Tuesday, July 22, 2008

MYSA, MRL, US Club Premier Leauge

Here is a spot to continue discussion on MYSA, Midwest Regional League and the US Soccer Premier League that is forming this fall.

2,440 comments:

«Oldest   ‹Older   1201 – 1400 of 2440   Newer›   Newest»
Anonymous said...

That (157) is the best laugh I have ever had. Now MTA thinks they walk with giants! I see you've gone from drinking kool aid to taking hallucinogens. MLS Teams? Man U? AC Milan? Who the hell are you kidding?
As much as it pains me to do this (which is not at all), I think you better stick with trying to catch up with Cleveland City (have to learn how to beat PDL teams before tackling any premier-level European clubs boys (you haven't forgotten about Cleveland City, have you?).
Still, thanks for the laughs pal, and go back to dreaming now.

Anonymous said...

Yeah, I'm sure it's some combination of heavy drugs that has Happy MTA guy so happy. Wait til the bill arrives. Hopefully you'll be able to afford bus fare.

Anonymous said...

Chicago Fire and Thunder as equals? You MTA guys better lower these peoples expectations a bit. Too much kool-aid.

Anonymous said...

lol and the haters keep on hating. Thanks Happy MTA Guy for drawing out the roaches! No vision and no lives - likely no kids with talent either. But I'm sure all the anons will claim DI prospects as after all that is what anons do.

Anonymous said...

MTA is walking in the shadows for the moment, but that still constitutes in the company in my book. The path is the same and completely perpendicular to those of the majority haters.

Anonymous said...

1:17, 1:19, 1:26, 2:22, 2:24, 2:32.....

I respect your opinions towards MTA, etc... whoever you may not agree with. I guess I am just trying to get a better understanding of what is at the root of the disagreement. Is it philosophy (completely understandable), personal (also completely understandable), yanking our chains (IDK, could be the reason), etc...

Since the beginning of mankind people have not seen eye to eye, but there is usually something at the root of the conflict. Please help us all understand and it would also help everyone if you cited some examples, experiences, etc....

Anonymous said...

The 1st division MRL teams are posted.

Did not find Shattuck 16's?

Also suprised how many teams that are not even top 4 in MN choose to play MRL. Nothing against them I think it is good but in the long run will MRL not turn into another way to start the season early vs get the top 2-3 teams from each state to compete.

I wish all the teams luck and congrats on being accepted.

SS

Anonymous said...

MRL First Division has become extremely watered down.

Anonymous said...

It has. There was a comment some time back that it had become similar to the MN Premier league in terms of competition. There was much anguish and derision directed tiward that comment. Guess what? There are some age groups where almost every MN Premier team is taking part!

Anonymous said...

I'm sure if only MTA teams were in MRL it would be the toughest league in the world. You need to get a life, seriously. Get some help for you and more importantly, your kids.

Anonymous said...

My daughter's CC doesn't offer year round training. The coaches for her team are parents with no soccer experience. Several years ago we decided to move to Bangu (now MTA) which has worked well. She has enjoyed it and improved as a player. I read through all of the back and forth about MTA, Shattuck, CC's and ask this question - what option does my daughter have? She is by no means the next Mia but is a better than average player. If she plays for the CC she get absolutely no quality trainig. I would need to spend my time and find different offseason training opportunities which may or may not be beneficial. During the season her team would routinely get pummeled and wouldn't play in any tournaments.

Anonymous said...

406 your anger at those who point out the obvious is troubling, please get some help. And no I have no connection with MTA.

Anonymous said...

youth sports are suppose to be for the youth, but imo some of the parents along with "skilled or paid coaches and programs" are ruining it for the kids. Yea I know thare are a small percent that want or need the specialized training or team to get them to the next level but just watch as down the line how many are dissapointed as they don't get their college scholarship they worked on their whole life.

Anonymous said...

4:12 sorry, that tired MTA line wont work. first what club were you with? second if your kid wants to train and do more there are more opportunities to get great training than there are days in the week. Too often parents get too involved and run off by their choice not the kid's to another club any club will and does provide training, you can train with older, younger teams you have 4 nights of Coerver avaiable (watch the idiots come and bash Coerver now) I'm absolutely for the ability to move around and think it is necessary occasionally but most often it appears to be parent driven. This is a kids game and the atmosphere is toxic mostly due to the idea it's a zero sum game these people play with kids and parents.

Anonymous said...

436 who should make the choice on what club to train with or how much training is right for a an individual? Obviously to you if the decision is made to go to MTA it is parent driven and if it is to stay at a CC it is child driven? Is that your point?

Anonymous said...

436 if a decision is made to go to SSM or MTA or IMG or Eclipse or Blake or AHA do you feel it is child or parent driven? What should be done about this?

Anonymous said...

SS and 4:00 anon, you seem to have strong opinios, specifically which teams should not be in MRL?

Anonymous said...

400 here I don't have any strong opinion on who should or should not be in MRL. The more the merrier! Just stating what is obvious from looking at the MRL website. MN Premier league contains 6 teams. There are several MN teams in Premier MRL. After that MRL First has an additional:

U14B 4 teams
U15B 6
U16B 3
U17B 5
U14G 4
U15G 4
U16G 2
U17G 5

How can you argue that MRL is stronger than MN Premier when almost all the MN Premier teams are in MRL? Think before you type and be less thin skinned. Pointing out the obvious is not a slam! Unless you want to say that the many teams from KY, IND, OH etc are better than the MN teams (I don't think they are) I fail to see your point.

Anonymous said...

For the hater haters. From now on, MTA can be referred to as an NCC (no community club). That way, your derisive (I'll pause so you can break out your RTR dictionary)labeling of all other clubs as "cc's" will have a nice, reflective term and we can talk to one-another on equally stupid terms. Hopefully, this helps your level of understanding.
Lou Holtz, when he coached at NC State once hollared at UNC fans who were jeering his players with "moo" calls, replied with the point that, "agriculture is better than no culture at all." CC is better than no CC boys.

Anonymous said...

Works for me. I would like to start by saying that NCC's are often formed and populated by people who got kicked out of cc's.

Anonymous said...

5:58 no, I'm not thin skinned. My son's team is now doing MRL. They are a decent team and the past couple years have had some kids leave for Bangu. Part of the reason was the chance to play regional teams and this seemed to entice these boys and their parents to leave. I'm not what some call a "hater" but do see an underlying resentment from MTA people regarding more Minnesota teams playing MRL. On one hand they want to be seen as trend setters until someone follows then they cry foul.

SSM-South Campus said...

SS-
You're right, the SSM U16G application was not sent to Region 2 for MRL at the decision of MYSA. So, now what choice do they have for games this Spring? Please go back to my comments of early this morning and ask yourself-- How does this help SSM OR the various MN league teams who will be put with them IF they play in the State League?

IMHO- IT DOESN'T HELP ANYONE EXCEPT FOR MAKING SOME MYSA DIRECTOR FEEL GOOD FOR PULLING SOME POLITICAL WEIGHT AND HURTING A GROUP OF PLAYERS. Great move for youth soccer in Minnesota MYSA. May you somedday REAP WHAT YOU SOW.

SSMSouthCampus

Anonymous said...

admin,can we PLEASE have a girls post and boys post seperate,it seems that most of the b.s. is about girls soccer which is surprising as its an overblown rec sport.

Anonymous said...

39 last year in MRL. do the math there are the same or less this year I think

Anonymous said...

ssm what a complete toss bag you are,get a hobby mate,try fishing

Anonymous said...

SSM, if your idea, that someone complained and they pulled SSM's app, who do you suppose that was? A lowly CC who potentially would have to play you in league here? You can't be that dumb. It was the usual suspects protecting their possessions and trying to hinder the SSM program as it is a threat to their imagined dominance.

Anonymous said...

So the SSM 16's will get to play c-3 this summer? Can someone answer that?

Anonymous said...

ssm did this to themselves..they had the option to put last years 16s in the state cup but neglected to do so. stop playing the victim card and instead ask your coaches why they acted with such horrible forsight.

Anonymous said...

Substitute MTA and you're quite correct.

Anonymous said...

I haven't seen SSM teams ducking anyone.

SSM-South Campus said...

8:17- How could the U16s have played in State Cup last year? They didn't qualify due to no MRL or MN league play.

Please revisit the earlier comments/rumor where the poster (MN State Cup maybe?) said that when some other clubs tried to get thier teams into MRL and MYSA said no the focus then went to "what abot SSM"? I then said that his rumor had some credibility. I would like to see the MYSA meeting minutes to see who did what. But I would guess that it had something to do with a three-letter club.

Not sure why all the negative backlash toward me and my comments. How can anyone disagree that keeping the SSM U16G out of MRL is good for anyone in MN youth soccer? I am done with this subject.


SSMSouthCampus

Anonymous said...

Looks like they'll take anybody in the First Division, there are some weak teams entered, especially at the U15 Girls...

Anonymous said...

after going 0-6-1 in the u16 1st division this fall, do you honestly believe that they are deserving of the opportunity to play mrl in the spring?

Anonymous said...

8:38:

Agreed, but the U-17 girl's team are lousy, other than the Inferno. Inferno???
They're asctually playing in the First Division? Julie must be wanting to pad her resume to get that all elusive D-1 job???

Anonymous said...

Inferno will be this years underacheivers. Even with their vaunted national pool player.

Anonymous said...

Mta has never come close to having a better team at that age. JE is one of the state's 2 or 3 best coaches, so keep up your hate while the Inferno racks up the wins.

Anonymous said...

i'm guessing she has no desire to get a d1 job given that her professional aspirations revolve around the graduate program that she is currently in the process of completing at the U.

Anonymous said...

No hate, just conjecture, who said anything about MTA? In fact, I'll go out on a limb and predict that the dominance of the awesome MTA Magic at U15 may be also coming to an end this year.

Anonymous said...

ssmsc the the MYSA refusal to forward applications was on the boys side. MRL simply did not accept the SSM 16G into the league because of poor previous league performance. MYSA not involved in that one.

Anonymous said...

9:22 interesting prediction if it happens, how fast will their coach conveniently get too busy to keep the team?

Anonymous said...

For a while I thought Anon 800 post wasn't going to pan out.

"1) Unsubstantiated anonymous rumours
2) An evil protagonist hated by many
3) An injured party searching for answers
4) Anoynimity for the accusers

This is going to be great!!"

But he/she is vindicated! The kool aid drinkers, haters, whiners, conspiracy buffs... they are all out in force on this one. And none with any clue what really happened. Blogmaster you should charge for entertainment like this.

Anonymous said...

Wow, this thread exploded. It would be nice if this cauldron of hate was closed down for the weekend so people could focus on more important things like their loved ones. What do you say mnfutbol?

Anonymous said...

9:50 Huh??

SSM-South Campus said...

I doubt the record had anything to do with the record. Check the other divisions. Couple that with the fact that most losses were by 1 goal and they weren't exactly blown out. The games were competitive, for the most part.

Besides, if the SSM U16s aren't good enough to be in the First Division of MRL what does that say for the EP U16s being in the Premier Division given the latest results from Faribault?

SSMSouthCampus

Anonymous said...

I sincerely hope there is a special place down below for all of you who find it easier to spend your time trying to take down someone else, be it MTA, SSM, CC, MYSA, or whomever, rather than spend that same time trying to better your own self.

And yes, from where I stand, there is plenty room for improvement for all, be it MTA, SSM, CC, MYSA, or whomever.

Anonymous said...

SSMSC....if you're going draw a conclusion based on the results of a single scrimmage don't forget to consider the fact that 1. ep had trained for all of 1-2 weeks before the scrimmage while ssm had 3 months of training and a complete mrl season; 2. they played on a field measuring 120x70, larger than anything that either team will play on for any showcase or state cup game(and probably larger than anything ep has ever played on); and 3. IT WAS A SCRIMMAGE...do you think the ssm coaches appreciate you making comments that make them and all those associated with the school look like a bunch of whiney brats?

SSM-South Campus said...

You're probably right, in some ways. I am not slandering the EP team. Do not take it that way. It was great to have a team of EP's caliber come in for a game. From what I could tell on the webcast (there is sound, and you can hear very, very well in the dome), the parents were very well behaved as were the players.

I am very angry that SSM got played in one way or the other because of some "agenda". The kids want to play quality competition, and they deserve to be allowed. Who are they going to play now? With surrounding states playing HS, and no MRL. What are they left with? C3? How can they do that when school will be out prior to league play ending? That really isn't an option either. Even if it was...it would just make even more people angry because mean-old SSM is unfairly beating up on C3 teams.

Say all you want about "serves them right" or anything like that, but all these kids are trying to do is get better at the game they love. The players don't care what the program motives are....it IS a kids game. Is it MYSA's job/goal/mission statement to put hurdles in the way of players trying to compete at the highest level possible?

You're right....I'll shut up now. But what has happened is wrong, very wrong and unfair to many more people than just those at SSM.

SSMSouthCampus

Anonymous said...

Question and not trying to anger anyone just looking for an answer. If it is true you cannot be in MRL without first playing in state cup, as I understand 3-4 teams were denied application status this year as a result of, then how did SSM get into MRL last year? And then they were denied this year for the same reason? I don't understand.

Anonymous said...

Chew on this with your turkey--MTA doesn't win the State Cup at either U-18 (WDB or Wings, and no, Wings, as we know has nothing to do with MTA at U-18). U-17 (WDB again). U-16 (EDP).

Anonymous said...

SSM, SSMSC and MTA parents and directors:

Food for thought-
Be a force of fortune instead of a feverish, selfish little clod of ailments and grievances complaining that the world will not devote itself to making you happy.

The rule are the rules, everyone else has to play by them. Suck it up. Life it tough. Deal with it. Quit your whining.

Anonymous said...

847 you are 1 for 3

U16 MTA
U17 WDB easily
U18 SSM easily

Anonymous said...

Forgot about SSM at 18, but EDP will beat MTA at 16, easily.

Anonymous said...

What happened to the Wings U15 and U17 boys teams (now MTA West I believe) that were in MRL last spring. I don't see them among the accepted teams either. More MYSA shenanigans or did they drop out?

Anonymous said...

847 I hope you are correct but why do you think MTA Blue will not contend at U18? Haven't they won it every year? SSM will undoubtedly give them trouble and is probably the favorite. I saw them play MTA 18 last year and they were the better team and should win this year. Unless Wings or Woodbury came up with new players I can't see them staying with either MTA or SSM. Wings was pounded 3-0 by an average WBL team last year and WDB also lost to WBL although they controlled play. Also saw MTA play WDB and while the score was close the run of play was well controlled by MTA. Has their been player movement. Why does nobody mention WBL as a contender? They were in Final last year and defeated both WDB and Wings.

Anonymous said...

U18 - MTA or SSM (tough to gauge as they haven't played each other) Tough to include either Wings or WDB until they actually for once beat MTA

U17 - WDB is the solid favorite

U16 - have no idea why someone would think that EP will "easily" beat MTA. EP has the same team as last year (which has never beaten MTA) and MTA has more overall talent, depth and IMO an edge in coaching.

Anonymous said...

I agree with 10:11 except didn't EP beat MTA at U15 in MRL last year? That could be a close game. Don't rule out SSM at U16 either.
At U18 agree it will be SSM or MTA although I favor SSM as I don't think MTA can replace the players they lost. Wings is the best of the rest and has a shot as they won Premier league. WDB did not impress last year and unless they had a talent infusion will not be in the final. U17 WDB will win easily, good team in an overall weak age group. U15 MTA Blue will win again. U13 and U14 who knows?

Anonymous said...

EP & MTA tied 1-1 in MRL and MTA won 2-1 at State Cup in 2008.

In 2007 MTA beat EP 1-0 in MRL and EP did not make it to the State Cup finals (which MTA won).

In 2006 MTA beat EP 3-1 in the State Cup finals.

Anonymous said...

EP will beat MTA at U16, but will not be able to beat SSM.

U15- MTA
U16- SSM
U17- WDB
U18- SSM

Anonymous said...

From the above post, it looks like the lustre is wearing off Bangu/MTA?

Anonymous said...

i'm sure that all depends on who's doing the posting.

Anonymous said...

10:03 I know 17 boys lost MN premier so they are a C1 team, def not MRL caliber team, no idea about 15's

Anonymous said...

is this the same ssm u16 team that just went winless in their mrl 1st division league (that's 1st division not premier)....

Anonymous said...

MTA will win anywhere from 4-6 State Cups on girls side. No other club will win more than 1. MTA still easily has the top lineup in the state but good to see others presenting a challenge. It is all good for soccer.

Anonymous said...

Speculation is nice but soon there will be some tournament results in and then there will actually be a basis for this discussion.

Anonymous said...

hail to mta you guys are the BEST

Anonymous said...

I would not discount SSM at U16. They beat EP recently outplaying them in the process and there seem to be a lot of people that think EP will do well. I also think SSM will win U18 over MTA in a very competitive game involving the two best teams at state cup. SSM could easily win 3 championships with one on the boys side as well.

Anonymous said...

11:06,

You are half correct. EP 16s will beat MTA and then will go on to beat SSM if SSM can make it that far.

Now that they are not playing in the MRL league, I doubt they will have quality competition to prepare for State Cup. Just my opinion. Not hating

Anonymous said...

12:59,

EP getting outplayed? Get real! Sure they came out a little flat, but they dominated the second half. I believe SSM had one good chance to score and they did. EP should have won the game 5-1. Even with only 1-2 weeks of training.

I still think SSM is a good team, but not at the MRL level. I guess thats why you got rejected this season. Enjoy playing C3 and stop hating on EP!

Anonymous said...

im not from ssm or mta or ep but i do know of all 3 teams and imo they are the 3 best tems at u16, so IF ssm does play at c3 what a joke that will be and again their opponents wont be too happy either

Anonymous said...

Disney shedules out

MTA 15
McLean VA #15R1
Stars GA NR
Baltimore Bays MD #24N

EP U16
Cobb GA #26R3
Sunrise FL NR
TBD

MTA U16
CUP Red OH #20R2
HYSA MS #17R3
Chantilly VA #38R1

WDB U17
Colorado Storm #19N
Atlanta Fire GA #46N
YMS Comets PA #35N

MTA U18
NASA GA #26N
Albertson NY #9N
Colorado Rush CO #20R4

Anonymous said...

If that's MA (2:05), and the classy diction would indicate that it may well be, the Thunder honchos have another reason why this brat should not be anywhere near the front page for them if they want to improve their collective image in the community. He needs to coach really well just to make people try to forget about his all too frequent inane, dumbass statements. You're a good coach, and you're right about the posters, but you insist on pointing out that you are also a horribly immature, unethical and arrogant human being. It's nice to see that you took time out from family today to throw f-bombs around on the blog. Better off anonymous in your case. Blogmaster: Any sense at all of decorum around here? Man, I wish we could kick out all of the girls posters.

Anonymous said...

First of all, MA would NEVER throw the f bomb out on this blog. Second, if he had something to say, he wouldn't hide his identity.

Whoever 2:05 is should be ashamed of themselves for using that word on a soccer blog. GROW UP!!

Anonymous said...

if 2:05 is insinuating that his post signed MA infers that he/she meant to attribute those comments to Mark Abboud then from a moral/ethical (and possibly legal) standpoint they are treading on thin ice.

Anonymous said...

Looks like MA didn't wait to long to get his hands in the cookie jar at East Ridge. I guess he had to go someone to find his next supply of $ signs.

Anonymous said...

Huh??

Anonymous said...

SSM U16 girls won't be eligible for State Cup in 2009 as they haven't yet played in a MYSA league
or MRL.
They will need to play this year at C3 this year then will be eligible for State Cup in 2007.
Rules are the same for all teams and clubs.

Anonymous said...

ssm u16 girls played in MRL in the fall. doesn't that make them eligible?

Anonymous said...

2:05 here. Easy guys, I'm not the MA you're thinking of. Thought it was kind of funny but also didn't think anyone would really believe it's coming from the MA of blog legend. Obviously got 10:01 reeled in though. You've got issues man and I feel sorry for you. Really. As for the f bomb, f u. This is a blog and I can say what I want. Everyone else always does and I was dead on in my post. Most of you posting are morons, on both sides of the table.

8:07, are you talking about the new high school in Woodbury? MA is involved? OMG, that would be perfect.

Anonymous said...

9:41 - why didn't you sign your most recent post with MA?

Anonymous said...

9:41

Your credibility is very high. Signing someone else's name to your post, throwing around f-bombs for no reason(I mean no reason) and castigating others for calling you on it? What kind of slop-house clown are you, anyway? I don't know that we've had f-bombs or people using someone else's identity in here, and the blogmaster would do well to delete your posts. Go lay by your trough, Einstein.

Anonymous said...

Why add to the controversy and fuel any fire? He just said he wasn't the guy you hate. What do you want him to do? Sign it MA But Not the MA You Are Thinking About? East Ridge will have its own athletic association. Is that what 8:07am is commenting about? Or is MA looking to coach at the new high school? Rumor (and it's just rumor) is that the Thunder East and the new athletic association will be partnering. That new athletic association will cater to at least 50% of current Woodbury soccer kids who will now be in the East Ridge school district. I'm sure the Woodbury club is not happy that MA and the Thunder will now have 1,000+ families affiliated with them. They must see the guy as the scourge of their club right now. Ironic and poetic in a sense if you ask me. But personal grievances aside Woodbury can't be thrilled about losing half their membership to a competing organization regardless of who is running it. What a stroke of luck for MTE.

Anonymous said...

12:16 - maybe so, but we can all make our own judgements on what he was trying to insinuate/accomplish.

Anonymous said...

When you recruit nationally you shouldn't really lose any games. You should be favored in all of them.

Anonymous said...

In the end when it's all said and done MTA will be the last man standing. SSM will be history and the cc's will still be the same ol cc's.

Anonymous said...

2:50 and 2:52..same guy...ohhh..o.k...where do I drink the kool aid?

Anonymous said...

yeah, I agree...I can't imagine any institution continuing to invest a high six figure/ low seven figure annual number in terms of travel and scholarships especially when the return (with the exception of the 18 boys last yr.) does not come close to meeting the expectations of the investors.

SSM-South Campus said...

9:34- I would say you are correct. The new soccer year begins after August 1st, therefore SSM U16s DID compete in a league in THIS soccer year qualifying them for State Cup.

1:14- Outplayed is an appropriate term. If you weren't at the game or have blurred memories of how it went down....you can order a DVD of the game and re-watch it. SSM U16s were only in danger ONCE on a break-away which was shut down by the SSM GK. It is interesting how one's perception of a game can be clouded. But, in this case...there is permanent record which you could order and revisit.

I have no idea what excuses could be given for the EP performance (I am sure there are some), but at this point it really doesn't matter. We'll see how things turn out late this Spring. Until then, speculation really doesn't matter.

SSMSouthCampus

Anonymous said...

Are we talking about the SSM U16 girls team that failed to win a game this fall in MRL 1st division???

SSM-South Campus said...

Yes we are 5:23. I'd say that they fared alright given the circumstances earlier this Fall. They lost the games, no excuses. They were competitive in most of the games, but couldn't put it together.

Like I said, let's wait and see what happens during State Cup time. Nothing we discuss now matters. Heck, nothing we say then will matter. The only thing that matters is what the outcomes are, driven by the players on the field.....not us sitting behind our keyboards. The only comparison I can make is the direct one from the EP U16 game a couple weeks ago. And, I was thoroughly thrashed for bringing that up. So, sit back and wait to see what the outcome is.

SSMSouthCampus

Anonymous said...

"let's wait and see what happens during State Cup time. Nothing we discuss now matters. Heck, nothing we "
then just shut up,please!!

Anonymous said...

again,this blog is full of girls parents who wish they had sons,lame as heck.
Please seperate this blog,boys/girls

Anonymous said...

Actually SSM can play in the MN State cup...they would just have to register as a C3 team for MYSA league play. That is what MYSA will dictate and have done before to "new" teams. Now tell me how fair it would be to all those other C3 teams they would have to play against....pretty crappy if you ask me. And yes any level team that is MYSA registered can play in the MN State Cup. Benn there watched that....

Anonymous said...

sorry 7:16, but since SSM particpated in Fall MRL, I believe that makes them eligible for State Cup. To be eligible, a team must participate in a MYSA approved league of which MRL is. They do not have to play C3, but my guess is they will enter as many high level tournaments and schedule as many scrimmages as possible to be ready.

Anonymous said...

EP seems to have a lot of loyal parents who post on this blog =)

Anonymous said...

In FL with the familly for a few days and looks like the blog has been busy. Prior to leaving I made a comment on the MRL first division it was not meant to slander the teams that have been accepted good for them.

Each team will decide on there own what is best for them. I do not think playing MRL division one is better than MN premier. What is best for MN socceer is if teams that can do both. I have tried to argue this before.

My team did not apply (know idea if we would have been accepted or not) reason we did not apply is simple we felt the cost is greater than the benefits and the experience. Who knows maybe we will try to get in next year.

Also it is wrong that Shattuck U16 can not play MRL.

Finally I live in woodbury and if the rumor is true that MA and Eastridge are talking that would be great for that schools soccer program.

Anonymous said...

oops forgot to sign last post

SS

Anonymous said...

i love ma but it would not be good for east ridge ans aaron harper for ma to be involvrd as cottage grove does not like him. wy not tim bunnel.

Anonymous said...

All this discussion about SSM. In a year or so they will drop soccer.If this is the best they could do recruiting nationally stick a fork in soccer.

Anonymous said...

Did not the former Bangu U15 team that is now the Thunder u17 get accepted to MRL without ever playing in a MYSA league or state cup?

Anonymous said...

As did the SSM U18s. This was a "make-up" call to make someone happy at MYSA. Who gets hurt, the players. I thought that was the specific group that MYSA was supposed to look out for?

Hey, person who is tired of reading about girls. Clue for you is that boys haven't been discussed on this thread at any significant level since it was opened. Don't participate in the thread if you don't like it. I certainly don't participate in the Boys threads on here.

Use Common Sense

Anonymous said...

MYSA forced a Bangu U14 girls team to play C3 a few years ago.
They scored about 60 goals or more as they won all league games, and State Tourney as they bowled over the competition.
Along the way they had to endure the jabs from their opponents for "running up the scores".
It's sad that MYSA ruins an entire league for several teams and the players instead of doing the right thing.
The bureaucrats just don't use common sense so many times.

Anonymous said...

well said 11:23!!

Anonymous said...

9:46-The U-17 Bangu team plays in the State Cup and gets clobbered annually in the MRL. I think they have won two games in two years.

Anonymous said...

2:05 my point was that how come that team got into MRL without ever playing MYSA they formed at U15 and got accepted to MRL, but SSM was not allowed even if they where allowed to play in the fall. 11:23 totaly agree with was done to the u14's a few years back was silly as well

ss

Anonymous said...

I for one will be interested to see the results if MA gets the East Ridge job. He will have to coach the roster he "has" for the first three years, and not the roster he "recruits". I think that will be the true test of his coaching abilities.

Anonymous said...

It is odd that current MTA U17G and SSM U18G both had a rule waived to allow them into MRL but now SSM U16G and MTA U15B and U17B are excluded under same rule. Not very consistent

Anonymous said...

ssm 16girls were not excluded by mysa, they were rejected by mrl.

Anonymous said...

MTA has both 15 and 17 boys teams in MRL

Anonymous said...

That is misinformation, 3:45. It was completely a MYSA decision.

Thanks for playing though. I'm sure you'll be offered a shiny parting gift.

Anonymous said...

2:48- What planet do you live on? Recruiting at the HS level is constant. What makes you think he'll have to "play with the roster he has"?

Anonymous said...

442- you are wrong

Anonymous said...

11:23 Clear the goober out of your eyes for a moment. That team was told in August the rule change that required 75% of MRL and Premier roster to be the same. Your directors thought they could do as they pleased, went and recruited kids, told them they'd be a premier team knowing it was not so. Easy to pass on misinformation on here though, a few of you should get involved on MYSA commitees and see the truth, there is no conspiracy against MTA, their bumbling foolishness keeps them in trouble quite well.

Anonymous said...

1123 that was an unfortunate applying of the "tonka rule" where a rule was passed at the November AGM at the behest of angry parents and applied retroactively to the team you reference that had formed the previous August. Was a total disaster for that team and for the teams that were forced to play in league with them. Too bad but that is what happens when short sightedness rules as it does in the case of 3 teams being denied application to MRL as we do now.

Anonymous said...

6:57 sounds like MYSA office staff chiming in. Which one of the bumbling women is it do you think?

As for the directors of SSM and MTA, you will never have the backing of MYSA as they need to cater to the 95% of players here in MN. They have never and will never cater to 100% and thank you, and thanks to all other CCs with high level teams, for looking out of the best MN has to offer.

Anonymous said...

CC's...strictly minor league.If the best your kid can do is play cc find em another sport.The elite players play for SSM and MTA and everybody knows it.

Anonymous said...

10:51-my kid has been recruited by both SSM and Bangu. She is doing just fine w/out either. Is she elite, definitely more so than many players at SSM and all but a few at Bangu. Too bad SSM,WDB and EDP will take the 16-18 girl's State Cups in '09.

SSM-South Campus said...

3:45- We could argue back and forth for quite some time. I can tell you that I have known of many teams who have fared much worse than the SSM U16s did in the Fall season. My daughter has played on an Iowa team who lost every game by an average goal differential of 5 goals (with one stomping being a 10-0 loss to KCFC Alliance). That went on for a full year and a half before they had thier first win. They are still in MRL. I have never seen a First Division team thrown out of the league based upon a single season's results.

Not sure what the Spring season holds for the SSM U16s, but I can assure you that the program is not going anywhere. The speculation about how long they can continue the "experiment" should be answered by looking at how long the hockey "experiment" lasted. I would say that a National Runner-up in the short time of the program is a pretty ROI? But, it really isn't about that for the school itself, it is about enrollment numbers. SSM was in pretty bad shape enrollment-wise prior to the hockey program. The soccer program has helped considerably as well with this issue. If you want to better understand, there was a great article about the SSM hockey program in ESPN The Magazine. It talks openly about enrollment, and hockey bringing the school back. Soccer is no different. The school's endowment is sufficient to carry the program, so I'd get used to it.

SSMSouthCampus

Anonymous said...

Nice try, SSMSC, but we on the MNfutbol blog are not about to let something as inconvinient as the facts get in the way of our opinions.

What do you think this is, The New York Times or PBS?

No, this is a blog ruled by rumor and personality clashes, not to mention quite a few personality disorders.

So keep your facts to yourself and leave us alone to fanticize about how MA is the name of the beast and how SSM has been denied by MRL and will wither and die because they were only able to achieve a national runner up team in their third year.

We are much happier to make sexist remarks about the women at MYSA than to actually volunteer at MYSA ourselves. That's just the kind of people we are, and you can't change that with your good intentions.

SSM-South Campus said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Anonymous said...

1128 made the same prediction last year about 15-17. Will probably be juat as accurate this year. MTA 16 and WDB 17 should win without much problem, a likelihood SSM U16 could challenge, possibly EP also but have lost to MTA so many times not sure why that would change. The game to watch will be SSM v MTA at U18. Should be very entertaining. Slight edge to SSM in my book. If for some reason MTA has all their players back I would give the slight edge to them. Should be a replay of the great game in the U18 final last year except both teams will be a bit stronger than the ones that played last year if MTA has everyone. WDB may be challenged by PSA but not likely. MTA will win U15 again although I think they will be challenged more than they have been.

Anonymous said...

anon 8:30 is correct.
The Bangu U14 team was formed at tryouts in August then at AGM 3 months later in November the "Tonka Rule" was voted in and a premier caliber team was forced into playing C3.
The Bangu board, coaching directors etc didn't know this would be voted in retroactively and were stunned the bureaucrats at MYSA would force the girls to play at C3.
In effect the MYSA bureaucrats ruined the league for all those teams and eliminated the opportunity for a true C3 team to advance to C2.
Many from our team think the MYSA bureaucrats believed the girls would not play C3.
So we did and forced MYSA to look like fools. Looks like that will happen again this year.
But whats new?

Anonymous said...

8:26 fact check, a letter was sent to ever club in the state, also sent multiple times to Bangu well before tryouts. Typical of the people running Bangu they were sure rules did not apply to them.

Anonymous said...

5:38 the new school EastRidge will not have open enrollment so unless somebody is willing to move their whole life to this side of town MA will have to work with what is here. Lucky for him there are very talented girls that will be on the roster for the first 2 years not sure what is behind that age group.

Anonymous said...

953 that is incorrect. The rule that forced the team to play C3 was proposed and approved at the November AGM. The team was formed in August.

Anonymous said...

11:03 is correct. Kind of hard to send out a letter informing folks of something that wasn't even proposed for another 3 months....

Anonymous said...

9:53,
You are the one needing to check facts.
This rule was enacted in November after the teams were formed after August tryouts.
How many organizations or governments make rule changes or laws retroactive???
There is no need or reason to lie about this.

Anonymous said...

Sorry, to all of you with goober filled eyes, Tonka sent notice in July, There was a copy to all clubs not a single dissent was sent back. This rule change had been talked about extensively before July, let alone November. The directors never let the families know they were likely not going to get their way with this. They also strung the parents along into the winter leading them to think the rule would get changed or they'd win an appeal.

Anonymous said...

6:13, you're either a Tonka or MYSA idiot. Directors were supposed to let parents know of a POTENTIAL rule change that, as far as I can find, would turn out to be the first retroactive rule passed at ANY AGM? Am I wrong? Please provide clarity and I'll eat my words. Else you're an idiot with no basis to spout hate from.

Anonymous said...

The only hate spouters on here on the MTA kool-aid drinking true beleivers following their marching orders to constantly shade the truth and spin to make their leaders look good.

Anonymous said...

Actually, what Bangu (at the time) was doing was exactly what they have always been about, creating another team to further line the pockets of the guys who make their living there. All the high minded talk about giving high level soccer opportunities to players is cover for a handful of guys there making a living. All the rest is bs people want to believe, similar to the townspeople in the Music Man.

Anonymous said...

Anonymous said...
10:51-my kid has been recruited by both SSM and Bangu. She is doing just fine w/out either. Is she elite, definitely more so than many players at SSM and all but a few at Bangu. Too bad SSM,WDB and EDP will take the 16-18 girl's State Cups in '09.

29/11/08 11:28 PM

Good for your dd, we all hope she is recruited by UNC, UCLA, Stanford or ND and is offered a 100% free ride!! Its always nice to read about a parent bragging.
Please tell us all, is she being recruited now?? Im assuming she is a 2011? Maybe on the region II ODP team that just got back from Fla? If not, then she must be something special huh??

Anonymous said...

626 is correct. The rule change is fine although petty. Making it retroactive to lash back at a team that was already formed under the existing rules was the result of vindictive whining parents who needed something, anything, to make themselves feel relevant. How it affected the kids involved (both Bangu and the C3 teams they played) was of no importance to them.

Anonymous said...

Who actually decides who goes to MRL? Is it MRL or MYSA? Why does MYSA have to approve the MRL league?

Anonymous said...

mysa recommends teams...mrl has final say. mysa did not recommend the mta teams because of the new rule, while ssm 16s were recommended by mysa and rejected by mrl.

Anonymous said...

Until you actually win state you are just a wannabe.

Anonymous said...

Why didn't the MTA (Wings) teams qualify. They were in MRL last year.

Anonymous said...

Bangu has always been about lining people's pockets? Another hopelessly clueless poster writing in hate with no knowledge of what they are talking about. Sad that some people will actually believe you, but once again it's just another demonstration of baseless hate and stupidity. Should have just left it with your post 18 minutes prior.

Anonymous said...

anon 6:13,
You are either very ignorant of the reality of this situation or just a hate filled liar.
Little Howie from Tonka sent an email to clubs, not in July but on August 7th, 2006 (after club tryouts took place) with a "proposed" rule to be voted on at the November 2006 AGM. This wasn't discussed "extensively". For you to indicate otherwise proves your ignorance or maybe is just another of your lies? Or maybe the hate has warped your memory in your little mind?
Nobody in their right mind would have thought a rule, even if approved and voted on in November, would be made retroactive to teams already formed in August.
Anon 6:13, you better get your facts straight and quit with the hate filled lies or you'll continue to look dumber with every post.

Anonymous said...

Ah good. This is more of what I come to this blog looking for...lies, misinformation, hate mongering, belittling of others.

Good stuff.

Anonymous said...

Big (I mean BIG) announcement from MTA/Thunder on Monday afternoon: Partnership with another club out of the Oceania WC Qualifying Group. I heard it's an Australian club. This means the Thunder will have substantial connections with teams on three continents (with an African partnership pending), and the possibility that the club could use this new connection to bring in major rugby and Australian rules football events to the NSC as well. If you still think that the Thunder are just another U-League team after reading this, get your head checked.

Anonymous said...

Who writes this crap, anyway? I doubt the Thunder could afford to call Australia (maybe collect), much less import Aussie rules football. There's more dung here than the average Farmington field.

SSM-South Campus said...

7:29- Again, I will tell you that you are incorrect. Not sure if it is for cover or because you are misinformed.

Let's confuse the avg blogger here with facts. Let me point out the Fall Season non-winners who were let in to MRL again. These are U14 teams, because many of the U15 (and up) teams would not have applied for Spring (because of HS in thier repsective States). Here goes----

Pennine United 0-6-1 GF 2 GA 22
Tonka Strikers 0-6-1 GF 3 GA 22

BOTH are back in MRL after less than desirable seasons in MRL.

Tonka had VERY unfavorable results losing 0-4; 0-5; 0-2; 1-3; and 0-2. Those are very lopsided scores, and yet.....MRL didn't decide to throw them out of the League. MRL is run by Region 2 who doesn't work like that. This has local handy-work written all over it.

Given the bad taste I currently have in my mouth, and the rumor mill telling me where the problems stem from....I am beginning to have some very strong negative feelings for a certain "blue" club myself. I really hope that the rumor mill is not right, I had more faith in the "blue" club than that. There is no reason for Club A to do thier best to sabotage Club B (and then not be man/woman enough to admit it).

SSMSouthCampus

Anonymous said...

SSM don't be naive about this, your suspicions are most lkely correct. They see SSM as a threat to their possessions and to their constantly talked about State Cup prowess. As to teams struggling in MRL the less than great performance of the Tonka 14's in the fall has been beaten to death on here by MTA attack dogs. When they have teams not win it is that they are there for the "competition" and "experience" when other clubs don't win it is because they don't belong there. Very convenient at twisting everything then crying foul when it's pointed out.

Anonymous said...

Aussie rules football at NSC? Crikey! You think Jacko will give up his acting career when he gets the call from MTA to coach a State Cup team? This again puts the rest of the clubs behind the mighty brain trust at MTA. Maybe SSM will start a Rugby program soon. Germans, Australians, Goobers, oh my!

Anonymous said...

SSM U16G and MTA (W) U15B and U17B were all denied admittance to MRL for the same reason. They did not qualify under the rules. SSMSC and all the MTA whiners should learn the guidelines and tell their leaders to follow them instead of whining on a blog about MYSA decisions that are perfectly sound. Get a life people and learn the facts before exposing your ignorance and pettiness by typing on a blog. The MYSA decision is the correct one.

Anonymous said...

Minn. Thunder Acad Elite
U13 Boys C1
U14 Boys C1/MRL
Player Exchange
[Updated: 11/26/2008]

Anonymous said...

713 you are correct but those are not the age groups I had been told were denied because of the name change from Wings to MTA. Unfortunate but that is MYSA. Nothing to be done about it. I have not heard a lot of MTA complaining and not that much from SSM with a few exceptions of course. Once those people learn the facts I would expect them to quiet down also.

Anonymous said...

One thing SSM and MTA share is a belief that they are "moving forward MN soccer" and that the rules should not apply to them.

Anonymous said...

It is comical that that some people think that MTA, which has been a thorn in the side of MYSA for years, could influence MYSA do unjustly exclude a team from another club from MRL. Just shows the ignorance out there and willingness to believe anything. MYSA would be happiest if MTA, and SSM for that matter, vanished. So would many others.

Anonymous said...

Always been the case with MTA they love the rules when they can use them to stick it to another club. Then cry like babies when they are applied to them. SSM we'll see I think they have a bigger perspective and and quite a bit more integrity.

Anonymous said...

It does not appear that way right now. I realize that a blog does not represent the general population. However, up to now I have seen more whining from SSM which lost one team than MTA which lost two. It is encouraging to see MYSA stand up to both the bullies.

Anonymous said...

8:12 again, the MTA exaggerated sense of your club's importance. I've got news for you, I doubt the folks over at MYSA sit each day talking about your club. The rules are there, voted on by the membership and your club can choose to participate or not. There is a large amount of honor the game is owed by following the spirit of the rules too. That is an area you could focus on and generate some good will in our community.

Anonymous said...

825 ?? I am not connected with MTA in any way. I do stand by my comment. Thers is no way that any club, MTA least of all, could influence MYSA into making an unjust decision. MYSA will do what is right whether it involves MTA, SSM or anyone else. And you are wrong if you don't think some topic concerning MTA doesn't come up almost every day at MYSA. It does.

812

Anonymous said...

The Tonka rule which was was enforced retroactively was an example of how MYSA functions.
Just imagine for a minute that when Barack Obama is inaugurated in January that he and Congress impose that everyone's income taxes for 2008 (not 2009) be retroactively increased by 10% with no recourse. Just send in the check with taxes due folks.
There are reasons laws, rules and the like are not made retroactive...except by MYSA.

SSM-South Campus said...

7:13- I don't see any similarities to the MTA boys' teams mentioned and the SSM U16 girls. The SSM U16 girls are the SAME team with the SAME club/name as they had in the Fall when THEY WERE ALLOWED TO PLAY.

I think we may be getting to the bottom of exactly who/why complaints were made? It couldn't have been anyone from MTA complaining that these teams should be let in to MRL the same way that the SSM U16G team was? Someone wanted a "make up call" and got it. Simple.

Maybe what I am doing is considered whining, that is not my typical response. But, in this particular case....I can't help it. IF (big if) the SSM U16s play in C3, any bets on how many others will be whining when they can't get promoted to C2 because SSM was placed in thier Division? Will absolutely waste a complete year of somebody's time. Just want to go on the record and say NOW that IF this happens, it is not SSM's fault. The goal is not to beat up on C3 teams.....but there aren't a lot of other choices for the program. You will be able to thank MYSA for this one.

Let's not talk about this anymore...I am tired of it as I am sure others are as well.

SSMSouthCampus

Anonymous said...

Was not a "retroactive" rule. Clubs can have tryouts in August/September and form teams. nowhere is it written or implied those teams will be exempt from November AGM rules. If it's a problem for your club hold tryouts in December and January problem solved.

Anonymous said...

8:49,
You're quite the thinker.
That's like changing the rules of the game once the whistle has blown starting the game.
But then I guess we shouldn't expect someone like you with an axe to grind to think logically or what would be best for soccer and the kids.

SSM-South Campus said...

8:53- It has already been stated earlier on here, please don't let facts or logic cloud the discussion. It confuses many.

Anonymous said...

so let me get this straight.....8:49 believes everyone should change everything based on a "proposed" rule change. tryouts in Dec/Jan? He/she's just trying to pull our leg isn't he/she as?

SSM-South Campus said...

8:41- One last comment, then I am done with this. You are probably correct in that MA or Club Directors could influence MYSA (I'd like to think so, anyway). But, complaint phone calls coming in the the MYSA offices from "concerned parents" could cause things to happen. While they may dislike certain clubs, they still have to answer the phone and have thier ear chewed off by angry parents.

Anonymous said...

I bet it hurts even more for SSM not making MRL especially with the school tuition that is paid. I hope that your DD went to SSM for the education and not the soccer.

Anonymous said...

8:59- Not to mention that if you held tryouts in December/January you would be in violation of the recruiting rules in MN (if you fielded the team before August 1). So, your thoughts on how to "fix" are completely wrong under MYSA rules. Well, as said rules stand today. Who knows, maybe they'll change them tomorrow (retroactively, ofcourse) and make you right?

SSM-South Campus said...

9:00-
As a matter of fact, she attends for both. The soccer is still fine. Regardless of what league they play in, she is still becoming a better player than she could have anywhere else. It isn't about that as much, it is more the senseless decision. Really makes one wonder whether or not MYSA is actually helping or hindering soccer in MN?

Anonymous said...

SSMSC, MTA people whoever. Bottom line is under a strict interpretation of the rules your teams did not qualify for MRL admittance. SSMSC just because the rules were waived once in your favor does not mean they should be again. MTA if you were perhaps a better citizen in th MN soccer community your arguments would be better received. That said, I do side with SSM and MTA on this. All three of these teams had played MRL before and are all being excluded on a technicality. I would have hoped MYSA could rise above this and do what is right for the three teams involved. I can understand why all had to be excluded if any were, but why not include all of them? That is the question that I would like answered.

Anonymous said...

SSMSC in your 844 post are you suggesting the reason the Wings (now MTA) teams were denied admittance is because their club changed it's name to MTA? Was that the reason?

SSM-South Campus said...

Darn it! I said I wasn't going to talk about this anymore. But, I can't resist.

9:08- Does your above post mean that someone is finally admitting that it was, in fact, MYSA and NOT MRL as was previously reported? Seems to me that finally people are admitting what actually happened. One other point, once a "waiver" is granted and the team plays in MRL....they are then qualified to continue play in MRL because they DID play in an approved league in the previous season. You are talking out of both sides of your mouth. It SHOULD have been an MRL decision, and not allowed to rot on a desk at MYSA.

Anonymous said...

well it's too bad that in the end it will be the young kids that get penalized and will have a bad taste left in their mouths. Not the way youth sports was intended. Knowing several of the girls that had to play C3 a few years ago when they were at least a C1 team, it didn't benefit the players, the other teams or progress MN soccer. If SSM is truly better than a C3 team, which I would assume they are, MYSA needs to figure out an alternative solution for the players NOT for the parents interests ONLY for the players. It just proves again that the CC are strong in MYSA and although SSM & MTA (Bangu) felt like they had the market on soccer, it is proving otherwise as many kids are playing in CCs and succeeding. It always comes down too, what is best for your kid and too not worry about the so-called status advantage that some think SSM & MTA will give them because right now it would appear that the CCs have the advantage.

Anonymous said...

9:04 check back a ways in this thread, MTA had 16 tryouts a couple weeks ago, are suggesting they were in violation of the rules? Wrong again goober boy!

Anonymous said...

SSM first, do you have a job? Man you are on here constantly. They can have a tournament only team. No need to beat up C-3 teams to prove a point. Truth is there probably should be an exception made here. We all know if there was the MTA boys would use it contantly. Curious isn't it they insist we as a state need to pool the best players on one team or two, then they spend all their time trying to have white, blue, green, tournament only, etc. teams at all age levels. So, what is it, elite or as many kids as possible to make more money from their possessions?

Anonymous said...

Interesting announcement regarding the Australian partnership with MTA. Good for them, pushing the envelope for the good of soccer here.

SSM-South Campus said...

9:30- You actually bring up a good point, and one which MYSA has created a bit of a loophole which they really should close at the next AGM.

The rule says that "the open period for registered players who are considering playing for any Affiliate Member or Extraterritorial Member in the follwing season begins on August 1 of each year. "

So, let me break this down. It says that August 1 is the earliest someone can start the recruiting/tryout process, but gives no "latest" date that this process can continue to take place. It does, however, say that anything conducted after August 1 is for team placement in the "following season". Can someone explain to me what MYSA's definition of "following season" is? As we all know, soccer is broken into two "seasons" within one "soccer year" (which runs from August 1 to July 31). IF MYSA considers the "fall season" to have already taken place (which it has), then that means that MTA has DEFINATELY broken recruiting rules if they held tryouts after the fall season BEGAN. It is especially important to note that any player who:
1) was rostered in the Fall with someone other than MTA
2) attended tryouts
3) recieved/accepted a bid

Must apply for club transfer, and thus the recruiting rules (including the SPIRIT of the rule) has been broken and penalties should apply to the MYSA affiliate who broke the rule. But, it isn't that cut and dried because the rule is written so poorly by MYSA. Who wrote this stuff? Maybe I can interpret them well because I stayed at a Holiday Inn Express last night?

Anonymous said...

Hell hath no fury like an MTA'er or SSM'er scorned.

Anonymous said...

Hey, a few more yrs and all of this will have no meaning, since your DD's will be training for their Freshman yr in college. Now that is the important stuff.

10s Dad

SSM-South Campus said...

9:36- What good does it do to have a tournament team if you want to try and play in the USYS NCS? You are constantly in the same "non-qualifying" position. But, I guess that would make some happy-- knowing that they'd never really have to compete against everyone for State Cup?


10:13- You're probably right. Golly, look how the SSM'er goes straight to facts when he is scorned. That really isn't fair, is it? I should stick to non-factual arguments.

BTW, I really do believe that MTA did break the recruiting rules if they had tryouts since the Fall season began.

Anonymous said...

SSMSC or MTA types.
1) Are you saying that your teams were incorrectly denied application to the MRL by MYSA? Then protest.
2) Are you saying that your teams did not qualify for MRL application but should have been given a waiver? Then why?
3) SSMSC 921 Are you saying that because the rules were waived for your team before they should be again? Why do you deserve consideration beyond other clubs?
4) MTA'ers are you saying that your teams should have been granted MRL application status even though they now belong to a different club? Again why?

Anonymous said...

For MTA the response is "we wanna do what we want and if we don't get our way you are all haters"

Anonymous said...

MTA 16's should be punished for breaking the recruiting rules. BTW, they have been in panic mode over there ever since they lost their National Team Player. How will they recover?

I heard that their coach asked Disney not to place them in the TOP flight because he was afraid that without his National Player they would get a beat down!

MTA is FINISHED at that age group

Anonymous said...

Have to wonder who would be motivated to make the 1221 post. The list is short.

Anonymous said...

1240,

he/she has to be a big MTA hater right? That list is long!

Anonymous said...

Let he without hate cast the first stone.

Anonymous said...

Amen brother! Let us pray.

Anonymous said...

12:05 - You are leaving out another option. Maybe those involved just don't agree with the rule in the first place. Maybe they believe that MYSA should be able to make reasonable decisions without falling back on a black and white rule.

The world is full of shades of grey, people. Any one who tries to reduce the world to black and white is intellectually lazy.

Anonymous said...

Read this blog and you will understand why Minnesota soccer will never be taken seriously at the national level.

Anonymous said...

It is amusing though.

Anonymous said...

1:23 you are of course referring to MTA, correct?

Anonymous said...

1:32(if that IS your real name) I thought MTA was putting MN soccer "on the map" nationally.

Anonymous said...

rules are rules even IF they hinder the development of some young ladies. I didn't agree with them when they did this to the bangu girls and i don't agree with them now with ssm. In the end hopefully ssm can work something out that will benifit the girls.

Anonymous said...

EP U18 are posting try outs on their website, also the U16 MTA tro outs where for the white team not the blue.

Anonymous said...

is it ok to have tryouts for a premier team for players currently on C1 or lower teams? i believe that their old club needs to give them a release if they are either playing up in age or level.

Anonymous said...

You guys keep on hating and SSM and MTA will keep on moving. In fact, your ignorant hate helps spurn them on I'd wager and you'll still be watching from the sidelines like you are now, trying desperately to thwart the goings on with your cowardly anon words. Keep on typing, it really may be working. Haters are either:
1 - parents who had kids not make the cut
2 - coaching directors or board members who are threatened by an elite system (like a certain u17 coach from the east side of town who posted today at 1221)
3 - parents of kids who had talented teammates leave for an elite program and now their little team won't win as many games. Am I wrong? Some hater enlighten all of us and give some backing to your hate by letting us all know where you're coming from. Maybe someone can even give us a concrete example of why they harbor such animosity. Because the elite get favored by MYSA? Not. Because the elite win more? Not, as I don't think any games have been played yet this year at the older ages. Because the elite have unfair marketing weight behind them of a prep school or pro team? Maybe, but you have to deal with that one. Because the elite get away with breaking rules? Right. No microscopes here. C'mon haters. Justify your comments and give us some rational. I don't expect to here much of anything and that will just go to prove that the vast majority of hate is petty and thus discounted easily in the end. And if someone gives some valid rational I'll eat my words gladly.

Anonymous said...

trying desperately to thwart the goings on with your cowardly anon words.
Posted by a courageous MTA attack anon this really caps a day of stupidity. Anon calling others cowardly anons when my kid needs a definition of absurdity I'll read this to him.

Anonymous said...

sorry singer, did 1221 hurt your feelings?

Anonymous said...

4:57 - thanks for all the answers to 4:30's questions.

Anonymous said...

2:03, I don't know about MTA putting MN soccer on the regional map, but apparently they ARE putting Aussie rules football on the MN map.

That and 2 bucks will get you a brewed coffee at starbucks.

Wait, am I a hater if I support MTA 80% of the time, but call them on their BS the other 20% of the time?

Stupid shades of gray. Can't I just be a hater or not? Black or white?

Anonymous said...

4:30 - Maybe it's because they constantly refer to themselves as "elite". You gotta admit, that is just annoying.

Anonymous said...

4:30pm here.

OK, I'll buy that one 5:58. Though I think it's mainly uninformed haters who mistakenly think MTA is advertising elite at all age groups. Though their older Blue teams are the only teams who can even come close to attaining that status, I can understand why it would be annoying if people thought that MTA thought their entire program was elite. Heck, maybe some directors/coaches/parents believe the latter is the case. However, that can't be the only justification for all the hate. Just look at 4:57 and the obviously steam coming off his fingers as he types. It's precious.

Anonymous said...

6:14 go back and read singer, I mean 4:30 now I will agree 4:57 qualifies as a hater but you'll need to stipulate the 4:30 rant was equally hate filled. Else you are another shill for MTA.

Anonymous said...

Also it is very annoying they have people every week it seems putting posts on here about big announcements, or partnerships with Australian clubs or German players coming to join them. They should not need to constantly look for attention.

Anonymous said...

6:30 - you can't be that naive to think those are coming from a mta person do you...... Oh, by the way I've got some swampland I would like to sell you in FL..

Anonymous said...

430/614-

Its the idea put forth by SOME mta and ssm coaches, directors, and overzealous parents that they are the only two clubs in MN where talented individual players or teams can be found...there are a number of quality teams/clubs from out side of the two on both the boys and girls side, but SOME people associated with both ssm and mta insist on disregarding them as rec teams/clubs. This kind of sentiment has a tendency to wear on people and causes those adversely effected individuals to resent both clubs and those assoicated with them....I think we'd all agree that there is nothing less attractive or more annoying/infuriating than a superiority complex...and in this case it is only made that much worse by the fact that this sense of superiority is derived from the successes/failures of children playing a game...Yes, it is just a game.

«Oldest ‹Older   1201 – 1400 of 2440   Newer› Newest»