Welcome to the TTP community
Be apart of something great, join today!
Very Important VMSL Development for 2005/06
- Thread starter Regs
- Start date
The number of teams in Premier has nothing to do with improving the quality of senior soccer... zip.. nothing...
How does this improve the quality of soccer? There is nothing magical in the number of teams a league has in its top division at all. No matter how many teams you have there will be teams at the bottom of the table.
This is not an issue like in the pros where bottom teams hurt the gates for home teams when they come calling as attendance is not an issue in the VMSL Premier. It is not an attendance driven league.
The idea of playoffs to go down is fair but coach10 is right that it can be a big issue with fields as those playoffs would be occurring at a bad time of year if the weather has led to lots of game cancellations. The idea though has merit.
This is all good stuff in theory but it defies the reality of what is going on with teams and/or the club system in the VMSL. The VMSL Premier league would be far better to look at other sports like lacrosse and its player/draft system and the old days of the Pacific Coast League where player movements were very much restricted and clubs had strong control over player movements and could command a small fee to move a guy.
If you are in Premier today, ask yourself if the teams overall are stronger today than say four years ago or before CAT? Whatever your answer both the problem and solutions lie elsewhere than fixating on the number of teams you have in your upper division. Reducing the number of teams is a solution in search of a problem to solve.
There has to be some vision in the future of senior soccer and the number of teams has less to do with the quality of soccer than many, many other issues that never get discussed.
Unfortunately in most amateur sports, vision and direction run together so long as it serves the interests of the independent affiliates.
How does this improve the quality of soccer? There is nothing magical in the number of teams a league has in its top division at all. No matter how many teams you have there will be teams at the bottom of the table.
This is not an issue like in the pros where bottom teams hurt the gates for home teams when they come calling as attendance is not an issue in the VMSL Premier. It is not an attendance driven league.
The idea of playoffs to go down is fair but coach10 is right that it can be a big issue with fields as those playoffs would be occurring at a bad time of year if the weather has led to lots of game cancellations. The idea though has merit.
This is all good stuff in theory but it defies the reality of what is going on with teams and/or the club system in the VMSL. The VMSL Premier league would be far better to look at other sports like lacrosse and its player/draft system and the old days of the Pacific Coast League where player movements were very much restricted and clubs had strong control over player movements and could command a small fee to move a guy.
If you are in Premier today, ask yourself if the teams overall are stronger today than say four years ago or before CAT? Whatever your answer both the problem and solutions lie elsewhere than fixating on the number of teams you have in your upper division. Reducing the number of teams is a solution in search of a problem to solve.
There has to be some vision in the future of senior soccer and the number of teams has less to do with the quality of soccer than many, many other issues that never get discussed.
Unfortunately in most amateur sports, vision and direction run together so long as it serves the interests of the independent affiliates.
- Thread starter
- Admin
- #23
Reccos,
The standard and quality of play will increase in the long run, as will the competitiveness. Allowing teams in Premier to play each other twice a season will ensure that, something that couldn't be done with 14 teams.
Is the NHL a stronger league with 30 teams or 20?
On an individual basis, some players that were playing in premier will now filter down to the lower divisions. And those that don't will displace other premier players... in the end, you are going to have around 40 extra quality players (admittedly, I use the term quality loosely here) strengthening teams in the lower divisions... that may mean some CAT teams will also strengthen but who knows in that area.
The standard and quality of play will increase in the long run, as will the competitiveness. Allowing teams in Premier to play each other twice a season will ensure that, something that couldn't be done with 14 teams.
Is the NHL a stronger league with 30 teams or 20?
On an individual basis, some players that were playing in premier will now filter down to the lower divisions. And those that don't will displace other premier players... in the end, you are going to have around 40 extra quality players (admittedly, I use the term quality loosely here) strengthening teams in the lower divisions... that may mean some CAT teams will also strengthen but who knows in that area.
- Thread starter
- Admin
- #25
Reccos,
You editted your last post while I was making the above reply...
You editted your last post while I was making the above reply...
I actually look at it from the standpoint that when the CAT system and the 4 extra teams were introduced to the league, that was the solution looking for a problem to solve.
SofaKingGood
Member
If your gonna change the Premier then change the whole league. If they are using 12 as the magical number for teams in the Premier, then every Div should have 12 teams. That way there is no such thing as having a weakside, its a fair playing field. You play each team twice and there are no excuses. There are prob 10 Div 2 teams that would "self-relegate" themselves to a lower Div. It would be a messy first year to place all teams into a single Div with no A or B side Bullshite. One massive playoff tourny for one summer, then everything else will fall into place after that. Better to do this sooner than later as the problem is getting worse and worse year in year out.
I like the idea of having 12 teams in each division.... what other league has division 1 A , B, C in soccer??? I think it would make relegation/promotion worth playing for more.... so waht are we looking at then 8 divisions??? Premier and then down??
SofaKingGood
Member
excluding CAT there are 64 teams in the VMSL. If there are 12 teams per div, that means Prem-Div. 4
termatofylakas
Well-Known Member
SofaKingGood said:
So what happens to the 4 other teams? If you go by 12 per group that means 60 teams for your Prem-Div 4 league. Do you add a Div. 5 as well and bring in another 6-8 teams at least?
Sorry Regs about catching you like that.
It seems that more divisions and no CAT would be palatable to players and make more sense. CAT is not improving quality.
It would be interesting as a study if someone actually looked at the teams and clubs since CAT came in. I think they would find that it isn't working. It would also be interesting to see what teams use CAT during the season (up and down) and not just because the CAT side can't field a side but for other reasons like giving a Premier guy a game. It would be interesting to see the extent to which Premier teams have brought up guys and given them games. Some do and it works but is this happening all over.
To me the solution lies less with the number of teams in your top division but more in considering ideas like player drafts like local senior lacrosse for Premier teams. That would improve the quality of play at the Premier levels and likely div. 1 but agreed it is also complex and would require teams to scout and develop better working relations with youth teams to make this workable.
It seems that more divisions and no CAT would be palatable to players and make more sense. CAT is not improving quality.
It would be interesting as a study if someone actually looked at the teams and clubs since CAT came in. I think they would find that it isn't working. It would also be interesting to see what teams use CAT during the season (up and down) and not just because the CAT side can't field a side but for other reasons like giving a Premier guy a game. It would be interesting to see the extent to which Premier teams have brought up guys and given them games. Some do and it works but is this happening all over.
To me the solution lies less with the number of teams in your top division but more in considering ideas like player drafts like local senior lacrosse for Premier teams. That would improve the quality of play at the Premier levels and likely div. 1 but agreed it is also complex and would require teams to scout and develop better working relations with youth teams to make this workable.
SofaKingGood
Member
termatofylakas said:
Yes. I'm told a lot of teams apply to get in the VMSL. Div.5 would be the place to start if a team wants in.
Hands of Stone
New Member
john said:Seriously, if the Capitals have had to merge with a division 1 team and apparantly Weakside are in some serious trouble with numbers, drop them both and bingo,a twelve team premier division and everyone is happy
It is a stupid comment, but in fact it is the whole problem behind the 14 team league. Look at Sportstoon and Fireman merge to stay alive or Indo/Akal merge to move back to Premier or Trollers and DeepCove last year and now Old Peg lads this year to try and stay competitive. This never happened in the past where teams had to join year after year to stay competitive in Premier, they did it by having 11 starting spots on 10 very good VMSL Premier teams, and if you wanted a chance at the best soccer in B.C., thats where you played. But with two sides of 7 teams, you have to many starting spots and not enough talent. Move to 12 at least and if you can, move the league back to 10 team, where it was the best in this Country if not North America for Winter Mens Soccer.
hos
I remember back in the early 90's when there was 5 or 6 points between the 8th place team and the top team in the 10 team Premier Div. , now that is competition.
HOS makes a compelling case for the old format back in the late 80s and early 90s before expansion and is the first post that makes me reconsider my comments that reducing the number of teams may not be the answer to quality.
To get to 10 would be dramatic and probably impossible if done with the teams being onside for that kind of change.
The other issues right now are:
1. all players are unrestricted each year and there are now too many gypsies. This has to end. In the PCSL days back in the 60s if you were on the team even at the u/23 level, the club did not have to allow a transfer without payment and in those days some wanted $150 for a transfer to the Mainland League! Players didn't have the freedom of movement like they do now.
A related issue is the merging of teams that HOS notes and this has not been working. Firefighters-Sportstown is a good one and so is Clan Alumni-Columbus. Instead of four not too bad teams with a couple struggling to stay up you go to two. Is that progress? Maybe the 10 team idea will solve that kind of merger and loss of good teams and coaches.
2. municipal rules are affecting some teams who now have to spend more time getting addresses of players in their city to use their parks than scouting for new talent (not sure if this is still a problem but it was when I was coaching and is one reason I am not any longer). How can a club like Sapperton find enough New West players as compared to say Vancouver who don't do that crap anyway? I am not involved now so this may have been resolved and no longer an issue.
2. the CAT mess - end it. It is not working.
3. establish a transparent policy in the VMSL on adding new teams. Do new teams have to be in clubs or not? It appears that a lot of new teams are not CAT so I'd say this is a sign that CAT is not consistent with players interests and is not working.
The goal is for strong clubs by forcing the CAT onto Premier teams and it ain't working.
Maybe HOS should be commissioner and introduce the HOS plan for a new ten team circuit that is over and above Premier now and invite teams to join that loop and possibly consider one or two Island teams - this is controversial as teams don't like to travel and it is costly with no sponsors so this may be a lousy idea. Only take 10 or if justified by the quality of the team, go to 12.
Then realign the rest of the teams working out new numbers.
To get to 10 would be dramatic and probably impossible if done with the teams being onside for that kind of change.
The other issues right now are:
1. all players are unrestricted each year and there are now too many gypsies. This has to end. In the PCSL days back in the 60s if you were on the team even at the u/23 level, the club did not have to allow a transfer without payment and in those days some wanted $150 for a transfer to the Mainland League! Players didn't have the freedom of movement like they do now.
A related issue is the merging of teams that HOS notes and this has not been working. Firefighters-Sportstown is a good one and so is Clan Alumni-Columbus. Instead of four not too bad teams with a couple struggling to stay up you go to two. Is that progress? Maybe the 10 team idea will solve that kind of merger and loss of good teams and coaches.
2. municipal rules are affecting some teams who now have to spend more time getting addresses of players in their city to use their parks than scouting for new talent (not sure if this is still a problem but it was when I was coaching and is one reason I am not any longer). How can a club like Sapperton find enough New West players as compared to say Vancouver who don't do that crap anyway? I am not involved now so this may have been resolved and no longer an issue.
2. the CAT mess - end it. It is not working.
3. establish a transparent policy in the VMSL on adding new teams. Do new teams have to be in clubs or not? It appears that a lot of new teams are not CAT so I'd say this is a sign that CAT is not consistent with players interests and is not working.
The goal is for strong clubs by forcing the CAT onto Premier teams and it ain't working.
Maybe HOS should be commissioner and introduce the HOS plan for a new ten team circuit that is over and above Premier now and invite teams to join that loop and possibly consider one or two Island teams - this is controversial as teams don't like to travel and it is costly with no sponsors so this may be a lousy idea. Only take 10 or if justified by the quality of the team, go to 12.
Then realign the rest of the teams working out new numbers.
I heard from Ruben that Vancouver is now shifting to "residency" fields like other municipalities in the lower Mainland.
Before, teams that had a mix of players from over the Lower Mainland could always get a Vancouver field. This is now going to change, and may have a huge impact, as these teams may not be able to get a home field anywhere due to residency requirements, or clubs will now have to become regionally based.
How much this will be enforced in terms of checking player addresses, I don't know.
The potential impact is huge.
Before, teams that had a mix of players from over the Lower Mainland could always get a Vancouver field. This is now going to change, and may have a huge impact, as these teams may not be able to get a home field anywhere due to residency requirements, or clubs will now have to become regionally based.
How much this will be enforced in terms of checking player addresses, I don't know.
The potential impact is huge.
Gurps: if that is the case, there goes ANY chance of improving the quality of soccer. Teams like Sikh Temple draw guys with interests in being part of an ethnic group and they come from all over.
This is an issue that teams have to go the politicians on - the Parks Board. It is fuelled by small minded juvenile idiots who don't see that their kids will someday be affected by that.
Ice arenas have lacrosse and hockey and they cross all boundaries including other provinces. Yes, they pay more for the use but they don't pay anywhere near the amount to justify this inconsistent policy.
The next thing is they will say a North Van team cannot play in Burnaby or vice versa.
This is an issue that teams have to go the politicians on - the Parks Board. It is fuelled by small minded juvenile idiots who don't see that their kids will someday be affected by that.
Ice arenas have lacrosse and hockey and they cross all boundaries including other provinces. Yes, they pay more for the use but they don't pay anywhere near the amount to justify this inconsistent policy.
The next thing is they will say a North Van team cannot play in Burnaby or vice versa.
Reccos said:
I agree 100%. Residency works for kids teams, but not mens.
As long as the teams are paying for the fields, who cares?
Anyways, it will be interesting to see how much the City enforces it, because if they do, this whole Premier/Ten teams issue will be moot.
Since we seem to have wandered into what is wrong with the league, I would like to throw out a couple of observations.
In the last 10 years, provincial cup champions have come from the VMSL eight times.
The reigning club champions are from the VMSL. Should we really be concerned with the quality of the premier league given the above. Probably for the future, but it is difficult to use this as the motivating factor for the "proposed change".
With respect to gypsies, I think that the "alleged" payments to players is one of the factors creating a lack of loyalty to clubs. The focus has been switched to short term results rather than the building of strong club-like atmospheres. I would not look to the respective parks departments to confirm players' addresses as there is no way that they have the resources. That will not be a deterent to player movement. Transfer fees might work for premier players (from one year to the next) and may even provide an impetus for teams to try and develop players in lower divisions in a club like system.
Perhaps the CAT system would be a good vehicle if it was used in the context of one league with equal and multiple divisions, rather than as the "seperate" league it is now.
If a club has teams in Premier to Div 8, then CAT players until Cup time. Promotion and demotion only for non Cat and if they are not league winners, perhaps play against bottom team in play off. I know I was concerned about play off games but 10 team leagues would allow this.
Substitutions: 5 in Premier and in Division 1; Unlimited in the lower divisions (all of which would be considered development leagues) until cup play and then back to 5.
In the above discussion, the players in the CAT teams have been largely ignored. Part of the "Purpose" of the VMSL according to the constitutioin is to "expand" soccer. Of the 34 CAT teams currently registered, there are arguably enough players for another 20 teams, so we should really be looking at a league of 84 teams? Now throw in the "30" masters teams and U21's and you start to see ways to build clubs that give players multiple opportunities to develop and play no matter what their age or ability.
I feel that in the end, that is what the game is about.
In the last 10 years, provincial cup champions have come from the VMSL eight times.
The reigning club champions are from the VMSL. Should we really be concerned with the quality of the premier league given the above. Probably for the future, but it is difficult to use this as the motivating factor for the "proposed change".
With respect to gypsies, I think that the "alleged" payments to players is one of the factors creating a lack of loyalty to clubs. The focus has been switched to short term results rather than the building of strong club-like atmospheres. I would not look to the respective parks departments to confirm players' addresses as there is no way that they have the resources. That will not be a deterent to player movement. Transfer fees might work for premier players (from one year to the next) and may even provide an impetus for teams to try and develop players in lower divisions in a club like system.
Perhaps the CAT system would be a good vehicle if it was used in the context of one league with equal and multiple divisions, rather than as the "seperate" league it is now.
If a club has teams in Premier to Div 8, then CAT players until Cup time. Promotion and demotion only for non Cat and if they are not league winners, perhaps play against bottom team in play off. I know I was concerned about play off games but 10 team leagues would allow this.
Substitutions: 5 in Premier and in Division 1; Unlimited in the lower divisions (all of which would be considered development leagues) until cup play and then back to 5.
In the above discussion, the players in the CAT teams have been largely ignored. Part of the "Purpose" of the VMSL according to the constitutioin is to "expand" soccer. Of the 34 CAT teams currently registered, there are arguably enough players for another 20 teams, so we should really be looking at a league of 84 teams? Now throw in the "30" masters teams and U21's and you start to see ways to build clubs that give players multiple opportunities to develop and play no matter what their age or ability.
I feel that in the end, that is what the game is about.
The parks dept issues and residency is a huge issue as only clubs from large cities like Surrey and Vancouver can win at that game. They do have the means to clamp down and it is wrong that Premier teams included have to worry about that when trying to develop a soccer program. If you coach in places as I have it is a huge issue doing the lists and trying to find addresses that work.
coach10 notes the sub rule issue and CAT. Why not use the same sub rule that provincial and national championships use so that VMSL teams are an equal footing to other teams and provinces when it comes to cup play. We have top teams yes, so that is not an issue so far but I'd rather have our BC reps going to nationals having used the sub rules during the entire season and know how changes will impact the flow of their team's play and the chemistry.
Meaning: if you have 18 eligible to be on a team list and VMSL in its arrogance allows 5 and in provincial and national competition the rule says 5 subs during play stoppage and unlimited at the half - ie no sub slips, it is not advantageous to have been able to use that rule in all league play so you know what works best for your team.
Willi wrongly feels that this rule will destroy the game and be like a kids games where subs will be coming on and off all the time. The numbers and logic suggest otherwise.
Who in their right mind unless it is a blowout game will put the 7 subs on at half time and then make 5 other changes during play stoppage? I can't see it and I have never done that even in a summer league game and no one else I have seen has done it either.
The CAT teams are faced with pressure to play Premier guys who need a game or part of a game but if they have a full roster say 18 for the day, who sits out and doesn't get a game in that scenario. CAT don't work there.
Also, look at the pro leagues. They can bring reserves in in cup play in all sports so that makes the reserve system work.
In the VMSL, teams will transfer all the CAT guys who can play Premier to that team leaving cAT hardly able to field a team in any cup play. If they don't they either don't need the bodies or they would be stupid.
CAT should be ended or used all year including cup but that won't work ergo, CAT should die.
coach10 notes the sub rule issue and CAT. Why not use the same sub rule that provincial and national championships use so that VMSL teams are an equal footing to other teams and provinces when it comes to cup play. We have top teams yes, so that is not an issue so far but I'd rather have our BC reps going to nationals having used the sub rules during the entire season and know how changes will impact the flow of their team's play and the chemistry.
Meaning: if you have 18 eligible to be on a team list and VMSL in its arrogance allows 5 and in provincial and national competition the rule says 5 subs during play stoppage and unlimited at the half - ie no sub slips, it is not advantageous to have been able to use that rule in all league play so you know what works best for your team.
Willi wrongly feels that this rule will destroy the game and be like a kids games where subs will be coming on and off all the time. The numbers and logic suggest otherwise.
Who in their right mind unless it is a blowout game will put the 7 subs on at half time and then make 5 other changes during play stoppage? I can't see it and I have never done that even in a summer league game and no one else I have seen has done it either.
The CAT teams are faced with pressure to play Premier guys who need a game or part of a game but if they have a full roster say 18 for the day, who sits out and doesn't get a game in that scenario. CAT don't work there.
Also, look at the pro leagues. They can bring reserves in in cup play in all sports so that makes the reserve system work.
In the VMSL, teams will transfer all the CAT guys who can play Premier to that team leaving cAT hardly able to field a team in any cup play. If they don't they either don't need the bodies or they would be stupid.
CAT should be ended or used all year including cup but that won't work ergo, CAT should die.
As stated many times here before: the VISL has it sorted out. 10 teams per division all the way from Div 1 to Div whatever. No sides, just 10, 10, 10 etc. The play within each division is MUCH more competitive, regardless of division number. If you are a new team you start at the bottom and you will climb the divisions until you settle into your team's ability. Simple.
Totally agreed on the sub rules. Why no consistency?
Totally agreed on the sub rules. Why no consistency?
Members online
No members online now.
