bettermirror
New Member
Base - what are you going on about?
Welcome to the TTP community
Be apart of something great, join today!
New Youth HPL league
- Thread starter Mr Base
- Start date
- Status
bettermirror
New Member
Furthermore, you want to defend 3 forwards by playing 3 defenders? Remind me to play 4-3-3 against any team you might put on the field.
BC Soccer introduces the High Performance League Selection Panel > British Columbia Soccer Association > Rotate News Article View
Selection panel announced...
The panel is comprised of Paul Barber, Chief Executive Officer with the Vancouver Whitecaps FC, Sean Fleming, the Canadian Soccer Association’s U17 Boys’ National Team Head Coach and Paul Mullen, BC Soccer’s new Director of Operations, who just recently joined the Association after a decade with The FA in England.
Glad to see that no one has a significant background in the BC Soccer scene...should lead to some refreshing perspective.
Selection panel announced...
The panel is comprised of Paul Barber, Chief Executive Officer with the Vancouver Whitecaps FC, Sean Fleming, the Canadian Soccer Association’s U17 Boys’ National Team Head Coach and Paul Mullen, BC Soccer’s new Director of Operations, who just recently joined the Association after a decade with The FA in England.
Glad to see that no one has a significant background in the BC Soccer scene...should lead to some refreshing perspective.
Nice to find a forum for public debate on this subject; ironic that its through BC Soccer...
Full disclosure first - I am in my third year as president of the Burnaby Selects (Boys) Program.
If the intent of HPL is to weed out clubs and teams that are not competitive in the current Select League, then I am all for the concept. I suspect the real intent it to try to get more BC players onto the various national teams - and to that I say take a look at whats going on at the Provincial Team level rather than at the grassroots - but anything that creates a better league for elite players gets my vote.
The 500 pound elephant in the room that no one seems to want to talk about is the cost.
My club charges $500 in annual fees. That is a comprehensive fee - tracksuit, travel, equipment, etc. Until last year the fee had been $350, and the change was not popular at our AGM.
We do not pay our coaches. We do not have a technical director. The player pool we have to draw from, in terms of size of districts, is one of if not the smallest in the Select league.
Despite this, our u14 and u18 A teams are in first place in the Select league, and our u16 A team is in second place. I should add that we do not move our best underages to the A team; they play on the B teams absent exceptional circumstances. While we do attract a fair number of out of district players, we abide by the same rules as everyone else in terms of OOD limits.
The point is not to pat my own club's back. No program is perfect, and we, like every other club, have our warts and issues to deal with.
The point is simply this - the idea that we must pay significant money to professional coaches if we want our youth players to develop is pure, unadulterated horseshit.
This is not simply a Burnaby phenomenon. Metro-Ford has traditionally and is currently a Select League powerhouse. Their fees, if I am not mistaken, are $495 (we're going to $490 next year out of spite
). The clubs that charge the most amount of money for their programs? They are, by and large, bottom-feeders. This cannot all be coincidence.
Unlike Burnaby, Metro-Ford does pay (some?) of their coaching staff. The parallel that remains, however, is parent affordability.
HPL will involve more travel than the Select League. I hear that the intent is for an unbalanced travel schedule to help the Island and Interior franchises. Assuming 3 games x 7 franchises = 21 games, and 2 of 3 vs the Island and Interior are away, this means the lower mainland teams will be traveling just under 20% of the time. Ouch.
The only place clubs can save on costs (absent sponsorship) is in the technical department. For the record, I have no problem with coaches being paid for the crucial service they play in player development. However, if my club can attract coaches that are good enough to send our teams to the top of the table, and do it by paying them exactly zero, then I strongly suspect the HPL franchises can attract quality coaches without having to pay in the $6000 - 10000 (or more) range like many, apparently, are planning to do.
If there were a way to avoid having parents shell out big bucks for paid coaches, I would have no problem paying every HPL coach huge dough to coach our youth. We aren't there. Conservatively, a season of HPL will cost a parent $2500 per player. In fact, the true numbers are much worse.
Take a player who chooses to play at Mountain FC starting this spring. His fees to play there will be approx. $1250. Let's say he then makes an HPL team. For those clubs NOT currently in existence, the "mini-season" will involve some club startup costs. Let's put the fee for that mini-season at $1000 per player. Finally, lets' say he continues on to play the full season of HPL. Another $2500 please. Grand total for 18 months of soccer - $4750.
This is not even close to being a reasonable fee for a child to play soccer. While Burnaby is a small district in terms of total numbers, it does an excellent job of talent retention because the fees are low no matter what club a player decides to join. That approach continues if the player happens to be good enough to play with the Burnaby Selects.
Burnaby has pockets of affluence; its also has pockets of significant poverty. Many of Burnaby's immigrant population do not have much money at all; what they do have is a passion for the world's game. Some of our very best players come from families who couldn't afford fees of $250 never mind $2500. For them, HPL is simply not an affordable option.
Oh yes, I know the argument. We will subsidize! We never turn players away! These sentiments are laudable, but flawed in logic. These statements assume that every family in need of financial help will approach us for that help. This is not the case. Many will either reject HPL, or worse, pull their child from soccer all-together. It is simply not realistic to think that we will be able to identify and catch all of those that might silently choose to pull their child away from the game. Even if we could, many of those people will not tell us the true reason they are leaving, for the very reason they didnt ask for help in the first place - personal pride.
I have gone on for too long, and welcome a discussion about the merits of my position. In summary, I believe that HPL must be affordable to the average family, or else it will be populated by players with money, rather than talent. Until sponsorship money starts rolling in, the only way to achieve that is to keep coaching fees at a modest level. The potential HPL fees I am hearing discussed, as a result, cause me significant concern.
(P.S. - I do not wish to be taken as equating team results with player development. There are various reasons why that thesis is itself flawed. That said, across the board team success would suggest, almost by necessity, the achievement of a certain level of player development...)
Full disclosure first - I am in my third year as president of the Burnaby Selects (Boys) Program.
If the intent of HPL is to weed out clubs and teams that are not competitive in the current Select League, then I am all for the concept. I suspect the real intent it to try to get more BC players onto the various national teams - and to that I say take a look at whats going on at the Provincial Team level rather than at the grassroots - but anything that creates a better league for elite players gets my vote.
The 500 pound elephant in the room that no one seems to want to talk about is the cost.
My club charges $500 in annual fees. That is a comprehensive fee - tracksuit, travel, equipment, etc. Until last year the fee had been $350, and the change was not popular at our AGM.
We do not pay our coaches. We do not have a technical director. The player pool we have to draw from, in terms of size of districts, is one of if not the smallest in the Select league.
Despite this, our u14 and u18 A teams are in first place in the Select league, and our u16 A team is in second place. I should add that we do not move our best underages to the A team; they play on the B teams absent exceptional circumstances. While we do attract a fair number of out of district players, we abide by the same rules as everyone else in terms of OOD limits.
The point is not to pat my own club's back. No program is perfect, and we, like every other club, have our warts and issues to deal with.
The point is simply this - the idea that we must pay significant money to professional coaches if we want our youth players to develop is pure, unadulterated horseshit.
This is not simply a Burnaby phenomenon. Metro-Ford has traditionally and is currently a Select League powerhouse. Their fees, if I am not mistaken, are $495 (we're going to $490 next year out of spite
). The clubs that charge the most amount of money for their programs? They are, by and large, bottom-feeders. This cannot all be coincidence.Unlike Burnaby, Metro-Ford does pay (some?) of their coaching staff. The parallel that remains, however, is parent affordability.
HPL will involve more travel than the Select League. I hear that the intent is for an unbalanced travel schedule to help the Island and Interior franchises. Assuming 3 games x 7 franchises = 21 games, and 2 of 3 vs the Island and Interior are away, this means the lower mainland teams will be traveling just under 20% of the time. Ouch.
The only place clubs can save on costs (absent sponsorship) is in the technical department. For the record, I have no problem with coaches being paid for the crucial service they play in player development. However, if my club can attract coaches that are good enough to send our teams to the top of the table, and do it by paying them exactly zero, then I strongly suspect the HPL franchises can attract quality coaches without having to pay in the $6000 - 10000 (or more) range like many, apparently, are planning to do.
If there were a way to avoid having parents shell out big bucks for paid coaches, I would have no problem paying every HPL coach huge dough to coach our youth. We aren't there. Conservatively, a season of HPL will cost a parent $2500 per player. In fact, the true numbers are much worse.
Take a player who chooses to play at Mountain FC starting this spring. His fees to play there will be approx. $1250. Let's say he then makes an HPL team. For those clubs NOT currently in existence, the "mini-season" will involve some club startup costs. Let's put the fee for that mini-season at $1000 per player. Finally, lets' say he continues on to play the full season of HPL. Another $2500 please. Grand total for 18 months of soccer - $4750.
This is not even close to being a reasonable fee for a child to play soccer. While Burnaby is a small district in terms of total numbers, it does an excellent job of talent retention because the fees are low no matter what club a player decides to join. That approach continues if the player happens to be good enough to play with the Burnaby Selects.
Burnaby has pockets of affluence; its also has pockets of significant poverty. Many of Burnaby's immigrant population do not have much money at all; what they do have is a passion for the world's game. Some of our very best players come from families who couldn't afford fees of $250 never mind $2500. For them, HPL is simply not an affordable option.
Oh yes, I know the argument. We will subsidize! We never turn players away! These sentiments are laudable, but flawed in logic. These statements assume that every family in need of financial help will approach us for that help. This is not the case. Many will either reject HPL, or worse, pull their child from soccer all-together. It is simply not realistic to think that we will be able to identify and catch all of those that might silently choose to pull their child away from the game. Even if we could, many of those people will not tell us the true reason they are leaving, for the very reason they didnt ask for help in the first place - personal pride.
I have gone on for too long, and welcome a discussion about the merits of my position. In summary, I believe that HPL must be affordable to the average family, or else it will be populated by players with money, rather than talent. Until sponsorship money starts rolling in, the only way to achieve that is to keep coaching fees at a modest level. The potential HPL fees I am hearing discussed, as a result, cause me significant concern.
(P.S. - I do not wish to be taken as equating team results with player development. There are various reasons why that thesis is itself flawed. That said, across the board team success would suggest, almost by necessity, the achievement of a certain level of player development...)
bettermirror
New Member
Can you bullet-point that for me?
The Elephant in the room has been the main topic of discussion!
TSS did thmselves a huge service posting up their proposal. I wonder if the other clubs went to the same extend to create as professional a proposal as TSS, from a marketing standpoint. Probably TSS's strongest card to play is their facility, and you know, maybe this type of model- an HPL franchise removed from the big clubs- is the way to go moving forward. Maybe the clubs should be focused on development w/ the intent on letting go of players once they reach that HPL level.
Again, still of the opinion that the idea should be shelved for a full year to dial it in. Conceptually, it makes sense, but financially, there are major gaps in the plan that can potentially derail it.
TSS did thmselves a huge service posting up their proposal. I wonder if the other clubs went to the same extend to create as professional a proposal as TSS, from a marketing standpoint. Probably TSS's strongest card to play is their facility, and you know, maybe this type of model- an HPL franchise removed from the big clubs- is the way to go moving forward. Maybe the clubs should be focused on development w/ the intent on letting go of players once they reach that HPL level.
Again, still of the opinion that the idea should be shelved for a full year to dial it in. Conceptually, it makes sense, but financially, there are major gaps in the plan that can potentially derail it.
bettermirror
New Member
I sure hope they don't select TSS because they have a pretty poster!
Is TSS can put out a superior product to their regional rivals they should get in. All the clubs should, yes, be developing players to let them move on to bigger better things. Whether they are HPL, Silver, or House. Unfortunately, I can tell you this doesn't happen. That is not down to the clubs but rather greedy coaches trying desperately to win the Conference Cup....etc.
Is TSS can put out a superior product to their regional rivals they should get in. All the clubs should, yes, be developing players to let them move on to bigger better things. Whether they are HPL, Silver, or House. Unfortunately, I can tell you this doesn't happen. That is not down to the clubs but rather greedy coaches trying desperately to win the Conference Cup....etc.
Well, the poster shows that they invested serious thought and time into their proposal. Take out the images, and the proposal still has substance. I again question the budget, and the availability of (I think) $80K in sponsor dollars.
But, I do like the concept of a franchise being a step removed from the big clubs. I don't like the concept of the big clubs being directly involved.
I know what you mean though...many coaches don't see the forest through the trees, and was evident in our "Q&A" session when the day after the Breakers / CCFC merger. One U-16 coach- a hockey guy I've never had a high level of respect for as a hockey coach, never mind trying to teach girls how to play our beautiful game- made it abundantly clear that he was concerned about his more talented girls being pulled from his team to serve the HPL, and "how am I going to replace that tallent"? He was right behind me, and I turned to him and said, "It's natural progression. If you're developing players, you should want them to move on". He gave me a nasty look, and I think it's because:
#1: He doesn't develop players. He's lucky to have a couple of talented players on his squad.
#2: Because I was right.
And that really is our plight here. The system just doesn't have enough "qualified" coaches. Plenty of coaches w/ tickets, formal training, etc, but not enough guys who truly know, understand, and can teach the game. That’s another topic for another day, though.
But, I do like the concept of a franchise being a step removed from the big clubs. I don't like the concept of the big clubs being directly involved.
I know what you mean though...many coaches don't see the forest through the trees, and was evident in our "Q&A" session when the day after the Breakers / CCFC merger. One U-16 coach- a hockey guy I've never had a high level of respect for as a hockey coach, never mind trying to teach girls how to play our beautiful game- made it abundantly clear that he was concerned about his more talented girls being pulled from his team to serve the HPL, and "how am I going to replace that tallent"? He was right behind me, and I turned to him and said, "It's natural progression. If you're developing players, you should want them to move on". He gave me a nasty look, and I think it's because:
#1: He doesn't develop players. He's lucky to have a couple of talented players on his squad.
#2: Because I was right.
And that really is our plight here. The system just doesn't have enough "qualified" coaches. Plenty of coaches w/ tickets, formal training, etc, but not enough guys who truly know, understand, and can teach the game. That’s another topic for another day, though.
bettermirror
New Member
No doubting the professionalism of the package! And Colin told me it was all done "in house." I asked if they went to university for that and he ignored me!
Haha, ya, we all have those examples of selfish coaches. It's far too rampant, and I am glad to say I can't empathize with these guys. The kids gotta move on to bigger and better be it gold, HPL, University, or Professional.......
Haha, ya, we all have those examples of selfish coaches. It's far too rampant, and I am glad to say I can't empathize with these guys. The kids gotta move on to bigger and better be it gold, HPL, University, or Professional.......
Well, a final proposal of that quality isn't rocket science, but it does require the skills of someone who is familiar w/ those publishing programs. Probably someone "in-house" who is involved in advertising. In our business, on proposals of high value / significance, we outsource that service to a local marketing wiz, and get the same dressed up look. For us, the whole point of dressing it up is that you ensure folks reading it will be drawn in and engaged, and that is the only purpose of the “dress-up”- to get them reading and engaged. Get beyond the gloss, and the proposal does have real substance. They have clearly put a lot of discussion and thought into their plan, which I'm sure would end up being their guide moving forward. Whoever is evaluating the proposals will take this into account...not just the numbers (memberships, etc.), but what will the franchise do and how will they do it going forward. It's a plan with substance behind the gloss.
Given that, I think that the proposal will demand serious consideration. Sportstown isn't reliant on membership to get clout w/ the city in order to get facility access. Therefore, the need for high membership is a moot point in their bid...unlike almost every other bid, which requires the backing of a big club in order to have proper facility access. If they are granted a franchise, I'm sure what you'd see next in the evolution of the HPL is that parents will come to them, and surrounding clubs "should" go to them to establish clear pathways for the top end players to transition over.
In any event, would love to see what the other clubs have proposed. I highly doubt most are as detailed- but I bet Surrey United and CMF are.
Given that, I think that the proposal will demand serious consideration. Sportstown isn't reliant on membership to get clout w/ the city in order to get facility access. Therefore, the need for high membership is a moot point in their bid...unlike almost every other bid, which requires the backing of a big club in order to have proper facility access. If they are granted a franchise, I'm sure what you'd see next in the evolution of the HPL is that parents will come to them, and surrounding clubs "should" go to them to establish clear pathways for the top end players to transition over.
In any event, would love to see what the other clubs have proposed. I highly doubt most are as detailed- but I bet Surrey United and CMF are.
- Thread starter
- #591
Far from it Colin is not a slfish person. On the oposite. Very good developer and a true Canadian coach. I just can not understan why he would risk going in to HPL. As a developer it would make way more sence for him to go in to partnership for a NASL club. HPL is small steps hor his game ability. I have coached for years and can see very little future for our kids here unless we open few more NASL clubs. All the coaching Colin does or I do it will all go waste side unless of kids sign a money cotract at the end of a true development. I see Poster above has posted the deferance in coast from one to onother. Burnaby selects $500.00 HPL around $2500.00 per season. All he has to understand that maybe four guys from each burnaby select side will make HPL. That is only four or five parents that will have to pay $2500.00. Rest can pay $500.00 and play tear two.
Gold players pay around $250.00 per year. The time has come. MLS is here. All the local kids were over looked. Due to one reason. They are not at that level. Or a level for MLS.
Now we have a choyse. Go to HPL where our kids will be as equal as residency program. All we have to do is buy paper spot in Province to edvance our kids. We must for an invite combine to NASL clubs to show what we have. Or we must go to Europe to UK tournasment at the age of sixteen. If we do not do these steps it again going to be just a paid soccer school. With no place to return a dollar on your investment.
HPL must go thats one`, second step is way more important, a spot in the provice every second day to show case our kids.
Gold players pay around $250.00 per year. The time has come. MLS is here. All the local kids were over looked. Due to one reason. They are not at that level. Or a level for MLS.
Now we have a choyse. Go to HPL where our kids will be as equal as residency program. All we have to do is buy paper spot in Province to edvance our kids. We must for an invite combine to NASL clubs to show what we have. Or we must go to Europe to UK tournasment at the age of sixteen. If we do not do these steps it again going to be just a paid soccer school. With no place to return a dollar on your investment.
HPL must go thats one`, second step is way more important, a spot in the provice every second day to show case our kids.
bettermirror
New Member
No one said Colin was selfish.
Re the Sportstown FC bid. As substantial (and slick) as it was, its simply not going to get serious consideration:
From the HPL FAQ on the BCSA website:
Q: Can academies with limited membership participate in HPL? Will they be able to play in games
against them?
A: At present, the existing rules do not make provisions for limited associate members to participate.
Q: Can private academies apply for HPL franchise status?
A: At this time, it would be fair to suggest that the RFP will be geared towards a club or district program
that would be able to satisfy the cradle to grave and boys and girls programming aspect. As well the
second tier (old metro and selects) will play an important role in the development of players for the HPL.
In light of that the current leagues and clubs would not allow a private academy to apply for HPL.
Sportstown (aka TSS) knows this of course and wrote the proposal not with the primary objective of getting a franchise but a. to raise awareness of accountability and transparency in the selection process on the part of both BCSA and the proponents; and b. as a marketing ploy. I suspect b. was the primary motive. Still, if other proponents take a page from the Sportstown proposal either in style or in substance, that won't be all bad.
As for cost - Dude is right: we have been discussing it here and elsewhere. (And the more I read about htis HPL, the more I am beginning to think Dude is right about waiting a year). The most common counter I have heard to your argument mtkb is that for that small percentage of truly elite players, $2500 per year is not a jump, its status quo. For those that have their children playing in Metro/Select with no additional training whatsoever in a club that doesn’t pay their coaches then yes, the jump will be significant. But the four or five players (as Base estimates) from those Metro/Select teams that will make the move to HPL are not just playing club fees - they are already paying additional training fees at private academies in the $1K+ range. Some, as you suggest, also play Y-league - another ~$1200. I agree that the fees are a barrier to many underprivileged families but I believe there is a way to retain the "many [that] will either reject HPL, or worse, pull their child from soccer all-together." We need to spread the word about the HPL (and about financial aid). I know you say that it isn't possible to identify them all but how vocal have we really been out in the community where non-soccer-nuts, non-blog-reading-people live? I can't tell you how many times I have had to explain the HPL to friends who have children who are elite players because they have never even heard of it. (This is one of the reasons why I am beginning to believe we are jumping the gun.) In my opinion, cost is not as big an elephant or a surprise (or a burden even) as value. What value is there in moving from Metro to HPL only to be coached by the same now-paid coach who last week was coaching me in Metro for free? And don't think for a minute that this isn't going to happen - where else are they going to find the 80 coaching positions? What is the value in moving to a player identification league as opposed to a player development league? Don't think that's what HPL is all about? From the HPL Prospectus:
3. Objectives
The High Performance League – or “HPL” -- is designed to create a new provincial league providing a level of competition and play that accomplishes three key objectives for BC Soccer and the game's major stakeholders in British Columbia.
First and foremost, it makes a strong contribution to player development at the National Team level by
simplifying scouting for National Training Centre candidates and providing a focus for top young prospects. Ultimately, it will help the province's best players earn berths representing Canada through the CanadianSoccer Association's National Teams
In my opinion, value, not cost, is the big elephant in the room. Dude's right. Let's take a year to sort out the coaching issues, properly publish and promote the league, generate sponsorships to keep costs down, develop not just a soccer programming strategy but a business strategy, and then launch. In my opinion.
From the HPL FAQ on the BCSA website:
Q: Can academies with limited membership participate in HPL? Will they be able to play in games
against them?
A: At present, the existing rules do not make provisions for limited associate members to participate.
Q: Can private academies apply for HPL franchise status?
A: At this time, it would be fair to suggest that the RFP will be geared towards a club or district program
that would be able to satisfy the cradle to grave and boys and girls programming aspect. As well the
second tier (old metro and selects) will play an important role in the development of players for the HPL.
In light of that the current leagues and clubs would not allow a private academy to apply for HPL.
Sportstown (aka TSS) knows this of course and wrote the proposal not with the primary objective of getting a franchise but a. to raise awareness of accountability and transparency in the selection process on the part of both BCSA and the proponents; and b. as a marketing ploy. I suspect b. was the primary motive. Still, if other proponents take a page from the Sportstown proposal either in style or in substance, that won't be all bad.
As for cost - Dude is right: we have been discussing it here and elsewhere. (And the more I read about htis HPL, the more I am beginning to think Dude is right about waiting a year). The most common counter I have heard to your argument mtkb is that for that small percentage of truly elite players, $2500 per year is not a jump, its status quo. For those that have their children playing in Metro/Select with no additional training whatsoever in a club that doesn’t pay their coaches then yes, the jump will be significant. But the four or five players (as Base estimates) from those Metro/Select teams that will make the move to HPL are not just playing club fees - they are already paying additional training fees at private academies in the $1K+ range. Some, as you suggest, also play Y-league - another ~$1200. I agree that the fees are a barrier to many underprivileged families but I believe there is a way to retain the "many [that] will either reject HPL, or worse, pull their child from soccer all-together." We need to spread the word about the HPL (and about financial aid). I know you say that it isn't possible to identify them all but how vocal have we really been out in the community where non-soccer-nuts, non-blog-reading-people live? I can't tell you how many times I have had to explain the HPL to friends who have children who are elite players because they have never even heard of it. (This is one of the reasons why I am beginning to believe we are jumping the gun.) In my opinion, cost is not as big an elephant or a surprise (or a burden even) as value. What value is there in moving from Metro to HPL only to be coached by the same now-paid coach who last week was coaching me in Metro for free? And don't think for a minute that this isn't going to happen - where else are they going to find the 80 coaching positions? What is the value in moving to a player identification league as opposed to a player development league? Don't think that's what HPL is all about? From the HPL Prospectus:
3. Objectives
The High Performance League – or “HPL” -- is designed to create a new provincial league providing a level of competition and play that accomplishes three key objectives for BC Soccer and the game's major stakeholders in British Columbia.
First and foremost, it makes a strong contribution to player development at the National Team level by
simplifying scouting for National Training Centre candidates and providing a focus for top young prospects. Ultimately, it will help the province's best players earn berths representing Canada through the CanadianSoccer Association's National Teams
In my opinion, value, not cost, is the big elephant in the room. Dude's right. Let's take a year to sort out the coaching issues, properly publish and promote the league, generate sponsorships to keep costs down, develop not just a soccer programming strategy but a business strategy, and then launch. In my opinion.
This is a weakness in the RFP, in my opinion, and where TSS has an advantage due to the access to their own private facility. It gives them much stronger long term footholds, and less potential for political maneuvering to upset the applecart. It would in fact allow them to have clear and single-minded focus directed at the HPL endeavor.
That advantage has to be sold to the evaluators, though.
bettermirror
New Member
The proposal has Tak's name all over it from a design perspective. I guess that could be considered "in-house"
I don't know who Tak is but Colin told me they weren't involved.
Within the selection process there are a number of key dates for applicants to be aware of. Upon the initial review of all applications, the panel will have the option to invite proponents in for an additional presentation with opportunity to ask further questions, if it is deemed necessary. These sessions would be held on Sunday, February 13th, with any groups standing to receive an invitation to be notified by no later than Wednesday, February 9th. A maximum of three representatives from each proponent group would receive a one hour timeslot with 30 minutes for presentations and another 30 minutes for questions and answers.(BC Soccer)
This should not be an option. All proponents need to given the opportunity to back their bids with an additional presentation. That is, if the panel is all about making an informed decision. Deemed necessary? Bloody Right it is.
sure:
- HPL is generally a very good idea
- my main concern is cost to parents
- there are a number of inherent costs that will drive the price of soccer up from where it currently is, despite what BC Soccer says / intends
- we (Burnaby) have been having considerable success without the technical overhead that everyone seems to think is required for better youth development
- clubs that have kept costs down (Burnaby and Metro Ford for instance) make the sport accessible to even the poorest families
- the fact that these clubs enjoy competitive success is no coincidence
- saying that we can subsidize the poorer folk assumes that they will ask for that help; many will not and will simply take a pass on HPL
- coaching is the only area the HPL clubs have any control over cost; given that we have managed to acquire good coaching for free, it must be that other groups can acquire good coaching for less than $6,000 to $10,000 (or more) per year...
- Status
Members online
No members online now.
