Vancouver YSA AGM - 2nd MSL Club?

Discussion in 'General Discussion' started by TKBC, Jan 10, 2017.

  1. TKBC

    TKBC Established Member

    Messages:
    1,231
    Ratings:
    +139 / 7
    Vancouverites have any thoughts?

    Adults clash over youth soccer regulations in Vancouver

    Surely VYSA can field two competitive MSL clubs? Competition is good for program and thus player development, thus improving the players Fusion has available for selection. In turn increases the number of kids possibly on Whitecaps Residency from Vancouver, and who knows....the MLS first team some day. Dare to dream, I suppose.
     
  2. LFC

    LFC Active Member

    Messages:
    314
    Ratings:
    +66 / 1
    According to the report they have 8000 young players so they should def be allowed to enter seperate MSL teams if they are good enough to compete.
    In Newton 4 different clubs have Metro spots at boys U17 !
    CCB , SFC , BC TIGERS & VAN UTD
     
  3. TKBC

    TKBC Established Member

    Messages:
    1,231
    Ratings:
    +139 / 7
    I think 8000 is the entire VYSA? If memory serves LUYSA is the biggest or nearly biggest club with about 3200? (Tho I have been wrong time and time again so maybe someone can correct this).

    Yes, I think VU should have a MSL club - but that opinion is based only on perception that I have. I don't have first hand knowledge.

    But, the concern will become again that MSL gets too big. Part of the motivator for the 8 team BCSPL was that MSL became way too watered down.

    If the MSL board could shrink the league to 12 per gender per year they'd really be onto something good.
     
  4. ABBYSOCDAD

    ABBYSOCDAD Member

    Messages:
    15
    Ratings:
    +8 / 0
    Kind of brings back the discussion here on the topic of the BCSPL/Metro/Div 1 doesn't it. Everyone wants their kids to be the best, get to the highest level.

    TKBC says "But, the concern will become again that MSL gets too big. Part of the motivator for the 8 team BCSPL was that MSL became way too watered down.

    If the MSL board could shrink the league to 12 per gender per year they'd really be onto something good."

    I personally think that is to small. 12 per gender? Huge development curve there for what maybe 25 kids in BCSPL and Metro for all of the Fraser Valley and each other area? Kid of placing all your eggs in one basket. I know there an be movement up and down, but lets get real... how much movement is there? I think 2 Metro teams for each in the 5 districts is not to bad. Remember you still have the chance to pick anyone from the metro clubs to play in BCSPL which is really where the highest development is stated to be. So why plug dam at MSL?
     
  5. Krutov

    Krutov Member

    Messages:
    31
    Ratings:
    +19 / 0
    This is an interesting topic to me. I was involved with a club for 3 years in the MSL and were not really competitive in 80% of our games unless we were at our very best. We managed about 10 wins total in that time. This record was very close to 3 other MSL clubs during that time and the trend is continuing this year as well. If we really want to improve the quality of MSL there needs changes made for clubs to qualify teams into this league.

    These 4 teams were probably mid table for Div1 but somehow the clubs are allowed to keep entering into the league year after year. I had meetings and conversations with our club about our quality and that we should give up our spot to a more deserving club but that was fruitless. I was told we would lose our spot if it was given up. The board of MSL really needs to look at this if we want to improve.

    The Premier team at this age group has also done just as poorly in their 4 years and have lost friendlies to MSL clubs on a regular basis.

    I understand the reasoning of needing to play against better competition to improve but after 4 years and there is no sign of improvement I think it is time to have someone make a decision for the clubs if they cannot make it for themselves.

    The kids that I have been involved with have been incorrectly assessed by the club. They have not been given the opportunity to enjoy the game (IE win some lose some) playing at their actual skill level.

    I vote for relegation at the higher levels of youth soccer. Maybe have a labour day tournament to prove your worthy of a metro spot with the other teams that think they are deserving??
     
  6. easoccer

    easoccer Established Member

    Messages:
    854
    Ratings:
    +267 / 2
    Nice to see someone else in the news. ;)
     
  7. soccer mom

    soccer mom Member

    Messages:
    80
    Ratings:
    +31 / 1
    what comes around goes around I suppose.
    The reason why Metro was established in the 1980's was to somewhat combat clubs within districts poaching players and creating super club teams. This was occurring in larger districts at the time such as Burnaby. Coaches and egos from clubs like Edmonds in those days would entice the better players from Wesburn, South Bby, Willingdon, North Burnaby, Cliff, etc and create super club teams. Metro was established such that each district would create district wide rep team and compete in their own league. (Burnaby Selects in this example) At the time likely 10 or 12 districts including Vancouver island.

    In recent years districts because of club pressure were applying with MSL to have multiple teams. This was done again mostly because of coaches and egos and district politics. Do we remember when SMSA metro team was a collaborative effort between SFC and Pegasus?? We all know how that turned out.

    In Burnaby Cliff Ave has in recent years challenged the Burnaby Selects model. That has of course gone legal and was a ^$^*^%? show or maybe still is.

    In Delta it lead from club hosted metro teams to a district wide collaboration called Delta Coastal Selects which had a nice feeder system into Coastal's HPL program. However the chair of that program John McGrandle was suspended for essentially "ever" via BC Soccer for violating BC Soccers Rule #?? for conduct unbecoming of soccer (one can only speculate what that means). Now Coastal FC has essentially taken over that metro program mostly because NDSC and South Delta show little interest in supporting the metro programs. The TD from North Delta was removed for being somewhat aloof to that program and Coastal has put their own people in place.

    Metro soccer used to be the elite league with each district having a rep team (1 team for all the clubs in that district). The metro board seems to allow any club in now and that is why you have seen many districts have multiple teams. Surrey being the prime example. The league has grown from 12 teams in each age group to 14 and some ages have more. The model of creating a elite league which used to be the way and was somewhat undermined when BC Soccer supported HPL is all but gone.

    Vancouver is just the next district to want to have multiple teams and because one club there holds most of the geographical and demographic power. (registration #'s and field allocations) they are wanting to undermine the Vancouver metro MSL program like has happened in Surrey, Delta, Burnaby and likely other districts I am not aware of.

    Interesting to note that several VUFC board members are lawyers and I suspect this is also causing an issue with BC Soccer as it relates to process as many of the processes involved at BC Soccer attempt to lock out lawyers.

    In my opinion there are too many elite leagues now. If HPl is the chosen model than keep everything at club below that. Div 1 would have club teams whereby poaching is not allowed and simply do away with Metro. Some of the smaller clubs don't have to enter teams at the Div 1 level if they cant compete and tier it that way. Metro district teams are a way of the past. Clearly if you look at Metro even 5 or so years ago it was each district had 1 team. There are essentially 11 districts in the lower mainland and so the elite status of that league was limited to less than 12 teams per age group.

    That has disappeared and now Vancouver is the next public district to do the same.
     
  8. TKBC

    TKBC Established Member

    Messages:
    1,231
    Ratings:
    +139 / 7
    Not sure what you mean? If I am mistaken please clarify. You suggest 2 teams in each of the 5 districts that equals 10 teams in MSL, less than my suggested 12. Keep in mind - MSL is meant to be the 2nd competitive tier. If it has too many clubs the players won't get enough meaningful competitive games - currently this certainly seems to be the case. I chose a division at random - u16 Boys B. 7th (last) place NVFC is 1-0-11, with a -38 GD. Every league, at all levels, all over the world has a bottom team. But, too often in MSL (and other local BC leagues) the bottom team is clearly out of its depth. By reducing the number of teams in the league, strong players will become more centralized thus creating more quality competition more often.

    This would also benefit Gold/Div 1 as a larger number of stronger players would join that league, thus then also trickling down to Silver.

    Having been part of watered down leagues as both a player and coach - no one enjoys the games vs the teams that are clearly out of their depth. It feels like a wasted day for both teams most of the time.

    Yes, everyone wants their kid to reach the highest level or (as should be the desire - reach their potential). But that doesn't mean we should allow bloated leagues. BCSPL, for example, should certainly not go above 8 teams in the near future.
     
  9. TKBC

    TKBC Established Member

    Messages:
    1,231
    Ratings:
    +139 / 7
    I hear you. It's disappointing to read such remarks certainly. I suppose my question is - why did the parents keep bringing their kids back? There must have been some redeeming quality to the team!
     
  10. TKBC

    TKBC Established Member

    Messages:
    1,231
    Ratings:
    +139 / 7
    ah the good old days. I remember playing silver soccer in the early 90's vs. Edmonds - lol they would destroy us. Definitely felt good joining a strong Metro team back then and beating up on the Burnaby Metro team ;)

    I joined Metro in the mid-90's. Each league had 6 teams when I joined - 1 per district. I thought this was perfect. This lasted for 2 years. In the 3rd year it bloated to 10 or 12. The bottom 5 teams were getting smashed while the top 5-6 were competing very well with each other. The games vs. the bottom teams were fun to rack up goals, but not challenging and no one really looked forward to them. And my team wasn't even a top 2-3 team! Metro kept growing from there to what it is now, and thus leading to the creation of BCSPL because a lack of competition and standards (the correct decision - even with the issues surrounding BCSPL). MSL now could be a fantastic 2nd tier - if it limited entries to, say 12, and put in place some more strict standards.

    Having 1 team per district, I think, is good. I think you could have a 2nd for the BCSPL franchise to have a reserve team. Done, dusted, sorted. High standard. Tough luck - not everyone is good enough to be in the top two tiers. But with a strong Gold/Div 1 system as a result many more players will develop and have a chance to move into the MSL.

    I remember when Surrey had just 1 MSL club - Surrey FC. They were truly exceptional. It was so so fun to play them. Sometimes the game would be 5-4, sometimes 0-6 (for them!) sometimes 3-1 for us....very fun games regardless of the result! For me how about this:

    6 BCSPL clubs
    -FV "B" (or a club team?)
    -SU "B"
    -CMF "B"
    -Fusion "B"
    -Mountain "B"
    -Coastal "B"
    plus another 1 rep per district (2 for Surrey)
    -Surrey FC
    -CCB
    -Tri Cities TBD
    -Burnaby Metro Soccer
    -Vancouver YSA
    -Vancouver United TBD

    IMO in this set-up North Van and Richmond would not need teams as Fusion and Mountain would have entries. Fraser Valley would not enter a 2nd MSL team ideally.

    I think this 12-club set-up adequately covers every geographical area except maybe Maple Ridge but they can get to Port Moody or Coquitlam or Langley fairly easily although tolled.
     
  11. CanadianSpur

    CanadianSpur Member

    Messages:
    84
    Ratings:
    +38 / 0
    Just a point of clarification... there are 9 districts in the lower mainland so 2 teams per district would be 18 which would definitely be a watered down league.

    Having one club get an MSL team in addition to the district team presents all kinds of problems as then every club wants to be treated "fairly" and will demand that they get an MLS team.

    Hopefully the BCSPL does move ahead with is reserve division with 2 reserve teams for each HPL franchise and we can eliminate MSL
     
  12. soccer mom

    soccer mom Member

    Messages:
    80
    Ratings:
    +31 / 1
    I take offense to the phrase the good old days ......than I think about it ....$%#$& ....I am old so never mind. lol
     
  13. TKBC

    TKBC Established Member

    Messages:
    1,231
    Ratings:
    +139 / 7
    definitely I would not agree to 18 teams! ;)

    Has anyone at BCSPL actually released anything that says they are discussing a reserve division? Would it be another 8 team league with same standards as the first division?
     
  14. TKBC

    TKBC Established Member

    Messages:
    1,231
    Ratings:
    +139 / 7
    yup we are!
     
  15. CanadianSpur

    CanadianSpur Member

    Messages:
    84
    Ratings:
    +38 / 0
    I don't think there has been an official statement but I heard it directly from someone in the BCSPL board. I don't know the number of teams discussed but I believe the okanagan and island were excluded so possible 2 teams for each if the lower mainland franchises. What wasn't clear was if these would be run by the SPL club or by the feeder clubs.
     
  16. TKBC

    TKBC Established Member

    Messages:
    1,231
    Ratings:
    +139 / 7
    If 2 each in the reserve then it would be 10 teams - good number.
     
  17. LauraH

    LauraH Member

    Messages:
    76
    Ratings:
    +18 / 0
    It did not get approved, according to this:
     
  18. TKBC

    TKBC Established Member

    Messages:
    1,231
    Ratings:
    +139 / 7
    Hopefully increased/improved collaboration is the outcome as noted by Sherbot (the president I assume)?

    Fraser Valley should only have 1 metro team - not enough player depth etc, but it's worth noting FV District also only approves 1 metro team now. Maybe other districts will follow suit with FV and VYSA.
     
  19. LFC

    LFC Active Member

    Messages:
    314
    Ratings:
    +66 / 1
    Thats a shame and makes no sense at all , Vancouver Utd is a fairly big club with a good catchment and i,m sure they would have put together competitive MSL teams in some age groups. Newton has 4 clubs with MSL spots and 2 of those clubs only got formed as winter clubs this season. Even the combined membership of both new clubs would be less than Vancouver Utd !
     
  20. LauraH

    LauraH Member

    Messages:
    76
    Ratings:
    +18 / 0
    I know nothing but what's in that statement, but it required 75% in favour to pass, which is not that easy to attain. I also wonder if the Metro league would have automatically granted them spots had it gone ahead. Teams were turned down for the current season. But it doesn't matter anyway...
     

Share This Page