goo

i've never really been swayed by that kind of thinking. certainly good teams find a way to win, but the better a team is the less difficult the search for that "way" ought to be. every W is not equivalent. convincing wins say more of a team's talent and focus than nail-biters. i would tend to say that that outcome provides powerful evidence that cbhs is not #1 nationally, though i don't think that this is really the linchpin as hs soccer in other parts of the country is much more serious and more easily comparable to club level ball, anyway. it will be interesting to see whether brothers uses this game as a wake up call and turns it on going forwards or if this really was an indication of their strength or lack thereof (lack, of course, only in comparison to the reviews that they've been getting on this board, when mba plays well, they play very well and might be expected to make a game of it even against a side as well spoken of as brothers...but not to put it to 8 pks)

part of the reason that the 'center ref' does not often make an overrule the call is because too often in tssaa play, there is no center judge, as the two ref system is often used. this is also a reason that referees so infrequently get the call right. even when there are three, however, the referees that tssaa tends to get do not seem to have a great understanding of what offsides is. in particular, many (perhaps most) of them fall into the same trap of watching the ball and being unaware of the striker's position when it was played and calling him offsides even if he did not advance into an apparent offsides position until after the ball was played. i know this, because as a defensive player i took advantage of it, running what i called the "tssaa trap" which consisted of telling my defense to step (before if possible) but even just after a ball was played long, leaving the strikers in an apparent offsides position by the time that it got to them. i used this strategy primarily in games where the ref was particularly bad, but contrary to illini's post, i would have to say that on average, had i so desired, i could have had my defense step late and been successful in getting the (unmerited) call 95% of the time.

i thought that you played for bga...

yeah the grass thing was an issue. the complex (and here i echo soccer44) never seemed to take the high school championships very seriously - they always seem to wait until spring fling is out of the way before dressing everything back up for club state or region. maybe, for hs, it will be better.

same times i assume? mba-ryan: 5 bga-jp2: 7 ???

agreed entirely, lc. i'm glad that i read the rest of the thread before responding to that post, else i would likely have been quite redundant in my observations. there are simply too many factors outside of the control of anyone on the field that affect the outcomes of matches and even individual sequences of play for luck not to play at least some role, if not necessarily in determining the outcome, in every contest.

i'd be pleasantly surprised if this facility compared at all, much less favorably, to Mike Rose (i.e. that one in germantown or memphis). it'd be great, though.

yo, no idea about the times. as far as predictions go, i'll say: bga 3 - jp2 0 mba 2 - frhs 0 bga 3 - mba 1 jp2 2 - frhs 1

good luck fever fan. i think that you guys will make it through region. though i don't think that you'll be able to knock off bga in the semis, i'd be surprised if you didnt' meet and beat frhs in the third place game. feel free to feed off my doubt to get going in the first one, which i won't be able to make. look forward to watching you on thursday in any case. peace.

i believe that "ridiculous" is the word that i chose to use myself in describing any such attempt and "moving the ball nicely" from your post echoes "moving the ball with ease" from mine. jp2 - your team i am assuming - looked very good. significantly better than usn. i have no doubt that you are actually the better team, but i also know that usn has enough (albeit unequally distributed) talent that on the right day they could hang with you and make it a game. thursday obviously was not the right day. it seems equally obvious, however, that the referees helped to ensure that it was not the right day. i must admit that i did not have a great angle on the pk, but i did not see anything and generally, unless it is absolutely flagrant, pks are not called that early in the game. i notice, however, that you say nothing about the offsides, which was apparent even from where i was, or the fact that those two early goals swung the momentum in a way that at least partially dictated the outcome of the game. they did not end the game. their interaction with the apparent psychological weakness of the usn side was what ended the game a mere twenty minutes after kick off. if you genuinely think that you are nine goals better than usn, you should have no trouble sweeping through region and probably state as well. if you do not, it seems reasonable to search for alternative or at least supplementary explanation of the scale of the victory, if not the victory itself. the ineptitude of the officiating crew manifested itself not only in those two early calls, but throughout the game. you guys were on the wrong end of a few yourselves. in general, though there were many missed calls, the timing and nature of the two mentioned seemed most critical...which, after all, is why i mentioned them. it is good to hear that your starters were pulled midway through the second half; it squares with the high opinion that i have of your coach. in addition to being a classy guy, he knows soccer very well. your team's tactical game is much more sophisticated than most hs level sides' and is consequently fun to watch. of your team, i have two primary critiques. first, despite good ball movement in the middle of the field, your attacking sequences too often seemed to devolve into combination play between your strikers, with little support from the midfield except for the left winger. second, it seems that your perennial weakness is, in some ways, just that, it seems as though many of your players are simply not strong enough and can and are muscled off the ball. fixing the first and at least keeping the second in mind might aid your run to/through state. peace.

concur. some of their goals were quite nice. two headers off crosses were particularly impressive. in fact, not to blow up their spot, but it seemed that most of their goals were off crosses. some off set-plays and build-ups, others in transition. it would behoove whoever plays them next to have height, particularly on backside to deal with the former and speed at the outside defensive positions (so that center back not forced to commit outside and leave middle open - another possibility = playing two center backs, as in flat four) to deal with the latter. what were the other outcomes from the first round? what are the other second round matchups? is there already a thread for those?

yeah, watching the game i was wondering the same thing. the referee gave away the first two goals on an unmerited pk and a missed (indisputable) offsides call in the first ten minutes. jp2 capitalized on the momentum that those goals generated for them and the confusion that they caused within the usn squad, including a coupla uncharacteristic mistakes from the usually solid sweeper, and put in two more before the midway point of the first half. after that the usn side, with few exceptions, displayed a complete lack of heart, character, and pride as they more or less rolled over, while jp2 continued to play solid ball, maintaining shape and moving the ball with ease. they scored their last three of four goals in the second half of the second half after usn pulled several starters including a coupla defensemen and the keeper. while it is ridiculous to blame a 9-0 loss on the officiating, one cannot help but look not only at the fact that the first two goals were given away, but that it is pretty much undeniable that those two calls (well, one call and one lack thereof) contributed to the confusion that led to the next few goals, which in turn led to the demoralization and ultimate benching of starters that led to the remaining goals. jp2 played a level of ball against the unspirited usn side that i am unsure the latter could have matched even on a good day, with good officials, but it is a shame that there will always be that tiny shread of uncertainty. after all during the regular season, the game was fairly evenly matched and was decided 1-0 in favor of jp2 with little time remaining. it's not fair and can't feel good for either team, though better, certainly, for the victors who even without any help were deserving of the W.

high school will never be club level. that's preposterous. the occasional hs team will be able to beat the better sophomore club sides, but infrequently and only on the strength of older travel players whose teams would crush said hs team.

brothers always has great talent and every once in while (think '03) has an almost unbeatable squad. in those years, however, it has seemed to be the case that they had players from a dominant club team. is that the case this year? is the reason that tnfc 88, which seems to be the most dominantside that the state has produced in a while, doesn't have an answer because they're so spread out? but, aren't there like five or six of you kids over @ BGA? what's the deal there?

that makes a huge difference. though i haven't seen cbhs this year, based on what i saw of jpII (granted it was earlier in the season), i would not pick them to go toe to toe with the big guys. though they've surprised me thus far, i still probably wouldn't have picked them at home and certainly won't pick them in memphis (in addition to home field advantage to brothers, that drive (if fri) and the inevitable shenanigans of hotel stays (if sat) leave teams exhausted. on the other hand, mad props to that program for really turning it up this year. if they ever toughen up - they've really seemed like a finesse side without much physical game ever since the days when the only had a jv squad - they could take their place as one of the stronger programs in dII. they certainly seem to have the talent base and coach to do so.

akula, i've enjoyed several of your posts on other threads, and i love parts of your arguments here, but disagree rather strongly with your conclusion. i like the idea (found in a later post) that, at least in the US, soccer is fairly pure insofar as it is free of commercialist taint. i also agree absolutely that coaches are role models for their players and should teach them not only soccer, but values. where i think that i disagree is on exactly which values you want to teach your players. while there is something intrinsically valuable in adhering to reasonable regulations consensually committed to, the same is not true of rules that are unfair, unwise, or despotic in content OR ENFORCEMENT. i would never teach my players to unthinkingly follow rules regardless of how it will adversely affect others, precisely because i do not think that it is the right thing to do. my reasoning in not turning myself in as the coach in a Tullahoma-like situation would be that it would be unfair to my team to erase their achievement for the sake of a rule whose spirit had not been violated. the rule is designed to keep schools from using part time students to bolster their programs, or from the other angle, to keep kids from using school only for sports. this was not the situation at tullahoma and no crime had been intentionally committed and no materially unfair advantage derived. consequently, while in acknowledgment of the mistake some light penalty might be acceptable, i could not conscionably negate the honest, legitimate efforts of my team for the sake of rules whose spirit was not binding in this situation and would hope to teach my kids to know better, too. lest my kids think that i was acting dishonorably and think that it was alright, i would explain to them the nature of the situation, encourage to consider the facts outline above, and explain that there were three courses of action: turning ourselves in, asking the kid in violation to stop playing, or continuing to compete with the kid on the roster. i would try to steer them towards one of the latter options and hope that they chose the last and risked their success on behalf of their senior, but would not obligate them to do so. in responding in this manner, i would be teaching them three things, directly and indirectly: 1.) to always make sure that their actions are morally justifiable on grounds other than "someone in charge said so." 2.) to believe in the legitimacy of democratic decision-making 3.) to take responsibility for their actions, by outlining the possible ramifications and implications of each alternative and letting them choose between. i value all of these things more than blind adherence to arbitrary rules in situations where the author and enforcer of the rules acts without a sense of justice. i mean to present this as an alternative frame in which to interpret the situation and do not assume your position on any of the issues thus reframed (ex: i would not conted that you believe in "blind adherence to arbitrary rules" when viewed as such) and hope that it is not offensive. peace. p.s. as is my wont (just ask manu721), i outdid you on the "novel" front

i'm gonna echo soy and ask how you know this. not that i necessarily disbelieve you, but after so much conjecture as to his identity, for you to just spit it out like it's common knowledge is interesting. can anyone on the FRHS team, which has long denied knowledge of his identity comment on whether or not it is this gallagher character?

to return to this observation briefly. certainly, efforts at reform the extant system are more likely to be successful than efforts to create a new one and should be worked towards. i would point out two things, before returning to agreeing with you. first, if situations do get bad enough, one should be willing to consider more serious measures even if they are more difficult. second, i feel that if we are able to legitimize the idea that breaking away from TSSAA is a feasible option, it will not only become a feasible option, but will be a powerful tool in leveraging TSSAA to deal more seriously with the soccer community's complaints. it would be ideal (and is probable) that with concerted effort and the kind of discussion that this board has facilitated, no extra-systemic action will be necessary. i agree whole-heartedly with the gist of what you said and commend your commitment to improving the situation. now, back to the proposed rule, which seems to be of immediate concern...

too true. also true that it will - no, i'm not willing to concede its inevitability - that it would hurt the level of soccer played in the state. it is also true that complications like those brought uniden, involving which player to make ineligible are troublesome. the policy, as uniden pointed out, has no real grounding, high school/club coaches are almost never the same - i can think of only one exception off the top of my head and she coaches girls. it seems painfully obvious that kids who go to the same school, live near each other, and like each other would play with the same, local club - there's nothing conspiratorial about it. most club teams are formed when kids are eight, and sometimes now, even seven years old. given that this is the case, the idea that they exist primarily or even secondarily as vehicles to advantage one high school or another is simply preposterous. club teams offer a place for kids of all ages, including HS, to get better training and become better players - they function in the interest of individuals, not schools. any benefits that accrue to particular schools are incidental. if as a high school coach, you feel that other coaches are deriving a benefit from the system that you are not, encourage young kids that will end up in your school to get involved in club, you'll be doing a favor to them, yourself, and everyone who plays with against them and gets to compete at a higher level as a result of their training. coacht - you seem to be the most in the loop about the content of the proposed rule. do you also know where, within, TSSAA this debate is taking place and who one might contact to either get more information or help to see the harm that the measure would do?

yeah. i didn't think there was much doubt after he posted during one of their games last year. don't know why he'd go out of his way screw ryan over, though, that's too much work to have been inspired even by FRHS's intense rivalries. i would bet that he is just some over-zealous fan (probably a current student, but could have grad'd and be living in the area) who, having an otherwise pathetic life, attempts to live vicariously through the efforts of the ryan team. the more intense the responses to his posts, the more he feels delusionally connected to something he is not a part of...just conjecture. i apologize to ROB if i'm wrong and extend my sympathy if i'm right.

alright, dude, i'd not consider my posts to be 'essays' and certainly don't think that they are motivated by any desire to 'show off how smart' i am. like i said, if you don't want to read them, don't. i apologize if you feel as though i'm trying to to boss you around and i'm sorry if i offended you at some point along the way. i hope that we can leave this tangential, personal altercation aside and focus on the content of the thread, which i do feel strongly about and hope that you do too and that that's why you've been keeping up with the thread. the more people involved in the discussion and the more ideas on the table, the better, feel free to participate. sorry again. hope we can put it behind us. peace?

akula21- that's a great point. i wouldn't be surprised if there are others like you out there. i'm not sure what the answer is. one hopes that there is some way to address both your concern and the others. can't think of anything off the top of my head, but i'll work on it. any ideas from anyone?

G- wow! i haven't heard anything about that, though you are much more in the loop than i am. that's completely unacceptable and even more arbitrary than some of the things that are wrong right now. i have difficulty believing that even TSSAA would seriously consider something that out of line, though perhaps that is simply naivete. if you hear anything more concrete, be sure to let people know so that they can do something about it! Coacht- are you talking about the old rule that allows games outside of school during the season to be no larger than 6 v 6 or is this information regarding the proposed new rule? if the latter, do you have any idea what the rationale is, how it would be enforced, who is supporting it (disgruntled, losing coaches?), or anything else? while the limit of six is less likely to be binding on many teams, it is still profoundly arbitrary and potentially harmful to the development of young players. furthermore it seems that TSSAA would be getting into the business of trying to regulate people's choices outside of what should be its realm of action (not that prohibiting players from practicing or playing soccer in other leagues during the season is not, but no reason to add to a bad record...) to the two of you above, i apologize for including this next on the same post, but am weak enough to feel that i must. manu721- if you prefer not to read longer posts, that's fine, understandable even, but don't comment on them if you haven't read them or involve yourself in a conversation if you're not interested enough in it to read what's being said.

As expected G, you make some quite valid arguments. I think I'll respond to some of the things that you said point by point: 1.) Perhaps giving the organization to the coaches in a direct way is not the best of plans - they/you do have a lot to do already - but it does not seem illogical to establish a separate administrative office to coordinate soccer. Because it would only be one sport, it would be smaller and almost definitionally less unwieldy and more responsive to SOCCER (rather than football and other) coaches even if they did not run it. As to "regulating all of the sports in TN" the job is as preposterous as you make it sound and any sport that tries to participate in such a venture (i.e. TSSAA) must recognize that in doing so it cedes power over itself to whoever (i.e. football coaches) runs the organization and puts itself at their mercy. 2.) It is the TSSAA's job to enforce the rules - true - but with power comes responsibility and it is irresponsible to be uncompromising and unthinking in their application. While one can make the argument that the strict enforcement of the rules will serve as an example for others, one might also look at the flip side and see that other teams who are aware of the situation will be much less likely to turn themselves in when they realize they are violating the rules if they aren't able to trust that they will be treated fairly....and i for one wouldn't blame them. Rules are only effective as long as people believe and have reason to believe in their fairness, particularly when they are dependent on the willing acquiescence of those governed by them. I am far removed from both the Tullahoma and Riverdale situations, but I can only shake my head and empathize. While TSSAA makes exceptions for ODP on a fairly regular basis, that program is more an every once in a while (usually once a month) kind of thing. The place that you really get better is usually club, as it meets more frequently and locally...and TSSAA has never, to my knowledge made an exception for it. When we step back for a moment, too, and consider the fact that high school athletics should be about the kids involved, we have to wonder why policies that keep players from developing are accepted without question by those who ought to be protecting their interests, including their parents, their coaches, and themselves. Is it just easier or am I missing something? BigG (and anyone else who'd like to step to the plate - props to the Express already) I'd be very interested to hear why we ought to continue to stand by as arbitrary regulations stunt the development of players across the state by preventing them from practicing with club teams during the regular season and playing ball in the spring rather than the fall, thereby decreasing the number of opportunities for them to be scouted (see other posts if unacquainted with this process)? These are the most egregious TSSAA policies and they affect all players rather than a few unlucky teams each year (not that that's ok). it seems to me that the only legitimate reason to continue to exist within TSSAA would be that we felt as though our (the soccer community's) best interest's were respected. the most compelling evidence of that, more convincing than overturning the Tullahoma ruling or apologizing to Riverdale (both of which ought to be done anyway) or using a more reasonable certification process for referees, would be to move the soccer season to the fall, or at the very least remove restrictions on outside practices, though both would be best. peace.

ManU721- did you read the post? i pointed to four specific things that TSSAA is doing wrong and that a different organization could do to make "whatever [my] problem is better." If you disagree with any of the critiques, make an intelligent post, otherwise don't feel compelled to interject fluff into what should be a serious conversation. Blackman Soccer Dad- What happened to your son is a travesty. Fortunately, most middle school teams are not members of TMSAA, TSSAA's middle school organization. While I was in middle school, I was able to simultaneously participate in school, club, and ODP ball, and I continued to improve at a a much higher pace than I did once I got into high school - it worked extremely well and HELPED rather than hurt the quality of middle school game the same way that reforms could help the quality of high school game. I was quite baffled when, upon entering high school, the rules suddenly changed - I looked for a rational answer as to why this would be the case and found none. Your point about access to college scouts is well taken. I shied away from making it myself because you inevitably have the poster who signs on and says "well most kids aren't going to play in college, so it doesn't matter..." Which argument I find to be somewhere between irrelevant (because some do) and simply an observation of the status quo (does it not seem to these posters that the fact that so few TN soccer players go on to play in quality college programs might have something to do with the fact that they're not getting opportunities to be scouted?) Unfortunately for soccer purists, i do not think that we will ever see the day when a majority of the best players forgo high school soccer, because the social aspect of things is so rewarding. I don't think that this is necessarily bad, i think that forcing kids to decide between club and high school would be forcing them to make a decision like the one your son made between ODP and middle school ball that's not fair. Instead, TSSAA should facilitate effective participation in both by conforming to national norms instead of allowing the football coaches to dictate which season soccer will be played in. Finally, though I agree with nearly all of what you've said, I feel that I must reiterate that while TSSAA's performance coordinating many other sports (though not all - see lacrosse for example) may be admirable, the only information relevant to the question of whether or not it is the best governing body for high school soccer is how well it serves the interests of high school soccer and high school soccer players. Looking objectively at the situation, I would contend that it betrays those interests in several significant ways and if it cannot be pressured to reform from within, it should be taken out of the picture entirely by efforts to build from without. BigG and Coacht - I respect your insights and would love to hear you weigh in more substantively on the particulars of the issue.