LM Popeye

Buena Park, CA

#1710 Nov 8, 2012
So who's in and who's out for the 2013 new Board of Directors ?
LM Parent

Pomona, CA

#1711 Nov 8, 2012
Downey Parent wrote:
<quoted text>
I am thankful for lmsa, our coach and the sig director because my son and a handful of other downey boys have the opportunity to play on the same sig team. thanks la mirada!
Handful? I thought lmsa only allowed 2 players outside of LM? I guess the BOD is not following their player policy..so political and unacceptable..Downey huh..I think I know who the coach is.
Soccer Dad

Buena Park, CA

#1712 Nov 8, 2012
Don't know about any 2 outside player per team rule.
Sounds sort of dumb to me.
The city only requires that LMSA as a whole maintain a 75% Resident rule.
Any stricter deviation from that is not kid friendly.
Thanks Soccer Dad

Lawndale, CA

#1713 Nov 8, 2012
Correct Soccer Dad, last year Xplosion BU11 was not in the top 3, in fact it placed 6th of 8 teams.(BU10 Bronze Kappa 2011)Here is the link to last years standings:http://www.coastsocc er.com/2011/SB10ZD.htm. So, they did not "intentionally", stay down in Bronze. They struggled last year playing 8 vs 8, but trained diligently throughout the Spring, and s a result took home Championship in The Wolfpack Irvine Summer Tournament. They continue to do well this Fall in Bronze Kappa U11. So, thanks for the compliment and for not slamming Xplosion BU11 as a few others on this blog often do.
Soccer Dad wrote:
<quoted text>
Don't know where that BU11 team was last year, but it's sure kicking Bronze butt this year.
If it was in the top 3 in Bronze U10 last year, then I would agree with you that their present record is not justified. But as I said, I don't know, and can see no logic for them to intentionally stay down when they would qualify for regulation.
So I given them the benefit of the doubt, and say good job boys.
Thanks Soccer Dad

Lawndale, CA

#1714 Nov 8, 2012
Correction: CSL 2011 they were BU 10 Bronze Delta, not Kappa. http://www.coastsoccer.com/2011/SB10ZD.HTM
big dog

Downey, CA

#1715 Nov 9, 2012
75% rule
4 players max for 11v11 16 players 4 non res = 75%
3 player max for 8v8
LM Parent wrote:
<quoted text>
Handful? I thought lmsa only allowed 2 players outside of LM? I guess the BOD is not following their player policy..so political and unacceptable..Downey huh..I think I know who the coach is.
$ club

Modesto, CA

#1716 Nov 9, 2012
big dog wrote:
<quoted text>75% rule
4 players max for 11v11 16 players 4 non res = 75%
3 player max for 8v8
Goes to show you, people have no clue most of the time. They just spout off and think they are right.
LM parent that cares

Pomona, CA

#1717 Nov 9, 2012
big dog wrote:
75% rule
4 players max for 11v11 16 players 4 non res = 75%
3 player max for 8v8
<quoted text>
Then why are there 6 players from Downey on the BU14 sig team?
big dog

Downey, CA

#1718 Nov 9, 2012
don't know will check into it though
LMSA Mom

South Gate, CA

#1719 Nov 9, 2012
please bring club to LMSA big dog bob in the fall. The BOD already allows it for the spring teams.
And

Whittier, CA

#1720 Nov 9, 2012
LMSA Mom wrote:
please bring club to LMSA big dog bob in the fall. The BOD already allows it for the spring teams.
Why? No reason except for peoples egos. It's ok to leave. Players and teams have left and new teams have formed in Signature. If your team leaves that create Opportunity for the next group of kids. Isn't that good?
LM Popeye

Buena Park, CA

#1721 Nov 9, 2012
big dog wrote:
75% rule
4 players max for 11v11 16 players 4 non res = 75%
3 player max for 8v8
<quoted text>
Wow, is this an LMSA rule ?
Because if its a city rule, then LMSA is the only LM sports program that enforces it.
Every other LM program only enforced the 75% resident rule league wide, not team specific.

And don't sweat the U14 Sig team #s. If its true, it happened under your watch. It was your responsibility to oversee this team.
What are you gonna do ? Fire yourself, slap yourself on the wrist ?
You know you ain't gonna do jack even if it is a violation. So don't make a big deal out of it. Anything you do now will just hurt the kids.

No you want to check on something, check on why you didn't allow those 14 & 15 year olds to form an play on a Sig U15 team.
Those were LM kids who didn't get to play due to your decision.
And

Whittier, CA

#1722 Nov 9, 2012
LM Popeye wrote:
<quoted text>
Wow, is this an LMSA rule ?
Because if its a city rule, then LMSA is the only LM sports program that enforces it.
Every other LM program only enforced the 75% resident rule league wide, not team specific.
And don't sweat the U14 Sig team #s. If its true, it happened under your watch. It was your responsibility to oversee this team.
What are you gonna do ? Fire yourself, slap yourself on the wrist ?
You know you ain't gonna do jack even if it is a violation. So don't make a big deal out of it. Anything you do now will just hurt the kids.
No you want to check on something, check on why you didn't allow those 14 & 15 year olds to form an play on a Sig U15 team.
Those were LM kids who didn't get to play due to your decision.
You are ok with 6 out of city residence on the BU14 team and then you complain that BU14 weren't able to play signature. That is the team they would play on. 15's didnt have enough players and could have played U16 as a team but decided to leave. Their choice to leave which is fine. Again their choice. Can't blame anyone else.
LM Popeye

Buena Park, CA

#1723 Nov 9, 2012
For the record, a group of LM boys wanted to play U15 Signature. It had both U15 and U14 age boys.
All wanted to play together on the U15 team.

Our fearless b-dog, because of his need to control didn't want to allow these kids to play together.
He wanted to force the younger age players to play on the U14 team and U15 age players to play in a division higher than their age group, U16.
Bottom line: No U15 Sig team because b-dog says so.

This is how LMSA under b-dog serves our LM youth.

Kids left, U14 was forced to get out of city kids. To fill a team.

Gotta love that b-dog.
big dog

Downey, CA

#1724 Nov 10, 2012
Really, that's the best that you can do, keep trying someday you might get it right. Bottom line we know who you aren't, informed.
LM Popeye wrote:
For the record, a group of LM boys wanted to play U15 Signature. It had both U15 and U14 age boys.
All wanted to play together on the U15 team.
Our fearless b-dog, because of his need to control didn't want to allow these kids to play together.
He wanted to force the younger age players to play on the U14 team and U15 age players to play in a division higher than their age group, U16.
Bottom line: No U15 Sig team because b-dog says so.
This is how LMSA under b-dog serves our LM youth.
Kids left, U14 was forced to get out of city kids. To fill a team.
Gotta love that b-dog.
And

Whittier, CA

#1725 Nov 12, 2012
Maybe they should look at allowing unlimited players to play up next year. Or at leat increace the amount that can play up so that those with late birthdays can play with their school grade. These would not count as playing up and only count those true youngers in the 2 max playing up. I don't feel there should be a restriction and if a player is good enough to make a team they should be allowed to play. Cal South allows unlimited players to play up and only requires a waiver if the player is 3 years under age.
Soccer Best Team Sport

Kent, WA

#1726 Nov 26, 2012
NEW YORK (AP)-- Major League Soccer Commissioner Don Garber says the league is at ''the finish line'' in negotiations with New York City to acquire land to build a stadium in Queens that would become home for the league's 20th team.

Garber says MLS hopes to have the team start play in 2016 at a 10-acre site in Flushing Meadows-Corona Park and spark a rivalry with the New York Red Bulls, who play at a 25,189-capacity stadium that opened in 2010 at Harrison, N.J
LMSA Mom

La Habra, CA

#1727 Nov 26, 2012
I felt like LMSA had such a short season.
ChrisPontius

Arcadia, CA

#1728 Nov 27, 2012
Champion, how did your team fare in League Cup? BU13
signature parent

Concord, CA

#1729 Nov 29, 2012
LM Popeye wrote:
For the record, a group of LM boys wanted to play U15 Signature. It had both U15 and U14 age boys.
All wanted to play together on the U15 team.
Our fearless b-dog, because of his need to control didn't want to allow these kids to play together.
He wanted to force the younger age players to play on the U14 team and U15 age players to play in a division higher than their age group, U16.
Bottom line: No U15 Sig team because b-dog says so.
This is how LMSA under b-dog serves our LM youth.
Kids left, U14 was forced to get out of city kids. To fill a team.
Gotta love that b-dog.
4 boys of the signature team left to Strikers and that team already had 3 or 4 Downey boys. Since they disallowed some boys from playing up to U15 signature they made the exception of them playing with U14 so they do not lose U14 AND U15 signature.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Brea Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Montebello police officer accused of DUI in Walnut 1 hr tELL iT liKE iT i... 4
Obama Pulls Head from Rear End, Sticks It Back In 6 hr Hu Hammand 7
Katy Perry Stuns Crowd With Filthy Vag 9 hr Yes It Was 3
Natalie Gived Massive Cream-Exploding HEAD 9 hr Kneepad 1
Samba11 Soccer Website for cheap soccer jerseys Fri Samba11 1
News Felon Arraigned on Assault, Robbery, Attempted ... Jun 29 Larry Miller 1
do you notice more black people in brea? Jun 6 No black people here 3
More from around the web

Brea People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

Personal Finance

Brea Mortgages