Stay and Play

[thedudeabides]

It's simple math. Take the woman's side whining about higher pay without producing the revenue to justify it, then in the same breath, doubling down and turning off probably half of fans / paying customers with National Anthem kneeling...what a genius decision to grow interest in your sport and generate revenue.

Like increasingly other BS issues in our society, soccer has ridiculous obstacles in the US, but a large pool of talent is not one of them.

I would just add "potential pool of talent" When African-Americans are predominantly choosing baseball, football, and basketball ahead of soccer in the development years, we are missing out on a large pool of potential soccer stars.

 

[MicPaPa]

I would just add "potential pool of talent" When African-Americans are predominantly choosing baseball, football, and basketball ahead of soccer in the development years, we are missing out on a large pool of potential soccer stars.

Yes, and eu doesn't face this issue with several other more popular sports.

 

[notintheface]

The thing to remember about stay-and-play is that it is a conscious choice by team admins, coaches, and parents to all go along with the swindling.

If the last year has taught us all anything, it is that we do not need to spend thousands of dollars in order to get decent competition for these kids. Scrimmages provide just as much competition between good teams for everyone except the absolute pinnacle, and even then there can be grassroots coopetition for two coaches at that high level to put their teams against each other.

For tournaments and "ID camps" that require specific hotels, there is going to be a gigantic reckoning coming. If nothing else, the pandemic has pulled back the veil for a bunch of parents on the inner workings of the business.

 

[Grace T.]

"Players as young as 9-10 are bought and sold as commodities and abandoned if they can’t cut it (long string if stories on the net about players cut from their academies and stuck now both off the sports/academic tracks... some with money go the us for college sports)."

Grace T, please stop making things up, there are few of us who went through Euro system as kids, no children as young as 9-10 were "bought and sold as commodities"!

 

[watfly]

The chief difference between the us/eu is the academy system and player tracking. It is ruthlessly capitalist. Players as young as 9-10 are bought and sold as commodities and abandoned if they can’t cut it (long string if stories on the net about players cut from their academies and stuck now both off the sports/academic tracks... some with money go the us for college sports). The academies are limited to the best of the best that intend to play pro. The rest are all rec like our ayso programs. Unlike the us, playing sports in college, college admissions, and scholarships are not a concern because university is either accessible through social connections or examination (no students creating fake charities in Europe). There’s nothing really socialist about this. It is more ruthlessly capitalistic and meritocratic than the us. It’s also why minorities are prone to play pro in Europe: the white middle class kids parents are too scared to take a roll of the dice on the academy system which will take them away from test prep...more recent arrivals are more willing to roll the dice.

I've posted this article before, it does a good job of explaining the ruthlessness of youth academy soccer in England.

Premier League Castoffs, Starting Over at Age 11 (Published 2017)

England’s soccer machine discards preteen players, and their dreams, with ease and efficiency every year. But not every player, or every family, is willing to give up.

www.nytimes.com

I don't buy the argument that our best athletes don't play soccer. We have more kids playing youth soccer than any other country in the world by a wide margin, only Germany is remotely close. Soccer gets its fair share of great American athletes. I've said this before...I've never looked at an USMNT and thought it wasn't full of great athletes. The size and speed of our athletes is typically superior to other countries. IMO our problem is player identification. To me soccer is a decision making sport more than anything else. You can have all the ball skill, size and speed in the world but if you can't make the right decisions then you don't have much value. You have to have the ability to see the field and make good decisions quickly aka Soccer IQ. IMO soccer is a sport that is played with the mind more so than the body. Of course you still have to have the skills to execute the decisions with accuracy. I see coaches all the time choose the best athletes and most skill full players thinking they can improve their soccer IQ. I think its easier to improve someone's skill than it is to improve their soccer IQ. We need to pick more players that are good decision makers. I think we put way too much reliance on 1v1 players because they're the flashy ones (and unfortunately oftentimes 1v1 players think their 1v3 players which is a problem). You obviously need good 1v1 players but you have to be careful. When a player goes 1v1 what are they looking at? Their focus is on the defender and not their teammates. The defender can't help them score but their teammates can. In part, I think our focus on athletes and not decision makers is a cultural issue. I'm just rambling but that's my $.02.

 

[lafalafa]

Pay and pay more is stay and play some times.

Depending on the location some times a tournament stay & play rate is better vs what you can find normally without discounts. The 30-60 service fee for the travel company well that's another story as are the kickback to the tournament hosts.

We prefer renting place airbnb or staying with friends for the adults, having the players staying together for accommodations is fine once the kids are of a certain age and some bonding can be good experience for them.

Travel Youth sports can and does get expensive and there are certain demographics that just don't participate because of that which is unfortunate so we need to find ways to have more local play and more affordability for everyone.

 

[whatithink]

I agree with the modeling. I would be interested to see the NFL or MLB try the youth academy model...would take a generation or two to measure success. Not sure, but I believe in Europe they do not play HS or College sports...I don't think that would work out in the US though.

The European model is diff. I'm more familiar with Britain & Ireland, but there the soccer is with your local team. If you are good enough, then you'll get selected to an all star team or county team which plays at a higher level. The schools also have teams (HS), as do colleges (some even do some scholarships but not many). The best players move to the higher levels and get scouted by the prof clubs. The local clubs are run by volunteers - hard core soccer people and they will have some coaching creds (generally sponsored by the national FA), but they do it because they want to, not have to. Localities have various divisions etc.

There's no incentive for any of the US/CA sports to develop at a youth level. MLs differs as they can sell to the big leagues, so there is $ in it for them.

As GraceT said, the European soccer clubs are 100% capitalistic. The US sports (NFL, NBA, MLB, NHL & MLS) are not. Bizarrely they are more socialist in nature - aside from the $ involved obviously - in how they are run. No relegation, no penalty for failure, collective agreements with players / revenue shares, protected markets ... bank the money year after year. There is an irony to how major US sports are run TBH.

 

[Grace T.]

I've posted this article before, it does a good job of explaining the ruthlessness of youth academy soccer in England.

Premier League Castoffs, Starting Over at Age 11 (Published 2017)

England’s soccer machine discards preteen players, and their dreams, with ease and efficiency every year. But not every player, or every family, is willing to give up.

www.nytimes.com

I don't buy the argument that our best athletes don't play soccer. We have more kids playing youth soccer than any other country in the world by a wide margin, only Germany is remotely close. Soccer gets its fair share of great American athletes. I've said this before...I've never looked at an USMNT and thought it wasn't full of great athletes. The size and speed of our athletes is typically superior to other countries. IMO our problem is player identification. To me soccer is a decision making sport more than anything else. You can have all the ball skill, size and speed in the world but if you can't make the right decisions then you don't have much value. You have to have the ability to see the field and make good decisions quickly aka Soccer IQ. IMO soccer is a sport that is played with the mind more so than the body. Of course you still have to have the skills to execute the decisions with accuracy. I see coaches all the time choose the best athletes and most skill full players thinking they can improve their soccer IQ. I think its easier to improve someone's skill than it is to improve their soccer IQ. We need to pick more players that are good decision makers. I think we put way too much reliance on 1v1 players because they're the flashy ones (and unfortunately oftentimes 1v1 players think their 1v3 players which is a problem). You obviously need good 1v1 players but you have to be careful. When a player goes 1v1 what are they looking at? Their focus is on the defender and not their teammates. The defender can't help them score but their teammates can. In part, I think our focus on athletes and not decision makers is a cultural issue. I'm just rambling but that's my $.02.

I think you have a very good point about the 1v1s. You see the emphasis on it throughout the US Soccer system. There was the Coever system. A large chunk of the AYSO tests for extreme/united focus on 1v1s. The US Soccer coaching guidance focuses on building up practices from small sides (1v1 2v2) up to scrimmage at the end of practice. In camps, a lot of what they emphasize is 1v1. Even our small sided field younger games focus more on taking on players 1 v 1 since the space is lacking to truly spread the field (Europe does a lot of futsal at the younger ages, but look at the u10 clip above....it's a short sided game but on a pretty big field). My son has worked with 2 coaches with ancestry from the UK, and 2 coaches from Latin America. The UK coaches always did 1 v 1. I can't remember the last time my son's Latin American coaches did 1v1.

 

[whatithink]

I get what you are saying but the greed has gotten out of hand. If you look at tourney fees 10 years ago, they were substantially less, even when adjusted for inflation. So it isn't that they have to do it to cover their costs, they are doing it to make even more money; and that is their prerogative, but I do believe there are unintended consequences that I pointed out in my original post.

There's more demand now than 10 years ago. As long as they get filled, the price will be reflective. The quality has probably diminished, e.g. Surf best of the best, but the tournaments are there to make money. They are not a service, they are product and will be priced accordingly with specific T&Cs (stay & play) that you need to adhere to or not.

 

[whatithink]

I've posted this article before, it does a good job of explaining the ruthlessness of youth academy soccer in England.

Premier League Castoffs, Starting Over at Age 11 (Published 2017)

England’s soccer machine discards preteen players, and their dreams, with ease and efficiency every year. But not every player, or every family, is willing to give up.

www.nytimes.com

I don't buy the argument that our best athletes don't play soccer. We have more kids playing youth soccer than any other country in the world by a wide margin, only Germany is remotely close. Soccer gets its fair share of great American athletes. I've said this before...I've never looked at an USMNT and thought it wasn't full of great athletes. The size and speed of our athletes is typically superior to other countries. IMO our problem is player identification. To me soccer is a decision making sport more than anything else. You can have all the ball skill, size and speed in the world but if you can't make the right decisions then you don't have much value. You have to have the ability to see the field and make good decisions quickly aka Soccer IQ. IMO soccer is a sport that is played with the mind more so than the body. Of course you still have to have the skills to execute the decisions with accuracy. I see coaches all the time choose the best athletes and most skill full players thinking they can improve their soccer IQ. I think its easier to improve someone's skill than it is to improve their soccer IQ. We need to pick more players that are good decision makers. I think we put way too much reliance on 1v1 players because they're the flashy ones (and unfortunately oftentimes 1v1 players think their 1v3 players which is a problem). You obviously need good 1v1 players but you have to be careful. When a player goes 1v1 what are they looking at? Their focus is on the defender and not their teammates. The defender can't help them score but their teammates can. In part, I think our focus on athletes and not decision makers is a cultural issue. I'm just rambling but that's my $.02.

Agree with you generally. I saw a game a few years back, at Man City Cup (U14 or 15), between Man City and RSL. The RSL kids were bigger, faster etc. The Man City kids were all noticeably smaller. It was very striking. Fundamentally different selection process is what I thought.

Van Der Sar, Ajax CEO, said a while back, the only team at Ajax that needs to win is the first team. They don't care about any other team winning. Obviously, they have developed a long listed of world class players. Their academy is ruthless with annual reviews/cuts from entry.

 

[happy9]

Agree with you generally. I saw a game a few years back, at Man City Cup (U14 or 15), between Man City and RSL. The RSL kids were bigger, faster etc. The Man City kids were all noticeably smaller. It was very striking. Fundamentally different selection process is what I thought.

Van Der Sar, Ajax CEO, said a while back, the only team at Ajax that needs to win is the first team. They don't care about any other team winning. Obviously, they have developed a long listed of world class players. Their academy is ruthless with annual reviews/cuts from entry.

Who won?

 

[watfly]

I think you have a very good point about the 1v1s. You see the emphasis on it throughout the US Soccer system. There was the Coever system. A large chunk of the AYSO tests for extreme/united focus on 1v1s. The US Soccer coaching guidance focuses on building up practices from small sides (1v1 2v2) up to scrimmage at the end of practice. In camps, a lot of what they emphasize is 1v1. Even our small sided field younger games focus more on taking on players 1 v 1 since the space is lacking to truly spread the field (Europe does a lot of futsal at the younger ages, but look at the u10 clip above....it's a short sided game but on a pretty big field). My son has worked with 2 coaches with ancestry from the UK, and 2 coaches from Latin America. The UK coaches always did 1 v 1. I can't remember the last time my son's Latin American coaches did 1v1.

I don't want to come across as anti 1v1, I'm not, it should be a tool in every player's arsenal, I just think its overly emphasized over decision making and field vision. I also think we've narrowed down the definition of 1v1 play to an offensive player with possession beating a defensive player on the dribble, or in the alternative the defensive player not getting beat on the dribble. A more important aspect of 1v1 play to me is a player being able to win 60-40, 50-50, 40-60 balls.

 

[watfly]

I would just add "potential pool of talent" When African-Americans are predominantly choosing baseball, football, and basketball ahead of soccer in the development years, we are missing out on a large pool of potential soccer stars.

Its interesting. Our last World Cup team (2014) was 40% African-American, much greater than the general population and we still have quite a number of black athletes in our current USMNT pool. However, I see very few black athletes on SoCal youth soccer teams. I wonder why there is the disparity between the two?

Back to the original topic, I've never had a coach or club hold a gun to my head and say my kid had to play in a tournament. Not saying that youth soccer isn't a racket at times, but its really no different than other youth sports. It's actually a pretty good value compared to some.

 

[whatithink]

Who won?

RSL actually, but yet Man City didn't "pick up" a single one of them, while their team went back to Manchester ... where would you prefer your kid to be?

 

[notintheface]

However, I see very few black athletes on SoCal youth soccer teams. I wonder why there is the disparity between the two?

You're in the "stay and play" thread. That's not a coincidence. There are some absolute ballers in the inner city but you don't know about them because of $$$.

 

[Grace T.]

RSL actually, but yet Man City didn't "pick up" a single one of them, while their team went back to Manchester ... where would you prefer your kid to be?

Well, the other thing that is true of the European academy players is they are early bloomers both physically and mentally. Look at the clip of the Barsca v Real game up above. The goalkeepers can bang the goalkick past the half way line....my kid, who trained the position starting at age 9, couldn't do that until age 11. They aren't as tall or fast as US players, but are compact and athletic. They are put on pressure early....notice the early goal at the beginning when the Barsa GK makes a backpass mistake....there's no pulling him from the game or changing alternatively to a long ball....back in the saddle keep playing the same game on national TV. The goalkeepers while still very raw (they can't catch) are executing 1 v 1 saves, coming out on crossing, and executing dives which no reputable US coach would start to teach them before age 9.

 

[crush]

The poor or lower middle class families couldn't or still can't afford all this soccer. Poor kids who can ball will always get the free handout or the rich parents will pay for the kid who can score goals and win nattys ((Maps teams did this he said as well)). The old system was all about "pay to play" & "pay and stay or no play" Even doing all that does not promise someone play time. I know a few parents who paid and paid some more and still no play for dd. That sucks!!! I would love to help poor kids play soccer for free in the future. Scrimmages are free so shall soccer. I say free soccer at the grass roots. Keep it local until 14 years old. BTW, I love ECNL for college purposes. I would like to see free soccer.

 

[Grace T.]

The poor or lower middle class families couldn't or still can't afford all this soccer. Poor kids who can ball will always get the free handout or the rich parents will pay for the kid who can score goals and win nattys ((Maps teams did this he said as well)). The old system was all about "pay to play" & "pay and stay or no play" Even doing all that does not promise someone play time. I know a few parents who paid and paid some more and still no play for dd. That sucks!!! I would love to help poor kids play soccer for free in the future. Scrimmages are free so shall soccer. I say free soccer at the grass roots. Keep it local until 14 years old. BTW, I love ECNL for college purposes. I would like to see free soccer.

In the younger years, there are a lot of club teams that are available to working class kid. My kid has played now on 2 almost all Latino teams (he's been near being the richest kid on both of them). We've scrimmaged against a lot of all Latino teams as well. The coaches don't charge huge coaching fees and do it largely for the love of the game, but they aren't as organized as the well established middle class clubs. The kids and parents though are really passionate about soccer and do it more for a love of the game than the college scholarship they can get. He's also played on an AYSO United Team that brought on some working class players who could afford it due to their more affordable fee structure and they have scholarships for hardship cases. AYSO United, inner city, and Latino teams have done extremely well on the boys side in the lower levels, including beating out the higher priced clubs in the State Cub.

The problem, though, is there's a glass barrier to the higher level/older teams where the fees get out of control, you have to engage in a huge amount of driving to get to the particular club, and the tournament costs. There's also developing an SCDSL (or whatever they call themselves now) and Coast split as the United, inner city and Latino teams have a tendency to play Coast.

 

[thedudeabides]

Its interesting. Our last World Cup team (2014) was 40% African-American, much greater than the general population and we still have quite a number of black athletes in our current USMNT pool. However, I see very few black athletes on SoCal youth soccer teams. I wonder why there is the disparity between the two?

Back to the original topic, I've never had a coach or club hold a gun to my head and say my kid had to play in a tournament. Not saying that youth soccer isn't a racket at times, but its really no different than other youth sports. It's actually a pretty good value compared to some.

Yes, that statistic may actually demonstrate how much more dominant they could be if they had similar numbers participating at a young age in the heavier soccer regions like SoCal. As far as youth soccer being like other sports, that is true to an extent for the ones that have club as a higher level option (doesn't really apply to football or many individual sports) but I'm speaking more about the US vs other countries. We have created too many financial barriers for kids to participate and enjoy a sport and the whole helicopter parent mentality has smothered our kids and created way too many parents that have lost a rational perspective of their kid's ability.

 

[Zvezdas]

Please stop bs, if you never lived in Europe or never experienced playing at local soccer club refrain from making s up! if you did play as a kid in European academy system (in any EU or non-EU country) do entertain me with your first hand experience, please.