# Understanding the "why"



## full90 (Mar 15, 2018)

Just curious if anyone knows they "why" behind not having a single age group for U16 for boys. I don't understand why US soccer would keep adding clubs (and some mediocre ones at that, but that's a different topic) and ages and not spend that same money instead to keep a single age year. As has been noted on here, it's silly to miss this year in development, as well as lose kids who might be on the back end of growing.

Is that the point? Is this intentional by the DA to funnel the best 03's to the 02 team and "cull the herd" of the low group? Maybe US Soccer is trying to reduce the pool of 03's?

Has anyone heard the thought process behind this from US Soccer?


----------



## MWN (Mar 15, 2018)

You are correct, "cull" the heard.  By age 14 the boys have gone through their first growth spurt and their skill set is fairly well developed.  The physical size difference between the 14 and 15 year olds isn't that great.  Top talent at 14 can compete against 15 year olds without difficulty.  The DA is purely about top talent.

With regard to this comment: "_I don't understand why US soccer would keep adding clubs (and some mediocre ones at that, but that's a different topic) and ages and not spend that same money instead to keep a single age year_."

Taking a step back, the USSDA pays nothing to DA affiliated clubs, it just manages the Development Academy league/program.  The DA has adopted a pyramid structure that intentionally "culls" the heard as they reach U18.  Because the National Team does not exclusively select from the USSDA, the USSDA doesn't care if some kids are lost and move to other programs (ODP, NPL, go to Europe, etc.).

Its costs the USSDA nothing to add lower level age groups because those costs are solely borne by the Clubs.  The USSDA's model is to say to both tiers of clubs (MLS and Independents), you guys must solely bear all costs to participate in the DA program and you get nothing if your investments in these kids pays off ... unless you are an MLS affiliated DA program, in which case you get a "Homegrown Player" exemption that has value.  For the non-MLS affiliated clubs, the DA is purely a marketing play that keeps their clubs competitive with the market and they support the DA teams through increased club fees to the non-DA teams (all those SCDSL, CSL, etc., teams).

The USSDA is also pushing hard for DA clubs that have U15/16 and U17/18 to have residential academies.  If the USSDA were to add a single age group for U15, it would increase costs by a factor of 33% because we would have 3 teams instead of 2 teams.  The MLS affiliated teams don't really care that much, but the Independents do.

So yes, culling is built in to the pyramid structure of many U12 teams and few U18 teams.


----------



## SBFDad (Mar 15, 2018)

MWN said:


> You are correct, "cull" the heard.  By age 14 the boys have gone through their first growth spurt and their skill set is fairly well developed.  The physical size difference between the 14 and 15 year olds isn't that great.  Top talent at 14 can compete against 15 year olds without difficulty.  The DA is purely about top talent.
> 
> With regard to this comment: "_I don't understand why US soccer would keep adding clubs (and some mediocre ones at that, but that's a different topic) and ages and not spend that same money instead to keep a single age year_."
> 
> ...


While all of this is likely true, there is the simple fact that many 03s next year will get considerably less playing time on an 02/03 team. This goes for MLS (LAG = 27x 01/02s rostered this season) and independents (Pats = 24x). Yes, some of those players are getting regular call-ups to the older age group, but plenty are riding pine with rosters this big. I think this is a mistake. In the end, a very small fraction of a percent of DA kids will play pro or for YNT/MNT. Those that are truly special with get what they need out of the system, but the rest will under-develop with the current set-up. Kids need to be playing to get better. A year of limited playing time at 15-16yrs old will set most of them back.

Heaven forbid USSF consider the needs of the vast majority of the kids in DA when making decisions like this. Yes, I know that they don’t give a shit about that, but as a parent of a DA player, I do. It’s unfortunate.


----------



## True love (Mar 15, 2018)

US soccer is sending some good 03's after the season ended, to go play some other sports like basketball football baseball and track & field, I would do the same thing too, turn to other sports, USSDA is just for exercise purpose anyway, there is no way some and most of the good 03's is going back to a flight 1 team after this season ended to play soccer. These weren’t the figures I was really hoping for when someone told me that these changes were going to “increase development.”Dear US Soccer, please show me the statistics you found and the research you completed for these changes. I find it really hard to just follow someone’s word blindly… Show us the research, then we can talk.


----------



## espola (Mar 15, 2018)

True love said:


> US soccer is sending some good 03's after the season ended, to go play some other sports like basketball football baseball and track & field, I would do the same thing too, turn to other sports, USSDA is just for exercise purpose anyway, there is no way some and most of the good 03's is going back to a flight 1 team after this season ended to play soccer. These weren’t the figures I was really hoping for when someone told me that these changes were going to “increase development.”Dear US Soccer, please show me the statistics you found and the research you completed for these changes. I find it really hard to just follow someone’s word blindly… Show us the research, then we can talk.


The only stat USSF has is that after 10 years of PDA effort, the US failed to make the World Cup for the first time since 1990.


----------



## MWN (Mar 15, 2018)

SBFDad said:


> While all of this is likely true, there is the simple fact that many 03s next year will get considerably less playing time on an 02/03 team ...


Consider that the real value of being on a DA team is not playing for 90 minutes (or 10 minutes) on a weekend, but training for 6 hours during the week and scrimmaging against your teammates and other local teams and having the "DA" pedigree on your college scholarship resume.  Once we get to the composite groups we have identified who has the talent to continue.  Yes, some will go to Flight 1 their "freshman" year and return to DA their "sophmore" year and 1 or 2 may eventually make a national team, but the DA is not concerned about the vast majority of those players because they will never be in the group of 36 under consideration for the National U16 team or the U17 team.

All this brings us back to what I perceive as a fundamental misunderstanding of parents whose kids are in the boys DA program.  The boys DA is and will always be about identifying the top .01% of US Soccer talent.  The remaining 4.99% are welcome to stay and play and help supports the financials of the league and possibly get a soccer scholarship, but these kids are college fodder and not US National Team candidates.

I'd also like to point out that "game" time is and has never been a stated goal of the USSDA.  Indeed, their stated philosophy is "The Academy Program's philosophy is based on _increased training, less total games, and more meaningful games using international rules of competition_." (http://www.ussoccerda.com/overview-what-is-da)

This means that kids on the bench stay on the bench under international rules because only the top 14 on a team take the field.


----------



## espola (Mar 15, 2018)

MWN said:


> Consider that the real value of being on a DA team is not playing for 90 minutes (or 10 minutes) on a weekend, but training for 6 hours during the week and scrimmaging against your teammates and other local teams and having the "DA" pedigree on your college scholarship resume.  Once we get to the composite groups we have identified who has the talent to continue.  Yes, some will go to Flight 1 their "freshman" year and return to DA their "sophmore" year and 1 or 2 may eventually make a national team, but the DA is not concerned about the vast majority of those players because they will never be in the group of 36 under consideration for the National U16 team or the U17 team.
> 
> All this brings us back to what I perceive as a fundamental misunderstanding of parents whose kids are in the boys DA program.  The boys DA is and will always be about identifying the top .01% of US Soccer talent.  The remaining 4.99% are welcome to stay and play and help supports the financials of the league and possibly get a soccer scholarship, but these kids are college fodder and not US National Team candidates.
> 
> ...


0.01% plus 4.99% is only 5.00%.


----------



## watfly (Mar 15, 2018)

espola said:


> The only stat USSF has is that after 10 years of PDA effort, the US failed to make the World Cup for the first time since 1990.


Not the only stat, they have also failed to qualify for the last two Olympics.  I'm not a DA hater,  my son just started and loves the intensity and competitiveness of the practices, but I'm realistic about what it impact it will have on my son.  The "proof is in the pudding" as the DA has failed at its goal to produce world class players (at a rate any higher, and possibly lower, than Pre-DA times).  The DA is structurally flawed and unless US Soccer puts substantially more skin in the game it will remain so.


----------



## MWN (Mar 15, 2018)

espola said:


> 0.01% plus 4.99% is only 5.00%.


Yes, that 5% is supposed to represent the top 5% of youth soccer players ... some say the DA targets the top 10%, but its really the top 5%.  There are roughly 12M youth soccer players between USYS, AYSO, US Club and US Soccer.  Of that 12M, 5% represents 600k (advanced) soccer players.  Of that 600k, .001% represents 600 "Elite" players.  At the U12-U15 level, US Soccer is fine with a wide base, but needs to do some serious culling at the U16/17+ ages.  This is the reason for the composite age group.

Of those 600 elite players making up the U12-U19 ages, US Soccer is concerned with about 100 in each group, and will eventually pair those down to the top 36 and then top 24.  Quite frankly, we would be doing a disservice to the goals of the program (identify and develop ELITE players) to allow the non-ELITE to continue to participate in the program.

My personal view is that US Soccer is f'ing it up because it treats the US as a single entity.  Given our population size and the "potential" for hundreds of kids to be "elite" with proper training and development  We should treat the various regions as single entities and allow the net to stay a little wider, because there are probably many more than 100 U16 kids that have the potential to become elite.  But when you have only 96 U16/U17 teams in the US, each with at least 24 players that means there are 2,304 kids participating in the composite U16/U17 level, which is more than plenty to find 100 Elite in that U16 age group.


----------



## Eagle33 (Mar 15, 2018)

As a parent of kid who already went trough all of this previously, I can tell you that it's not all that bad. He had a chance to play a year of HS soccer with his mates and yes, Fight 1. 
I got to tell you though, there are plenty good teams out there who don't play academy and will give your team and your kid a run for your DA money.
It's not like he's getting kicked out of DA, is it? I'm sure they will keep his team and training same for exception of few studs who will play with 02's.


----------



## full90 (Mar 15, 2018)

Thanks. That is helpful. 

And it makes sense to narrow the field in the current system we have in place. 

I think what I find odd is that out of our team, the kids that will make the composite team are big/strong/fast but rank in the bottom 1/3 of soccer IQ. In this most recent part of the season their size/strength/speed has been less and less effective as other kids grow and i watch them making the same dumb soccer choices over and over and over. Now, maybe US Soccer says, hey, "we can teach strong, fast kids to think the game" so it's a fair gamble to take those kids and throw them with the 02's and see who gets smarter. The kids I see who are soccer smart and actually solving soccer problems on the field and thinking 2 passes ahead won't make the composite team...it's become more obvious as the season goes on who the "soccer" players are and who the "athletes" are. And at least per parent chatter on sideline, the "athletes" will be moving up. Hopefully it works out....and I do think those guys should be in an environment where they can't just run past or muscle through opponents. No one on our team will be a pro, but it will be interesting to see in 5 years where everyone ends up. (my kid is neither small and smart or big and fast so without a dog in either fight it's been interesting to observe both groups altho I am sure I have my own biases so please note that I recognize that about myself). I just am bemoaning the fact that the soccer smart guys won't be in the same training environment for a year...and who knows what that cost will be?


----------



## espola (Mar 15, 2018)

Eagle33 said:


> As a parent of kid who already went trough all of this previously, I can tell you that it's not all that bad. He had a chance to play a year of HS soccer with his mates and yes, Fight 1.
> I got to tell you though, there are plenty good teams out there who don't play academy and will give your team and your kid a run for your DA money.
> It's not like he's getting kicked out of DA, is it? I'm sure they will keep his team and training same for exception of few studs who will play with 02's.


One of the best raw soccer players I ever saw refused to play any higher than club rec level.  Speed, size, reasonable foot skills for only playing in rec season.  All the club coaches knew about him, but he couldn't be touched.  His father was a former MLB player for several years, and the kid followed to a degree - 4-year college scholarship, but then was passed over in the MLB draft.


----------



## MWN (Mar 15, 2018)

full90 said:


> Thanks. That is helpful.
> 
> And it makes sense to narrow the field in the current system we have in place.
> 
> I think what I find odd is that out of our team, the kids that will make the composite team are big/strong/fast but rank in the bottom 1/3 of soccer IQ. In this most recent part of the season their size/strength/speed has been less and less effective as other kids grow and i watch them making the same dumb soccer choices over and over and over. Now, maybe US Soccer says, hey, "we can teach strong, fast kids to think the game" so it's a fair gamble to take those kids and throw them with the 02's and see who gets smarter. The kids I see who are soccer smart and actually solving soccer problems on the field and thinking 2 passes ahead won't make the composite team...it's become more obvious as the season goes on who the "soccer" players are and who the "athletes" are. And at least per parent chatter on sideline, the "athletes" will be moving up. Hopefully it works out....and I do think those guys should be in an environment where they can't just run past or muscle through opponents. No one on our team will be a pro, but it will be interesting to see in 5 years where everyone ends up. (my kid is neither small and smart or big and fast so without a dog in either fight it's been interesting to observe both groups altho I am sure I have my own biases so please note that I recognize that about myself). I just am bemoaning the fact that the soccer smart guys won't be in the same training environment for a year...and who knows what that cost will be?


Hopefully you are with a club that has the ability to keep the younger boys together on a Flight 1 team.  I know in 2017, the 2002's were left in cold and a number of clubs simply kept the boys together on F1 teams in SCDSL, in fact I believe the top 3 finishers in the Champions league were all made up of primarily 2002 academy kids in an off year and Arsenal's DA team won the playoffs (finished 3rd in league).

Bottom line is US Soccer wants "smart athletic kids."  To play at the highest level, if the speed isn't there the smarts don't mean much because everybody else is smart and athletic (quick/fast).  Soccer IQ can be taught ... size and speed, not so much.


----------



## Eagle33 (Mar 15, 2018)

MWN said:


> Soccer IQ can be taught ... size and speed, not so much.


I have to disagree on this statement. At 15 yo you don't know yet how big, strong or fast some of those boys will be. I will pick smart player any day over a track star. And you absolutely right, that's exactly how US Soccer thinks and that's why we can't make Olympics or a World Cup. We currently have great athletes with zero soccer IQ's.


----------



## Eagle33 (Mar 15, 2018)

full90 said:


> Thanks. That is helpful.
> 
> And it makes sense to narrow the field in the current system we have in place.
> 
> I think what I find odd is that out of our team, the kids that will make the composite team are big/strong/fast but rank in the bottom 1/3 of soccer IQ. In this most recent part of the season their size/strength/speed has been less and less effective as other kids grow and i watch them making the same dumb soccer choices over and over and over. Now, maybe US Soccer says, hey, "we can teach strong, fast kids to think the game" so it's a fair gamble to take those kids and throw them with the 02's and see who gets smarter. The kids I see who are soccer smart and actually solving soccer problems on the field and thinking 2 passes ahead won't make the composite team...it's become more obvious as the season goes on who the "soccer" players are and who the "athletes" are. And at least per parent chatter on sideline, the "athletes" will be moving up. Hopefully it works out....and I do think those guys should be in an environment where they can't just run past or muscle through opponents. No one on our team will be a pro, but it will be interesting to see in 5 years where everyone ends up. (my kid is neither small and smart or big and fast so without a dog in either fight it's been interesting to observe both groups altho I am sure I have my own biases so please note that I recognize that about myself). I just am bemoaning the fact that the soccer smart guys won't be in the same training environment for a year...and who knows what that cost will be?


Don't confuse what US Soccer thinks vs what your current club thinks or do. Like I said, most DA's will keep the team together and he will still be training with same group and hopefully scrimmage your 04s DA few times. So training should stay the same. As far as games, you will get around the same amount of games in SCDSL and will be playing against other 03s DA who is on break just your team, as well as some good non DA clubs.


----------



## MWN (Mar 15, 2018)

Eagle33 said:


> I have to disagree on this statement. At 15 yo you don't know yet how big, strong or fast some of those boys will be. I will pick smart player any day over a track star. And you absolutely right, that's exactly how US Soccer thinks and that's why we can't make Olympics or a World Cup. We currently have great athletes with zero soccer IQ's.


By age 15, the average boy is within an inch of their maximum height.  From that point on its just adding "man" muscle to that slender frame and to your point, I agree, we don't know how quick/fast that kid is going to be.  There are always exceptions (boys growing 4" from 15-17), but the reality is the vast majority of boys are done growing by age 16 and by age 17-19 their growth plates calcify and they are completely done.

I personally could see just treating the U18/19 as the composite group, but I'm also sympathetic to the fact that most U16/17 year old players are within 95% of their "man size."


----------



## Zvezdas (Mar 15, 2018)

I come from Europe and my son currently plays on a DA club, anyways i am puzzled why most of the people on this board blame USSDA for usmnt failure to qualify for the wc? Italians are not blaming their academy system for the failure. One of the main reasons why usmnt failed is the mls, the league in every nation is the force behind the national team. I dont expect much from the academy system here or anywhere else on the planet, chances  that my kid will play on the national team are super low and i have no illusions, thats not why we joined the DA team. People in Europe are much more realistic when it comes to their kids who play on pro-club academies, they know that their kids can be cut anytime, and they also understand that there is a small chance that their kid will make it to a professional side and sign that pro contract!


----------



## Dr. Richard Hurtz (Mar 15, 2018)

MWN said:


> Hopefully you are with a club that has the ability to keep the younger boys together on a Flight 1 team.  I know in 2017, the 2002's were left in cold and a number of clubs simply kept the boys together on F1 teams in SCDSL, in fact I believe the top 3 finishers in the Champions league were all made up of primarily 2002 academy kids in an off year and Arsenal's DA team won the playoffs (finished 3rd in league).
> 
> Bottom line is US Soccer wants "smart athletic kids."  To play at the highest level, if the speed isn't there the smarts don't mean much because everybody else is smart and athletic (quick/fast).  Soccer IQ can be taught ... size and speed, not so much.


Yes 


MWN said:


> Hopefully you are with a club that has the ability to keep the younger boys together on a Flight 1 team.  I know in 2017, the 2002's were left in cold and a number of clubs simply kept the boys together on F1 teams in SCDSL, in fact I believe the top 3 finishers in the Champions league were all made up of primarily 2002 academy kids in an off year and Arsenal's DA team won the playoffs (finished 3rd in league).
> 
> Bottom line is US Soccer wants "smart athletic kids."  To play at the highest level, if the speed isn't there the smarts don't mean much because everybody else is smart and athletic (quick/fast).  Soccer IQ can be taught ... size and speed, not so much.


*Yes I agree. Soccer I.Q. can be taught.. well somewhat, I wouldn’t say all of it. But the US hasn’t been teaching it to the bigger and faster stronger kids..  that’s why our national team can’t qualify for the Olympics and World Cup. I’m just saying stop picking the stronger athletes. It’s time to pick real soccer players. Guys who are smart!!*


----------



## Dr. Richard Hurtz (Mar 15, 2018)

And by your reasoning that boys are almost comeplety done growing by 17 and are almost a man.. well then I guess their soccer  brains must be done growing too??  Give me the smaller kid who’s smart any day over these giants. This is dumb


----------



## Lambchop (Mar 15, 2018)

MWN said:


> By age 15, the average boy is within an inch of their maximum height.  From that point on its just adding "man" muscle to that slender frame and to your point, I agree, we don't know how quick/fast that kid is going to be.  There are always exceptions (boys growing 4" from 15-17), but the reality is the vast majority of boys are done growing by age 16 and by age 17-19 their growth plates calcify and they are completely done.
> 
> I personally could see just treating the U18/19 as the composite group, but I'm also sympathetic to the fact that most U16/17 year old players are within 95% of their "man size."


All the males in my family had their biggest growth spurt between 17-20! A  couple of friends have sons playing D1 right now, both of their sons grew in college. One is graduating in May and grew 2 inches in college, was 6' and is now 6'2, the other was 5'10 and is now 5'11 and is a junior.


----------



## Lambchop (Mar 15, 2018)

MWN said:


> Consider that the real value of being on a DA team is not playing for 90 minutes (or 10 minutes) on a weekend, but training for 6 hours during the week and scrimmaging against your teammates and other local teams and having the "DA" pedigree on your college scholarship resume.  Once we get to the composite groups we have identified who has the talent to continue.  Yes, some will go to Flight 1 their "freshman" year and return to DA their "sophmore" year and 1 or 2 may eventually make a national team, but the DA is not concerned about the vast majority of those players because they will never be in the group of 36 under consideration for the National U16 team or the U17 team.
> 
> All this brings us back to what I perceive as a fundamental misunderstanding of parents whose kids are in the boys DA program.  The boys DA is and will always be about identifying the top .01% of US Soccer talent.  The remaining 4.99% are welcome to stay and play and help supports the financials of the league and possibly get a soccer scholarship, but these kids are college fodder and not US National Team candidates.
> 
> ...


And....only 24 or so will EVER play internationally under FIFA sub rules.  STUPID to have so many players play under that rule.  If those 24 can't comprehend what the sub rules mean and adapt in the first game they have no business playing internationally.


----------



## mirage (Mar 16, 2018)

full90 said:


> ....Is that the point? Is this intentional by the DA to funnel the best 03's to the 02 team and "cull the herd" of the low group? Maybe US Soccer is trying to reduce the pool of 03's?
> 
> Has anyone heard the thought process behind this from US Soccer?


The reason there are far less DA clubs for older is exactly for the reason you've stated herein.  Number of clubs decrease with age with an intention.

USSF knows that by having less older clubs, increases competition for roster spots and they can get to the top 1% or less.  By having more clubs for older, while increases the pool, dilutes the talent concentration.  I've been told this, second hand, via DA DOC that heard it directly from USSF.

Aside from the growth discussion that preceded my post, which I agree with most with MWN, all these exceptions that people are stating do exist.  To argue a logic is right or wrong based on exceptions, rather than the general trend, is a misguided effort by my sense.  It is just as silly to use WC qualifier for effectiveness of DA.

In assessing the effectiveness, there is the process and there is the execution.  My observation is that USSF has failed more in the latter than the former.  While the process may not be perfect, we do not execute talent identification and development very well.

Last, the point of younger ages playing up, is an initiative that USSF encourage clubs and scores how well they do that.  When my kid played DA, prior to now playing in college, at the playoffs and showcases, the USSF scouts aways wanted to know how many kids on the field were younger ages playing up.

So by the time the kid is U16, you pretty much have to accept the fact that there is no real separation between 16s~19s.  As such, can you compete at that level becomes the first order filter.  Is there a flaw in that logic - yes but its a small calculated risk.


----------



## focomoso (Mar 16, 2018)

MWN said:


> ...Yes, some will go to Flight 1 their "freshman" year and return to DA their "sophmore" year and 1 or 2 may eventually make a national team, but the DA is not concerned about the vast majority of those players because they will never be in the group of 36 under consideration for the National U16 team or the U17 team.


Is there any data on the level of current top players when they were younger worldwide? Meaning, were all the national team players around the world clearly the best by u12, or u16 or u19? My understanding is that while some pros were obviously the best from a very early age, many (perhaps the majority) bloomed later. Many of the elite players didn't become elite until adulthood.


----------



## MWN (Mar 16, 2018)

focomoso said:


> Is there any data on the level of current top players when they were younger worldwide? Meaning, were all the national team players around the world clearly the best by u12, or u16 or u19? My understanding is that while some pros were obviously the best from a very early age, many (perhaps the majority) bloomed later. Many of the elite players didn't become elite until adulthood.


That is a great question and I have not seen any publicly citable sources, but for the heck of it I went and looked at the Premiere League Champions - Chelsea FC and looked at the top 14 starters with more games than anybody else.  Looked at their year of birth and the first date of "Pro" (i.e. senior start date) to come up with the approximate age the player turned Pro.  Here is the result:

Jersey Name Born Year Pro *Age Pro*
10 Eden Hazard 1991 2007 *16*
15 Victor Moses 1990 2007 *17*
4 Cesc Fabregas 1987 2004 *17*
2 Antonio Rudiger 1993 2011 *18*
27 Andreas Christensen 1996 2014 *18*
9 Alvaro Morata 1992 2010 *18*
14 Tiemoue Bakayoko 1994 2012 *18*
13 Thibaut Courtois 1992 2010 *18*
28 Cesar Azpilicueta 1989 2007 *18*
24 Gary Cahill 1985 2004 *19*
3 Marcos Alonso 1990 2010 *19*
22 Willian 1988 2007 *19*
11 Pedro 1987 2008 *21*

The youngest was Eden Hazard getting his first pro start at age 16 and the oldest was Pedro getting his pro start at age 21.  The average age each of these "elite" players received their pro start was 18.1583846 (18.2 years of age).  This result surprised the heck out of me because I genuinely believed it would be something like 24.

If you really look at this from a where does that US fit in to the "world stage" we are very far behind when it comes to youth development primarily because we have no legitimate professional lower level teams and the MLS teams would likely be the equivalent to League 1 or 2 (Premiere, Champions, League 1, League 2) and Galaxy would probably get their butts kicked by Stevenage and Barnet.

With regard to the National Team for England, I believe most of the players recently named all started their Pro careers before age 21.

You could look them all up if you have time, but here is a sample:

Born Pro Debut *Age Pro* National Team Age National
 Joe Hart 1987 2003 *16* 2005 18 
Danny Rose 1990 2006 *16 * 2005 15 
Harry Maguire 1993 2011 *18 * 2012 19 
Adam Lallana 1988 2006 *18 * 2006 18 
Dele Alli 1996 2011 *15 * 2012 16 
Jamie Vardy 1987 2007 *20 * 2015 28 

The vast majority of the National Team players had their professional starts at 18 and under, where some were late bloomers (Jamie Vardy) at 20.

In my mind a footballer has not hit adulthood until after age 23/24.  Why?  Because the world still considers those at age 22 (in development) and has a special bracket for those kids USMNT U23 through U15.

As far as becoming "elite" I believe the age is 27 for men to reach their pinnacle.


----------



## MWN (Mar 16, 2018)

mirage said:


> ...
> Aside from the growth discussion that preceded my post, which I agree with most with MWN, all these exceptions that people are stating do exist.  To argue a logic is right or wrong based on exceptions, rather than the general trend, is a misguided effort by my sense.  It is just as silly to use WC qualifier for effectiveness of DA.


Obviously, you are very smart as evidenced by this statement "...I agree [] most with MWN..."  

I also agree that the argument some make that the USMNT performance (failure to secure World Cup) is an indication of the USSDA effectiveness is simply silly.  It demonstrates a fundamental misunderstanding of youth and senior development in the United States.  Moreover, it ignores the reality that the US Mens National Team had a Medium Age of 27, which means that half of the team members are over the age of 27 and never played in the USSDA.

The DA is 10 years old and stops at U19 (i.e. age 18).  That said, of the Trinidad&Tobago squad no player on the USMNT, but Pulisic (age 18), played in the DA within the last 4 years.  It makes no logical sense to hold a program responsible for a result when over 4 years have past since 99% of the athletes on the USMNT could have played in that program.

If we really want to understand why our team lost then we need to look at where these players have trained after graduating from the youth academies at age 18.  The Infamous Panama / Trinidad & Tobago Squad
https://www.ussoccer.com/mens-national-team/latest-roster#tab-1

MLS Team: 19
Mexico 5
Europe 3

19 Players from our awesomely substandard pro league and 8 from abroad.  Aaaahaaa, I think we have the culprit.


----------



## Desert Hound (Mar 16, 2018)

MWN said:


> Obviously, you are very smart as evidenced by this statement "...I agree [] most with MWN..."
> 
> I also agree that the argument some make that the USMNT performance (failure to secure World Cup) is an indication of the USSDA effectiveness is simply silly.  It demonstrates a fundamental misunderstanding of youth and senior development in the United States.  Moreover, it ignores the reality that the US Mens National Team had a Medium Age of 27, which means that half of the team members are over the age of 27 and never played in the USSDA.
> 
> ...


Interesting. I had to look up some previous squads. Up to and through 2002-2014 about half or more of the squads were playing in Europe. I didn't go back further.

MLS is getting better but has a long way to go. I watched a couple of friendlies last year and those European clubs were running circles around our teams.


----------



## MWN (Mar 16, 2018)

Desert Hound said:


> Interesting. I had to look up some previous squads. Up to and through 2002-2014 about half or more of the squads were playing in Europe. I didn't go back further.
> 
> MLS is getting better but has a long way to go. I watched a couple of friendlies last year and those European clubs were running circles around our teams.


The MLS is still 20+ years away from competing at the International level, unless US Soccer twists their arms into making competitive changes, which won't occur until the collective owners of the MLS cash flow positive in all business units.

But bringing this back to the DA, we are in a competitive "disadvantage" to Europe and South America because we don't have domestic high-level professional teams and our youth academies are effectively subpar independents, thus, phenom/elite players are stuck in a subpar USSDA until age 18.  Its only a select few with dual citizenship that can escape the US earlier (see, FIFA Article 19, which prohibits international transfer of players under 18) and then once out of the US, must deal with Work Permit status if a non-EU passport holder.

Article 19 is designed to prevent child trafficking, and we need to have a serious look at how we might make changes to allow free movement of minors that want to pursue soccer.  Once we get that figured out, the US will have a chance to compete for Championships.  Right now we simply compete to make the groupings so we can be eliminated before the Quarter Finals with our sub-par MLS alumni.


----------



## focomoso (Mar 16, 2018)

MWN said:


> That is a great question...


I agree.  

It would be really interesting to see if, say, the EPL at large had older pro-starting ages than the national teams. I looked around at the soccer data APIs out there and none of them seem to include an age_turned_pro field, though I but you could scrape it off of wikipedia for the better known players.

One thing to keep in mind though is that European and South American players turn pro much younger than US players because they have robust lower leagues. Lewandowski, for example, could turn pro at 18 because he played for Zincz Pruszkow which was a "flight 3" Polish team (at the time). Also, European players don't have to worry about NCAA eligibility, where as a US players has to be absolutely sure they're pro material before giving up on their college career.


----------



## watfly (Mar 17, 2018)

MWN said:


> I also agree that the argument some make that the USMNT performance (failure to secure World Cup) is an indication of the USSDA effectiveness is simply silly.  It demonstrates a fundamental misunderstanding of youth and senior development in the United States.  Moreover, it ignores the reality that the US Mens National Team had a Medium Age of 27, which means that half of the team members are over the age of 27 and never played in the USSDA.


You need to rethink your logic because the fact that the average age on the team is 27 is even more proof that the DA has failed to meets its goal.  If the DA had been successful at producing world class players you would have expected to have seen a much lower average age on the USMNT.  By your very own analysis world class players average pro start is at age 18.

I agree with you that its not just the USMNT failure to qualify that's proof of the DA's failure, its also the Olympics, its the U-23 and below results, its the lack of impact American players on 1st division European teams...etc.  We have had multiple cycles of players that have been through the full DA program with no evidence of any difference in the production of American world class players.  I'm all ears if you have evidence of the success of the DA, but so far I've only heard excuses.

From all accounts the DA is a great league, and I'm stoked to have my son to play with a group of highly competitive kids, but as its presently structured its not an effective development system.


----------



## espola (Mar 17, 2018)

watfly said:


> You need to rethink your logic because the fact that the average age on the team is 27 is even more proof that the DA has failed to meets its goal.  If the DA had been successful at producing world class players you would have expected to have seen a much lower average age on the USMNT.  By your very own analysis world class players average pro start is at age 18.
> 
> I agree with you that its not just the USMNT failure to qualify that's proof of the DA's failure, its also the Olympics, its the U-23 and below results, its the lack of impact American players on 1st division European teams...etc.  We have had multiple cycles of players that have been through the full DA program with no evidence of any difference in the production of American world class players.  I'm all ears if you have evidence of the success of the DA, but so far I've only heard excuses.
> 
> From all accounts the DA is a great league, and I'm stoked to have my son to play with a group of highly competitive kids, but as its presently structured its not an effective development system.


If 10 years ago they had started with 1-0-year-olds, we might be seeing a difference by now.  Instead, they started with 18-year-olds, who were too far along to be given much help even by any miraculously  perfect coaching method.

I agree that making a situation where all the best players practice and play together every week is the foundation of a good player development system - when are they going to do that?


----------



## MWN (Mar 17, 2018)

watfly said:


> You need to rethink your logic because the fact that the _average age on the team is 27_ is even more proof that the DA has failed to meets its goal.  If the DA had been successful at producing world class players you would have expected to have seen a much lower average age on the USMNT.  By your very own analysis world class players average pro start is at age 18.


Logic is sound, but my data was a bit flawed in that I misread the article (was too quick) and used the 2014 data instead of the 2017 team.  There are 3 points to be made.

There is a difference between turning pro (17 or 18) and peaking in athletic performance (age 25-27).  
What is the average age that National Team athletes are at their peak and did the Coach (Arenas) exercise good judgment in selecting the squad.

How many USSDA athletes turn pro before aging out at 19.
But first, let's back up and correct my mistake in stating the data.  According to this article: https://content.iospress.com/articles/journal-of-sports-analytics/jsa0021 *the median age of the Trinidad USMNT was 29* (not 27).  The 2014 squad's median age was 27.  In addition, according to this article, Coach Bruce Arenas elected to start only 4 players under the age of 25 (https://www.nytimes.com/2017/10/12/sports/soccer/usmnt-world-cup-landon-donovan.html)

Because nearly 1/2 of the squad was over the age of 30 and over half were over the age of 27, the USSDA had no impact as it didn't exist and for the balance of the players there was only marginal influence of their development given the starting 11's age.  Logically speaking we can conclude that the USSDA had insignificant direct impact on the players chosen to start for the USMNT and the performance of that team had very little "direct" influence.

Your point, however, is the lack of young players chosen for the team is "indirect" evidence of the ineffectiveness of the USSDA.  To analyze this point we need to look at a few factors:
1) *Bias in choosing players for the USMNT by Arenas*.  Let's ignore this one and just assume that Arenas picked the best players, despite charges he didn't and went with players he knew.
2) *What is the peak performance age for professional players*.  The prevailing thought is that professional soccer players reach their peak performance between the ages of 25-27.  Indeed, the average of most World Cup teams is 27.5 (see, http://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-28254123, and https://content.iospress.com/articles/journal-of-sports-analytics/jsa0021 [25-27])

Based on the two referenced articles and statistical analysis presented therein; a successful World Cup team should have players with an average age of 27.5.  This means that nearly 7-9 years will pass between when a player graduates from the USSDA and reaches their "peak performance" at 25-27 years of age.  Remember, players age out of the USSDA at 18.

We come to the final question/point.  Is the USSDA capable of producing "elite" players that are capable of turning pro at age 17/18, and if so, is the system capable of taking in those players domestically and furthering their training so they reach "peak performance" at age 25-27?

I believe the answer is yes (system can produce 16 year old phenoms ... Lederman, Pulisic is an example) and no its not capable of developing those players further.

US phenoms are stuck in a catch-22.  The level of play in the USSDA is high enough for these players to get on the radar of foreign youth academies, but because of Article 19 (FIFA), they can't move to those clubs until they reach 18 (see, https://www.nytimes.com/2015/09/01/sports/soccer/strict-enforcement-of-fifa-rules-sidelines-young-players-abroad.html).

Once players age out of the USSDA they are faced with the choice of choosing college (death sentence for development at the mens level) or going pro to play on an MLS "B" team.  The vast majority of European academies that wanted those players wanted them at 14-15, not 19, so that option is out.  Once a USSDA player chooses college they basically become unavailable because their development is stunted due to the NCAA's training restrictions.  So now the only hope for high level training and development is the MLS programs, which is subpar compared to their European counterparts for a variety of reasons (namely athletes in program are not elite).

Ultimately, this brings us to the Million Dollar question, can we blame the USSDA for not producing 25-27 year old soccer phenoms that will make an impact on the USMNT?

I believe the answer is no primarily due to the fact that those 17/18 year old elite players can only become world class players by training and playing at levels not offered domestically at the present time.  It therefore follows that because USSDA players age out at 18 and won't reach their peak performance until 25-27, the failure of the USMNT is directly due to the failure of our domestic senior programs (MLS, NASL and USL) to (1) entice and/or (2) train players in order to further their development instead of going to college where it will regress.


----------



## xav10 (Mar 17, 2018)

MWN said:


> Logic is sound, but my data was a bit flawed in that I misread the article (was too quick) and used the 2014 data instead of the 2017 team.  There are 3 points to be made.
> 
> There is a difference between turning pro (17 or 18) and peaking in athletic performance (age 25-27).
> What is the average age that National Team athletes are at their peak and did the Coach (Arenas) exercise good judgment in selecting the squad.
> ...


Ben Lederman has been good enough for FC Barcelona youth team for 5 years, but doesn’t get caps with US National Youth Teams. What does that tell us about our choices?


----------



## SBFDad (Mar 17, 2018)

xav10 said:


> Ben Lederman has been good enough for FC Barcelona youth team for 5 years, but doesn’t get caps with US National Youth Teams. What does that tell us about our choices?


Speaks volumes. Doesn’t fit the USYNT “profile”...bigger, faster, stronger. If you can actually play really good soccer, it’s a bonus.


----------



## MWN (Mar 17, 2018)

xav10 said:


> Ben Lederman has been good enough for FC Barcelona youth team for 5 years, but doesn’t get caps with US National Youth Teams. What does that tell us about our choices?


@xav10 and @SBFDad

Ummm No.  On the surface it tells us that some of us bring in biases to a discussion and don't research facts.  

Ben Lederman has been brought into the USYNT a number of times and has earned US YNT caps as a U14 and U15.  (https://www.ussoccer.com/stories/2014/05/14/09/09/140514-u14-bnt-international-training-camp-zagreb). When he was banished from Barcelona due to FIFA Article 19, he returned to the US and trained at IMG.  Now that he has a Polish passport he can return to Barcelona to continue his training.  US Soccer also brought him in tot he U17 Residency camp (https://www.ussoccer.com/stories/2016/01/15/15/41/160115-u17-john-hackworth-names-32-player-u17-mnt-2016-spring-residency-roster, https://www.topdrawersoccer.com/club-soccer-articles/u14-boys-national-team-roster-for-croatia_aid28806).

That said, while Ben Lederman was/is in the Barcelona youth academy system, Barcelona retains ultimate control of the lad and unless Barcelona releases the player to play with the Youth National Team, the player cannot be named/rostered.  (https://www.starsandstripesfc.com/2017/12/31/16835428/weekly-youth-update-12-31).  Lederman would be an idiot to ask to leave Barcelona's youth academy and train and play with the USYNT in meaningless games.


----------



## Dr. Richard Hurtz (Mar 17, 2018)

Jesus Christ  enough with all this researching the web and referencing articles... the bottom line is DA soccer is run by the same people over at US soccer who hired Bruce Arena who scouted the same old ass recycled players. Eric Wynalda is right. Promotion and relegation is our future and MLS needs to conform. It has to start from the top down. The election held back in February didn’t change anything. We can’t have the same people running the show from 20 yrs ago. Can’t have the same scouts from 15 yrs ago. And we can’t keep scouting the same stereotypical all American athlete for our National teams. At some point it has to start with I.Q.   This sport isn’t about at what age a boy matured. It’s about which boy matured mentally faster with his soccer brain. Scout these boys and then watch how well fast America will qualify for Olympics and World Cups. If soccer were a business instead of a federation people accountable would be fired. Ex soccer players should be running this show. Not Excutives.


----------



## xav10 (Mar 17, 2018)

Dr. Richard Hurtz said:


> Jesus Christ  enough with all this researching the web and referencing articles... the bottom line is DA soccer is run by the same people over at US soccer who hired Bruce Arena who scouted the same old ass recycled players. Eric Wynalda is right. Promotion and relegation is our future and MLS needs to conform. It has to start from the top down. The election held back in February didn’t change anything. We can’t have the same people running the show from 20 yrs ago. Can’t have the same scouts from 15 yrs ago. And we can’t keep scouting the same stereotypical all American athlete for our National teams. At some point it has to start with I.Q.   This sport isn’t about at what age a boy matured. It’s about which boy matured mentally faster with his soccer brain. Scout these boys and then watch how well fast America will qualify for Olympics and World Cups. If soccer were a business instead of a federation people accountable would be fired. Ex soccer players should be running this show. Not Excutives.


Between NCAA offering educations and MLS billionaires not permitting pro/rel, USSF has power over AYSO and not much else. It’s too bad.


----------



## SBFDad (Mar 17, 2018)

MWN said:


> @xav10 and @SBFDad
> 
> Ummm No.  On the surface it tells us that some of us bring in biases to a discussion and don't research facts.
> 
> ...


Um ok. So go ahead and share your sources. I don’t believe that Barca won’t release the kid for YNT camps. If that’s true, shame on Barca. If not, point stands.


----------



## Zvezdas (Mar 18, 2018)

SBFDad said:


> Um ok. So go ahead and share your sources. I don’t believe that Barca won’t release the kid for YNT camps. If that’s true, shame on Barca. If not, point stands.


It seems like you are not following Euro national teams and clubs, there were numerous instances of European clubs not releasing their players for the national duty. They usually mask that with phantom injuries. Lazio refused to release one of the worlds most talented midfielders Milinkovic-Savic to play for U21 national team stating that he should play for a senior side and not for a u21 side that a few months earlier won u20 world cup...


----------



## ray8 (Mar 21, 2018)

MWN said:


> By age 15, the average boy is within an inch of their maximum height.  From that point on its just adding "man" muscle to that slender frame


The difference between 02 and 03 players is huge, and little to do with inches in height. Muscle maturity, strength, recovery rates, attitude...
Some 03's can play up. That doesn't mean all future prospects can play up at 15. I've seen more than a few suffer this way.


----------



## Jace (Mar 22, 2018)

The responses on this thread is comical... and it reflects how imature the states are regarding soccer. Determining and throwing players aside at 16... and many cases younger.... its why we suck and will continue to do so on the world stage.


----------



## Jace (Mar 22, 2018)

We develop the team first in this country instead of the player. Then we choose the athletic undeveloped soccer player to rise in the system.... and this is pervasive in DA...


----------



## Jace (Mar 22, 2018)

And to make it worse we pigeon hole players from the youngest to oldest. Sure there are exceptions... but not the rule. Bottom line... our soccer leaders and coaches dont know squat about developing players


----------



## MWN (Mar 22, 2018)

Jace said:


> We develop the team first in this country instead of the player. Then we choose the athletic undeveloped soccer player to rise in the system.... and this is pervasive in DA...


So what is the solution?


----------



## xav10 (Mar 22, 2018)

Jace said:


> And to make it worse we pigeon hole players from the youngest to oldest. Sure there are exceptions... but not the rule. Bottom line... our soccer leaders and coaches dont know squat about developing players


What I witness is shocking. The views of Spaniards and French about excellent players who aren’t considered prospects here really let us know how backward we are in our thinking. The game tells us that technique comes first and that’s the last thing coaches here care about. Ergo, we suck.


----------



## Jace (Mar 22, 2018)

MWN said:


> So what is the solution?


There is no "solution" imo. There are huge impediments at every level. We are slowly developing a soccer culture... coaches and soccer leaders will be replaced by more knowledgeable successors.... it will take many generations for change. Mainly... we need to learn... " dont do that...". Adults are the problem. Not the kid...

If you have a kid currently in soccer... it is what it is. Take it for what it is today and enjoy watching your kid play... but dont play for tomorrow....

And i speak a bit from experience.. my kid is in DA... and for most part it is mediocre at best.

I have come to conclusion.... there are a small handful of places where your kid may have a shot at being developed (for US standards)... and no surprise its where the scouts concentrate... its a matter of geography


----------



## GKDad65 (Mar 23, 2018)

More DA clubs and teams means more DA Kool-Aid  !!  Yeah !!!


----------



## Jace (Mar 23, 2018)

GKDad65 said:


> More DA clubs and teams means more DA Kool-Aid  !!  Yeah !!!


Well, i have to tell you, the non DA in my area.. not too good.  So, you can choose mediocre... to... hey "what about baseball..."? Yea... i have suggested that but my kid says its too slow... boring... which i agree...


----------



## El Clasico (Mar 23, 2018)

Dr. Richard Hurtz said:


> Jesus Christ  enough with all this researching the web and referencing articles... the bottom line is DA soccer is run by the same people over at US soccer who hired Bruce Arena who scouted the same old ass recycled players. Eric Wynalda is right. Promotion and relegation is our future and MLS needs to conform. It has to start from the top down. The election held back in February didn’t change anything. We can’t have the same people running the show from 20 yrs ago. Can’t have the same scouts from 15 yrs ago. And we can’t keep scouting the same stereotypical all American athlete for our National teams. At some point it has to start with I.Q.   This sport isn’t about at what age a boy matured. It’s about which boy matured mentally faster with his soccer brain. Scout these boys and then watch how well fast America will qualify for Olympics and World Cups. If soccer were a business instead of a federation people accountable would be fired. Ex soccer players should be running this show. Not Excutives.


This reminds me of the expression..."Those who can't do, teach".  There are people on this board posting regularly that have no personal understanding of the game (coaching rec doesn't count, hell, I know club coaches that have no clue that only sell the company line) and they think that because they can't post links to stories, that they are somehow an authority on something. Reminds me of another great quote by Mike Tyson when he said "Everyone has a plan till you punch them in the face". Different sport, same concept.  We can read all the books, institute the PDIs and do everything USSF mandates us to do (yes, they do have control) but the US misses the point. That creates robots and we need to be teaching our players to think.  It is a thinking game more than an athletic game and until that changes, we will not progress.  When you watch both the men and the women play, show me where you see the creativity needed to compete at the international level.


----------



## xav10 (Mar 23, 2018)

El Clasico said:


> This reminds me of the expression..."Those who can't do, teach".  There are people on this board posting regularly that have no personal understanding of the game (coaching rec doesn't count, hell, I know club coaches that have no clue that only sell the company line) and they think that because they can't post links to stories, that they are somehow an authority on something. Reminds me of another great quote by Mike Tyson when he said "Everyone has a plan till you punch them in the face". Different sport, same concept.  We can read all the books, institute the PDIs and do everything USSF mandates us to do (yes, they do have control) but the US misses the point. That creates robots and we need to be teaching our players to think.  It is a thinking game more than an athletic game and until that changes, we will not progress.  When you watch both the men and the women play, show me where you see the creativity needed to compete at the international level.


We don’t care about smart, it’s sad. However, you’re incorrect about the USSF control. Their guidelines mandate a style of play  that is ignored by clubs and DA teams everywhere and there’s no enforcement mechanism.


----------



## Dr. Richard Hurtz (Mar 23, 2018)

El Clasico said:


> This reminds me of the expression..."Those who can't do, teach".  There are people on this board posting regularly that have no personal understanding of the game (coaching rec doesn't count, hell, I know club coaches that have no clue that only sell the company line) and they think that because they can't post links to stories, that they are somehow an authority on something. Reminds me of another great quote by Mike Tyson when he said "Everyone has a plan till you punch them in the face". Different sport, same concept.  We can read all the books, institute the PDIs and do everything USSF mandates us to do (yes, they do have control) but the US misses the point. That creates robots and we need to be teaching our players to think.  It is a thinking game more than an athletic game and until that changes, we will not progress.  When you watch both the men and the women play, show me where you see the creativity needed to compete at the international level.


Nicely put el Clasico. Absolutely. I couldn’t agree with you more


----------



## El Clasico (Mar 23, 2018)

xav10 said:


> We don’t care about smart, it’s sad. However, you’re incorrect about the USSF control. Their guidelines mandate a style of play  that is ignored by clubs and DA teams everywhere and there’s no enforcement mechanism.


I agree, this is very true. However, USSF chooses to relegate the DA program to Clubs rather than spend their money creating a true Academy system and its oversight. USSF gives control to clubs who ignore mandates and perpetuates the pay to play system.


----------



## mirage (Mar 24, 2018)

xav10 said:


> We don’t care about smart, it’s sad. However, you’re incorrect about the USSF control. Their guidelines mandate a style of play  that is ignored by clubs and DA teams everywhere and there’s no enforcement mechanism.


In terms of absolutes, no, USSF does not ignore smart players.  That said, they probably place less emphasis on smart players and will most likely pick bigger, stronger and faster players over smart creative players if that's the choice.

As for DA mandate of style of play, the clubs should ignore and tailor the style of play to the kind of players they have.  Besides, the mandate has been relaxed, especially with the departure of Klinsmann so its a non-issue.  By forcing certain style only, it stifles creativity and at the end of the day, a real smart player will adapt and adjust the style of play to exploit the opponent.  Despite what we all like to spew out on the forum, the main purpose of "development" is learning how to win consistently.


----------



## mirage (Mar 24, 2018)

El Clasico said:


> ....However, USSF chooses to relegate the DA program to Clubs rather than spend their money creating a true Academy system and its oversight......


Do you truly believe that USSF created academy, ran by them, its a better answer?

USSF's job is to create framework and an environment for better coaching at the youth level and hold the all clubs's feet to the fire.  They need to get out of DA business all together.  They have created feeding frenzy for parents who live vicariously through their kids.

Set the curriculum and let clubs follow as they will.  The market place will quickly determine which clubs are worth a damn and which ones not.  

Local leagues like SCDSL and CSL will be more competitive, and high school soccer will mean something again.  College coaches will have to go back to doing real scouting and find good players out there, rather than just attending DA playoffs and showcases to pick so called "Academy Players".

We do best when we let creativity lead us and to do that, less structure is better than too much structure.  Right now, we appear to have too much structure and not enough creativity and innovation in youth sports.


----------



## El Clasico (Mar 24, 2018)

mirage said:


> Do you truly believe that USSF created academy, ran by them, its a better answer?
> 
> USSF's job is to create framework and an environment for better coaching at the youth level and hold the all clubs's feet to the fire.  They need to get out of DA business all together.  They have created feeding frenzy for parents who live vicariously through their kids.
> 
> We do best when we let creativity lead us and to do that, less structure is better than too much structure.  Right now, we appear to have too much structure and not enough creativity and innovation in youth sports.


Mirage, you misunderstand my message completely.  My point was just as yours, that USSF has too much control, you see it with the DA program by limited choices and options and you see it all the way down to the rec programs that some of the big clubs have created.  They, USSF, delegated their mission to the clubs who in turn impose it upon ALL youth players, including the vast majority who have no plans or intentions to do anything other than have fun playing soccer. US Soccer takes the fun, excitement, experimentation and creativity out of the game simply by imposing their mandates on everyone else when they have the resources to fund and develop (ironic), and operate their own program the way they feel is best. But they would rather pad their bank account, get rich and fat and impose mandates on clubs who turn around and market to the moron parents who don't understand the game but write big checks so the clubs get rich and fat too.  Only in America!!  I am not saying it is not a big money sport worldwide, I am saying that here, it is big money all the way down to the kids who really should only be playing rec. That is the big difference. As a child, I never had to pay, or saw anyone who had to pay anything to play, rent fields, or kick a ball. Very confusing to me. Let the kids play!


----------



## Lambchop (Mar 24, 2018)

mirage said:


> The reason there are far less DA clubs for older is exactly for the reason you've stated herein.  Number of clubs decrease with age with an intention.
> 
> USSF knows that by having less older clubs, increases competition for roster spots and they can get to the top 1% or less.  By having more clubs for older, while increases the pool, dilutes the talent concentration.  I've been told this, second hand, via DA DOC that heard it directly from USSF.
> 
> ...


And,,,, that is one reason our men's team does so poorly!!


----------



## lafalafa (Mar 25, 2018)

Why?   Primary reasons are $$$ money, the Establishment, and the lack of promotion and regulation.  

The whole  "dilutes the talent argument" is a big smoke screen.  

The establishment doesn't want real competition otherwise there would be promotion and regulations.  Instead we have established clubs that don't put out many competitive teams year  after year yet they remain in DA,  just look at the standings there are 3x or these just in the SW division for the boys for example.   Mediocrity persists and the level of play is very uneven,   yet year after year little changes at U15+ and the smaller clubs with competitive teams get shut out of getting any teams past this age. 

/rant on
He's a perfect example;  smaller club players bigger established club yesterday in DA:
The bigger established club is loosing the game and has a player sent off for a  2nd yellow card,  Coach of this established teams losses it and is sent off but refuses to leave so after a while the officials declare the game over due to opposing coaches behavior after only 30 minutes of play.  

Who losses in this situation?  all the players who trained for 4 days to play a 30 minute game.   At the end of the day nothing will happen to the established club/team and they will be back in DA next year after being in the bottom 3, getting smoked 6-0 their previous game, having  different players suspended for 4 out of the last 5 game, etc.   Really poor examples of conduct yet no repercussions so what does that say ?

There is very little oversight on clubs & teams and they pretty much act and do as they please picking  & choosing what they adhere to,  standards are not being applied across the board, some follow while others not so much.

A closed league that favors the establishment, those with more $$ /wo pro/regulation  or  standards enforcement is what DA has been/became . 

USSF should really blow up DA and start over and turn this over to a third party professional soccer management organization who can manage independently without all the insider influences,  they can't seen clearly through the clouds today.

/rant off

The high cost of DA is another topic but one of reasons there is not more teams and a desire to limit the number of groups playing.


----------



## USC (Mar 26, 2018)

lafalafa said:


> Why?   Primary reasons are $$$ money, the Establishment, and the lack of promotion and regulation.
> 
> The whole  "dilutes the talent argument" is a big smoke screen.
> 
> ...


Rant?   Nope, you are spot on!   The truth hurts, but only feelings that are getting hurt are the establishments.  

DA should be ran similar to CRL where you have to earn your right to play.   Giving Fusion academy status in U12 has to be the biggest joke, they had no B2007 team nor history of developing any kids!  How can a club earn DA status this way?  Please help me understand this.


----------



## will (Mar 26, 2018)

Let's have it clear. US Soccer has no clue about how to develop a player and for over 30 years they have been looking to the wrong examples, applying first the culture of politics and business rather than inserting the sport culture. In the other hand, mediocre coaches from Europe saw an opportunity and took advantage of the lack of soccer knowledge from the locals here. So today we have a mediocre system, with mediocre people in charge of National team and MLS academies, and mediocre parents that only stand up for "playing time" while keep buying the mediocre propaganda out of lack of knowledge. Look at San Diego as an example, in two major clubs we have Rec coaches making 65k per year to coach rec U9 teams while real coaches make 24k to coach academy. Parents buy this nonsense and then come here to complain, come on, demand quality from your DOC, demand professionalism from US Soccer!! Stop paying for playing at Academy, this is the top of mediocrity!!


----------



## mirage (Mar 26, 2018)

Lambchop said:


> And,,,, that is one reason our men's team does so poorly!!


How's that?  You may be correct but I see no relationship between fewer number of older DA teams and USMNT doing poorly.  There are nearly 80 older DA teams across the country, with total population of over 1600 players, if the roster is 20/team.  If we cannot find handful of talented players out of 1600+ players, then having more of the same will not make any difference.


----------



## TMJ (Mar 26, 2018)

Jace said:


> There is no "solution" imo. There are huge impediments at every level. We are slowly developing a soccer culture... coaches and soccer leaders will be replaced by more knowledgeable successors.... it will take many generations for change. Mainly... we need to learn... " dont do that...". Adults are the problem. Not the kid...
> 
> If you have a kid currently in soccer... it is what it is. Take it for what it is today and enjoy watching your kid play... but dont play for tomorrow....
> 
> ...


----------



## TMJ (Mar 26, 2018)

Agree...it'll be a slow crawl to get where many other countries are.  I see the DA as about the most/best training my teen can get and maybe better access to the college soccer pipeline.  Enjoy!  I'm gonna miss this so much in a few years


----------



## ray8 (Mar 26, 2018)

TMJ said:


> Agree...it'll be a slow crawl to get where many other countries are.  I see the DA as about the most/best training my teen can get and maybe better access to the college soccer pipeline.  Enjoy!  I'm gonna miss this so much in a few years


When the parents learn what soccer is really about things will change. Parents, the paying customers, don't know what soccer looks like, what it takes to be a soccer player, nor the difference between development and a sham. 
If and/or when our kids' kids play, I bet their dads will know what's what. And more importantly, they will know if their kid is really cut out to be a competitive soccer player, no matter what any pricey trainer or club tries to sell them.
So attention all dads. Don't blame anyone but yourselves. No magic development system will make up for our lack of soccer culture. This mess is a product of our ignorance. 
And vampires can't enter your home unless you invite them in.


----------



## Jace (Mar 27, 2018)

TMJ said:


> Agree...it'll be a slow crawl to get where many other countries are.  I see the DA as about the most/best training my teen can get and maybe better access to the college soccer pipeline.  Enjoy!  I'm gonna miss this so much in a few years


Pretty much our viewpoint. I watch my kid play... and im amazed what he does at his age. I was not near the athlete that he is... ever. I wonder if he had access to some of the training that is offered overseas... what could have been? We will never know... but he has endured some really crappy programs... and often an atmosphere that kills individual development.

Having said that... there is no future for a soccer player in US. The scholarships horrible... pro pay horrible (for most).

We have friends who we train with who were on US natl team other pretty successful players in own right. Those that did not focus outside of soccer are broke...


----------



## Eagle33 (Mar 28, 2018)

TMJ said:


> Agree...it'll be a slow crawl to get where many other countries are.  I see the DA as about the most/best training my teen can get and maybe better access to the college soccer pipeline.  Enjoy!  I'm gonna miss this so much in a few years


Don't get too excited about DA. Coaching can be really good or really bad, just like anywhere else including colleges. The whole problem with US soccer, it's based on favoritism and politics at all levels.


----------



## JJP (May 24, 2018)

From what I’ve seen of DA, the coaching is good but the talent identification sucks ass.  The coaches have their favorites, or players who have been in the organization for a long time that they are loyal to, and it blinds their judgment.  At some point they realize the kid is not going to work out but in the meantime the wrong player has taken playing time away from better talent.


----------



## mirage (May 24, 2018)

JJP said:


> From what I’ve seen of DA, the coaching is good but the talent identification sucks ass.  The coaches have their favorites, or players who have been in the organization for a long time that they are loyal to, and it blinds their judgment.  At some point they realize the kid is not going to work out but in the meantime the wrong player has taken playing time away from better talent.


Depends on the club.  I know at least 2 are like what you've stated and at least 3 that looks at the whole process as an open source for new talent each year right off the top of my head.

Those that have more open look are at the older ages, since there are limited number of clubs at U16+ and they feel they should attract the best.  Cannot comment one way or another for younger ages....


----------



## Paul Spacey (Jun 5, 2018)

Some fair points regarding athleticism and soccer IQ. 

One thing I would add (which might seem obvious) is that slower 12 year olds tend to remain that way and the ‘fast’ young kids generally remain the fastest. You can make incremental improvements through training but speed and athleticism is largely genetic.

There was a large scale study at pro academies (in Holland I believe) regarding speed and the fastest/slowest kids. Regardless of developmental age or growth spurts, the fast kids at young ages remained the fast kids when they were older. Same goes for the slower kids. Nothing much changes in that regard with age.

Soccer IQ and decision making should always be the absolute priority for every practice though IMO. The athletic side largely takes care of itself so we need to help nurture better decision makers and players who are self-sufficient learners, self-motivated and creative enough to compete with the top talent around the world.


----------



## MWN (Jun 6, 2018)

Paul Spacey said:


> Some fair points regarding athleticism and soccer IQ.
> 
> One thing I would add (which might seem obvious) is that slower 12 year olds tend to remain that way and the ‘fast’ young kids generally remain the fastest. You can make incremental improvements through training but speed and athleticism is largely genetic.
> 
> There was a large scale study at pro academies (in Holland I believe) regarding speed and the fastest/slowest kids. Regardless of developmental age or growth spurts, the fast kids at young ages remained the fast kids when they were older. Same goes for the slower kids. Nothing much changes in that regard with age.


I believe the research to date indicates that what you wrote for boys is generally true.  Puberty for boys tends to simply enhance athletic performance, shoulders widen and muscle mass increases.  The rich get richer.  

Girls are not-so-lucky.  Puberty causes the female skeleton to go through some negative changes from an athletic performance standpoint, the pelvis becomes wider, total bone density peaks, and the center of mass decreases (i.e. weight goes to hips).  The wider pelvis causes two problems (again, athletically speaking).  Speed declines because the hips widen, which also causes the legs/knees to rotate inward.  The fact that females have looser joints and the increased pressure on the ACL due to the rotation of the legs causes by the widening of the pelvis puts post-puberty female athletes are greater risk of non-contact knee injuries.

So yes for boys, but no for girls.


----------



## JJP (Jun 6, 2018)

MWN said:


> I believe the research to date indicates that what you wrote for boys is generally true.  Puberty for boys tends to simply enhance athletic performance, shoulders widen and muscle mass increases.  The rich get richer.
> 
> Girls are not-so-lucky.  Puberty causes the female skeleton to go through some negative changes from an athletic performance standpoint, the pelvis becomes wider, total bone density peaks, and the center of mass decreases (i.e. weight goes to hips).  The wider pelvis causes two problems (again, athletically speaking).  Speed declines because the hips widen, which also causes the legs/knees to rotate inward.  The fact that females have looser joints and the increased pressure on the ACL due to the rotation of the legs causes by the widening of the pelvis puts post-puberty female athletes are greater risk of non-contact knee injuries.
> 
> So yes for boys, but no for girls.


So you guys are saying the most athletic boys remain the most athletic boys after puberty.  Which accords with what I’ve seen.

But the most athletic girls are not the most athletic girls after puberty?


----------



## Jace (Jun 8, 2018)

hmm... so athleticism and maturity are not linked... and I guess Europe and US Soccer has it all wrong. I mean top European clubs have been implementing bio banding for some time now... but hey what do they know right?


----------



## MWN (Jun 8, 2018)

JJP said:


> So you guys are saying the most athletic boys remain the most athletic boys after puberty.  Which accords with what I’ve seen.
> 
> But the most athletic girls are not the most athletic girls after puberty?


The elite generally make it through, but about half are negatively impacted where performance drops.  Read this:
https://sportsday.dallasnews.com/high-school/sportsheadlines/2010/05/19/20100513-Track-skills-often-decline-as-girls-6083


----------



## JJP (Jun 8, 2018)

MWN said:


> The elite generally make it through, but about half are negatively impacted where performance drops.  Read this:
> https://sportsday.dallasnews.com/high-school/sportsheadlines/2010/05/19/20100513-Track-skills-often-decline-as-girls-6083


Great article and pretty much accords with what I’ve seen.  In my observations, the “elite” girl is one who either 1) is naturally low on female hormones and was always very slim hipped and slim breasted as a girl and after puberty, and/or 2) was exposed to a lot of male hormones in the womb during mom’s pregnancy which can happen for a number of reasons (male fraternal twin, mom has endometriosis and produces excess androgens), so she develops more like a man.

Otherwise the girls generally get worse as they mature.  If you read books by gymnasts and dancers, coaches try to delay puberty or lessen its effects by focusing on the girls weight, which has the effect of making the girls starve themselves.


----------



## cabcon (Jun 11, 2018)

Eagle33 said:


> I have to disagree on this statement. At 15 yo you don't know yet how big, strong or fast some of those boys will be. I will pick smart player any day over a track star. And you absolutely right, that's exactly how US Soccer thinks and that's why we can't make Olympics or a World Cup. We currently have great athletes with zero soccer IQ's.


I know this first hand, My kids evaluation was praised on IQ, speed, decision making and technical abilities. BUT his coach actually referenced his size as part of not having more playing time... TWICE! Just goes to show where the development is.


----------



## MWN (Jun 12, 2018)

cabcon said:


> I know this first hand, My kids evaluation was praised on IQ, speed, decision making and technical abilities. BUT his coach actually referenced his size as part of not having more playing time... TWICE! Just goes to show where the development is.


While it won't happen at the regular club level, US Soccer is exploring solutions to this problem.  There is no dispute that we are leaving some kids behind or the smaller kids are not getting a fair shake.  Your experience is not unique.  One response is the "bio-banding" experiment that attempts to place players into training and gaming teams based on their biological age.  Thus, an older smaller kid is playing with athletes of his same relative size.

My kid is on the opposite side of the spectrum.  A 2003 goalkeeper that is 6'2" (14 year old (U15s-->U16s)) that is now playing on a Flight 1 2001 team (2 years up) (16/17 year olds).  He has the opportunity to play up, which will aid his development, whereas, smaller (but older) kids don't have that opportunity to play down.


----------

