other coach

Los Angeles, CA

#4182 Mar 6, 2014
A Rangers Mom told me her u10 boys season would be almost 2000.00. I know Brea is around 1500.00. What is Strikers? these fees are if you have their paid coach im assuming. But also thesecoacheshave various teams and go MIA at times.
If LMSA can compete on the fields with a respectable product then they will always consider departure.
And so we go back to the same questio. Money doesn't always buy you the best or better. The advantage of these clubs is they can carry 40 kids per age group. a great gold/premiers team a mid level team and the developmental team....parents will keep on the hopes of their kid reaching that premiere team. but in the meanwhile the payments keep coming.
Think About It

Whittier, CA

#4183 Mar 6, 2014
If you are not on the top team your team is there to feed the higher level team. They will keep taking the best from the lower teams and move them up while everyone else stays stagnant. You see it now. Rangers #2 teams in both boys and girls stuck at Silver while their top team keeps moving up. If you are one of those on the mid level team your fees are paid to develop players to leave your team.

If you child is happy stay and pay the 2k, If you are there to tell others that you play for the Rangers/Strikers than you are there for the wrong reason. And by the way no one cares who you play for unless you are gold or premier and beyond. Tier 1 is a watered down version of silver elite and gold teams in comparison. Don't get too excited yet. SCDSL doesn't make you earn your level unfortunately.

LMSA tryouts are coming. Don't make that first payment or you are stuck at one of these other clubs. Money is gone at that point.
LMSA 2

Whittier, CA

#4184 Mar 6, 2014
Smartest thing said. If your kid is happy they will perform better.
EX LM Mom

Los Angeles, CA

#4185 Mar 7, 2014
I would rather pay an extra fee for better coaching. Just by saying you have a winning record doesn't make a program or a coach successful. How about developing players? I am not bashing the idea of club in LM but as a resident my daughter was unhappy with her volunteer coach that couldn't win or develop her skills. From the looks of watching other practices I saw some coaches have better practices but still that was it. No real growth of players. They are going to kick the ball around for a few years go to HS and stop there.

How many LMSA coaches have developed players into college soccer players? How many LMSA coaches have contacts to local college soccer programs?

Fullerton and Brea have that. Fullerton more so than Brea but their DOC has connections to Biola, Hope, Concordia Universities. All private schools with unlimited scholarship opportunities. Let me tell you having a winning record doesn't do anything nor does a trophy. I wish LMSA would do something about paying their coaches. It was tough watching my daughter suffer and the entire team that shouldn't have hap
other coach

Los Angeles, CA

#4186 Mar 7, 2014
Developing and winning go hand in hand. Winning teams dont keep winning trophies with underdeveloping practices and unsuccesfull coaching.
as for lmsa the luck of the draw on coaching but be aware there is Rec coaching in club and club coaching in Rec.
find the coach that fits u best dont knock the rest.
Jack

Montebello, CA

#4187 Mar 7, 2014
If the only connections Fullerton and Brea are offering are Biola, Hope, and Concordia, I wouldn't be too impressed with what they have to offer. I'd expect/demand only D-1 schools. Everything else is sub par.
LMSA 2

Whittier, CA

#4188 Mar 7, 2014
These schools go to the top clubs first. I would bet Biola doesn't have any Rangers on the roster.

Pay your extra fee, but if better coaching is automatic then why do teams lose as many players every year. The money doesn't change the caliber of competition. This helps these players develop. Paying 2k to play tier 3 is not very intelligent. Save your money and play Signature. Seriously every coach is great for the first 3 months to a year. After that it gets old.
Brea Parent

Los Angeles, CA

#4189 Mar 10, 2014
LM Parent is right. Parents think my kid needs to get a Division 1 scholarship or will get one bc they play club. but they aren't as educated in college athletics because if they were they would realize that going to Biola or Hope or Chapman is better because they aren't regulated by the NCAA. Those Universities are private schools that can offer as many scholarships as they choose. So having coaches with that connection with the club and those schools is key. My son received a scholarship from an NAIA school that competes against those schools. Free tuition all because his club coach and DOC made a couple calls and he got a scholarship at a small private school. He wasn't good enough for UCLA or USC but he could play at a lower level and thanks to the club program it worked.
Paying $500 a year for club is great but you definitely get what you pay for. And being honest winning doesn't mean anything to those college coaches. It's all about who you know.
Davis

Whittier, CA

#4190 Mar 11, 2014
other coach wrote:
Developing and winning go hand in hand. Winning teams dont keep winning trophies with underdeveloping practices and unsuccesfull coaching.
as for lmsa the luck of the draw on coaching but be aware there is Rec coaching in club and club coaching in Rec.
find the coach that fits u best dont knock the rest.
I don't total agree development and winning have little to do with each other. Top teams recruit better that is why there is so much turn over player movement like today in the NFL a middle of the pack team with a couple of great signings could now become a super bowl contender.
We definitely what the player to develop but if they are good as they are going to get then that is all you get. if someone walks into your camp that is better then that developed player they get left behind sorry to say but a 3 legged horse can't win the derby no matter how well they have been trained
top teams, top programs recruit they way to the top. I'm not against development IT MUST be done because you never know who can become what, so development will make them better but as far as teams winning it's about recruitment. I'm sorry that your kid had such a rought year last year really sorry
LMSA

Los Angeles, CA

#4191 Mar 11, 2014
Great to see Big Dog with an apology, and i thought he was the tin man....lol.
oh great wins aswell. I was watching the rec games There is so much young talent in our programs, raw talent. Providing them with great training and coaching they will see no need to leave if they take the step up.
I know a few teams are playing under the generic name La Mirada Soccer association, are we going to come up with a name?
Davis

Whittier, CA

#4192 Mar 11, 2014
LMSA wrote:
Great to see Big Dog with an apology, and i thought he was the tin man....lol.
oh great wins aswell. I was watching the rec games There is so much young talent in our programs, raw talent. Providing them with great training and coaching they will see no need to leave if they take the step up.
I know a few teams are playing under the generic name La Mirada Soccer association, are we going to come up with a name?
I keep try ang get the girls team names to pride but no one will bite LOL

The apology crack was really stupid
Jack

Montebello, CA

#4193 Mar 11, 2014
Brea Parent wrote:
LM Parent is right. Parents think my kid needs to get a Division 1 scholarship or will get one bc they play club. but they aren't as educated in college athletics because if they were they would realize that going to Biola or Hope or Chapman is better because they aren't regulated by the NCAA. Those Universities are private schools that can offer as many scholarships as they choose. So having coaches with that connection with the club and those schools is key. My son received a scholarship from an NAIA school that competes against those schools. Free tuition all because his club coach and DOC made a couple calls and he got a scholarship at a small private school. He wasn't good enough for UCLA or USC but he could play at a lower level and thanks to the club program it worked.
Paying $500 a year for club is great but you definitely get what you pay for. And being honest winning doesn't mean anything to those college coaches. It's all about who you know.
With all due respect, when it comes to college athletics, there is no way that Biola, Hope and Chapman are in any way better than attending a Division 1 school. First, they aren't exactly the academic powerhouses that many of the Division 1 schools are (Notre Dame was the Division 1 Champion this season for the men and UCLA for the women). If you are looking to be a college athlete, you obviously want to aim for the best. If you don't have what it takes, there is nothing wrong with that. Truthfully, you have to be among the top 1% of players in your sport to move to that next level. The problem is with parents who can't accept reality. Instead of pushing your kid to get an athletic scholarship no matter what, why not focus on them getting an academic scholarship and play on the college club team for fun? Sports should always be secondary, it is "student-athlete" after all.

FWIW, Chapman is Division III, and the NCAA does not allow members of Division III to award any type of scholarship or financial aid based on athletic ability. Also, USC doesn't have men's soccer....
Susan

Whittier, CA

#4194 Mar 11, 2014
Jack wrote:
<quoted text>
With all due respect, when it comes to college athletics, there is no way that Biola, Hope and Chapman are in any way better than attending a Division 1 school. First, they aren't exactly the academic powerhouses that many of the Division 1 schools are (Notre Dame was the Division 1 Champion this season for the men and UCLA for the women). If you are looking to be a college athlete, you obviously want to aim for the best. If you don't have what it takes, there is nothing wrong with that. Truthfully, you have to be among the top 1% of players in your sport to move to that next level. The problem is with parents who can't accept reality. Instead of pushing your kid to get an athletic scholarship no matter what, why not focus on them getting an academic scholarship and play on the college club team for fun? Sports should always be secondary, it is "student-athlete" after all.
FWIW, Chapman is Division III, and the NCAA does not allow members of Division III to award any type of scholarship or financial aid based on athletic ability. Also, USC doesn't have men's soccer....
Jack Chapman does allow scholarships. They are not allowed to give "athletic" scholarships. But if your an athlete and your a great student they can give any scholarship to any student athlete. People assume that all D3 athletes are walk ons. That is not the case some D3 schools athletic team are completely on scholarships. The school has flexibility however not to offer full scholarship. They can offer partial unlike D1 schools.
Jack

Montebello, CA

#4195 Mar 11, 2014
Susan, agreed, but if you see what I wrote (which is from their own site), "the NCAA does not allow members of Division III to award any type of scholarship or financial aid based on athletic ability". Technically, yes they are all walk-ons. If they are doing otherwise, they are committing NCAA violations. Also, D-1 schools often offer partial scholarships.
who you know

Los Angeles, CA

#4196 Mar 11, 2014
Jack wrote:
<quoted text>
With all due respect, when it comes to college athletics, there is no way that Biola, Hope and Chapman are in any way better than attending a Division 1 school. First, they aren't exactly the academic powerhouses that many of the Division 1 schools are (Notre Dame was the Division 1 Champion this season for the men and UCLA for the women). If you are looking to be a college athlete, you obviously want to aim for the best. If you don't have what it takes, there is nothing wrong with that. Truthfully, you have to be among the top 1% of players in your sport to move to that next level. The problem is with parents who can't accept reality. Instead of pushing your kid to get an athletic scholarship no matter what, why not focus on them getting an academic scholarship and play on the college club team for fun? Sports should always be secondary, it is "student-athlete" after all.
FWIW, Chapman is Division III, and the NCAA does not allow members of Division III to award any type of scholarship or financial aid based on athletic ability. Also, USC doesn't have men's soccer....
Thanks, for the intelligent clarification. Who you know only got the Brea player in a D3 school, So if the player just increased his student scores,he would walk on w.an academic scholarship and play for free. We are still digging out of those style failed politics from previous administration. But if you want to spend your $, go for it. It would be better spent on private additional lessons and enjoying playing close to home. Just sayin
Davis

Whittier, CA

#4197 Mar 12, 2014
Really we are talking about D1 schools?
There maybe hand full of kids that will be playing D1 from LM and if they are playing here they won't go to D1. I not sure that we have and premiere level kids in Lmsa U12 and above here now. Please remember that D1 school are competing worth each other to get kids and they look al over the world - does your kids play/train soccer everyday for 3 hrs- D1 kids do also they in honors classes because soccor skills won't get it done alone. This isn't football LOL

Just saying and BTW a D3 degree is pretty darn good- probably better then everyone here wasting time on this post- the degree is the thing and if after 2 years at a D3 school they are good enough they can transfer to a D1 school.

********Lets get the grades first and then worry about playing soccer.
Leon B13

Whittier, CA

#4199 Mar 12, 2014
Davis wrote:
<quoted text>
I keep try ang get the girls team names to pride but no one will bite LOL
The apology crack was really stupid

We dumped our name "Stampede" a few seasons ago we are just LMSA now , Bob I dont think people would take another teams name no offense. The best bet would be a complete new name for the entire club side. I prefer all of us under one name just shows more unification. Many of the Club programs all play under same name.
I think we should....
Davis

Whittier, CA

#4200 Mar 12, 2014
It's a running joke with other bod member that frequent here
LM res-coach

Whittier, CA

#4201 Mar 12, 2014
Davis wrote:
It's a running joke with other bod member that frequent here
Maybe we should get a clue and and come up with something that would represent us well. I'm sure the current club coaches would lobby for their team name, but I think we should come up with one that isn't currently being used. I do agree with Bobby that we should all play under a single club name. I don't see why this can't be in place before the fall season.
Davis

Inglewood, CA

#4202 Mar 12, 2014
it is a topic of discussion our "club/signature" group will make a recommendation to the main bod shortly.

Personally I like the girls as one group name and the boys another but im just one vote

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.

Rowland Heights Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News UCLA FOOTBALL NOTEBOOK: Neuheisel says Prince w... (Sep '10) 22 min tom wingo 29,954
News Costa Mesa bans vaping in public parks, regulat... 1 hr informer 2
Tuttle Mentally Disturbed, Just Look at the Lie... 2 hr Baca Fam Bam 14
City Council Meetings are Tuttle's Super Bowl 3 hr Baca Fam Bam 1
Tuttle excited for 1st & 3rd Wednesday's of the... 3 hr Baca Supporter 4
Pacheco Being Dumped for Rodriguez for Council 3 hr Just Wait 4
Quotes From Mayor Lozano on Pacheco about Hadse... 4 hr Remove 32
More from around the web

Personal Finance

Rowland Heights Mortgages