AYSO's Mike Hoyer: Youth soccer needs options between entry level and full travel/club commitment

IMO, part of the problem is that club soccer is ultimately a business. If “development” was the ultimate end goal and simply breaking absolutely even (with a small amount of reserves) was acceptable then there wouldn’t be a need to have 3-4 teams in certain age groups. You could simply focus time and effort on a handful of kids.

How many kids are really turned away every tryout season and “recommended” to go back to Rec? Very few probably. Most kids will get turned down from Galaxy and then go to Beach. If they get turned down from Beach, they will go to Western Ave FC. If they go to enough tryouts, they will probably get asked to play.
 
SPChamp1 said:
IMO, part of the problem is that club soccer is ultimately a business. If “development” was the ultimate end goal and simply breaking absolutely even (with a small amount of reserves) was acceptable then there wouldn’t be a need to have 3-4 teams in certain age groups. You could simply focus time and effort on a handful of kids.

How many kids are really turned away every tryout season and “recommended” to go back to Rec? Very few probably. Most kids will get turned down from Galaxy and then go to Beach. If they get turned down from Beach, they will go to Western Ave FC. If they go to enough tryouts, they will probably get asked to play.
Click to expand...

You have it upside down. The explosion in club soccer was never caused by the elite players. Many soccer clubs have been around since the 70s and back then high school was an option for recruitment. The explosion of 3-4 teams were caused by the middle players. AYSO began with a philosophy that everyone should play together from the elite player to the handicapped kids. But the parents of those middle players, particularly those with college aspirations, got tired of the product AYSO and other rec programs were offering-- coaches that didn't know anything about the game, players who couldn't connect a pass, and AllStar programs that were increasingly political. The AYSO core program didn't appeal to these parents, who now were being exposed to even low levels of professional and high school soccer and sort of had an idea of what the game is supposed to look like (such as during the US World cup), even if they were foggy on the details. AYSO was wedded to a uniquely American perspective that kids shouldn't be tracked and sorted (which is why before magnets were introduced our public school systems are organized the way they are) and that everyone is equal. AYSO was the victim of its own bad product, and a philosophy which became outdated as the competition pendulum swung. Hey...parents are now even paying people to coach their children in fortnite, so when hypercompetitive parents crash into an egalitarian philosophy with a bad product, this was bound to happen. Apparently these fortnite coaches are making more than some soccer coaches.

https://www.businessinsider.com/fortnite-coaches-2018-7

That's why if we care about the participation rate and having a broadbased participation, having multiple levels of soccer is a good thing.
 
p.s. the good news for rec programs is that things are changing. Increasingly as parents who played have kids, the entire coaches and ref who don't know what they are doing will go away. And IMHO, the AYSO coaching materials and program are just simply better than the way US Soccer has gone. Also note the UK has multiple levels of soccer, with a very small elite academy program at the top of the pyramid...the result there is lot's of kickball too at the lower and introductory levels.
 
Grace T. said:
You have it upside down. The explosion in club soccer was never caused by the elite players. Many soccer clubs have been around since the 70s and back then high school was an option for recruitment. The explosion of 3-4 teams were caused by the middle players. AYSO began with a philosophy that everyone should play together from the elite player to the handicapped kids. But the parents of those middle players, particularly those with college aspirations, got tired of the product AYSO and other rec programs were offering-- coaches that didn't know anything about the game, players who couldn't connect a pass, and AllStar programs that were increasingly political. The AYSO core program didn't appeal to these parents, who now were being exposed to even low levels of professional and high school soccer and sort of had an idea of what the game is supposed to look like (such as during the US World cup), even if they were foggy on the details. AYSO was wedded to a uniquely American perspective that kids shouldn't be tracked and sorted (which is why before magnets were introduced our public school systems are organized the way they are) and that everyone is equal. AYSO was the victim of its own bad product, and a philosophy which became outdated as the competition pendulum swung. Hey...parents are now even paying people to coach their children in fortnite, so when hypercompetitive parents crash into an egalitarian philosophy with a bad product, this was bound to happen. Apparently these fortnite coaches are making more than some soccer coaches.

https://www.businessinsider.com/fortnite-coaches-2018-7

That's why if we care about the participation rate and having a broadbased participation, having multiple levels of soccer is a good thing.
Click to expand...
I like this post a lot. Your comment on middle rung player resonates truth. Club was in its infancy when I was a youth it did not draw the best players or offer better coaching. But that was then. Now it is the bridge that offers middle ground players a chance of real growth.
 
Grace, I absolutely agree. You definitely said it better than I did.

I was just saying that as the “middle players” sought better coaching and competition, clubs took that opportunity to grow with that demand, disregarding children that had no business being there because the parents were willing to pay for it.

I’m 38yrs old, grew up playing AYSO, played in High School, attempted to play in college (injury ended that experience). But back in the early 90’s Club Soccer was still fairly closed and only really accessible for the top talent of the age groups and according to my mother, was extremely expensive. Open tryouts with 100 kids wasn’t the norm if at all. It wasn’t until around mid to late 90’s (1994 World Cup) that it started to open up and become more accessible to those not necessarily at the top level of talent.

As you mentioned, when those middle level parents sought something else and were willing to shell out the money for it, the clubs began to open the doors.
 
SPChamp1 said:
d.

I was just saying that as the “middle players” sought better coaching and competition, clubs took that opportunity to grow with that demand, disregarding children that had no business being there because the parents were willing to pay for it.
.
Click to expand...

Where I disagree [sort of] is the "no business being there". Like I always harp about around here, it depends what we want to do...what's the goal? If it's to create a men's national team well then absolutely right. The UK system, for example, has a very small elite program at the top and it's middle academies have been shutting down...with our DA program we seem to be doing the opposite as more and more clubs think they have to have one...and well, much like in the rest of the world, the girls are completely irrelevant if our sole goal is to create a pros and a men's national team. But if our goal is to create college players, the current system is working very well in that respect...sure there are C and D teams that won't make it to college but then the news recently in the NYT about kids dropping out when they reach high school should be greeted as welcomed news...the system is self-correcting. And if our goal is to create broadbased participation, well then having those C and D teams, along with choices like United and Extras, is exactly what we need because then the news about kids dropping out is a problem...we need more choices not less. As I've said before: you can have your soccer competitive, accessible to all or developmental...pick 2.
 
Yes exactly. In England, the professional teams have their academy teams (fully funded) which is very serious, closed and only for the top top players. Everything else is voluntary and grassroots pretty much. Some teams try to compete as a development club but that's just for those who are easy targets to sell higher prices to, and they still play with the grassroots teams.

There aren't enough professional teams in Southern California to have an academy league for just the professional teams, but yes it seems there are way too many DA teams here and seems to be a shift towards a much watered down club scene where some clubs will take any players, regardless of ability or commitment.

But as Grace said, it depends what the US wants. Personally, I don't think it makes sense to have dozens and dozens of DA and Flight 1 teams, it should be difficult to get to that point in my opinion, with more Flight 2 (AYSO United), Flight 3 (AYSO Extra) and eventually a Flight 4 (AYSO Core), shaped in a pyramid style with very few flight 1 teams and dozens of flight 4 teams.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top