# Stay and Play



## thedudeabides (Mar 5, 2021)

There are numerous things that are hindering developing world class soccer players in the U.S. because we start off with a smaller pool of athletes to begin with and then proceed to do everything to discourage continuing in the sport. The inherent nature of the political landscape of club soccer is leading the charge. The alphabet soup of acronyms of leagues and programs that change with the weather is mind boggling. Heap the financial barriers of pay to play on top of that and you have a recipe for failure; and we have seen that unfold for decades.

Within the whole pay to play system are the "stay and play" tournament policies. We all know what is really going on here. If this really was a cheaper option for teams then it would be an easy choice but when traveling to tourneys within your state, there is a real possibility that many players have relatives they could stay with, own RV's, want to stay in cheaper hotels not on the list, or are more comfortable staying in a VRBO. These are inherently discriminatory policies against individuals with lesser financial means and may be creating an atmosphere where some tournaments are pricing out good competition. This hurts everyone.

I want to know what your feelings are about these "stay and play" policies and if you have found legal remedies around them.


----------



## Soccermaverick (Mar 5, 2021)

thedudeabides said:


> There are numerous things that are hindering developing world class soccer players in the U.S. because we start off with a smaller pool of athletes to begin with and then proceed to do everything to discourage continuing in the sport. The inherent nature of the political landscape of club soccer is leading the charge. The alphabet soup of acronyms of leagues and programs that change with the weather is mind boggling. Heap the financial barriers of pay to play on top of that and you have a recipe for failure; and we have seen that unfold for decades.
> 
> Within the whole pay to play system are the "stay and play" tournament policies. We all know what is really going on here. If this really was a cheaper option for teams then it would be an easy choice but when traveling to tourneys within your state, there is a real possibility that many players have relatives they could stay with, own RV's, want to stay in cheaper hotels not on the list, or are more comfortable staying in a VRBO. These are inherently discriminatory policies against individuals with lesser financial means and may be creating an atmosphere where some tournaments are pricing out good competition. This hurts everyone.
> 
> I want to know what your feelings are about these "stay and play" policies and if you have found legal remedies around them.



I am going to take a 10000 foot view to what you are posting... which i agree with.

Please point out any prejudices so I can correct them.

Basically it comes down to systems of governance, economy and cultural structure.

The US is a ultra capitalistic society. We do not provide support directly to sports in the way to help them grow... Everything is indirect. We get what we pay for.

Europe has a more socialist agenda. Each town/ village supports their clubs financially in the EU. Most people never move from their town/city. There is more continuity in European Soccer. The clubs are seen as social  identities.

The UK use a quasi-European  club system to promote social programs in the community... More socialism but with a capitalist hierarchy.

Mexico.. 9000 professional soccer players.  LA Galaxy gave up on the US and now promotes from Mexico.That’s all I know.

South America.. my opinion... like Europe.

Japan..Tradition gets in the way of creativity...they are starting to produce some good players.

China: Communism has been proven not to bring out the best athletes (consistently)

Russia: see China above...now are endorsing capitalistic policies. They will start to resemble the US.  Their population is half the US.

this is a 10000 foot view...

I prefer the European model for soccer  as it’s more social and less materialistic.

I believe most US club owners would prefer the UK model.


----------



## Grace T. (Mar 5, 2021)

Soccermaverick said:


> I am going to take a 10000 foot view to what you are posting... which i agree with.
> 
> Please point out any prejudices so I can correct them.
> 
> ...


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


----------



## whatithink (Mar 5, 2021)

thedudeabides said:


> There are numerous things that are hindering developing world class soccer players in the U.S. because we start off with a smaller pool of athletes to begin with and then proceed to do everything to discourage continuing in the sport. The inherent nature of the political landscape of club soccer is leading the charge. The alphabet soup of acronyms of leagues and programs that change with the weather is mind boggling. Heap the financial barriers of pay to play on top of that and you have a recipe for failure; and we have seen that unfold for decades.
> 
> Within the whole pay to play system are the "stay and play" tournament policies. We all know what is really going on here. If this really was a cheaper option for teams then it would be an easy choice but when traveling to tourneys within your state, there is a real possibility that many players have relatives they could stay with, own RV's, want to stay in cheaper hotels not on the list, or are more comfortable staying in a VRBO. These are inherently discriminatory policies against individuals with lesser financial means and may be creating an atmosphere where some tournaments are pricing out good competition. This hurts everyone.
> 
> I want to know what your feelings are about these "stay and play" policies and if you have found legal remedies around them.


Tournaments are fund raisers for clubs or for profit ventures for the prof. sports events companies (Surf Sports, Rates Sports etc.). Hotel commissions are a huge part of the money making piece, for large tournaments pulling in hundreds of thousands in kick backs. For actual non-profit clubs the tournaments "balance" their books.

I have seen in some instances where teams can pay a fee to get off the hook, but that's more for far west regional league type events, never for club or for profit entities, there's just too much money to be made.

If the big tournaments were going to allow travel teams to opt out, then they would probably raise your tournament fee by 100-200% to make up their revenue shortfall. They are not going to do that because teams would get sticker shock at paying $3000-$4000 for one tournament.


----------



## happy9 (Mar 5, 2021)

Grace T. said:


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


I guess another point to add is our cultural view of soccer.  Even though it's a large youth sport, it will forever remain a niche sport.  Our top athletes don't play it, likely never will.  The girls side is a different animal.  The boys side will get marginally better but the MLS will never be the equal of the EPL, La Liga, Bundesliga, etc.   At times the MLS is hard to watch and at times it's fun to watch.  Admittedly, it's more fun when you get a long in the tooth former euro start to play for a few years.

Club soccer will continue to move in the direction of super clubs, absorbing smaller clubs or putting them out of business.  Pay to play will still be a thing that excludes players and families, but not enough to move the needle on changing pay to play.  In some ways, the pandemic will help the super clubs.  As CA and others loosen restrictions further, eager parents and players will do just about anything to play games again, attend showcases, be seen, etc.  There is a flurry and fury to get back in front of coaches.  It's a psychological thing.  Players and parents feel as if they've fallen behind.  Some may have, most U15 and below haven't.

Pay to play/stay and play isn't going anywhere.  I wish it would diminish but I just don't think it's going to happen.  The steady flow of CA license plates into AZ at the height of the pandemic to play soccer is proof enough I guess.


----------



## whatithink (Mar 5, 2021)

Grace T. said:


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


The kids that young are not contracted and can't be bought or sold. For sure, deals are done with parents but they are adults. 

I agree that its ruthless and definitely a meritocracy. If you are not good enough, you are dropped. The education side is a major problem, but there are examples of kids going through the academy process and also getting a top quality education, Frank Lampard comes to mind, but the focus is the football side, so the kids have to knuckle down and the parent have to be 100% focused on the education side (if it doesn't work out), as his were and his family were hard core football people at prof clubs.


----------



## MicPaPa (Mar 5, 2021)

Grace T. said:


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


No, this is BY FAR the "chief difference between *us/eu*" *soccer *---> follow the money...it's ALWAYS the $$$:


----------



## MicPaPa (Mar 5, 2021)

Also, check male college scholarships for Football, Baseball, Basketball, Track & Field, and probably Hockey vs. Soccer...and female soccer even lower of a percentage scholarship.


----------



## Grace T. (Mar 5, 2021)

MicPaPa said:


> No, this is BY FAR the "chief difference between *us/eu*" *soccer *---> follow the money...it's ALWAYS the $$$:
> 
> View attachment 10315


Fair.  But if you add up the European leagues it’s roughly on nba par.


----------



## Messi>CR7 (Mar 5, 2021)

thedudeabides said:


> There are numerous things that are hindering developing world class soccer players in the U.S. because we start off with a smaller pool of athletes to begin with and then proceed to do everything to discourage continuing in the sport. The inherent nature of the political landscape of club soccer is leading the charge. The alphabet soup of acronyms of leagues and programs that change with the weather is mind boggling. Heap the financial barriers of pay to play on top of that and you have a recipe for failure; and we have seen that unfold for decades.
> 
> Within the whole pay to play system are the "stay and play" tournament policies. We all know what is really going on here. If this really was a cheaper option for teams then it would be an easy choice but when traveling to tourneys within your state, there is a real possibility that many players have relatives they could stay with, own RV's, want to stay in cheaper hotels not on the list, or are more comfortable staying in a VRBO. These are inherently discriminatory policies against individuals with lesser financial means and may be creating an atmosphere where some tournaments are pricing out good competition. This hurts everyone.
> 
> I want to know what your feelings are about these "stay and play" policies and if you have found legal remedies around them.


In many tournaments you can pay $50 or so per family to opt out of the stay and play requirement.  To me this is no different than the fundraiser, golf ball sales, paying for uniforms, etc.

I personally prefer an all-inclusive price tag upfront over the nickel-and-dime practice.  But after a couple of years in club soccer, I learned quickly to add another 30% on top of the quoted club fee to arrive at the true cost, and made our decision accordingly.


----------



## timbuck (Mar 5, 2021)

thedudeabides said:


> There are numerous things that are hindering developing world class soccer players in the U.S. because we start off with a smaller pool of athletes to begin with and then proceed to do everything to discourage continuing in the sport. The inherent nature of the political landscape of club soccer is leading the charge. The alphabet soup of acronyms of leagues and programs that change with the weather is mind boggling. Heap the financial barriers of pay to play on top of that and you have a recipe for failure; and we have seen that unfold for decades.
> 
> Within the whole pay to play system are the "stay and play" tournament policies. We all know what is really going on here. If this really was a cheaper option for teams then it would be an easy choice but when traveling to tourneys within your state, there is a real possibility that many players have relatives they could stay with, own RV's, want to stay in cheaper hotels not on the list, or are more comfortable staying in a VRBO. These are inherently discriminatory policies against individuals with lesser financial means and may be creating an atmosphere where some tournaments are pricing out good competition. This hurts everyone.
> 
> I want to know what your feelings are about these "stay and play" policies and if you have found legal remedies around them.


The easy answer -  Don't attend these tournaments.  

It was mentioned above that tournaments fundraisers/money makers for clubs.  This is 100% true.  It is also true that the "big" clubs have reciprocity agreements with other big clubs to have teams attend their tournaments.  "If you attend our tournament, we'll attend yours" is very common.  It's a (not so secret) way that clubs help fund each other.  You'll rarely see a slammers or slammers affiliate attend anything that has a Surf logo on it.  But you'll see Slammers and Legends usually attending each other's events.


----------



## MicPaPa (Mar 5, 2021)

Grace T. said:


> Fair.  But if you add up the European leagues it’s roughly on nba par.


Fair? No, it is the right answer.

The point of the thread is "There are numerous things that are hindering developing world class soccer players in the U.S." Then it became a comparison of how other countries, mainly eu, focus on soccer and developing their youth, right?

The 800lb gorilla in the room...and clearly the obvious answer, again BY FAR, and arguably the only answer,  is REVENUE $$$!


----------



## whatithink (Mar 5, 2021)

timbuck said:


> It's a (not so secret) way that clubs help fund each other.


It's a (not so secret) way for clubs to get *their parents* to give them extra funds (mandatory participation in own tournament) and also fund other clubs (reciprocal).


----------



## whatithink (Mar 5, 2021)

MicPaPa said:


> Fair? No, it is the right answer.
> 
> The point of the thread is "There are numerous things that are hindering developing world class soccer players in the U.S." Then it became a comparison of how other countries, mainly eu, focus on soccer and developing their youth, right?
> 
> The 800lb gorilla in the room...and clearly the obvious answer, again BY FAR, and arguably the only answer,  is REVENUE $$$!


I agree to a point, but there is a difference in the models, e.g. the NFL develops nothing. They have college to do that. MLB have their farm system, but again (youth) talent has been developed for them. In short the major US professional leagues rely on everyone / anyone else to do the development and then skim off the top.

The European soccer clubs, for example, run fully funded DAs from an early age. They invest major $ in developing players and the best they develop may make it (in their club or another) or not. Many of those clubs use those DAs as revenue generating, the lower leagues ones hope to develop players for their first team and maybe, every now and again, get lucky with one they can sell for large $. The big clubs use it as a revenue stream, e.g. Chelsea have 50+ players out on loan - they developed and sold Salah, DeBruin, Lukaku and others.

I like the graphic BTW. I read recently that the NFL are looking to double TV revenue. I also see that the French league lost their sponsor and still haven't got another - noone will pay what they want.


----------



## MicPaPa (Mar 5, 2021)

happy9 said:


> I guess another point to add is our cultural view of soccer.  Even though it's a large youth sport, it will forever remain a niche sport.  Our top athletes don't play it, likely never will.  The girls side is a different animal.  The boys side will get marginally better but the MLS will never be the equal of the EPL, La Liga, Bundesliga, etc.   At times the MLS is hard to watch and at times it's fun to watch.  Admittedly, it's more fun when you get a long in the tooth former euro start to play for a few years.
> 
> Club soccer will continue to move in the direction of super clubs, absorbing smaller clubs or putting them out of business.  Pay to play will still be a thing that excludes players and families, but not enough to move the needle on changing pay to play.  In some ways, the pandemic will help the super clubs.  As CA and others loosen restrictions further, eager parents and players will do just about anything to play games again, attend showcases, be seen, etc.  There is a flurry and fury to get back in front of coaches.  It's a psychological thing.  Players and parents feel as if they've fallen behind.  Some may have, most U15 and below haven't.
> 
> Pay to play/stay and play isn't going anywhere.  I wish it would diminish but I just don't think it's going to happen.  The steady flow of CA license plates into AZ at the height of the pandemic to play soccer is proof enough I guess.


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

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


----------



## Grace T. (Mar 5, 2021)

MicPaPa said:


> Fair? No, it is the right answer.
> 
> The point of the thread is "There are numerous things that are hindering developing world class soccer players in the U.S." Then it became a comparison of how other countries, mainly eu, focus on soccer and developing their youth, right?
> 
> The 800lb gorilla in the room...and clearly the obvious answer, again BY FAR, and arguably the only answer,  is REVENUE $$$!


I agree. As what I think points out, the European clubs make money in transfer fees for their players.  The MLS does not, which further limits their revenue stream.  US Players do have the option to go to play in Europe, but the immigration and tax rules make it difficult for them.  It has become easier, though, as witnessed by the number of young players playing in Europe right now.  But vis-a-vis the MLS, I think your point is absolutely correct.


----------



## happy9 (Mar 5, 2021)

MicPaPa said:


> It's simple math. Take the woman's side whining about higher pay without producing the revenue to justify it, then in the same breath, doubling down and turning off probably half of fans / paying customers with National Anthem kneeling...what a genius decision to grow interest in your sport and generate revenue.
> 
> Like increasingly other BS issues in our society, soccer has ridiculous obstacles in the US, but a large pool of talent is not one of them.


It is an interesting business strategy to say the least.


----------



## Zvezdas (Mar 5, 2021)

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

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


----------



## MicPaPa (Mar 5, 2021)

whatithink said:


> I agree to a point, but there is a difference in the models, e.g. the NFL develops nothing. They have college to do that. MLB have their farm system, but again (youth) talent has been developed for them. In short the major US professional leagues rely on everyone / anyone else to do the development and then skim off the top.
> 
> The European soccer clubs, for example, run fully funded DAs from an early age. They invest major $ in developing players and the best they develop may make it (in their club or another) or not. Many of those clubs use those DAs as revenue generating, the lower leagues ones hope to develop players for their first team and maybe, every now and again, get lucky with one they can sell for large $. The big clubs use it as a revenue stream, e.g. Chelsea have 50+ players out on loan - they developed and sold Salah, DeBruin, Lukaku and others.
> 
> I like the graphic BTW. I read recently that the NFL are looking to double TV revenue. I also see that the French league lost their sponsor and still haven't got another - noone will pay what they want.


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


----------



## thedudeabides (Mar 5, 2021)

whatithink said:


> Tournaments are fund raisers for clubs or for profit ventures for the prof. sports events companies (Surf Sports, Rates Sports etc.). Hotel commissions are a huge part of the money making piece, for large tournaments pulling in hundreds of thousands in kick backs. For actual non-profit clubs the tournaments "balance" their books.
> 
> I have seen in some instances where teams can pay a fee to get off the hook, but that's more for far west regional league type events, never for club or for profit entities, there's just too much money to be made.
> 
> If the big tournaments were going to allow travel teams to opt out, then they would probably raise your tournament fee by 100-200% to make up their revenue shortfall. They are not going to do that because teams would get sticker shock at paying $3000-$4000 for one tournament.


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


----------



## thedudeabides (Mar 5, 2021)

MicPaPa said:


> It's simple math. Take the woman's side whining about higher pay without producing the revenue to justify it, then in the same breath, doubling down and turning off probably half of fans / paying customers with National Anthem kneeling...what a genius decision to grow interest in your sport and generate revenue.
> 
> Like increasingly other BS issues in our society, soccer has ridiculous obstacles in the US, but a large pool of talent is not one of them.


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


----------



## MicPaPa (Mar 5, 2021)

thedudeabides said:


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


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


----------



## notintheface (Mar 5, 2021)

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

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

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


----------



## Grace T. (Mar 5, 2021)

Zvezdas said:


> "Players as young as 9-10 are bought and sold as commodities and abandoned if they can’t cut it (long string if stories on the net about players cut from their academies and stuck now both off the sports/academic tracks... some with money go the us for college sports)."
> 
> Grace T, please stop making things up, there are few of us who went through Euro system as kids, no children as young as 9-10 were "bought and sold as commodities"!


----------



## watfly (Mar 5, 2021)

Grace T. said:


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


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








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

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




					www.nytimes.com
				




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


----------



## lafalafa (Mar 5, 2021)

Pay and pay more is stay and play some times.

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

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

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


----------



## whatithink (Mar 5, 2021)

MicPaPa said:


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


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

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

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


----------



## Grace T. (Mar 5, 2021)

watfly said:


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


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


----------



## whatithink (Mar 5, 2021)

thedudeabides said:


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


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


----------



## whatithink (Mar 5, 2021)

watfly said:


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


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

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


----------



## happy9 (Mar 5, 2021)

whatithink said:


> Agree with you generally. I *saw a game a few years back, at Man City Cup (U14 or 15), between Man City and RSL. The RSL kids were bigger, faster etc. The Man City kids were all noticeably smaller. It was very striking. Fundamentally different selection process is what I thought.*
> 
> Van Der Sar, Ajax CEO, said a while back, the only team at Ajax that needs to win is the first team. They don't care about any other team winning. Obviously, they have developed a long listed of world class players. Their academy is ruthless with annual reviews/cuts from entry.


Who won?


----------



## watfly (Mar 5, 2021)

Grace T. said:


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


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


----------



## watfly (Mar 5, 2021)

thedudeabides said:


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


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

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


----------



## whatithink (Mar 5, 2021)

happy9 said:


> Who won?


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


----------



## notintheface (Mar 5, 2021)

watfly said:


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


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


----------



## Grace T. (Mar 5, 2021)

whatithink said:


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


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


----------



## crush (Mar 5, 2021)

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


----------



## Grace T. (Mar 5, 2021)

crush said:


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


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

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


----------



## thedudeabides (Mar 5, 2021)

watfly said:


> Its interesting.  Our last World Cup team (2014) was 40% African-American, much greater than the general population and we still have quite a number of black athletes in our current USMNT pool.  However, I see very few black athletes on SoCal youth soccer teams.   I wonder why there is the disparity between the two?
> 
> Back to the original topic, I've never had a coach or club hold a gun to my head and say my kid had to play in a tournament.  Not saying that youth soccer isn't a racket at times, but its really no different than other youth sports.  It's actually a pretty good value compared to some.


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


----------



## Zvezdas (Mar 5, 2021)

Grace T. said:


>


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


----------



## RayClemence (Mar 5, 2021)

Grace T. said:


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


I don't post much here, just mostly reading and enjoying the lively discussions.  I have been coaching at the AYSO and club levels since 2005 and have seen this whole "industry" evolve over 16 years.  Grace's comments above are 100% spot-on.  My older daughter played on a Latino club team where the fees are embarrassingly low but the coach was passionate and committed in trying to get the players college scholarships (many did), and she even played D3 soccer in college.  A lot is said about how the bigger clubs can provide "exposure" to college coaches, but there is a lot of college recruitment going on with talented players on "smaller" and "local" club teams who cannot afford to pay the fees needed to play on a big club team.  This is where Grace's "glass barrier" comment is so accurate.


----------



## happy9 (Mar 5, 2021)

whatithink said:


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


The weather is terrible in the UK.


----------



## Grace T. (Mar 5, 2021)

Zvezdas said:


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


that's funny that you won't believe the video evidence in front of your eyes.  No never did play in the academy system in Europe, but my relatives are European and my son and I did spend a month  2 summers ago in the Basque area with the fam where he did get to check out the soccer scene.  The European academy system is very well documented as well in the Soccernomics series of books.  So far the only thing you've contributed to this discussion is just saying disregard the video you've just seen.  If you have any actual insight for how the system currently works first hand, please speak up.  I'm sure people will find it useful and entertainment.  But you disputed the academy U10....I just showed you video evidence....if you have something to rebut please speak up.


----------



## watfly (Mar 5, 2021)

notintheface said:


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


Understood.  So how are the African American ballers making it to the National Team in a greater percentage from other parts of the country?  Are they not coming up in pay to play systems or are you saying that the pay to play system is a much higher $$$ in SoCal?  Or is it there a proportional lack of higher income blacks in SoCal?

I've have no question that Pay to Play is a barrier to entry for some black soccer players, but it seems that possibly there are some regional issues unrelated to money that may be driving the difference.   Maybe it's in large part because there is a lower percentage of blacks in SoCal as compared to other areas? It just seems to me that black soccer players are underrepresented in SoCal as compared to our National Team.


----------



## Grace T. (Mar 5, 2021)

watfly said:


> Understood.  So how are the African American ballers making it to the National Team in a greater percentage from other parts of the country?  Are they not coming up in pay to play systems or are you saying that the pay to play system is a much higher $$$ in SoCal?  Or is it there a proportional lack of higher income blacks in SoCal?
> 
> I've have no question that Pay to Play is a barrier to entry for some black soccer players, but it seems that possibly there are some regional issues unrelated to money that may be driving the difference.   Maybe it's in large part because there is a lower percentage of blacks in SoCal as compared to other areas? It just seems to me that black soccer players are underrepresented in SoCal as compared to our National Team.


Football is still king in the south and rust belt.  Club football is taking off.  There was a netflix series recently on it.....Friday Night Tykes....parents crazy competitive.  Recruitment though still goes through the high school teams.


----------



## watfly (Mar 5, 2021)

happy9 said:


> The weather is terrible in the UK.


No such thing as bad weather, just bad clothing.  At least you can throw some clothes on in the UK, in Arizona you have to stay inside in the AC, or stay in the pool which isn't necessarily a bad thing but not sustainable over a long period of time.   Sorry, I can't help myself.  I owe you a beer in MB.


----------



## Grace T. (Mar 5, 2021)

Grace T. said:


> that's funny that you won't believe the video evidence in front of your eyes.  No never did play in the academy system in Europe, but my relatives are European and my son and I did spend a month  2 summers ago in the Basque area with the fam where he did get to check out the soccer scene.  The European academy system is very well documented as well in the Soccernomics series of books.  So far the only thing you've contributed to this discussion is just saying disregard the video you've just seen.  If you have any actual insight for how the system currently works first hand, please speak up.  I'm sure people will find it useful and entertainment.  But you disputed the academy U10....I just showed you video evidence....if you have something to rebut please speak up.


Oh and as to the neve lived in Europe part I spent my gap year at the University of Sevilla.  I was too old to play then, but I did become a passionate fan of Sevilla FC.  We swung by my old haunts on our trip out there and one of the great joys in my life was sharing the football scene in my favorite city with my son.  We even swung by the gym across from Santa Justa there just for a visit to check out their soccer camp....they were very friendly and asked my son to join in a scrimmage since they'd never faced an American keeper they loved it...the kids were actually more interested in asking him about baseball, which is another sport they were teaching (and he knew nothing about) but they assumed as an American he'd be a pro at it.  My roommates' kid from my gap year made a run for the academy system (can't remember if it was Sevilla or Betis) but she couldn't say enough negative things about it.  Don't think he got further than the trials.


----------



## happy9 (Mar 5, 2021)

watfly said:


> Understood.  So how are the African American ballers making it to the National Team in a greater percentage from other parts of the country?  Are they not coming up in pay to play systems or are you saying that the pay to play system is a much higher $$$ in SoCal?  Or is it there a proportional lack of higher income blacks in SoCal?
> 
> I've have no question that Pay to Play is a barrier to entry for some black soccer players, but it seems that possibly there are some regional issues unrelated to money that may be driving the difference.   Maybe it's in large part because there is a lower percentage of blacks in SoCal as compared to other areas? It just seems to me that black soccer players are underrepresented in SoCal as compared to our National Team.


I'm thinking MLS academies are just good at IDing talent and not wasting time.  I haven't done the research on the pedigree of some of the MNT players.  My only experience is with my son's old club back in Jersey.  The DOC for the club was also the Red Bull Academy U17 coach and part of the scout staff.  He always pointed out that many of their kids in the academy would never see too much time playing in mainstream club soccer.  They were plucked early on and diverted straight in the academy.  He was a valuable resource for parents, always emphasizing environment and coaching over league.  We were a few years out from even being considered for the academy but he was always willing to engage parents of the up and comers.


----------



## Zvezdas (Mar 5, 2021)

Grace T. said:


> that's funny that you won't believe the video evidence in front of your eyes.  No never did play in the academy system in Europe, but my relatives are European and my son and I did spend a month  2 summers ago in the Basque area with the fam where he did get to check out the soccer scene.  The European academy system is very well documented as well in the Soccernomics series of books.  So far the only thing you've contributed to this discussion is just saying disregard the video you've just seen.  If you have any actual insight for how the system currently works first hand, please speak up.  I'm sure people will find it useful and entertainment.  But you disputed the academy U10....I just showed you video evidence....if you have something to rebut please speak up.



What is the evidence please, i can post random game between lets say U12 Rapid Wien vs Salzburg so what. I played in those age groups and I can assure you no kids nor parents were paid or sold like commodities, money usually gets involved when kid reaches U17 age group and even then clubs are not allowed to sign player but in some instance or in some countries (both EU and non-EU) offer scholarships. Few weeks on vacation in EU or relatives there do not make you an expert nor make your argument valid. Furthermore, there is a big difference between clubs in Western EU, Central, and Eastern Europe, non-EU countries where for example majority of youth players were recruited for renowned "League 5 clubs" have a little bit different road to pro level... Please do show evidence (any type of source) of U9 or U10 player being paid, sold like a commodity, let us know what club in EU or non-EU part of Europe pulled that, what was the amount, was it inter-country transfer, or was  the kid brought from another EU or non-EU country, how was FA involved in that process, UEFA? I would love to learn about that, thanks.


----------



## happy9 (Mar 5, 2021)

watfly said:


> No such thing as bad weather, just bad clothing.  At least you can throw some clothes on in the UK, in Arizona you have to stay inside in the AC, or stay in the pool which isn't necessarily a bad thing but not sustainable over a long period of time.   Sorry, I can't help myself.  I owe you a beer in MB.


Ha...no doubt.  I'll rephrase.  I oppose bad weather clothing.  There is a reason I moved to AZ. after many years of wearing "good" clothing.


----------



## watfly (Mar 5, 2021)

Grace T. said:


> that's funny that you won't believe the video evidence in front of your eyes.  No never did play in the academy system in Europe, but my relatives are European and my son and I did spend a month  2 summers ago in the Basque area with the fam where he did get to check out the soccer scene.  The European academy system is very well documented as well in the Soccernomics series of books.  So far the only thing you've contributed to this discussion is just saying disregard the video you've just seen.  If you have any actual insight for how the system currently works first hand, please speak up.  I'm sure people will find it useful and entertainment.  But you disputed the academy U10....I just showed you video evidence....if you have something to rebut please speak up.


With all due respect Grace, Zvezdas  was questioning whether these kids were "bought and sold like commodities".  It appears that they can be cast aside at age 9-10 like used commodities, but are they really part of arms length trades or sales between clubs.  It would seem to me that that couldn't happen until age 16 when they can sign professional contracts.


----------



## Grace T. (Mar 5, 2021)

Zvezdas said:


> What is the evidence please, i can post random game between lets say U12 Rapid Wien vs Salzburg so what. I played in those age groups and I can assure you no kids nor parents were paid or sold like commodities, money usually gets involved when kid reaches U17 age group and even then clubs are not allowed to sign player but in some instance or in some countries (both EU and non-EU) offer scholarships. Few weeks on vacation in EU or relatives there do not make you an expert nor make your argument valid. Furthermore, there is a big difference between clubs in Western EU, Central, and Eastern Europe, non-EU countries where for example majority of youth players were recruited for renowned "League 5 clubs" have a little bit different road to pro level... Please do show evidence (any type of source) of U9 or U10 player being paid, sold like a commodity, let us know what club in EU or non-EU part of Europe pulled that, what was the amount, was it inter-country transfer, or was  the kid brought from another EU or non-EU country, how was FA involved in that process, UEFA? I would love to learn about that, thanks.


Ah, I see what you are saying.  You are critiquing the salary part as opposed to disputing that the kids actually play for the pro academy.  That's fair.  You are correct that kids and parents don't receive a pay check that young.  If that's what I implied, I didn't intend to (internet short hand).  But that actually is one of the critiques of the academy system....as you see from the video the kids are on television performing, under all this stress, essentially working for free for the chance to make pro (excepting the training they are receiving) but without a pay check, for a roll at the dice at later on getting a pay check.  In Spain, though, the clubs receive training payments later on for transfers which carry over from team to team....I believe they start to vest at U11 but I'm not sure if that information is current since it's a couple years old (might have gone down in age levels over the last 2 years since U10 academy soccer has only exploded in recent years....it actually has a pretty substantial public following which is a little gross, but the reality of European television is they lack the US production facilities and so are a bit content starved).  It's why the EU clubs are incentivized to present this training, because later on if the player develops and is sold, they are entitled to a portion of the sum for the training they invested in the child.  That's what I meant by them being a commodity.  If the investment doesn't look like it will pay off, the club cuts the child and moves on to the next possible investment.


----------



## Grace T. (Mar 5, 2021)

watfly said:


> With all due respect Grace, Zvezdas  was questioning whether these kids were "bought and sold like commodities".  It appears that they can be cast aside at age 9-10 like used commodities, but are they really part of arms length trades or sales between clubs.  It would seem to me that that couldn't happen until age 16 when they can sign professional contracts.


IIRC there are training solidarity payments.  I believe in Spain they vest at U11.  But no, I'm not the expert on those....somebody once posted a complete summary of how these solidarity training payments worked....can't remember who....


----------



## Zvezdas (Mar 5, 2021)

Grace T. said:


> Oh and as to the neve lived in Europe part I spent my gap year at the University of Sevilla.  I was too old to play then, but I did become a passionate fan of Sevilla FC.  We swung by my old haunts on our trip out there and one of the great joys in my life was sharing the football scene in my favorite city with my son.  We even swung by the gym across from Santa Justa there just for a visit to check out their soccer camp....they were very friendly and asked my son to join in a scrimmage since they'd never faced an American keeper they loved it...the kids were actually more interested in asking him about baseball, which is another sport they were teaching (and he knew nothing about) but they assumed as an American he'd be a pro at it.  My roommates' kid from my gap year made a run for the academy system (can't remember if it was Sevilla or Betis) but she couldn't say enough negative things about it.  Don't think he got further than the trials.


Grace, I dont understand, should I be impressed that you spent a year in Spain or that you know kids who were on trial at Betis? I played briefly for one of the major EU academies, second maybe to Ajax in the production of youth players who end up in EU's top 5 leagues, and so what? You made bs argument and you cannot show any evidence, and the worst part some people here who have no clue about EU or non-EU academy system will unfortunately think that 8 and 9 year old's are sold and paid like commodities, when in realities that never occurs, but if you have evidence please share that evidence with us, i am sure local newspapers wrote about those kids, as you know every player's move within EU and non-EU has to be registered with the country's FA even amateur clubs are required to submit docs to FA. There are issues, but they usually occur with older teens, what i know is connected to situations with kids who are 16, 17 years of age...


----------



## whatithink (Mar 5, 2021)

happy9 said:


> I'm thinking MLS academies are just good at IDing talent and not wasting time.  I haven't done the research on the pedigree of some of the MNT players.  My only experience is with my son's old club back in Jersey.  The DOC for the club was also the Red Bull Academy U17 coach and part of the scout staff.  He always pointed out that many of their kids in the academy would never see too much time playing in mainstream club soccer.  They were plucked early on and diverted straight in the academy.  He was a valuable resource for parents, always emphasizing environment and coaching over league.  We were a few years out from even being considered for the academy but he was always willing to engage parents of the up and comers.


The other thing to note, taking your NY example, is the number of prof clubs in Europe vs the US. London vs NY - London has 6 teams in the EPL (2 N, 1 E, 2 W, 1 S), 2 in the Championship (both W), 2 in League One (S and SW) and 1 in League 2 (E). That's 11 prof clubs for London alone. Its an extreme example of course, but generally if a kid has talent there is a prof club locally or fairly local that will spot it. There are no financial barriers for talent to get noticed or for talent to be given opportunities.


----------



## Zvezdas (Mar 5, 2021)

watfly said:


> With all due respect Grace, Zvezdas  was questioning whether these kids were "bought and sold like commodities".  It appears that they can be cast aside at age 9-10 like used commodities, but are they really part of arms length trades or sales between clubs.  It would seem to me that that couldn't happen until age 16 when they can sign professional contracts.


Thanks, money or promise of money is brought up when player reaches U16-17-18 level, no club in Europe would waste money on 9 year old!


----------



## Grace T. (Mar 5, 2021)

Zvezdas said:


> Grace, I dont understand, should I be impressed that you spent a year in Spain or that you know kids who were on trial at Betis? I played briefly for one of the major EU academies, second maybe to Ajax in the production of youth players who end up in EU's top 5 leagues, and so what? You made bs argument and you cannot show any evidence, and the worst part some people here who have no clue about EU or non-EU academy system will unfortunately think that 8 and 9 year old's are sold and paid like commodities, when in realities that never occurs, but if you have evidence please share that evidence with us, i am sure local newspapers wrote about those kids, as you know every player's move within EU and non-EU has to be registered with the country's FA even amateur clubs are required to submit docs to FA. There are issues, but they usually occur with older teens, what i know is connected to situations with kids who are 16, 17 years of age...


o.k. I take your point and curtsey to your higher experience in the area, but it's not a BS statement and it's not like I'm completely out of the know.  My fundamental point is that unlike here, the academy system is a business and that business is engaged in spotting and recruiting players as young as U10.  And there is a revenue stream from the training solidarity payments which vest at U11 in Spain I believe.  The higher you go up the more financially invested the club becomes, including the signing of the pro salary contract at age 16, 17 which is why the academies are so ruthless in cutting (the investment in the player is low at U10 but as the player develops it becomes more costly for them, so the dead weight is readily cut).



Zvezdas said:


> Thanks, money or promise of money is brought up when player reaches U16-17-18 level, no club in Europe would waste money on 9 year old!


"Waste money".  That's salary.  That's only a part of the expense.  The team also incurs expenses with travel, coaching, facilities, and if they are residential food/medical care/education.  The team wouldn't provide this if there wasn't a capitalistic financial incentive.  Cost is more than player salary.  Again, you've seen the video.  It's right there..."wasting money" on the 9 year olds.


----------



## watfly (Mar 5, 2021)

Zvezdas said:


> Thanks, money or promise of money is brought up when player reaches U16-17-18 level, no club in Europe would waste money on 9 year old!


That's an interesting point.  In a backasswards sort of way we do that in the US with some clubs scholarshipping players at that those young ages.  On occasion its done out of the goodness of their hear, but its usually to recruit better players to develop a winning team.  The clubs will claim its only done for kids that can't afford it, but in many situation that's not the case and is done purely to entice the best players to come to the club.  There are a fair number of scholarshipped kids whose parents roll up in a fully loaded SUV wearing designer clothes head-to-to.


----------



## Zvezdas (Mar 5, 2021)

Grace T. said:


> o.k. I take your point and curtsey to your higher experience in the area, but it's not a BS statement and it's not like I'm completely out of the know.  My fundamental point is that unlike here, the academy system is a business and that business is engaged in spotting and recruiting players as young as U10.  And there is a revenue stream from the training solidarity payments which vest at U11 in Spain I believe.  The higher you go up the more financially invested the club becomes, including the signing of the pro salary contract at age 16, 17 which is why the academies are so ruthless in cutting (the investment in the player is low at U10 but as the player develops it becomes more costly for them, so the dead weight is readily cut).
> 
> 
> 
> "Waste money".  That's salary.  That's only a part of the expense.  The team also incurs expenses with travel, coaching, facilities, and if they are residential food/medical care/education.  The team wouldn't provide this if there wasn't a capitalistic financial incentive.  Cost is more than player salary.  Again, you've seen the video.  It's right there..."wasting money" on the 9 year olds.


I am not sure about vested money in 10 year old, who can quit soccer for basketball or handball in Spain or get injured few years later and never make it to pro level. Young player becomes interesting for pro clubs once they reach certain age, most likely around 18-19. There are super rare cases of younger kids who got signed at age 16-17, yes it happens but its super rare. Second, if you are really good around age 17-18 you will be sent to lower division semi-pro or pro club to prove your quality, and that's where i would say based on my experience 40-60% players get lost and never reach pro-levels of game. Some of them quit and some "hang" in lower divisions for another few years before they realize its time to get a real job and forget about soccer. I dont think majority of people on this message board understand the system, pro club academies show interest and recruit youth players but they are not paid, and they can leave for another club relatively easily, all it takes is for parents to request paperwork and join another club. Idea that these pro clubs will "tie" U16 kid with some sort of secretive contract just because they invested money is laughable, there is a huge pool of talent and youth players movement is calculated by the pro clubs. I mean, i can give you million examples of current Euro stars who played for a myriad of academies before they signed their first pro contract.

Academies of pro clubs in Europe are part of their business, part that loses money. Pro clubs make most of their money, player wise, via transfers (ex. buy cheap sell for a lot more). Pro club is super happy if 3-4 kids out of 24-26 make it to pro level and can either play for their first team aka pro team or be sold, period.


----------



## Zvezdas (Mar 5, 2021)

Just to be clear:









						UEFA solidarity payments: how they work | Inside UEFA
					

UEFA has allocated €128.69m for clubs across Europe to invest in football development projects.




					www.uefa.com
				




*What is the objective of UEFA's solidarity payments?*


Solidarity payments are distributed through national associations to clubs to invest in their youth development programmes and/or local community schemes:


Only clubs not participating in the group stage of either the 2018/19 UEFA Champions League or UEFA Europa League are eligible for a share of solidarity payments.
These clubs must be running approved youth development programmes (in compliance with a national club licensing manual accredited by UEFA).


*How is the money shared out?*


Of the available amount, 80% is distributed to clubs of national associations that have at least one club participating in the UEFA Champions League group stage.

The remaining 20% is distributed to national associations with no clubs in the UEFA Champions League group stage.


----------



## Zvezdas (Mar 5, 2021)

...Grace, your average Spanish club will pay more attention to lets say 18 year old Croatian kid with EU passport, who played a year or two in domestic league and had some experience in Europa League or CL, than their own academy 18 year old!


----------



## Grace T. (Mar 5, 2021)

Zvezdas said:


> I am not sure about vested money in 10 year old, who can quit soccer for basketball or handball in Spain or get injured few years later and never make it to pro level. Young player becomes interesting for pro clubs once they reach certain age, most likely around 18-19. There are super rare cases of younger kids who got signed at age 16-17, yes it happens but its super rare. Second, if you are really good around age 17-18 you will be sent to lower division semi-pro or pro club to prove your quality, and that's where i would say based on my experience 40-60% players get lost and never reach pro-levels of game. Some of them quit and some "hang" in lower divisions for another few years before they realize its time to get a real job and forget about soccer. I dont think majority of people on this message board understand the system, pro club academies show interest and recruit youth players but they are not paid, and they can leave for another club relatively easily, all it takes is for parents to request paperwork and join another club. Idea that these pro clubs will "tie" U16 kid with some sort of secretive contract just because they invested money is laughable, there is a huge pool of talent and youth players movement is calculated by the pro clubs. I mean, i can give you million examples of current Euro stars who played for a myriad of academies before they signed their first pro contract.


Yes, but the clubs still recover part of that money in training solidarity payments if the player is older than U11.  That's why the system tends to rachett up (it goes residential in Spain, for example, around age 11-12, but until then the club has the player commuting for which transport costs are either provided or reimbursed). The salary only comes later but there are plenty of players willing to exchange the free labor for the training and the shot of a pay off later.  It's a buyer's (the academies) not a seller's (the players) market.  

For folks interested, here's a good look at the experience the players have at La Masia for Barsca.


----------



## Grace T. (Mar 5, 2021)

Zvezdas said:


> ...Grace, your average Spanish club will pay more attention to lets say 18 year old Croatian kid with EU passport, who played a year or two in domestic league and had some experience in Europa League or CL, than their own academy 18 year old!



True, but that's even less room for a homegrown kid from Cordoba that wants to break into pros.  First, he has to be good enough to get into the academy.  Then, he has to be good enough to survive the academy.  Then, he has to be good enough to beat the Croatian kid.  Tough ride.


----------



## notintheface (Mar 5, 2021)

watfly said:


> Understood.  So how are the African American ballers making it to the National Team in a greater percentage from other parts of the country?  Are they not coming up in pay to play systems or are you saying that the pay to play system is a much higher $$$ in SoCal?


To give you an idea, pre-pandemic I was planning on going out to Atlanta to study up on the culture that Atlanta United has created there. Hopefully once we get our vaccines I can still make that trip. People in Orange County need to understand just how much of a bubble they live in-- yes you are getting some kids paying 3 grand a year for soccer but by and large the world isn't like that. Successful programs are very much about instilling a base culture of potential, diversity, and abilities no matter the cost. That, I think, is what the most-brainwashed parents in the OC have the most wrong; the idea that you have to pay out the nose for Blues, your ECNL travel, and all of that is just wrong. People aren't dumb, I think they probably realize this at some base level but there is so much entrenched thought around "well, if I don't spend 10 grand a year on this, little Brayden isn't going to get noticed" that I understand it's easy to get suckered.

It is about playing, and if as a parent you're looking for your kids to get on the USMNT/USWNT you are in the absolute wrong place here because the networking and connections required to get that look are completely disconnected from any spending you might do. (Why does Tim Weah's cousin have a spot on the team, for example)


----------



## Zvezdas (Mar 5, 2021)

Grace T. said:


> True, but that's even less room for a homegrown kid from Cordoba that wants to break into pros.  First, he has to be good enough to get into the academy.  Then, he has to be good enough to survive the academy.  Then, he has to be good enough to beat the Croatian kid.  Tough ride.



And its not even about being better than Croatian kid, its all about soccer market! So, kid from Cordoba can play for U18 Real Madrid academy, but his chances of playing senior soccer for RM are slim to none, his chances of playing for U18 Spanish NT are also very small in comparison to Croat kid who plays most likely for Dinamo Zg, being at Dinamo academy he has an almost guaranteed spot in the Croat NT, at age 17-18 he already played some games in their domestic pro league, and by virtue of current Croat NT ranking can easily transfer to any major EU club for a handsome transfer fee...same can be said of random Dutch kid in same situation (vs Spanish kid)...non-EU and Eastern European youth players often get more chances at playing senior soccer then their counterparts in Western Europe, if they come from a country with significant tradition like Croatia, Serbia, Bosnia and their national teams are "trendy" they will get pro contract before their Western Euro counterparts, also they are much cheaper salary wise although their initial transfers will be hefty, but their future transfer will be more lucrative (look at modric, matic, jovic etc.)...


----------



## watfly (Mar 5, 2021)

notintheface said:


> To give you an idea, pre-pandemic I was planning on going out to Atlanta to study up on the culture that Atlanta United has created there. Hopefully once we get our vaccines I can still make that trip. People in Orange County need to understand just how much of a bubble they live in-- yes you are getting some kids paying 3 grand a year for soccer but by and large the world isn't like that. Successful programs are very much about instilling a base culture of potential, diversity, and abilities no matter the cost. That, I think, is what the most-brainwashed parents in the OC have the most wrong; the idea that you have to pay out the nose for Blues, your ECNL travel, and all of that is just wrong. People aren't dumb, I think they probably realize this at some base level but there is so much entrenched thought around "well, if I don't spend 10 grand a year on this, little Brayden isn't going to get noticed" that I understand it's easy to get suckered.
> 
> It is about playing, and if as a parent you're looking for your kids to get on the USMNT/USWNT you are in the absolute wrong place here because the networking and connections required to get that look are completely disconnected from any spending you might do. (Why does Tim Weah's cousin have a spot on the team, for example)


I live in a bubble in here in San Diego, that's part of why I asked the question.  If you make it out to Atlanta please report back on what you saw.


----------



## SoccerFan4Life (Mar 5, 2021)

watfly said:


> I live in a bubble in here in San Diego, that's part of why I asked the question.  If you make it out to Atlanta please report back on what you saw.


Here's my take based on my experience growing up in South America.  

1. US has a huge talent pool to build amazing teams.   Who cares if Lebron or Tom Brady types are not playing soccer.  The best athletes do not make great soccer players.  Chad Johnson (Ocho Cinco tried and failed), The fastest runner in the world tried it and couldnt make it even on the Australian league. 

2. South America succeeds because the best players rise to the top through local leagues and school leagues at a very young age.  Tournaments are organized for everyone to play and coaches find the best players this way.  Only a few make it to the top at a young age. 

3.   Most kids in South America play for fun and develop their technical skills and soccer IQ on their own as young as age 5.  Kids play every day in the street, before school, during school, after school.  During my summer days, we played all day from 10am to midnight.  We learned the technical skills by playing on asphalt, in between cars, and plenty of  3 v 3's and 5 v 5's.   We developed our skills by trying out tricks and playing for fun.  No coaches or parents telling us what to do. 

4. The USA is a consumer first soccer environment. If Dad thinks his/her little child is awesome, that kid gets pushed to flight 1, ecnl, ecrl,  da, mls next.  People make up leagues to get their little ones in the top teams.   We live in an entitled society (Especially in the OC and SD).  

5. The moment our USWNT starts losing to the rest of the world, we will finally begin to see changes to the youth programs.  European countries are catching up to the US but they still have a good 4 years to go. 

Finally, this is great that we are finally talking about soccer in this forum!! It's about time.


----------



## OrangeCountyDad (Mar 5, 2021)

just as a comparison- my other kid does competitive dance and we can *only* stay at the hotel the competition provides AND the competition is required to sell X-number of hotel stay nights.  They very carefully manage the schedule so families are stuck there X-number of nights.  2019 we had events on days 1 and 2, nothing on day 3, one event day 4, final event on day 5.  I suppose we could've driven home for day 3 and turned around the following day.  spent the gas on driving back and forth plus the time lost to a 100 miles 1-way drive.


----------



## Grace T. (Mar 5, 2021)

SoccerFan4Life said:


> Here's my take based on my experience growing up in South America.
> 
> 1. US has a huge talent pool to build amazing teams.   Who cares if Lebron or Tom Brady types are not playing soccer.  The best athletes do not make great soccer players.  Chad Johnson (Ocho Cinco tried and failed), The fastest runner in the world tried it and couldnt make it even on the Australian league.
> 
> ...


Agree with almost everything here (great insight into Latin American football) but a few notes.

1. Yes, but as others have noted the problem is player ID.  There is a bit of a glass ceiling in the US, particularly for Latino working class players, unless they are early bloomers enough to get IDd by an MLS academy.

2. South America isn't doing as great relative to Europe as it once was.  Part of the reason it has held in as long as it can has been because the Messis of the world can go to Europe due to the closer immigration and laxer tax laws between the regions.  Spain has long been an outlet, but after the refugee crisis of a few years back, the EU tightened immigration requirements making it harder for Latin American players to play in Europe.  Fortunately for them, like the LA Galaxy's Pavon, for second tier players the MLS also offers a ready market.

3. Part of the technical deficiency of Latin American players has been an overemphasize on 1 v 1, dribbling, the physical game, and short passing over long field dynamics you get from playing on an academy team.  Latin America has taken steps to replicate the academy system, but with less money hasn't been as successful as Europe.

4. My father made a run at the B leagues in Peru when he was younger.  He took an injury and that was the end of his pro dreams.


----------



## Grace T. (Mar 5, 2021)

Zvezdas said:


> And its not even about being better than Croatian kid, its all about soccer market! So, kid from Cordoba can play for U18 Real Madrid academy, but his chances of playing senior soccer for RM are slim to none, his chances of playing for U18 Spanish NT are also very small in comparison to Croat kid who plays most likely for Dinamo Zg, being at Dinamo academy he has an almost guaranteed spot in the Croat NT, at age 17-18 he already played some games in their domestic pro league, and by virtue of current Croat NT ranking can easily transfer to any major EU club for a handsome transfer fee...same can be said of random Dutch kid in same situation (vs Spanish kid)...non-EU and Eastern European youth players often get more chances at playing senior soccer then their counterparts in Western Europe, if they come from a country with significant tradition like Croatia, Serbia, Bosnia and their national teams are "trendy" they will get pro contract before their Western Euro counterparts, also they are much cheaper salary wise although their initial transfers will be hefty, but their future transfer will be more lucrative (look at modric, matic, jovic etc.)...


Agree but that's where the solidarity and transfer payments come in.  The A level academies like La Masia aren't necessarily training players to play at Barcelona....they are training them to sell them to La Coruna or Zaragoza.  The B level academies are training the players not necessarily to play at their home teams, but to sell to Latin America or China.  Bit exception in Spain being my homeland of Bilbao.


----------



## watfly (Mar 5, 2021)

SoccerFan4Life said:


> Here's my take based on my experience growing up in South America.
> 
> 1. US has a huge talent pool to build amazing teams.   Who cares if Lebron or Tom Brady types are not playing soccer.  The best athletes do not make great soccer players.  Chad Johnson (Ocho Cinco tried and failed), The fastest runner in the world tried it and couldnt make it even on the Australian league.
> 
> ...


Certainly some cultural elements that we may only achieve over time if they're achievable at all.  We certainly don't put a lot of value in "free play".  A problem that is compounded by too many joysticking coaches, in part, because parents think their child is only getting proper training if the coach is incessantly shouting commands from the sideline.  We can't allow our kids to make wrong decisions on the pitch, it could cost the team a game.


----------



## El Clasico (Mar 6, 2021)

Zvezdas said:


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


You go first


----------



## happy9 (Mar 6, 2021)

watfly said:


> *Certainly some cultural elements that we may only achieve over time if they're achievable at all*.  We certainly don't put a lot of value in "free play".  A problem that is compounded by too many joysticking coaches, in part, because parents think their child is only getting proper training if the coach is incessantly shouting commands from the sideline.  We can't allow our kids to make wrong decisions on the pitch, it could cost the team a game.


Culturally soccer's just not our gig.  I think it's always going to play second fiddle  to everything.  I don't have a problem with that.  I'm surprised and was sad at first that my players went from multisport athletes to just soccer.  It was more of a me thing really, I used to coach them in other sports.  Now I've been sitting on the sidelines, which is not a bad thing and less stressful.  I don't always have to pay attention and don't even have to go if I don't want to.  

Soccer is now their thing and their hard work is paying off.  You nailed it in regards to parents feeling like the only quality training that occurs is under the close advisement of a coach.  Just the way it is.  It's good for the business of youth soccer and required for the way we consume soccer.


----------

