# 17-18 boys applications



## mahrez

Now open until 12/4:
http://www.ussoccerda.com/da-applications-2017-18

"The Boys' Development Academy Membership Application is now available online here for the 2017-18 season. The application is open to any clubs that are not currently members of the Development Academy as well as any existing members wishing to expand to additional age groups. New clubs can apply for one of three options: U-12 only, U-12 to U-14, and full Academy. Existing Academy clubs can apply for one of three expansion options depending upon their current status: U-13 & U-14, U-13 to U-18/19, and U-16/17 & U-18/19. Existing Academy members are encouraged to contact their Technical Advisor to discuss the plans for the market"


----------



## mahrez

For the 2003's in 2017-18 app

*U-15 Age Group*
The Development Academy will not have applications for the U-15 age group for the 2017-18 season. Instead, the decision on which clubs will have a U-15 age group will be made after internal planning and in collaboration with each club.
Other age groups:
U-12 (2006), U-13 (2005), U-14 (2004), U-16/17 (2001/2002), & U-18/19 (1999/2000)

Combined ages for 16/17 & 18/19 is different than the calendar year that some of the earlier slides proposed


----------



## younothat

mahrez said:


> For the 2003's in 2017-18 app
> 
> *U-15 Age Group*
> The Development Academy will not have applications for the U-15 age group for the 2017-18 season. Instead, the decision on which clubs will have a U-15 age group will be made after internal planning and in collaboration with each club.
> Other age groups:
> U-12 (2006), U-13 (2005), U-14 (2004), U-16/17 (2001/2002), & U-18/19 (1999/2000)
> 
> Combined ages for 16/17 & 18/19 is different than the calendar year that some of the earlier slides proposed


Huh wonder why ussda decided to stick with the combined age groups  for the olders?

Extending the league to U18/19 does give current U17/18's 99'S a chance to continue on with DA

u15 seems to be the age now where we see a drop in the number of teams in the in the league.

I would quess that unless you already have a 03' team (will be U15 in 17-19') or get full da, new or partial clubs might have a tough time getting into the U15 age group.  With each region already having 12 03' teams may not be a lot of room for more?

The big question is what will LAFC apply for this time? and will they partner or go alone?

Please post up if you know of new clubs applying or any plans you have heard from your club(s).


----------



## BJ18

younothat said:


> Huh wonder why ussda decided to stick with the combined age groups  for the olders?
> 
> Extending the league to U18/19 does give current U17/18's 99'S a chance to continue on with DA
> 
> u15 seems to be the age now where we see a drop in the number of teams in the in the league.
> 
> I would quess that unless you already have a 03' team (will be U15 in 17-19') or get full da, new or partial clubs might have a tough time getting into the U15 age group.  With each region already having 12 03' teams may not be a lot of room for more?
> 
> The big question is what will LAFC apply for this time? and will they partner or go alone?
> 
> Please post up if you know of new clubs applying or any plans you have heard from your club(s).


Here are the clubs that are applying based on a previous post:"teams applying for DA status next year are Galaxy SB, Celtics, United FC, CDA Slammers, and Legends."


----------



## Box2Box

BJ18 said:


> Here are the clubs that are applying based on a previous post:"teams applying for DA status next year are Galaxy SB, Celtics, United FC, CDA Slammers, and Legends."


We can also add BF310


----------



## mahrez

BJ18 said:


> Here are the clubs that are applying based on a previous post:"teams applying for DA status next year are Galaxy SB, Celtics, United FC, CDA Slammers, and Legends."


Slammer's might have the best chance of the bunch but who knows?

Geography plays a role since there are existing da members in just about all the areas for those clubs listed,  overlapping is something that's been of a concern each year in the acceptance debates vs new territory.


----------



## younothat

FYI from the app

• TRAVEL
- The Academy season will require local travel at the U-12 age group, regional travel athe U-13 age group, and national travel at U-14 and above during the 10-month season"

TRAINING AND REST DAYS
- U-12: Each team will be expected to hold at least three (3) soccer training sessions perweek during the Academy season. Each team is expected to provide at least two (2)days of rest per week during the Academy season.
- Older: Each team will be expected to hold at least four (4) soccer training sessions perweek during the Academy season. Each team is expected to provide at least one (1)day of rest per week during the Academy season.


----------



## JJP

BJ18 said:


> Here are the clubs that are applying based on a previous post:"teams applying for DA status next year are Galaxy SB, Celtics, United FC, CDA Slammers, and Legends."


How does Galaxy SB get academy status when LA Galaxy is already an academy?


----------



## mahrez

JJP said:


> How does Galaxy SB get academy status when LA Galaxy is already an academy?


Not to mention there are 4 other clubs in the LA area (galaxy, laufa, lafc, tfa) with some da status already.   SB is a big longshot to get accepted if they apply.


----------



## Sane65

BJ18 said:


> Here are the clubs that are applying based on a previous post:"teams applying for DA status next year are Galaxy SB, Celtics, United FC, CDA Slammers, and Legends."


When will these clubs be informed of their application approval or denial?  Any thoughts?  Will they then need to scramble to put together DA teams for 2017/2018.


----------



## Sane65

Sane65 said:


> When will these clubs be informed of their application approval or denial?  Any thoughts?  Will they then need to scramble to put together DA teams for 2017/2018.


Nevermind....  found my own answer based on your link-  thanks Mahrez.


----------



## mahrez

For future reference

*Application Timeline:*

October 12, 2016 - Application Opens
December 4, 2016 - Final Day to Submit Applications
January 23, 2017 - Application Decisions Announced
February 6, 2017 - New Clubs Confirm Participation
September 1, 2017 - Start of the 2017-18 Academy Season
Should be plenty of time for new teams to form,  registration took place in later Aug with some asking for extra time this year until around Sept.

56 new u12 clubs joined the existing 78 this season 16-17' so there is now a total of 134 clubs in DA.

Will we see that level of expansion for new clubs in 17-18?  Doubtfull,  rather more likely to see existing members move from 1 to 3-5 or 3 to 5 teams next season 1st.  Some new clubs yes but SC may not get much this time around for new memberships.


----------



## sbay

JJP said:


> How does Galaxy SB get academy status when LA Galaxy is already an academy?


LAGSB applied, but nothing is for sure.  They will always feed to lAG and LAG is a place that players want to try out for so they will never hurt for talent.  But, the reality is the other academies you mentioned are really not that close to the SB locations.  Commuting to LAUFA, TFA, or LAFC is actually far, and there are a lot of clubs in this area with enough good players to field at least a group of 20 kids who coulee compete.  I the affiliates like LAGSD have a DA it is not that far fetched for lAGSB to at least be considered.


----------



## sbay

Does anyone know if LAFC, TFA, of any others with only U12's this year have applied for expanding to U14 next year to keep their players?  Otherwise the kids on TFA and LAFC will be looking for homes next year!


----------



## younothat

Galaxy and LAFC (two exemptions) cover a 75 mile radius of their homes...that's a huge area

TFA and LAFC are also in LA, within range of anything else in LA county including the south side.

Carlsbad (LAG SD)  is 75 miles away was approved girls da before LA galaxy girls even applied.   Affiliates close by the parent in it the boys da goes against one of the 7 criteria for selection.

LAFC will be in the DA league with at least 3 teams next year.


----------



## Box2Box

sbay said:


> Does anyone know if LAFC, TFA, of any others with only U12's this year have applied for expanding to U14 next year to keep their players?  Otherwise the kids on TFA and LAFC will be looking for homes next year!


Lafc will be granted whatever age they wanna add. Mls academies are excempt from the application process. And good luck to lag sb, I think they have enough talent and stability to be granted the status.


----------



## sbay

younothat said:


> Galaxy and LAFC (two exemptions) cover a 75 mile radius of their homes...that's a huge area
> 
> TFA and LAFC are also in LA, within range of anything else in LA county including the south side.
> 
> Carlsbad (LAG SD)  is 75 miles away was approved girls da before LA galaxy girls even applied.   Affiliates close by the parent in it the boys da goes against one of the 7 criteria for selection.
> 
> LAFC will be in the DA league with at least 3 teams next year.



I get the 75 mile radius, but not everyone can drive that distance to reach an academy.  here is LA 15 miles can take you 2 hours, not everyone is able to do that commute.

_Im mostly curious about TFA...can they get another team for their current u12's or will those kids be shopping._


----------



## younothat

sbay said:


> I get the 75 mile radius, but not everyone can drive that distance to reach an academy.  here is LA 15 miles can take you 2 hours, not everyone is able to do that commute.
> 
> _Im mostly curious about TFA...can they get another team for their current u12's or will those kids be shopping._


TFA will be applying for 5 teams, they have a good shot at getting 3 (u12-14) or will just end up with one IMO.

LAUFA already has 3 teams and will apply for 5 I would venture to quess.

Golden State, Arsenal,  LA Galaxy have 5 teams already.

LAFC gets whatever they want,  makes sense for them to go with 3 teams for 17-18' and expand to 5 following season for a pathway for the players and the start of  MLS play.

LA county seems to have enough coverage for the boys DA , newer applicants late to the party will have a tougher time making a case for membership in that market /space.


----------



## Distraction

I would also venture that there is little interest from the MLS academies to add additional non-MLS DA teams to the mix, and I would guess that the MLS academies have a lot of say in who gets added and who doesn't.

"With due respect, playing against youth clubs with no pro team (i.e. amateur clubs) does us [LA Galaxy Academy] no good. It’s too easy. Pound for pound, not only is our roster superior, but the entire development environment from proper training, to facilities, to incentives, make the team too good to play against the amateur sides."

http://blog.3four3.com/2016/08/24/xolos-galaxy-u16-possession-soccer-development-environment/


----------



## pique2002

I have a lot of respect for Galaxy organization, but way more for FC Dallas Academy that truly dominates the DA in the last few years and developed youth players into pros. Galaxy still has a way to go with their U17/18 that ranks 8 of 9 in the Southwest Division currently.

*Rank* *West U-17/18 Southwest Division* *GP* *W* *L* *T* *Pts* *GF* *GA* *GD* *Pts/GP*
1 Real So Cal U-17/18[PLAYOFFS 8] 8 6 2 0 18 30 11 19 2.25
2 Real Salt Lake AZ U-17/18[PLAYOFFS 13] 8 5 1 2 17 20 7 13 2.125
3 Arsenal FC U-17/18[PLAYOFFS 21] 8 3 2 3 12 12 13 -1 1.5
4 Strikers FC U-17/18 7 3 3 1 10 9 9 0 1.4286
5 FC Golden State U-17/18 7 2 2 3 9 11 11 0 1.2857
6 Pateadores U-17/18 8 2 2 4 10 15 13 2 1.25
7 Nomads SC U-17/18 8 3 4 1 10 13 11 2 1.25
8 LA Galaxy U-17/18 7 2 4 1 7 12 10 2 1
9 San Diego Surf U-17/18 8 1 5 2 5 6 25 -19 0.625

http://www.ussoccerda.com/sam/standings/league/standings.php?leagueId=MTAwMw==

Galaxy DA should peak at U17/18 not at younger age so the prospects has real chance to go pro. If it were too easy at young age to play against other amateur club, what went wrong at U17/18 that Galaxy could not compete against the amateur clubs locally, let along the pro clubs?


----------



## sbay

Distraction said:


> I would also venture that there is little interest from the MLS academies to add additional non-MLS DA teams to the mix, and I would guess that the MLS academies have a lot of say in who gets added and who doesn't.
> 
> "With due respect, playing against youth clubs with no pro team (i.e. amateur clubs) does us [LA Galaxy Academy] no good. It’s too easy. Pound for pound, not only is our roster superior, but the entire development environment from proper training, to facilities, to incentives, make the team too good to play against the amateur sides."
> 
> http://blog.3four3.com/2016/08/24/xolos-galaxy-u16-possession-soccer-development-environment/


I don't disagree at all with you.  I think it is clear MLS teams with DA have a clear step up in terms of caliber.  My only argument is that not everyone has access to MLS DA teams.  Therefore, there is a market for players who could play at MLS DA teams, but can't for whatever logistical reason.  MLS DA teams are not accessible to everyone just due to geography...

On your list there are a lot of non-MLS teams above LAG.  So does that make playing against non-MLS teams not challenging enough?  

good article though!


----------



## justneededaname

pique2002 said:


> I have a lot of respect for Galaxy organization, but way more for FC Dallas Academy that truly dominates the DA in the last few years and developed youth players into pros. Galaxy still has a way to go with their U17/18 that ranks 8 of 9 in the Southwest Division currently.


Agree, FC Dallas is probably the gold standard for academies in the US at this point.

It is an interesting question as to why LAG is doing so poorly at the 17/18 age group. Reasons I can think of:

 - The best 17/18s in the LAG system are playing for Los Dos and not the academy team
 - Parents might not want to commit to the high school
 - Their coaches suck (the 3four3 coaches Distraction quoted tend to work with younger teams...and agree...interesting read)
 - This particular age group has a group of kids more focused on college than pro

I don't know if any of these are the case. Just brainstorming.

But, if a player is truly high enough quality to go pro, I cannot think of a good reason to play for a club other than LAG (and LAFC in the future) and miss out on the advantages of a homegrown contract.


----------



## younothat

justneededaname said:


> Agree, FC Dallas is probably the gold standard for academies in the US at this point.
> 
> It is an interesting question as to why LAG is doing so poorly at the 17/18 age group. Reasons I can think of:
> 
> - The best 17/18s in the LAG system are playing for Los Dos and not the academy team
> - Parents might not want to commit to the high school
> - Their coaches suck (the 3four3 coaches Distraction quoted tend to work with younger teams...and agree...interesting read)
> - This particular age group has a group of kids more focused on college than pro
> 
> I don't know if any of these are the case. Just brainstorming.
> 
> But, if a player is truly high enough quality to go pro, I cannot think of a good reason to play for a club other than LAG (and LAFC in the future) and miss out on the advantages of a homegrown contract.


Pretty good reasoning, (maybe not the coaching part)  most of the exceptional players by this age have a bunch of options and DA is sometimes not their primary focus any longer.

I would say same goes for the 17/18 team, doesn't seem to get as much attention or focus as the others for LAG for whatever reasons.  I'm pretty sure they could stack a U17/18 team if they wanted to, notice the roster for this team is short compared to the others,  two of the best have moved on, and there are very few outside recruits if at all.

The  http://blog.3four3.com/2016/08/24/xolos-galaxy-u16-possession-soccer-development-environment/  article hit's the nail on the head. 

"If we want MLS franchises to have more and better competition, we must enable others to compete with them.

How? You open the soccer economy to all clubs. For those of you who aren’t aware, that means opening the pyramid (aka promotion & relegation at the pro level).

When you open the pyramid, there is more competition for MLS franchises.
They will no longer have a monopoly on their geographic player pool.
They will no longer be the only ones with an incentive to develop professionals

Opening the pyramid provides a real business case for existing lower division pro clubs to take player development serious. Currently most don’t even have youth teams, let alone take it serious. So of course MLS academies aren’t being challenged.

It also provides historically youth-only clubs a real business case for launching their own first teams. That, in turn, obviously stimulates them to take player development seriously.

It mobilizes investors & capital currently locked out of MLS to flow into lower division clubs, which as mentioned above, would now have a strong incentive to develop and field far more serious youth sides.

Ladies and gentlemen, this is how top performing ecosystems work

It’s called an open economic market. Open markets create fierce competition".


----------



## galaxydad

The huge issue is the lack of an open market and Id argue that some clubs want it to be a limited market because its not about developing players but about the $$$. Do not tell me Strikers and Pats can't afford to make the DA free but they are filling their purses instead- So OC and SD kids have to travel great distances to be trained by a real academy team. Only LAG,LAFC and LAFA have their DA's free of charge and that is an issue geographically as pointed out earlier. Its comedy that they don't allow their DA teams to play teams outside the DA. Id argue that several none DA teams are better than most of the current teams within the DA. At the  03 age group CDA Slammers, West Coast, Oxnard, Valley United would beat most of the DA teams and Slammers and West Coast have in the rare tournament that the DA teams managed to play.  

Id also like to point out that so few are cut out for the professional ranks, the money is not there by a long shot so Id rather have my kids shoot for a scholarship to a university than give up everything to play in a professional system where they are making on average $22,000 a year in Los Dos


----------



## mahrez

Opening up the pyramid and moving towards real regulation & promotion is something sorely needed.

DA's aim is to be more player focus rather than team.  Longer term game-centric approach.  Spend more time training to improve individuals.  Normal clubs teams care more about how well the teams are doing as a whole.

DA is looking to place players in the national team pools,  players can be on a bottom of the table team but still get recognized.  Over the teams record many clubs consider player placement more important than team results.

Comparing DA to regular amateur club teams is a bit like Apple to Oranges because often they have different goals or mandates.   Winning league, tournments, whos best is not a big concern but player progress is for the DA league.  The playing field is not level, DA and MLS are looking for those few individual spectacular players and don't care as much about team results or what team you play for.


----------



## Wez

galaxydad said:


> Do not tell me Strikers can't afford to make the DA free but they are filling their purses instead...


Do you mean they don't charge a club fee but still charge for travel?


----------



## JJP

justneededaname said:


> Agree, FC Dallas is probably the gold standard for academies in the US at this point.
> 
> It is an interesting question as to why LAG is doing so poorly at the 17/18 age group. Reasons I can think of:
> 
> - The best 17/18s in the LAG system are playing for Los Dos and not the academy team


This is probably the reason.  If you are 17-18 and you are not on at least Galaxy 2, you are probably not pro caliber.  There are exceptions.  I think Zardes went to college and then joined Galaxy, but Zardes is really the exception, not the rule.  There are many doors that open up for players with skill, can dunk a b-ball, and run like an NFL WR.

If you are not as physically talented, you probably have to be good enough to at least get rostered in an MLS second team by 18 or the doors of opportunity slam shut.


----------



## Eagle33

Wez said:


> Do you mean they don't charge a club fee but still charge for travel?


Both. They pay fees AND travel expenses


----------



## Box2Box

Slammers Irvine will officially be L.A Galaxy OC in the 17-18 season and beyond. Anyone know if they will produce their own DA? Like the SD connection.


----------



## mahrez

Box2Box said:


> Slammers Irvine will officially be L.A Galaxy OC in the 17-18 season and beyond. Anyone know if they will produce their own DA? Like the SD connection.


They can apply like any club but would be a longshot for acceptance

LA Galaxy Academy is a separate entity, they will take players from anywhere and you don't necessarily have a advantage playing for a affiliate unless your coach moves over.

Carlsbad (turned into Galaxy SD) is a special case in the womens da who where accepted before LA Galaxy applied and are 75 miles away so don't count on any more  affiliates getting in unless they meet the 7 criteria.


----------



## mahrez

The U.S. Soccer Development Academy application for 2017-18 is now closed. 

Record number of applications submitted: which new clubs will get approved? 

Existing ones with priority to expand I was told so look for most with the 3 teams to get 5.   1 to 3 is much bigger numbers so will have to see. Unless MLS 1 to 5 not likely.


January 23, 2017 - Application Decisions Announced
February 6, 2017 - New Clubs Confirm Participation


----------



## BJ18

mahrez said:


> The U.S. Soccer Development Academy application for 2017-18 is now closed.
> 
> Record number of applications submitted: which new clubs will get approved?
> 
> Existing ones with priority to expand I was told so look for most with the 3 teams to get 5.   1 to 3 is much bigger numbers so will have to see. Unless MLS 1 to 5 not likely.
> 
> 
> January 23, 2017 - Application Decisions Announced
> February 6, 2017 - New Clubs Confirm Participation


How do you know a record number of applications were submitted?  Is there a list somewhere of those that applied?


----------



## GKDad65

mahrez said:


> Opening up the pyramid and moving towards real regulation & promotion is something sorely needed.
> 
> DA's aim is to be more player focus rather than team.  Longer term game-centric approach.  Spend more time training to improve individuals.  Normal clubs teams care more about how well the teams are doing as a whole.
> 
> DA is looking to place players in the national team pools,  players can be on a bottom of the table team but still get recognized.  Over the teams record many clubs consider player placement more important than team results.
> 
> Comparing DA to regular amateur club teams is a bit like Apple to Oranges because often they have different goals or mandates.   Winning league, tournments, whos best is not a big concern but player progress is for the DA league.  The playing field is not level, DA and MLS are looking for those few individual spectacular players and don't care as much about team results or what team you play for.


You're kidding yourself.  DA is just another league.  You may have an advantage playing for a "real" MLS club, not the "fake" affiliates, but all in all DA is just another league, no better no worse.  More sugar for my Kool-Aid!


----------



## mahrez

BJ18 said:


> How do you know a record number of applications were submitted?  Is there a list somewhere of those that applied?


Yes over 200 applications this year,  no the list is not public.

There are 134 clubs across the country currently participating in the DA league. More will be added for 17-18'.

The annocments to the clubs are going out tomorrow 1/10, by 2/6 they confirm participation and a public announcement on the ussda site will be posted shortly after that.

Arena Calls 32 Players, 10 Development Academy Alums for MNT January Camp
http://www.ussoccerda.com/20170105-mnt-release-head-coach-bruce-arena-calls-32-players-for-january-camp


----------



## Myleftfoot

younothat said:


> Huh wonder why ussda decided to stick with the combined age groups  for the olders?
> 
> Extending the league to U18/19 does give current U17/18's 99'S a chance to continue on with DA
> 
> u15 seems to be the age now where we see a drop in the number of teams in the in the league.
> 
> I would quess that unless you already have a 03' team (will be U15 in 17-19') or get full da, new or partial clubs might have a tough time getting into the U15 age group.  With each region already having 12 03' teams may not be a lot of room for more?
> 
> The big question is what will LAFC apply for this time? and will they partner or go alone?
> 
> Please post up if you know of new clubs applying or any plans you have heard from your club(s).




* U.S. SOCCER DEVELOPMENT ACADEMY INTRODUCES U-15 SINGLE AGE GROUP FOR 2017-2018 SEASON *




_ Change to Pathway is Part of a Long-Term Plan for Improved Player Development;
Five Academy Clubs Receive Promotion into U-15 Age Group, Joining 73 Current Academies _



CHICAGO (Jan. 9, 2017) - As part of an overall goal to improve the player development pathway for elite boys soccer players, the U.S. Soccer Development Academy is adding a U-15 single age group for the 2017-2018 season. The strategic move to expand the pathway is part of a long-term plan for player development, and will provide Academy clubs with the opportunity to enhance their efforts to develop world-class players.

"The addition of the U-15 age group is another important step to ensure players have the opportunities they need to develop on and off the field," U.S. Soccer Development Academy Director Jared Micklos said. "We have all seen the benefits of the increased opportunities this season with the split of last season's U-13/14 division into single U-13 and U-14 age groups. We believe the U-15 age group will be another avenue for clubs to further their player development efforts."

At the beginning of the current 2016-2017 Development Academy Season, the move to split the previously combined U-13/14 age group to single ages (U-13 and U-14) made a significant improvement in the player development pathway by increasing the overall number of players, teams, clubs and games. With the addition of a single birth year U-15 age group, the pool of elite players will expand further, adding approximately 1,500 players to Academy clubs and raising the total number of Academy players across all age groups to more than 12,000.

The change to a U-15 single age group is in coordination with the birth year mandate that will go into effect at the beginning of the 2017-2018 season. The Academy will continue to register players by birth year and all of the six age groups featured in 2017-18 will provide a continuous pathway for players from Zone 1 (age 6-11), through Zone 2 (age 12-17), and into Zone 3 (age 18 and above). Having single age groups throughout the foundational ages (U-12 through U-15) creates a player pathway with no gaps in maturity. This further allows Academy coaches and technical staff to  mitigate relative age effect  and gives an additional ability to play younger players up when they are ready.

The goals of the new U-15 single age group will continue to be aligned with U.S. Soccer Development Academy objectives, which include more training, playing fewer total games, but more meaningful games, having age-appropriate travel and competition, reducing costs, paving a consistent development pathway, and playing under a simplified calendar that allows clubs to plan for elite level international and domestic events. Overall, developing players starts with coaching. The addition of U-15 age group will provide players with coaches that meet the minimum  U.S. Soccer B license standard  and create a positive learning environment focused on individual development within the team concept.

"Over time, we have closely monitored the Development Academy combined groups to assess the impact on talent identification and development, especially at the ages during early adolescence where there can be significant physical differences, based on an individual's maturation rate," said Director of Scouting Tony Lepore. "From looking at the data and speaking with our Technical Advisors and club directors, we know that adding U-15 single age group to the program will not only expand the influence and player pool, but it will also help clubs streamline the learning environment and allow individual players to follow their own pathway. The expansion to U-15 single age will really help to provide a place for individuals born later in the year or talented late developers, similar to what we have seen with the addition of the DA U-13 single age group this season."

The change will see five clubs rewarded with promotion of a team into the U-15 expansion age group:

Albion SC - San Diego, Calif.
Armada FC Pro Academy - Jacksonville, Fla.
Ballistic United SC - Pleasanton, Calif.
Cedar Stars Academy - Carlstadt, N.J.
New York Soccer Club - Chappaqua, N.Y.
Virginia Development Academy - Woodbridge, Va.


----------



## Sane65

mahrez said:


> The U.S. Soccer Development Academy application for 2017-18 is now closed.
> 
> Record number of applications submitted: which new clubs will get approved?
> 
> Existing ones with priority to expand I was told so look for most with the 3 teams to get 5.   1 to 3 is much bigger numbers so will have to see. Unless MLS 1 to 5 not likely.
> 
> 
> January 23, 2017 - Application Decisions Announced
> February 6, 2017 - New Clubs Confirm Participation


Any early news on club acceptance into Developmental Academy? ....


----------



## younothat

Sane65 said:


> Any early news on club acceptance into Developmental Academy? ....


Ask your club next Tuesday 1/24 , the Application Decisions are going out this week and should filter down by next Monday,  Should be posted on the ussda site 1st week in February after those clubs confirm acceptance.


----------



## Sane65

younothat said:


> Ask your club next Tuesday 1/24 , the Application Decisions are going out this week and should filter down by next Monday,  Should be posted on the ussda site 1st week in February after those clubs confirm acceptance.


Monday 1/23....  I am curious to see if there is any information out there yet?  I know it will eventually trickle down to SoCal but just checking in to see if anyone has updates.


----------



## Box2Box

Sane65 said:


> Monday 1/23....  I am curious to see if there is any information out there yet?  I know it will eventually trickle down to SoCal but just checking in to see if anyone has updates.


It sounds like a "decline" for most that applied.


----------



## Sane65

Box2Box said:


> It sounds like a "decline" for most that applied.


Crickets......


----------



## PandM

Sane65 said:


> Crickets......


In SD Carlsbad granted 2004 and 2005, SDSC denied and CVFC denied


----------



## BJ18

PandM said:


> In SD Carlsbad granted 2004 and 2005, SDSC denied and CVFC denied


Legends granted 2006.


----------



## megnation

BJ18 said:


> Legends granted 2006.


Wow so adding Legends into the mix. Anyone else get added? Anyone get dropped?


----------



## Box2Box

megnation said:


> Wow so adding Legends into the mix. Anyone else get added? Anyone get dropped?


There's speculation that tfa will lose their status for the 04/05 in the 17-18 season. Can anyone confirm this?


----------



## BJ18

Box2Box said:


> There's speculation that tfa will lose their status for the 04/05 in the 17-18 season. Can anyone confirm this?


I heard the same thing yesterday as well.  TFA to lose 04/05.


----------



## justneededaname

BJ18 said:


> I heard the same thing yesterday as well.  TFA to lose 04/05.


Someone is going to be really happy when that TFA DA 05 team shows up at their doorstep.


----------



## Box2Box

justneededaname said:


> Someone is going to be really happy when that TFA DA 05 team shows up at their doorstep.


The other question is what would become of tfa


----------



## justneededaname

PandM said:


> In SD Carlsbad granted 2004 and 2005, SDSC denied and CVFC denied


Not surprising. Being affiliated with LAG probably had some influence. Gives North County parents an alternative to Surf. Which makes parents happy and Surf sad.


----------



## mahrez

No SC DA club had their total amount of teams reduced as far as I know.

Remember new clubs applied for one of three options: U-12 only, U-12 to U-14, and full Academy.

Existing Academy clubs applied  for one of three expansion options depending upon their current status: U-13 & U-14, U-13 to U-18/19, and U-16/17 & U-18/19.

For the existing clubs with say (1) team this 16-17'  year like a TFA they may have not been approved for the three dev set:  U12, U13, U14 for 17-18 but they still retain the (1) U12 team for 17-18' but that just happens to be the 06' age group for that playing year.


----------



## PandM

mahrez said:


> No SC DA club had their amount of teams reduced as far i can tell.
> 
> Remember new clubs applied for one of three options: U-12 only, U-12 to U-14, and full Academy.
> 
> Existing Academy clubs applied  for one of three expansion options depending upon their current status: U-13 & U-14, U-13 to U-18/19, and U-16/17 & U-18/19.
> 
> For the existing clubs with say (1) team this 16-17'  year like a TFA they may have not been approved for the three dev set:  U12, U13, U14 for 17-18 but they still retain the (1) U12 team for 17-18' but that just happens to be the 06' age group for that playing year.


correct SDSC and CVFC still have 2006


----------



## Myleftfoot

mahrez said:


> No SC DA club had their total amount of teams reduced as far as I know.
> 
> Remember new clubs applied for one of three options: U-12 only, U-12 to U-14, and full Academy.
> 
> Existing Academy clubs applied  for one of three expansion options depending upon their current status: U-13 & U-14, U-13 to U-18/19, and U-16/17 & U-18/19.
> 
> For the existing clubs with say (1) team this 16-17'  year like a TFA they may have not been approved for the three dev set:  U12, U13, U14 for 17-18 but they still retain the (1) U12 team for 17-18' but that just happens to be the 06' age group for that playing year.


What about LAUFA? Are they going to have 03's and 02's next season?


----------



## mahrez

Myleftfoot said:


> What about LAUFA? Are they going to have 03's and 02's next season?


For those existing clubs ( Santa Barbara, Albion, LAUFA) with the (3) dev set: U12, U13, U14 they have those for 17-18'  plus whatever else was approved or not?

We know Albion has U15 due to previous promotion but I haven't heard or seen anything about those other clubs yet. Maybe somebody in the know can post up with that info?


----------



## DefenseWins

What a bummer for TFA.  Anyone have any insight on why they weren't approved for more teams?


----------



## Distraction

DefenseWins said:


> What a bummer for TFA.  Anyone have any insight on why they weren't approved for more teams?


1. Everybody hates TFA.
2. LAG and LAFC want their players.


----------



## 3leches

Really surprised to hear about TFA if the rumors are true. TFA has a good program that produces great players.


----------



## Colombichi

3leches said:


> Really surprised to hear about TFA if the rumors are true. TFA has a good program that produces great players.


I would say that TFA scouts top quality young players based on their winning reputation. Not sure how well they develop players because the top TFA talent eventually gets picked up by Galaxy and now the new LAFC.


----------



## justneededaname

3leches said:


> Really surprised to hear about TFA if the rumors are true. TFA has a good program that produces great players.


I bet there are going to be girls team coaches lined up out the door to try to recruit the two 05 girls.


----------



## 3leches

still unfortunate ,development or no development.


----------



## DefenseWins

Distraction said:


> 1. Everybody hates TFA.
> 2. LAG and LAFC want their players.


While I can see why TFA families would say this, it's assuming that US Soccer has been politicized, which I would hope isn't the case.  However, they are geographically pretty darn close to So Cal's two MLS Academies.  And once LAFC moves into their new stadium they'll be even closer together.  With that said, because they always put a good product on the field for others to compete against, it IS a bummer.


----------



## Colombichi

f


3leches said:


> still unfortunate ,development or no development.


For sure I agree with you. Its tough to break up their current 04 & 05 academy teams. They


DefenseWins said:


> While I can see why TFA families would say this, it's assuming that US Soccer has been politicized, which I would hope isn't the case.  However, they are geographically pretty darn close to So Cal's two MLS Academies.  And once LAFC moves into their new stadium they'll be even closer together.  With that said, because they always put a good product on the field for others to compete against, it IS a bummer.


Well stated!


----------



## Distraction

DefenseWins said:


> While I can see why TFA families would say this, it's assuming that US Soccer has been politicized, which I would hope isn't the case.  However, they are geographically pretty darn close to So Cal's two MLS Academies.  And once LAFC moves into their new stadium they'll be even closer together.  With that said, because they always put a good product on the field for others to compete against, it IS a bummer.


With BK at LAG and JC at LAFC working on the same style of soccer there is no need for TFA in central LA past U11. For the youngers, definitely still a market for them.


----------



## mahrez

DefenseWins said:


> While I can see why TFA families would say this, it's assuming that US Soccer has been politicized, which I would hope isn't the case.  However, they are geographically pretty darn close to So Cal's two MLS Academies.  And once LAFC moves into their new stadium they'll be even closer together.  With that said, because they always put a good product on the field for others to compete against, it IS a bummer.


Some politics play a role in just about everything but the ussda does have a strict criteria for applications: http://www.ussoccerda.com/overview-join-the-academy

Geography,  location of several other existing da clubs in the LA county area.

TFA has'nt been around that long traditionally focused on the younger ages so may not have much to show for players in the YNT or pro levels yet.

TFA's staffing doesn't have former world cup players as a director, coaches, or really any high profile ex soccer players or anything like that I'm sure doesn't help when looking at one of the criteria. 

I watched some of the TFA u12's at the futsal showcases this past weekend and I was impressed,  those players stood out compared to the other teams.

What would help everyone not just TFA is a more open approach with real regulation & promotion where some of establishment that has lost its ways can be replaced with those org, coaches, and teams doing a better job of development.


----------



## Bubbles

Distraction said:


> With BK at LAG and JC at LAFC working on the same style of soccer there is no need for TFA in central LA past U11. For the youngers, definitely still a market for them.


If LAG and LAFC are serious about their first team playing in that style, surely it's in their interests that as many clubs as possible in southern california play that same way.


----------



## 3leches

I agree that TFA stood out this weekend by far at the futsal tournament


----------



## ADPSOCCER

LA Premier is in for BU12's starting this Fall.
http://www.lapremierfc.com/football/boysda


----------



## younothat

One change I heard about this past weekend is for the youngest age group DA U12 scores will not keep any longer starting in the 17-18' season.   Currently, there are no standing until U15/16  but scores are kept for all events and age groups.

Is this a good idea?   Will this diminish the competitive  spirit, will  and desire to win or this help player, clubs, teams to work on their identity, style of play without being overly concerned with the game results?


----------



## megnation

younothat said:


> One change I heard about this past weekend is for the youngest age group DA U12 scores will not keep any longer starting in the 17-18' season.   Currently, there are no standing until U15/16  but scores are kept for all events and age groups.
> 
> Is this a good idea?   Will this diminish the competitive  spirit, will  and desire to win or this help player, clubs, teams to work on their identity, style of play without being overly concerned with the game results?


I remember when SCDSL started doing this and everyone was up in arms over it. At the end of the day we have posters on the forum who will share the scores ..... hopefully.


----------



## uburoi

Everyone has heard this analogy but I'll repeat it. When Germany reformulated its national culture when it came to soccer and abandoned scorelines until the older ages, above 13 I think it was, 10 years later they won the world cup. I think this was done across European countries and not just Germany. Someone on the forum probably knows. If this works, why not try it? Do you think the kids really care or is it just the parents that care? Parents ruin the game for the kids, we know this. We also know that kids know that they played good or not, usually. They have the rest of their life to work on winning and losing. What about just developing?


----------



## Box2Box

uburoi said:


> Everyone has heard this analogy but I'll repeat it. When Germany reformulated its national culture when it came to soccer and abandoned scorelines until the older ages, above 13 I think it was, 10 years later they won the world cup. I think this was done across European countries and not just Germany. Someone on the forum probably knows. If this works, why not try it? Do you think the kids really care or is it just the parents that care? Parents ruin the game for the kids, we know this. We also know that kids know that they played good or not, usually. They have the rest of their life to work on winning and losing. What about just developing?


Too many parents and coaches over value winning. Someone here even mentioned abandoning good soccer as long as it gives you a chance of winning a big tournament.


----------



## Zvezdas

I am curious, what happened to BF310 u12 bid for the academy status?


----------



## espola

younothat said:


> One change I heard about this past weekend is for the youngest age group DA U12 scores will not keep any longer starting in the 17-18' season.   Currently, there are no standing until U15/16  but scores are kept for all events and age groups.
> 
> Is this a good idea?   Will this diminish the competitive  spirit, will  and desire to win or this help player, clubs, teams to work on their identity, style of play without being overly concerned with the game results?


If you are not keeping scores or standings, why bother with goalkeepers or defense?  If the opponents put the ball in your net, you just get the ball back halfway up the field, for free.


----------



## justneededaname

When these discussions pop up, I always find myself going back to 3four3 and spending some time reading. What does Gary say on the subject? I can never find the blogs that I think I remember, and I usually just find the ones that make me realize that he would call me an idiot, ignorant, and an amateur (and he is probably right).

Here is one I found today:

Winning vs Development: Really? That’s the problem?
http://blog.3four3.com/2010/12/11/winning-vs-soccer-development-really-thats-the-problem/

Read through his replies in the comments. It is definitely worth it.

When it comes to deciding whether we should keep score, I wonder if we should ask the players what they think. I remember back when my son was 4 and playing in his first community league. There were no scores kept by adults. But my son sure did. He always knew the score. He plays soccer because you score points. This is a kid who stopped riding his bike that same year. I love bike riding and was looking forward to years of riding with him. When I asked him why he stopped, his answer was "You can't score points on a bike." For my son, scoring points matters. Scoring more points than the other team is what drives him to get better. He cares about his development because he knows it will help him win. If all of the training had no end result he wouldn't be interested in putting in the hard work needed to get better. 

Who does a development-only model serve? The kids? Hardly. 99.9% of them will never get to a level where they can practice that development. Might it be better for US soccer in the long run? Might the US national team win more games? Might the MLS be prettier to watch? Maybe. But my kid really doesn't give a damn about whether the US national team wins more games sometime in the future. That will not motivate him to work hard, pay attention in practice, and try to apply what he has learned on the soccer field. Winning is what motivates him to do those things.


----------



## KoaBear

Distraction said:


> With BK at LAG and JC at LAFC working on the same style of soccer there is no need for TFA in central LA past U11. For the youngers, definitely still a market for them.


Is it true that JC is no longer at LAFC?!?!?


----------



## mahrez

*Second Largest Development Academy Expansion Welcomes 17 New Clubs for 2017-2018 Season*
_17 Clubs, 165 teams and 2 divisions added for 2017-18 Development Academy Season_
http://www.ussoccerda.com/20170203-development-academy-expansion-announcement


----------



## espola

mahrez said:


> *Second Largest Development Academy Expansion Welcomes 17 New Clubs for 2017-2018 Season*
> _17 Clubs, 165 teams and 2 divisions added for 2017-18 Development Academy Season_
> http://www.ussoccerda.com/20170203-development-academy-expansion-announcement


Nothing in there about how well the "development" is doing except a throwaway line at the end about how many Academy graduates are playing pro and MNT.  How much better are those players than they would have been without DA?


----------



## mahrez

_Adding 165 teams _for the 17-18 is more than most would have guessed, ussda is really increasing at a rate (more so in other parts of the county) not seen before these last two seasons:

SoCal Summary:

NEW CLUBS WELCOMED AT U-11/12:

Legends FC (LA)
Los Angeles Premier FC (LA)
Murrieta Surf Soccer Club (LA)
EXISTING CLUBS PROMOTED INTO U-13 & U14:

LA Galaxy San Diego (Southwest)
Los Angeles Football Club (LAFC) (Southwest)
EXISTING CLUBS PROMOTED INTO U-15:

Albion SC (Southwest)
Los Angeles United Futbol Academy (Southwest)
EXISTING CLUBS PROMOTED INTO U-16/17:

Albion SC (Southwest)


----------



## DefenseWins

Add Rebels Soccer Club from San Diego to your new U-11/12 clubs.


----------



## Dargle

What is unsaid in this announcement, but should be considered carefully by parents in the 2006 age group who are considering Development Academy for their son starting this coming season when they become eligible for U12, is that very few clubs that received U12 Academy slots last year were promoted to the U13 age groups (pretty much only the academies affiliated with professional clubs).  Clubs may promise that they are applying to get full academy in future years, but the evidence suggests that those efforts are unlikely to succeed.  That means if you move from your existing team to take a spot on a DA team in a club that only has a U12 Academy Program, there is a very good chance you will have to move again the following year if you want to stay in the DA.  Moreover, because the pool of U12 Academy clubs is intentionally much larger than the clubs with U13 DA teams (150 v. 115 in 2017-2018), many kids won't even be able to stay in the DA after this one year and they will have to not only move to a third club in three years, but they (and their parents) will have to accept a "demotion" back to regular club soccer.  It's not a reason not to take the leap (as they say, "you can't win if you don't enter"), but it is something to consider.  It's easier to get into DA now than ever before because of the increased number of entry-level slots, but the high school-level slots really haven't changed in the last several years.  It's a wider funnel, with a very narrow spout.


----------



## younothat

DefenseWins said:


> Add Rebels Soccer Club from San Diego to your new U-11/12 clubs.


NEW CLUBS WELCOMED AT U-11/12:

Legends FC (LA)
Los Angeles Premier FC (LA)
Murrieta Surf Soccer Club (LA)
Rebels Soccer Club (San Diego)



Dargle said:


> What is unsaid in this announcement, but should be considered carefully by parents in the 2006 age group who are considering Development Academy for their son starting this coming season when they become eligible for U12, is that very few clubs that received U12 Academy slots last year were promoted to the U13 age groups (pretty much only the academies affiliated with professional clubs).  Clubs may promise that they are applying to get full academy in future years, but the evidence suggests that those efforts are unlikely to succeed.  That means if you move from your existing team to take a spot on a DA team in a club that only has a U12 Academy Program, there is a very good chance you will have to move again the following year if you want to stay in the DA.  Moreover, because the pool of U12 Academy clubs is intentionally much larger than the clubs with U13 DA teams (150 v. 115 in 2017-2018), many kids won't even be able to stay in the DA after this one year and they will have to not only move to a third club in three years, but they (and their parents) will have to accept a "demotion" back to regular club soccer.  It's not a reason not to take the leap (as they say, "you can't win if you don't enter"), but it is something to consider.  It's easier to get into DA now than ever before because of the increased number of entry-level slots, but the high school-level slots really haven't changed in the last several years.  It's a wider funnel, with a very narrow spout.


The ussda way of promotion (subtraction + philosophy buy in, geography, player production, etc) is different and does favor the establishment or existing members more than new ones.  One could say those late to the party have a more difficult time being invited back to other parties.  For these new U11/12 clubs there are some methods to mitigate ... 07's (thats why u11 is listed)  in certain numbers so they can play next year at u12 again for example.

U12 was new this year and one year in the league clubs were not a priority over new geographical regions or clubs, for example, this expansion year.   You really have to stand out if you're not an MLS or pro affiliate but as we've seen with these promos possible for high value smaller to mid-size niche clubs.

Since there is no normal promo/reg system this hybrid approach...the number of players are way up in ussda even for the high school kids nut yes there is a pyramid of numbers to some extent just like number of HS players to college ones...U18/19...numbers reduce drastically


----------



## tylerdurden

mahrez said:


> _Adding 165 teams _for the 17-18 is more than most would have guessed, ussda is really increasing at a rate (more so in other parts of the county) not seen before these last two seasons:
> 
> EXISTING CLUBS PROMOTED INTO U-13 & U14:
> 
> LA Galaxy San Diego (Southwest)
> Los Angeles Football Club (LAFC) (Southwest)


So who's the LAFC team? Is this the '03 Slammers Godinez team?


----------



## Box2Box

tylerdurden said:


> So who's the LAFC team? Is this the '03 Slammers Godinez team?


No 03 team in lafc for 17-18


----------



## mahrez

tylerdurden said:


> So who's the LAFC team? Is this the '03 Slammers Godinez team?


No,  new: LAFC team U13(05) & U14(existing 04's which are playing U12 For LAFC) this year.

U15 (03') is for 17-18 ussda and LAFC only has the 3 team dev set: u11/12, U13, u14.


----------



## PandM

Does anyone have a link to or a list of the 2004 U14 Southwest Division for next season?


----------



## younothat

PandM said:


> Does anyone have a link to or a list of the 2004 U14 Southwest Division for next season?


Existing: 

Albion SC
Arsenal FC
Central California Aztecs
FC Golden State
L.A. United Futbol Academy
L.A. Galaxy
Nomads SC
Pateadores
Real So Cal
San Diego Surf
Santa Barbara Soccer Club
Strikers FC

New: 

LA Galaxy San Diego 
Los Angeles Football Club


----------



## PandM

younothat said:


> Existing:
> 
> Albion SC
> Arsenal FC
> Central California Aztecs
> FC Golden State
> L.A. United Futbol Academy
> L.A. Galaxy
> Nomads SC
> Pateadores
> Real So Cal
> San Diego Surf
> Santa Barbara Soccer Club
> Strikers FC
> 
> New:
> 
> LA Galaxy San Diego
> Los Angeles Football Club


 Thanks where did you get this list?


----------



## younothat

PandM said:


> Thanks where did you get this list?


ussda web site


----------



## JJP

mahrez said:


> No,  new: LAFC team U13(05) & U14(existing 04's which are playing U12 For LAFC) this year.
> 
> U15 (03') is for 17-18 ussda and LAFC only has the 3 team dev set: u11/12, U13, u14.


That's confusing.  This year the 04s are u12, 03s are u13, and 02s are u14.

So next year the 05s should be u12s and the 04s u13.  Yet your post says LAFC will have a u14 team.

I think you meant LAFC will have an 04 u13 and 05 u14 team.  There will be no 03 u14 team for LAFC.


----------



## younothat

JJP said:


> That's confusing.  This year the 04s are u12, 03s are u13, and 02s are u14.
> 
> So next year the 05s should be u12s and the 04s u13.  Yet your post says LAFC will have a u14 team.
> 
> I think you meant LAFC will have an 04 u13 and 05 u14 team.  There will be no 03 u14 team for LAFC.


For Ussda the age groups make up a year in 17-18' since they were behind:
16-17'  U12/04 U13/03 U14/02  U15/16  (01/00)
17-18'  U12/06 U13/05 U14/04 U15/03

LAFC has the 3 development teams for 17-18:  U12-U14 there is no U15/03 for them.


----------



## JJP

younothat said:


> For Ussda the age groups make up a year in 17-18' since they were behind:
> 16-17'  U12/04 U13/03 U14/02  U15/16  (01/00)
> 17-18'  U12/06 U13/05 U14/04 U15/03
> 
> LAFC has the 3 development teams for 17-18:  U12-U14 there is no U15/03 for them.


So the 03s go from u13 to u15.  Right now most ussda teams have a combined u15-16 team.  Is there going to be separate u15 and u16 teams next year?


----------



## fhr2k3

JJP said:


> So the 03s go from u13 to u15.  Right now most ussda teams have a combined u15-16 team.  Is there going to be separate u15 and u16 teams next year?


new age groups
u16/u17 &
u18/u19


----------



## PandM

JJP said:


> That's confusing.  This year the 04s are u12, 03s are u13, and 02s are u14.
> 
> So next year the 05s should be u12s and the 04s u13.  Yet your post says LAFC will have a u14 team.
> 
> I think you meant LAFC will have an 04 u13 and 05 u14 team.  There will be no 03 u14 team for LAFC.


They all skip a year next year. 2004 should be U13 this year, 2005 is U12 this year and will be U13 academy next year and 2004 will be U14 the introduction of the U12 Academy made it pretty wonkey. The U12 academy next year will be 2006


----------



## PandM

JJP said:


> So the 03s go from u13 to u15.  Right now most ussda teams have a combined u15-16 team.  Is there going to be separate u15 and u16 teams next year?


Separate U15 next year, U16/17 and U18/19


----------



## JackZ

younothat said:


> For Ussda the age groups make up a year in 17-18' since they were behind:
> 16-17'  U12/04 U13/03 U14/02  U15/16  (01/00)
> 17-18'  U12/06 U13/05 U14/04 U15/03
> 
> LAFC has the 3 development teams for 17-18:  U12-U14 there is no U15/03 for them.


Ah ha, so for 17/18 the DA age groups designations will match the Cal South ones ...


----------



## SBFDad

JackZ said:


> Ah ha, so for 17/18 the DA age groups designations will match the Cal South ones ...


Correct. All aligned next year.


----------



## Distraction

DefenseWins said:


> Add Rebels Soccer Club from San Diego to your new U-11/12 clubs.


Two straight reds for players on their 06 team in Presidents Cup. Rebels will be a fine addition to DA.


----------



## Dargle

Distraction said:


> Two straight reds for players on their 06 team in Presidents Cup. Rebels will be a fine addition to DA.


DA clubs are chosen based on their geography, their coaching, and their institutional set-up, not their current players, but it's certainly interesting to watch the 2006 teams in newly-selected clubs since at least the parents of the kids on their top teams, if not the clubs themselves, assume that those kids are going to form the core of the new Academy team.  For example, Murietta Surf didn't even make it out of group play in President's Cup and was largely dominated in the games it lost.  LA Premier FC was one of the weakest teams in Silver Elite this year and didn't make it out of group play in President's Cup either, with it's only win coming by forfeit.  Legends didn't even enter its teams in President's Cup.  They are in Governor's this year.  Either those clubs will greatly dilute the talent in DA next year or there will be significant turnover among their teams.


----------



## Bubbles

What is the thinking behind these terminal u12 DA programs (if indeed that's what we're seeing - perhaps in a year things will look very different)? If the object of DA is to find and develop players, is u12 the right age to bounce kids out of the program? That's only 1-2 years. If a kid is in the pool to be considered a future pro at 11, is age 12 old enough to rule him out? It's particularly problematic because kids' bodies are changing so unevenly at that time. I would think after u14 would make much more sense to funnel kids out. Beginning of high school, kids interests and mentalities are really starting to change, etc. It'd give kids the chance to settle into the DA program and see if they can learn. If you're on a terminal u12 DA, you'll probably spend a good half the year jockeying for a spot at next year's DA club. Hardly the best way to develop.

Also, what's in it for the clubs? Clubs have to incur all sorts of overhead to get DA status. That's a lot of expense for just the one DA squad. Basically all they're doing is making it easier for the full academies to scout the top players. Yes, they get that pretty DA logo on their website, but come u13 there are going to be a lot of unhappy families.


----------



## mahrez

Bubbles said:


> What is the thinking behind these terminal u12 DA programs (if indeed that's what we're seeing - perhaps in a year things will look very different)? If the object of DA is to find and develop players, is u12 the right age to bounce kids out of the program? That's only 1-2 years. If a kid is in the pool to be considered a future pro at 11, is age 12 old enough to rule him out? It's particularly problematic because kids' bodies are changing so unevenly at that time. I would think after u14 would make much more sense to funnel kids out. Beginning of high school, kids interests and mentalities are really starting to change, etc. It'd give kids the chance to settle into the DA program and see if they can learn. If you're on a terminal u12 DA, you'll probably spend a good half the year jockeying for a spot at next year's DA club. Hardly the best way to develop.
> 
> Also, what's in it for the clubs? Clubs have to incur all sorts of overhead to get DA status. That's a lot of expense for just the one DA squad. Basically all they're doing is making it easier for the full academies to scout the top players. Yes, they get that pretty DA logo on their website, but come u13 there are going to be a lot of unhappy families.


The single age u11/12 clubs (150) are for those new to da.  115 of the 150 have U13, 123 with U14.   This is known as the (3) core development set and almost 80% of the clubs have those 3 teams.

U15 4 seasons later only 82 clubs but this is what happens typically anyway as fewer kids play up the age ladder.

Southwest u13 & U14 will have (14) socal teams that somebody listed above for 17-18.  Only 3 clubs with U12 only (TFA, WC, and CV) prior


----------



## JJP

Bubbles said:


> What is the thinking behind these terminal u12 DA programs (if indeed that's what we're seeing - perhaps in a year things will look very different)? If the object of DA is to find and develop players, is u12 the right age to bounce kids out of the program? That's only 1-2 years. If a kid is in the pool to be considered a future pro at 11, is age 12 old enough to rule him out? It's particularly problematic because kids' bodies are changing so unevenly at that time. I would think after u14 would make much more sense to funnel kids out. Beginning of high school, kids interests and mentalities are really starting to change, etc. It'd give kids the chance to settle into the DA program and see if they can learn. If you're on a terminal u12 DA, you'll probably spend a good half the year jockeying for a spot at next year's DA club. Hardly the best way to develop.


The idea is to get as many players as possible into the USSDA player pool trained in the Dutch/Ajax/Cruyff/Barcelona 4-3-3 system.  The pool of players will be narrowed at each age group by reducing the number of DA teams.

The USSDA wants to concentrate the best players on fewer teams that play each other, the only way to get that done is to reduce the number of DA clubs at the older age groups.  There needs to be more clubs for younger players both to cast the widest net, and because very few parents are willing to travel at the younger ages.  The driving most parents are willing to do for a top 16 year old is a lot more than what most parents are willing to do for a top 12 year old.

I'm not sure why you think jockeying for positions at other clubs would have any impact, that kind of stuff was happening before DA.

I think it's a good idea to funnel kids out at each age group.  In fact I'd prefer to see fewer DA teams and more weeding out.  There's too many DA teams for the level of talent out there IMO.

I don't think 12 is too early to weed out kids, I seriously doubt you will miss even one future pro among the kids weeded out at 12.



> Also, what's in it for the clubs? Clubs have to incur all sorts of overhead to get DA status. That's a lot of expense for just the one DA squad. Basically all they're doing is making it easier for the full academies to scout the top players. Yes, they get that pretty DA logo on their website, but come u13 there are going to be a lot of unhappy families.


Clubs have to meet bunch of requirements to get DA status.  Clubs with DA status can attract better coaches, USSDA also helps train DA coaches to make them better, which leads to a better product on the field, higher status for the club, which should eventually pull in more paying customers.  DA has not been going on long enough to determine whether the expense of DA is worth it for the clubs, and only those privy to a club's books really know whether the club is making a profit off DA. The only benefit a club definitely receives from DA is higher status.

I'm not sure why you are concerned with unhappy u13 families.  Why would they be unhappy?  In sports you have to compete to make the top teams.  DA is supposed to be about identifying and training the best players, not giving out participation trophys.  If a kid can't make DA after u12, there are plenty of good non-DA options out there.


----------



## Ilikefutbol

In trying to figure out '05 DA's for 17/18, this is what I found on the US Soccer website map (http://www.ussoccerda.com/2016-u-13-14-club-map):  If this has been covered before, my bad.  Strange thing is, the expansion announcement shows only LAFC and LAG-SD in the newly promoted/existing.  What's the true story of what '05 U13 will be DA for 17/18?
*SOUTHWEST*

Albion SC
Arsenal FC
Central California Aztecs
FC Golden State
L.A. United Futbol Academy
L.A. Galaxy
Nomads SC
Pateadores
Real So Cal
San Diego Surf
Santa Barbara Soccer Club
Strikers FC


----------



## mahrez

Ilikefutbol said:


> In trying to figure out '05 DA's for 17/18, this is what I found on the US Soccer website map (http://www.ussoccerda.com/2016-u-13-14-club-map):  If this has been covered before, my bad.  Strange thing is, the expansion announcement shows only LAFC and LAG-SD in the newly promoted/existing.  What's the true story of what '05 U13 will be DA for 17/18?
> *SOUTHWEST*
> 
> Albion SC
> Arsenal FC
> Central California Aztecs
> FC Golden State
> L.A. United Futbol Academy
> L.A. Galaxy
> Nomads SC
> Pateadores
> Real So Cal
> San Diego Surf
> Santa Barbara Soccer Club
> Strikers FC


Yes those 12 existing clubs you listed plus 2 new for a total of 14 in U13(05) for 17-18'

Existing:

Albion SC
Arsenal FC
Central California Aztecs
FC Golden State
L.A. United Futbol Academy
L.A. Galaxy
Nomads SC
Pateadores
Real So Cal
San Diego Surf
Santa Barbara Soccer Club
Strikers FC

New:

13. LA Galaxy San Diego
14. Los Angeles Football Club


----------



## Ilikefutbol

mahrez said:


> Yes those 12 existing clubs you listed plus 2 new for a total of 14 in U13(05) for 17-18'
> 
> Existing:
> 
> Albion SC
> Arsenal FC
> Central California Aztecs
> FC Golden State
> L.A. United Futbol Academy
> L.A. Galaxy
> Nomads SC
> Pateadores
> Real So Cal
> San Diego Surf
> Santa Barbara Soccer Club
> Strikers FC
> 
> New:
> 
> 13. LA Galaxy San Diego
> 14. Los Angeles Football Club


Gracias!


----------



## Bubbles

JJP said:


> The idea is to get as many players as possible into the USSDA player pool trained in the Dutch/Ajax/Cruyff/Barcelona 4-3-3 system.


Is that really the explicit or even tacit goal of USSDA? I'm scouring the DA site and I don't see anything about a specific style of play.


----------



## Box2Box

Bubbles said:


> Is that really the explicit or even tacit goal of USSDA? I'm scouring the DA site and I don't see anything about a specific style of play.


I agree and if so, most of the teams are not following that style.


----------



## Bubbles

JJP said:


> The USSDA wants to concentrate the best players on fewer teams that play each other, the only way to get that done is to reduce the number of DA clubs at the older age groups.  There needs to be more clubs for younger players both to cast the widest net, and because very few parents are willing to travel at the younger ages.  The driving most parents are willing to do for a top 16 year old is a lot more than what most parents are willing to do for a top 12 year old.
> 
> I'm not sure why you think jockeying for positions at other clubs would have any impact, that kind of stuff was happening before DA.
> 
> I think it's a good idea to funnel kids out at each age group.  In fact I'd prefer to see fewer DA teams and more weeding out.  There's too many DA teams for the level of talent out there IMO.
> 
> I don't think 12 is too early to weed out kids, I seriously doubt you will miss even one future pro among the kids weeded out at 12.


I agree with most of this. Actually I think there's too many u12s. Dargle made that point about the talent at the 06 group, and I'm seeing a lot of DAs looking at 06 kids who obviously have no future as pros.

It's probably too fine a point, but I think we'd be better off investing in solid u11/12 to u14 programs than providing a wider entry point.



> I'm not sure why you think jockeying for positions at other clubs would have any impact, that kind of stuff was happening before DA.


Since the old system isn't effective for development, it's neither here nor there to refer to it.

But my point is part of a larger argument that I think as a soccer culture we spend too much of our time trying to identify talent. (e.g.: DA tryouts run into a quarter of year.) We have the fantasy that we can pick the future players and isolate them from the masses of jungleballers. It's understandable why we do that -- the vastness of the problem -- but ultimately the ignorance in the wider soccer culture keeps showing up into the DA programs. There just isn't enough of a demand for quality soccer training, and the USSF doesn't have the resources to oversee the DA enough to insure quality training.



> Clubs have to meet bunch of requirements to get DA status. Clubs with DA status can attract better coaches, USSDA also helps train DA coaches to make them better, which leads to a better product on the field, higher status for the club, which should eventually pull in more paying customers. DA has not been going on long enough to determine whether the expense of DA is worth it for the clubs, and only those privy to a club's books really know whether the club is making a profit off DA. The only benefit a club definitely receives from DA is higher status.
> 
> I'm not sure why you are concerned with unhappy u13 families. Why would they be unhappy? In sports you have to compete to make the top teams. DA is supposed to be about identifying and training the best players, not giving out participation trophys. If a kid can't make DA after u12, there are plenty of good non-DA options out there.


I hope you're right, but it strikes me as glass half-full thinking. What I foresee happening is the u12 DA clubs going through the motions, but not really changing much in terms of their style of play or the focus on trophies. They'll know their u12 DA team is going to blow up and they have to go back to the usual focus on winning. One u12 squad isn't enough to change their business model.

I mean does the USSDA make meaningful effort to train DA club coaches? Are they really going to be investing in coaches that are at u12 only DA clubs?

I don't know, my son is still young so I haven't see the system up close, but what I hear is that a lot of non-MLS academies are mailing it in when it comes to really developing intelligence in players, and instead rely on their DA status to have the top players roll in.


----------



## Bubbles

mahrez said:


> The single age u11/12 clubs (150) are for those new to da.


New to DA you say? So you would expect some of TFA, WC, CV, and now Legends, Murietta Surf, LA Prem FC, and Rebels to get u13 and u14 in the near future? 
(I realize that there's been a lot of expansion, but right now of the 22 u11/12 DAs in So-Cal, 14 have the u13 and u14 status.)

I just think the single-year setup seems to be maximally disruptive to clubs, kids and parents without really providing the benefits that JCC talked about.


----------



## Dargle

Bubbles said:


> New to DA you say? So you would expect some of TFA, WC, CV, and now Legends, Murietta Surf, LA Prem FC, and Rebels to get u13 and u14 in the near future?
> (I realize that there's been a lot of expansion, but right now of the 22 u11/12 DAs in So-Cal, 14 have the u13 and u14 status.)
> 
> I just think the single-year setup seems to be maximally disruptive to clubs, kids and parents without really providing the benefits that JCC talked about.


It's not quite right to have said that 150 clubs are new to DA.  I believe the way to read the stats is that 150 of the DA clubs have U12 teams currently, which includes both U12-only clubs and full academies.  Last year, a number of teams received U12-only status.  I don't know how many applied for U13 status for this year, but I know some did and those applications were all denied in SoCal except for the Academies affiliated with MLS teams (LAFC and LA Galaxy San Diego).  You would therefore be ill-advised to assume that if you move your child to one of the U12-only Academies you listed that they would be able to stay there for more than one year and still play Academy.  Not impossible, of course.  It could be that DA wanted to see them for more than one year in operation before granting expansion.  Nevertheless, the stated purpose of allowing U12-only Academies in the first place (rather than simply allowing existing Academies to start at U12) was to provide a broader entry point while not forcing 11 year-old kids to drive quite as far as they transition from perhaps two practices a week to 3-4.  They could have accomplished the first objective by simply allowing existing DA's to have 4 U12 teams, but having U12-only DA clubs spread geographically helped alleviate the travel concern.  It is therefore consistent with that purpose to conclude that they don't want to expand all of those academies, but rather funnel the kids into existing academies in subsequent years, after winnowing out the kids who proved to not be academy material.


----------



## Bubbles

Thanks Dargle, I always appreciate your well-reasoned posts. That clarified what Mahrez said, which made it seem like u12 was an entry point for clubs into the core program.


----------



## mahrez

See attached or use link for ussda style of play
https://tinyurl.com/jmzc5oj

Some of the existing single age group clubs (u11/u12) have a good opportunity each year to apply for additional teams.  Gets more selective as more teams are added so following the ussda mandates is one of the keys. 

Those late to the party are at a disadvantage, current system favors the establishment heavily so that's one thing,  geography in LA county for example with many established clubs already will make promotion increasingly difficulty for these new clubs


----------



## JJP

Bubbles said:


> Is that really the explicit or even tacit goal of USSDA? I'm scouring the DA site and I don't see anything about a specific style of play.


Teams that are trying to win, what they do is limit touches by weaker players and force feed the ball to their best players, who are almost always the most physically mature, strongest, fastest players.  Bypassing weaker players results in lots of long ball, or direct play.

This style of play works until u16 because by then all the boys have had their growth spurt and relative age effects and the benefits of early physical maturity are gone.  So by u16, the boys need to be able to play a more advanced, sophisticated passing system.

However, it takes years of practice and A TON of talent and kids that have high soccer IQ to make these advanced passing systems work.  When kids are learning these advanced passing systems, there will be a lot of losses at the younger age groups, because a lot of kids just don't have the soccer IQ or skills to make these systems work, and weaker players, who typically turn the ball over at much higher rates, are touching the ball more.  Even the kids who have the talent to operate a Cruyff style 4-3-3 will still make mistakes and turnovers.

There have been some posters on this board who have ripped teams for not playing advanced passing systems, and booting it to speed forwards.  I think that criticism is unfair.  The clubs have to look out for themselves, and winning teams make more money, because parents pay for those clubs.  If parents paid money to losing teams that strictly enforced Cruyff style 4-3-3, that's what clubs would provide.

I also think there are just a very limited number of kids who have that combo of high level ball skills, speed and high soccer IQ to make these advanced passing systems work.  Since so few teams have the talent needed to run the academy 4-3-3, they end up direct passing or longballing to their best players out of the academy 4-3-3 formation. However, I do think there is less longballing and more advanced passing in academy League than in any other league I have seen, except for futsal leagues.


----------



## JJP

Bubbles said:


> I hope you're right, but it strikes me as glass half-full thinking. What I foresee happening is the u12 DA clubs going through the motions, but not really changing much in terms of their style of play or the focus on trophies. They'll know their u12 DA team is going to blow up and they have to go back to the usual focus on winning. One u12 squad isn't enough to change their business model.


That could happen.  USSDA does scout all the teams pretty heavily, so if a club should mail it in on the DA system, I imagine USSDA would find out sooner or later, and possibly revoke DA status.

I can't tell you what teams with only a u12 DA team are doing.  My son's team, which is full DA, has started rolling out the DA passing drills and systems to their younger non-DA teams, which I believe will raise the level of play throughout the club.  Now a full DA team has greater incentive to do this because they want to funnel the best kids who get this training through their DA system, but still this is an example of DA training filtering its way through to all levels of a club.



> I mean does the USSDA make meaningful effort to train DA club coaches? Are they really going to be investing in coaches that are at u12 only DA clubs?


I don't know for sure, it's what I've heard so I should have made that clear.  Sorry if I was misleading, not my intention.  I've heard that USSDA provides lot of packets with detailed drills, guidance in coaching the systems they want DA teams to employ.  Beyond that I'm not sure and someone else would have to answer this.


----------



## Wez

Bubbles said:


> I'm seeing a lot of DAs looking at 06 kids who obviously have no future as pros.





Bubbles said:


> But my point is part of a larger argument that I think as a soccer culture we spend too much of our time trying to identify talent. (e.g.: DA tryouts run into a quarter of year.) We have the fantasy that we can pick the future players and isolate them from the masses of jungleballers.


Aren't these two statements contradictory?


----------



## Bubbles

Wez said:


> Aren't these two statements contradictory?


Not really, no.


----------



## Wez

Bubbles said:


> Not really, no.


Ok, maybe I'm missing the point.  To me it seems like you're saying you can tell a 10 year olds ability to become a pro some day and then saying, "We have the fantasy that we can pick the future players".


----------



## mahrez

Bubbles said:


> New to DA you say? So you would expect some of TFA, WC, CV, and now Legends, Murietta Surf, LA Prem FC, and Rebels to get u13 and u14 in the near future?
> (I realize that there's been a lot of expansion, but right now of the 22 u11/12 DAs in So-Cal, 14 have the u13 and u14 status.)
> 
> I just think the single-year setup seems to be maximally disruptive to clubs, kids and parents without really providing the benefits that JCC talked about.


Yes for 16-17 in SC just (5) new u12 only, (2) of which have since been promoted and now (4) new this coming season in 17-18.

For 18/19 and beyond how well the scouting, auidts, reviews goes from them will be a key factor when applying for promotion.

DA is set up to cherry pick for the YNT,  couple top prospect's at best playing for the more well known clubs spread out among the 80 or clubs around the usa will make it and everybody else is just "developing"


----------



## soccerdadx3

I agree -- before high school, it's vital that kids grow a passion for the game.  Yes skills matter, but if you don't love the game, you'll leave it.


----------



## Wez

Mahrez, any thoughts on how strong the B05 LAFC Academy team will be?


----------



## mahrez

Wez said:


> Mahrez, any thoughts on how strong the B05 LAFC Academy team will be?


LAFC has ~(9)  05' players on the current U12 DA team that are well versed & trained so they should do well in the future. 

There is strong interest in that age group with a large pool of players (some clubs didn't promote to U13 DA for example) but LAFC is doing things a bit different from most with scouting and outreach.  The LAFC invitational at Bell Gardens couple weeks ago didn't include the 05's  because that existing pool of potential players is already large:  http://lafc.academy/first-annual-lafc-invitational-draws-hundreds/

LAFC will have strong technical teams that emphasis medium to  longer turn development over immediate results so they will not sacrifice style of play or stack rosters with 22 players where 5 don't get on the game day roster or 7 sub's sit on the bench and not get into the games.

Still taking applications at: http://lafc.academy/


----------



## galaxydad

Sophisticated passing patterns and soccer smarts are huge but so is the ability to take opponents on. I hope that is not being lost with the DA clubs. Many of your worlds best players learned on the streets and then were taught the system. Only the best can do all three and we are in very short supply in this country


----------



## Ilikefutbol

And, if the DA teams are all playing the same system and formation, and only playing against each other, they won't be exposed to the other systems and strategies.


----------



## xav10

mahrez said:


> LAFC has ~(9)  05' players on the current U12 DA team that are well versed & trained so they should do well in the future.
> 
> There is strong interest in that age group with a large pool of players (some clubs didn't promote to U13 DA for example) but LAFC is doing things a bit different from most with scouting and outreach.  The LAFC invitational at Bell Gardens couple weeks ago didn't include the 05's  because that existing pool of potential players is already large:  http://lafc.academy/first-annual-lafc-invitational-draws-hundreds/
> 
> LAFC will have strong technical teams that emphasis medium to  longer turn development over immediate results so they will not sacrifice style of play or stack rosters with 22 players where 5 don't get on the game day roster or 7 sub's sit on the bench and not get into the games.
> 
> Still taking applications at: http://lafc.academy/


I think you mean 7 '05s.


----------



## uburoi

Any inside information on 2018-2019 new academy team applications?


----------



## RedDevilDad

No news yet?  Just curious which teams will go from only u12s to have a u13 team for their 2006s.


----------

