# Opinions?



## so cal (Oct 21, 2019)

https://www.thenation.com/article/us-soccer-latino-neglect/


----------



## myself (Oct 21, 2019)

It's more important to the good ol' boys club at US Soccer to make sure that they and their friends continue to be employed than have a good national team. Anyone don't believe me? Why is Berhalter still the coach despite the team performing worse than before he took the job? Isn't his brother high up in US Soccer??? Isn't Cordeiro buddy-buddy with Gulati?

Other federations are more corrupt than ours, but they at least have the benefit of having soccer be a national pastime, which means they'll have more  talent than they know what to do with.


----------



## dyzio03 (Oct 21, 2019)

Article is obviously and painfully spot on to anyone familiar with and knowledgeable about soccer in SoCal. To put it bluntly - there is more talent, passion and creativity in a Sunday youth league game in Santa Ana than in an official DA showcase match. Accessibility isn't just about pay-per-play. It's also about controlling the market and deciding which teams get to play (franchise model vs promotion/relegation). As long as soccer in the US continues to be more about protecting the commercial interests of the few rather than about growing the sport, we will lag behind.


----------



## Justus (Oct 22, 2019)

https://www.soccerwire.com/news/u-s-soccer-hosts-first-ever-girls-development-academy-directors-course/

"The candidates could learn as well from some of the most experienced individuals in European football: the *course included a trip to England* that allowed the *participants to absorb and interact *with representatives from both English clubs and the FA."

I would suggest a trip to Brazil, Argentina and maybe go to Mexico for a few days to absorb and interact with those clubs


----------



## dk_b (Oct 22, 2019)

so cal said:


> https://www.thenation.com/article/us-soccer-latino-neglect/


I really look forward to this article.  I have said for a while that there is a ton of youth talent in the Sunday park with kids playing against men and getting the shit kicked out of them while they dazzle with creativity and a knowledge of the game that is well beyond their years.  Up here in the Bay Area, go to parts of Richmond or San Jose or a number of places in between and you will see what you see in other areas where the soccer culture reigns supreme over the suburban sports culture.  

But let's not kid ourselves that it is easy to scout that talent without a certain level of sacrifice - you need a high volume at the younger ages and unless you have a "soft landing" as the numbers get smaller and smaller, you get kids who are discarded (I often think about how we don't really know about the 14yo Spanish or German or English star who peaks at 16 and then never plays again - in their systems, of course there are kids like that).  That said, I'd love to see US Soccer do the difficult work of actually going to where the talent is rather than relying on DA clubs (that may be prohibitive for any number of reasons - cost, geography, culture, home obligations) and then figuring out HOW to give opportunities to the kids who have been overlooked for decades.


----------



## justneededaname (Oct 22, 2019)

This is one place where I do have to give credit to Surf (San Diego). Their coaches are always at the Sunday leagues looking for players. And they give out a ton of scholarships to get those kids on their teams. From their U6 coach bringing his littles to the Sunday leagues to play, to their U15 DA coach when he was looking to rebuild this year. Their intentions are not altruistic. They are looking to build winning teams, so they can attract more paying suburban parents to their brand. But regardless, they are out there trying to find those gems.


----------



## Grace T. (Oct 22, 2019)

The reason it operates this way is because US club soccer is a business that is geared selling parents on college admissions and scholarships.  That's the market: upper middle class families looking to get their kids into college.  That's how the clubs make their money.  They won't reform because they want to protect their money stream (as any business would).

We don't have a system that creates professionals.  That's not the goal.  Future professionals are not the ones that the clubs are selling to.  Future professionals are not the ones the system is built for (otherwise, we wouldn't have kids waste 4 years of their prime development on the limited training they get in college, where the season isn't long enough, the training isn't robust enough, and the competition is strong enough to produce pros except on the girl's side, where the quality of the rest of the world has been lagging and which in the absence of competition from gridiron football tends to pull the best athletes).  

The MLS hasn't helped.  It's primary interest (as evidence by the latest entrance of Sacramento into the fold) is to keep the giant Ponzi scheme going.  Salaries, because of the caps, are not high enough to tempt upper middle class kids away from the college track or away from more lucrative sports opportunities.  And as the article points out, Latino working class kids with soccer dreams have other options like Liga MX without the barriers of having to work your way up the DA system.

Given the recent performance of our youngers national teams, we aren't doing too badly with the under 18s.  Where the drop off tends to occur is after age 20 because there is nothing in the system that bridges youth development into professionalism.  But the system was set up to nurture and protect the MLS, so that's what we are stuck with.


----------



## BigSoccer (Oct 22, 2019)

Justus said:


> https://www.soccerwire.com/news/u-s-soccer-hosts-first-ever-girls-development-academy-directors-course/
> 
> "The candidates could learn as well from some of the most experienced individuals in European football: the *course included a trip to England* that allowed the *participants to absorb and interact *with representatives from both English clubs and the FA."
> 
> I would suggest a trip to Brazil, Argentina and maybe go to Mexico for a few days to absorb and interact with those clubs


Not sure sending them to Mexico for training is the right place unless you are looking for them to learn how to not pay their players any salaries and how to deal with the on field protest that gave up two goals (Vera Cruz).  Learning how to remove a drug lords son from the stadium which caused fights and protests and ended up in 8 deaths (Dorado Sinoloa), controlling fan fighting where 37 people were injured with pipes and metal objects int the stands (San Luis v. Queretaro).   All just in about a weeks time.   Just saying Liga MX is not a tight ship right now.   Although El Chapo's son was at a second tier match so....


----------



## Justus (Oct 22, 2019)

BigSoccer said:


> Not sure sending them to Mexico for training is the right place unless you are looking for them to learn how to not pay their players any salaries and how to deal with the on field protest that gave up two goals (Vera Cruz).  Learning how to remove a drug lords son from the stadium which caused fights and protests and ended up in 8 deaths (Dorado Sinoloa), controlling fan fighting where 37 people were injured with pipes and metal objects int the stands (San Luis v. Queretaro).   All just in about a weeks time.   Just saying Liga MX is not a tight ship right now.   Although El Chapo's son was at a second tier match so....


Oh yes, very scary place to learn how to play the game as a youth.  Del Mar and Norco have their own challenges but not El Chapo


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Oct 22, 2019)

BigSoccer said:


> Not sure sending them to Mexico for training is the right place unless you are looking for them to learn how to not pay their players any salaries and how to deal with the on field protest that gave up two goals (Vera Cruz).  Learning how to remove a drug lords son from the stadium which caused fights and protests and ended up in 8 deaths (Dorado Sinoloa), controlling fan fighting where 37 people were injured with pipes and metal objects int the stands (San Luis v. Queretaro).   All just in about a weeks time.   Just saying Liga MX is not a tight ship right now.   Although El Chapo's son was at a second tier match so....


Build that wall.


----------



## Justus (Oct 22, 2019)

Sheriff Joe said:


> Build that wall.


Sorry Joe, that's not my fight here at the SoCal Soccer Forum.  I suggest you write Fox News and their competition CNN and tell them your complaint.  Right now, I'm trying to find out why USSF has no Latinos on the Task force except their brother Landon.  We need more Latin blood Sheriff in the USSF


----------



## CopaMundial (Oct 22, 2019)

justneededaname said:


> This is one place where I do have to give credit to Surf (San Diego). Their coaches are always at the Sunday leagues looking for players. And they give out a ton of scholarships to get those kids on their teams. From their U6 coach bringing his littles to the Sunday leagues to play, to their U15 DA coach when he was looking to rebuild this year. Their intentions are not altruistic. They are looking to build winning teams, so they can attract more paying suburban parents to their brand. But regardless, they are out there trying to find those gems.


That's on the boys side. On girls side, Surf got hella lucky with Macario showing up and having a Brazilian family on the team to make her feel comfortable. Made for easy transition. Now Surf touts, "homegrown or developedhere". Which I love homegrown players, but those talents aren't accurate if they show up at 13, are they?

As for boys, it's much easier for coaches to recruit out of Mexican and Sunday Leagues, but there are a handful of girls that play and they will never get recruited to club. Some are not so good, but some are amazing. Either way, they will be overlooked. For girls, you have to play club and conform. The game, as is the politics.


----------



## oh canada (Oct 23, 2019)

Article is spot on.  Could write the same about the girls too.  Not only does US Soccer insist you play at their academies, but they also require you to play their 4-3-3 formation, practice in their methods exclusively, not play any outside soccer or futsal, not play any other sports, etc.  Surprised they don't yet have a requirement stating that you can only watch MLS.  Any creative players coming into the DA system are quickly coached out of it by men who think Chipotle is authentic Mexican food. Here's to the future vanilla cookie=cutter players coming to a stadium near you.

You want to see diversity?  Take a look at Canada's...

https://www.canadasoccer.com/men-s-national-team-p144311#CANMNT   (scroll down after clicking)


----------



## El Clasico (Oct 23, 2019)

justneededaname said:


> This is one place where I do have to give credit to Surf (San Diego). Their coaches are always at the Sunday leagues looking for players. And they give out a ton of scholarships to get those kids on their teams. From their U6 coach bringing his littles to the Sunday leagues to play, to their U15 DA coach when he was looking to rebuild this year. Their intentions are not altruistic. They are looking to build winning teams, so they can attract more paying suburban parents to their brand. But regardless, they are out there trying to find those gems.


So that I understand you correctly. When they needed to rebuild their U15 DA team this year, rather than pull from their DPL team, or their 40 other teams that wear the Surf Jersey who they have been "developing and grooming" on their "pathway" for this opportunity, they went looking for talent at the Sunday leagues?? Most of which learned how to play only by playing or with the guidance of a parent coach, likely with no coaching license at all. Anybody else see a problem here?  And we wonder why we can't get our sh*t together on the field.  With Surf (and others) gobbling up all the smaller clubs to grow their business, they soon will run out of places to look for talent because they aren't finding it within.


----------



## Grace T. (Oct 23, 2019)

oh canada said:


> You want to see diversity?  Take a look at Canada's...
> 
> https://www.canadasoccer.com/men-s-national-team-p144311#CANMNT   (scroll down after clicking)


Canada's men's team is more diverse because it's middle class is more diverse (a legacy of the Empire and US slavery)...also they have a similar issue to a competing sport (hockey) except because it's more expense than soccer hockey tends to pull the white kids....in the US the African American community has deep roots in gridiron football and since it's a route to college scholarships you have the pull there.

There are two questions: why did we lose to Canada, and why with such a large soccer base can't we compete with the premiere socer powers.  They are two separate questions, a short term and a long term problem.  We lost to Canada for 2 main reasons: 1. because the USMNT is being asked to play a complicated possession style game with set pieces they weren't brought up playing and haven't had enough time together to practice, and 2. the USMNT with anchor starters having or aging out and new anchors like Pulisic underperforming is a team still in transition.  Look at 2 of the key roles (both of whom qualify as "diverse").  At striker, one of our options is Zardes, who has had a rocky career leading to his ultimately being dropped by the Galaxy, is a bit of a one trick wonder striker lacking creative play and basically playing for opportunities to score, and has no business playing on the international stage.  The only reason he's on the USMNT is because he knows the system, and that's why he's been brought on.  His best performance to date was a Scott Sterling moment.  Or look at our keeper, Steffen, who is not what we would call a sweeper keeper, and primarily was been asked to play on his line by his home club.  Steffen has been caught numerous times out of position in order to support the attacking play and doesn't have a whole lot of experience building from the back and is still very young to boot.

The long term problem is just simply why aren't we better.  The answer to that is college ball and that we don't have a bridge from youth to professional soccer, and the best we have for professionalism is the MLS.  In fact, Canada and the US have the same problem when it comes to the MLS.  Canada has slightly more players playing in Europe and Latin America.  Their looser immigration and tax systems probably help with that.  But the Canadian football association has complained, and recently published a discussion paper, that they are living under the MLS's shadow.  They want to be structured like small nations like Croatia or Iceland, with academies in their major cities, but can't because the MLS dominates their academy systems and many of their players are locked in to pay to play clubs chasing US and Canadian college opportunities.  Some Canadians are advocating the creation of a Canada only league, but with the MLS already in place, it's almost impossible to do.


----------



## Chalklines (Oct 23, 2019)

Justus said:


> Oh yes, very scary place to learn how to play the game as a youth.  Del Mar and Norco have their own challenges but not El Chapo


Would rather deal with El Chapo then some of these parents.


----------



## oh canada (Oct 23, 2019)

Grace T. said:


> Canada's men's team is more diverse because it's middle class is more diverse (a legacy of the Empire and US slavery)...also they have a similar issue to a competing sport (hockey) except because it's more expense than soccer hockey tends to pull the white kids....in the US the African American community has deep roots in gridiron football and since it's a route to college scholarships you have the pull there.
> 
> There are two questions: why did we lose to Canada, and why with such a large soccer base can't we compete with the premiere socer powers.  They are two separate questions, a short term and a long term problem.  We lost to Canada for 2 main reasons: 1. because the USMNT is being asked to play a complicated possession style game with set pieces they weren't brought up playing and haven't had enough time together to practice, and 2. the USMNT with anchor starters having or aging out and new anchors like Pulisic underperforming is a team still in transition.  Look at 2 of the key roles (both of whom qualify as "diverse").  At striker, one of our options is Zardes, who has had a rocky career leading to his ultimately being dropped by the Galaxy, is a bit of a one trick wonder striker lacking creative play and basically playing for opportunities to score, and has no business playing on the international stage.  The only reason he's on the USMNT is because he knows the system, and that's why he's been brought on.  His best performance to date was a Scott Sterling moment.  Or look at our keeper, Steffen, who is not what we would call a sweeper keeper, and primarily was been asked to play on his line by his home club.  Steffen has been caught numerous times out of position in order to support the attacking play and doesn't have a whole lot of experience building from the back and is still very young to boot.
> 
> The long term problem is just simply why aren't we better.  The answer to that is college ball and that we don't have a bridge from youth to professional soccer, and the best we have for professionalism is the MLS.  In fact, Canada and the US have the same problem when it comes to the MLS.  Canada has slightly more players playing in Europe and Latin America.  Their looser immigration and tax systems probably help with that.  But the Canadian football association has complained, and recently published a discussion paper, that they are living under the MLS's shadow.  They want to be structured like small nations like Croatia or Iceland, with academies in their major cities, but can't because the MLS dominates their academy systems and many of their players are locked in to pay to play clubs chasing US and Canadian college opportunities.  Some Canadians are advocating the creation of a Canada only league, but with the MLS already in place, it's almost impossible to do.


You seem to know a lot about Canadian soccer?  Agree with some of the above, but let me help with a couple.  First, Canada was no slavery saint.  For 200 years, slave owning was widespread in the colonies and despite it becoming the last stop on the underground railroad, slavery in Canada was banned only 30 years prior to Lincoln's Emancipation Proclamation.  So I don't buy your history reason for the diversity of Canada's soccer program now.  

Second, It is true that hockey is a white sport in Canada, but the Canadian Football Federation has put forth diversity efforts for several years now and that is beginning to show.  US Soccer has not.  A commitment to futsal has also helped as it is an indoor sport and one that can be played at school gymnasiums in urban (read diverse) areas throughout the country, then becoming a pipeline to the outdoor game.  Does US even have a futsal team?  Canada is 73% white (US is 78%), so statistically there is not much of a difference.  But if you look at actual numbers of minorities playing soccer in US (actual headcount), there are millions more to choose from, if you desire.

U.S. Soccer’s current dominion over soccer arose after Congress passed the Amateur Sports Act in 1978. The law allows the United States Olympic Committee to designate a “national governing body” with exclusive oversight rights for every sport that participates in the Olympics. This makes sense for some sports: It’s one thing for the federal government to turn over sole governance rights for sports with limited participants, followers and financial prospects. But such a regime is inapt for soccer, the world’s most popular and lucrative sport. Soccer is “amateur” in name only, and it is too important a sport, particularly for women and other minorities, for Congress to hand off to an organization immune from both competition and meaningful government oversight—not to mention, one dominated by men.  That is the problem.


----------



## justneededaname (Oct 23, 2019)

El Clasico said:


> So that I understand you correctly. When they needed to rebuild their U15 DA team this year, rather than pull from their DPL team, or their 40 other teams that wear the Surf Jersey who they have been "developing and grooming" on their "pathway" for this opportunity, they went looking for talent at the Sunday leagues??


Yes. Truth hurts. If any of those kids were good enough for the DA they would have been on the DA years previously. Parents on B-D teams need to realize they are just paying the bills. 



El Clasico said:


> Most of which learned how to play only by playing or with the guidance of a parent coach, likely with no coaching license at all. Anybody else see a problem here?.


I don't know how it works in LA, but in San Diego, almost all of the kids playing in the City Heights  and Vista Sunday leagues play on club teams (Chula Vista, Rebels, Atlante, Hotspurs, etc). The nice thing about the Sunday league is they are all in one place at one time so it is easy to scout them.


----------



## foreveryoung (Oct 23, 2019)

justneededaname said:


> Yes. Truth hurts. If any of those kids were good enough for the DA they would have been on the DA years previously. Parents on B-D teams need to realize they are just paying the bills.


This assumes that Surf are perfect at talent identification.  They may have players in their club with better long term potential but overlook them for what can help them just win games at the U15 level.  Another short-sighted strategy that plagues our youth development system.


----------



## Grace T. (Oct 23, 2019)

oh canada said:


> Second, It is true that hockey is a white sport in Canada, but the Canadian Football Federation has put forth diversity efforts for several years now and that is beginning to show.  US Soccer has not.  A commitment to futsal has also helped as it is an indoor sport and one that can be played at school gymnasiums in urban (read diverse) areas throughout the country, then becoming a pipeline to the outdoor game.  Does US even have a futsal team?  Canada is 73% white (US is 78%), so statistically there is not much of a difference.  But if you look at actual numbers of minorities playing soccer in US (actual headcount), there are millions more to choose from, if you desire.
> 
> .


Don't know too much about your last point so I'll pass on it.  Don't get me wrong...I do think that diversity is an issue with recruiting the best talent....my son plays on a team currently that is split 50% minority and 50% white so I get to see the issues first hand (though having a policy of not writing about my son's current team, I can't really get into it).  But I will say: 1) the issue of being pay to play as a barrier to Latino involvement is vastly overstated....there are plenty of Latinos playing club ball and various organizations (including our dear friend Luis') that cater to this particular community, but 2) in hitting the higher levels there is definitely a financial barrier since you are competing with kids that can afford camps and trainers, and pay for the tournaments, driving and intermediate costs it takes to get up to those levels, so you have to be all the more talented to get there.  Getting the kids to and from soccer practice (finding someone to drive if both parents work, or having a reliable vehicle) is much more of an obstacle than club fees, particularly as you get into the higher levels where driving distances increase away from local community-based clubs.  In the African American community, particularly in the south, gridiron football is still dominant, and there are simply more college scholarship opportunities in gridiron football than men's soccer to make a significant dent there.  I agree the US could benefit from an increase diversity scouting problem, but that's not the main driver of the problem.  Middle class white boys can play soccer too (see Iceland) and we should have enough of them to make a dominant USMNT...but yes I also agree it would be nice if the team was diverse (it's just not the heart of the problem for why the US fails).

I love futsal, and you are right that futsal works in Canada because of the cold weather.  Yes, we do have a futsal national team.  Our local big club recently asked our school board to convert a tennis court into a futsal court in middle school.  They sold it as the kids could use it in school too and they'd pick up most of the cost in return for preferential rentals.  That club is pretty much the only one that uses it (and then only if it rains....particularly useful during tryout season).  The futsal court is too far to the outside of the campus to be used by middle schoolers during recess (given the chaperone problem).  In Spain, most of their free play is on futsal courts (but that leads to issues in Spain's game such as goalkeepers using their feet too much to block and other teams countering their possession soccer with pressing and long ball games....Spain's recent struggles can be traced back to futsal right now, at least in part).  Futsal is great for developing passing, game IQ, and speed of play.  It should be part of our formula, but again it's not the heart of the problem.


----------



## justneededaname (Oct 23, 2019)

foreveryoung said:


> This assumes that Surf are perfect at talent identification.  They may have players in their club with better long term potential but overlook them for what can help them just win games at the U15 level.  Another short-sighted strategy that plagues our youth development system.


I disagree. I do not think the B through whatever teams at the big clubs (it is not just Surf) are loaded with undiscovered talent. They are loaded with kids that love soccer. They are loaded with parents that think their kid is an undiscovered talent. The "undiscovered" talent is on smaller (ie: cheaper) club teams, and a lot of people at the big clubs know who they are, just for whatever reason (cost, ability to get players to training, parents preferring the community of their current team, pressure from their existing club not to abandon their team) they have not moved to the big club.

I think the problem with our youth development system in not identifying the talent. It is what is done to train and nurture that talent.

Another problem is that many of the would be diamonds are playing basketball and have never set foot on a soccer field. But that is a different discussion.


----------



## MWN (Oct 23, 2019)

so cal said:


> https://www.thenation.com/article/us-soccer-latino-neglect/


My opinion (_actually its not an opinion but fact_) is the article completely misses the elephant in the room and takes a turn down an easy lane of bias.  Can we all agree that the world revolves around money?  Club soccer is not immune.  Money, money, money.  The MLS is in business to make money.  The players at the professional level all want money.  Even the vast majority of "Clubs" need money to pay for fields, coaches, refs, etc.

Why doesn't the clubs or MLS teams invest millions of dollars to go find these diamonds in the rough?  Bias?  NO!!!!  White coaches with English accents?  NO!!!!  Its money, or lack thereof.

This author and many of you need to appreciate that this is a simple economic problem.  In the United States of America we have yet to adopt FIFA's "Training and Solidarity Payments."  We have stripped the financial incentive out of prospective development.  The only incentive an MLS team has is they get to label the player a "homegrown player" skipping the draft and receiving some salary cap relief.  Without making training and solidarity payments we (the US of A) put ourselves at a serious disadvantage to the rest of the world. 

Its stupid and the author is stupid ignorant for not appreciating this fundamentally basic fact.  There is no financial incentive to reach into the barrio or ghetto or countryside or anyplace else to find these diamonds because there is no freaking money to be made.

Sorry, if I'm come off as a bit short tempered, but its absolutely criminal that we have so-called experts writing about why we are not "investing in youth talent" to be competitive to the rest of the world and none understand that the fundamental economic concept of "investing" requires a "return on investment."  We have stripped virtually all incentive away to invest.

Give the clubs an incentive to invest and they will, because it all comes down to money.


----------



## oh canada (Oct 23, 2019)

Grace T. said:


> Getting the kids to and from soccer practice (finding someone to drive if both parents work, or having a reliable vehicle) is much more of an obstacle than club fees, particularly as you get into the higher levels where driving distances increase away from local community-based clubs.


We're on the same page.  Wanted to especially highlight the above quote as I completely agree that soccer is unique in this regard and it's a complete discriminator in favor of middle/upper class (mostly white) families who have one parent either not working, working part-time, or working from home, who can drive kids 3-5x/week to their club requirements (and usually sit, hover and watch every practice).  If you live 20 miles + away from a US Soccer DA club (which US Soccer says you must play at), that's a 60-90 minute round trip commute at least with SoCal traffic, usually before typical work day end of 5pm.  (btw, at $4.25/gallon of gas, add another $100/week or $5K/year in cost.)  Not like a kid can hop on a bus/subway and commute on his/her own in SoCal like many of the inner-city athletes do back east.  So, totally agree, commute is a bigger turnoff than cost even.

 Kids who want to play basketball can play and train in the neighborhood and play at their neighborhood school (no driving necessary); kids who want to practice baseball, same....football, same...track/cross country, same.  With its 4x/week practice requirements, ban on high school soccer, and pay-for-play network of clubs, US Soccer is the most discriminatory "big" sport in the USA and US Soccer doesn't care, even with its men's team nosediving into irrelevance.  And girls watch out...US Soccer's DA project is ruining the men's program.  Why should the effect on the female's side be any different?


----------



## justneededaname (Oct 23, 2019)

oh canada said:


> Kids who want to play basketball can play and train in the neighborhood


Not at the highest level. At the highest level there is as much, if not more, travel and cost in basketball than in soccer. If you think poor inner-city kids are getting to the top of basketball by only playing in the neighborhood, you are buying into a myth.

Take Zion Williamson for example. "He competed in youth leagues and played for the Sumter Falcons on the Amateur Athletic Union (AAU) circuit." (his wikipedia page) Playing on the AAU circuit can cost up to $4000 a summer. It involves an insane amount of travel. But that is where the best of the best learn their trade and are identified by college and pro scouts.

For one of my children, the nearest flight one basketball team is at least a 30 minute drive from where I live. I have not looked into an AAU team yet, because, well, I don't want to deal with the costs (that and while he loves basketball, I know won't make it).

As for the high school aspect of it ... anecdotally, I know the basketball players face similar pressures. At the last tournament, I "listened in" on four high school players having a conversation about how to deal with their high school coach not wanting them to play AAU and their AAU coach not wanting them to play high school.


----------



## oh canada (Oct 23, 2019)

justneededaname said:


> Not at the highest level. At the highest level there is as much, if not more, travel and cost in basketball than in soccer. If you think poor inner-city kids are getting to the top of basketball by only playing in the neighborhood, you are buying into a myth.
> 
> Take Zion Williamson for example. "He competed in youth leagues and played for the Sumter Falcons on the Amateur Athletic Union (AAU) circuit." (his wikipedia page) Playing on the AAU circuit can cost up to $4000 a summer. It involves an insane amount of travel. But that is where the best of the best learn their trade and are identified by college and pro scouts.
> 
> ...


All true, but 99% of the top basketball players can and still are playing for their high schools.  HS coaches are still viewed as better skill, technique and situational coaches than AAU coaches.  And, winning city, state and regional basketball competitions still carries weight in the BB world, especially NY, LA and DMV.  Plus, it's not US Basketball threatening the removal of local opportunities via high school.  It's the shoe companies.


----------



## watfly (Oct 23, 2019)

Grace T. said:


> 1) the issue of being pay to play as a barrier to Latino involvement is vastly overstated....there are plenty of Latinos playing club ball and various organizations (including our dear friend Luis') that cater to this particular community, but 2) in hitting the higher levels there is definitely a financial barrier since you are competing with kids that can afford camps and trainers, and pay for the tournaments, driving and intermediate costs it takes to get up to those levels, so you have to be all the more talented to get there.  Getting the kids to and from soccer practice (finding someone to drive if both parents work, or having a reliable vehicle) is much more of an obstacle than club fees, particularly as you get into the higher levels where driving distances increase away from local community-based clubs.


100%.  From what I've seen there are plenty of scholarships for talented Latino kids in Southern California.  Most top teams in Socal are loaded with Latino kids, many from lower income families.  As you say, the bigger hurdles are transportation and parents schedules which impacts these kids' ability to attend practice on a consistent basis.

I do find it curious that there aren't more Latinos on the MNT, considering how their numbers dominate Socal Soccer.  Do I think having more Latinos would make a significant improvement to our MNT, no not necessarily.  That's not to slight Latinos, but a condemnation of US Soccer's fundamentally flawed operation and development of the National Teams.


----------



## MWN (Oct 23, 2019)

I disagree.



oh canada said:


> US Soccer doesn't care, even with its men's team nosediving into irrelevance.  And girls watch out...US Soccer's DA project is ruining the men's program.  Why should the effect on the female's side be any different?


The DA League was created over 10 years ago because US Soccer understood it has a major problem, which is:

The Professional Leagues (MLS and USL) have substandard training and economics model.
The Professional Leagues (MLS and USL) lacks effective youth training academies.
The Professional Leagues (MLS and USL) have no financial incentive to invest in youth players because of the lack of Solidarity and Training compensation, which the Players selfishly oppose.
Because the rest of the developed soccer world doesn't have 1, 2 or 3 holding player development back, the DA was created in an attempt to jump start higher level youth development.  Its not a "silver bullet" because of 1 and 2 above. 

US Soccer has now realized that the MLS and USL are not capable of fixing this, as a result, the push is now to pave the way for players to exit the US as quickly as possible.  Unfortunately, on this front US Soccer doesn't have any weight because of Article 19.  We are in a catch-22 for men.  The rest of the world with their more fully developed professional and youth academies have kids go pro at age 15/16.  Our 16 year olds are stuck on some U17 team playing with good (but not elite) cannon fodder.  By the time our kids reach 18, they are already 2-4 years behind the development curve.

This is not a DA problem per se, but the reality of have a system that contains no monetary incentives.

The DA has never been the problem because its simply a league created to fix a deeper problem (lack of financial incentive to develop youth players).  The problem is the MLS and the Players Association that fights against Solidarity and Training Fees.  The good news is that US Soccer is no longer standing in the way like it did under Klinsman, see, https://the18.com/soccer-news/jurgen-klinsmann-mls-criticism and https://ftw.usatoday.com/2019/01/miguel-almiron-sebastian-giovinco-luciano-acosta

The other good news is the MLS is "FINALLY" getting it: https://www.goal.com/en-us/news/mls-commissioner-garber-we-need-to-become-a-selling-league/1t0nqp9ilsaay16bud5gjjajfl

Once the MLS and US Soccer go to war with the Players then things will change.

With regard to you other question "why should the effect on the female's side be any different?"  The short answer is the economics of the men's game and the female game internationally are vast distances apart.  There is little to no money in women's professional soccer, so aside from a few European leagues, the U.S. College system remains the best post youth development system for women at this time.  European academies (subsidized by the men's programs) are starting to make inroads.

The DA, ECNL, NPL, etc. exist to showcase female talent for college.   So, in a nutshell, the proper path for International grade (i.e. potentially help us win a world cup) is:

Boys/Mens Path = Youth (DA/ODP/NPL) --> Professional Academy @ 16/17 --> Pro Team --> USMNT
Girls/Women's Path = Youth (DA/ECNL) --> College -- Semi-Pro Team (NWSL) -- USWNT

... and let me add that its all Pay-To-Play because there is no financial incentive for the Youth and Professional Academy (unless, that Professional Academy is outside the US).


----------



## MWN (Oct 23, 2019)

Out of curiosity, how many of you are aware of:

https://alianzadefutbol.com/

Heard of David Zavala? (https://alianzadefutbol.com/en/undiscovered-hispanic-youth-soccer-player-receives-21-professional-invitations-at-the-allstate-sueno-alianza-national-showcase/)

Should US Soccer and the MLS continue to support and attend this type of tournament or try to take it over?


----------



## oh canada (Oct 23, 2019)

MWN said:


> I disagree.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Yes.  This is why I tell my friends with young soccer boys who "want to go pro" that they should start googling a European city that they want to move to.  

My point about the effect on the female side was more re player development.  I can't yet id a male impact player that came through the DA system (10+ years in operation and running).  So why should the expectation be any different for developing girls under the DA iron grip?  Who's to say that girls not running track wouldn't be faster and better soccer players because of it...or girls playing high school basketball become better headers of the ball in their soccer pursuits...or girls playing high school soccer become better because they play a different position?  Or girls don't burn out because they're practicing 3x/week instead of 4x.  Big brother U.S. Soccer can't know what's best for all kids, especially minorities when they don't have that representation within their own ranks.  These decisions should be left to families and the local club/high school coaches and trainers of that player, and other mentors in their communities.  But US soccer wants us all to believe they know best for all and expect compliance or else face consequences (e.g., youth national team disqualifications).  Can you imagine if USA Basketball said all high school kids must play AAU and cannot play for their schools...and dictated to all the AAU clubs that they must  practice 4x/week...and play a man-to-man defense only...and can only sub 3 players!?  And, US Soccer has the gall to make these demands without a proven track record of success (on the men's side at least).  

When you really stop and reflect about how invasive US Soccer policies are on family decisions, it should be offensive to all moms and dads.  Yep, youth soccer participation is falling dramatically and diversity is lacking.  Is anyone really surprised?


----------



## Emma (Oct 23, 2019)

oh canada said:


> Yes.  This is why I tell my friends with young soccer boys who "want to go pro" that they should start googling a European city that they want to move to.
> 
> My point about the effect on the female side was more re player development.  I can't yet id a male impact player that came through the DA system (10+ years in operation and running).  So why should the expectation be any different for developing girls under the DA iron grip?  Who's to say that girls not running track wouldn't be faster and better soccer players because of it...or girls playing high school basketball become better headers of the ball in their soccer pursuits...or girls playing high school soccer become better because they play a different position?  Or girls don't burn out because they're practicing 3x/week instead of 4x.  Big brother U.S. Soccer can't know what's best for all kids, especially minorities when they don't have that representation within their own ranks.  These decisions should be left to families and the local club/high school coaches and trainers of that player, and other mentors in their communities.  But US soccer wants us all to believe they know best for all and expect compliance or else face consequences (e.g., youth national team disqualifications).  Can you imagine if USA Basketball said all high school kids must play AAU and cannot play for their schools...and dictated to all the AAU clubs that they must  practice 4x/week...and play a man-to-man defense only...and can only sub 3 players!?  And, US Soccer has the gall to make these demands without a proven track record of success (on the men's side at least).
> 
> When you really stop and reflect about how invasive US Soccer policies are on family decisions, it should be offensive to all moms and dads.  Yep, youth soccer participation is falling dramatically and diversity is lacking.  Is anyone really surprised?


I'm not going to look it up but two comes off the top of my head - Weston McKennie and Christian Pulisic both came thru the DA system.


----------



## MWN (Oct 23, 2019)

oh canada said:


> Yes.  This is why I tell my friends with young soccer boys who "want to go pro" that they should start googling a European city that they want to move to.
> 
> My point about the effect on the female side was more re player development.  I can't yet id a male impact player that came through the DA system (10+ years in operation and running).  So why should the expectation be any different for developing girls under the DA iron grip?  Who's to say that girls not running track wouldn't be faster and better soccer players because of it...or girls playing high school basketball become better headers of the ball in their soccer pursuits...or girls playing high school soccer become better because they play a different position?  Or girls don't burn out because they're practicing 3x/week instead of 4x.  Big brother U.S. Soccer can't know what's best for all kids, especially minorities when they don't have that representation within their own ranks.  These decisions should be left to families and the local club/high school coaches and trainers of that player, and other mentors in their communities.  But US soccer wants us all to believe they know best for all and expect compliance or else face consequences (e.g., youth national team disqualifications).  Can you imagine if USA Basketball said all high school kids must play AAU and cannot play for their schools...and dictated to all the AAU clubs that they must  practice 4x/week...and play a man-to-man defense only...and can only sub 3 players!?  And, US Soccer has the gall to make these demands without a proven track record of success (on the men's side at least).
> 
> When you really stop and reflect about how invasive US Soccer policies are on family decisions, it should be offensive to all moms and dads.  Yep, youth soccer participation is falling dramatically and diversity is lacking.  Is anyone really surprised?


To place any blame on the DA means you don't fully appreciate how professional development is supposed to work.  On the men's side professional international players leave the youth system and join the professional academies at 15/16.  These now 16 and 17 year olds are training next to the field the First Team is training on, using the same facilities as Messi, Ronoldo, etc.  They eat, drink and sleep soccer in a residential environment.  In the US, only a few MLS team have anything that approaches this.  The DA was never intended to be a professional system, like the youth academies in Europe, this is for the MLS teams to implement.  Professional quality development is within the sole domain of the professional teams.  The DA was always intended to be a stop gap measure while the MLS teams worked on profitability.

You asked about "Male Impact Players" with US DA pedigree: Christian Pulisic (*2008–2015* PA Classics), short stint at IMG's USYNT program then off the Europe at 17; Tyler Adams (New York Red Bulls Development Academy - Turned pro at 16, skipped college, now in Europe; and same can be said for Josh Sargent DA --> US Residential Academy at IMG --> Europe.  These players are all young and will come in their own as impact players when they reach their peak (age 26-27).

Note, the DA was formed a little over 10 years ago.  Most the 26+ aged generation of US Soccer players never had an opportunity to go through the program because they were already 17/18.  The younger generation has (e.g. Pulisic, Adams, Sargent, W.McKinnie (FC Dallas), etc.), and the younger generation has forgone their "Homegrown Player" contracts and high-tailed it to Europe for "*real, professional, development.*"

The DA is just a league that local clubs participate in, putting their "best" players on a Team to play with and against sub-par players that would never get sniffed at for a professional contract.  Contrast that to  Europe where the best play with, and against the best.  The training, education, and food are all paid for by an professional club that treats them as an investment (lottery ticket).

Edit: my ultimate point is that the DA has very little impact with the USMNT, its too far removed.


----------



## justneededaname (Oct 23, 2019)

oh canada said:


> but 99% of the top basketball players can and still are playing for their high schools.


By "their" I am going to guess you mean the public high school to which they are assigned based on their home address. While I have no data to support this, I expect this number is actually significantly smaller. Zion, for example, is from North Carolina. He went to a private high school in South Carolina (I expect they have a great basketball program).

If you look at the top basketball 10 prospects on 24/7 sports (https://247sports.com/Season/2020-Basketball/CompositeRecruitRankings/?InstitutionGroup=HighSchool), nine of them go to private schools and one goes to a public school (that is definitely not in the inner-city). One goes to a private school, Prolific Prep, that sounds like the basketball equivalent of the Barca Academy.


----------



## espola (Oct 23, 2019)

Emma said:


> I'm not going to look it up but two comes off the top of my head - Weston McKennie and Christian Pulisic both came thru the DA system.


Came up through?  McKennie spent his formative adolescent years in Germany and Pulisic is from a family of soccer players and likely would have been international material without the existence of DA.


----------



## Emma (Oct 23, 2019)

espola said:


> Came up through?  McKennie spent his formative adolescent years in Germany and Pulisic is from a family of soccer players and likely would have been international material without the existence of DA.


With any program, the program shouldn't get full credit bc the family and individual play a large part.  Oh Canada said there were no players that came through there.  According to Wikipedia, Pulisic was at a DA club from 08-15 and McKennie was at FC Dallas (A DA club) 09-16.  Those are a significant amount of years.  You made me look it up even though I said I wouldn't.  Thanks Espola.


----------



## espola (Oct 23, 2019)

Emma said:


> With any program, the program shouldn't get full credit bc the family and individual play a large part.  Oh Canada said there were no players that came through there.  According to Wikipedia, Pulisic was at a DA club from 08-15 and McKennie was at FC Dallas (A DA club) 09-16.  Those are a significant amount of years.  You made me look it up even though I said I wouldn't.  Thanks Espola.


Since USSF has declared DA to be the top youth program, they get full credit for any young diamonds whether their program made any difference in their development or not.  Both players cited had unusual development routes connected with play in Europe.  Their presence in DA programs is coincidental.


----------



## MarkM (Oct 23, 2019)

Emma said:


> I'm not going to look it up but two comes off the top of my head - Weston McKennie and Christian Pulisic both came thru the DA system.


Tyler Adams and Josh Sargent too.


----------



## MarkM (Oct 23, 2019)

espola said:


> Came up through?  McKennie spent his formative adolescent years in Germany and Pulisic is from a family of soccer players and likely would have been international material without the existence of DA.


Formative adolescent years are from ages 6 to 8 years old?  Huh?  That's when he developed?


----------



## MWN (Oct 23, 2019)

espola said:


> Came up through?  McKennie spent his formative adolescent years in Germany and Pulisic is from a family of soccer players and likely would have been international material without the existence of DA.


Logic doesn't work.  McKennie's so-called-formative years was from age 6-9 playing little kid soccer.  His formative years were at FC Dallas.  Pulisic would not have developed further without an opportunity to hone his skills in the DA.  That said, both McKennie and Pulisic's "real development" occurred once outside of the US playing/training in professional youth academies, which we simply don't have in the U.S. and will never have until Training and Solidarity Payments are allowed and financial incentives created.


----------



## MarkM (Oct 23, 2019)

espola said:


> Since USSF has declared DA to be the top youth program, they get full credit for any young diamonds whether their program made any difference in their development or not.  Both players cited had unusual development routes connected with play in Europe.  Their presence in DA programs is coincidental.


I guess if someone stood on European soil from ages 6 to 8, that deserves full credit for soccer development.  Makes sense.


----------



## MWN (Oct 23, 2019)

... and for the record, this all comes full circle to a major point the article missed.  Without professional academies that have financial incentives to invest tens of thousands of dollars training players, the less wealthy kids will be left on the sideline.  There isn't a single MLS team out there that would look at an immigrant kid and say ... "nope, too brown."  The reality is our system is and will remain "Pay-To-Play" because that is how the MLS Players (union) wants it, until we can give MLS teams a genuine incentive to invest in players, the only money at the table belongs to the parents of little Jimmy and Jenny.


----------



## justneededaname (Oct 23, 2019)

While I do not think the DA has been the disaster that some other people do, I believe the DA has outlived its usefulness and should be disbanded.

At u13 and 14 MLS academies can play in flight one of their local competitive league. At U15 and above they can have their own league. If they feel they need a few more teams to round things out then they can invite the teams that they want to join.

On the boys side the existing national championship series and tournament system can fill in the gaps for college recruiting. On the girls side ECNL was doing just fine and can go back to doing just fine.

With that system I doubt we will have any more or any fewer diamonds identified, but at least we would have one less boogeyman to point the blame at.

The things I think would make the biggest difference:

 - Solidarity payments to all clubs, not just MLS (https://www.mlssoccer.com/post/2019/04/18/mls-clubs-seek-training-compensation-claims-and-solidarity-payments)
 - Attending MLS and USL games so the teams have more money to pay better salaries
 - Watching MLS on TV so the league gets a better TV contract so teams have more money to pay better salaries
 - Promote the heck out of any time an American player is sold for an amount of money that sounds similar to a football, basketball, or baseball contract (I know that is not the same as the player's salary, but it is the soccer number everyone talks about)
 - Celebrate when that good kid at your local club gets a spot at an MLS academy, a USNT look, or a spot at a European academy.


----------



## MWN (Oct 23, 2019)

justneededaname said:


> While I do not think the DA has been the disaster that some other people do, I believe the DA has outlived its usefulness and should be disbanded.
> 
> At u13 and 14 MLS academies can play in flight one of their local competitive league. At U15 and above they can have their own league. If they feel they need a few more teams to round things out then they can invite the teams that they want to join.
> 
> ...


The DA has begun to evolve (there is still a long way to go).  This year marks the first year we have two divisions on the boys U18/U19 level: Top Tier and Lower Tier.  The concept being the MLS teams with the larger budgets for residential and a few others (FC Dallas) get invites to the Top Tier.  The lower tier will have the also rans.  It is changing to a model where the MLS teams will be playing themselves and consolidating talent (as it should be).


----------



## justneededaname (Oct 23, 2019)

MWN said:


> The DA has begun to evolve (there is still a long way to go).  This year marks the first year we have two divisions on the boys U18/U19 level: Top Tier and Lower Tier.  The concept being the MLS teams with the larger budgets for residential and a few others (FC Dallas) get invites to the Top Tier.  The lower tier will have the also rans.  It is changing to a model where the MLS teams will be playing themselves and consolidating talent (as it should be).


This has also been applied to the DA Cup groups at u15 and above. I think the easiest thing to do is cut the DA2 clubs and just have the DA1 league and let the MLS run it. But once you cut the clubs out of DA1 at the older ages there is little incentive to keep the youngers, so jettisoning the whole thing is appropriate.


----------



## espola (Oct 23, 2019)

justneededaname said:


> This has also been applied to the DA Cup groups at u15 and above. I think the easiest thing to do is cut the DA2 clubs and just have the DA1 league and let the MLS run it. But once you cut the clubs out of DA1 at the older ages there is little incentive to keep the youngers, so jettisoning the whole thing is appropriate.


How many MLS teams are there?  Perhaps even more germane, what proportion of the US population lives within commuting distance to MLS practice grounds?


----------



## Grace T. (Oct 23, 2019)

espola said:


> How many MLS teams are there?  Perhaps even more germane, what proportion of the US population lives within commuting distance to MLS practice grounds?


At the way the MLS is expanding, every mid sized city will have a tier one MLS team before long.  Sacramento for God's sake!!!  Anchorage, Cheyenne and Augusta can't be far behind.

We may all disagree on certain aspects of the problem, but I think we have a consensus on one thing: the MLS sucks, at least as far as promoting player development is concerned.  Sure, we needed a closed loop system when the MLS was just starting out to get the league going and cement professional soccer into the United States (and Canada).  But now it seems to be doing more harm than good, at least as currently structured.


----------



## outside! (Oct 24, 2019)

justneededaname said:


> On the girls side ECNL was doing just fine and can go back to doing just fine.


I am going to disagree with this statement. ECNL was not doing just fine in SoCal. They were a corrupt monopoly that actively prevented clubs with teams that were just as competitive from joining. It took the formation of GDA to open their eyes in order to stay in business. Note that the same people are still running ECNL and I would not trust them just because they became more inclusive to save their asses. If GDA would not have made so many bonehead moves (they are just as corrupt), ECNL would have become 2nd tier to GDA. I don't think SoCal needs ECNL or GDA. We have enough teams to have our own elite league. With less travel, the expenses would fall and open more opportunities for players from families without the resources to play in the current GDA/ECNL BS system of traveling out of state for league games.


----------



## End of the Line (Oct 24, 2019)

MWN said:


> I disagree.
> 
> The DA League was created over 10 years ago because US Soccer understood it has a major problem, which is:
> 
> ...


The U.S. has always faced all of the challenges you have described, yet the MNT has never been in worse shape.  That falls squarely on the DA.  The only way to improve as a soccer country is for more kids to play it more often and for more years, but everything about the DA structure causes fewer kids to play the sport, fewer to play it at a high level, and more to give it up at an earlier age.  The only thing that has changed since the MNT would at least make it out of the group stage at the WC is that the DA has driven boatloads of kids out of the sport and impeded the growth and development of those who didn't.

Furthermore, no thanks if the key to soccer greatness requires: (1) having 15 year olds signing pro contracts; (2) making kids live in full time soccer academies from the age of 12, where most of them will ultimately fail as soccer players and many will become roadkill in life; and (3) solidarity payments that essentially allow youth clubs to hold players hostage unless they get a cut of the kid's value.  The whole concept of solidarity payments is just so stupid.  Seriously, someone can't work in their chosen profession unless and until every club they played in from the age of 12 forward gets a check?  It is crazy that people come to this forum complaining that a college providing $300,000 or more in educational benefits constitutes indentured servitude, yet they nod their heads reflexively up and down about the awesomeness of a solidarity payment system that actually is indentured servitude.  There's a reason someone can work as a doctor without a cut of their initial salary going to their 6th grade teacher.  There's a reason we don't have 12 year old kids who show "great potential" attend as full time youth medical school academies for free and then finance them by forcing hospitals to pay them hundreds of thousands of dollars before they can hire them.  There's a reason medical school isn't free and we don't make medical practice groups finance them by paying schools a huge cut of what would otherwise be the doctor's salary.  There's a reason the philharmonic isn't required to pay someone's 6th grade piano teacher before they're allowed to play a musical instrument. The reason is that it's the dumbest idea ever.


----------



## oh canada (Oct 24, 2019)

Emma said:


> With any program, the program shouldn't get full credit bc the family and individual play a large part.  Oh Canada said there were no players that came through there.  According to Wikipedia, Pulisic was at a DA club from 08-15 and McKennie was at FC Dallas (A DA club) 09-16.  Those are a significant amount of years.  You made me look it up even though I said I wouldn't.  Thanks Espola.


Kinda making my point.  McKennie is still TBD.  Just because he scores a bunch of goals against Cuba doesn't make him a superstar.  And he hasn't done anything yet at Schalke.  Pulisic has a very unique background beyond DA--Germany, Father a pro coach, etc. so while he has the achievements, and I root for him (glad to see Lampard finally giving him a shot), I don't use him as proof that the DA system (aka "league") has succeeded developing talent better than how Donovan (a Canadian citizen btw), Dempsey, Howard, et al. grew up.  By way of comparison, in the same time, Hirving Lozano (24yrs) grew up in the Pachuca system and has definitely become an impact player for Napoli and MX. Josh Sargent could be an example, he is still young and having success, but also TBD.


MWN said:


> until we can give MLS teams a genuine incentive to invest in players, the only money at the table belongs to the parents of little Jimmy and Jenny.


Correct.  And therein lies the problem and reason why soccer is the most discriminatory "big" sport in this country.  Even more so on the girls side.



justneededaname said:


> By "their" I am going to guess you mean the public high school to which they are assigned based on their home address. While I have no data to support this, I expect this number is actually significantly smaller. Zion, for example, is from North Carolina. He went to a private high school in South Carolina (I expect they have a great basketball program).
> 
> If you look at the top basketball 10 prospects on 24/7 sports (https://247sports.com/Season/2020-Basketball/CompositeRecruitRankings/?InstitutionGroup=HighSchool), nine of them go to private schools and one goes to a public school (that is definitely not in the inner-city). One goes to a private school, Prolific Prep, that sounds like the basketball equivalent of the Barca Academy.


Private or public school doesn't matter to my point.  Basketball players have been attending private high schools for a long time.  Love the movie "Hoop Dreams".  Point is they are still playing their sport at the high school they attend in addition to AAU or whatever other club commitments they currently have...as it should be.


----------



## focomoso (Oct 24, 2019)

espola said:


> Perhaps even more germane, what proportion of the US population lives within commuting distance to MLS practice grounds?


By my back of the napkin calculations, about a 3rd. (US population: roughly 330 million; metro areas with MLS teams: 110 million.)


----------



## focomoso (Oct 24, 2019)

End of the Line said:


> The U.S. has always faced all of the challenges you have described, yet the MNT has never been in worse shape.  That falls squarely on the DA.  The only way to improve as a soccer country is for more kids to play it more often and for more years...


Agreed, but I don't think the DA can do this. It's basketball, football (and a tiny bit baseball) that pull potential soccer stars away. Finding someone with the ability to be a world-class soccer player is a statistical anomaly. If most of the kids with potential play other sports, we'll never compete. 



> Furthermore, no thanks if the key to soccer greatness requires: ...


But this is exactly how it works in Europe. The kids with the most potential are identified early and put into pro academies. Most of them drop out but the few who make it are that much better. If developing world-class players is the goal, then this system seems to work pretty well, whether we like it or not.


----------



## espola (Oct 24, 2019)

focomoso said:


> Agreed, but I don't think the DA can do this. It's basketball, football (and a tiny bit baseball) that pull potential soccer stars away. Finding someone with the ability to be a world-class soccer player is a statistical anomaly. If most of the kids with potential play other sports, we'll never compete.
> 
> 
> But this is exactly how it works in Europe. The kids with the most potential are identified early and put into pro academies. Most of them drop out but the few who make it are that much better. If developing world-class players is the goal, then this system seems to work pretty well, whether we like it or not.


Based on personal experience - the "good" players in the pre-high-school years were lured away by baseball, tennis, wrestling, and karate.  On the other hand, there was a so-so BU12 goalkeeper who became a killer high school lacrosse player.


----------



## Justus (Oct 24, 2019)

focomoso said:


> Agreed, but I don't think the DA can do this. It's basketball, football (and a tiny bit baseball) that pull potential soccer stars away. Finding someone with the ability to be a world-class soccer player is a statistical anomaly. If most of the kids with potential play other sports, we'll never compete.
> 
> 
> But this is exactly how it works in Europe. The kids with the most potential are identified early and put into pro academies. Most of them drop out but the few who make it are that much better. If developing world-class players is the goal, then this system seems to work pretty well, whether we like it or not.


This system sucks!!!  On the girls side it really sucks!!!  We have a few Really Good Soccer Players at each age group (RGSPs or GOATs) in America.  RGSPs are easy to see with an honest eye.  We call them, "GOAT or a Can't miss recruit."  Then we have the rest of the girls which we can call, Good Soccer Players (GSPs).  The GSPs is the problem.  You can't separate GSPs at an early age. We don't know which ones will become a RGSP.  My dd is a GSP and a lot of times in the big games she becomes a RGSP and is a dangerous weapon to put one in at the right time.  We also have a lot of rich parents with GSPs and Cash is King in this world we live in and I'm telling you, if you have some $$$ you can work the soccer system unfortunately


----------



## Emma (Oct 24, 2019)

oh canada said:


> Kinda making my point.  McKennie is still TBD.  Just because he scores a bunch of goals against Cuba doesn't make him a superstar.  And he hasn't done anything yet at Schalke.  Pulisic has a very unique background beyond DA--Germany, Father a pro coach, etc. so while he has the achievements, and I root for him (glad to see Lampard finally giving him a shot), I don't use him as proof that the DA system (aka "league") has succeeded developing talent better than how Donovan (a Canadian citizen btw), Dempsey, Howard, et al. grew up.  By way of comparison, in the same time, Hirving Lozano (24yrs) grew up in the Pachuca system and has definitely become an impact player for Napoli and MX. Josh Sargent could be an example, he is still young and having success, but also TBD.
> 
> McKennie, Pulisic, Sargent and Tyler all are between the age of 19-21.  DA started in 2007.  These boys were 7-9.  They grew up with the DA system and their families.  Before the DA, we had all your examples - but they were 40, 37, 36.  There is no great talent between  36 and 21 with maybe Bradley at 32 years of age.  The DA was created to find those kids and help them be recognized.  It worked even though it's not perfect as we have all pointed to the flaws of it.   There are at least 4 great players between the ages of 19-21 and a few more coming up through the pipeline.  It's also accurate, those four players that grew up through the DA are still not at their peak yet because they have at least 6 more years to reach their peak as men.
> 
> ...


----------



## Emma (Oct 24, 2019)

Oops...forgot how to use this forum for a moment. 2nd try.

McKennie, Pulisic, Sargent and Tyler all are between the age of 19-21. DA started in 2007. These boys were 7-9. They grew up with the DA system and their families. Before the DA, we had all your examples - but they were 40, 37, 36. There is no great talent between 36 and 21 with maybe Bradley at 32 years of age. The DA was created to find those kids and help them be recognized. It worked even though it's not perfect as we have all pointed to the flaws of it. There are at least 4 great players between the ages of 19-21 and a few more coming up through the pipeline. It's also accurate, those four players that grew up through the DA are still not at their peak yet because they have at least 6 more years to reach their peak as men.

They do need to find a way to make DA more accessible, cheaper and cast a wider net but whatever they are doing is at least creating some results whether you like the way they are handling things.

If Pulisic's dad did not think the DA system was sufficient for 7 years, he would have been able to pull his son and move to Europe for better training. With his dad's experience, he chose to leave his son in the DA system and let him flourish until he was ready for the next step.

As much as I dislike the lack of organization and the expense of DA, I do see results. We didn't have much there for almost two decades.


----------



## Justus (Oct 24, 2019)

Emma said:


> Oops...forgot how to use this forum for a moment. 2nd try.
> 
> McKennie, Pulisic, Sargent and Tyler all are between the age of 19-21. DA started in 2007. These boys were 7-9. They grew up with the DA system and their families. Before the DA, we had all your examples - but they were 40, 37, 36. There is no great talent between 36 and 21 with maybe Bradley at 32 years of age. The DA was created to find those kids and help them be recognized. It worked even though it's not perfect as we have all pointed to the flaws of it. There are at least 4 great players between the ages of 19-21 and a few more coming up through the pipeline. It's also accurate, those four players that grew up through the DA are still not at their peak yet because they have at least 6 more years to reach their peak as men.
> 
> ...


What results are you seeing Emma?  Winning for the men to me would make it out of group play at World Cup and making a run.  Not making World Cup games because you lose to Tobago is a complete failure and #1 reason for a re-boot and have folks fired.  The girls have been winning so anything less than gold and world cup win is failure.  I saw better woman teams this year but we got lucky on PKs, that's the only reason we won this year.  The System is a mess to the core and that's why it will never work until we clean house


----------



## Justus (Oct 24, 2019)

Lesson #1  Get over it, Rich Dad has more money than you
Lesson #2  Money is the root of most of the evil we see
Lesson #3  However, Money is not evil
Lesson #4  Money used as a tool for good is a good thing
Lesson #5  Not all Rich dads are assholes
Lesson #6  Not all Poor Dads are poor
Lesson #7  Not all Rich dads are rich


----------



## espola (Oct 24, 2019)

Emma said:


> Oops...forgot how to use this forum for a moment. 2nd try.
> 
> McKennie, Pulisic, Sargent and Tyler all are between the age of 19-21. DA started in 2007. These boys were 7-9. They grew up with the DA system and their families. Before the DA, we had all your examples - but they were 40, 37, 36. There is no great talent between 36 and 21 with maybe Bradley at 32 years of age. The DA was created to find those kids and help them be recognized. It worked even though it's not perfect as we have all pointed to the flaws of it. There are at least 4 great players between the ages of 19-21 and a few more coming up through the pipeline. It's also accurate, those four players that grew up through the DA are still not at their peak yet because they have at least 6 more years to reach their peak as men.
> 
> ...


We "didn't have much" except a nationwide ODP system at State and Regional levels and some youth national teams, along with a poorly-supported residency program in Florida - but we still qualified for the World Cup regularly.  Outstanding players like those stated as examples of the success of the DA program would have bubbled to the top of the older ODP-YNT system as well.  The DA has added nothing.


----------



## oh canada (Oct 24, 2019)

Emma said:


> There is no great talent between 36 and 21 with maybe Bradley at 32 years of age.


No disrespect, but with the second half of that sentence you lost all soccer talent identification credibility with me.


----------



## Emma (Oct 24, 2019)

espola said:


> We "didn't have much" except a nationwide ODP system at State and Regional levels and some youth national teams, along with a poorly-supported residency program in Florida - but we still qualified for the World Cup regularly.  Outstanding players like those stated as examples of the success of the DA program would have bubbled to the top of the older ODP-YNT system as well.  The DA has added nothing.


I think the problem is that we were unable to find talent for a decade with the existing programs.  US Soccer had to look for a different way to find or help further develop players and the DA did help with it.  It's not complete and it needs improvements but it's giving us hope.  As this young group of player continues to mature as players on international stages, I do believe we will be competitive again.


----------



## Emma (Oct 24, 2019)

oh canada said:


> No disrespect, but with the second half of that sentence you lost all soccer talent identification credibility with me.


You noticed the "maybe" right.  I agree he's not good.  I was trying to help you out there with your point that we were identifying talent before DA.  We did fine until the world changed their system of identifying talent.  Then for a decade, we couldn't identify talented soccer players.  Twelves years after the inception of DA, we found some.  You can say it's a coincidence or you can give some credit.  I don't believe in coincidences.


----------



## BigSoccer (Oct 24, 2019)

Check me if I am wrong, Pulisic came through with US Club Soccer.  He was with the NIKE ID2 program in the MIC Cup and not DA.


----------



## Emma (Oct 24, 2019)

BigSoccer said:


> Check me if I am wrong, Pulisic came through with US Club Soccer.  He was with the NIKE ID2 program in the MIC Cup and not DA.


He was with PA Classics, a DA club, from 2008-2015. He did get selected for the NIKE ID2 in 2012 but he was definitely with PA Classics during the time period he was selected.  My opinion is NOT that DA is the only place to be seen and noticed or developed, but it has helped and we are seeing some results - Not as fast as I'd like because I'm impatient but I see some twinkle of hope.


----------



## outside! (Oct 24, 2019)

Justus said:


> I saw better woman teams this year but we got lucky on PKs, that's the only reason we won this year.  The System is a mess to the core and that's why it will never work until we clean house


I watched every WWC game. I did not see any teams that were clearly better than the US. I did see some very good teams.


----------



## Justus (Oct 24, 2019)

outside! said:


> I watched every WWC game. I did not see any teams that were clearly better than the US. I did see some very good teams.


I didn't say "clearly."  I saw "better teams" for what that's worth.  I didn't see really good soccer from our team Outside, but that's just my take.  We won and that's what matters


----------



## MWN (Oct 24, 2019)

End of the Line said:


> The U.S. has always faced all of the challenges you have described, yet the MNT has never been in worse shape.  That falls squarely on the DA.  The only way to improve as a soccer country is for more kids to play it more often and for more years, but everything about the DA structure causes fewer kids to play the sport, fewer to play it at a high level, and more to give it up at an earlier age.  The only thing that has changed since the MNT would at least make it out of the group stage at the WC is that the DA has driven boatloads of kids out of the sport and impeded the growth and development of those who didn't.
> 
> Furthermore, no thanks if the key to soccer greatness requires: (1) having 15 year olds signing pro contracts; (2) making kids live in full time soccer academies from the age of 12, where most of them will ultimately fail as soccer players and many will become roadkill in life; and (3) solidarity payments that essentially allow youth clubs to hold players hostage unless they get a cut of the kid's value.  The whole concept of solidarity payments is just so stupid.  Seriously, someone can't work in their chosen profession unless and until every club they played in from the age of 12 forward gets a check?  It is crazy that people come to this forum complaining that a college providing $300,000 or more in educational benefits constitutes indentured servitude, yet they nod their heads reflexively up and down about the awesomeness of a solidarity payment system that actually is indentured servitude.  There's a reason someone can work as a doctor without a cut of their initial salary going to their 6th grade teacher.  There's a reason we don't have 12 year old kids who show "great potential" attend as full time youth medical school academies for free and then finance them by forcing hospitals to pay them hundreds of thousands of dollars before they can hire them.  There's a reason medical school isn't free and we don't make medical practice groups finance them by paying schools a huge cut of what would otherwise be the doctor's salary.  There's a reason the philharmonic isn't required to pay someone's 6th grade piano teacher before they're allowed to play a musical instrument. The reason is that it's the dumbest idea ever.


@End of the Line, based on these statements:


> "_Seriously, someone can't work in their chosen profession unless and until every club they played in from the age of 12 forward gets a check?_"





> _solidarity payments that essentially allow youth clubs to hold players hostage unless they get a cut of the kid's value. _


Short answer is: No to both.  Your understanding of how solidarity and training fees work is flawed because neither of your assumptions are correct.  Under  FIFA Regulations on the Status and Transfer of Players (“*RSTP*”), a club is compensated when a player, prior to the end of the season of his 23rd birthday, signs his first contract to play professionally in another country (called “*Training Compensation*”), and when a player is subsequently transferred – at any age – between clubs in different countries before the expiration of his current contract in exchange for a transfer fee (called a “*Solidarity Payment*”).

The system does not prevent any player from signing a contract and the Training Compensation and Solidarity Payment is the sole obligation of the Club signing the player.  This system is what continents of Europe, Asia, South/Central America and Africa all adhere too.  Its what enables "clubs" to eliminate Pay-To-Play at the academy levels.

Prior to age 16, youth players are free to do just about anything they want.  Depending on the country and employment laws in that country, most players cannot sign a professional contract until 16 to 18.  Transfers of players aged 16 and older can occur, but under 15 the rules are very rigid giving the 12-15 year olds significant freedom.

With regard to your analogies:

*Medical School*: many medical school students that opt out of going into debt by 100's of thousands of dollars, commit to various programs that pay for their school in exchange for X amounts of years of service.  For example, future doctors can have their medical school bills paid by serving in undeserved communities through programs operated by Indian Health Services, National Health Services Corp.  My brother went the military route and exchanged 6 years of service for a $750k, Ivy League dental and periodontics education.  So, in fact we do it with doctors currently, and any 12 year old is free to try assuming they have the maturity, knowledge and grades to attend medical school.  
With regard to a "cut of their salary" going to the 6th grade teacher (or school), this does not occur because that education was paid for by the tax payers (public) or the parents (private).  If a private school were to operate a program where they would provide a private education for middle school kids through medical school in exchange for a cut of that doctors salary, there very likely would be many parents/kids willing to sign up.  The problem is the ultimate salaries doctors make in comparison to top level professional athletes pale in comparison, so the economics may not be viable.
*Philharmonic*:  the reason again is the schooling was paid for by the parents or publicly, the analogy is flawed.
If you want to find an analogy that works, you need to find an industry that takes workers, trains and educates them on the industries dime, and then takes a cut of their wages over the span of their lifetime.  A good example is *trade unions with apprenticeship programs*.   Here the apprentice workers are educated by the union workers both in the field and classroom, using union dues to fund the education, and in exchange the workers are forced to work through the union with a portion of their wages (i.e. dues) are paid back to the union.  This is essentially the RSTP model, so its not stupid, but millions of workers adhere to this model, here in the U.S.

BTW, the MLS has officially changed course and is now stating its intent and the need for RSTP:  https://www.mlssoccer.com/post/2019/04/18/faqs-about-training-compensation-and-solidarity-payments


----------



## El Clasico (Oct 24, 2019)

Emma said:


> He was with PA Classics, a DA club, from 2008-2015. He did get selected for the NIKE ID2 in 2012 but he was definitely with PA Classics during the time period he was selected.  My opinion is NOT that DA is the only place to be seen and noticed or developed, but it has helped and we are seeing some results - Not as fast as I'd like because I'm impatient but I see some twinkle of hope.


I think that the problem with your argument and why everyone is calling BS on your position is it is pretty clear to those of us who have been around for those 10 (11 now) years since DA came onto the scene for boys (yes, had a son play DA, graduated long ago), we have yet to see a true product of the DA. Where you go wrong using Pulisic and Weston is that they only played DA on Wikipedia which allows for some people to come in, copy and paste selected information and for those unenlightened, believe what they see. Take Pulisic, you say that he was with a "DA club" from 2008 to 2015 implying that he played DA all those years and was developed. Problem is that DA was just being rolled out around that time and like on the girls side, it was new and were using existing teams and coaches and just renaming them the DA team. Additionally, since Pulisic was only like 9 years old at that time, he was not playing DA. Now if you actually followed him and read and watched the interviews with him and, more importantly, his father, you would know that his dad didn't think much of DA, which is why he took him to train with a nearby "pro" team when he was a bit older. He found that even that was not development so they moved him to Germany.  To give DA credit for him just tells me that you are trying to fool people or you just don't know.  Weston is an even better story (just doesn't help your sales pitch).  The TD of FC Dallas is the guy that actually sent him off to Europe.  He took a rash of shit from US Soccer that wanted him to stay in the US but ultimately, FC Dallas convinced him to pack up and go.  Said that DA could do nothing for him. In other words, the guys at FC Dallas DA club chose to do the right thing for his development and sent him off to Europe rather than ruin him here in the DA system.  But I am sure you won't find this info in Wikipedia.


----------



## BigSoccer (Oct 25, 2019)

So for the record Pulisic may have been at a DA club and may have played for a DA post NIKE ID2 but reading those requirements you can not be a DA player and be part of NIKE ID2.  US Club Soccer v. US Soccer.  El Classico is absolutely correct.    Do we know when PA Classics received the coveted DA Badge?  
Dortmund developed Pulisic not DA.


----------



## Emma (Oct 25, 2019)

El Clasico said:


> I think that the problem with your argument and why everyone is calling BS on your position is it is pretty clear to those of us who have been around for those 10 (11 now) years since DA came onto the scene for boys (yes, had a son play DA, graduated long ago), we have yet to see a true product of the DA. Where you go wrong using Pulisic and Weston is that they only played DA on Wikipedia which allows for some people to come in, copy and paste selected information and for those unenlightened, believe what they see. Take Pulisic, you say that he was with a "DA club" from 2008 to 2015 implying that he played DA all those years and was developed. Problem is that DA was just being rolled out around that time and like on the girls side, it was new and were using existing teams and coaches and just renaming them the DA team. Additionally, since Pulisic was only like 9 years old at that time, he was not playing DA. Now if you actually followed him and read and watched the interviews with him and, more importantly, his father, you would know that his dad didn't think much of DA, which is why he took him to train with a nearby "pro" team when he was a bit older. He found that even that was not development so they moved him to Germany.  To give DA credit for him just tells me that you are trying to fool people or you just don't know.  Weston is an even better story (just doesn't help your sales pitch).  The TD of FC Dallas is the guy that actually sent him off to Europe.  He took a rash of shit from US Soccer that wanted him to stay in the US but ultimately, FC Dallas convinced him to pack up and go.  Said that DA could do nothing for him. In other words, the guys at FC Dallas DA club chose to do the right thing for his development and sent him off to Europe rather than ruin him here in the DA system.  But I am sure you won't find this info in Wikipedia.


We all know Pulisic or McKennie (along with many others recently) left DA and we agree, DA was no longer sufficient to continue developing their skill sets further after 14 or 15.  At one point DA was though and it was for a significant number of years. What you refuse to do here is give some credit where it might be due.  We all agree that individuals and families are the 2 primary reasons why any of the star athletes rise to the top.  However, there must be vehicles set up that assist along the way.  One of those vehicles is the DA.  For anyone to argue that DA has not been of any assistant to these individuals and families is to ignore the hard fact that we have no men's international talent between age 36 and 21. 

DA was put in place to find these talent because we were struggling with the resources available and now we are seeing some results.  Whether or not MLS or DA is able to develop talent after 15 is a whole different story and I think too many people confuse the two just like you are above.

What DA brings to the table is a clear indication that  a program is collecting players who want to play at a high level, are willing to work 4 days a week and would like to be challenged by other players.  For most soccer parents or players, they will not have the time or resource to go to different 40 soccer teams and research which teams would offer this.  The DA label helps identify it.   There are other teams outside of the DA that are doing this too but most people don't know who they are and it's hard to do the research with limited individual time and resources.  The easier you make it for your consumer to find a product that helps, the more likely consumers are able to utilize it and help themselves.

There's no denying that the DA label has made it easier to find a bunch of hard working kids who want to play at a high level and have coaches with more coaching education (some probably need a lot more).

What I don't understand is the refusal to give some credit.  I don't have the delusion that the DA label will turn any child into that special player.  However, I do see that it has made it easier for that "special player" to find a hard working team to practice with and flourish at the younger ages.


----------



## MWN (Oct 25, 2019)

Emma said:


> We all know Pulisic or McKennie (along with many others recently) left DA and we agree, DA was no longer sufficient to continue developing their skill sets further after 14 or 15.  ... For anyone to argue that DA has not been of any assistant to these individuals and families is to ignore the hard fact that we have no men's international talent between age 36 and 21.
> 
> DA was put in place to find this talent because we were struggling with the resources available and now we are seeing some results.  Whether or not MLS or DA is able to develop talent after 15 is a whole different story and I think too many people confuse the two just like you are above...
> 
> What I don't understand is the refusal to give some credit.  I don't have the delusion that the DA label will turn any child into that special player.  However, I do see that it has made it easier for that "special player" to find a hard working team to practice with and flourish at the younger ages.


@Emma's perspective is absolutely correct.  The DA is just a league, let's not forget that the DA exists because US Soccer saw the professional teams (MLS and USL) were not stepping up to the plate with viable youth development programs and their professional development programs were substandard.  10 to 11 years ago the professional path of a US soccer player was play in a high level youth soccer program, go to college and have the best development years stagnate with substandard coaching and NCAA rules that prevented development, enter the MLS draft and play in a league filled with players that would never see the field in high level international play.  We sucked because we are missing multiple pieces of development for the U17-U23 ages.

To blame the DA for the lack quality international level players misses a critical development level, which is the post youth professional academy (16-22 year olds), where players enter full-time dedicated training in the rest of the world.  We just have not had that in the US at the level we need.  Sure, the Galaxy has their Galaxy II team that mucks around playing games in the USL-Champions League (2nd Division in the US), which would be the equivalent of 5th Division (or worse) in England.


----------



## BigSoccer (Oct 25, 2019)

My point is US Soccer is taking credit for Pulisic.  They had little influence.  If a player moves to DA and U16/17 or U18/U19 and then moves into Youth National Team pools is that US Soccer's success or the success of the preceding club.  There are players blessed with talent all over US Soccer just makes it a closed system to where you must move or travel to be DA.  This is not just a boys issue.  The closed system is what is not working.


----------



## watfly (Oct 25, 2019)

The DA is not inherently bad, nor is it inherently better than what we had previously.  It has not increased the quality of national team players or produced more world class players.  Since that's its stated goal it has been a failure in that regard.  Spare me the argument that its only been in existence for 10 years.  If it was effective we would at least be seeing some sign of incremental improvement, which we have not.  DA has not made a difference because it is just another league with the same coaches that coached flight 1 pre DA. USSoccer has very little tangible involvement in the training and development of players as far as I can tell.  My son has played for a couple DA clubs. One club focused primarily on 1v1 and individual skills.  The other focuses more on movement, decision making and passing. 

So the answer is more internationally trained players, right?  Some heralded our recent lineups with predominately international playing players as a turning point for US Soccer.  How did that work out?  Our worse loss to Mexico in 10 years and our first loss to Canada in over 3 decades.  Granted this is only a very small sample size with two games, but that fact is were not showing any signs of improvement, but regression instead.  The hole we need to get out of just keeps getting deeper and deeper.  We used to beat minnows easily, now we're losing to them.

Are Training Compensation and Solidarity Payments the answer?  I don't know.  Are clubs and coaches saying were not going to give our players the best training because were not going to get Training Compensation?  Are they just giving the bare minimum because they only receive Pay to Play money?  Pay to Play money is guaranteed, Training Compensation is not...its higher return, but higher risk.  Throwing money at a problem doesn't work without accountability (see US Government).

To me one of the biggest problems with our American soccer system is the lack of accountability from bottom to top and across the board...parents, coaches, refs, DOC's administrators.  Unfortunately, the biggest offenders are the executives that run US Soccer. (I don't have the patience to type the laundry list of examples).

So what's the answer?  I don't know, I guess its much easier to be a critic than a creator.  I believe that some of it is cultural and it will just take time and has to occur organically; however, I'm concerned that some of the things that are being done structurally are hindering the cultural evolution.  What happened to Double Pass revolutionizing US development?  Personally, the first thing I would start with is making coaching education more affordable and more readily available.  Second, the soccer leaders need to humble themselves and drop the arrogance. https://www.goal.com/en-us/news/claudio-reyna-on-american-soccer-were-far-too-arrogant-far/1w9vcdubu5yhf1vj9c89qmxyib


----------



## Grace T. (Oct 25, 2019)

watfly said:


> So the answer is more internationally trained players, right?  Some heralded our recent lineups with predominately international playing players as a turning point for US Soccer.  How did that work out?  Our worse loss to Mexico in 10 years and our first loss to Canada in over 3 decades.  Granted this is only a very small sample size with two games, but that fact is were not showing any signs of improvement, but regression instead.  The hole we need to get out of just keeps getting deeper and deeper.  We used to beat minnows easily, now we're losing to them.


Our supposedly best player is struggling at Chelsea right now and hasn't received a significant amount of minutes.  We've had to rely heavily on Bradley, an MLS player who is also now older.  And up top we don't have a dangerous, internationally trained striker.  Our keeper is young and has been asked to play a specific role at his home club, which is almost the opposite of what's being required of him for the USMNT.

We can argue if playing internationally helps.  But we have only 7 international players on roster, with only 1 being at a top tier club.  Excluding injuries the Canadians have 15 playing on international rosters outside the MLS.


----------



## ToonArmy (Oct 25, 2019)

And those 7 international players are very young in terms of the experience relied on to win games in international competition even in concacaf which is why we still have to rely on Bradley and zardes and those never have beens. I think results some have been speaking about on here is the talent of the young kids pulisic and co. 

By the way this is a great thread every one making good points lots of informed people on here unlike myself


----------



## ToonArmy (Oct 25, 2019)

And those 7 international players are very young in terms of the experience relied on to win games in international competition even in concacaf which is why we still have to rely on Bradley and zardes and those never have beens to show us to way to suck. I think results some have been speaking about on here is the talent of the young kids pulisic and co. 

By the way this is a great thread every one making good points lots of informed people on here unlike myself


----------



## OCsoccerdad7777 (Oct 25, 2019)

MWN said:


> The DA has begun to evolve (there is still a long way to go).  This year marks the first year we have two divisions on the boys U18/U19 level: Top Tier and Lower Tier.  The concept being the MLS teams with the larger budgets for residential and a few others (FC Dallas) get invites to the Top Tier.  The lower tier will have the also rans.  It is changing to a model where the MLS teams will be playing themselves and consolidating talent (as it should be).


Just my opinion but I personally like having non-mls academies in there like Crossfire who had pretty good records in the past against mls academies. It keeps the mls teams more accountable by the embarrassment of getting smashed by non mls academies who are doing a good job developing.  If there is another way to hold them accountable I'm all for it but so far I like having both.


----------



## ToonArmy (Oct 26, 2019)

Get in Pulisic!


----------



## focomoso (Oct 28, 2019)

Grace T. said:


> Our supposedly best player is struggling at Chelsea right now and hasn't received a significant amount of minutes.


Note the date of this post. I suspect with Saturday's performance, this is about to change.


----------



## Not_that_Serious (Oct 29, 2019)

These articles pick the low hanging fruit. There have been a few of these Articles the last few years. Then you get the FB post about how racist it all is. Not a race thing - usually. it’s a money thing. USSF enjoys money in but no money out. This topic has been posted a few times. Very few coaches care about the race of the player - but sure care if the kid can knock it in the net or are aggressive athletic mids/defenders. Most of us would take the tallest, fastest kid at certain spots - good coaches always think they can teach kids how to hold a ball or work on their touch.  As mentioned before minority communities(if you look closely you’ll notice a lot more black players playing high level soccer in D1 and locally) get plucked of talent by clubs. Clubs literally raid leagues in Santa Ana, Anaheim, Garden Grove, East Los, Riverside. The clubs don’t donate money, time or other resources to help these leagues. I have reviewed team rosters at many clubs and I would see entire rosters of North OC kids playing in South County. Kids coming from Riverside to play in South County. East LA kids going to Westside. Never just a couple players, always same coaches, done at majority of clubs (Even “small” ones) and just about every kid playing free. I think they should be playing for free but that’s a double edged sword on how most parents act as soon as coach leaves - but that’s for another topic. The truth is kids can be targeted due to the inability to pay and someone coming around offering higher level competion at no cost. Some coaches truly offering good opportunity to improve players, some just using them for wins in the short term. You can see certain clubs have taken entire Sunday league teams - another topic discussed on other posts. The disconnect, or lack of moving up the Soccer path, usually happens in HS. Sometimes due to parenting, cultural issues (earning income before schooling), hanging around wrong kids, becoming pregnant, getting someone pregnant and other things.

The biggest Problem is systemic. USSF should be integrating the leagues and coaches via free training. This kids are less likely to leave if they are playing in same leagues as everyone else. Actually implementing FIFA rules would help as well. The lack of resources hurts the girls side the most - have to keep National teams paid first I guess. Clubs love this system since they can get kids technically trained better than rev kids and can help their teams right away. Again, save clubs money, makes club money by attracting paying parents.

Can search the forum, been long discussion on the topic and ways to fix it. First USSF has to want to fix it. Journalists also have to be stop being lazy on the topic and actually do some real investigating -not just call a couple folks on the phone.


----------



## Grace T. (Oct 29, 2019)

focomoso said:


> Note the date of this post. I suspect with Saturday's performance, this is about to change.


Short term the fortunes of the team rise and fall with pulisic. If he becomes a top talent he’ll attract other talent who’ll want to play with him and at least disasters like Canada won’t happen as much

but even messi can’t right Argentina. The coaching has got to be there and the defensive and striker problems also have to be solved, and that’s assuming pulisic stays healthy and develops consistency.  Never good to have all your eggs in one basket and that’s what we have right now. 

long term there are other issues, all of which have been touched upon here


----------

