What CL Teams Won't Make?

ntxsoccerchat wrote:My bad on the Texans White thing. No fair putting teams out of order!

On the other note, doesn't matter what system CL puts in place. Coaches (or directors or parents or whomever you wish to blame today) will find a way around, over or through the rules.

happyfeet wrote:

Cranky wrote:

RedBaron wrote:

True10 wrote:

soccerdad1 wrote:I agree as we were beat by a top 97 team before. My point was a club could put a 97 Plano team in a 96 Classic league spot if they had the bye. I am all fore bringing the N+1 rule back.

The classic league people cannot be oblivious. I hope. N+1, I think would not solve the problem. A move up one division and not letting a younger team move up would be a possibility in conjunction with/and/or a n+1 system might work. Just a thought.

So did any teams not make?

Sorry - the Classic board needs to STOP inventing rules to curb work around. They need to step up and evaluate the violators and put them in their place. Headed in a different direction, the new substitution rule is absurd. How many players will work their butt off during practice only to ride pine during games. WHAT purpose does the rule enforce? If there are too many substitutions, then have the refs deny the number of substitutions at the end of the game. Don't penalize the young men trying to get playing time on a competitive team.

Where you go wrong is thinking the Classic Board is there to help and or protect the players. There purpose, from what I have seen, is to protect and further the goals of the clubs.

Where you go wrong is thinking the league came up with this out of the blue. It was approved by the coach's committee. So if you don't like it, you may want to go talk with your coach or DOC, as they probably voted for it!