CPP Rule Change

Yes, unless they just changed it but last year a girl could only play one classic game a day.

How hard is it to just say no CPP'ing players down to lower divisions? It is extremely rare that this rule has been used for development. 99.9% of the time it has been used to sway results and give teams wins and draws that they normally wouldn't get. I know it's just 1 player as opposed to 3 but I still think 1 player, especially that stud forward or shutdown sweeper, can have an effect on the outcome of a game. I now see why people complain about the powers that be at LH so much.

So, a club can only CPP 1 D1 player from the same age group down to a D2 or D3 team for any given game.

However, if I am reading the new rule correctly, there is nothing that would prevent a club from CPP'ing 3 ECNL players from the same age group to a D1, D2, or D3 team for any given game, correct?

I'm also not seeing anything that would prevent a club from CPP'ing 3 players from a younger D1 team to an older D2 or D3 team, or CPP'ing 3 players from a younger ENCL team to an older D2 or D3 team, correct?

I'm sorry, but talking about CPP is getting old and boring. Everyone knows your thoughts on the rule, but is seriously time to get on with it. There will eventually be changes to the rule maybe, but to think that the changes will be completely satisfying when they do get around to it.

The rule will be changed to some degree, but given that its primary use has been to help clubs maintain byes ($), I would not expect the changes to eliminate that.

Zizou wrote:I'm sorry, but talking about CPP is getting old and boring. Everyone knows your thoughts on the rule, but is seriously time to get on with it. There will eventually be changes to the rule maybe, but to think that the changes will be completely satisfying when they do get around to it.

I would politely disagree with you on this....."Change" only occurs if the opposition to an idea/way is voiced and voiced on a regular basis.

Confucius says:  ".......Doing away with CPP is the only true satisfying way to a fulfilled and meaningful life"

The rule does not differentiate between age groups. It is purely by division, so any age group eligible player from a higher division would be considered playing down. ECNL players would most likely be treated as D1 or possibly above D1 so only one of those players would be eligible to play in D2 or D3 for a single match. That isn't written, so it is yet to be seen how it will be interpreted.

The rules are typically very carefully written, so read them as they are printed without adding anything between the lines. Let's call it "strict constructionist interpretation" for those constitutional conservative types :-)

wittymgr wrote:The rule does not differentiate between age groups. It is purely by division, so any age group eligible player from a higher division would be considered playing down. ECNL players would most likely be treated as D1 or possibly above D1 so only one of those players would be eligible to play in D2 or D3 for a single match. That isn't written, so it is yet to be seen how it will be interpreted.

The rules are typically very carefully written, so read them as they are printed without adding anything between the lines. Let's call it "strict constructionist interpretation" for those constitutional conservative types :-)

That's not how the rule is written.

"A “division down” player is
defined as one who is rostered to a LHGCL team within the same age
group or older age group and from a higher division than that of the
Receiving Team."

I'm trying to keep an open mind and give the administrators of LHGCL the assumption that they have great reasons for their application of CPP but I'm out of reasonable arguments that support their case. I'd love to learn why this isn't a rule that is in place to disproportionately help the big clubs with multiple teams because the application of the rule most definitely is a disadvantage to independent teams that don't have the luxury of having other teams to borrow players from.

Professional teams send players down all the time for injury rehab but never to help them compete. CPP is akin to the Texas Rangers sending their studs down to Frisco to win a minor league championship or the Dallas Cowboys loaning out their studs to the Longhorns to win a national championship.

What's the worst thing you can do in professional sports? Cheating by having refs or players shave points, bet on the game, deflate balls, etc.. because it impacts the competitive fabric and legitimacy of the game and various leagues. LHGCL is basically legalizing cheating by the larger clubs and they can do it because they're the pinnacle of competitive talent in DFW. Nobody is forcing anybody to play in LHGCL and teams are dying to get in. If anybody doesn't like it then they're welcome to find a different league to play in and if it's not competitive then perhaps they can play up in age group. But most don't want to go that route because it's harder to sell to the parents, harder to recruit for that route since it's playing in relative obscurity and yet those are the limited options.

If anybody can make a case for CPP I'd love to hear it. The injury excuse is a red herring that has already been addressed by increasing the roster size to 18. In the end it's either sad or comical that we spend this much time, effort and money on a sport in a league that is rigged. Perhaps the life lesson that we're paying for our girls to learn is that life isn't fair.

CUZete90 wrote:

wittymgr wrote:The rule does not differentiate between age groups. It is purely by division, so any age group eligible player from a higher division would be considered playing down. ECNL players would most likely be treated as D1 or possibly above D1 so only one of those players would be eligible to play in D2 or D3 for a single match. That isn't written, so it is yet to be seen how it will be interpreted.

The rules are typically very carefully written, so read them as they are printed without adding anything between the lines. Let's call it "strict constructionist interpretation" for those constitutional conservative types :-)

That's not how the rule is written.

"A “division down” player is
defined as one who is rostered to a LHGCL team within the same age
group or older age group and from a higher division than that of the
Receiving Team."

The last sentence in my first paragraph covers that... It's not written, so it is yet to be determined how the league will deal with ECNL players that are NOT registered on a LHGCL team (dual rostered), but are on a NTSSA roster for a team that doesn't play in ANY league (tournament team). Remember Plano and Arlington teams have been considered "below D3" for QT and CPP purposes in the past.

CBTeamworks wrote:If anybody can make a case for CPP I'd love to hear it. The injury excuse is a red herring that has already been addressed by increasing the roster size to 18. In the end it's either sad or comical that we spend this much time, effort and money on a sport in a league that is rigged. Perhaps the life lesson that we're paying for our girls to learn is that life isn't fair.

Let me guess, you've never had an older kid in the league, have you? I have seen middle and high school aged rosters devastated by injury, illness, prom, and any number of other reasons. How many goal keepers does your team roster? Want to play that important game with a field player in the net? I've seen high school teams with two keepers have one out with a broken limb or ACL and another get a concussion. Same scenario.

How the coaches choose to use CPP is really what people are upset about...

wittymgr wrote:

CBTeamworks wrote:If anybody can make a case for CPP I'd love to hear it. The injury excuse is a red herring that has already been addressed by increasing the roster size to 18. In the end it's either sad or comical that we spend this much time, effort and money on a sport in a league that is rigged. Perhaps the life lesson that we're paying for our girls to learn is that life isn't fair.

Let me guess, you've never had an older kid in the league, have you? I have seen middle and high school aged rosters devastated by injury, illness, prom, and any number of other reasons. How many goal keepers does your team roster? Want to play that important game with a field player in the net? I've seen high school teams with two keepers have one out with a broken limb or ACL and another get a concussion. Same scenario.

How the coaches choose to use CPP is really what people are upset about...

This is the 04 forum and these are soon to be 6th grade girls with a roster size of 18. These aren't high school girls yet and injuries aren't that prevalent yet. If this rule is designed for high school players then apply it to high school players rather than 6th graders.

The coaches will coach to win the game. The coaches will use every rule to their advantage. It's the responsibility of the league to set rules that apply to each team equally rather than favoring the larger clubs with multiple teams. LHGCL has failed to do that and I can only assume that the attitude is that the leadership consists primarily of individuals that came from the larger clubs and they feel that they built this league and anybody that doesn't like rules that favor the larger clubs can find a new league or start a new league.

wittymgr wrote:

CUZete90 wrote:

wittymgr wrote:The rule does not differentiate between age groups. It is purely by division, so any age group eligible player from a higher division would be considered playing down. ECNL players would most likely be treated as D1 or possibly above D1 so only one of those players would be eligible to play in D2 or D3 for a single match. That isn't written, so it is yet to be seen how it will be interpreted.

The rules are typically very carefully written, so read them as they are printed without adding anything between the lines. Let's call it "strict constructionist interpretation" for those constitutional conservative types :-)

That's not how the rule is written.

"A “division down” player is
defined as one who is rostered to a LHGCL team within the same age
group or older age group and from a higher division than that of the
Receiving Team."

The last sentence in my first paragraph covers that... It's not written, so it is yet to be determined how the league will deal with ECNL players that are NOT registered on a LHGCL team (dual rostered), but are on a NTSSA roster for a team that doesn't play in ANY league (tournament team). Remember Plano and Arlington teams have been considered "below D3" for QT and CPP purposes in the past.

So to skirt that consideration, all a club needs to do is stash some ECNL players at the end of a PPL or APL roster, or will LHGCL start cross-referencing rosters on the ECNL website?

Also, am I correct that according to the wording of the rule, players rostered on a D1 roster of a younger age group would not be considered "division down" if they were CPP'd to a D2 or D3 team in an older age group.  For example (and this is just for the purpose of a real world example, not suggesting these particular teams would try to do this), let's say the receiving team is Solar Chelsea '04 East, playing in U12 D3.  Players from Solar Chelsea '05 Red playing in U11 D1, would NOT be considered "division down", because the rule specifically states players "rostered to a LHGCL team within the same age group or older age group".  Therefore, Solar Chelsea '04 East could receive up to 3 CPP players from Solar Chelsea '05 Red for a game as long as it's not one of the final 3 games of the season, correct?

And as long as Solar Chelsea 05 Red didn't have any of those 3 girls on their game day roster (for the same day).
Your scenario is accurate.

I believe that the league identified the most common method of CPP abuse (or misuse) and addressed that issue accordingly.

CBTeamworks wrote:

wittymgr wrote:

CBTeamworks wrote:If anybody can make a case for CPP I'd love to hear it. The injury excuse is a red herring that has already been addressed by increasing the roster size to 18. In the end it's either sad or comical that we spend this much time, effort and money on a sport in a league that is rigged. Perhaps the life lesson that we're paying for our girls to learn is that life isn't fair.

Let me guess, you've never had an older kid in the league, have you? I have seen middle and high school aged rosters devastated by injury, illness, prom, and any number of other reasons. How many goal keepers does your team roster? Want to play that important game with a field player in the net? I've seen high school teams with two keepers have one out with a broken limb or ACL and another get a concussion. Same scenario.

How the coaches choose to use CPP is really what people are upset about...

This is the 04 forum and these are soon to be 6th grade girls with a roster size of 18. These aren't high school girls yet and injuries aren't that prevalent yet. If this rule is designed for high school players then apply it to high school players rather than 6th graders.

The coaches will coach to win the game. The coaches will use every rule to their advantage. It's the responsibility of the league to set rules that apply to each team equally rather than favoring the larger clubs with multiple teams. LHGCL has failed to do that and I can only assume that the attitude is that the leadership consists primarily of individuals that came from the larger clubs and they feel that they built this league and anybody that doesn't like rules that favor the larger clubs can find a new league or start a new league.

CBT you make some good points, but I say your perspective is off a bit.. From a Ref perspective that handles the CPP forms each game. The CPP is used much more than you think AND the vast majority of the times is used by mid level clubs for legitimate injury issues... It IS used for the reasons you mention, but not close to the majority of the time. Even the small clubs use it frequently. Most common example, bring an 03 up to 02 because of injuries... Those type of teams generally have smaller rosters and CPP is a big help.

Injuries are a fickle part of the game. Injuries are not a valid excuse for open cheating. Play your roster. Don't give any coach an additional loophole because they will drive a Mack truck through it in an effort to do their job (winning) and the end result is less playing time for non-injured rostered players and an uneven playing field for independent teams that don't have the advantage of being able to play players from other teams. The rule is ridiculous. It's flat out cheating. It's too big to fail. Might as well outlaw participation from all independent teams while you're at it since that is the effect and their road is more difficult that any of the large clubs. If CPP exists then restricting it to within the club is a sham and you might as well let any player from any team be able to guest play regardless of club.

Maybe I haven't seen this rule be effective at upper age groups but I can tell you right now that it's cheating regarding 6th graders.

It was cheating regarding 8th and 9th graders too..and it would certainly be for 10 graders this year considering 22 player rosters..

I see no difference than in the academy system with multiple teams in a age division sharing players. Yes, usually it is the A team supporting the B and C teams. All clubs big and small at the academy divisions are doing this for extra touches, games and winning. At the younger age its deemed developement but of course in select when what division your team is more important than anything else the CPP is cheating. Lol

Zizou wrote:I see no difference than in the academy system with multiple teams in a age division sharing players. Yes, usually it is the A team supporting the B and C teams. All clubs big and small at the academy divisions are doing this for extra touches, games and winning. At the younger age its deemed developement but of course in select when what division your team is more important than anything else the CPP is cheating. Lol

If that is the logic, then why not just go to open rostering w/I a club for LHGCL.

If the clubs and coaches are all about development then do away with fixed rosters and the team concept and let them decide who they want to play in what game week to week.

Now that WOULD be interesting... do away with the promotion/relegation, continue with development... what an intersting concept.

Zizou wrote:I see no difference than in the academy system with multiple teams in a age division sharing players. Yes, usually it is the A team supporting the B and C teams. All clubs big and small at the academy divisions are doing this for extra touches, games and winning. At the younger age its deemed developement but of course in select when what division your team is more important than anything else the CPP is cheating. Lol

Using academy as an excuse is a joke. We're not playing for participation trophies anymore. Winning in select impacts recruiting and job security for coaches. The whole reason CPP exists in select is so that the big clubs can maintain their competitive advantage over the smaller independent teams which helps them to keep a large number of teams and grow. The big clubs don't need the added help and shouldn't get it. It has zero to do with injuries or development at the 6th grade level. Injuries happen to every team. Deal with it.

CBTeamworks wrote:

Zizou wrote:I see no difference than in the academy system with multiple teams in a age division sharing players. Yes, usually it is the A team supporting the B and C teams. All clubs big and small at the academy divisions are doing this for extra touches, games and winning. At the younger age its deemed developement but of course in select when what division your team is more important than anything else the CPP is cheating. Lol

Using academy as an excuse is a joke. We're not playing for participation trophies anymore. Winning in select impacts recruiting and job security for coaches. The whole reason CPP exists in select is so that the big clubs can maintain their competitive advantage over the smaller independent teams which helps them to keep a large number of teams and grow. The big clubs don't need the added help and shouldn't get it. It has zero to do with injuries or development at the 6th grade level. Injuries happen to every team. Deal with it.

NTX was one of the last states to approve CPP.  It's in use all over the country.  No amount of bitching on a message board is going to change that.  Is the rule implemented perfectly, I don't know.  There probably isn't a perfect implementation to be had, someone is always going to be unhappy.

I would suggest, and I say this with all sincerity, that some of you that are so vocal about this "cheating" consider volunteering for the board and help them make decisions like this.  I know many of the people that serve on the board, and the notion that they are so in bed with the big clubs and their sole motivation is to serve those clubs to the detriment and destruction of all small clubs is absurd.

I suspect that might have a better chance of success than constantly attacking them, but that's just my opinion.

ballhead wrote:

CBTeamworks wrote:

Zizou wrote:I see no difference than in the academy system with multiple teams in a age division sharing players. Yes, usually it is the A team supporting the B and C teams. All clubs big and small at the academy divisions are doing this for extra touches, games and winning. At the younger age its deemed developement but of course in select when what division your team is more important than anything else the CPP is cheating. Lol

Using academy as an excuse is a joke. We're not playing for participation trophies anymore. Winning in select impacts recruiting and job security for coaches. The whole reason CPP exists in select is so that the big clubs can maintain their competitive advantage over the smaller independent teams which helps them to keep a large number of teams and grow. The big clubs don't need the added help and shouldn't get it. It has zero to do with injuries or development at the 6th grade level. Injuries happen to every team. Deal with it.

NTX was one of the last states to approve CPP.  It's in use all over the country.  No amount of bitching on a message board is going to change that.  Is the rule implemented perfectly, I don't know.  There probably isn't a perfect implementation to be had, someone is always going to be unhappy.

I would suggest, and I say this with all sincerity, that some of you that are so vocal about this "cheating" consider volunteering for the board and help them make decisions like this.  I know many of the people that serve on the board, and the notion that they are so in bed with the big clubs and their sole motivation is to serve those clubs to the detriment and destruction of all small clubs is absurd.

I suspect that might have a better chance of success than constantly attacking them, but that's just my opinion.

I have asked for legitimate reasons for the use of CPP and nobody including you can come up with one. Injuries is not a valid reason when you have an 18 player roster on a 6th grade team. If you don't think it's cheating then please share your opinion. I would love to hear the rationale. I mean that. I fully believe that there are reasons that the board has CPP in place at this age group but I haven't heard any good ones yet. Please share your information if you've got any.

CBTeamworks wrote:

ballhead wrote:

CBTeamworks wrote:

Zizou wrote:I see no difference than in the academy system with multiple teams in a age division sharing players. Yes, usually it is the A team supporting the B and C teams. All clubs big and small at the academy divisions are doing this for extra touches, games and winning. At the younger age its deemed developement but of course in select when what division your team is more important than anything else the CPP is cheating. Lol

Using academy as an excuse is a joke. We're not playing for participation trophies anymore. Winning in select impacts recruiting and job security for coaches. The whole reason CPP exists in select is so that the big clubs can maintain their competitive advantage over the smaller independent teams which helps them to keep a large number of teams and grow. The big clubs don't need the added help and shouldn't get it. It has zero to do with injuries or development at the 6th grade level. Injuries happen to every team. Deal with it.

NTX was one of the last states to approve CPP.  It's in use all over the country.  No amount of bitching on a message board is going to change that.  Is the rule implemented perfectly, I don't know.  There probably isn't a perfect implementation to be had, someone is always going to be unhappy.

I would suggest, and I say this with all sincerity, that some of you that are so vocal about this "cheating" consider volunteering for the board and help them make decisions like this.  I know many of the people that serve on the board, and the notion that they are so in bed with the big clubs and their sole motivation is to serve those clubs to the detriment and destruction of all small clubs is absurd.

I suspect that might have a better chance of success than constantly attacking them, but that's just my opinion.

I have asked for legitimate reasons for the use of CPP and nobody including you can come up with one. Injuries is not a valid reason when you have an 18 player roster on a 6th grade team. If you don't think it's cheating then please share your opinion. I would love to hear the rationale. I mean that. I fully believe that there are reasons that the board has CPP in place at this age group but I haven't heard any good ones yet. Please share your information if you've got any.

I don't know why or how they implemented the rule the way that they did.  As I stated, it's used all over the country, so maybe they looked at other implementations, maybe they didn't.  I just don't know.  Frankly, I don't think it would make any difference to you, because you've already decided that injuries (the reason some on this board have stated) isn't valid, so I suspect you might take the same position on other reasons.

I do not consider it cheating.  It's allowed by the rules, so by definition it's not cheating.  Having managed a team for many years, I can honestly say injuries can affect teams at any age group, particularly at the positional level.  It's easy to say that an 18 player roster means it isn't an issue, but that doesn't necessarily make it so.  

I don't know if everyone will fill an 18 player roster, I know I wouldn't at this age group.  Maybe they will, maybe they won't.  

I'm just suggesting that maybe demanding answers about why LHGCL implemented things the way they did from people who weren't involved, has a limited chance for success.  

Getting involved in the process and helping make those decisions has a far greater chance of success, at least in my opinion.

I don't think anyone is going to try and pacify those strongly against CPP at this point because over the last couple of years there has been numerous multipage threads on the subject. As a parent of an older DD I would suggest to worry less about CPP , Age Pure, Ghost players and just enjoy watching your DD play a game she hopefully loves. Enjoy the moment it will be over before you realize.

rockindaddy wrote:I don't think anyone is going to try and pacify those strongly against CPP at this point because over the last couple of years there has been numerous multipage threads on the subject.  As a parent of an older DD I would suggest to worry less about CPP , Age Pure, Ghost players and just enjoy watching your DD play a game she hopefully loves. Enjoy the moment it will be over before you realize.

That's a fact. In retrospect, these select soccer years go by so fast. Mine's in college now, and I certainly miss the year round soccer!