# Youth broken system



## coachsamy (Jul 19, 2018)

According to ESPN, its DA, some expensive travel ball or nothing. Interesting views, however I do think there is plenty of opportunities for the middle kid that they claim have no opportunity to play.

http://www.espn.com/video/clip?id=3569463


----------



## younothat (Jul 19, 2018)

Youth Soccer participation is down 14%  600,000 fewer participants between 6-12
p2p not helpful

Taylor Twellman:
In between..from "elite travel soccer academies" to home town play (Ayso, Latin Leagues) is diminishing
If you're not good enough for "elite travel soccer" there is no place for you in the us system
Putting kids 9,10,11,12,13 into some serious soccer situations can be detrimental to them as human beings
N'Golg Kante' of France one of the best of the WC tournament was playing in the 9th Division when he started  and worked his way up, in the US he would have been told he was not good enough and fallen to the waste side
If USSDA is on the top what's in between?
If you don't play to pay there are no other good options for parents which is a huge problem
Smaller level home town teams are having to combine because the kids are moving to development academies or quitting
Everything is so structured there is no creativity, you can't develop robots.  Cultural questions; kids need to be playing with freedom all day but not with coaches, cones organized all the time.

Could nitpick some of what TT is says but he has some good points and hard to argue with the facts.   P2P is helpful but only too a certain % of  the players IMO and the rest (majority) would be better off in between


----------



## timbuck (Jul 19, 2018)

With regard to soccer not being affordable/accessible to lower income families...
My kid played in Copa Del Mar this past weekend.  Well run tournament.  Great fields.  Good competition.
But....$10 per day for parking.  Wife drove separate so we were $20 on Saturday.   $10 on Sunday. Made the final which was played on Monday. $40 for parking.
Tank of gas back and forth from OC 8 times.
Coupled with a Monday final. Many families of lower income have parents working weekends.  Or they are certainly working on a Monday.  I have a bit of flexibility with my job, but I was on conference calls the way up and back.

What reason other than parking revenue would there be to have a final on a Monday?

The actual soccer is expensive enough. But to tack on another $100 just to get to the fields coupled with possible lost income you can see why local unsanctioned leagues are popular.


----------



## rainbow_unicorn (Jul 19, 2018)

If N'Golo Kante played in the US 8 years ago he would be on the USMNT as opposed to 9th division French league. 

I don't agree that there is nowhere for non-DA 9 to 13 year olds to play...what about the thousands of non-DA club, AYSO or local teams?  Also get tired of hearing about "look how Germany and Belgium have been successful".   It's hard to draw an apples-to-apples comparison between the US and any other country in the world.  Geographically the US is so big that the travel component is an issue in of itself.  The US also has so many more sports that compete against soccer for the best athletes.


----------



## younothat (Jul 19, 2018)

timbuck said:


> With regard to soccer not being affordable/accessible to lower income families...
> My kid played in Copa Del Mar this past weekend.  Well run tournament.  Great fields.  Good competition.
> But....$10 per day for parking.  Wife drive separate so we were $20 on Saturday.   $10 on Sunday. Made the final which was played on Monday. $40 for parking.
> Tank of gas back and forth from OC 8 times.
> ...


Hotel Stay 3 nights; family room = $600
Gas, Food, entertainment $400
Tournament fee per player = $60-to 100.  If you have multiple kids x2,x3     (Sponsored team maybe 0% or reduced cost)

Not uncommon to spend a $1K (grand) if you go out of town for a tournament even if its in San Diego.

If I didn't work for myself no way I could afford these tourneys for my kids .   Much rather go to Hawaii for week and rent a condo if I'm spending thousands on tournaments each year.   Even when there on sponsored teams travel is not covered for the family so we don't attend many


----------



## younothat (Jul 19, 2018)

rainbow_unicorn said:


> If N'Golo Kante played in the US 8 years ago he would be on the USMNT as opposed to 9th division French league.
> 
> I don't agree that there is nowhere for non-DA 9 to 13 year olds to play...what about the thousands of non-DA club, AYSO or local teams?  Also get tired of hearing about "look how Germany and Belgium have been successful".   It's hard to draw an apples-to-apples comparison between the US and any other country in the world.  Geographically the US is so big that the travel component is an issue in of itself.  The US also has so many more sports that compete against soccer for the best athletes.


N'Golo Kante was not the finished product you see today so who knows if he would even still be playing if he was in the US.    

We have a lot of Latin unsanctioned leagues so there are places in Socal but don't think its like that in the rest of the US.   AYSO has seen a drop off in numbers 
https://www.socceramerica.com/publications/article/76121/new-study-finds-big-drop-in-soccer-participation-i.html


----------



## coachsamy (Jul 19, 2018)

The biggest issue I see with pay to play, that it is a social activity to massage the ego of parents. At the end of the day you need your neighbors kids that are not "good" enough to be in XYZ club to be able to play so the kids can meet up at their local park and play, like they do other sports.


----------



## Dargle (Jul 19, 2018)

younothat said:


> N'Golo Kante was not the finished product you see today so who knows if he would even still be playing if he was in the US.
> 
> We have a lot of Latin unsanctioned leagues so there are places in Socal but don't think its like that in the rest of the US.   AYSO has seen a drop off in numbers
> https://www.socceramerica.com/publications/article/76121/new-study-finds-big-drop-in-soccer-participation-i.html


Some have argued that the birth year age group shift hurt AYSO, but I don't think so (AYSO delayed implementation until this coming year, so it wasn't responsible for the reported drop-off).  What really hurt AYSO was an attempt to keep up.  When I first started, a few top players moved from AYSO to club at U10 (some even played in both for a year or two), but most didn't move until U12 or U13.  Then average players started moving over earlier as clubs expanded teams and the number of clubs grew (seeking money, competing with DA's drop to U12, etc) and club dropped down their youngest age groups from U10 to U8.  AYSO tried to compete and created Extra/Plus or whatever other name you want to give to it.  That really hurt AYSO, because they lost not only the upper half of the league in terms of skill to either club or Extra, but the top volunteer parents/coaches/referees too.  Many AYSO regions had Extra teams at U10 and U11, but didn't even have enough quality kids to field one at U12 because Extra was just a gateway to club for most kids and those who didn't want to or couldn't make that jump in commitment didn't want to go back to the regular AYSO because it was seen as a demotion.  Those are the saddest cases of kids who quit altogether, because they actually would have played quite successfully and for quite a few years more under the old system.  The creation of Extra actually hastened their departures.


----------



## Messi>CR7 (Jul 19, 2018)

Twellman made some good points, but I would not call it a broken system.  What we have is the end product based on our culture and priority.

My 10-year old DD loves watching soccer and watched about 15 WC matches with me.  But when I asked if she ever discussed WC with her teammates, the answer was no.  Soccer is not deep in our culture and there aren't enough local stars that inspire our kids to watch and play soccer all day on their own.

Pay-to-play, as many on this forum have pointed out, is necessary (especially for girls) since clubs don't get payments for developing young players in the US.  Barcelona paid for Messi's growth medicine when he was an undersized kid.  I don't know where that money would come from if Messi were playing in the US.

I think for many of us, soccer is a from of entertainment, a fabulous way to spend precious time with our kids, and perhaps a mean to improve the chance to get into a good college.  I saw a Netflix documentary "Class of '92" that profiled an English team in the 7th division.  If anything the show did a good job of portraying the love for futbol as men in their late 20s and 30s live and die to have one more shot at a soccer career.  And "one more shot" merely means having a chance to play soccer semi-professionally (some don't get paid) while holding a day-time job somewhere else.


----------



## 46n2 (Jul 19, 2018)

Remember in the 80's when you made All Star Team in baseball how everyone was super happy for you.  Soccer has alot of jealously issues in the US.
In my country we just play and the pack gets divided as children evolved , in the US , people feel entitled because they *PAY* they think their kid *CAN* play....
Pls send all hatemail to my inbox .
Thank you.


----------



## jrcaesar (Jul 19, 2018)

Dargle said:


> ... kids who quit altogether, because they actually would have played quite successfully and for quite a few years more under the old system. The creation of Extra actually hastened their departures.


^^^Yes to this. Completely agree.^^^


----------



## Grace T. (Jul 19, 2018)

timbuck said:


> The actual soccer is expensive enough. But to tack on another $100 just to get to the fields couple with possible lost income you can see why local unsanctioned leagues are popular.



Yup, for lower income families it's the time of work, transport, hotels and parking expenses.  The problem isn't the jump from Latino League or AYSO to club....there are plenty of tracksuit coaches skulking around these games willing to offer quality players scholarships and clubs with lower fees aimed at low income players....it's that the players hit a ceiling when it comes time to advance beyond the flights 3 and 2 because then the travel becomes longer and the expenses heavier.



Dargle said:


> .  The creation of Extra actually hastened their departures.


AYSO has doubled down on this approach by creating United, which is AYSO's entrant into the club soccer world.  On the one hand, this allows for a great middle ground in soccer: lower fees, guaranteed play time, and clears out Extras for new players as they advance into United.  On the other hand, it's further gutting the basic program from experienced coaches/refs and discourages kids who don't make it.



Messi>CR7 said:


> My 10-year old DD loves watching soccer and watched about 15 WC matches with me.  But when I asked if she ever discussed WC with her teammates, the answer was no.  Soccer is not deep in our culture and there aren't enough local stars that inspire our kids to watch and play soccer all day on their own.
> 
> .


This might be a girl/boy thing.  At One Soccer Camp, my son tells me the boys and male coaches all had rousing discussions and arguments during the world cup, with players following their preferred teams religiously (even giving up swim time to watch their team's games).



46n2 said:


> Remember in the 80's when you made All Star Team in baseball how everyone was super happy for you.  Soccer has alot of jealously issues in the US.
> In my country we just play and the pack gets divided as children evolved , in the US , people feel entitled because they *PAY* they think their kid *CAN* play....
> Pls send all hatemail to my inbox .
> Thank you.


All Star Team selection both in soccer and other sports have become highly political, which was one of the reasons parents pushed for the creation of other products.  With my older, I remember his basketball league's allstar team was made up mostly of coach's and referee's sons.


----------



## 46n2 (Jul 19, 2018)

[/QUOTE] All Star Team selection both in soccer and other sports have become highly political, which was one of the reasons parents pushed for the creation of other products.  With my older, I remember his basketball league's allstar team was made up mostly of coach's and referee's sons.[/QUOTE]

Agreed, thats why my kids play soccer--


----------



## jrcaesar (Jul 19, 2018)

Grace T. said:


> AYSO has doubled down on this approach by creating United, which is AYSO's entrant into the club soccer world.


AYSO is telling families, "If your kid is Rec Level Good, then (s)he should be playing Club. And, hey, we have that now."

They *should *be doing the opposite: "If your kid is Rec Level Good, then get them off that Flight 3 team, get them *out* of Club, and have them play in AYSO."


----------



## Sportyspice (Jul 19, 2018)

timbuck said:


> With regard to soccer not being affordable/accessible to lower income families...
> My kid played in Copa Del Mar this past weekend.  Well run tournament.  Great fields.  Good competition.
> But....$10 per day for parking.  Wife drove separate so we were $20 on Saturday.   $10 on Sunday. Made the final which was played on Monday. $40 for parking.
> Tank of gas back and forth from OC 8 times.
> ...


Don't get me started. We have two kids playing now so it was $10 at the Polo Fields & $12 at Oceanside Sports Complex. Forget inviting family & friends its gotten to be ridiculous. And yesss!!! Please tell me why games need to spill over to Mondays again?

It has gotten to be a bit too much. This is a small version of a complete rant I can have regarding this but I wont.


----------



## soccer dude (Jul 19, 2018)

Sportyspice said:


> Don't get me started. We have two kids playing now so it was $10 at the Polo Fields & $12 at Oceanside Sports Complex. Forget inviting family & friends its gotten to be ridiculous. And yesss!!! Please tell me why games need to spill over to Mondays again?
> 
> It has gotten to be a bit too much. This is a small version of a complete rant I can have regarding this but I wont.



I agree that Monday is a total money maker.  There needs to be some monitoring system in the US that prevents clubs from doing this to the parents.  I love surf cup but not the Monday consolation games where everyone needs to come back.  I'm sorry, if we don't make the semi's, I'd rather go home and forgo the 1 day of overpayment.  In my day (and in 2014 or earlier), only the best teams competed on Monday and that's the way it should be!  On a side note, I know so many parents that treat these tournaments like a vacation and stay in nice hotels, eat expensive meals, etc..  For me, it's all about soccer.  Scratch the nice hotels and meals and let's focus on soccer.  I remember on an old team of mine where I complained about having to spend $250/night at surf cup hotel for 3 nights.  All the other parents were fine with it and even said "we're not staying in a cheap hotel".  It's the culture that's wrong with soccer and I blame the parents a lot for feeding into this image persona.  Tell me again how staying in a nice hotel means your kid is a great player...


----------



## El Macho (Jul 19, 2018)

I believe that Club coaches do not work together due to egos or financial security. Two common complaints I see on the sidelines is playing time or the team not being competitive.

You see players sitting too many minutes on the bench or a team with players at many levels on a team. No player will develop to their potential without playing. This is especially true at the younger ages.

You see players that should drop to a lower level team and players that should move up. The problem is that coaches are constantly competing against each other even though at the same Club. DOC's need to think of age groups as one team. 

Just look at the big Clubs. You will sometimes see 3 teams that are all highly competitive with three different coaches. All these teams have 3 players that get very little playing time and players that if put together would challenge themselves to be better. In the end one team gets top billing the other two break up and move to different Clubs. 

Its a long conversation but in the end. Club has too many egos and too little money for Coaches to work together. 

Parents also need to relax and be realistic. Just because you spend a lot of money does not mean you are getting the best training. Good teams are usually recruited just look at DA. There are some Clubs that develop but a lot buld their teams through recruiting from other Clubs. If you see a top tier team with the majority coming within the Club then thats a good system. 

Then you also have the politics. Only certain voices are heard and not thoroughly looked at.

So I think the DOC's are were to start. They should mandate coaches to work together. They should also be more involved. How many times do you see a DOC go to a Flight 3 practice? Check not only players but his staff? What about the main DOC coming to check how the affiliate Clubs are being organized?

So, I would start with holding the DOC's more accountable for the quality of their program.


----------



## *GOBEARGO* (Jul 19, 2018)

timbuck said:


> With regard to soccer not being affordable/accessible to lower income families...
> My kid played in Copa Del Mar this past weekend.  Well run tournament.  Great fields.  Good competition.
> But....$10 per day for parking.  Wife drove separate so we were $20 on Saturday.   $10 on Sunday. Made the final which was played on Monday. $40 for parking.
> Tank of gas back and forth from OC 8 times.
> ...


Unfortunately as the saying goes "Build it and they will come" & I was one of the "they".


----------



## jpeter (Jul 19, 2018)

46n2 said:


> Remember in the 80's when you made All Star Team in baseball how everyone was super happy for you.  Soccer has alot of jealously issues in the US.
> In my country we just play and the pack gets divided as children evolved , in the US , people feel entitled because they *PAY* they think their kid *CAN* play....
> Pls send all hatemail to my inbox .
> Thank you.


Oh yeah I recall those days played over the line at the beach and sandlot until 11 when I could ride my bike far enough 4  or so miles each way to get to the local LL.

The coaches picked the all star starters but the players got to vote on the rest.  After waiting through the coaches anoucements I was finally called up to my surprised but was stoked to later hear every player on the team voted for me.    The star pitcher on the team got drafted out of HS and had a pretty good MLB career but bounced around a bit before his arm went out in his late 20's.

To be picked by my peers motivatied me to keep working hard at baseball and HS ball was a great time highlighted by the city playoffs at Dodger's stadium.


----------



## AFC (Jul 19, 2018)

soccer dude said:


> I agree that Monday is a total money maker.  There needs to be some monitoring system in the US that prevents clubs from doing this to the parents.  I love surf cup but not the Monday consolation games where everyone needs to come back.  I'm sorry, if we don't make the semi's, I'd rather go home and forgo the 1 day of overpayment.  In my day (and in 2014 or earlier), only the best teams competed on Monday and that's the way it should be!  On a side note, I know so many parents that treat these tournaments like a vacation and stay in nice hotels, eat expensive meals, etc..  For me, it's all about soccer.  Scratch the nice hotels and meals and let's focus on soccer.  I remember on an old team of mine where I complained about having to spend $250/night at surf cup hotel for 3 nights.  All the other parents were fine with it and even said "we're not staying in a cheap hotel".  It's the culture that's wrong with soccer and I blame the parents a lot for feeding into this image persona.  Tell me again how staying in a nice hotel means your kid is a great player...


Did you ever stayed at Red Roof Inn in Lancaster?


----------



## Surfref (Jul 19, 2018)

younothat said:


> N'Golo Kante was not the finished product you see today so who knows if he would even still be playing if he was in the US.
> 
> We have a lot of Latin unsanctioned leagues so there are places in Socal but don't think its like that in the rest of the US.   AYSO has seen a drop off in numbers
> https://www.socceramerica.com/publications/article/76121/new-study-finds-big-drop-in-soccer-participation-i.html


Interesting read.  My daughter and I were talking about soccer coaches the other day while driving home after an afternoon of refereeing.  She is a club coach (2nd year), referee, and college player.  To summarize her thoughts as a coach, she thinks that club coaches do not receive enough training and are over paid.  She was shocked to learn that coaches do not have to attend a designated number of hours of mandatory structured (USSF approved) annual training like referees.  The club where she coaches does hold bi-monthly all-coach meetings that include some type of coach training. She has a couple friends/college players that also coach club and both of them receive no training from their clubs. 

It really surprised me that she said most coaches are overpaid.  She makes $400 a month (works out to about $17 an hour) and coaches G8 and G14 teams.  She also does privates ($35 for an one hour plus) and has 3 players that she works with 4 times a month and another 5 that she works with 1-3 times a month. She usually makes $500 to $600 a month from privates.  She thinks that what she makes is sufficient especially for a second year coach who is attending college fulltime.  One of her friends, who my daughter thinks is way over paid, is making $800 a month (works out to $50 an hour) for a G12 team plus charges the two G12 players she does privates with as a pair for $80 an hour, and she just got her coaching license this past winter.  My daughter did say that her friend has tons of pressure from the club to win, while my daughters club wants her to develop the skills and love of the game for the G8's and with the G14 to make sure they are enjoying the game and learning advanced tactics. I agree with my daughter that coaches who only coach a couple teams *should not* (didn't want a Trump slip) be making enough to use their club coaching salary as their sole means of income and be making enough to afford a $50K+ car and $500K+ house. If you club soccer were to lower some of these crazy high coaching salaries, maybe clubs could lower their fees a little and be more affordable.


----------



## Grace T. (Jul 19, 2018)

jrcaesar said:


> AYSO is telling families, "If your kid is Rec Level Good, then (s)he should be playing Club. And, hey, we have that now."
> 
> They *should *be doing the opposite: "If your kid is Rec Level Good, then get them off that Flight 3 team, get them *out* of Club, and have them play in AYSO."



Yes, but in fairness to them they aren't just marketing United to Rec players....they are marketing it to club parents as well and having some apparent success.  Also because United can recruit from a very large talent pool (club/Extras/allstars/core), some teams are having quite a bit of success, though I take the point it will be difficult for many teams to break into the highest levels given how they are structured.

If we were seriously about restructuring AYSO a few things would have to happen, and the parties are too invested too realistically have it occur:

1. AYSO would have to fully submit to the US Soccer umbrella.  They haven't wanted to do that, preferring to keep their own philosophy and leadership structure.
2. Pay or play would have to be outlawed and there would be no club soccer outside of fully funded academy programs.   As a result there would probably be fewer of them than there already are DA teams in the U.S.
3. AYSO would then be free to reorg into various levels.  Other than the basic 1 level, teams would sort based on coach selection and recruitment. Naturally, the better coaches would sort into the higher level teams....compensation would be minimal, but increasing as you move up in level....the incentive for the coaches in addition would be bragging rights for their levels.  Of course, level 1 would still be the old AYSO parents that never played soccer (at least til the next generation grows up).  All Stars/United/Extras also go away.  You couldn't recruit outside your region (with progressively higher levels having bigger regions).  At a certain level, you couldn't recruit your own kid.  The existing AYSO region chapter autonomy would go away as well.  Everyone would have some sort of service requirement placed on them to play, sort of like now for AYSO but more restrictive and severe.
4. The everyone plays, no competition purists would need to cave.  Part of the motivation of the coaches to do this is personal glory....to win.  The possessionists also wouldn't be happy....you'd see a lot of kick ball, particularly in the early ages.

In other words, we'd get the current English system: volunteer based with minimal compensation, very restricted and limited academy system, graduated tiers, lot's of kickball (perhaps more than we even have now) at the younger ages.  But it would solve the income problem (too much talent too poor or unable to travel to afford club), the participation issue (there are enough levels for everyone, depending on their level of commitment), the randomized problem (that AYSO is like a box of chocolates...you never know what coach you are going to get, unless it's you) and the high school problem (outside of the academies, largely funded by the MLS, recruitment would have to fall back on high school).  It would maintain a professional track (the academies) as well as allow room for late bloomers to advance up the level chain and be spotted by professional clubs.  The ones who would be unhappy of course would be the paid coaches and parents hoping to develop their kids for college athletics...in other words most of us on this board.


----------



## Messi>CR7 (Jul 19, 2018)

Surfref said:


> It really surprised me that she said most coaches are overpaid.  She makes $400 a month (works out to about $17 an hour) and coaches G8 and G14 teams.  She also does privates ($35 for an one hour plus) and has 3 players that she works with 4 times a month and another 5 that she works with 1-3 times a month. She usually makes $500 to $600 a month from privates.  She thinks that what she makes is sufficient especially for a second year coach who is attending college fulltime.  One of her friends, who my daughter thinks is way over paid, is making $800 a month (works out to $50 an hour) for a G12 team plus charges the two G12 players she does privates with as a pair for $80 an hour, and she just got her coaching license this past winter.  My daughter did say that her friend has tons of pressure from the club to win, while my daughters club wants her to develop the skills and love of the game for the G8's and with the G14 to make sure they are enjoying the game and learning advanced tactics. I agree with my daughter that coaches who only coach a couple teams *should not* (didn't want a Trump slip) be making enough to use their club coaching salary as their sole means of income and be making enough to afford a $50K+ car and $500K+ house. If you club soccer were to lower some of these crazy high coaching salaries, maybe clubs could lower their fees a little and be more affordable.


Can you ask your DD if there is any difference between the $35/hr training and the $80/hr training .

A UK coach once told me even he is surprised that he can make a living in the US by teaching little girls soccer.


----------



## Grace T. (Jul 19, 2018)

p.s. Also keep in mind that soccer isn't the only sport having problems with high school retention

https://www.forbes.com/sites/bobcook/2018/07/16/whats-killing-youth-soccer-in-america-is-also-hurting-most-every-other-sport/#2c0da36b1ea8

The part about sailing is hilarious.

All the other sports, including football, are gradually shifting towards more of a club model.  Soccer could have evolved along the lines of the English system before club ball took off.  It didn't, with AYSO relying upon the uniquely American all star system of play like in other sports.  Americans have never been big into sorting (we don't do it in our public schools either, whereas Europe has no problems telling kids early in life which ones should go to college and which ones are destined for trade schools)....there was a sense that all kids should participate on the same teams as a community, even those that might be handicapped for example.  Soccer just changed quicker because: 1) the volunteer coaching just isn't up to snuff with so few parents knowing how to play soccer, and 2) soccer's kind of unique as a team sport...for the striker to do anything someone's got to get them the ball....if little Billy defender swings and misses at the ball, a talented striker isn't going to have a lot to do....to progress the striker needs to be with like leveled players, particularly when teams are larger than say a 5 man basketball team or a baseball team that relies upon a few batters on offense or a football team that can have different body types play different roles.


----------



## oh canada (Jul 19, 2018)

Pet peeve alert:  Commentaries, opinions, soapbox rants that only complain about the problem BUT DON'T OFFER A SOLUTION.  (as this interview does)

It's easy to identify a problem(s), much more difficult to offer a solution(s), especially one that will work.

I agree with the ESPN piece that soccer kids in USA (and Canada) do not play enough on their own and this is one of the primary reasons why creativity and flair is lacking in most our players' games.  So, taking it to the next step, how do we motivate our kids to play with friends in the neighborhoods?  Build some attractive small fields/courts that kids can hang out and play on all day long.  Every neighborhood--from inner cities in NYC to suburbs of Toronto--have basketball courts.  So it's no surprise where most of the creative basketball players come from.  Convert some of those paved courts to soccer fields, build some new ones, and guess what you'll see -- kids shooting, juggling and playing with a different type of round ball.  Go to any South American country, and most European cities and the number of soccer courts (more like futsal) outnumber basketball courts 20:1.  Even in Asia, the public courts are much more likely to be soccer than anything else.  As the saying goes, "if you build it, they will come."   

Some might say, we have plenty of parks for kids to play soccer...well guess what...after school who is occupying most of those greenspaces?  Your local soccer clubs.  (or the homeless in the cities)

USA Hockey has no problem hanging with the best countries in the World on the ice (even beating Canada once in awhile  ).  Why?  Because just like in Canada all winter, kids from Minnesota to Maine are playing on neighborhood ice ponds every chance they get.   USA Soccer should look to US Hockey as a model.

Last - don't give me that argument that most of USA's best athletes go play other sports...BS...NBA players are 6'5" and taller -- they're not gonna play soccer.  NFL players are mostly 240lbs and heavier (and most 6'3" and taller)---they're not gonna play soccer.  MLB?  most are pitchers (not fast runners nor quick) and now many of the best athletes in MLB are coming from Latin America, not here.   But ok granted there could be some overlap in MLB.  Hockey?  Those kids are not gonna play soccer--hockey much more popular in those parts that churn out the best hockey players.  Easy to generalize that "ohhh so many of our athletes are going to other sports," but when you break it down, it's really not true.   At the World Cup, how many players did you see that looked like they could put on shoulder pads and play NFL?  Lukaku is one, maybe Ronaldo as a second and one or two others, but the nature of soccer fits a different type of athlete than other sports.


----------



## foreveryoung (Jul 19, 2018)

[QUOTE  What reason other than parking revenue would there be to have a final on a Monday?/QUOTE]

For "Stay and Play" tournaments like Surf Cup it means an extra night of hotel stay kickbacks to the club, for a consolation game no less.  Competitive youth soccer (and other youth sports) serves the adults (parents, coaches, organizations, etc.) involved.  I rarely see examples of it being about the kids anymore.


----------



## espola (Jul 19, 2018)

oh canada said:


> Pet peeve alert:  Commentaries, opinions, soapbox rants that only complain about the problem BUT DON'T OFFER A SOLUTION.  (as this interview does)
> 
> It's easy to identify a problem(s), much more difficult to offer a solution(s), especially one that will work.
> 
> ...


Most of USA's best athletes go play other sports.


----------



## jpeter (Jul 19, 2018)

Worked for D. Yedlin but not so much for Crossfire his local development club. Going off to eupore gets MLS compensation but not his local club is something that needs to be fixed.
https://www.si.com/planet-futbol/2015/06/29/us-soccer-youth-club-compensation-crossfire-deandre-yedlin-mls-fifa


----------



## SPChamp1 (Jul 20, 2018)

The Youth Soccer system is not broken, it is just sub-optimal. It seems like it has hit its ceiling of what it can do without drastic overhaul and the constant introduction of different leagues, and elite tiers within these leagues are just trying to reinvent the same wheel. 

     I don’t know what that overhaul looks like exactly, but part of what TT said about being more inclusive makes a lot of sense. So how do we become more inclusive and open the doors to kids who may have been overlooked, without “opening the flood gates”? Would regionalizing the ODP program even smaller than at a State Association level help with identifying missed talent? Could each league (say CSL Gold and SCDSL Flight 1) be tasked with finding these kids and holding more local ODP style camps before making the recommendation to the State Level ODP camp? I ask that because I have seen kids, who IMO can compete at the ODP but don’t get an opportunity because they don’t play for what is considered to be a “major” club. Coaches at these smaller clubs aren’t often encouraged to refer these players. 

     As for AYSO, I could go on for hours about what a horrible organization they are, but I will save that for another discussion. AYSO is struggling because they are a day late and a dollar short to adapting to the changes in the Youth Soccer landscape. Those that have the power to make changes at AYSO are old school and still believe that what made them successful 25 years ago will continue to make them successful today. AYSO prides itself on being ALL VOLUNTEER, but for many families, 9-5 jobs aren’t common anymore. Many families require both sets of parents to hold jobs, or a single parent to sometimes hold two jobs. Some parents don’t have time to volunteer and those that do are forced to
meet an ever increasing amount of requirements to do so. 

     AYSO started United officially last year on a National Level as a means to stay relevant, but all they are doing is poaching their own players. Most current  club families still see AYSO United as a joke on the Competitive Circuit and many families already in club wouldn’t consider United even if they were “shopping” around. Also save a few coaches that are legit (and will be poached by other clubs), they are being coached by paid volunteer level coaches with a USSF E License. I believe that AYSO United will not survive in its current iteration. To make a real go at competitive soccer they will need to merge with a few smaller clubs to build out their coach and player base and they will need to drop AYSO from the name officially. Just be United South Bay or United High Desert Cities, etc...


----------



## Grace T. (Jul 20, 2018)

SPChamp1 said:


> The Youth Soccer system is not broken, it is just sub-optimal. It seems like it has hit its ceiling of what it can do without drastic overhaul and the constant introduction of different leagues, and elite tiers within these leagues are just trying to reinvent the same wheel.
> \...


To determine whether it's broken or not you have to ask the question what is youth soccer trying to accomplish.  If fielding a competitive's men's team at the world cup is the objective, more kids in ODP isn't going to do much.  If creating pro players is the objective, it's irrelevant the number of girls that attend ODP.  If making soccer more broadbased is the objective and creating a US Soccer culture, then making ODP more relevant is going to discourage that because the kids that don't make it will just give up which is what numbers are showing across sports right now.  If making soccer accessible to the poor is the objective, well then I'm not sure how that helps because you still have to be in the club soccer circle to be considered.  If our objective is to produce college players and make sure everyone gets a fair look, well o.k....it couldn't hurt.

It's the same question with United.  If creating a men's team or professionals is our objective, you are right it's probably not going to help, at least not directly.  It might help the accessibility issue somewhat, though, by providing poorer kids an affordable route into club soccer but they'll: 1) still hit the ceiling at higher levels where money for travel and tournaments is required and 2) AYSO is fixing the E license level in some regions by paying their coaches (which is the biggest component in affordability) (on a side note, the volunteer issue isn't as big of an impediment as you say...sure you need a lot of time to coach, but you can satisfy the requirement by refiing 4-5 games a year, buying the team banner, or manning the hot dog truck on tournament day).  If our objective is to create a middle ground between rec and club, as some posters have mentioned, well then both Extras and United a great for that (I mentioned once I interviewed a girl from flight 1 that to focus on academics had stepped to a United team....but for United she probably would have stopped playing).  If our objective is to create college players, well you are right United probably isn't going to be much help.  And if our objective is to keep AYSO relevant, it probably will, but at the cost of gutting the core program even further after a certain age.


----------



## Eagle33 (Jul 20, 2018)

Grace T. said:


> Yes, but in fairness to them they aren't just marketing United to Rec players....they are marketing it to club parents as well and having some apparent success.  Also because United can recruit from a very large talent pool (club/Extras/allstars/core), some teams are having quite a bit of success, though I take the point it will be difficult for many teams to break into the highest levels given how they are structured.
> 
> If we were seriously about restructuring AYSO a few things would have to happen, and the parties are too invested too realistically have it occur:
> 
> ...


It's amazing how you subconsciously (or not) started promoting AYSO


Grace T. said:


> To determine whether it's broken or not you have to ask the question what is youth soccer trying to accomplish.  If fielding a competitive's men's team at the world cup is the objective, more kids in ODP isn't going to do much.  If creating pro players is the objective, it's irrelevant the number of girls that attend ODP.  If making soccer more broadbased is the objective and creating a US Soccer culture, then making ODP more relevant is going to discourage that because the kids that don't make it will just give up which is what numbers are showing across sports right now.  If making soccer accessible to the poor is the objective, well then I'm not sure how that helps because you still have to be in the club soccer circle to be considered.  If our objective is to produce college players and make sure everyone gets a fair look, well o.k....it couldn't hurt.
> 
> It's the same question with United.  If creating a men's team or professionals is our objective, you are right it's probably not going to help, at least not directly.  It might help the accessibility issue somewhat, though, by providing poorer kids an affordable route into club soccer but they'll: 1) still hit the ceiling at higher levels where money for travel and tournaments is required and 2) AYSO is fixing the E license level in some regions by paying their coaches (which is the biggest component in affordability) (on a side note, the volunteer issue isn't as big of an impediment as you say...sure you need a lot of time to coach, but you can satisfy the requirement by refiing 4-5 games a year, buying the team banner, or manning the hot dog truck on tournament day).  If our objective is to create a middle ground between rec and club, as some posters have mentioned, well then both Extras and United a great for that (I mentioned once I interviewed a girl from flight 1 that to focus on academics had stepped to a United team....but for United she probably would have stopped playing).  If our objective is to create college players, well you are right United probably isn't going to be much help.  And if our objective is to keep AYSO relevant, it probably will, but at the cost of gutting the core program even further after a certain age.


It's amazing how parents of kids who got cut from the club become AYSO promoters. 
AYSO is nothing more than a recreational program. It was build for this particular purpose and it should stay this way. "Everyone plays" philosophy is exactly what hurts soccer in this country. I'm not saying anything is wrong with that and kids who wants play for fun should stay in AYSO, but you need to understand how United came about. Actually you said it yourself talking about UK guys figuring out they can make a living coaching little girls soccer in US. Look who runs United and maybe you'll understand what it's all about.


----------



## Grace T. (Jul 20, 2018)

Eagle33 said:


> It's amazing how you subconsciously (or not) started promoting AYSO
> 
> 
> It's amazing how parents of kids who got cut from the club become AYSO promoters.
> AYSO is nothing more than a recreational program. It was build for this particular purpose and it should stay this way. "Everyone plays" philosophy is exactly what hurts soccer in this country. I'm not saying anything is wrong with that and kids who wants play for fun should stay in AYSO, but you need to understand how United came about. Actually you said it yourself talking about UK guys figuring out they can make a living coaching little girls soccer in US. Look who runs United and maybe you'll understand what it's all about.


I'm hardly an AYSO promoter, and stand by my past criticism of the daddy ball issues.  I even just said it....if it hadn't been for the daddy ball and everyone plays philosophy, club soccer wouldn't exist.  I even pointed out soccer is a harder sport to have an everyone plays philosophy because is little defender Billy swings and misses and can't get the ball up to talented striker Johnny, Johnny's not going to be able to develop much.  Indeed, one of the reasons I took my own sons out of core and into Extras was because that was happening way too much.

Same question to you regarding what "hurts" soccer.  What are we trying to accomplish?  Are we trying to create a men's team, have broad participation, or create college athletes?  The original post started with the position that there doesn't seem to be a middle ground.  If that's what we are concerned about, then United and Extras is a great solution. If it's trying to create a men's team, then as currently structured, I think both club soccer and AYSO are an impediment.


----------



## INFAMEE (Jul 20, 2018)

If players are not playing CSL Gold or Flight 1 by age 12 they should just play AYSO or MX Leagues.

I get it most parents just want to be part of something, it doesn't matter if they're completely oblivious to what development is. It's fun it's fuzzy and just the in thing because everybody's kid is doing it.

If righteous parents that are in the know take your kid to the nearest full funded academy and have them try out there. All those fun worthless tournaments and league games in flight 2 and Silver Elite will be put to the test.


----------



## Eagle33 (Jul 20, 2018)

Grace T. said:


> I'm hardly an AYSO promoter, and stand by my past criticism of the daddy ball issues.  I even just said it....if it hadn't been for the daddy ball and everyone plays philosophy, club soccer wouldn't exist.  I even pointed out soccer is a harder sport to have an everyone plays philosophy because is little defender Billy swings and misses and can't get the ball up to talented striker Johnny, Johnny's not going to be able to develop much.  Indeed, one of the reasons I took my own sons out of core and into Extras was because that was happening way too much.
> 
> Same question to you regarding what "hurts" soccer.  What are we trying to accomplish?  Are we trying to create a men's team, have broad participation, or create college athletes?  The original post started with the position that there doesn't seem to be a middle ground.  If that's what we are concerned about, then United and Extras is a great solution. If it's trying to create a men's team, then as currently structured, I think both club soccer and AYSO are an impediment.


The only thing "hurts" soccer in US is cultural issue and it always will be here. Soccer is NOT #1 sport here and it will never be #1. All the best athletes will not play soccer in US. Not much you or anyone else can do about it. Compare to 30 years ago, we made huge leap in popularity of the sport, however we are still ways behind. All this nonsense about bringing foreign consultants and changing player and coaching education will never work. I would start with changing parents soccer perspective before anything else.


----------



## Grace T. (Jul 20, 2018)

p.s.  we were having the same argument about heading in the world cup thread.  If our goal is to create a winning men's team, the no header rule is probably going to hurt us in the long run because heading has become so important in soccer and so many of the world cup goals were scored that way.  And it takes a really long time not only to get good at heading but to practice getting the ball into a place where it can be headed...and you need to know the technical skills solidly before you can start to develop tactically and strategically.  If our goal is to keep the 99.9% of kids safe that won't be playing at that level, well then I agree the header rule is probably a good idea.  What's frustrating about these discussions and articles is that no one (consciously or subsconsciously) can seem to agree as to what our objective is....only that missing the world cup is bad...which is why we keep talking each other in circles on this debate instead of coming to a realistic solution.  If our goal is to create college athletes, SPChamp1 is right on: systems working probably just needs to be tweaked.



Eagle33 said:


> The only thing "hurts" soccer in US is cultural issue and it always will be here. Soccer is NOT #1 sport here and it will never be #1. All the best athletes will not play soccer in US. Not much you or anyone else can do about it. Compare to 30 years ago, we made huge leap in popularity of the sport, however we are still ways behind. All this nonsense about bringing foreign consultants and changing player and coaching education will never work. I would start with changing parents soccer perspective before anything else.


If our problem is the cultural issue, then I agree as well (see above) that both AYSO and club sport are an impediment.  That question though is different from the best athletes playing.  Cultural penetration only gets the best athletes to give soccer a look.  What makes the differences is the money.  If you pay, they'll come.  Again, I ask the question: what's the end goal here?  What are we trying to create?


----------



## Chalklines (Jul 20, 2018)

Eagle33 said:


> The only thing "hurts" soccer in US is cultural issue and it always will be here. Soccer is NOT #1 sport here and it will never be #1.


This is it. Agree 100%


----------



## Simisoccerfan (Jul 20, 2018)

foreveryoung said:


> [QUOTE  What reason other than parking revenue would there be to have a final on a Monday?/QUOTE]
> 
> For "Stay and Play" tournaments like Surf Cup it means an extra night of hotel stay kickbacks to the club, for a consolation game no less.  Competitive youth soccer (and other youth sports) serves the adults (parents, coaches, organizations, etc.) involved.  I rarely see examples of it being about the kids anymore.


I am all for the extra day if it means the kids are only playing one game a day.  Once a kid hit HS age they should never play more than one game a day.  There is a whole host of reasons why playing more than one game a day is not good for them.  The DA has gotten it right regarding this issue.  Surf Cup should doing this for the other brackets not just the DA brackets.   Why on earth does the U18 bracket winners need to play 5 games over 3 days?  That's ridiculous.  Just call it a showcase and do 3 games instead.   Yes parents complain about the cost of stretching out a tournament/showcase but if it was truly about the kids they would do this.


----------



## Messi>CR7 (Jul 20, 2018)

oh canada said:


> Last - don't give me that argument that most of USA's best athletes go play other sports...BS...NBA players are 6'5" and taller -- they're not gonna play soccer.  NFL players are mostly 240lbs and heavier (and most 6'3" and taller)---they're not gonna play soccer.  MLB?  most are pitchers (not fast runners nor quick) and now many of the best athletes in MLB are coming from Latin America, not here.   But ok granted there could be some overlap in MLB.  Hockey?  Those kids are not gonna play soccer--hockey much more popular in those parts that churn out the best hockey players.  Easy to generalize that "ohhh so many of our athletes are going to other sports," but when you break it down, it's really not true.   At the World Cup, how many players did you see that looked like they could put on shoulder pads and play NFL?  Lukaku is one, maybe Ronaldo as a second and one or two others, but the nature of soccer fits a different type of athlete than other sports.


The problem is the best athletes 6'2" and under were also playing basketball and football during puberty.  They just can't make it to the pro level because of their height limitation.  Using a local OC tennis legend Michael Chang as an example.  John McEnroe once said if Chang were a couple inches taller and 15 pounds heavier, Chang would be Jimmy Connors.

For US to be a soccer powerhouse, we just need a constitutional amendment to force kids to play only soccer if their dad is 6' or shorter.   History has shown an authoritarian or communist government may not be good for its citizens, but is very effective at winning Olympic medals.


----------



## ItsCalledSoccer (Jul 20, 2018)

Having just come back from the AYSO National Cup (Where United teams from all over the place came to compete in a tournament), I can see that some areas of AYSO United are less professional than we have in OC and can understand the criticisms. But AYSO definitely has it's place, providing opportunity to play for those recreational players, providing cheap opportunities to develop without having to commit 100% to soccer year round (Extra) and for those who want to go beyond and take the sport seriously (United). Yes I understand the car sticker isn't as impressive as some of the others, but in the end it doesn't matter if the coaching is good and your child is getting playing time.

Its funny how there was a comment on how the 'Everyone Plays' idea is killing US Soccer, I think soon there will be mandates on all club teams to copy AYSO's vision and have kids play at least 50% of the game (at least up until a certain age, maybe 11v11).


----------



## Eagle33 (Jul 20, 2018)

Grace T. said:


> p.s.  we were having the same argument about heading in the world cup thread.  If our goal is to create a winning men's team, the no header rule is probably going to hurt us in the long run because heading has become so important in soccer and so many of the world cup goals were scored that way.  And it takes a really long time not only to get good at heading but to practice getting the ball into a place where it can be headed...and you need to know the technical skills solidly before you can start to develop tactically and strategically.  If our goal is to keep the 99.9% of kids safe that won't be playing at that level, well then I agree the header rule is probably a good idea.  What's frustrating about these discussions and articles is that no one (consciously or subsconsciously) can seem to agree as to what our objective is....only that missing the world cup is bad...which is why we keep talking each other in circles on this debate instead of coming to a realistic solution.  If our goal is to create college athletes, SPChamp1 is right on: systems working probably just needs to be tweaked.
> 
> 
> 
> If our problem is the cultural issue, then I agree as well (see above) that both AYSO and club sport are an impediment.  That question though is different from the best athletes playing.  Cultural penetration only gets the best athletes to give soccer a look.  What makes the differences is the money.  If you pay, they'll come.  Again, I ask the question: what's the end goal here?  What are we trying to create?


US Soccer goal is to produce World Class players. 
Parents goal is to get their kid to College.


----------



## Grace T. (Jul 20, 2018)

ItsCalledSoccer said:


> Its funny how there was a comment on how the 'Everyone Plays' idea is killing US Soccer, I think soon there will be mandates on all club teams to copy AYSO's vision and have kids play at least 50% of the game (at least up until a certain age, maybe 11v11).


I'll drive Eagle33 here even more crazy and make a deeper criticism of "Everyone Plays".  The idea of "Everyone Plays" isn't just limited to the 50% of game time.  50% of game time is only one element, and one that is largely Extras/United based.  In AYSO core for the youngers, it's supposed to be EQUAL play time (with all players on small rostered teams sitting a quarter).  It was also supposed to be (before the handicapped kids got sent to their own program, and the better players shuffled to AllStars/Extras/United), that everyone played on the same team, whether they were good or bad.  Growing up in the 70's/80's, my brothers' basketball teams were organized the same way: the worst kid who couldn't dribble got to play with the future all American.  It was an idea that everyone could learn form everyone else, which as I've said before especially doesn't work for soccer (if Billy can't get the ball to Johnny), and which ultimately caused the upper middle class to peel away from such an idea as college sports recruitment became more ruthless.  The upper middle class did the same with public schools, which are organized the same way (everybody learns together)....starting with the busing, they upper middle class began to move to the suburbs and private schools where not everyone learned together.  So it shouldn't surprise us that the same thing happened with soccer (which is such an upper middle class sport) that happened to public schools.



Eagle33 said:


> US Soccer goal is to produce World Class players.
> Parents goal is to get their kid to College.


Which, when all is said and done, is the heart of the problem.


----------



## Eagle33 (Jul 20, 2018)

Grace T. said:


> I'll drive Eagle33 here even more crazy and make a deeper criticism of "Everyone Plays".  The idea of "Everyone Plays" isn't just limited to the 50% of game time.  50% of game time is only one element, and one that is largely Extras/United based.  In AYSO core for the youngers, it's supposed to be EQUAL play time (with all players on small rostered teams sitting a quarter).  It was also supposed to be (before the handicapped kids got sent to their own program, and the better players shuffled to AllStars/Extras/United), that everyone played on the same team, whether they were good or bad.  Growing up in the 70's/80's, my brothers' basketball teams were organized the same way: the worst kid who couldn't dribble got to play with the future all American.  It was an idea that everyone could learn form everyone else, which as I've said before especially doesn't work for soccer (if Billy can't get the ball to Johnny), and which ultimately caused the upper middle class to peel away from such an idea as college sports recruitment became more ruthless.  The upper middle class did the same with public schools, which are organized the same way (everybody learns together)....starting with the busing, they upper middle class began to move to the suburbs and private schools where not everyone learned together.  So it shouldn't surprise us that the same thing happened with soccer (which is such an upper middle class sport) that happened to public schools.
> 
> 
> 
> Which, when all is said and done, is the heart of the problem.


I don't think it's a problem. One thing already works - getting kids to college. Many kids from different countries coming here because they don't have this option back home. We've done this quite well. Good players have option to get some kind of money while playing and getting their college education - Great!
Now producing World Class players should not be what we are after. We should be after creating our OWN system of play with what we got. We should stop trying to produce what we can't.


----------



## Surf Zombie (Jul 20, 2018)

jrcaesar said:


> AYSO is telling families, "If your kid is Rec Level Good, then (s)he should be playing Club. And, hey, we have that now."
> 
> They *should *be doing the opposite: "If your kid is Rec Level Good, then get them off that Flight 3 team, get them *out* of Club, and have them play in AYSO."


Where we live in the Boston area, as well as most of New England as far as I know, there is a much different “Rec” or “AYSO” type system in place than what you have in CA.  Every town has a soccer program.  Top kids at each age play on their town’s A team, second group plays on the B team and all other teams are level picked.  It’s essentialy like high school soccer where kids play on Saturdays for their town team and on sundays for their club team. 

My 2007 daughter is on her 5/6 grade town  “A” team and my 2009 son is on his 3/4 grade town “A” team.  100% of the kids on these A teams, as well 75-85% of the “B” team players also play  in club programs.  The problem we have seen is that with the non- A/B teams, not only is there a lack of coaches, but those kids quickly realize that there is no way they are making an A or B team without playing soccer year round.  It forces a lot of kids to choose: quit all together because they feel like they aren’t a good player or join a club’s 3rd or 4th team in an effort to keep up with the other kids.  In my daughter’s grade alone, we have 26 female club soccer players in a class of about 150 girls.  Another 15-20 who played soccer with her growing up in grades K-4 have already  quit playing all together.


----------



## justneededaname (Jul 20, 2018)

Going back to the original post (sorry I am late to the party). Whenever I see stories like this, I always want to see the data. Where is that 14% drop data coming from? Should we take it as fact, or is someone sifting through a larger data set in order to find data that supports their argument. 

Here is an article that I believe talks about the data that provides the 14% number - https://www.aspeninstitute.org/blog-posts/7-charts-show-fix-youth-sports/

Some things I notice in this data. All youth team sport participation is down. In 2008 44.5% of children 6-12 participated in team sports. In 2016, that number was 36.9%.  So soccer is not an anomaly out there. Over the last three year period it was the highest, but the drop is less than half that of the biggest drop. Tackle football dropped 29% over the 8 year period of the study.

The sports that grew account for only 12.5% of team sport participation and their growth only accounts for 2.3% of the 6-12 population. Far less than the number that dropped out of team sports completely.

This is a soccer forum, so we discuss these issues in terms of what could be done in the soccer world to try to fix the declining participation in soccer. But it is entirely possible that this is a societal problem. One whose solution is to focus on getting kids 6-12 to play ANY sport, not just soccer.

To me, the answer starts with build more parks. The newer suburbs have lots of parks (read, upper middle class people). But the urban cores do not. And after those parks are built, make sure everyone feels safe going to them.  

Until recently I lived in an urban (1930s era) neighborhood that got a new park. In the corner of that park was a police substation. It was perfect. The park is always filled with kids outside playing stuff.

Now I live in a different neighborhood. It is not far away from the first, 1940s era, still very much in the center of the city. There is no park anywhere my kids could walk to (or really even ride a bike). The debate isn't should the park have a futsal court instead of basketball, it is how do we get anything here for kids. There is nowhere for kids to go and play. If their parents want them to play sports, they have to be able to afford to take their kids somewhere. Afford the price of the program, afford the time to drive them. There are a lot of kids around these neighborhoods whose parents cannot afford that.

On our street the solution was a basketball hoop that we put outside our house with a pile of basketballs and a sign that says everyone is welcome to play. We get kids from all over coming to play once they find it. But how many parents let their 6-12 year old kids go wandering off until they find a friendly basketball hoop?


----------



## timbuck (Jul 20, 2018)

Kids quit sports when they realize it is no longer fun.
I loved baseball growing up.  I realized in 6th grade that I sucked at hitting.  It no longer became fun to strike out or hope that I got walked each time I went up to bat.  So I quit playing as a kid.  Still played some softball (beer league) as an adult.
I liked basketball a lot too.  We had a middle school team that had tryouts. About 90 kids would try out.  I made the 7th grade team and the 8th grade team the following year. But other kids grew taller than me. And I decided not to tryout for the 9th grade team.  I got garbage minutes near the end of 8th grade.  Practicing every day but barely playing in games was no fun.  I preferred hanging out with friends or going snow skiing (grew up in the midwest) over busting my a$$ on the basketball court for nothing all winter.  (I think our 8th grade team was undefeated- so even though we won a lot, I didn't love it).
I still played pick up basketball and played in some 3-on-3 tournaments.  Would I be counted as a kid that still played a sport?  Or would statistics say that I quit playing basketball?
If you took the stats from my middle school -  It would tell you that 82% of kids quit basketball in 7th grade.  (Because 75 out of 90 didn't make the team).

I think if you look at reasons why kids are quitting soccer younger it is because it's not as fun.  Lets say at 9 years old you make a club team (And most players that show up for a club tryout these days make one of the teams.  Might be the 2nd team in Flight 3- but they get a spot and their parents pay $1,500+).  The coach is a dickhead and only cares about winning.  8 kids on the 10 player roster play 80% of all games.  Your parents freakout because they "wasted" $1,500 for you to sit on the bench.  So they push you harder to get something out of your investment.  Yell at you in the car.  Hire some dude to give you private training when you'd rather be playing Fortnite or riding your bike.  So you say "f-this.  I'm going to join the swim team.  At least I can't hear people screaming like maniacs when my face is in the water."

Or- let's say you make the "A" team at the age of 9.  You are a super star player.  You play all game, every game. The coach loves you.  Your parents tell everyone that in 9 more years, you will be going to college on a full ride.  You love soccer.  As the years go on, you move to a "better" team.  You leave your friends behind for greener pastures.  You are now on a DA team when you turn 14.  You are practicing 4 days a week.  Games on Saturday.  Sunday is your day to chill, but you feel that you need to push yourself to stay on that team next year, so you train with some former pro that charges your parents $75 for an hour.  You do this because the other 17 players on your team are very good and very driven. You don't want to lose your starting spot.  You see some of your old teammates that you "left behind".  They are still playing soccer.  They are on some random "B" team.  They practice 2x per week. They play most Saturdays.  They aren't spending more time in a car than they are playing soccer.  They are also going to play on the high school team.  And go to the mall to hang out.  They attend a non-soccer camp over the summer.  You know you are way better than them. But those kids are "playing" soccer and having fun.  While you are "working" soccer.  But you can't go back to a "lower" team.  That would be embarrassing.  And your parents would freak out having you play for a coach that didn't play "semi-pro" in Europe or on some "professional indoor" team in San Diego in 1985.  So you say "hey mom and dad.  I need to focus on school.  I think I might want to quit soccer."

For some kids - That "A" player scenario is great.  The "unicorns" as MAP calls them.  They are driven and want it all.
But for the "rest" of the high end 9 year olds -  I think some get pushed too hard, too soon and wind up crashing out.


----------



## mirage (Jul 20, 2018)

justneededaname said:


> ...Where is that 14% drop data coming from? Should we take it as fact, or is someone sifting through a larger data set in order to find data that supports their argument.
> 
> Here is an article that I believe talks about the data that provides the 14% number - https://www.aspeninstitute.org/blog-posts/7-charts-show-fix-youth-sports/
> 
> ...


The article is written from the perspective of inactive kids problem, the decline in sports participation is a symptom of inactivity.  

What is interesting is looking at the data bit closer, albeit at macro level, about drop off in participation from 2011 to 2016 occurs at 2 of 5 income levels in the study.  The biggest drop-off comes from real poverty level income households (<$25k/yr).  The drop is 41.9% down to 34.6%, or decline of 7.3% of total population at the income level.  The next biggest drop comes from lowest end of the middle class income households ($50k/yr~$75/yr).  The drop is 59.6% down to 53.7%, or decline of 5.9% of those population.

Interestingly, the 25K/yr~$50k/yr had an increase in participation, as well as over $100K/yr, while $75k/yr~$100k/yr remained steady.  What this tells me, speculating of course, is that those in poverty got worse due to lack of income increasing with time while the cost of participation increased.  The increase in participation fees from rec to club was quite noticeable during early part of this decade as we started to recover from a hard recession/financial crisis in 08/09.

The next income level witnessed increase.  Probably it was a case where families who always wanted to participate in team sports or had to drop out of team sports due to economic condition was now able to do so.  The following level, 50~75, probably suffered due to price of X-Box and PS3/4 dropping to more affordable level as well as a second hand units became readily available, in addition to playing with handheld low cost Android phones.

The rest of the upper level income families coped with costs and increased in participation as more and more sports became available to them (e.g., club crewing, sand volleyball, etc).

The lack of participation in the inner city has always been an issue.  Having grown up in a metropolitan city as well as a bedroom community, there is a clear difference in access to playing sports and how frequently.  In a city, I recall playing stick-ball in the streets, where as once we moved to the "burbs" we had a proper baseball diamond nearby.  That said, building more parks is probably not the solution.

Real solution in the inner cities require schools to run sports programs after-hours, where they do have the fields and adult supervision - both coaching and security.  Unfortunately, sports is the first item to be cut when there is a funding shortfall and is expensive to maintain the infrastructure.

Personally, I do not find lack of participation to be necessarily a bad thing.  One of my old boss was a 3-star general/flag officer who said "when America stopped the draft, the military won, but the country lost".  What he meant was the those who enlisted wanted to be there whereas the draft required everyone, which means most that did not want to be there.  Clearly you can extend the similar analogy to sports.  Parents drag their kids who have no interest in participating but are forced to do so.

If we had less kids participating, we'd have less teams and that equates to less clubs and less money grabbing opportunist pretending to be a coach.  The overall quality of the game will increase and those who want to stay in the sports will prosper and have more opportunities.   I know this is not a popular opinion but its likely to be true....


----------



## blam (Jul 21, 2018)

I just came back from overseas. When I was there, my kid would go to the park at around 5pm and play soccer for FREE. It was mostly pick up or if he is the first one there, other children would join him later.

In the USA, every soccer game he played in has been through AYSO or some organized soccer club. The only time unorganized play happens is during school recess.

Lack of soccer goal posts in the USA doesn't explain this. USA has lots of baseball fields, but you still never see kids go to the baseball field and play baseball themselves, except through some organization like little league.

What are your kids doing at 5pm? Are you not sending them off to a local park to play? 

Another problem I see in the USA is sports is not done through schools but through private 3rd party. What this means is that children whose parents do not enroll in sports don't realize there is a sports world out there until they get to high school. Overseas, when children get to the age of 11, the school offers sport clubs where they meet every week and play. We have soccer clubs, basketball clubs, swimming clubs (also art clubs, scouts, etc. not restricted to just sports) all supervised by a teacher and supported by the school. Sports is part of the school system and considered an extra curricular activity.


----------



## 46n2 (Jul 21, 2018)

_Personally, I do not find lack of participation to be necessarily a bad thing. One of my old boss was a 3-star general/flag officer who said "when America stopped the draft, the military won, but the country lost". What he meant was the those who enlisted wanted to be there whereas the draft required everyone, which means most that did not want to be there. Clearly you can extend the similar analogy to sports. Parents drag their kids who have no interest in participating but are forced to do so.

If we had less kids participating, we'd have less teams and that equates to less clubs and less money grabbing opportunist pretending to be a coach. The overall quality of the game will increase and those who want to stay in the sports will prosper and have more opportunities. I know this is not a popular opinion but its likely to be true...._
*
this is good!!!*

And for the other comment above regarding "A" player and "B"player its does ring true what your saying, Timbuck you make a lot of sense here too.  

I have a friend , his kid is over it ,parents complain, why complain, its a sport , listen to your kid, pull kid from soccer, save big money, done! Next Sport...

*no one is forcing anyone to pay this $$$ for your kids to play this sport, its our own fault, not the kids, only people to blame are the parents .....not the system.....it not the youth killing the game , its the egotistic parents lurking in Johnny/Jennys shadow not allowing them to progress and enjoy the game.  
It goes back to ----Since I pay 3k a year in soccer, I think my kid is a star scenario and he/she deserves to start--
Kid doesn't start, parents get tainted, theres no one to blame but you.  Lack of playing time, be realistic and put your kid on a team where he'll play a lot and grow, its the parents that want to say DA or Flight 1, kids don't care , and if they do hopefully they work at it to get better, unless richyrich mommy/daddy come with the big bucks and ruin it for everyone now, cause theres a sub par player on the team.
At our level I don't hear too much complaining, our kids are there to compete and be the best.....
its the parents that got left behind that whine, find excuses, post on forums behind fake names, etc.....
ugh...why am I even typing this....
sorry.*


----------

