# U.S. Soccer Youth Task Force: An opportunity to transform soccer in America'



## younothat (Oct 17, 2018)

U.S. Soccer creates Youth Task Force: 'An opportunity to transform soccer in America'
https://www.socceramerica.com/publications/article/80021/us-soccer-creates-youth-task-force-an-opportun.html?verified=1

Not sure about that headline & these endless task forces but some of the issues do need to be addressed and I'm glad the different orgs are at least trying to work together hopefully. 

*"Mike Hoyer* (AYSO), *Doug Wood* (SAY Soccer), *Mike Cullina* (U.S. Club Soccer), *Craig Scriven* (USSSA) and *Pete Zopfi *(U.S. Youth Soccer) have been named to U.S. Soccer's Task Force to address youth soccer issues in the USA.

U.S. Soccer President *Carlos Cordeiro*, who was elected in February, announced in June his intentions of creating the Youth Task Force to tackle issues such as:

-- Stagnant participation numbers;
-- Fragmented and fractured landscape;
-- Overemphasis on winning trophies and making money;
-- Lack of level playing field; and
-- High cost of pay-to-play.

_*U.S. Soccer's open letter to the youth soccer community*_

_As you may know, U.S. Soccer formed a special task force to specifically address youth soccer matters.  The belief is that our sport is much stronger when its stakeholders are working together._

_We took our first step last Friday, Oct. 12, holding the first Youth Task Force Leadership Council meeting in Tampa, Fla.  With a council comprised of the leadership from AYSO, SAY Soccer, US Club Soccer, USSSA, US Youth Soccer and the U.S. Soccer Federation, we discussed a number of critical issues facing youth soccer in America._

_We believe that with an eight-year runway toward the 2026 FIFA World Cup, we have an opportunity to transform soccer in America, and it starts by tackling the challenges in front of us at the grassroots level._

_This Task Force, which will grow to include experts and thought leaders supporting a number of working groups, will focus on areas where we believe we can work together to create significant and lasting change, while supporting the strategic vision for U.S. Soccer._

_As we work together, the following statement guides our approach:_

_Soccer is the most beloved sport in the world, and we believe it’s future in the U.S. will be positively impacted by our efforts to work cooperatively under a shared sense of purpose and a common belief in supporting the development of players, coaches and referees._

_In that way, we believe …
… that players should be kept at the center of every decision, and should be provided with an environment that is fun, inclusive and safe.
… that coaches should participate in courses and educational opportunities that match their ambition.
… that referees should be treated with respect, and provided with the resources that allow them to develop and enjoy the experience._

_There are many faces of youth soccer -- across all ages and levels of competition -- and we are unified in our desire to grow the sport together. _

_In closing, we wish to express our deepest gratitude to the many thousands of volunteers and professionals who have dedicated their lives to this beautiful game.  You inspire us, and together we will work to improve the game for all those who participate in it._

_-- *Mike Hoyer* (AYSO), *Doug Wood* (SAY Soccer), *Mike Cullina* (U.S. Club Soccer), *Craig Scriven* (USSSA) and *Pete Zopfi* (U.S. Youth Soccer), and U.S. Soccer's *Carlos Cordeiro*, *Dan Flynn*, *John Collins* and *Tim Turney*._
* * * * * * * * * *
*•* Zopfi of Cal North was elected U.S. Youth Soccer Chair in August.

*•* Hoyer is AYSO's National Executive Director.

*•* Cullina became Chairman of U.S. Club Soccer’s Board of Directors in January.

*•* Scriven is the National Director of the United States Specialty Sports Association.

*•* Wood is the Executive Director of SAY Soccer.


----------



## tabletop (Oct 17, 2018)

younothat said:


> U.S. Soccer President *Carlos Cordeiro*, who was elected in February, announced in June his intentions of creating the Youth Task Force to tackle issues such as:
> 
> -- Stagnant participation numbers;
> -- Fragmented and fractured landscape;
> ...


US Soccer had a very big role in creating 4 of the 5 issues they are attempting to now tackle.  The Pay to Play issue in youth soccer is a relatively new phenomenon.  In the 80s you could count the number of paid youth coaches in So Cal on one hand.  US Soccer championed the concept of paid coaches and mega clubs as a way to improve player development.  There is a US Soccer document from the early 90s that may still be available online which specifically outlines how to structure a mega club and how to use player dues to fund club administrator’s salaries.

And of course the US Soccer’s DA creation years ago created the absolute un-level, fractured, fragmented playing field that exists today.  I can’t think of any one action that has had a more significant impact on the current landscape of youth soccer than when US Soccer allowed mega clubs to run DA programs alongside MLS academies.

I’m not sure a task force can do much to address these issues at this point.  Too many people have too much money at stake to allow for real change.  Instead of spending money on a task force perhaps US Soccer should simply read their own literature and invest in a mirror.


----------



## Simisoccerfan (Oct 17, 2018)

When money that can be made off youth soccer equals the money made off youth football, basketball or baseball then we will see soccer prosper.  We also need soladarity payments to make it work.


----------



## timbuck (Oct 17, 2018)

How does the coach licensing structure work for youth basketball, football, baseball and hockey?   How do youth coaches in those sports get paid?

US Soccer needs to reduce the number of acronyms under their unbrella.  Should be 1 governing body for:
-Recreational
-Competitive
-Natioanl Team 

And each state should have 1 governing body for each.


----------



## El Clasico (Oct 18, 2018)

timbuck said:


> How does the coach licensing structure work for youth basketball, football, baseball and hockey?   How do youth coaches in those sports get paid?
> 
> US Soccer needs to reduce the number of acronyms under their unbrella.  Should be 1 governing body for:
> -Recreational
> ...


In my experience in youth basketball and youth baseball, there was/is no licensing structure and there sure as hell was no pay which is why the previous post confuses me. One of the intriguing things about Little League baseball is that there is no such thing as club jumping unless you join a "travel team", which is much more rare than a "rec" team. You have to play for your own city "community"  (and proud of it) and if a coach wants to advance in all stars and beyond to the Little League world series, he better develop his team because that is all he has got. And he usually has to do it for free. Some people call it passion. This is similar to what we had with soccer where I grew up. 

So is the problem US Soccer (definitely partly) or is it the parents here in So Cal who always see the grass as greener on the other side? Maybe a bigger part. I don't think much of USSF and I think most DOCs are greedy M*th*r F*ck*rs who couldn't care less about your kid and more about the money as evidenced by their actions. Most coaches only coach to win (because of vanity or a mandate from above because it helps grow a club?) but as sh*tty as a lot of them are, I have, over the years, watched and wondered how some of these coaches can possibly build a quality team playing quality soccer since his team gets shuffled every year.  

I guess what I am trying to say is that we don't need more money in youth soccer, we need much less. Have the cities open up their fields, keep kids local while still young and let them play. Had a family member grow up to play Pro soccer in this country and he didn't even have a coach growing up until he was 12 or 13. We just played. Pick up games with adults and kids of all ages helps teach the game. TV helped teach the game and us playing after school helped teach the game.


----------



## focomoso (Oct 18, 2018)

El Clasico said:


> In my experience in youth basketball and youth baseball, there was/is no licensing structure and there sure as hell was no pay which is why the previous post confuses me. One of the intriguing things about Little League baseball is that there is no such thing as club jumping unless you join a "travel team", which is much more rare than a "rec" team. You have to play for your own city "community"  (and proud of it) and if a coach wants to advance in all stars and beyond to the Little League world series, he better develop his team because that is all he has got. And he usually has to do it for free. Some people call it passion. This is similar to what we had with soccer where I grew up.
> 
> So is the problem US Soccer (definitely partly) or is it the parents here in So Cal who always see the grass as greener on the other side? Maybe a bigger part. I don't think much of USSF and I think most DOCs are greedy M*th*r F*ck*rs who couldn't care less about your kid and more about the money as evidenced by their actions. Most coaches only coach to win (because of vanity or a mandate from above because it helps grow a club?) but as sh*tty as a lot of them are, I have, over the years, watched and wondered how some of these coaches can possibly build a quality team playing quality soccer since his team gets shuffled every year.
> 
> I guess what I am trying to say is that we don't need more money in youth soccer, we need much less. Have the cities open up their fields, keep kids local while still young and let them play. Had a family member grow up to play Pro soccer in this country and he didn't even have a coach growing up until he was 12 or 13. We just played. Pick up games with adults and kids of all ages helps teach the game. TV helped teach the game and us playing after school helped teach the game.


I agree with most of this, but soccer is different in the US because it is (still) not organic. Kids don't just go out and play in the neighborhood park the way they do with basketball. We're too spread out in the suburbs and there aren't enough fields in the more densely populated cities.

Re. the Little League community approach, again, soccer is different from baseball because the quality of your teammates matters more in soccer. Learning to field, throw or hit are individual skills (how good the second baseman is has no bearing on the shortstop's progression). But in soccer, the better your teammates, the better you become because: 1) you have to play faster in practice and 2) you learn that if you pass well, you'll get the ball back. The trouble with the community approach in soccer is that the good kids learn that the only way to win is to dribble through everyone (because if they pass, their teammates loose the ball) and when they finally do move up to a higher level, they have to learn how to actually play.


----------



## younothat (Oct 18, 2018)

El Clasico said:


> In my experience in youth basketball and youth baseball, there was/is no licensing structure and there sure as hell was no pay which is why the previous post confuses me. One of the intriguing things about Little League baseball is that there is no such thing as club jumping unless you join a "travel team", which is much more rare than a "rec" team. You have to play for your own city "community"  (and proud of it) and if a coach wants to advance in all stars and beyond to the Little League world series, he better develop his team because that is all he has got. And he usually has to do it for free. Some people call it passion. This is similar to what we had with soccer where I grew up.
> 
> So is the problem US Soccer (definitely partly) or is it the parents here in So Cal who always see the grass as greener on the other side? Maybe a bigger part. I don't think much of USSF and I think most DOCs are greedy M*th*r F*ck*rs who couldn't care less about your kid and more about the money as evidenced by their actions. Most coaches only coach to win (because of vanity or a mandate from above because it helps grow a club?) but as sh*tty as a lot of them are, I have, over the years, watched and wondered how some of these coaches can possibly build a quality team playing quality soccer since his team gets shuffled every year.
> 
> I guess what I am trying to say is that we don't need more money in youth soccer, we need much less. Have the cities open up their fields, keep kids local while still young and let them play. Had a family member grow up to play Pro soccer in this country and he didn't even have a coach growing up until he was 12 or 13. We just played. Pick up games with adults and kids of all ages helps teach the game. TV helped teach the game and us playing after school helped teach the game.


Get what your saying and my kids starting playing what they call "streetball" with friends and neighbors then futsal later without supervision or coaches for the first couple of years before they even played on grass or had coaches but in socal suburb's some people don't even know there neighbors so the old school doesn't really work much here anymore

Yes there is club baseball, pony league, Babe Ruth, etc and even Champions League beyond little league.  Yes true you do start out in LL most of the time and due to there geo boundaries you play locally but you can outgrow local LL and move on if the comp or instruction is not good enough for your player

Same goes for youth basketball there are bunch of different tournaments, leagues, clubs beyond your local rec league in your town.

Most kids use to start soccer in AYSO and those good enough would go club.  Club players that showed a lot of promise would move on to higher leagues like USSDA but all that seems like a jumble nowadays so I hope this task force works something out like a real soccer pyramid where all players have a legitimate "pathway" to reach there potential not all these self serving closed leagues.


----------



## Grace T. (Oct 18, 2018)

younothat said:


> Same goes for youth basketball there are bunch of different tournaments, leagues, clubs beyond your local rec league in your town.
> 
> Most kids use to start soccer in AYSO and those good enough would go club.  Club players that showed a lot of promise would move on to higher leagues like USSDA but all that seems like a jumble nowadays so I hope this task force works something out like a real soccer pyramid where all players have a legitimate "pathway" to reach there potential not all these self serving closed leagues.


Basketball, baseball, hockey and even football (see "Friday Night Tykes") are becoming more club oriented now too.  One of the big differences is that in basketball and football high school is still used for college recruitment, and college is a pathway still to pro, but even that is changing.

I was very happy to see that AYSO had a seat at the table for this taskforce...while I'm not optimistic about the taskforce accomplishing anything positive (I'm that much of a cynic), without AYSO at the table it would have been doomed from the start.  One of the big problems has been coordinating cooperation between AYSO (where many kids start) and club.  AYSO has obviously not been happy with the idea of becoming just a soccer intro set for new players  and to lose its best players (and parent volunteers) to club as the players age out (which is why United was created).  AYSO's philosophy also doesn't align 100% with USSF, and vice versa, and both orgs have jealously guarded what they think is the "proper" philosophy.  And on various levels of the club structure, USSF has at best been neutrally quiet about the United program, and at worst hostile.  Anyone hear about the new ID64 program?  Looks like they are laying the ground work to take a run at the DA too.  Well, in any case, the turf war between AYSO and USSF has been one of the impediments to real change....I hope they can settle it.


----------



## timbuck (Oct 18, 2018)

Along those same lines-   AYSO coaching education is actually really solid.  Now coaches don’t always learn or follow-  but the courses are good-  at least on par with the USSF grassroots courses. 
AYSO is 100% free.  And usually includes an online and field component. USSF charges $25 per online course. 
AYSO will accept reciprocity with USSF courses. (At lease they used to). USSF does not accept any of the AYSO courses.


----------



## Grace T. (Oct 18, 2018)

timbuck said:


> Along those same lines-   AYSO coaching education is actually really solid.  Now coaches don’t always learn or follow-  but the courses are good-  at least on par with the USSF grassroots courses.
> AYSO is 100% free.  And usually includes an online and field component. USSF charges $25 per online course.
> AYSO will accept reciprocity with USSF courses. (At lease they used to). USSF does not accept any of the AYSO courses.


I'll add having been through both programs on the ref side the beginning ref education in AYSO is just so much superior than the Level 8 stuff for USSF, as is the continuing education and mentoring of the refs.  Again, the problem is that the refs don't always learn of follow (particularly if you get a coach or ref that has never played before).  At the higher levels, though, the sense I get is that the USSF stuff is superior but I haven't been through the process yet (I'm debating right now whether to head to the CalSouth ref conference in SD over thanksgiving or to take my intermediate test for AYSO...wasn't impressed with the intermediate AYSO course which is on par with what I've seen at the USSF refs meetings).


----------



## timbuck (Oct 18, 2018)

Here's my take at a very high level from AYSO to USSF (At least the old courses)
1. AYSO teaches you how to teach soccer to kids.  They teach technical work.  They teach how to get kids to pay attention and to have fun.
2.  USSF teaches you how to coach soccer.  Period.  Nothing about how kids learn.  It's about how to structure your practice.  Very little about teaching a kid technical skills.  They expect that a coach taking a course already knows how to teach technical work.

In a perfect world, you'd have a combination that includes some type of Coerver work at the 9v9 and under levels, coupled with the principles of play.


----------



## Grace T. (Oct 18, 2018)

timbuck said:


> 2.  USSF teaches you how to coach soccer.  Period.  Nothing about how kids learn.  It's about how to structure your practice.  Very little about teaching a kid technical skills.  They expect that a coach taking a course already knows how to teach technical work.
> 
> I.


Don't know if it's still true, but I'd take it a step further.  When I took my E License 2 years ago, the sense I got was that they discourage you doing any technical work (technique/Coerver/goalkeeping).  To the extent that work was done at all in the program, it was supposed to be done in "Level 1-- Warmup"....but a warmup is supposed to be just that: a warmup for your body, not a teaching moment.  For my Level 2 exercise, I set out to teach U10 how to properly cross the ball....my emphasis was on getting the right touch sufficiently far out to make the curve in possible, but not so far that you push it down and out of the pitch or to an opponent....the instructor reemed me out in the evaluation for assuming my players couldn't cross, teaching them technique, and not making the Level 2 more game like by putting pressure on them.  I asked: "Well, when do they learn the technique to actually, you know, cross the ball properly?"  He answered, in his Liverpool accent, "They should know it already, or that's what private trainers are for."  The funny thing was that many of the people there were getting their E License because they were private trainers but felt they needed the license to show parents they could properly teach.


----------



## Grace T. (Oct 18, 2018)

Grace T. said:


> Don't know if it's still true, but I'd take it a step further.  When I took my E License 2 years ago, the sense I got was that they discourage you doing any technical work (technique/Coerver/goalkeeping).  To the extent that work was done at all in the program, it was supposed to be done in "Level 1-- Warmup"....but a warmup is supposed to be just that: a warmup for your body, not a teaching moment.  For my Level 2 exercise, I set out to teach U10 how to properly cross the ball....my emphasis was on getting the right touch sufficiently far out to make the curve in possible, but not so far that you push it down and out of the pitch or to an opponent....the instructor reemed me out in the evaluation for assuming my players couldn't cross, teaching them technique, and not making the Level 2 more game like by putting pressure on them.  I asked: "Well, when do they learn the technique to actually, you know, cross the ball properly?"  He answered, in his Liverpool accent, "They should know it already, or that's what private trainers are for."  The funny thing was that many of the people there were getting their E License because they were private trainers but felt they needed the license to show parents they could properly teach.


p.s. the other thing I got reemed out for was for coaching the goalkeeper (played by my son).  I was told if the exercise was on crossing, I should only be coaching the wingers, not the defenders on what they are doing wrong or the GK for when he should come out or not come out.


----------



## Sons of Pitches (Oct 18, 2018)

Grace T. said:


> Basketball, baseball, hockey and even football (see "Friday Night Tykes") are becoming more club oriented now too.  One of the big differences is that in basketball and football high school is still used for college recruitment, and college is a pathway still to pro, but even that is changing.
> 
> I was very happy to see that AYSO had a seat at the table for this taskforce...while I'm not optimistic about the taskforce accomplishing anything positive (I'm that much of a cynic), without AYSO at the table it would have been doomed from the start.  One of the big problems has been coordinating cooperation between AYSO (where many kids start) and club.  AYSO has obviously not been happy with the idea of becoming just a soccer intro set for new players  and to lose its best players (and parent volunteers) to club as the players age out (which is why United was created).  AYSO's philosophy also doesn't align 100% with USSF, and vice versa, and both orgs have jealously guarded what they think is the "proper" philosophy.  And on various levels of the club structure, USSF has at best been neutrally quiet about the United program, and at worst hostile.  Anyone hear about the new ID64 program?  Looks like they are laying the ground work to take a run at the DA too.  Well, in any case, the turf war between AYSO and USSF has been one of the impediments to real change....I hope they can settle it.


Wow, had not seen the ID64 program before but I like what AYSO is attempting to do.


----------



## toucan (Oct 18, 2018)

timbuck said:


> Here's my take at a very high level from AYSO to USSF (At least the old courses)
> 1. AYSO teaches you how to teach soccer to kids.  They teach technical work.  They teach how to get kids to pay attention and to have fun.
> 2.  USSF teaches you how to coach soccer.  Period.  Nothing about how kids learn.  It's about how to structure your practice.  Very little about teaching a kid technical skills.  They expect that a coach taking a course already knows how to teach technical work.


I have been through the old D and E courses, the new C course, and 2 of the 4 grassroots courses.  Honestly, USSF has it 90% wrong, and the difference between what USSF practices and preaches is chasmatic. 

Up through the C course of a couple of years ago, USSF dogmatically insisted that there is only one method of running a practice.  There must be a 4-stage practice on a single theme beginning with a warm-up, a small-side game, an extended small-side game, and a full game.  Every practice.  At no point during any practice should skills be taught or strategy, because children are supposed to work that out on their own in a self-guided process of discovery.  The method is not a bad method, but it is far too rigid, and I doubt even 5% of club coaches have the field space and sufficient number of players to perform such a practice.  And the idea that kids are just going to "teach themselves" anything is hopeful and inefficient, though I agree that kids would learn best if they did so.

The grassroots courses use the play-practice-play methodology, and USSF insists that this is the "best" teaching method in the grassroots videos.  The primary coaching techniques are "praise," and "guided questions" leading a player to his or her own conclusions about how to play.  Again, its not a bad method, but you are never to instruct, and you are never to be critical of play, which means that you can never offer analysis to the player.  In other words, every player gets an "A" on every assignment, no matter how poorly he or she performs.

Neither teaching method allows for any kind of focused repetition of skills, or of any kind of verbal instruction.  Despite the fact that cone-work is probably the best and most proven technique for developing quick footwork, neither teaching system allows for it because it is just "drill-work."  Neither teaching technique allows for focused 1 v. 1 work in a 10X10 grid, because that is not "gamelike."  You're not allowed to use words to tell a player why a backpass works in any given situation - you have to ask him questions until he figures out that a backpass is a possible option - and that could take forever when you're dealing with 14 kids who need to learn the technique.  Most of the people who teach the course resort to asking a guided question as follows: "Joey - can you make a backpass?"  How that differs from just commanding Joey to make a backpass is a distinction without a difference in my book, but hey, that's what USSF wants.


----------



## timbuck (Oct 18, 2018)

One of the lesson plans in any of the coaching courses should be "What to do when it all falls apart:  When you have a roster of 15 and 5 kids show up.  When you are planning a session on finishing but your 7,8,9,10,11 are all out sick.  When you are splitting a 7v7 sized field with 3 other teams.  When the field is full of mud because someone in charge of the sprinkler system wasn't paying attention.  When you are planning to use to large goals, but one of them is rusted and fell apart when you were moving it."


----------



## toucan (Oct 18, 2018)

To improve younger players' decision-making skills, USSF if changing the D-license course  to incorporate Professor Harold Hill's "Think System."


----------



## GKDad65 (Oct 18, 2018)

Oh, good!!  The coyotes are going to discuss chicken-coop security.
I'm so excited that something meaningful is going to finally happen.

Kool-Aid for all!


----------



## jpeter (Oct 18, 2018)

timbuck said:


> One of the lesson plans in any of the coaching courses should be "What to do when it all falls apart:  When you have a roster of 15 and 5 kids show up.  When you are planning a session on finishing but your 7,8,9,10,11 are all out sick.  When you are splitting a 7v7 sized field with 3 other teams.  When the field is full of mud because someone in charge of the sprinkler system wasn't paying attention.  When you are planning to use to large goals, but one of them is rusted and fell apart when you were moving it."


----------



## timbuck (Oct 18, 2018)

And add a module on how to deal with parents.


----------



## jpeter (Oct 18, 2018)

timbuck said:


> And add a module on how to deal with parents.


----------



## jpeter (Oct 18, 2018)

GKDad65 said:


> Oh, good!!  The coyotes are going to discuss chicken-coop security.
> I'm so excited that something meaningful is going to finally happen.
> 
> Kool-Aid for all!


----------



## Sons of Pitches (Oct 19, 2018)

timbuck said:


> And add a module on how to deal with parents.


It is funny that you say that.  I was very active at one time in our local AYSO, coached for all 3 of our kids, ref, DD, etc....  One year when running a Boys U10 division I had a lot of first year coaches, and they all had to go to our Region's coaching.  About half way through the year, I had several comment to me that they did not understand why we had spent so much time in our clinic talking about dealing with difficult parents, but that they now understood.


----------



## Not_that_Serious (Oct 22, 2018)

timbuck said:


> Along those same lines-   AYSO coaching education is actually really solid.  Now coaches don’t always learn or follow-  but the courses are good-  at least on par with the USSF grassroots courses.
> AYSO is 100% free.  And usually includes an online and field component. USSF charges $25 per online course.
> AYSO will accept reciprocity with USSF courses. (At lease they used to). USSF does not accept any of the AYSO courses.


Solid to a certain level. Great to get kids started, but still flawed. No rec system gets kids technically sound (except for many "Mexican" leagues), which is probably the most important aspect that should be focused on. We bring in many AYSO kids who had parents as their coaches - hard for them grasp their education is limited and also flawed. Once kids get to a certain age and seem to have outgrown the level of competition, it is hard for the parents to let go coaching to someone with more experience - even ones with professional playing experience, european club experience or even national team experience. So, much of this is on parent/coach/player dynamic. Hard for people to step outside parent-coach to see the flaws. Most of the time it is because the coach at AYSO level doesnt have the knowledge to breakdown what the root issues are during a game. They are taught to coach a certain way and keep doing the same thing regardless of the personnel, the game conditions, other team's strengths/weaknesses, etc. You can go to a tournament and see a game listed against AYSO or other Big Rec Orgs that have club teams and already know how they will play - direct over the top ball or through balls. stick fastest biggest kid at top and feed him/her. At younger levels, will win games, since kids are not the most technically gifted. Balls will eventually fall in and you will score a good percentage of the balls. Kids dont have a good tactical sense on how to stop this - how would they if the coaches themselves dont know how to coach against teams that have more physically dominant players. Kids need to be taught how to play against kids who have developed faster than them, or are just physical freaks of nature. This will never happen in vast majority (id say over 90%) of rec leagues (even some clubs who have loose hiring practices) because of lack of training by experienced individuals. Not something difficult to fix, but has to be motivation and more than the superficial changes used to blow smoke up everyone's butts. 

Other things that blends into this is our sports culture arrogance - can google Claudio Reyna's comments about that. Money involved. How US Soccer admin is elected. So much more, but cant fix the system at grass roots with all the moving parts and the current structure. Many of these people who become directors/admins in these places do so because they are cushy jobs. They come in because someone tossed some $$ at them, make minor changes that look awesome on the surface, then bail when someone else in the soccer org network tosses more money at them. No one is rocking the boat to make drastic changes.


----------



## Not_that_Serious (Oct 22, 2018)

timbuck said:


> And add a module on how to deal with parents.


that would be a quick module from the standpoint of some coaches. it would be a one word chapter - Don't.


----------



## Grace T. (Oct 22, 2018)

Not_that_Serious said:


> No rec system gets kids technically sound (except for many "Mexican" leagues), which is probably the most important aspect that should be focused on.


Well, the other reason you see a lot of long ball played by AYSO teams is because they are very heavily influenced by the English system.  Whether the UK International camp, consultants that are hired to develop the material, trainers that come in to help the parents coach, or the way higher level AYSO officials were taught, you see a lot of connections to the UK.  And from just seeing my son's little YouTube English penpal play (have posted some of the videos before), at the younger youth levels the English seem to be worse bootballers than us.

The problem often overlooked with Mexican leagues is that they also have daddy coaches, and those daddy coaches teach in the style they know...the Mexican style.  It's very physical and doesn't really emphasize pretty technique like skill moves or passing lanes.  That's part of the problem when asking what is "technically sound"....we don't have established parameters for what the kids should be learning and how they should be playing and that isn't being communicated to the parents.  One of my rec ARs this weekend wanted to get into a long debate with me over why the buildout line is stupid....didn't get it all and the guy knew soccer (huge Premier League fan and with a daughter who played in higher level club).


----------



## Not_that_Serious (Oct 23, 2018)

Grace T. said:


> Well, the other reason you see a lot of long ball played by AYSO teams is because they are very heavily influenced by the English system.  Whether the UK International camp, consultants that are hired to develop the material, trainers that come in to help the parents coach, or the way higher level AYSO officials were taught, you see a lot of connections to the UK.  And from just seeing my son's little YouTube English penpal play (have posted some of the videos before), at the younger youth levels the English seem to be worse bootballers than us.
> 
> The problem often overlooked with Mexican leagues is that they also have daddy coaches, and those daddy coaches teach in the style they know...the Mexican style.  It's very physical and doesn't really emphasize pretty technique like skill moves or passing lanes.  That's part of the problem when asking what is "technically sound"....we don't have established parameters for what the kids should be learning and how they should be playing and that isn't being communicated to the parents.  One of my rec ARs this weekend wanted to get into a long debate with me over why the buildout line is stupid....didn't get it all and the guy knew soccer (huge Premier League fan and with a daughter who played in higher level club).


I disagree, most mexican league coaches (yep, usually a parent) emphasize proper technique. If you catch games you will see even at a young age kids heading ball properly - the game played in the air is very visually appealing. The aggression problems usually happen as the kids get to middle school. Most leagues wont go past U13-14 due to the crazy parents and kids not being able to control their tempers. Moving the ball is a 50-50 proposition depending on the styles they are familiar with. My child use to play once in awhile with his friends on various teams. Some teams could pass the ball and switch the field around - usually teams that didnt have ball dominate players. Some of the teams have very skillful players that go into "Hero Ball" mode. Some of these players we have taken into our club and have had to be reeled in a bit. Some coaches who get players from the Mexican Leagues will cut-off all forms of dynamic play to fit into their rigid system. Part of the reason why our country as a whole doesnt have dynamic players. Hard to find the balance, but a wealth of good technical players in Mexican Leagues, but they might fit the 6ft tall mold DAs and Colleges want.

In the premier league the only team that had any success booting balls over the top was Leicester City. That was an anomaly. It was the only way they could compete against more talented teams. Defend and then boot to Vardy or Mahrez who are at full sprint. Liverpool to a small degree do this, but they stretch the field as well. Coaches and Kids who come from Premier League Academies arent taught to play this way. my kid's coach trained at a top 4 UK Academy (also Germany) since he was 13 , as an American. Apparently someone convinced a lot of people this is the "UK Style" of play. Guess they heard the accent and it was all over, "Where do we sign?".


----------

