# Boys DA rumors



## boomer

Rumors coming out of multiple camps today...

Single age group for BU16 coming for the 2019/2020 season
Doing away with BU12 & BU13 after the 2019/2020 season (current players not effected)

Anyone able to shed some light?


----------



## Kante

Question: any insights on what would happen with the u12 thru u14 only clubs? I can infer but figure i’d Ask. Some impact to SoCal but lots of impact to groups like washington


----------



## boomer

Kante said:


> Question: any insights on what would happen with the u12 thru u14 only clubs? I can infer but figure i’d Ask. Some impact to SoCal but lots of impact to groups like washington


Good question with an answer TBD once that dust settles, assuming these rumors are true. Changes their realities for sure. My take, some may try to graduate with their players to the older age groups I suppose. But those that don't, you'd think most were pretty successful clubs prior to being awarded DA status at the younger age groups and will continue to be successful afterwards.


----------



## 66 GTO

I think is smart to do away with u12 for sure. Having an 06 son that played the DA u12 9v9  I didnt  a big advantage and  playing the same 7 teams 3 times and no tourneys or state cup some kids get  bored plus  one ref at every game didnt help


----------



## jpeter

2019/20 age group discussion for possible da realignment groups:

BU14 / 06
BU15 / 05
BU16 / 04
BU17 / 03
BU18/19 02 & 01'

Will know soon when the apps come but single age groups has been discussed every years past 3 for the olders so maybe this time?

Staying with 5 age groups is same $$ so I could see the short sided ages going away since DA traditional been 11v11.


----------



## 1009

boomer said:


> Rumors coming out of multiple camps today...
> 
> Single age group for BU16 coming for the 2019/2020 season
> Doing away with BU12 & BU13 after the 2019/2020 season (current players not effected)
> 
> Anyone able to shed some light?



Can you elaborate on what camps?


----------



## SBFDad

jpeter said:


> 2019/20 age group discussion for possible da realignment groups:
> 
> BU14 / 06
> BU15 / 05
> BU16 / 04
> BU17 / 03
> BU18/19 02 & 01'
> 
> Will know soon when the apps come but single age groups has been discussed every years past 3 for the olders so maybe this time?
> 
> Staying with 5 age groups is same $$ so I could see the short sided ages going away since DA traditional been 11v11.


Splitting the 16s and 17s is the right call. Hope they do it. Too many 2003s on the sidelines this year.


----------



## PaytoplayinLancaster?

Hopefully, all groups will get an opportunity to play for a National Championship.   Can they take a break to play for their high school as well?  Unless DA is going to be like Harvard of course.


----------



## jpeter

PaytoplayinLancaster? said:


> Hopefully, all groups will get an opportunity to play for a National Championship.   Can they take a break to play for their high school as well?  Unless DA is going to be like Harvard of course.


DA has there own playoffs & championship for the older age groups but you have to finish top 3-4 in the division to qualify unless you get a wild card.  
http://www.ussoccerda.com/sam/standings/league/

HS not currently unless you apply & get a waiver before season starts.   Few players do this.  There is normally a break to fit in HS play but this year some overlap so while hopefully HS can be fit in future years but kind of doubtful da is going to reserve course on this one.


----------



## focomoso

jpeter said:


> 2019/20 age group discussion for possible da realignment groups:
> 
> BU14 / 06
> BU15 / 05
> BU16 / 04
> BU17 / 03
> BU18/19 02 & 01'
> 
> Will know soon when the apps come but single age groups has been discussed every years past 3 for the olders so maybe this time?
> 
> Staying with 5 age groups is same $$ so I could see the short sided ages going away since DA traditional been 11v11.


I agree with doing away with the U12s, but if these are the '19/20 brackets, what happens to the 07s (the current U12s)?


----------



## focomoso

Also, does this mean that LAFC and Galaxy's youngers (U12 / U13) will play in Coast or SCDSL? Talk about uneven competition.


----------



## RedDevilDad

I’ve heard a someone whom I would personally assume to be highly informed (I don’t have his/her permission to name) say they have heard this as planned and that they anticipate they will do away with the u-12s next year, allowing the 07s to progress. Then do away with the u-13s, the following year. 
The impression I got was the end of the u-12/13s is coming definitively, just not clear how to not penalize the 07s.


----------



## 66 GTO

If that is the case then is a smart move in my opinion get rid of u12 and 13s and separate the 16s and 17s
The same clubs that are dominating in the younger ages will continue to dominate 
Difference will be no DA patch


----------



## Kante

playing devil's advocate on this change.

statistically, the biggest size advantage between early developers/Jan-Mar birthdays and late developers/Oct-Dec birthdays starts in the u13 age group and then is most pronounced in u14. 

having the u12 enables, in theory, us soccer to ID kids with solid skills/ability early, wait out the big growth spurt at u13 and u14, and then see how the high performing u12 late developers/late birthdays do at u15. 

This is assuming that US soccer has it together enough to actively track progress by player over time.

If academy is to start at u14 then there's a whole set of players who seem they like they would go by the wayside due to age-related size disadvantage.

Plus, there's a large number of feeder academy clubs with u12 thru u14 academy teams that would probably find it hard to continue to recruit players/families into an academy track - given the $, time and energy required - without the academy brand formally attached. 

And there's a number of academy u12 teams that have actively been including 08's this year. what happens with those boys? You could argue that they continue w/ the 07s but the age difference/size difference/developmental difference will kick in next year.


----------



## RedDevilDad

@Kante 
I agree. I have mixed emotions. These are personal to my experience and may not relate to others: 
Pros:
1.  Playing u-12 DA took the pressure off winning and results. 
2. Allowed clubs to create a large pool and shake it to see the top that develop into the u-13 team. 
3. Players under contract for 10 months reduced team shakeup and fear of losing spot/teammates bailing. 

Cons:
1. Tournaments can be fun for the family and player. 
2. Some teams could not field comparable quality due to so many u-12 teams. 
3. 08 and 09 parents won’t be able to brag around the water cooler.


----------



## RedDevilDad

Kante said:


> And there's a number of academy u12 teams that have actively been including 08's this year. what happens with those boys? .


I’m under the impression that the 08s will be the ones most impacted and that the 07s will be grandfathered in and the door closing behind them.


----------



## 66 GTO

I have seen coaching changes at u12 DA
Because the results have not been there even though a team has improved as a whole but had more losses than wins so winning does matter 
To most just they say the opposite. I don’t think u12 -14 clubs will be impacted negatively in those ages .TFA is a perfect example a lot people choose them before before the mls academies right now


----------



## timbuck

Any rumors on the girls side?


----------



## jpeter

Ussda is changing again /w a plan to go back to u13/14 as the beginning group making sense from a $$$ cost & uniformity standpoint.    The shorter fields and u12/u13 rules go away and clubs don't have to find and pay for two different sized fields, lots of high Schools won't let you mark there turf fields for example. 

Since there is no ynt for those ages anyway ussda sees these ages as a nice to have luxury but not really essential.  Meanwhile da sees older players walk away each year in the combo groups so they have decided to make some changes. 

U13 / 2007 could go on for 19-20' or they could be a u13/14 combo group like what was done for years but changes are coming either way, just a matter of what/when?    Apps come out shortly so will know soon.


----------



## Kante

Question: what is apps?


----------



## jpeter

Kante said:


> Question: what is apps?


Applications for 19-20'


----------



## Dargle

Kante said:


> Question: what is apps?


Applications for next year's DA clubs/age groups.  If they do/don't list certain age groups, the rumors will be confirmed or refuted.


----------



## 66 GTO

Kante said:


> playing devil's advocate on this change.
> 
> statistically, the biggest size advantage between early developers/Jan-Mar birthdays and late developers/Oct-Dec birthdays starts in the u13 age group and then is most pronounced in u14.
> 
> having the u12 enables, in theory, us soccer to ID kids with solid skills/ability early, wait out the big growth spurt at u13 and u14, and then see how the high performing u12 late developers/late birthdays do at u15.


My 06 son is a late June playing up u14  DA as an Outside back and as 06 he is not that big in size either clearly big size advantage between him and my 05 March son but he holds his own. Everyone has different theories and ways seeing development. Players gotta find what best fits them


----------



## Kante

got it. The decisions on applications are typically made by January?


----------



## watfly

I think it makes a lot of sense to ditch U12 and U13.  For selfish reasons, since my son is an 07, I hope the 07's are grandfathered and can play U13 next year.  Although I won't lose any sleep if that doesn't happen.

My son's experience has been different than RedDevilDad's.  My son has definitely has felt a lot more pressure to perform in DA, which comes with both positives and negatives.


----------



## RedDevilDad

watfly said:


> My son's experience has been different than RedDevilDad's.  My son has definitely has felt a lot more pressure to perform in DA, which comes with both positives and negatives.


Our pressure: Perform yes. Win: not necessarily. 
For example, we will die on playing it out of the back.  Coach could care less about the score but is on every detail and mistake.


----------



## focomoso

watfly said:


> My son's experience has been different than RedDevilDad's.  My son has definitely has felt a lot more pressure to perform in DA, which comes with both positives and negatives.


My son, also 07, has seen both sides of this. Last year he played with the 06s and the coach kept repeating that the outcomes didn't matter, that his goal was to develop the kids. Then the club fired the coach. This year - on a different team - there's a growing pressure for results that is having a detrimental effect on games and practices. The kids are afraid to play soccer.

It makes sense if you think about it. Coaches have been competitive athletes their entire lives. They have tied their egos to wins for years. It's very hard for them to turn that part of themselves off, even if they know it's better for the kids. It takes a very confident (and experienced) coach to put the kids above the team's record.


----------



## RedDevilDad

focomoso said:


> My son, also 07, has seen both sides of this. Last year he played with the 06s....


Hey, us too. 07 played with 06s now again in u-12.


----------



## boomer

Posted this afternoon on the DA website. U12 & U13 are options on the interest form but sounds like still being evaluated...

_For Clubs

2019-20 Development Academy Interest Form

The U.S. Soccer Development Academy has announced the initial stage for new Clubs that are interested in joining or existing clubs that are interested in expanding. Clubs who have interest in joining or expanding into additional age groups for the 2019-20 season or beyond, should complete the interest form.

Application Deadline: December 15, 2018
*Existing Full Academy Clubs do not need to apply.

As shared in previous Academy meetings, the Academy is evaluating the age groups within the program for the future. In order to capture the most accurate interest and information from new and existing Clubs; we have included all potential age groups in the interest form as an option.

Note, the form includes U-16 as a single age option, this is for new Clubs to express their interest (existing Clubs do not need to apply for U-16). An official decision regarding age groups for boys and girls will be made and communicated in November, or at latest during the Winter Showcase._


----------



## StrikerOC

boomer said:


> Rumors coming out of multiple camps today...
> 
> Single age group for BU16 coming for the 2019/2020 season
> Doing away with BU12 & BU13 after the 2019/2020 season (current players not effected)
> 
> Anyone able to shed some light?


Anyone got any updates on this? Our club seems to think its a done deal but I heard there will be a vote. I assume the DA teams are the ones voting on this but IDK.
Anyone heard anything new?


----------



## jpeter

StrikerOC said:


> Anyone got any updates on this? Our club seems to think its a done deal but I heard there will be a vote. I assume the DA teams are the ones voting on this but IDK.
> Anyone heard anything new?


The  response to the interest form deadline is Dec 15 but the age group decisions has been stated to come before that. 

Not sure how much weight the interest form has?  However we've been told that the majority response will be considered even if there is only a sample size by the end of the month.   For example if the majority of the clubs want u12 or single age u16 those have a better chance.  The maximum # of groups of (6) which is the same as this season is likely we've been told also but there are (7) on the interest form so who knows?  If that's the case u12 might not continue or there could be 2x combo groups again u16/17 & u18/19.


----------



## StrikerOC

jpeter said:


> The  response to the interest form deadline is Dec 15 but the age group decisions has been stated to come before that.
> 
> Not sure how much weight the interest form has?  However we've been told that the majority response will be considered even if there is only a sample size by the end of the month.   For example if the majority of the clubs want u12 or single age u16 those have a better chance.  The maximum # of groups of (6) which is the same as this season is likely we've been told also but there are (7) on the interest form so who knows?  If that's the case u12 might not continue or there could be 2x combo groups again u16/17 & u18/19.


The vibe I get from talking to a lot of parents about this is that DA U12-U13 isn't all that necessary right now. I do think top talent will flock to clubs with DA status though. I know there will be one team that continues playing up an age group and I bet there will be another one joining them. Good teams that would have normally been on the DA U12 can still play older kids but also enjoy the tournaments.


----------



## Definitelynotanotherref

It is admittedly strange that the kids at the higher end of the talent pool of their age group essentially take a step backwards in competitiveness. To go from U11 with 3 refs to U12 with 1 referee. The season with State/National Cup and other big tournaments adds a little excitement, and then they go to playing the same 9 teams 3-4times a year.

It feels weird telling a parent with their future MLS star child that "if the DA really cared if the ball went 1 inch over the sideline, then they would hire AR's". The referee has to guestimate offsides. There are subs on the fly allowed and DA doesn't really keep score. The interchangeable 22 man roster where they split them into 2 games. It all definitely has a "4phun" kind of vibe to it. At the same time, while DA doesn't really emphasize winning because they want to promote development, the coaches sure seem to emphasize winning and I have seen some kids go with little playing time.

1 possible benefit is that the referees doing the solo U12 DA games are definitely way better than the average Center referee if you stayed in CSL, SDCSL, SDDA etc. So while you don't have the accuracy of correct out of bounds and offside calls, you will have the rule accuracy as well as the foul recognition and card selection (relative) consistency.


----------



## SBFDad

boomer said:


> Posted this afternoon on the DA website. U12 & U13 are options on the interest form but sounds like still being evaluated...
> 
> _For Clubs
> 
> 2019-20 Development Academy Interest Form
> 
> The U.S. Soccer Development Academy has announced the initial stage for new Clubs that are interested in joining or existing clubs that are interested in expanding. Clubs who have interest in joining or expanding into additional age groups for the 2019-20 season or beyond, should complete the interest form.
> 
> Application Deadline: December 15, 2018
> *Existing Full Academy Clubs do not need to apply.
> 
> As shared in previous Academy meetings, the Academy is evaluating the age groups within the program for the future. In order to capture the most accurate interest and information from new and existing Clubs; we have included all potential age groups in the interest form as an option.
> 
> Note, the form includes U-16 as a single age option, this is for new Clubs to express their interest (existing Clubs do not need to apply for U-16). An official decision regarding age groups for boys and girls will be made and communicated in November, or at latest during the Winter Showcase._


Winter Showcase for olders starts in 4 days, USSDAs self-imposed deadline. Anyone hearing anything recently on status of U12, U13, or U16 for next year?


----------



## RedDevilDad

No news yet.  I emailed and got this token reply.
"We are continuing to review the structure of the Development Academy for next season. Once the decisions have been finalized, the information will be communicated to clubs."


----------



## StrikerOC

RedDevilDad said:


> No news yet.  I emailed and got this token reply.
> "We are continuing to review the structure of the Development Academy for next season. Once the decisions have been finalized, the information will be communicated to clubs."


We are at a DA affiliated club in OC (2008 Pre Acad. so directly effected) and have basically been told that the DA U12 & U13 aren't going to happen. I think you are going to see at few more of the really good teams at this age group start to play up in age for better competition until they get to U14


----------



## 66 GTO

StrikerOC said:


> We are at a DA affiliated club in OC (2008 Pre Acad. so directly effected) and have basically been told that the DA U12 & U13 aren't going to happen. I think you are going to see at few more of the really good teams at this age group start to play up in age for better competition until they get to U14


I don’t think that will be the case. It’s going to be more of the same only that they will go back to play csl gold or scdsl flight one
And that’s what DA is now the flight ones move to DA the C team becomes the B team and B becomes the A or DA2 or Pre academy 
The competition still going to be the same 
That’s how it was before they added the U12-14 DA 
I think it’s a smart move. Youngers may not like it but at u16 splitting the teams to one age group makes a lot of sense ask any 03players right now they want DA.
Having gone thru it last year on the short side DA it was cool at first but if it goes away you are not missing out much at u12-u13 even at u 14 
With the regions separated


----------



## Kante

StrikerOC said:


> We are at a DA affiliated club in OC (2008 Pre Acad. so directly effected) and have basically been told that the DA U12 & U13 aren't going to happen. I think you are going to see at few more of the really good teams at this age group start to play up in age for better competition until they get to U14


So you guys were told that u13 will go away for the 2019-20 season?


----------



## SBFDad

Tweeted by Kevin Hartman 20 minutes ago...

“.@ussoccer_acad "will no longer operate U12 programming, and... will begin to transition to a decentralized U12 initiative led by clubs and members."


----------



## Kante

Here's the whole announcement:

Dear Academy Clubs,

U.S. Soccer created the Development Academy in 2007 following a comprehensive review of elite player development in the United States and around the world. At that time, the Academy Program was launched for male players in the U-15 to U-18 age groups. In 2013, the Academy expanded direct influence to include the U-13/14 age group, improving the everyday learning environments for younger players by bringing them in line with the Development Academy philosophy, based on international standards. Then, in 2016, the Academy expanded to include Zone 1 and help Clubs create better environments for developing younger players. To that end, U.S. Soccer introduced the Player Development Initiatives (PDI) simultaneous to the U-12 Academy launch, to help spread uniform, age-appropriate standards to impact player development nation-wide. Together, they set the benchmark and provided the example for all Clubs and leagues countrywide to achieve U.S. Soccer uniform standards.

Since its introduction, here’s some of what the Academy U-12 program has provided to impact the development of players, coaches and Clubs:


Created age-appropriate programming, training and game environments
Streamlined individual players’ learning pathways
Improved the quality of coaching for younger players by extending minimum coaching license requirements—B licenses for coaches and A licenses for Directors
Altered focus from team to individual player development within Clubs and created flexible player pools instead of teams
Shifted focus away from a results-driven philosophy
Increased training frequency (3x/week minimum) and promoted fewer, more meaningful games
Applied age-appropriate standards and philosophy to training and games
Focused on local environments, reducing and limiting travel
Unified player development initiatives and standards across the country
Provided safe and enjoyable soccer environments built on respect and positive encouragement from players, coaches, parents, and fans
The U-12 program expanded the Academy influence to players and Clubs at younger ages. Now, we believe that the time is right to empower and support Clubs and Members across the country to operate standards-based programming.  The Academy Clubs have shown a commitment to this collective effort to improve environments, and in many cases have already expanded the philosophy to additional non-Academy teams and ages within their Clubs.  In addition, Members have also taken steps to adopt PDI’s. We are confident that the initiative can continue to grow as needed without direct programming hosted or organized by U.S. Soccer or the Development Academy. 

Therefore, in the fall of 2019, the Development Academy will no longer operate U-12 programming, and we will begin the transition to a decentralized U-12 initiative led by Clubs and Members. This will allow for more direct management of Zone 1 player needs, while continuing to meet Academy philosophy and standards. Currently, 3,870 players participate in Academy standards-based environments. We want this number to continue to grow through Member influence on the landscape, and to positively impact hundreds of thousands of players.  Additionally, we hope that organizing Zone 1 programming in your local communities will limit travel and costs for players and parents, so the players can spend more time on the field.

Beginning in 2019-20, it will no longer be an option for U-12-only Clubs to participate in DA programming. However, U-12 Clubs remain an integral part of the player development pathway. Your efforts to develop and identify individual Zone 1 players are critically important to ensuring they can reach their full potential. Developing affiliations and partnerships with full Academy Clubs or Professional Clubs will help us achieve our collective goal of creating the best possible environments for the development of world-class players.

As part of our Mission to improve everyday environments for all athletes, we will continue to support Clubs and Members through our newly created Club Development department. We believe the time is right for Clubs and Members to take control of their environments and take ownership of the U-12 age group as part of Zone 1 programming. Together, we will continue to create the best environments for player development now and in the future.

We expect Clubs and Competitions to continue to uphold the following Zone 1 programming principles and initiatives:


Adopt and commit to the Player Development Initiative philosophy, focusing on the individual development of players
Be the example in your community—establish partner and affiliate Clubs for cooperation and collaboration
Emphasize training and positive learning environments
Provide all players with meaningful minutes, focusing on development, not results
Ensure every player plays in at least 50% of game minutes each game
Longer periods of playing time and less frequent interruptions to benefit player development
Accelerate learning by allowing teams to move players up or down based on physical needs and/or relative age to appropriately challenge a player
All club constituents (parents, coaches, support staff, etc.) are expected to play a role in creating a supportive and positive environment for training and games
If you have any questions or concerns, please contact the Development Academy.

Thank you,

*U.S. Soccer Development Academy*


----------



## StrikerOC

Kante said:


> So you guys were told that u13 will go away for the 2019-20 season?


We haven't officially been told that but our club is making plans for us to play up an age group again. From my personal conversations and from what I gathered from talking to the other parents on the team is that the current DA U12-13 will be grandfathered in. 

I am not saying that it is a done deal, I am just saying that the mood changed within our club about a month ago. Again, this is a team that is directly effected by this change so they have been very upfront about what they are hearing from USDA


----------



## StrikerOC

66 GTO said:


> I don’t think that will be the case. It’s going to be more of the same only that they will go back to play csl gold or scdsl flight one
> And that’s what DA is now the flight ones move to DA the C team becomes the B team and B becomes the A or DA2 or Pre academy
> The competition still going to be the same
> That’s how it was before they added the U12-14 DA
> I think it’s a smart move. Youngers may not like it but at u16 splitting the teams to one age group makes a lot of sense ask any 03players right now they want DA.
> Having gone thru it last year on the short side DA it was cool at first but if it goes away you are not missing out much at u12-u13 even at u 14
> With the regions separated


I actually agree with you 100%. The more people I talk to who have had kids in U12-13 DA say the same thing. Our team will be playing up an age group so we will find plenty of good competition that way.


----------



## 46n2

I don't think a team can just play up ,doesn't it have to be approved by the league?  My DD team always spoke about it but rumor was league said no?


----------



## RedDevilDad

No mention of the u13s (2007s).


----------



## StrikerOC

46n2 said:


> I don't think a team can just play up ,doesn't it have to be approved by the league?  My DD team always spoke about it but rumor was league said no?


League approved our team this season. We played '07 flight 1 as a '08 team, but we will play all tournaments with the '08


----------



## watfly

Definitelynotanotherref said:


> It is admittedly strange that the kids at the higher end of the talent pool of their age group essentially take a step backwards in competitiveness. To go from U11 with 3 refs to U12 with 1 referee. The season with State/National Cup and other big tournaments adds a little excitement, and then they go to playing the same 9 teams 3-4times a year.
> 
> It feels weird telling a parent with their future MLS star child that "if the DA really cared if the ball went 1 inch over the sideline, then they would hire AR's". The referee has to guestimate offsides. There are subs on the fly allowed and DA doesn't really keep score. The interchangeable 22 man roster where they split them into 2 games. It all definitely has a "4phun" kind of vibe to it. At the same time, while DA doesn't really emphasize winning because they want to promote development, the coaches sure seem to emphasize winning and I have seen some kids go with little playing time.
> 
> 1 possible benefit is that the referees doing the solo U12 DA games are definitely way better than the average Center referee if you stayed in CSL, SDCSL, SDDA etc. So while you don't have the accuracy of correct out of bounds and offside calls, you will have the rule accuracy as well as the foul recognition and card selection (relative) consistency.


Going into it I thought it was odd that my son would be going from 3 refs to 1 ref.  I perceived that as a step back.  However, the single DA refs we've had this year have been substantially better (for the most part) than the 3 ref crews we had last year in SCDSL flight 1.  They've done a surprisingly great job with offside calls.   They certainly haven't been perfect with sidelines calls, but the benefit is that they err on the side of playing on.  I would much rather have play continue on a ball that is an inch or two outside of the touchline than have the game stopped for a throw in.

As far as playing time goes, it hasn't been an issue for my son's team.  If everyone's healthy and not on vacation we still only have two subs per team.  We could actually us another sub or two.


----------



## 66 GTO

watfly said:


> Going into it I thought it was odd that my son would be going from 3 refs to 1 ref.  I perceived that as a step back.  However, the single DA refs we've had this year have been substantially better (for the most part) than the 3 ref crews we had last year in SCDSL flight 1.  They've done a surprisingly great job with offside calls.   They certainly haven't been perfect with sidelines calls, but the benefit is that they err on the side of playing on.  I would much rather have play continue on a ball that is an inch or two outside of the touchline than have the game stopped for a throw in.
> 
> As far as playing time goes, it hasn't been an issue for my son's team.  If everyone's healthy and not on vacation we still only have two subs per team.  We could actually us another sub or two.


How about the travel? and playing same team 3- 4 times and no tournaments... I know my son missed playing tournaments and I did too.


----------



## John Akii-Bua

My biggest annoyance with the DA so far is the ban on outside soccer. I'm down with no high school team, but at the younger ages it seems really counter productive to limit kids soccer. I know at least one club around here that won't even let kids play rec pickup futsal. That's total crap -- the ussf supposedly promotes futsal with their u12 showcase, then pressures kids to not actually play any futsal.


----------



## watfly

66 GTO said:


> How about the travel? and playing same team 3- 4 times and no tournaments... I know my son missed playing tournaments and I did too.


We had a unique situation last year in that we were in the only SD team in our SCDSL bracket, so we actually have had a lot less travel this year than last year.  We played 4 tourneys before league started and are going to play in a January tournament with a DA bracket.



John Akii-Bua said:


> My biggest annoyance with the DA so far is the ban on outside soccer. I'm down with no high school team, but at the younger ages it seems really counter productive to limit kids soccer. I know at least one club around here that won't even let kids play rec pickup futsal. That's total crap -- the ussf supposedly promotes futsal with their u12 showcase, then pressures kids to not actually play any futsal.


Some clubs I guess are pretty strict, others take a "don't ask, don't tell" approach when it comes to playing Mex league, indoor soccer and futsal.  There is no specific prohibition on futsal in the USSDA rules.  I would argue that "futsal is futsal" and "soccer is soccer".  Sometimes asking for forgiveness is easier than asking for permission.


----------



## John Akii-Bua

watfly said:


> Some clubs I guess are pretty strict, others take a "don't ask, don't tell" approach when it comes to playing Mex league, indoor soccer and futsal.  There is no specific prohibition on futsal in the USSDA rules.  I would argue that "futsal is futsal" and "soccer is soccer".  Sometimes asking for forgiveness is easier than asking for permission.


Agreed. I just think they should make it perfectly clear that outside futsal is allowed and encouraged. the up and coming clubs that are applying for expansion feel they need to strictly follow the rules, and since the rules aren't clear, they err on the side of caution and expressly ban futsal. Result is less player development. Kids shouldn't feel their roster spot is in jeopardy just for playing pickup futsal.


----------



## jpeter

The reduction continues,. This years changes to fewer 20 odd games for u16+ is topic for conversation.  I know Teddy at the Pats was concerned going into the Showcase that his olders only played 4 games first half.  Tough one first FL showcase game in  sunny, windy conditions but the east teams are doing pretty good so far...

futsal going from required and having showcases to not at all it's kind of disappointing


----------



## jpeter

RedDevilDad said:


> No mention of the u13s (2007s).


Same for U16/17 03/04' .... will be evaluating the response to interest form before making a decision we were told although some think it's likely to stay combined.


----------



## watfly

RedDevilDad said:


> No mention of the u13s (2007s).


Can we "assume" that U13 will continue at least another year?  Who knows...US Soccer is so bad about getting their message out (among many other things).  This U-12 press release is barely intelligible, 90% rationalization, 10% substance.  They can't even hire a USMNT coach.  The first thing they need to do after they hire a coach is fire their PR department.  Some of the public comments made by their director/officers about the DA and coach licensing have been absurd.


----------



## SBFDad

jpeter said:


> Same for U16/17 03/04' .... will be evaluating the response to interest form before making a decision we were told although some think it's likely to stay combined.


That would be a mistake. But they’ve been making that mistake for years. Why should we really expect anything different next year? Par for USSDA.


----------



## size_five

it was the opinion of our DA coach last year, who was privy to some of Double Pass's evaluation of US Soccer some years ago, that U12/U13 was almost too late to begin the type of rigorous strategic and skills based training that the academies offered.  In order to properly prime the US pipeline for talent that could compete on an international level, DA type training needed to start even earlier.


----------



## timbuck

DA type training does not necessarily require DA to make it happen.


----------



## size_five

@timbuck: true; however, having standards (such as minimum coaching licensing levels, strategy/ curriculum, etc) is much more difficult without the structure of a national organization.

what I would hope, is that USSDA publishes a curriculum for clubs for each of the younger age levels, and provides resources (or at least opportunities) for coaches to be sufficiently trained to execute the curricula.

additionally, without the DA, the waters get muddy again.  Where do you go to get the top level training?  in socal, is it: scdsl flight one, csl gold, ecnl, odp, etc, etc.


----------



## espola

size_five said:


> @timbuck: true; however, having standards (such as minimum coaching licensing levels, strategy/ curriculum, etc) is much more difficult without the structure of a national organization.
> 
> what I would hope, is that USSDA publishes a curriculum for clubs for each of the younger age levels, and provides resources (or at least opportunities) for coaches to be sufficiently trained to execute the curricula.
> 
> additionally, without the DA, the waters get muddy again.  Where do you go to get the top level training?  in socal, is it: scdsl flight one, csl gold, ecnl, odp, etc, etc.


Leagues don't train anybody.  Club/team/coach does that.


----------



## size_five

espola said:


> Leagues don't train anybody.  Club/team/coach does that.


Well, yes ... and no.  In order for a coach's training/ instruction to have max impact, the player needs to be surrounded by other high quality players and teams.  This is where the league comes in.  From what I've experienced in CSL Gold, ECNL, and SCDSL, the variance in coach/player/ and team quality is pretty large.  Personally, I think the environment of the DA will produce more higher quality players.  Anyway, that's just my opinion.  Take it for what it's worth.


----------



## espola

size_five said:


> Well, yes ... and no.  In order for a coach's training/ instruction to have max impact, the player needs to be surrounded by other high quality players and teams.  This is where the league comes in.  From what I've experienced in CSL Gold, ECNL, and SCDSL, the variance in coach/player/ and team quality is pretty large.  Personally, I think the environment of the DA will produce more higher quality players.  Anyway, that's just my opinion.  Take it for what it's worth.


Not without player (and parents) commitment to the program, and actual good coaches who can (and will) train to the program.

What DA has done as a league is to scare many good players away.


----------



## focomoso

John Akii-Bua said:


> That's total crap -- the ussf supposedly promotes futsal with their u12 showcase, then pressures kids to not actually play any futsal.


They killed that program this year, which is too bad. It was the best part of the season last year.


----------



## StrikerOC

watfly said:


> Can we "assume" that U13 will continue at least another year?  Who knows...US Soccer is so bad about getting their message out (among many other things).  This U-12 press release is barely intelligible, 90% rationalization, 10% substance.  They can't even hire a USMNT coach.  The first thing they need to do after they hire a coach is fire their PR department.  Some of the public comments made by their director/officers about the DA and coach licensing have been absurd.


THIS 100%


----------



## SBFDad

Bump. 

Jury still out on continuing with U13 (2007) and splitting U16 (2004) and U17 (2003) for next season.

Who knows what?


----------



## jpeter

At the FL showcases we where told no other changes for now other than giving U12 back to the clubs.

Other announcements could follow in Jan when new/updated clubs are announced with possible changes to the age groupings.  Some East coast & Midwest clubs didn't seem to support calendar year U16 as much as keeping U16/17 combined.  not that much difference in those groups to make it worth it $$$ wise according to the few we spoke with.


----------



## Kante

Favor to ask. Have been posting a variety of things. It's all interesting to me and relatively easy to do. But, I don't want to waste people's time and clutter up the forum with information that is not useful. In the poll below, there's a number of ideas for post. If you could vote on what you prefer, that would be helpful. Thanks! Feliz Navidad!

http://www.socalsoccer.com/threads/poll-what-are-the-most-useful-postings-here.16377/


----------



## RedDevilDad

Kante said:


> Favor to ask. Have been posting a variety of things. It's all interesting to me and relatively easy to do. But, I don't want to waste people's time and clutter up the forum with information that is not useful. In the poll below, there's a number of ideas for post. If you could vote on what you prefer, that would be helpful. Thanks! Feliz Navidad!
> 
> http://www.socalsoccer.com/threads/poll-what-are-the-most-useful-postings-here.16377/


Bro. Lol. One post of this may have been sufficient. Lol.


----------



## focomoso

Do we have any definitive info about the U13s next year. Our club is continuing on as if it's a sure thing, but I've heard parents of other clubs say that it isn't.


----------



## boomer

Girls DA club in Virginia announced 16/17 split next year on twitter a week ago. Curious if legit and if it applies to boys. Haven't heard anything on this in weeks.


----------



## jpeter

boomer said:


> Girls DA club in Virginia announced 16/17 split next year on twitter a week ago. Curious if legit and if it applies to boys. Haven't heard anything on this in weeks.
> 
> View attachment 3703


Yes the u16/17 split for the girls was announced at their  showcase so u16(04) & u17 (03) will be celendar year in 19-20'.

The U13 for the girls thats listed is a new one and haven't heard anything about that or boys split just yet?

U12 going back to the clubs for the boys was the only thing that we heard from the boys showcase.


----------



## MimiV42

boomer said:


> Girls DA club in Virginia announced 16/17 split next year on twitter a week ago. Curious if legit and if it applies to boys. Haven't heard anything on this in weeks.
> 
> View attachment 3703


This would imply expansion to U13 for girls too wouldn't it?  Don't girls currently start at U14?


----------



## focomoso

A post on the Girls DA board mentioned that a few regions have had the U13 for a bit as an experiment. I wouldn't read this as meaning that all the girls regions will follow or that the boys will keep U13.


----------



## StrikerOC

focomoso said:


> Do we have any definitive info about the U13s next year. Our club is continuing on as if it's a sure thing, but I've heard parents of other clubs say that it isn't.


Interesting, our club seems to be preparing as if U-13 will be given back to clubs next year. They informed the parents very early on that U-12 DA would not continue. It seems that the '08 (U-11) will be the first age group to have to wait until DA U-14 since the recent change


----------



## watfly

StrikerOC said:


> Interesting, our club seems to be preparing as if U-13 will be given back to clubs next year. They informed the parents very early on that U-12 DA would not continue. It seems that the '08 (U-11) will be the first age group to have to wait until DA U-14 since the recent change





focomoso said:


> Do we have any definitive info about the U13s next year. Our club is continuing on as if it's a sure thing, but I've heard parents of other clubs say that it isn't.


Our club is proceeding as if we're playing U-13 next year, and why wouldn't they...the elimination of U13 is only a rumor.  I also wouldn't expect a definitive statement from USSDA on a rumor.  If they're going to eliminate U13 after next year I would expect them to announce that at the end of next year even if they're plan right now is to eliminate it.  I would assume they would want to keep their options open and USSDA doesn't have a great reputation for being proactive.

I've heard second hand that our club will maintain a similar DA U12 training format for the 2008's (amount of training, roster size, two teams etc).  I wouldn't be surprised if other clubs follow suit and there is a Pre-DA U12 bracket of some sort, although that's pure speculation on my part.


----------



## StrikerOC

watfly said:


> Our club is proceeding as if we're playing U-13 next year, and why wouldn't they...the elimination of U13 is only a rumor.  I also wouldn't expect a definitive statement from USSDA on a rumor.  If they're going to eliminate U13 after next year I would expect them to announce that at the end of next year even if they're plan right now is to eliminate it.  I would assume they would want to keep their options open and USSDA doesn't have a great reputation for being proactive.
> 
> I've heard second hand that our club will maintain a similar DA U12 training format for the 2008's (amount of training, roster size, two teams etc).  I wouldn't be surprised if other clubs follow suit and there is a Pre-DA U12 bracket of some sort, although that's pure speculation on my part.


Again, I have no facts as of yet on U-13 next year but our club does seem very confident it will go away. My son is a '08 and is directly effected by this. Our club had already formed the DA U-12 team last year so this was inconvenient to say the least. They have proceeded with DA training and our team has been playing up in age ('07) as part of this and will continue to do so. 

I am actually ok with DA starting at U-14 and a bigger supporter of advanced kid/teams playing up in age until 14 yrs old.


----------



## makeyourself

Is it fair to assume that no new clubs will be granted U13 for next season knowing that it would be removed the following year? I would imagine only clubs with existing U13 will just keep it for another year assuming it eventually gets removed the year after next.


----------



## younothat

Lots of rumors flying but seems clear to me that DA is in a transition phase and will be for next couple of years likely.

After a bunch of expansion this is the first year after many where Ussda didn't even take in applications for new clubs or expansion for existing ones. Basically a statement that more expansion is unlikely and changes are coming. So what are the changes?

Fewer clubs or age groups for those that don’t have full academy status for one is a good possibility IMO. U12 going back to the clubs for the boys is just the start. U13 for 18-19’ may well only be granted or offered to the full academy clubs for example. That AG could go also go back to the clubs soon as the shift to the emphasis on the older groups continue; the U18-U20 gap is something that's going to be addressed sooner or later so don’t be surprised to see a new program for those ages at some point and a reduced offering for the younger groups.

DA has basically been selling wolf tickets to 2nd tier or non MLS or professional affiliated clubs but that’s likely to change also. There could be a 2 tier system or secondary level that separates the professional clubs from the rest of the bunch at some point, either that or the non full academy clubs won’t be getting any more teams starting 18-19’ & will eventually age out in the next 3 years or so. This already started in a subtle way with the way the scheduling is done after u15+ where you play teams based on previous results or not.

One thing is for sure! DA won’t be the same going forward, a transition has already begun where or how it ends up is still anybodies guess?  Thank you, next kind of deal.  

Some of the bigger clubs or MLS ones will continue on with U12 programming and there are rumors about another usclub league or offering in the works for 18-19' season.


----------



## SBFDad

younothat said:


> Lots of rumors flying but seems clear to me that DA is in a transition phase and will be for next couple of years likely.
> 
> After a bunch of expansion this is the first year after many where Ussda didn't even take in applications for new clubs or expansion for existing ones. Basically a statement that more expansion is unlikely and changes are coming. So what are the changes?
> 
> Fewer clubs or age groups for those that don’t have full academy status for one is a good possibility IMO. U12 going back to the clubs for the boys is just the start. U13 for 18-19’ may well only be granted or offered to the full academy clubs for example. That AG could go also go back to the clubs soon as the shift to the emphasis on the older groups continue; the U18-U20 gap is something that's going to be addressed sooner or later so don’t be surprised to see a new program for those ages at some point and a reduced offering for the younger groups.
> 
> DA has basically been selling wolf tickets to 2nd tier or non MLS or professional affiliated clubs but that’s likely to change also. There could be a 2 tier system or secondary level that separates the professional clubs from the rest of the bunch at some point, either that or the non full academy clubs won’t be getting any more teams starting 18-19’ & will eventually age out in the next 3 years or so. This already started in a subtle way with the way the scheduling is done after u15+ where you play teams based on previous results or not.
> 
> One thing is for sure! DA won’t be the same going forward, a transition has already begun where or how it ends up is still anybodies guess?  Thank you, next kind of deal.
> 
> Some of the bigger clubs or MLS ones will continue on with U12 programming and there are rumors about another usclub league or offering in the works for 18-19' season.


Thanks for bringing this string back alive. Still waiting to hear what the boys side will do with U16 and U17 age groups next year. It is confirmed that the girls side is splitting. Nothing out there that addresses the boys side.


----------



## RedDevilDad

younothat said:


> DA has basically been selling wolf tickets to 2nd tier or non MLS or professional affiliated clubs but that’s likely to change also. .


With the new law, they can only sell rescue wolf tickets.
Sorry, couldn't resist. 
Ok, here's what I've seen on the rumor mill...
I've seen it said that in the 2020-21, they will eliminate U13 DA and break the combined U16/17 into separate U16 and U17 programs. 
For the life of me, I can't remember where I read that. I think it was on www.bigsoccer.com.


----------



## StrikerOC

younothat said:


> DA has basically been selling wolf tickets to 2nd tier or non MLS or professional affiliated clubs but that’s likely to change also. There could be a 2 tier system or secondary level that separates the professional clubs from the rest of the bunch at some point


This seems a little arrogant of DA to assume all the worthy kids will be playing for MLS DA teams. There's a ton of young talent that can't even make it onto a club because they don't have the finances. 

The non MLS clubs can't get a fee like European clubs when one of their product (kid) goes pro and they are going to be further punished for not being an MLS DA... US Soccer makes no sense to me


----------



## mahrez

LAFC was told earlier last month U12 was going back to the clubs for next season 19-20'.    However, planning on  continuing the U12 program without ussda and possibly with usclub.

For u16/17 next season 19-20' still proceeding with the plans for that to still be a combined age group since there has been nothing to date to indicate otherwise.


----------



## s0ccerM0m

mahrez said:


> LAFC was told earlier last month U12 was going back to the clubs for next season 19-20'.    However, planning on  continuing the U12 program without ussda and possibly with usclub.
> 
> For u16/17 next season 19-20' still proceeding with the plans for that to still be a combined age group since there has been nothing to date to indicate otherwise.


Mahrez, does that mean LAFC will be adding 03s to the roster?


----------



## jpeter

s0ccerM0m said:


> Mahrez, does that mean LAFC will be adding 03s to the roster?


LAFC has been scouting 03's and trialling some already so they have something in the works but very limited numbers I would guess.   If the u16/17 stay combined I would guess yes they will have some 03's maybe like 6 or so.


----------



## SBFDad

jpeter said:


> LAFC has been scouting 03's and trialling some already so they have something in the works but very limited numbers I would guess.   If the u16/17 stay combined I would guess yes they will have some 03's maybe like 6 or so.


Seems like pulling in an insignificant number of 03s is a mistake, at least for those players pulled in. Can’t see LAFC committing to U18/19 the following year (2020-2021) in order to keep those few players around. Too much recruiting to do. Just letting their 04s age up over the next few seasons seems more logical. That said, Mahrez would know more. Input?


----------



## focomoso

SBFDad said:


> Seems like pulling in an insignificant number of 03s is a mistake, at least for those players pulled in. Can’t see LAFC committing to U18/19 the following year (2020-2021) in order to keep those few players around. Too much recruiting to do. Just letting their 04s age up over the next few seasons seems more logical. That said, Mahrez would know more. Input?


I'm pretty sure LAFC could put together a top team at any age level in a matter of months. They have that much prestige and are right in the middle of the strongest demographic.


----------



## jpeter

focomoso said:


> I'm pretty sure LAFC could put together a top team at any age level in a matter of months. They have that much prestige and are right in the middle of the strongest demographic.


The 04's are top of the league but they know from playing 03' club teams in scrimmages all the time  they will need some to stay there If the age groups stays combined u16/17 next season.  They have been pretty success vs those 03 teams when they use those 03 trialist  w/ their 04's.  When they find players that can dominate or stand out on the other teams they will note those on the scouting reports and coaches talk it over.

LAFC is going to have teams in leagues besides DA for 18-19 so this might be the year they start a USL team for 18+ since they didn't renew with OC blues.

Not rumor but new Galaxy GM making some changes.... Want's to get more bang for the buck$$$.

Te Kloese looking to bring academy closer to LA Galaxy first team
https://www.mlssoccer.com/post/2019/01/08/stejskal-te-kloese-looking-bring-academy-closer-la-galaxy-first-team

"As is the case with the first team, the ingredients are in place for the Galaxy academy to be successful. Their region is incredibly talented and their academy has solid facilities and, according to Te Kloese, is run well on an administrative and logistical standpoint. They haven’t, however, had an academy director for two years, something Te Kloese said he wants to correct within the next couple of months. Once he makes that hire, the principles of how the club’s youth players will train, play and learn will become more defined. "


----------



## Kante

https://www.socceramerica.com/publications/article/80950/mls-clubs-consider-leaving-the-development-academy.html


----------



## younothat

Kante said:


> https://www.socceramerica.com/publications/article/80950/mls-clubs-consider-leaving-the-development-academy.html


"But the thing we are really focused on is that alignment of the pathway   As you know, our landscape is quite fragmented. It's really important for us to have that alignment, so when we think about player development we think about, ‘OK, maybe it's good to have pro competition and then the other clubs.’”

Last year, U.S. Soccer responded to complaints from MLS clubs’ about traveling long distances to play against teams that don’t offer meaningful competition. It decreased the number of DA games on the schedule and created “free weekends” for clubs to choose their own competition, such as against foreign teams. The DA has also for years allowed MLS clubs to compete in the Generation adidas Cup.

“One of the things [the MLS clubs] really like to do is play against international opponents,” said Romeijn. “And, of course, that's a really good benchmark when you're talking about player development.
“Then we say, of course, we will look at the schedule and we will give you the opportunities. It's the same when you're looking at the Generation [adidas] Cup they organize.”
For some MLS clubs, the free weekends provided so far aren’t enough to satisfy their quest to take international trips or they fall during inconvenient times of the year.
Romeijn says he can envision MLS continuing in the DA with a different format in which MLS clubs are given more flexibility. But …

An example of adjusting the DA schedule to please MLS clubs would be to allow, within the DA structure, more games between MLS clubs.
“You can imagine Philadelphia and Red Bulls,” Romeijn said, “and they say, OK, not only two but four of these games are really valuable for them when you're looking at player development. And that's what we want to do. Focus on player development.”

More likely, MLS academies could design a combination of national, local and international competition for their youth teams, and perhaps combine with USL youth programs.
Alternatives to MLS pulling all of its teams out of the DA include keeping its younger teams in the DA and MLS creating its own competition for the older age groups. The DA, for its part, could propose a tiered format based on the quality of its clubs to placate the MLS clubs that believe they’re playing too many games against weaker competition.
“We are now in the process of having these conversations,” said Romeijn. “Nothing has been decided yet.”

*Charles Boehm*‏
Worth noting: when asked about longstanding talk of creating a "pro" tier of the Development Academy for MLS and other academies, Lepore and his USSF colleague Nico Romeijn say nothing has yet been decided. Interesting given how much chatter there's been re the idea lately.

*Charles Boehm*‏
Asked to comment on the state of the USMNT program, Vermes says "we've done ourselves a disservice" by failing to vertically integrate across age groups to inculcate a style of play and way of working so that players can rise through the system and grow/evolve efficiently

Currently there really is no pathway from the USSDA to anything else,  USL is outside and this is no integration.   MLS club spend $$millions$$ on there academy  to see those player walk away for free for college scholarships, play in Europe, Mexico, other domestic teams.  The return on investment is not happening and sooner or later things have to change  with the USSDA & MLS academies.  Money is not going to be keep flowing without better ROI.

From that Stejskal piece with the new Galaxy boss:
Te Kloese naturally has more on his plate, namely increasing the return the Galaxy get on their academy. Despite operating in what’s likely the most talent-rich region in the country, LA have only ever produced one Homegrown Player of note in Gyasi Zardes. He was traded to Columbus last winter.

Te Kloese, who helped recruit several players from the LA area to Mexico’s youth national teams during his time with the FMF, is well aware that the Galaxy need to get more out of their academy. He knows they have a ton of work to do with their youth system, too.

“I’ve always been a little bit like with the idea that they could be taking so much more out of the local community,” said Te Kloese. “In the end is not so easy for a big club to play young players, but I think there should be some on the roster and there should be something that gives a little bit extra to the Galaxy based on their local talent pool.”


----------



## Kante

jpeter said:


> The 04's are top of the league but they know from playing 03' club teams in scrimmages all the time  they will need some to stay there If the age groups stays combined u16/17 next season.  They have been pretty success vs those 03 teams when they use those 03 trialist  w/ their 04's.  When they find players that can dominate or stand out on the other teams they will note those on the scouting reports and coaches talk it over.
> 
> LAFC is going to have teams in leagues besides DA for 18-19 so this might be the year they start a USL team for 18+ since they didn't renew with OC blues.


am sure that LAFC could quickly recruit in as many 03's as they felt were needed for next year, but the current 04 team's DA record over the last 18 months is 33 wins, 2 draws and 2 losses with a +155 goal differential over 37 games. And this is playing against the toughest 04 DA group in the country. 

If LAFC don't add 03's for u16/u17 maybe they don't win 90% of their games, but that's probably ok. get that the club wants to build its brand by loading up a super team that demolishes all comers (and from a professional club pov, that's an ok goal), but would argue that it's in the players' best interest developmentally to experience a bit of adversity. 

pretty well documented that players drop out/plateau at two key ages. 

the first is u12/u13 when some youngers (born in q4 of the year ) and late developers drop out due to size/strength disparity vs olders (born in q1 of the year) and early developers. 

the second is at u16/17 when the youngers/late developers still in the system catch up physically and then some olders and early developers plateau to due skill disparity because these players have relied on physical advantages to this point. 

Net net, seems like LAFC has been building their brand in the last couple of years at the expense of players' long term interest and could be queuing up a number of players for this 2nd drop-out/plateau period in the next couple of years.


----------



## StrikerOC

SBFDad said:


> Bump.
> 
> Jury still out on continuing with U13 (2007) and splitting U16 (2004) and U17 (2003) for next season.
> 
> Who knows what?


I can confirm that the 2008 U-12 club teams that were supposed to be starting DA (until this year when it was sent back to clubs) will be starting a league and continue to play U-12 DA teams. I believe the league is "unofficial" because I know some teams will also be playing SCDSL. There are some details still being worked out but it is happening...


----------



## focomoso

StrikerOC said:


> I can confirm that the 2008 U-12 club teams that were supposed to be starting DA (until this year when it was sent back to clubs) will be starting a league and continue to play U-12 DA teams. I believe the league is "unofficial" because I know some teams will also be playing SCDSL. There are some details still being worked out but it is happening...


Do you know whether all the DA clubs are doing this or just a subset?


----------



## StrikerOC

focomoso said:


> Do you know whether all the DA clubs are doing this or just a subset?


Just a subset from what I understand, there are still details being worked out. We will have more info in next couple weeks I was told


----------



## timbuck

Another new league/division?  Is this really necessary?


----------



## StrikerOC

timbuck said:


> Another new league/division?  Is this really necessary?


The feeling I got is that it is an unofficial league and that maybe 2/3 of the "DA" clubs would be participating. There is some push back because most of these teams will still be little competition for the big 5 in this age group so it seems kinda pointless for the good teams to do this. Especially when a couple of them are already playing up in age with SCDSL. 

There were other issues brought up like playing your best kids against the weaker teams when you have reg season games and making sure every game will be on a quality field with quality refs


----------



## SBFDad

Looks like the U16/17 split dust has settled. From the DA website...

2019-20 Season Age Group Adjustments
Girls' U-16 Age Group: The U-16 program will be adopted as an additional age group across all Clubs in the Academy Program. 
Boys' U-12 Age Group: The Development Academy will no longer operate U-12 programming. U-12 programs will be led by Clubs and Members for more direct management of Zone 1 (U-6 to U-12) player needs, while continuing to meet Academy philosophy and standards.

The Boys' Acdemy program currently utilizes five (5) age groups for competition, three (3) single age groups and two (2) mixed age groups: U-13, U-14, U-15, U-16/17, and U-18/19. Clubs competing in the U-16/17 and U-18/19 age groups must field teams at both age levels.
The Girls' Academy program utilizes five (5) age groups for competition, three (3) single age groups and two (2) mixed age groups: U-14, U-15, U-16, U-16/17, and U-18/19.


----------



## younothat

SBFDad said:


> Looks like the U16/17 split dust has settled. From the DA website...
> 
> 2019-20 Season Age Group Adjustments
> Girls' U-16 Age Group: The U-16 program will be adopted as an additional age group across all Clubs in the Academy Program.
> Boys' U-12 Age Group: The Development Academy will no longer operate U-12 programming. U-12 programs will be led by Clubs and Members for more direct management of Zone 1 (U-6 to U-12) player needs, while continuing to meet Academy philosophy and standards.
> 
> The Boys' Acdemy program currently utilizes five (5) age groups for competition, three (3) single age groups and two (2) mixed age groups: U-13, U-14, U-15, U-16/17, and U-18/19. Clubs competing in the U-16/17 and U-18/19 age groups must field teams at both age levels.
> The Girls' Academy program utilizes five (5) age groups for competition, three (3) single age groups and two (2) mixed age groups: U-14, U-15, U-16, U-16/17, and U-18/19.


Well that's interesting I guess you're referring to this link:
http://www.ussoccerda.com/faq

"Clubs competing in the U-16/17 and U-18/19 age groups must field teams at both age level"

If really stated correctly that would be mean LAFC would have to have create a new team U18/19 if they also want to have a U16/17 in 19-20'  &  I'm pretty certain they want to have that.  Interesting development if confirmed or applies to the 19-20 season.


----------



## jpeter

younothat said:


> Well that's interesting I guess you're referring to this link:
> http://www.ussoccerda.com/faq
> 
> "Clubs competing in the U-16/17 and U-18/19 age groups must field teams at both age level"
> 
> If really stated correctly that would be mean LAFC would have to have create a new team U18/19 if they also want to have a U16/17 in 19-20'  &  I'm pretty certain they want to have that.  Interesting development if confirmed or applies to the 19-20 season.


Yup and LAFC likely knew & been planning for this.   The 02s were at the training facility for the Nike event and they have been heavily scouting 03's.  Makes you wonder if they have plans for playing mostly 04's in u16/17 & 03/02 in u18/19 for 19-20'.


----------



## Zacrob

jpeter said:


> Yup and LAFC likely knew & been planning for this.   The 02s were at the training facility for the Nike event and they have been heavily scouting 03's.  Makes you wonder if they have plans for playing mostly 04's in u16/17 & 03/02 in u18/19 for 19-20'.


This jibes with rumors I have been hearing that LAFC may look to play many of its players in age groups up one year.   So, the 08's would play U-13 next season and not have a non-DA experience for them.  Definitely not 100% confirmed but being considered.


----------



## Toe poke

SBFDad said:


> Looks like the U16/17 split dust has settled. From the DA website...
> 
> 
> The Boys' Acdemy program currently utilizes five (5) age groups for competition, three (3) single age groups and two (2) mixed age groups: U-13, U-14, U-15, U-16/17, and U-18/19. Clubs competing in the U-16/17 and U-18/19 age groups must field teams at both age levels.
> The Girls' Academy program utilizes five (5) age groups for competition, three (3) single age groups and two (2) mixed age groups: U-14, U-15, U-16, U-16/17, and U-18/19.


What is the update on the split years? Is there a U16 & U17 split?


----------



## SBFDad

Toe poke said:


> What is the update on the split years? Is there a U16 & U17 split?


No split for the boys.


----------



## Footballero

SBFDad said:


> No split for the boys.


That’s just dumb......when are this people going to get things done right?


----------



## jpeter

Mixed signals with the boys staying combined u16/17 but the girls having both u16/17 & u16.

Doesnt seem like the best investment to train players for what 3-4+ yrs than see > 50% or more not play or walk away the follow year.  There are combined ages in high school, other us club leagues like: super y, uspl (14,16,18 for example) so ussda is not the only league doing this.

The team chemisty changes every year with the combo age groups so it's harder to keep teams together this way but in the long run has helped my player work harder but playing up could have done the same thing so not sure of the overall value of continuing this model in da, maybe some short term savings but long term development could suffer.

Some of the da clubs are now going to play/support other leagues like nplwest so they have places for the calendar year age groups (u11,u12, u16) that da doesn't offer.


----------



## SBFDad

jpeter said:


> Mixed signals with the boys staying combined u16/17 but the girls having both u16/17 & u16.
> 
> Doesnt seem like the best investment to train players for what 3-4+ yrs than see > 50% or more not play or walk away the follow year.  There are combined ages in high school, other us club leagues like: super y, uspl (14,16,18 for example) so ussda is not the only league doing this.
> 
> The team chemisty changes every year with the combo age groups so it's harder to keep teams together this way but in the long run has helped my player work harder but playing up could have done the same thing so not sure of the overall value of continuing this model in da, maybe some short term savings but long term development could suffer.


I agree. Shortsighted decision. Somehow there’s value to split the age groups for the girls but not the boys? Makes no sense. Guessing they caved to those clubs that claim they can’t field full 16s and 17s squads with their current talent pool, those clubs that complained about the added expense, or both.

Couple this decision with the fact that 7 of the 8 YNT jobs on the boys side are vacant...both indicative of the sad state of US Soccer and USSDA right now.


----------



## SBFDad

...and let’s not forget that US Soccer was sitting on a $120M surplus a year ago and had the opportunity to really invest in the next generation of talent. Guess they chose not to.


----------



## Kante

jpeter said:


> Mixed signals with the boys staying combined u16/17 but the girls having both u16/17 & u16.
> 
> Doesnt seem like the best investment to train players for what 3-4+ yrs than see > 50% or more not play or walk away the follow year.  There are combined ages in high school, other us club leagues like: super y, uspl (14,16,18 for example) so ussda is not the only league doing this.
> 
> The team chemisty changes every year with the combo age groups so it's harder to keep teams together this way but in the long run has helped my player work harder but playing up could have done the same thing so not sure of the overall value of continuing this model in da, maybe some short term savings but long term development could suffer.
> 
> Some of the da clubs are now going to play/support other leagues like nplwest so they have places for the calendar year age groups (u11,u12, u16) that da doesn't offer.


the combined u16/u17 USSDA age group is an u17 age group where a handful of u16s play up. there is no USSDA option for 80% to 90%  of u16s. 

Doesn't make sense since they broke out the u15s boys due to developmental differences, plus they're now separating the girls age groups. Plus there's a dedicated u16-only national team.

looking at the boys' height and weight averages for the combined u16/u17 age group, in theory, an average 15 year old weighing 130 lbs (at the 50% mark for his age) could be on the field with a set of average 16 1/2 year olds weighing on 150 lbs (at the 50% mark for their age). And the +20 lbs is age-related added muscle. 

yeah, there's players at the professional level who overcome this gap, but players like modric and messi are the .00001% exception. plus they're supported by world class training, injury prevention, conditioning and recovery.


----------



## DefenseWins

Here's the 2019-2020 announcement for the girls.....  http://www.ussoccerda.com/20190220-NEWS-DA-Six-New-Clubs-to-Join-Girls-Development-Academy-for-19-20-Season

And it has a little insight into the boys announcement to come......

*"Expansion to Boys' Academy membership will be announced in the coming weeks. The 2019-20 regular season and event schedule will be released by June 1, 2019."

 "Entering its 13th year in 2019-20, the Academy season will be comprised of teams across five age groups in the boys program: U-13, U-14, U-15, U-16/17 and U-18/19, and five age groups in the girls program: U-14, U-15, U-16, U-17 and U-18/19."
*
So now I guess we just wait to see if they expand the number of clubs since we know that they were accepting applications to do so.


----------



## i_am_taxed

DefenseWins said:


> Here's the 2019-2020 announcement for the girls.....  http://www.ussoccerda.com/20190220-NEWS-DA-Six-New-Clubs-to-Join-Girls-Development-Academy-for-19-20-Season
> 
> And it has a little insight into the boys announcement to come......
> 
> *"Expansion to Boys' Academy membership will be announced in the coming weeks. The 2019-20 regular season and event schedule will be released by June 1, 2019."
> 
> "Entering its 13th year in 2019-20, the Academy season will be comprised of teams across five age groups in the boys program: U-13, U-14, U-15, U-16/17 and U-18/19, and five age groups in the girls program: U-14, U-15, U-16, U-17 and U-18/19."
> *
> So now I guess we just wait to see if they expand the number of clubs since we know that they were accepting applications to do so.


wasn't there a rumor that U-13 will be removed in 20-21 season? it seems like boys side will eventually match girls side, U-14, U-15, U-16, U-17, U-18/19.


----------



## Darbfig

Footballero said:


> That’s just dumb......when are this people going to get things done right?


so, if I'm reading the threads correctly some of the B08 "DA" teams   will have their own league to play in and others will play in the SCDSl for next year (2019-2020)?  When you talk to the different coaches at the DA clubs they kind of beat around the bush with their answers...


----------



## focomoso

Darbfig said:


> so, if I'm reading the threads correctly some of the B08 "DA" teams   will have their own league to play in and others will play in the SCDSl for next year (2019-2020)?  When you talk to the different coaches at the DA clubs they kind of beat around the bush with their answers...


I don't think anyone knows yet. Pats is trying to set up a league for the 08s, but I don't think everyone is going to join. For the teams that don't, their 08s will be a "regular club" and play in whatever leagues their club teams play in (CSL or SCDSL).


----------



## jpeter

focomoso said:


> I don't think anyone knows yet. Pats is trying to set up a league for the 08s, but I don't think everyone is going to join. For the teams that don't, their 08s will be a "regular club" and play in whatever leagues their club teams play in (CSL or SCDSL).


http://www.socalsoccer.com/threads/so-cal-da-clubs-enter-npl-for-u11-u12.16639/

Nplwest.com a usclub soccer league will offer fall programming for those age groups.  The academy clubs in that league currently will put teams in & some will get there affliates involved.

https://www.soccerwire.com/news/clubs/youth-boys/npl-west-expands-adds-11-u-and-12-u-age-groups/

As far as other boys DA news; who's going to be the first new club to get olders besides LAFC?

Will some big names really opt out or reduce this time around?  Nplwest a possibility for calendar year age groups


----------



## justneededaname

jpeter said:


> who's going to be the first new club to get olders besides LAFC?


Are they going to expand the number of U15 teams to keep San Diego and Los Angeles separate? That is probably my biggest question.


----------



## Kante

justneededaname said:


> Are they going to expand the number of U15 teams to keep San Diego and Los Angeles separate? That is probably my biggest question.


interesting. could see adding two u15 teams in each group. and maybe rsl comes down to u15. Would put LA and SD at 9 teams each, so 24 games plus room for tournaments.


----------



## messy

Kante said:


> interesting. could see adding two u15 teams in each group. and maybe rsl comes down to u15. Would put LA and SD at 9 teams each, so 24 games plus room for tournaments.


I imagine TFA will get a U15 team


----------



## Kante

messy said:


> I imagine TFA will get a U15 team


yup, and legends has been putting in competitive matches.


----------



## jpeter

messy said:


> I imagine TFA will get a U15 team


They may well be deserving but the southwest div is more likely to be adding out of state teams vs local unless there are some deflections from what I heard. 

The hang up currently is some east coast MLS teams who are considering breaking out so either the shoe going to drop or the will come up with some kind of compromise or changes to see those clubs play each other more frequently.


----------



## focomoso

Kante said:


> yup, and legends has been putting in competitive matches.


I suspect every current U14 team will get U15 and the current U13s will get U14. In the end, U14 will be the youngest group and it doesn't make sense for any clubs to have a single year DA.


----------



## jpeter

focomoso said:


> I suspect every current U14 team will get U15 and the current U13s will get U14. In the end, U14 will be the youngest group and it doesn't make sense for any clubs to have a single year DA.


That's a big stretch since there are already (13) U15 teams in the Southwest Division and there are very few ( only 2 for example)  non full academy clubs  with U15.  Could see 2-3 more teams but some of those could be from out of state. Ussda boys has expanded for several years but has repeatedly said this 19-20'  season there will actually be fewer teams, with u12 out of the picture not sure how that all adds up but geography is going to play a role as the other states have been making big pushes.


----------



## focomoso

jpeter said:


> That's a big stretch since there are already (13) U15 teams in the Southwest Division and there are very few ( only 2 for example)  non full academy clubs  with U15.  Could see 2-3 more teams but some of those could be from out of state. Ussda boys has expanded for several years but has repeatedly said this 19-20'  season there will actually be fewer teams, with u12 out of the picture not sure how that all adds up but geography is going to play a role as the other states have been making big pushes.


They've been talking about splitting the middle ages up to LA and SD like the youngers for a while now.

But I'll amend my earlier statement: I suspect every current U14 team will get U15 and the current U13s will get U14 *or be dropped from the DA altogether*. It doesn't make sense in the long run to have DA for just 1 or 2 years.


----------



## futbol10

Hearing that Real Salt Lake Arizona and SC Del Sol to get U13 and U14 DA.  Phoenix Rising to get U15 and older DA.  No idea what division the U13 and U14 would play in (LA and SD are approx the same distance to PHX), and assuming Phoenix Rising will play in the SW division.


----------



## Kante

futbol10 said:


> Hearing that Real Salt Lake Arizona and SC Del Sol to get U13 and U14 DA.  Phoenix Rising to get U15 and older DA.  No idea what division the U13 and U14 would play in (LA and SD are approx the same distance to PHX), and assuming Phoenix Rising will play in the SW division.


makes sense. RSL will be heading back - I think - to Utah and would guess they'd be in the LA group. SC del Sol and Phoenix likely would be SD. Any info on Nevada teams being added?


----------



## Carl

Ussda - it has posted.


----------



## Kante

Carl said:


> Ussda - it has posted.


Carl, muchas gracias.

Here's the adds that affect SoCal.


----------



## watfly

So is it safe to say that U13 is not going away anytime soon since new clubs and some existing clubs received U13 for this year.  It would seem odd (but not certainly not out of the realm of possibility coming from USSF) to give a team U13 one year and take it away the next leaving them just one age group at U14.


----------



## jpeter

Kante said:


> Carl, muchas gracias.
> 
> Here's the adds that affect SoCal.
> View attachment 4132


That's puts the rumors to rest, not much change but good for TFA in getting U15.

Real Salt Lake AZ & Del Sol out of AZ for the West conf gets them into some new markets. 

Galaxy SD getting u16/17 was a bit of surprise but good for them.  Besides Murrieta Surf with the u14 add all the other afflicate teams like OC Surf even through they we're already advertising u15 apparently didn't get in or additional teams.


----------



## futbol10

No Nevada and no Phoenix Rising...  didn't think Nevada had a chance, I bet Phoenix Rising is dependent on getting into MLS at some point, like the two other new adds (Austin and Miami).

http://www.ussoccerda.com/20190307-NEWS-DA-Four-New-Clubs-to-Join-Boys-DA-for-201920-Season


----------



## Zvezdas

Big news for Ventura Fusion, they got u13 and u14!


----------



## jpeter

watfly said:


> So is it safe to say that U13 is not going away anytime soon since new clubs and some existing clubs received U13 for this year.  It would seem odd (but not certainly not out of the realm of possibility coming from USSF) to give a team U13 one year and take it away the next leaving them just one age group at U14.


Well Rebels seems to out after having just U12 this past season.

Chula Vista only has U13 this next season so unless da continues with U13 or they get additional teams they could be out also like the rebels.

At some point if U16/17 gets split could see u13 being phased out but for now that could just be a carry over rumor.

In any case if u14 players from Santa Barbara, Legends, OC Surf or others want to continue with DA guess they have to look to other clubs.  Same could be said for some U12 players and those that aged out with other clubs


----------



## Zvezdas

Ventura Fusion defnitly shocking expansion. LA Premier only for u14...


----------



## 1dad2boys

Fusion accomplished the goal of pulling from the under tapped local area this year. Why shocking to give the team another year and add one age group?


----------



## Zvezdas

Because this has been for a long time Santa Barbara territory and Eagles tried for years to get the boys DA status. Fusion got the DA status about a year ago and this year expanded to two new age groups while for an example TFA got only one age group and Premier only u14...


----------



## 1dad2boys

I understood SB had done poorly in attracting the Camarillo/Oxnard/Ventura talent and USS wanted to develop that. Eagles were deemed not the right vehicle to do that. Can’t say why TFA did/did not get additional years. And yes, this was the first year for Fusion.


----------



## Zvezdas

I honestly do not have info or evidence of SB poor performance, i do know that they won national titles and produced numerous collegiate players, some ynt players. Eagles used Sampson and argued that they had successful DA girls side...what i heard is that money and politics played a role with Fusion, how true is that i dont know, but thats what soccer people in conejo and ventura areas are talking.


----------



## 1dad2boys

Did not mean to imply SB was poor in general. Just been told that they had not made the inroads to those areas that USS wanted.


----------



## focomoso

Zvezdas said:


> LA Premier only for u14...


Premier only applied for U14. They're just moving the current U13 up (and the current U12 to U13). They don't have a current U14 DA-level team to move up to U15. They also have ECNL which is going to spread the resources pretty thin up there... I suspect Premier will get U15 next year and then stop at the 3 age groups.


----------



## StrikerOC

Darbfig said:


> so, if I'm reading the threads correctly some of the B08 "DA" teams   will have their own league to play in and others will play in the SCDSl for next year (2019-2020)?  When you talk to the different coaches at the DA clubs they kind of beat around the bush with their answers...


This is the way I understand it


----------



## RedDevilDad

StrikerOC said:


> This is the way I understand it


Correct. Our 08s were told they’ll play in the NPL West...
https://www.soccerwire.com/news/clubs/youth-boys/npl-west-expands-adds-11-u-and-12-u-age-groups/


----------



## ChrisD

We have some powerful teams in OC and LA has TFA and LAFC, is it wishful thinking to combine both so that u12 teams can play each other in NPL ?


----------



## Husky13

Any updates to the rumors of splitting Boys U16/17 DA?  

The lead guy for one prominent DA club was telling parents this summer that it was a done deal for next season (2020-21), although that seems a bit premature to make such a definitive statement.


----------



## full90

Husky13 said:


> Any updates to the rumors of splitting Boys U16/17 DA?
> 
> The lead guy for one prominent DA club was telling parents this summer that it was a done deal for next season (2020-21), although that seems a bit premature to make such a definitive statement.


It’s been a “done deal” for 3 years straight now. But anytime someone at US soccer talks they want the mixed group and don’t want to split it. They want the attrition. It’s part of the weeding out process. Not saying it’s right just that’s how I’ve heard it justified. Maybe this is the year but that’s been said every year I’ve been around it.


----------



## carla hinkle

One rumor I heard is that when (if?) they get rid of boys U13 DA, they will get rid of the U16/U17 split. So boys will be U14, U15, U16, U17, U18/19, like the girls.


----------



## A Board

full90 said:


> It’s been a “done deal” for 3 years straight now. But anytime someone at US soccer talks they want the mixed group and don’t want to split it. They want the attrition. It’s part of the weeding out process. Not saying it’s right just that’s how I’ve heard it justified. Maybe this is the year but that’s been said every year I’ve been around it.


Part of US soccer’s problem is their approach. They do not understand basic learning theory.
Ages should be split because learning or development  is not usually obtained in an uphill slope- which US Soccer seems to assume hence the “weeding out” explanation. 
It has has been shown that most learning takes place in more of a stair-step pattern. A long flat period followed by a steep (vertical) increase in knowledge/development.
They should split the ages to account for the long “seemingly flat”  period where athletes are assimilating information and learning to apply it.  Then,  the athlete will make huge “steep” increases in their development. Then flat, then vertical increases in development....
If try-out time is during their flat phase their out. Not a great system.


----------

