# Roster Changes - u15/2005 birth year for 2019-20



## Kante (Aug 28, 2019)

A handful of 05 SoCal teams have had full rosters published so far. Here's what the attrition looks like. #'s below are just where player has been confirmed on a new roster. actual attrition/change is likely higher but won't know for sure until final rosters for all teams are available. Will post more detail in a day or so.

*TFA:* -4 players
*LAUFA:* -4 players
*San Diego Surf:* -3 players (this likely will be ~2x higher as wom had a number of players going to Barca but Barca hasn't published their u15 roster yet)
*Nomads:* -2
*Strikers:* -2
*Albion:* -1
*Arsenal:* -1
*LAGSD:* -1
*Real SoCal:* -1


----------



## soccerdad79 (Aug 29, 2019)

Kante said:


> A handful of 05 SoCal teams have had full rosters published so far. Here's what the attrition looks like. #'s below are just where player has been confirmed on a new roster. actual attrition/change is likely higher but won't know for sure until final rosters for all teams are available. Will post more detail in a day or so.
> 
> *TFA:* -4 players
> *LAUFA:* -4 players
> ...



SD Surf had 4 players EZ, RM, DL, AL go to RSL, 4 players MMG, ME, DN, GE go to Barca, and 4 players GD, QG, DS, VB go to LAGSD.


----------



## Purabarca (Aug 29, 2019)

I've heard 12+ NEW players headed to SD Surf DA team, and few NEW players we're also invited to National camps numerous times.......


----------



## BJ18 (Aug 29, 2019)

Purabarca said:


> I've heard 12+ NEW players headed to SD Surf DA team, and few NEW players we're also invited to National camps numerous times.......


Are these new players the same ones that just lost to Celtic at Surf Cup or is this a whole new group coming in after Surf Cup?


----------



## soccerdad79 (Aug 29, 2019)

BJ18 said:


> Are these new players the same ones that just lost to Celtic at Surf Cup or is this a whole new group coming in after Surf Cup?


50% of the new team was at Surf Cup.  They had to bring up some 06 DA players just to be able to fill a team for Surf Cup


----------



## Kante (Aug 29, 2019)

Here’s more detailed info. Am sure that these numbers will change as teams add tweaks to their roster. Arsenal, Barca and LAUFA have not posted their rosters yet.

*Key takeaways:*

San Diego Surf and TFA – hmm, how to put this? – had their rosters savaged over the summer by external recruiting and are basically brand new teams in 2019-20. Suspect - but don’t know - that LAUFA may also have experienced significant churn, which would the second time in two years that they've lost significant players to other teams
The median attrition rate of 36% seems, uh, ridonkulously high. More than one in three players from 2018-19 did not continue with the same team in 2019-20…
If a business had a 36% attrition rate, it would go out of business.​
But clubs look at families as suppliers, not customers. From that pov, the 36% attrition rate makes sense.​
(whether or not families should be looked as suppliers, not customers, when, even at u15, more than half of the teams charge btw $2k-$3k per player per year plus all the other travel costs is an important conversation, but for a different time)​
*Other minor notes:*

LA Galaxy, after replacing half their team last year, has settled down and has also added all new coaches for their 05s.
Pateadores and Albion, after disappointing 2018-19 seasons (for different reasons), are rebooting in 2019-20
Nomads had a late season uptick in 2018-19 and are taking another step up in 2019-20
Chula Vista, even though they were shut down for u14 by USSDA, were the DA entry point for five players who are now rostered on 05 academy teams (well done!)
LAFC looks set to continue their reign of terror
Enjoy and welcome to 2019-20!

Looking at the table below, here’s what’s what, moving left to right,

In the first column, teams are listed first sorted by alpha.
The 2nd yoy Attrition column is the # of 2018 players who were included at least once in a game roster who are not listed as of 8/29 on the team 2019-20 roster. The data for 2018-19 rosters in pulled from last year’s game reports.
The 3rd yoy Attrition as % is pretty self-explanatory.
The # of players added is the # of players on the 2019-20 roster who were not on the 2018-19 roster. The # of total players on the 2019-20 roster is pulled from the USSDA website as of 8/29. (this number is likely to change a bit).
The % new column is straight forward.
The “from which club” column is the clubs where the new players played in 2018-19.


----------



## Soccerdad2016 (Aug 29, 2019)

Lots of data but there is a lot behind the numbers (were players dropped or did the better ones move on?). Some of the teams here replaced with better talent and some were decimated by moves to better opportunities. Rosters are still moving or being updated so a few weeks from now things will look different as well.


----------



## Kante (Aug 30, 2019)

Soccerdad2016 said:


> Lots of data but there is a lot behind the numbers (were players dropped or did the better ones move on?). Some of the teams here replaced with better talent and some were decimated by moves to better opportunities. Rosters are still moving or being updated so a few weeks from now things will look different as well.


All legit points and genuinely well-received.

Absolutely rosters are still being updated and so that's a caveat on the data. As an fyi, however, only included teams with at least 14 rostered (14 is the min required) so those rosters listed are either final or close to final (eg, Arsenal only has nine players rostered so far so was listed tdb in the table)

Guess the significant point that jumped out (and was surprising) was that the high rate of attrition across the board, particularly for the non-MLS teams. 

Last year, folks were outraged that LAG churned close to 50% of their 05 team but the reality was that they were largely an outlier. 

This year, that kind of churn looks like standard operating procedure. To be fair, don't know what the churn has historically been moving from u14 to u15 in SoCal, but 40% churn seems extraordinarily high.

So, why is it happening? Agreed that teams are replacing with better talent and/or players are moving on to better opportunities. Would add that teams look like they are also slimming rosters down to increase PT. 

All these things are legit practices.

It's the volume/degree/frequency to which they are occurring that is attention getting. 

In some cases, eg SD Surf and TFA, there was coaching turnover. It's reasonable why the coaching turnover happened but it's also reasonable to that coaching churn would ead to player churn.

In most other cases, though, either the expert coaching staff at clubs are systematically poor judges of talent or they systematically misrepresented the player potential/likelihood for development to the families (either by commission or, more likely, omission). 

Why? Well, one of the byproduct of adding so many players is increased club fees. 

Doing the math, the average non-MLS team carrying players for one year (u14) who will likely be cut in the next year (u15) generated an average of $10k to $15k extra per team. Not that much, but all these clubs are non-profits, all these coaches are under-paid and all the DA teams are likely loss-leaders for the clubs, so the $10k to $15k could be considered by the club to be consequential.

Again, what's most concerning is that, looking at the numbers, it appears that this was a standard operating practice last year... (am flashing to the Casablanca scene where Renault says he is shocked, absolutely shocked "there is gambling going on in this establishment.")

Don't mean to be glib (well, maybe a little).

Am 100% on board that the non-MLS coaches need to be paid more and the non-MLS clubs need a more stable source of income. Non-MLS clubs clearly need help from somewhere in order to support the infrastructure (eg, high quality coaching, professional player/family interactions, adequate practice time i.e 4x week for 2 hours, and adequate practice field space) necessary to be consistently competitive year in and year out with MLS DA teams. 

Not sure that running a bait and switch with families who may not fully understand the Darwinistic nature of DA is the best way to do that. 

(and now time for more coffee...)


----------



## justneededaname (Aug 30, 2019)

U14 to 15 is also the first year of high school. So I think this is a sorting year.

Players who are on non-mls teams that think they still have a shot, are trying to do what they think is needed to make it. This includes joining MLS academies in other cities, moving to soccer boarding schools, and switching clubs (moving to Tier 1 from Tier 2).

Players now have options to play high school sports that didn't exist before so they are dropping out of DA to be able to play at their schools (and maybe not just play soccer).

Paying players that spent a lot of time on the bench are realizing they are not going to make it so parents are choosing to spend their money and time somewhere else.

Players from non-DA teams are filling in the open spots. Many of these players are coming in on scholarships. They were not in the DA before because their parents either didn't know about it or could not afford it. They are being recruited to fill roster spots. These kids are on neither the pro or college track.


----------



## Emilio Castro (Aug 30, 2019)

*Key takeaways:*

San Diego Surf and TFA – hmm, how to put this? – had their rosters savaged over the summer by external recruiting and are basically brand new teams in 2019-20. Suspect - but don’t know - that LAUFA may also have experienced significant churn, which would the second time in two years that they've lost significant players to other teams
Here we go again... 
Another season full of up and downs. not speaking behind the wall as 98% here. we are currently at FCGS (left TFA) 
FCGS is looking pretty good, a lot of  kids, big roster and a lot of internal competition. Some upsets will definitely land of players attending 4 days of practice and 0 min of playing time. (Hopefully not me, lol) 
I hope TFA rebuilds in a good way, it will be a challenge. they just lost 9-0 vs LAFC couple weeks ago in a friendly. They got 4 players form LAUFA  according a TFA parent, these parents are "trouble maker parents". I wonder why they were cut, umm! 
many doubts until the ball start rolling My biggest hope on TFA, we are thankful with that club and staff
Speaking with my friend at LAUFA last night. The team has 4 or 5 new kids, most of them new to DA but interesting players, will see. 
it is not new that either TFA, FCGS or LAUFA can surprise anybody at anytime. 
Good luck to everyone!! Welcome 2019-2020 DA season. 

Shake the Crystal ball Nostradamus-Kante and predict on my favor. FCGS will beat everyone. Lol!


----------



## Carl (Aug 30, 2019)

For LAFC you didn't mention the player from TFA. For TFA's coaching change not one player followed WD and their U14 kept all their players except a few that were cut and replaced with stronger players.


----------



## Kante (Aug 30, 2019)

Carl said:


> For LAFC you didn't mention the player from TFA. For TFA's coaching change not one player followed WD and their U14 kept all their players except a few that were cut and replaced with stronger players.


Got it. Thx.  Just saw HA when the roster was refreshed today. Will add him in. On the u14, looks like TFA picked up LAFC's D, yes?


----------



## Soccerdad2016 (Aug 30, 2019)

Not sure


----------



## Kante (Sep 12, 2019)

Here's updated boys 05 DA roster churn numbers from 2018-19 season to 2019-20 season. per some input (thank you for that!) removed the PT and non-2005 players so it was a true apples to apples comparison. Figure new DA parents would want to know info on how much a club churns thru players before they sign-up.

Here's socal team churn sorted by team alpha:




Here's comparative socal team churn sorted by most churn to least churn (was surprised to see Albion and Real SoCal so high up):


----------



## Raakjoer (Sep 12, 2019)

It would be interesting to see the same thing for U15 -> U16/17. I would have to imagine the attrition numbers are even higher considering the teams aren't cutting U16s to make way for incoming U15s. Numerous factors of course, but one would assume ~50% of the U15s have to find a new team for U16/17 year. But, could be totally wrong.


----------



## Kante (Sep 12, 2019)

Raakjoer said:


> It would be interesting to see the same thing for U15 -> U16/17. I would have to imagine the attrition numbers are even higher considering the teams aren't cutting U16s to make way for incoming U15s. Numerous factors of course, but one would assume ~50% of the U15s have to find a new team for U16/17 year. But, could be totally wrong.


good point. have eyeballed the #'s from u15 to u16/u17 (really, u17 - USSDA calling it u16/u17 is USSDA marketing...) 

typically u17 socal teams have btw 2-4 u16s and park the rest of the u16s in club premier or its equivalent for one year.


----------



## SoCalFutBolCrazy (Sep 12, 2019)

Interesting... so was wondering if club DA roster attrition good or bad?  Without knowing the actual reason for the attrition it's difficult to tell I think.


----------



## 3leches (Sep 12, 2019)

I think Galaxy would have done an overhaul of the 2005 team if there wasn’t a staff change. A lot of kids were saved by the bell so to speak.


----------



## 66 GTO (Sep 12, 2019)

3leches said:


> I think Galaxy would have done an overhaul of the 2005 team if there wasn’t a staff change. A lot of kids were saved by the bell so to speak.


Not really..
The team was mostly set by the old coaching staff Before the staff changed
New coaching staff brought in 2 players


----------



## Kante (Sep 13, 2019)

SoCalFutBolCrazy said:


> Interesting... so was wondering if club DA roster attrition good or bad?  Without knowing the actual reason for the attrition it's difficult to tell I think.


What would be an example of where club attrition rates would be good? (genuinely asking) 

Can see where a certain of yoy attrition/churn is reasonable and should be expected, just like lay-offs in a business eg, bottom 10% etc. LAFC is probably the best example of this. For the 05s, they've been btw 15-20% churn for each of the past two years.

But attrition above this "reasonable" rate seems like it's inherently indicative of instability.


----------



## justneededaname (Sep 13, 2019)

SoCalFutBolCrazy said:


> Interesting... so was wondering if club DA roster attrition good or bad?  Without knowing the actual reason for the attrition it's difficult to tell I think.


I guess the first question is good or bad for whom? 

Players? The ones that left probably thought at the time it was good. Only time will tell if that was the right decision. Of those who stayed, some probably thought the others leaving was good and some probably thought it was bad.  How it ends up will depend on the player.

Clubs? As long as there is still someone to write our checks to and schedule our games, do we really care? For the clubs that provide the service at no charge, they get to decide for themselves.

The Quality of Professional US Players? As long as the best players keep moving up (club -> MLS acad or Europe -> USL or Europe ->MLS or Europe) then moving is not a bad thing.

Youth soccer in the US in general? I think the vast majority of youth soccer players and parents in the US have no idea what the DA is. So in that case, it is neither good or bad, it is irrelevant.


----------



## Kante (Sep 13, 2019)

justneededaname said:


> I guess the first question is good or bad for whom?
> 
> Players? The ones that left probably thought at the time it was good. Only time will tell if that was the right decision. Of those who stayed, some probably thought the others leaving was good and some probably thought it was bad.  How it ends up will depend on the player.
> 
> ...


was thinking primarily about the DA families and by connection the DA players. 

feel like typical/average club attrition/churn is an important piece of information to know when considering teams. if a club asks your son to join but you know that historically 40% of the club's players one year are not with the club the next year, that seems like good info to know.


----------



## justneededaname (Sep 13, 2019)

Kante said:


> feel like typical/average club attrition/churn is an important piece of information to know when considering teams. if a club asks your son to join but you know that historically 40% of the club's players one year are not with the club the next year, that seems like good info to know.


I agree. It would be very useful to have year over year data for both a specific birth year (05s for example) or for an age (U15s). If 40% is common from year to year and across clubs, then it is not an indicator that a parent can really use for making a decision on which club to join. If you only have one year of data to make your decision on it is hard to know how relevant it is. 

I guess what I am saying is I hope you and your data crunching are in this for the long haul so when my trailing child gets here (U10 currently) I can get some really useful numbers to look at. Keep it up, like many, I appreciate your hobby.


----------



## MWN (Sep 15, 2019)

Kante said:


> was thinking primarily about the DA families and by connection the DA players.
> 
> feel like typical/average club attrition/churn is an important piece of information to know when considering teams. if a club asks your son to join but you know that historically 40% of the club's players one year are not with the club the next year, that seems like good info to know.


@Kante, you are looking at this through the wrong lenses.  Consistent connections between players and their families on DA teams means US Soccer has failed.  The goal is to identify elite players and provide a league for those elite players and the next level down to play.  US Soccer should encourage a high churn rate with regard to the league fodder (i.e. everybody below the top 50 players in an age group).  If the DA and its clubs are doing their jobs then DA1 teams should see about a 20% to 30% churn rate and the DA2 clubs should probably see closer to 40% to 50%, assuming they are looking for DA quality players and not trying to keep parents on the hook with dues.

The top players need to be identified and moved to the MLS Academies, and the other players need to stay at competitive soccer DA2/Premier/NPL, etc., etc. for colleges exposure.


----------



## Kante (Sep 15, 2019)

MWN said:


> @Kante, you are looking at this through the wrong lenses.  Consistent connections between players and their families on DA teams means US Soccer has failed.  The goal is to identify elite players and provide a league for those elite players and the next level down to play.  US Soccer should encourage a high churn rate with regard to the league fodder (i.e. everybody below the top 50 players in an age group).  If the DA and its clubs are doing their jobs then DA1 teams should see about a 20% to 30% churn rate and the DA2 clubs should probably see closer to 40% to 50%, assuming they are looking for DA quality players and not trying to keep parents on the hook with dues.
> 
> The top players need to be identified and moved to the MLS Academies, and the other players need to stay at competitive soccer DA2/Premier/NPL, etc., etc. for colleges exposure.


MWN, get the points and understand the pov. fair discussion. so, three questions (genuinely asked) then. 1) from this pov, who is the primary customer in this environment? 2) should families be explicitly informed by the club - before signing their son up - that the goal is to churn 20-50% of the DA roster yoy 3) At the December eval, should players and families be informed where the player sits on the team depth chart?


----------



## MWN (Sep 15, 2019)

Kante said:


> MWN, get the points and understand the pov. fair discussion. so, three questions (genuinely asked) then. 1) from this pov, who is the primary customer in this environment? 2) should families be explicitly informed by the club - before signing their son up - that the goal is to churn 20-50% of the DA roster yoy 3) At the December eval, should players and families be informed where the player sits on the team depth chart?


1. The primary customer of the DA is US Soccer and the MLS.  The money invested by US Soccer and the MLS are orders of magnitude higher than any player, parent or team.  Never forget that the sole purpose is to identify elite talent.

2. Clubs should be not mislead and should be clear on the DA League purpose.  Parents have a responsibility to educate themselves.

3.  I don't believe parents should be involved for DA1 teams, DA2 teams are now glorified club programs, so possibly.  But always go back to the purpose of the DA: find unicorns and move them to MLS residential academies, professional teams, and eventually the National team.


----------



## SoCalFutBolCrazy (Sep 15, 2019)

Completely agree with MWN. If US Soccer cannot keep the DA to this high standard then very soon we'll see MLS Youth Academies creating their own league. One thing I have noticed though regarding new players joining a DA team - majority seem to be coming from some other DA team not from other Premier/DA2/NPL teams. Now why are these players leaving their old DA team and venturing into another DA team? Clearly they are not at the level where they can get into an MLS Academy yet. For the non-MLS DAs I think there is some selection bias towards prior DA player. Except for a select few the quality of these players needs to be seen.

Except for clubs who don't have DA till u19 this phenomenon of attrition needs to be investigated and some pattern may help. Maybe it's the parents of these kids think it's a better Academy and take the kids there.

Would post more of my observations...


----------



## foreveryoung (Sep 16, 2019)

MWN said:


> 1. The primary customer of the DA is US Soccer and the MLS.  The money invested by US Soccer and the MLS are orders of magnitude higher than any player, parent or team.  Never forget that the sole purpose is to identify elite talent.
> 
> 2. Clubs should be not mislead and should be clear on the DA League purpose.  Parents have a responsibility to educate themselves.
> 
> 3.  I don't believe parents should be involved for DA1 teams, DA2 teams are now glorified club programs, so possibly.  But always go back to the purpose of the DA: find unicorns and move them to MLS residential academies, professional teams, and eventually the National team.


This sounds pretty accurate, but the real question is does it work?  Are you only explaining the system or also endorsing it?  

Isn't this limited vision/mission the reason we can't compete at the national level?  Any idea how US soccer and the MLS teams define elite youth talent?  Is there a unified understanding of what they are looking for in players that the DA clubs are adhering to when they make up their DA teams each year?  And what about all the other potential "elite talent" that aren't playing in a DA league?  And what is the incentive to clubs to move their top players to the MLS academies?


----------



## MWN (Sep 16, 2019)

foreveryoung said:


> This sounds pretty accurate, but the real question is does it work?  Are you only explaining the system or also endorsing it?
> 
> Isn't this limited vision/mission the reason we can't compete at the national level?  Any idea how US soccer and the MLS teams define elite youth talent?  Is there a unified understanding of what they are looking for in players that the DA clubs are adhering to when they make up their DA teams each year?  And what about all the other potential "elite talent" that aren't playing in a DA league?  And what is the incentive to clubs to move their top players to the MLS academies?


Now you are opening a bag of worms with complexities that most Americans refuse to accept (including US Soccer and the MLS), but here it goes:

1) The Development Academy league works very well at identifying very talented American youth players (12-15/16).   The reason we can't compete at the national/international level has nothing to do with our early youth development system (DA/ECNL/NPL/ODP/SUPER-Y), rather, everything do with what happens after age 15 or age 16 and especially 17-20.  Let me try to give you an analogy:

Let's pretend these leagues were colleges and judged on Academics of their graduates:

England (Premiere League) ---> Harvard
Germany (Bundesliga) ---> Yale
France (Ligue 1) ---> MIT
Italy (Serie A) ---> Stanford
Spain (La Liga) ---> Columbia
Brazil (Serie A) ---> Princeton
Mexico (Liga MX) --->Tufts
[Rest of Europe] ---> Pick a UC School
[Rest of Latin America] ---> Pick a Cal State School
MLS ---> Rancho Santiago Community College
USL ---> Southern Alabama Community College

The US cannot compete against professional International players because our best, and I mean our very best MLS team would be a bottom of the standing 2nd division team, and our worst MLS team would be a bottom of the barrel 3rd division team in virtually every league.

In Europe, the saying goes for most soccer players that "If you have not signed a professional contract by age 16, you are not going to make it."  These 15 and 16 year olds are playing and practicing at levels that not even our MLS players see.  This is the reason that kids like Pulisic and Sargent high tail it to Europe as soon as they can.  If they are lucky they avoid the Article 19 waiting period, and sign with a team by age 16/17, like Pulisic.

Our problem has little to do with the youth system, and everything do to with our professional system.  Elite US players stagnate in the US compared to their European counterparts because the level of professional training here (age 16 to 40) is the equivalent of community college.  Going back to my academic analogy, we send players holding AA degrees against Harvard MBAs to compete on the International stage.  

The good news is that with the recent success of Pulisic, many European clubs are eyeballing US Talent and luring that talent into Europe to receive legitimate professional training.  The tide is turning and the DA League helps aggregate that talent for display.  The bad news is the MLS realizes it screwed up with RSTP and is getting nothing for talented 18 year olds that are jumping to Europe.

2) The above answers all of your questions, except for the last one.  There is no incentive.  No training fee compensation, no solidarity payments, no RSTP at all ... nothing, therefore no incentive.  For this we blame the players.


----------



## foreveryoung (Sep 16, 2019)

MWN said:


> The Development Academy league works very well at identifying very talented American youth players (12-15/16).


What do you base this statement on?  Just your personal opinion or do you have something to back this up?  And do you mean works well at identifying very talented American  players from the DA league or American youth players period? 

I am aware that we are the only country that has a college then professional pathway for players.   I am also aware that in most other countries soccer is generally a working class sport that is not played by kids that are working towards a higher education.   In England for instance the private school kids play Rugby and would never think of playing soccer.  There are no soccer teams at private schools.  And particularly the best world players originated from humble beginnings (as did two of the US best players to date:  Dempsey and Donovan).  I would guess the DA league considering it's costs and travel requirements (excluding fully funded programs) would be unattainable to the kids that play soccer in other countries and from my experience is primarily played by upper middle class kids. 

So are we good at identifying very talented youth that can play in the DA league or very talented youth American players?

I would also argue that the recent success of US kids playing in Europe is not necessarily indicative of success for US soccer.  Developing a US soccer star would be a major win for any European club because we are the last untapped soccer market and it will bode well for their marketing efforts in the US.   The PL morning show loves to use Pulisic in all their marketing shots and talk about him to death because it encourages US ratings.   I am rooting for Pulisic but I'm yet to be convinced he's of the quality to be an impact player in a major PL club.  Whether all the US kids playing in Europe have international quality potential is yet to be proven.  And the last time they played together on the YNT it didn't seem encouraging.  Perhaps they look better playing in Europe because they are surrounded by better quality players on the pitch.  Only time will tell.


----------



## SoCalFutBolCrazy (Sep 16, 2019)

I cannot agree with MWN more. 

We have the talent but we simply don't have the system to develop players!

2 years back when my son was u13  my son used to go to a training session hosted by a Coach who was  an ex Ajax Academy player ( originally LA native ). One day he called me and told me one thing, if you want your son to grow into a football player please take him to Europe. 

Looks like us who have spent so much effort, time, money, hard work by the kid to even get to this level in US are all doomed... if you think of the big picture.

However... I'm an optimist.


----------

