Total -Base]

You all know that we have that we only have forty guys per age group with top talent. What is the reason to play teams and beat them 8 zip. In my opinion club sadists love it. If you take North Van they went from three clubs in to one. In my opinion it's a good program. Dunbar Kerrisdale and point Gray the same also good thing, Douglas Park and Grandview the same. West Van has huge area big pool of kids.Those four clubs need to play in a group with Port Moody and Cuitlam. Now so called small clubs like KLM, Killarney, Wesburn,Kliff and south Burnaby in a group two. Reason is these kids will develop with way less stress of loosing to selected teams. Only play each other in a A tournament
That is how rest of world does it, if any three clubs join in to a bigger club move them up if not they play tier two soccer like it or not. We must think of our kids not about Wesburn president ego in witch he destroys kids. There is teams that did not win a game hole year can you think what that does to kids and also to parents. Same goes for South Burnaby where coach goes nuts on kids trying to beat mega clubs. Or ICSF where coach quits on kids and lies on the graund in a spazzz. Guys BC Soccer has nothing to do with dumb presidents of these small clubs. What is the reason behind ICSF do we not live in Canada why do we need ethnic teams in youth. It is time for clubs like Killarney and ICSF and KLM to sit down and think of our kids. How about call it east side Canadians.
This is how I see it. If you take Wesburn as a club, due to small number of kids ,no team should be in gold one level minus three is where the team will win half of the games and loose half. Silver one or silver two is where the kids will develop and have fun. Any higher most will quit in two three years.
Till club presidents an TD start to understand that nothing can be done by force it takes time for proper development. Do you think parent and child will go if they get hammered each game. At the end of the year they start pochinng from each other to do better next year. Sick in every way. Jason can talk till he turns blue with out Pro League total waste of time and money taken from kids to pay him to tell local presidents what to do. It is more about Redbrigde four hour drive and money making. They really do not think what they do to kids.
The hole Provice is running nuts with all these leagues and soccer schools for what. Where do they play at the end of development?
Make it fun at least kids will stay in the game.