Re: CPP IN FULL FORCE THIS WEEKEND.

by pull_your_line 08/04/14, 11:07 am

From my understanding Plano does not recognize this rule, is this true? That said can someone one a plano team play for a lh team?
If so how do they go about it?

by Guest 08/04/14, 11:28 am

pull_your_line wrote:From my understanding Plano does not recognize this rule, is this true?

True. PPL decided not to adopt any form of CPP yet.

pull_your_line wrote:That said can someone one a plano team play for a lh team?

Yes. As long both the PPL and LH team are from the same club, and the player in question is eligible to play in the age group in question, i.e. an "age pure" '00 (U14) can't play in a U13 game.

pull_your_line wrote:If so how do they go about it?

LH team coach would have to ask for it and file appropriate paperwork with LH age group commissioner at least 48 hours prior to game time.

by KnKsDad 08/04/14, 11:48 am

I really don't give a flip who's a lifer or gray beard on here or if you're a ref or whatever, bottom line is that this rule is unfair in the manner in which it is being used if in fact lower ranked teams are borrowing players from higher ranked teams. Even if it is true that the teams using CPP have lost more times than they've won, doesn't make it right to use it in this manner because all it takes is one time to potentially alter the course of a team through advancement or relegation. Ask a club like Lady Aztecs what they think of this rule. Maybe they are in favor of it, but I doubt it. It would suck if they were relegated due to the impact from this rule. Ask other clubs like Andromeda, Fever or Wichita Falls to name a few, what they think of the rule. This rule clearly favors the big clubs and to say otherwise is being disingenuous imo.

by jsullivan81 08/04/14, 11:53 am

KnKsDad wrote:I really don't give a flip who's a lifer or gray beard on here or if you're a ref or whatever, bottom line is that this rule is unfair in the manner in which it is being used if in fact lower ranked teams are borrowing players from higher ranked teams. Even if it is true that the teams using CPP have lost more times than they've won, doesn't make it right to use it in this manner because all it takes is one time to potentially alter the course of a team through advancement or relegation. Ask a club like Lady Aztecs what they think of this rule. Maybe they are in favor of it, but I doubt it. It would suck if they were relegated due to the impact from this rule. Ask other clubs like Andromeda, Fever or Wichita Falls to name a few, what they think of the rule. This rule clearly favors the big clubs and to say otherwise is being disingenuous imo.

If you are that against it, and clearly you are, then do something about it. Go play in a league that has not adopoted it. I believe the QT for Plano is coming up. But, most leagues adopted it years ago. LH was late to the party.

by 00scrmom 08/04/14, 11:56 am

Oh look, it's my favorite topic... Shocked

by Guest 08/04/14, 12:06 pm

Wonder what happened to AtmAg on this...thought he /she was going to publicly shame anyone who abused this rule....after being so adamant Sting had too much PRIDE to do it.

by intrinsic 08/04/14, 12:39 pm

KnKsDad wrote:I really don't give a flip who's a lifer or gray beard on here or if you're a ref or whatever, bottom line is that this rule is unfair in the manner in which it is being used if in fact lower ranked teams are borrowing players from higher ranked teams. Even if it is true that the teams using CPP have lost more times than they've won, doesn't make it right to use it in this manner because all it takes is one time to potentially alter the course of a team through advancement or relegation. Ask a club like Lady Aztecs what they think of this rule. Maybe they are in favor of it, but I doubt it. It would suck if they were relegated due to the impact from this rule. Ask other clubs like Andromeda, Fever or Wichita Falls to name a few, what they think of the rule. This rule clearly favors the big clubs and to say otherwise is being disingenuous imo.

I agree with you 100% but there isn't much for the smaller club to do other than resolve to train the team so well that the impact on us is minimal.

by midfieldersdad 08/04/14, 01:26 pm

Before the implementation of CPP. A LH board member said to me, the CPP rule will best observed ungoverned to identify issues going forward. How's that for wisdom? Seems to me, the the playing field would be leveled by allowing all players registered in NTX eligible to play on any team in LH not just by club affiliation.

by soccersounder 08/04/14, 01:44 pm

KnKsDad wrote:I really don't give a flip who's a lifer or gray beard on here or if you're a ref or whatever, bottom line is that this rule is unfair in the manner in which it is being used if in fact lower ranked teams are borrowing players from higher ranked teams. Even if it is true that the teams using CPP have lost more times than they've won, doesn't make it right to use it in this manner because all it takes is one time to potentially alter the course of a team through advancement or relegation. Ask a club like Lady Aztecs what they think of this rule. Maybe they are in favor of it, but I doubt it. It would suck if they were relegated due to the impact from this rule. Ask other clubs like Andromeda, Fever or Wichita Falls to name a few, what they think of the rule. This rule clearly favors the big clubs and to say otherwise is being disingenuous imo.

I'm glad you mentioned the LAs....

I happen to be great friends with the Boss Man over there.... I got a C-Note that says the LAs say: "I don't care who the big clubs put in front of us, we just play"... In fact, I guarantee that it motivates the LAs to get to a place where they CAN use the CPP....

New Eastside soccer motto: JUST PLAY

Just for fun sake, I wish ole Eastsider Higdon was around to comment on this one... My guess is he would agree with you...

by 00scrmom 08/04/14, 02:44 pm

midfieldersdad wrote:Before the implementation of CPP. A LH board member said to me, the CPP rule will best observed ungoverned to identify issues going forward. How's that for wisdom? Seems to me, the the playing field would be leveled by allowing all players registered in NTX eligible to play on any team in LH not just by club affiliation.

Like that idea but boy i could see that really stirring up the pot!!

by intrinsic 08/04/14, 03:31 pm

midfieldersdad wrote:Before the implementation of CPP. A LH board member said to me, the CPP rule will best observed ungoverned to identify issues going forward. How's that for wisdom? Seems to me, the the playing field would be leveled by allowing all players registered in NTX eligible to play on any team in LH not just by club affiliation.

Isn't that exactly what academy (U10 and younger) does?

by KnKsDad 08/04/14, 04:57 pm

soccersounder wrote:
KnKsDad wrote:I really don't give a flip who's a lifer or gray beard on here or if you're a ref or whatever, bottom line is that this rule is unfair in the manner in which it is being used if in fact lower ranked teams are borrowing players from higher ranked teams. Even if it is true that the teams using CPP have lost more times than they've won, doesn't make it right to use it in this manner because all it takes is one time to potentially alter the course of a team through advancement or relegation. Ask a club like Lady Aztecs what they think of this rule. Maybe they are in favor of it, but I doubt it. It would suck if they were relegated due to the impact from this rule. Ask other clubs like Andromeda, Fever or Wichita Falls to name a few, what they think of the rule. This rule clearly favors the big clubs and to say otherwise is being disingenuous imo.

I'm glad you mentioned the LAs....

I happen to be great friends with the Boss Man over there.... I got a C-Note that says the LAs say: "I don't care who the big clubs put in front of us, we just play"... In fact, I guarantee that it motivates the LAs to get to a place where they CAN use the CPP....

New Eastside soccer motto: JUST PLAY

Just for fun sake, I wish ole Eastsider Higdon was around to comment on this one... My guess is he would agree with you...

I don't disagree with you, that's what ballers do, they just play. That's what our team would do. On the front end weekend of spring break we play a Sting team that we are battling with for a top spot that's 16 strong (not meaning to say that they used CPP in that one, I don't know, but they coulda). We roll in with 12. No helping hand from anywhere. My DD goes down late in game and we end up taking her to emergency room and finish up game with 11. Not looking for any sympathy. I was just taking a little exception to the chatter/inference about it not making a difference, etc. If it don't make a difference, then why do it?

by jsullivan81 08/04/14, 05:04 pm

Sorry about your daughter. But if your club had another team, and had a choice to play with zero subs, or borrow, are you implying they would play with zero subs?

by Guest 08/04/14, 05:17 pm

All the dds are in the same age group. Only 11 on the field at one time using the same ball, same refs, same field.

The playing field is already level.

Play whoever shows up and do the best you can. This whining is unAmerican...lol...sound like Frenchies.

by 02Dad 08/04/14, 11:06 pm

silentparent wrote:cpp should only go up NEVER down. then it would be beneficial. as it is now, its a weapon to insure promotion or avoid relegation...

Really?

Have you never seen a DI player who really should be playing DII? Or A DII player who would be best suited for DIII play?

Either have the rule or not, but a silly artificial limiter like that makes no sense.

by soccersounder 09/04/14, 09:47 am

[/quote]

I don't disagree with you, that's what ballers do, they just play. That's what our team would do. On the front end weekend of spring break we play a Sting team that we are battling with for a top spot that's 16 strong (not meaning to say that they used CPP in that one, I don't know, but they coulda). We roll in with 12. No helping hand from anywhere. My DD goes down late in game and we end up taking her to emergency room and finish up game with 11. Not looking for any sympathy. I was just taking a little exception to the chatter/inference about it not making a difference, etc. If it don't make a difference, then why do it?[/quote]

I hear you Bro.

I understand both sides. My DD is currently Sting ECNL, but has suited up for Genesis, Mustangs and was on the Flagship Lady Aztecs 99 team. There was definetley a time I would not of liked the rule, but long ago I took my lead from Chivas at the LAs: Let's just play...

The rule kind of snuck up on us this year, but going forward, everyone will know the rules are when they sign-up to play...

by Guest 09/04/14, 10:42 am

The numbers should tell the story. If both the intent and actual use of CPP is to foster development, then the split between the # of CPP's that play "up" vs. the # of CPP's that play "down", should be close to 50/50. There's equal opportunity for development to occur both ways.

Hopefully, LHGCL will review those kind of numbers at the end of the Spring season, and if they see that the split is heavily tilted towards CPP's that played "down", then it would seem clear to me that the "spirit" of the rule is not really being followed. I would hope that if the numbers showed something like that, that LHGCL would try to "tweak" the rule to drive the coaches/clubs to use it more in it's intended manner.

by Guest 09/04/14, 10:57 am

bwgophers wrote:The numbers should tell the story. If both the intent and actual use of CPP is to foster development, then the split between the # of CPP's that play "up" vs. the # of CPP's that play "down", should be close to 50/50. There's equal opportunity for development to occur both ways.

Hopefully, LHGCL will review those kind of numbers at the end of the Spring season, and if they see that the split is heavily tilted towards CPP's that played "down", then it would seem clear to me that the "spirit" of the rule is not really being followed. I would hope that if the numbers showed something like that, that LHGCL would try to "tweak" the rule to drive the coaches/clubs to use it more in it's intended manner.

I don't think this lends itself to a simple 50:50 numbers solution. Suppose a club has one d1 team with 18 players and one D3 team. Suppose the bottom 3-4 players are not D1 material and rarely get minutes, so they CPP them down to D3 on a regular basis. Suppose none of the D3 players are anywhere close to D1 quality. Why would LH need to force this club to balance their CPP up vs. down?

And what to do with scenarios where a club has a top 3 D1 team and sends CPP "down" to a bottom dweller D1 team? LH shouldn't be micro managing how many players can go up or down IMO.

Folks should realize this rule gets you closer to ECNL...which is essentially wide open and lets a club roster 30 players on one team and pick and choose who dresses...how they see fit - no questions asked. You can even go get players from another state and add discovery players not rostered to your club...yet we don't see the whining about ECNL roster rules?

by Guest 09/04/14, 11:45 am

4-3-3 wrote:
bwgophers wrote:The numbers should tell the story. If both the intent and actual use of CPP is to foster development, then the split between the # of CPP's that play "up" vs. the # of CPP's that play "down", should be close to 50/50. There's equal opportunity for development to occur both ways.

Hopefully, LHGCL will review those kind of numbers at the end of the Spring season, and if they see that the split is heavily tilted towards CPP's that played "down", then it would seem clear to me that the "spirit" of the rule is not really being followed. I would hope that if the numbers showed something like that, that LHGCL would try to "tweak" the rule to drive the coaches/clubs to use it more in it's intended manner.

I don't think this lends itself to a simple 50:50 numbers solution. Suppose a club has one d1 team with 18 players and one D3 team. Suppose the bottom 3-4 players are not D1 material and rarely get minutes, so they CPP them down to D3 on a regular basis. Suppose none of the D3 players are anywhere close to D1 quality. Why would LH need to force this club to balance their CPP up vs. down?

And what to do with scenarios where a club has a top 3 D1 team and sends CPP "down" to a bottom dweller D1 team? LH shouldn't be micro managing how many players can go up or down IMO.

Folks should realize this rule gets you closer to ECNL...which is essentially wide open and lets a club roster 30 players on one team and pick and choose who dresses...how they see fit - no questions asked. You can even go get players from another state and add discovery players not rostered to your club...yet we don't see the whining about ECNL roster rules?

You don't see whining about ECNL rules for a couple of reasons:

1) ECNL is essentially already about "the best of the best". Name me all of the ECNL clubs that have a team in their age group that would be considered better than their ECNL team where people would whine about better players being brought in for competitive advantage?

2) ECNL only allows clubs 1 team per age group, and there is no "promotion/relegation" between upper and lower divisions of ECNL

3) All of the ECNL clubs are on a level playing field when it comes to bringing in "discovery" players during the year. With the NTSSA roster rules and LHGCL roster size limits, it is far more restrictive regarding mid-year additions.

...and I'm not talking about LHGCL "micro-managing" CPP. I'm talking about LHGCL taking a realistic look at the numbers. If they show a 60/40 split, probably don't touch it... If they show something more like an 80/20 or 90/10 split, it's hard to justify that the "spirit" of the rule is really being followed. In that case, consider some tweaks to the conditions of the rules that would hopefully drive different behavior. Would it be perfect? Probably not. Could it be improved in such a case? Probably.

What's the cutoff for when you take action? I don't know... but if the split was 80/20 or higher, I'd take a look at doing something.

by Guest 09/04/14, 11:59 am

BWG You're missing the point focusing on why people aren't complaining. Why did ECNL start in the first place? Best I can tell it's because the clubs wanted more control of how to manage this stuff...didn't want to be told what to do by some local or state administrators.

So the ECNL open roster rules are there because the big clubs want that flexibility.

Now we get to LH. Who carries the biggest stick within LH? The same clubs. You think this rule would even have been created if the big clubs didn't want it?

So the clubs want flexibility, and if LH doesn't accommodate them they could always break from LH and start their own closed league for their B and C teams similar to what u.s. club is doing in socal with EGSL.

So if the rule isn't going anywhere because the big clubs want it, the question becomes how do you implement it? Trying to control "up" from "down" doesn't solve any of the perceived abuse issues. If I'm seeking competitive advantage I can do the same things within a division as I can in a lower division.

I think you set the # of CPPs allowed and leave it alone. If the rule doesn't work, remove it completely.

by Guest 09/04/14, 12:33 pm

4-3-3 wrote:BWG You're missing the point focusing on why people aren't complaining. Why did ECNL start in the first place? Best I can tell it's because the clubs wanted more control of how to manage this stuff...didn't want to be told what to do by some local or state administrators.

So the ECNL open roster rules are there because the big clubs want that flexibility.

Now we get to LH. Who carries the biggest stick within LH? The same clubs. You think this rule would even have been created if the big clubs didn't want it?

So the clubs want flexibility, and if LH doesn't accommodate them they could always break from LH and start their own closed league for their B and C teams similar to what u.s. club is doing in socal with EGSL.

So if the rule isn't going anywhere because the big clubs want it, the question becomes how do you implement it? Trying to control "up" from "down" doesn't solve any of the perceived abuse issues. If I'm seeking competitive advantage I can do the same things within a division as I can in a lower division.

I think you set the # of CPPs allowed and leave it alone. If the rule doesn't work, remove it completely.

Uncle... having flashback's to fall of 2010... drunken

by jsullivan81 09/04/14, 01:00 pm

For the umpteenth time, LH did not create this rule. They only adopted it. Other soccer associations adopted it many many moons ago. LH was late in doing so. If you don't like it, you have options.

by SD69 09/04/14, 02:24 pm

NTX adopted it. LH followed suit half a season later.

by fatherofoneplayer 09/04/14, 02:27 pm

soccerdad1969 wrote:NTX adopted it. LH followed suit half a season later.

Gore invented it as well as the internets.

by InaB 09/04/14, 02:37 pm

And Sarah Palin saw it from her living room window! Very Happy

by Sponsored content

Join Heath Soccer Academy (Rockwall area)	29/08/24, 10:58 pm	socroc
Join Heath Soccer Academy (Rockwall area)	29/08/24, 11:02 am	socroc
09/10 COMPETITIVE TEAM IN ROCKWALL AREA	17/08/24, 02:26 am	Jumpman
Last call Solar 09/10 Rockwall	22/07/24, 10:48 am	socroc
Last call Solar 09 Rockwall	22/07/24, 10:15 am	socroc
Solar 09 NPL NTX (Rockwall)	15/07/24, 08:15 pm	socroc
Solar 09 NPL NTX (Rockwall)	15/07/24, 06:35 pm	socroc
Solar 09 NPL NTX (Rockwall)	15/07/24, 05:18 pm	socroc
Solar 09 NPL NTX (Rockwall)	26/06/24, 10:29 am	socroc
2008G Dallas Texans Tryouts (Final 1-2 spots)	26/06/24, 10:20 am	Dallas Texans East
2008G Dallas Texans Tryouts	26/06/24, 09:52 am	Dallas Texans East
Solar 07 Spear DII Classic League	25/06/24, 01:42 pm	socroc
Solar 06B RL and DI Classic	25/06/24, 01:34 pm	socroc
RSC 11' GCL w/Coach Adam	23/06/24, 01:15 pm	acst
Oh Yeah! movin' on UP 09's	23/06/24, 09:58 am	acst
Open Practice	20/06/24, 10:00 am	Coach Jim
BvB '06 Gold D-1 Coach Chris Obara formerly with Ayses	17/06/24, 11:18 am	BiroBiro
Renegades 2016G and 2017G North Blanton	16/06/24, 06:30 pm	tareyncarol
FCP Dynamos 2010B - Looking For Players	16/06/24, 05:02 pm	fcpcoach
Solar 2014B Williams - White - Needing 2 more players	09/06/24, 02:39 pm	Marvelousmar
RSC ELITE CAC	09/06/24, 12:10 pm	acst
RSC 08Clark	02/06/24, 05:43 pm	acst
Sting 2011 Boys ECNL RL NTX	02/06/24, 06:17 am	Jumpman
NTX Celtic 2011B ECNL-RL-NTX Opportunity	01/06/24, 11:04 pm	FSFFL
NTX Celtic 06/07G ECNL-RL-NTX Opportunity	01/06/24, 10:49 pm	FSFFL