Sunny Surrey: Pacific United Suspended

[4_the_kids]

Of course we all know very well that in many instances those players, or parents will shop around first or will be approached.

Is it common for a player to quit a high level team with no back up plan?

We left CCB during the fiasco two years ago, my son was playing Div 1, tryouts were over, teams decided already as it was middle of summer, we played Div 3 for the year and now he is back on the div 1 team. . as an example of what I was referring too.
Under normal circumstances I would say one would have a plan ...
Guildford, Surrey United and Coastal all do evals for teams Div 3 and higher , that is to play on a div 3 or higher team you must be at evals as these teams are selected. CCB had evals for its Div 1 or development teams, I believe SFC did as well. Pacific united had posted evals this year so I would say its pretty common to at least have them, whether they mean anything or not is another thread in its self.

 

[soccer mom]

Unless they go the route of Victoria (LISA) there is no way whatsoever to stop player movement on a mass scale. Open boundaries within SMSA means a kid can choose to sign for any club they want within their district. From what I hear/read going the route of LISA's closed boundaries would be a huge mistake.

Despite the issues in Surrey, having competition amongst the clubs to provide good programming is excellent for the players. what the clubs need to do (well, BCSA and district 5 maybe more so than the clubs) is educate parents on what "good programming" actually is.

I cant agree more with this post from @easoccer. Competition is always a good thing. I hear some clubs in Delta Youth such as North Delta and South Delta being concerned over the new merger and open district with Surrey. My response to that is not one of concern but of opportunity. If those 2 clubs decided to start putting on some better competitive programming than the open boundary would allow the clubs to flourish. If those clubs are worried about losing kids to Surrey its likely because they aren't confident in their programming. South Delta has less of a geographical concern but North Delta and certainly some of the bordering Surrey clubs should look at this open competition as an opportunity to provide better programming and maybe encourage families to join their club that otherwise were not able to in the past.
It all comes down to putting on a better program. Word travels fast.
I don't hear much from CFC being concerned but more the concerns from those club leaders are how are they going to accommodate the new players coming over. Because ....currently CFC has good programming. Surrey United as well. The clubs that need to worry are North Delta, SFC, CCB and the other dysfunctions along the Scott Road border.

 

[easoccer]

I cant agree more with this post from @easoccer. The clubs that need to worry are North Delta, SFC, CCB and the other dysfunctions along the Scott Road border.

Well la dee da.....lol.

Here we are again. People keep talking about SUS and CFC and I can tell you that there is not much that sets them apart. Maybe they can put their noses up higher because of bcspl. I can quite confidently say the only thing seperating them from the air in Newton is distance. But to use another members term, they are the other side of the same coin.

 

[soccer mom]

Well la dee da.....lol.

Here we are again. People keep talking about SUS and CFC and I can tell you that there is not much that sets them apart. Maybe they can put their noses up higher because of bcspl. I can quite confidently say the only thing seperating them from the air in Newton is distance. But to use another members term, they are the other side of the same coin.

truth hurts. SUS and CFC seem to be flourishing while the other Surrey clubs and North Delta are making the news consistently for the wrong reasons. CCB SFC NDYSC and now Tigers speak of development and winning championships. Mostly in front of discipline boards at District and BC Soccer while CFC and SUS just continue to spend countless hours building larger trophy cases.

 

[soccer mom]

truth hurts. SUS and CFC seem to be flourishing while the other Surrey clubs and North Delta are making the news consistently for the wrong reasons. CCB SFC NDYSC and now Tigers speak of development and winning championships. Mostly in front of discipline boards at District and BC Soccer while CFC and SUS just continue to spend countless hours building larger trophy cases.

forgot to mention PUFC as well. Kinda implied because this post was about the club being suspended in the first case. Last year it was CCB and North Deltas President being suspended for eternity. Tigers are now doing joint stuff with North delta and are at the forefront of controversy with PUFC. You might be right that SUS and CFC breath the same air but if they are having issues they dont seem as public.

 

[easoccer]

If the trophy cases are the important thing, then I guess so.

Summer soccer gets a bad rap around here, but on occasion it has afforded me the opportunity to hear from parents that register in the fall in those clubs and I can tell you that their stories are not so different from ours.

 

[easoccer]

forgot to mention PUFC as well. Kinda implied because this post was about the club being suspended in the first case. Last year it was CCB and North Deltas President being suspended for eternity. Tigers are now doing joint stuff with North delta and are at the forefront of controversy with PUFC. You might be right that SUS and CFC breath the same air but if they are having issues they dont seem as public.

I seem to recall an SUS coach in the media recently. In pursuit of better taste I'll just leave it at that.

 

[Admin]

I seem to recall an SUS coach in the media recently. In pursuit of better taste I'll just leave it at that.

Apples and oranges as it applies to this thread - an individuals' misdeeds outside of soccer isn't controllable by a club and shouldn't be used as a sign the club has questionable practices.

 

[TKBC]

truth hurts. SUS and CFC seem to be flourishing while the other Surrey clubs and North Delta are making the news consistently for the wrong reasons. CCB SFC NDYSC and now Tigers speak of development and winning championships. Mostly in front of discipline boards at District and BC Soccer while CFC and SUS just continue to spend countless hours building larger trophy cases.

SUS and CFC have the added benefit of geographic uniqueness as well though.

 

[easoccer]

The topic was bad press. In this case there was. My point again is that neither of these clubs are any better. SUS is a member the same SMSA that many on here have complained about. Certainly they had a voice.

I have heard of half SUS teams move from CFC and vice versa because they are not happy with a coach. I have had experience with parents who complained that for weeks the coach assigned to their team was always busy. Not at practices and games. No equipment.

Anyway. I said it before and Ill say it again they all face the same issues.

And the reason they are in the media so much is not because of deeds but because the people involved are hoping that whining to the media will improve their position.

It did not.

 

[4_the_kids]

The biggest difference is the social economic status of the majority of the members of SU and CFC as well well as the demographics.
Also the stories are the same for those who feel they should have been selected to a higher team but weren't, every time a parent questions a selection they challenge to club, the eval process, the coach selection, the TD etc... on the other side of the same coin is the parents whose kids are playing at a level they feel is correct, those parents are almost always happy and nothing but positive things to say.
I would also say the membership of SU and CFC tend to be more excepting of the systems and programs, maybe because those clubs broadcast / share it better. Go to CFC website and you will find more info there than any other club...its not a coincidence

 

[easoccer]

Im not trying to put any club down. Having 5 kids playing, and having had to move due to folded or no teams at certain ages I can only speak from experience. The only club my kids havent played for in surrey is SUS.

My experience has been good at all of them. All of them have also had similar issues.

Its a pity the impression people get of surrey/newton is based on the actions of so few.

 

[4_the_kids]

Perception is formed from either ones own experiences or through the opinions of others.
I left a Newton club for many reasons including no TD, lack of programming, being a development team with no additional resource and paying an extra fee to be provided said resources, lack of support from club, parents and rouge coaches having to much power , influence and say and not for the positive, high stress environment for my son , to much pressure from parents, pressure to play summer soccer or lose you team or players, the list goes on.
I can honestly say since switching we have not experienced any of the above, and as a result my son is having fun for the first time in 5 years. That's not to say there isn't issues just not to the magnitude there was at Newton.
This is my experience, my reality and my perception , it is unfortunate but as they say where there is smoke there is fire...

 

[soccer mom]

looked at the club as a whole and not isolated events such as a coach leaving or a team. That is always going to happen as some individuals expectations will never be met. The overall macro perception of a club is more relevant and unless CFC and SUS have the ability to bury conflict internally their club perception is one of being more stable and successful relative to those other clubs mentioned. PUFC, NDYSC, SFC, CCB and Tigers.
I am out in Coquitlam and all I hear about is those clubs and not in a glowing way.

SUS and CFC seems to be insulated from those discussions and i have to believe there is a reason.

So back to my point about competition with the borders opening up...those clubs better figure put how to compete through programming or continue to lose membership to the successful clubs who focus on development rather than winning at all costs and ego and power etc etc.

 

[juninho]

As for Evals, from my experience, the Newton clubs historically eval for D1 or higher. Guildford they want all kids out. Not sure about SUS.

SUS picks all select teams at evaluations - whether they get the right kids or not is up to interpretation of course.

 

[TKBC]

indeed - every team and club has issues.

SUS picks all select teams at evaluations - whether they get the right kids or not is up to interpretation of course.

lol well said

 

[LFC]

Here we are again. People keep talking about SUS and CFC and I can tell you that there is not much that sets them apart. Maybe they can put their noses up higher because of bcspl.

Im not trying to put any club down. Having 5 kids playing, and having had to move due to folded or no teams at certain ages I can only speak from experience. The only club my kids havent played for in surrey is SU.
My experience has been good at all of them. All of them have also had similar issues.

Great posts easoccer - I have coached at nearly all the clubs in Surrey - Whalley, SU , Surrey Youth , Coastal FC & now CCB.
I have had some great experiences at all the clubs & made good friendships with fellow coach,s .
At SU i made friends with Jeff Verhoven , Cory, Sean & Ross who are still coaching there. [SU is very organized but not a very friendly atmosphere].
Coastal was a very friendly & calm club.
Both those clubs are well organized & have evaluations every season and a great system of players continuing to move up the ladder. Didn,t agree with some player selections/coaching appointments but i guess that,s down to the clubs being loyal to their coach,s/players who have been there since U5/U6 .
The diamond in the crown for them is the BCSPL Frachise which is a huge attraction for players from Surrey/Delta .

 

[Shawn Gill]

As of BC Soccer, it is a conflict of interest in some of Surrey clubs and more, like
- Coastal FC related with Elleven management owned by their ED Chris Murphy
- BC Tigers related with Supra Fitness and Sports Inc owned by their TD Justin Sidhu
- Surrey FC related with B.E.S.T owned by TD Paul Bahia
And lot more clubs are doing it but now the question is why only PUFC is TAGETED by BC Soccer, even though BCS haven’t proved any wrong doings so far. This is a big question why they got picked on.

 

[easoccer]

I think the trend is concerning to say the least.

There are many 3rd party trainers in Newton as well. Clubs are basically operating as glorified equipment managers with less resources going to the teams. Its crazy how we need to look to hire someone outside the club to help develop the players rather than the clubs developing good coaches.

Then we have staff coaches on the payroll coaching the higher level teams, using club resources and barely any of it goes to the majority that supports the clubs.

Anyway, to the PUFC issues, isnt it more to do with an unclear distribution of funds than the relationship with an outside academy? And then that part gives me dejavu as BCT also complained that CCB also mismanaged funds.

I hope it all gets resolved soon.

 

[TKBC]

"glorified equipment managers" may not be far off base. VIPL proposed changes by LISA conclude with a fee summary. $250 to play on the team. Additional $225 for kit.

The only "kit" kids need is a pair of socks, shorts, and t-shirts. Can we get over this faux-professionalism please? If teams want a track suit give them a few club supported options to purchase if they want.