# US Soccer Splits Boys DA U18/U19 clubs into two tiers



## Dargle (Aug 2, 2019)

This is where DA is heading.  It will spread down the age groups eventually.  DA2 is going to be mighty unattractive, especially given the travel involved.

https://www.soccerwire.com/news/u-s-soccer-splits-boys-da-u-18-19-age-group-into-2-divisions/



> As first reported by Soccer America‘s Mike Woitalla and confirmed by SoccerWire’s sources, U.S. Soccer has split the Boys Development Academy U-18/19 age group into two divisions for the 2019-2020 season.
> 
> The Red tier will be the top flight, and will feature 36 teams, including all 22 MLS academies.
> 
> ...


Basically, it's the MLS clubs breaking off into their own league, but they added a few non-DA clubs to make it feasible logistically


----------



## timbuck (Aug 2, 2019)

No dog in this fight and I really don't follow much on the boys side.  Are the "Blue" teams typically getting crushed by the Red teams?

Will there be possible promotion/relegation?  If so -  I like this model.  If not-  Why in the hell would a team stick with DA if they are Blue?


----------



## texanincali (Aug 2, 2019)

Another ridiculous move by US Soccer.  Everything they touch turns into absolute crap.


----------



## espola (Aug 2, 2019)

Dargle said:


> This is where DA is heading.  It will spread down the age groups eventually.  DA2 is going to be mighty unattractive, especially given the travel involved.
> 
> https://www.soccerwire.com/news/u-s-soccer-splits-boys-da-u-18-19-age-group-into-2-divisions/
> 
> ...


Surf in top tier, Nomads in 2nd?  I can imagine the smoke and flames coming from DA's ears.


----------



## texanincali (Aug 2, 2019)

Article say Crossfire's nearest opponent is 800 miles away.  An expensive sports just priced a bunch of kids out of the game.


----------



## foreveryoung (Aug 2, 2019)

texanincali said:


> Another ridiculous move by US Soccer.  Everything they touch turns into absolute crap.


This looks like some sort of compromise to the MLS clubs wanting their own league.  They should have just given them their own league and left everyone else to go back to our own regional leagues.


----------



## Dos Equis (Aug 2, 2019)

foreveryoung said:


> This looks like some sort of compromise to the MLS clubs wanting their own league.  They should have just given them their own league and left everyone else to go back to our own regional leagues.


Agreed, but that would mean US Soccer would lose control of the de-facto top flight of youth soccer in the country, and might have to start acting like a sanctioning body, promoter of soccer education, growth and development, and national teams manager instead of the commissar of youth soccer.


----------



## foreveryoung (Aug 2, 2019)

As a parent I'm not a fan of some of the DA rules to begin with and this just reinforces the question of is it worth it.  If I was DOC of a Tier 2 club I would definitively be asking if it's worth it.


----------



## watfly (Aug 2, 2019)

Before this was announced our Technical Director claimed that DA was eventually looking at creating 4 tiers.  I think two tiers makes sense. Four seems excessive and just more dilution.


----------



## timbuck (Aug 2, 2019)

If a true "Academy" system is what we want and building professional level soccer players is what we want -  Then all acadamies should be residential with world class facilities.  And they should be fully funded -  Player fees, housing, uniforms, travel, etc.
If MLS teams are the only one's that can afford this type of set up - So be it.  Sure, some kids in areas that don't have an MLS club nearby might get missed.  Or they may have to move to an MLS city to be part of the academy.  Not much different than the way the rest of the soccer world does things.


----------



## full90 (Aug 2, 2019)

I agree. The top tier should be residential and free. The second tier should be same programming but allow kids to play high school, go 3 days a week with a flex 4th day and only play a few crossover games with Tier 1. Us Soccer should tell kids in their player pool they have to relocate to a tier 1 academy or risk being dropped from the pool. Then send their scouts to tier 2 programs all the time to find kids.


----------



## TT the Bear (Aug 2, 2019)

full90 said:


> I agree. The top tier should be residential and free. The second tier should be same programming but allow kids to play high school, go 3 days a week with a flex 4th day and only play a few crossover games with Tier 1. Us Soccer should tell kids in their player pool they have to relocate to a tier 1 academy or risk being dropped from the pool. Then send their scouts to tier 2 programs all the time to find kids.


That's a pretty good plan, but then open up tier 2 to lots more clubs.  Never understood the DA's reluctance to play non-DA teams. It makes sense from a scouting perspective if nothing else.


----------



## timbuck (Aug 2, 2019)

And I'm talking about film rooms, fully staffed athletic trainers (maybe even team doctors), multiple coaches for each team, technical trainers, sports psychologists, weight room with the latest equipment, etc.  Like what you'd find at a D1 Football school.

An "academy" with 1 head coach, and assistant coach and renting a school (or going to a players house) to watch game and training film isn't enough.  Telling a kid to go to the doctor for an injury isn't enough.  Having a kid get his own ankle taped before a game isn't enough.  Having a medical tent at a tournament staffed by PT interns isn't enough.


----------



## younothat (Aug 2, 2019)

My sons club is in the top division but this new setup seems to *stack the deck* too much in favor of too few clubs while basically regulating 44 clubs to a lower division by club instead of teams so the placements seem to be unearned in many ways/cases

This trickles down to U16/17 and U15

As somebody else posted in the 2005 thread for the DA cup, The groups are:

California /  AKA Top Division, Tier 1
LA Galaxy
FC Golden State
Pateadores
Surf
Sacramento Republic
LAFC
San Jose Earthquakes
Force

Pacific:   2nd Division, Tier 2
Breakers
Silicon Valley
Arsenal
Nomads
Albion

Pac NW:  Top Division, Tier 1
Real Salt Lake
Timbers
Rapids
Sounders
Real Colorado
Whitecaps

West: 3rd Divsion, Tier 2
LAG SD
TFA
LAUFA
Ballistic

West Coast:  3rd division, Tier 2
Barca
Crossfire
Strikers
Real So Cal

So what does all mean besides creating a caste like system, well for starters all the Tier I teams seems to  get automatic entry to DA Cup winter and only are playing the first 6-7  games for placement and rankings while all the Tier 2 teams need to win all there games in hopes of getting a slot in one the DA cup.   The wildcards for the playoffs are now based on the DA cup outcomes.   

But now teams like say the LA Galaxy will play each team once in their division for DA cup play but teams like the Strikers have to play most teams 2x in theire division for DA qualifying because there are not enough teams in that division.  Even if they win all those games they still might not have enough PPG to make DA cup winter and will be regulated to the "showcase" because those spots are Tier 2 throughout the whole country.


----------



## Dargle (Aug 2, 2019)

timbuck said:


> No dog in this fight and I really don't follow much on the boys side.  Are the "Blue" teams typically getting crushed by the Red teams?
> 
> Will there be possible promotion/relegation?  If so -  I like this model.  If not-  Why in the hell would a team stick with DA if they are Blue?


My understanding is that there will not be promotion and relegation between tiers, other than in the sense that USSDA is always evaluating DA clubs and could change their designation if they fail to meet standards.  It's certainly not based on sporting merit now, since Crossfire won the U18/U19 division the last two years (although the style of play conducive to winning might not be the style of play conducive to developing the talent necessary for the nat'l team).


----------



## younothat (Aug 2, 2019)

watfly said:


> Before this was announced our Technical Director claimed that DA was eventually looking at creating 4 tiers.  I think two tiers makes sense. Four seems excessive and just more dilution.


There is four tiers behind the scenes already just look at how the DA CUP is structured, stacking the deck for Tier 1 teams, All 24 are in now matter what while Tier 2 Winners only and they get just 8 out of the 24 slots.


----------



## oh canada (Aug 2, 2019)

I actually think this is a step in the right direction.  It will further funnel the best players to a smaller group of clubs.  Agree with the posts above that the "Red" clubs should be free/no cost to the players.  Residency?  A bit premature for that and not really necessary at this point.


----------



## texanincali (Aug 3, 2019)

timbuck said:


> If a true "Academy" system is what we want and building professional level soccer players is what we want -  Then all acadamies should be residential with world class facilities.  And they should be fully funded -  Player fees, housing, uniforms, travel, etc.
> If MLS teams are the only one's that can afford this type of set up - So be it.  Sure, some kids in areas that don't have an MLS club nearby might get missed.  Or they may have to move to an MLS city to be part of the academy.  Not much different than the way the rest of the soccer world does things.


I agree with much of what you say, but I think you greatly overstate the amount of residencies in Europe.  They are definitely not the norm in Europe and many clubs actually think giving a kid some normalcy by going to school with neighborhood friends and living at home is beneficial.  

I think I would support a residency at U18/19 if it makes sense, but doing so at U13 - U17 isn’t necessary.


----------



## SBFDad (Aug 4, 2019)

texanincali said:


> I think I would support a residency at U18/19 if it makes sense, but doing so at U13 - U17 isn’t necessary.


I think U18/19 is too late for all that. The idea of in-residency is full immersion in the professional culture, something kids need before they’re 18yrs old if it is going to be impactful. I agree that there is a “too young” age, but a high school kid should be ready for all of it and would benefit greatly from it. So I’ll say U15/16 for in-residency to start. It’s where RSL is at, so there’s a reference point. That said, a full immersion environment isn’t for every kid, even if they are talented enough. But if they excel in that type of environment and really enjoy the experience, the earlier the better.


----------



## texanincali (Aug 4, 2019)

SBFDad said:


> I think U18/19 is too late for all that. The idea of in-residency is full immersion in the professional culture, something kids need before they’re 18yrs old if it is going to be impactful. I agree that there is a “too young” age, but a high school kid should be ready for all of it and would benefit greatly from it. So I’ll say U15/16 for in-residency to start. It’s where RSL is at, so there’s a reference point. That said, a full immersion environment isn’t for every kid, even if they are talented enough. But if they excel in that type of environment and really enjoy the experience, the earlier the better.


Fair enough.  In lieu of a full time residency, what about what a number of the other clubs do?  For example, FCD trains at 7:30am, club brings them to school (public school), and then picks them up and brings them back to the stadium for film, treatment, etc.  the kids get to have a normal childhood with school and still get a full slate of football.

Local kids can live at home, and out of town kids live with host families.  I like that mode better than living at the facility full time.  I just think it develops more rounded kids.


----------



## surf&donuts (Aug 4, 2019)

So is Tier 2 considered a less competitive club? If so, why Pats over Strikers?


----------



## SBFDad (Aug 4, 2019)

texanincali said:


> Fair enough.  In lieu of a full time residency, what about what a number of the other clubs do?  For example, FCD trains at 7:30am, club brings them to school (public school), and then picks them up and brings them back to the stadium for film, treatment, etc.  the kids get to have a normal childhood with school and still get a full slate of football.
> 
> Local kids can live at home, and out of town kids live with host families.  I like that mode better than living at the facility full time.  I just think it develops more rounded kids.


This is a good approach. Galaxy academy does something similar with their older groups with an on-site high school. Train in the morning, then off to school. Local kids go home in the afternoon/evening, out-of-area kids to their host families.

RSLs program has their athletes going to a charter school they set up that accepts non-athletes and both genders. Several different ways to blend the soccer world and the real world at MLS academies who look to be leading the way...RSL, Galaxy, and Dallas. I am sure there are others doing good things are well.


----------



## JPS (Aug 4, 2019)

surf&donuts said:


> So is Tier 2 considered a less competitive club? If so, why Pats over Strikers?


Pats are a much bigger organization (about 200 teams) vs. Strikers (around 20 teams). Also Pats play in the competitive, stronger LA Division teams / MLS teams vs. Strikers playing against much weaker San Diego clubs such as Arsenal, Nomads, OC Surf, etc....
Another advantage is the Pats more experienced and larger coaching staff over a very small Strikers coaching staff.


----------



## JPS (Aug 4, 2019)

surf&donuts said:


> So is Tier 2 considered a less competitive club? If so, why Pats over Strikers?


Also Pats are a fully funded Academy


----------



## Dargle (Aug 4, 2019)

JPS said:


> Also Pats are a fully funded Academy


My guess is that USSDA figures it doesn't really matter because the coaches and players will all migrate over to whichever clubs are named the T1 DAs. The only reason for any non-MLS DAs in T1 is to provide some geographic linkage to reduce travel costs.  They expect the best players will end up moving to the MLS DAs anyway.


----------



## justneededaname (Aug 5, 2019)

JPS said:


> Also Pats are a fully funded Academy


I am guessing the split is fully-funded vs not. FCGS is fully-funded. Pats is fully-funded. Surf is heading that way (at least I know that at U15 it is something like 70% of the players are funded). I have heard for several years from coaches at both Strikers and Albion that the DA really wants clubs to be fully-funded from U15 and up. Maybe this is a step towards encouraging that. In San Diego it is definitely going to help Surf and hurt Albion (and LAGSD at the younger ages).

I can't imagine what this is going to do to Crossfire. The costs of all of travel is going to be insane.


----------



## Dargle (Aug 5, 2019)

justneededaname said:


> I am guessing the split is fully-funded vs not. FCGS is fully-funded. Pats is fully-funded. Surf is heading that way (at least I know that at U15 it is something like 70% of the players are funded). I have heard for several years from coaches at both Strikers and Albion that the DA really wants clubs to be fully-funded from U15 and up. Maybe this is a step towards encouraging that. In San Diego it is definitely going to help Surf and hurt Albion (and LAGSD at the younger ages).
> 
> I can't imagine what this is going to do to Crossfire. The costs of all of travel is going to be insane.


Fully funded would be a rational way to distinguish among DA club tiers (since the top players gravitate to either the MLS clubs or the ones that give them full scholarships), but that wouldn't explain why Crossfire is in Tier 2, since it fully funds everything, including travel

https://www.soccernation.com/how-do-they-do-it-crossfire-premier-fully-funds-their-top-da-teams/

In Tier 2, with league games in Southern California and AZ, that's going to be might difficult to continue.


----------



## jpeter (Aug 5, 2019)

Politics at play with the convoluted attempt to create tiers to appease the MLS clubs which have discuss leaving if things didn't change...

The non MLS clubs had to be "all in" with boys & girls teams to get consideration for tier 1 it seems.   Crossfire girls for example left DA for ECNL so even through the boys won their division and made QF in the playoffs there were basically demoted on a club bases and not a team one.

The biggest flaw is placing teams in tiers based on a club name basically, instead of something quantitive or earned, they basically caved in and went with self placement without a clear criteria on how a team can move tiers if at all which is a shame.

While say Pats over Strikers in tier 1 is a very curious choice since they seems to cover the same area, practice & play at some of the same locations: CM & Irvine.  Both clubs subside the club fees but to say full funding like Galaxy would be a strech. Travel costs for non da scholarshiped players can add up.

The biggest gripe is this was dropped on clubs & DOC's last minute without anything scheduling input or saying in anything.  Starts in 3 weeks


----------



## megnation (Aug 5, 2019)

jpeter said:


> Politics at play with the convoluted attempt to create tiers to appease the MLS clubs which have discuss leaving if things didn't change...
> While say Pats over Strikers in tier 1 is a very curious choice since they seems to cover the same area, practice & play at some of the same locations: CM & Irvine.  Both clubs subside the club fees but to say full funding like Galaxy would be a strech. Travel costs for non da scholarshiped players can add up.


I would say that in the 18/19 division Strikers have failed to get to the playoffs the last two seasons while Pats have had 1st and 3rd place finishes in their division. Could have played a factor


----------



## OCsoccerdad7777 (Aug 5, 2019)

Where does Galaxy SD stand in this? They are MLS but do they carry the same weight? Does the LA Galaxy treat them close to equally?

If they ever get granted U17/U18 status on boys, would they be put in tier 1 since it isn't a performance based criteria?


----------



## megnation (Aug 5, 2019)

OCsoccerdad7777 said:


> Where does Galaxy SD stand in this? They are MLS but do they carry the same weight? Does the LA Galaxy treat them close to equally?
> 
> If they ever get granted U17/U18 status on boys, would they be put in tier 1 since it isn't a performance based criteria?



Is Galaxy SD fully funded like LA Galaxy? Didn't think they were


----------



## jpeter (Aug 5, 2019)

OCsoccerdad7777 said:


> Where does Galaxy SD stand in this? They are MLS but do they carry the same weight? Does the LA Galaxy treat them close to equally?
> 
> If they ever get granted U17/U18 status on boys, would they be put in tier 1 since it isn't a performance based criteria?


LAGSD is in the last division of tier 2 in the DA cup and I doubt they will have ever see tier 1 as a affiliate or get u18/19.  Same with the surf affiliates.  

Instead of regulating teams  no matter their performance, DA has decided to keep these full members clubs in year after year but this time in a lower tier.  The big question is are there ways to move up/down based on performance from year to year  or are these "casted" in stone going forward?


----------



## jpeter (Aug 5, 2019)

megnation said:


> Is Galaxy SD fully funded like LA Galaxy? Didn't think they were


Only about half of top tier clubs are funded to certain degrees. Even some of the MLS clubs charge like DC united.  Even in the West-red bracket it's about half/half with club like Golden State, Surf, Sacramento, force not covering travel for example.


----------



## timbuck (Aug 5, 2019)

jpeter said:


> LAGSD is in the last division of tier 2 in the DA cup and I doubt they will have ever see tier 1 as a affiliate or get u18/19.  Same with the surf affiliates.
> 
> Instead of regulating teams  no matter their performance, DA has decided to keep these full members clubs in year after year but this time in a lower tier.  The big question is are there ways to move up/down based on performance from year to year  or are these "casted" in stone going forward?


I’m guessing the way to “move up” is going to be on a player by player basis.  And they’ll have to move teams.


----------



## OCsoccerdad7777 (Aug 5, 2019)

megnation said:


> Is Galaxy SD fully funded like LA Galaxy? Didn't think they were


Think you're right, just checked their site. Wow thought they were fully funded by LA Galaxy but seems like they just use the name like an OC Surf. 

Hopefully they will bring teams up based on success. If/when TFA ever gets to that age, doesn't make sense for them to be T2 assuming they keep pace.


----------



## Dargle (Aug 5, 2019)

timbuck said:


> I’m guessing the way to “move up” is going to be on a player by player basis.  And they’ll have to move teams.


That's exactly what DA is intended to do.  Find the best players by the end of U19, not the best teams or the best clubs.  That's why the number of DA teams decline as the age groups rise.  Players on DA teams in clubs that don't have the next age group are expected to either drop out or move to other DA clubs and displace less able players on that team. It's all part of the winnowing out process.  Clubs are theoretically supposed to be just vehicles for passing the kids along.  After all, there's no process for getting a club promoted into DA based on team success either.


----------



## timbuck (Aug 5, 2019)

And no training compensation for “promoting” a kid to a higher level.


----------



## Dargle (Aug 5, 2019)

timbuck said:


> And no training compensation for “promoting” a kid to a higher level.


Not yet anyway.


----------



## BigSoccer (Aug 6, 2019)

So now it gets a little confusing.  If you are rhe developmental team for a T2 team are you a developmental developmental player?


----------



## watfly (Aug 6, 2019)

It would be great if US Soccer would allow non-tier 1 players to play high school...unfortunately its leadership is too arrogant to do so.


----------



## jpeter (Aug 6, 2019)

watfly said:


> It would be great if US Soccer would allow non-tier 1 players to play high school...unfortunately its leadership is too arrogant to do so.


That's the rub with DA, the real value of the program has to be with the training since players spend much more time training 4x a week vs actual playing then just about anything else.

For the olders there are 6-7 cup games, 16-18 regular season games, 3 or 6 showcase plus playoffs so around 30-33 odd games over 10 months.  Most da teams don't play many if any tournments especially with the combined age groups so overall the training ratio to games play is very high compared to anything else considering the high roster counts and sub rules finding enough playing time can be a challenge.


----------



## LAOC (Aug 6, 2019)

OCsoccerdad7777 said:


> Think you're right, just checked their site. Wow thought they were fully funded by LA Galaxy but seems like they just use the name like an OC Surf.
> 
> Hopefully they will bring teams up based on success. If/when TFA ever gets to that age, doesn't make sense for them to be T2 assuming they keep pace.


Also assuming this trickles down to the younger age DA teams it will begin to make even less sense.


----------



## LAOC (Aug 6, 2019)

texanincali said:


> Another ridiculous move by US Soccer.  Everything they touch turns into absolute crap.


This is death blow to a club like Strikers. They compete with Pats as one of the only two academies in OC and by placing Pats as tier 1 and Strikers as tier 2 they have managed to royally F*%k Strikers. My son is a U12 and wanted to tryout next year for Strikers pre academy team because all their club teams are better then Pats but there is no point in getting him into the Strikers system now. 

Academy used to Start at U-13 but that changed within the last 12 months as well. With all the recent changes I feel like the current crop of '08s & '09s are mixed signals from everywhere.


----------



## foreveryoung (Aug 6, 2019)

jpeter said:


> That's the rub with DA, the real value of the program has to be with the training since players spend much more time training 4x a week vs actual playing then just about anything else.
> 
> For the olders there are 6-7 cup games, 16-18 regular season games, 3 or 6 showcase plus playoffs so around 30-33 odd games over 10 months.  Most da teams don't play many if any tournments especially with the combined age groups so overall the training ratio to games play is very high compared to anything else considering the high roster counts and sub rules finding enough playing time can be a challenge.


Right, so then you say is it worth it?  Why not play in a league with relaxed sub rules, the flexibility to play outside of DA, less travel for league games, etc. etc.  Training can still be 4 days a week.


----------



## LAOC (Aug 6, 2019)

foreveryoung said:


> Right, so then you say is it worth it?  Why not play in a league with relaxed sub rules, the flexibility to play outside of DA, less travel for league games, etc. etc.  Training can still be 4 days a week.


I was saying it isn't worth going to the Strikers, I might as well take him to Pats. I don't see any point in going to a tier 2 academy in this new system, at least not from the start. Maybe it makes sense if your kid isn't getting playing time but for me the logical step is to "start" with a tier 1 academy. 

Every situation is different with kids and family but for him/us we realize the DA is where the top talent goes. We just moved to OC from LA and he is only 11 but it seems this will start to make its way down to the younger ages as well.


----------



## jpeter (Aug 6, 2019)

foreveryoung said:


> Right, so then you say is it worth it?  Why not play in a league with relaxed sub rules, the flexibility to play outside of DA, less travel for league games, etc. etc.


Depends on the player, club, coaching staff.

If you value academics more than youth soccer I would say DA is questionable for many players.  Spending 2 hrs a night 4x a week + travel time is a big commitment and trying to juggle that plus achieving
high academic is tough and not for everyone.  The highly motivated and organized player can make it worth it but there some sacrifices to be made.

U18/19 is basically the last year of HS (u18) for most players and u19 is college time so it's a mixed bag especially in the spring with all the senior activities.


----------



## foreveryoung (Aug 6, 2019)

LAOC said:


> I was saying it isn't worth going to the Strikers, I might as well take him to Pats. I don't see any point in going to a tier 2 academy in this new system, at least not from the start. Maybe it makes sense if your kid isn't getting playing time but for me the logical step is to "start" with a tier 1 academy.
> 
> Every situation is different with kids and family but for him/us we realize the DA is where the top talent goes. We just moved to OC from LA and he is only 11 but it seems this will start to make its way down to the younger ages as well.


Yes, exactly my point.  There is no real value in a tier 2 DA league.  If I was the DOC of a tier 2 club I wouldn't be too happy right now.


----------



## jpeter (Aug 6, 2019)

foreveryoung said:


> Yes, exactly my point.  There is no real value in a tier 2 DA league.  If I was the DOC of a tier 2 club I wouldn't be too happy right now.


Besides LA Galaxy, FC Golden St, Pateadores, SD Surf, and LAFC all other Socal clubs are tier 2 now basically and will remain so unless there are changes next year.

Already tricked down to U15, U16/17 in the DA cup (first 5-7 games).  Even in tier 2 there are lower & higher divisions internally.   Strikers for example is in 2nd tier but 2nd or 3rd division within that just like LA Galaxy SD is and they play lesser competition as a result at least for u15+ this season


----------



## Kante (Aug 6, 2019)

Here’s a link to a very solid article from SoccerAmerica if anyone is interested. 
https://www.socceramerica.com/publications/article/83165/boys-development-academy-shakeup-us-soccer-move.html

In the article, it says that the following criteria was used by USSDA to create the new groupings:

Performance history. US Soccer was quoted as saying “we’re not looking at a single year (instead) using data across age groups and across years”
Player production (presumably for YNT)
Markets
Ability of a club to provide “meaningful games”. Last year, US Soccer was quoted as defining “meaningful games” as games with a three or smaller goal differential i.e. 3-0, 4-1 etc.
The article also says that US Soccer will re-evaluate the tiers and structure and may move teams in 2020-21 but US Soccer has not provided specific criteria (other than the general notes above) for how teams will be evaluated.

So, looked at the u18/u19 clubs and their performance history since the 2015-16 season and looking at team results from the u15 thru the u19 age groups. Two key items stand out from looking at the data:

Generally, looking at all the performance history that’s available from u15 up, the groups seem to be highly performance-based, particularly looking at performance in aggregate across age groups and seasons.
However, exceptions seem to have been made in three fo the four groups. Based on aggregate performance, the following clubs deserve to be in Tier 1:
East: Cedars – Bergen and Met Oval
Frontier/Southeast: Kendall and Weston
West: Barca, Crossfire Premier and Strikers​
And the following clubs likely deserve to be in Tier 2 (Will be interesting to see how meaningful the games are next year with these clubs. Suspect that a number of folks will be paying close attention to results): 

East: Baltimore Armour and New England Revolution
Frontier/Southeast: Saint Louis FC and Solar Soccer Club
West: De Anza Force, Portland Timbers and San Diego Surf​
Here’s the data table looking at USSDA new groupings. Per USSDA, teams are sorted in each group by alpha.



And here's a data table for reference grouped and sorted by best to worst club aggregate performance instead of the USSDA grouping. Teams in each group are sorted by best to worst aggregate club performance:


----------



## jpeter (Aug 6, 2019)

Kante said:


> Here’s a link to a very solid article from SoccerAmerica if anyone is interested.
> https://www.socceramerica.com/publications/article/83165/boys-development-academy-shakeup-us-soccer-move.html
> 
> In the article, it says that the following criteria was used by USSDA to create the new groupings:
> ...


Good stuff

What they don't mention in the article is the criteria doesn't / didn't matter if your a MLS club or if your club doesn't support Girls DA also.    In the case of Crossfire and Strikers that hurt them IMO as the "markets" criteria does,  covering the same area as other clubs do.  Need some teams to fill in to make the games more geographically desirable for example.


----------



## Kante (Aug 6, 2019)

jpeter said:


> Good stuff
> 
> What they don't mention in the article is the criteria doesn't / didn't matter if your a MLS club or if your club doesn't support Girls DA also.    In the case of Crossfire and Strikers that hurt them IMO as the "markets" criteria does,  covering the same area as other clubs do.  Need some teams to fill in to make the games more geographically desirable for example.


got it. Was fully funded/not fully funded a criteria as well or not so much?


----------



## jpeter (Aug 6, 2019)

Kante said:


> got it. Was fully funded/not fully funded a criteria as well or not so much?


More in terms of investment overall, too few really fully fund everything and the term is used loosely somewhat. However
when a club says they investment $4 million in DA programing  that does get noticed as do championships ala Solar both Boys & Girls this past season.

The YNT call up factor is a curious one, as few clubs are included and some of the ones who do/did half the time played for other clubs before moving to a MLS one for example so who gets the credit for that?  Player Production is a funny term, top ten in stats or something, not sure?


----------



## LAOC (Aug 6, 2019)

Kante said:


> got it. Was fully funded/not fully funded a criteria as well or not so much?


I read the article and didn't see funding listed as criteria but that doesn't mean it wasn't considered. 

On a side note, I saw Strikers announce something about this https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_United_Strikers_FC a while back and thought it was curious. Looking back I wonder if they new they were going to be demoted and are proactively trying to make a case for tier 1 after the 2020 season when the article says these tiers will be reviewed?

I wonder if Tier 2 teams will just start exploring different options? https://www.soccerwire.com/news/next-step-in-creation-of-usl-academy-league-announced/


----------



## Kante (Aug 6, 2019)

jpeter said:


> More in terms of investment overall, too few really fully fund everything and the term is used loosely somewhat. However
> when a club says they investment $4 million in DA programing  that does get noticed as do championships ala Solar both Boys & Girls this past season.
> 
> The YNT call up factor is a curious one, as few clubs are included and some of the ones who do/did half the time played for other clubs before moving to a MLS one for example so who gets the credit for that?


Agreed. eg, VV, playing w/ u15 ynt now, came originally from strikers before moving to LAG. 

looks like USSDA mostly decisions based on historical performance so the question is what drove the exceptions. 

The MLS teams that should be in Tier 2 is straightforward (i.e. they're MLS, so automatically in Tier 1 to start) but curious about what the common factors re: xf, cedars-bergen, met oval, weston, kendall, barca and the strikers would be that would put them into Tier 2 despite their solid historical performance?


----------



## foreveryoung (Aug 6, 2019)

Kante said:


> Here’s a link to a very solid article from SoccerAmerica if anyone is interested.
> https://www.socceramerica.com/publications/article/83165/boys-development-academy-shakeup-us-soccer-move.html
> 
> In the article, it says that the following criteria was used by USSDA to create the new groupings:
> ...


I read the article and the comments left by readers.  There were many and all were highly critical of the changes (particularly  of the non-mls club selections for tier 1) and US Soccer not surprisingly.  Anyone heard feedback or commentary from coaches or DOC's at any of the tier 2 clubs?


----------



## foreveryoung (Aug 6, 2019)

jpeter said:


> Good stuff
> 
> What they don't mention in the article is the criteria doesn't / didn't matter if your a MLS club or if your club doesn't support Girls DA also.    In the case of Crossfire and Strikers that hurt them IMO as the "markets" criteria does,  covering the same area as other clubs do.  Need some teams to fill in to make the games more geographically desirable for example.


In the reader comments someone suggested that Crossfire's solidarity claim for DeAndre Yedlin played a part in their tier placement.


----------



## Dargle (Aug 6, 2019)

Interesting timing on this bit of news. Jared Miklos, the Director of USSDA, is departing

https://twitter.com/MikeWoitalla/status/1158880530378526720


----------



## Eagle33 (Aug 7, 2019)

foreveryoung said:


> I read the article and the comments left by readers.  There were many and all were highly critical of the changes (particularly  of the non-mls club selections for tier 1) and US Soccer not surprisingly.  Anyone heard feedback or commentary from coaches or DOC's at any of the tier 2 clubs?


I heard something from Ebert. He  said "this...beep....soccer...beep...and....beep....federation...beep....and...beep.


----------



## espola (Aug 7, 2019)

DA on the boys side has been around long enough now that it is clear that it is not meeting its stated objective. Any same system of management would insist that something be done.  Under the previous system (picking a National Team from ODP and college players) we never won a World Cup.  Under the DA system, we can't qualify for a World Cup.


----------



## timbuck (Aug 7, 2019)

Bring back Bradenton!!!!
https://www.soccertoday.com/u-s-soccer-development-academy-closes-bradenton/


----------



## foreveryoung (Aug 8, 2019)

Follow up article with feedback from the non-MLS clubs.

Late announcement, no input from amateur clubs, vague description of criteria for Tier 1, no clear path for promotion, perception of inferiority, favoritism to MLS clubs.

https://www.socceramerica.com/publications/article/83223/the-das-new-tiered-format-the-stigma-of-relegati.html?utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_content=headline&utm_campaign=22017&hashid=WXStpuIAm-2uzNm2zYa5-thFP0w


----------



## Dargle (Aug 8, 2019)

foreveryoung said:


> Follow up article with feedback from the non-MLS clubs.
> 
> Late announcement, no input from amateur clubs, vague description of criteria for Tier 1, no clear path for promotion, perception of inferiority, favoritism to MLS clubs.
> 
> https://www.socceramerica.com/publications/article/83223/the-das-new-tiered-format-the-stigma-of-relegati.html?utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_content=headline&utm_campaign=22017&hashid=WXStpuIAm-2uzNm2zYa5-thFP0w


Ironically, you could use all those words to describe the criticism of non-DA clubs about the selection of which clubs get to be DA clubs.


----------



## younothat (Aug 8, 2019)

Dargle said:


> Ironically, you could use all those words to describe the criticism of non-DA clubs about the selection of which clubs get to be DA clubs.


Yes and there lies the underlining problems:  Closed league without regulation or promotion

This is a half baked idea about appeasing the MLS clubs at the expense of everybody else

"The stigma of relegation without a clear path for promotion"
Can't read the article since don't have the SA sub so if somebody will C&P the content that would be great

Lots of discontent for just about everybody I hear form. My player is with a Tier 1 club and I still don't like what they have done. 

Basing this on club instead of team performance  just seem crazy to me and giving one group preferred placement over everyone else without earning it just seems wrong to me.

Open up DA and have teams qualify for the league each year just like with Cal South does with CRL.  Sure you could still have the auto-qualifiers like top 4 finishers, quarter finalist  in the playoffs etc but all the other teams should have to play in some sort of qualifying tournaments.  That would be for Tier 1.

For Tier 1 teams that didn't make they would be regulated to tier 2 for one season and they would have to qualify the following season for tier 2, get promoted back to tier 1 via performance or be dropped all together.

New teams could start at tier 2 through qualifying and work there way up or not.


----------



## watfly (Aug 8, 2019)

FYI, if you have SiriusXM, Mike Woitalla (the author of the articles) discusses this on the Coaching Academy on Sirius FC which is available on demand.


----------



## foreveryoung (Aug 8, 2019)

younothat said:


> Yes and there lies the underlining problems:  Closed league without regulation or promotion
> 
> This is a half baked idea about appeasing the MLS clubs at the expense of everybody else
> 
> ...


While I'm all for opening up the DA and established criteria for qualification, I fear that winning as the only criteria will just create "win at all cost" environments that do not encourage player development or great talent ID.  We are back to the big kids on the team and kickball soccer.  I believe one of the purposes of the DA (not saying it did this successfully) was to avoid this, hence DEVELOPMENT academy.  But I definitely agree that establishing values and goals in youth development that they actually adhere to and clear criteria for league placement is necessary.


----------



## Dargle (Aug 8, 2019)

I'm not sure the fundamental problem is the lack of club or team pro-rel, for the reasons @foreveryoung states.  The whole point is for players, not teams, to be moved up or down and to narrow the pool as they get older.  The reasons professional clubs are the ideal vehicles for this kind of system is that their incentive is to find the jewels, develop them, and discard the rest.  In theory, they shouldn't care about wins and losses any more than Major League Baseball teams care about the wins or losses of their minor league affiliates (except insofar as it indicates that all of the players are developing well).  Youth clubs that aren't affiliated with pro teams might have the same incentive if they reliably developed players who signed overseas contracts, making them eligible for training compensation/solidarity payments, but that's a lottery ticket more than a club development strategy.  Unless and until MLS clubs start paying for players sent their way, the major incentive for non-pro youth clubs is to win so they attract other paying players to their club (although they can also brag about the alums they've placed in college and the pros too) and so their coaches can use it on their resumes.  It's one of the flaws in DA as it exists now.


----------



## jpeter (Aug 8, 2019)

foreveryoung said:


> While I'm all for opening up the DA and established criteria for qualification, I fear that winning as the only criteria will just create "win at all cost" environments that do not encourage player development or great talent ID.  We are back to the big kids on the team and kickball soccer.  I believe one of the purposes of the DA (not saying it did this successfully) was to avoid this, hence DEVELOPMENT academy.  But I definitely agree that establishing values and goals in youth development that they actually adhere to and clear criteria for league placement is necessary.


With the olders DA in reality is practically win at most costs already anyway. The FIFA sub rules where only a max 15 players get game time doesn't help development either. 

 I don't believe pro/rel with hurt development in this case if done like @younothat suggested in fact I think that would improve the overall competitiveness for all clubs not just the tier 1 which is the case with this new setup


----------



## surf&donuts (Aug 8, 2019)

This is messed up. Even the clubs that are not fully funded have put up significant amounts of resources - time, money, field acesss - only to be placed at tier 2.  As a parent if  DA player I also put up significant amount of money, time, mileage - only to have US Soccer pull this at the last minute is very very low - especially this late in the game! It is disrespectful to the clubs, parents and players.


----------



## BruceDern (Aug 9, 2019)

foreveryoung said:


> Follow up article with feedback from the non-MLS clubs.
> 
> Late announcement, no input from amateur clubs, vague description of criteria for Tier 1, no clear path for promotion, perception of inferiority, favoritism to MLS clubs.
> 
> https://www.socceramerica.com/publications/article/83223/the-das-new-tiered-format-the-stigma-of-relegati.html?utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_content=headline&utm_campaign=22017&hashid=WXStpuIAm-2uzNm2zYa5-thFP0w


The article gives good insight on MLS criteia.Good read.


----------



## Kante (Aug 9, 2019)

(1 of 3 - hit the 10k character limit w/ the article)

for the folks w/o a SoccerAmerica subscription, here's what they wrote on feedback received from club DOCs on the new u18/19 schedule/grouping. The author talked to more than a dozen DOCs as part of putting together the article. good stuff. 

would recommend subscribing since it's only $39/yr and seems to be the most informed and insightful info available on DA inner workings. also, articles - like the one below - require a lot of legwork, and this kind of effort and product should be compensated. 

here's the link to join: https://www.socceramerica.com/join/
_______________________
*The DA's new tiered format: The stigma of relegation without a clear path for promotion*

by Mike Woitalla @MikeWoitalla, Yesterday
It’s one thing for clubs to get demoted into a lower division. It's an even more bitter pill to swallow when they aren’t presented with a clear path for promotion into the top tier. That’s one of the reasons why U.S. Soccer’s splitting of the Boys Development Academy’s U-18/19 league into two divisions has sparked so much outrage.
* * * * * * * * * *
Beginning with the 2019-20 Boys DA season that kicks off on Aug. 31, the oldest age group will be comprised of the 36 teams in the higher Red Division and 44 teams in the lower Blue division. MLS clubs are only in the Red Division, where they are joined by 14 non-MLS clubs (three USL clubs and 11 non-pro clubs).

This season's U-15 and U-16/17 age group divisions will remain the same as during 2018-19 season, although U.S. Soccer has informed its DA clubs that it will "consider expanding the two-tier format to other age groups" after the 2019-20 season.

As for this season's Blue Division teams' chances of earning a move to Red Division, the only hope they have been given by U.S. Soccer is that: "At the conclusion of the 2019-20 season, the U-18/19 tiers and structure will be reevaluated, and teams may be moved for the 2020-21 season accordingly."







That the MLS clubs were all placed into the top tier -- including 2020 expansion club Inter Miami, which just launched its academy -- is another reason for discontent from the demoted clubs’ directors, who believe the tiered system was introduced to placate MLS clubs that threatened to leave the DA. Also common is the assertion by directors that a number of non-MLS clubs – not necessarily their own -- are more qualified than some of the MLS clubs for the Red division.

Which brings us to another complaint: U.S. Soccer provided only a vague description of the criteria it used to split the teams: "Each U-18/19 team was scheduled into a tier based on performance history, player production, market and the ability to provide meaningful games."







I spoke with a dozen DA club directors representing clubs that were placed into both the Red and Blue Divisions. Some asked not to be quoted by name because they did not have authority from their board to do so. Others cited fear that their clubs would be punished by U.S. Soccer if they were critical of the governing body. This has been something I have encountered on several occasions in recent years when reporting on other DA-related issues. (I do not know whether it’s true that U.S. Soccer would retaliate against critics within its own membership, but that there’s a perception that it would is in and of itself concerning.)

Here are some of the reasons the club directors gave for being upset. They include feedback from directors who believe their teams were unfairly demoted, and from directors who don’t dispute their clubs’ ranking but are frustrated with how the transition was implemented and are concerned about possible future implications.

*• The late announcement of the new format. *Example: A club that does not charge its players for DA travel set its budget earlier in the year based on last season’s conference alignment. The tiered format created new geographic divisions, requiring farther travel to different states, at a cost that exceeds its planned budget – while taking off its schedule games against local rivals.

Example: The late announcement came after players and parents signed up for a season that now looks different from what they had been promised – such as games against MLS teams and expectations on where they would travel. “It makes me look bad in front of our parents,” said one director.

(continued in next post)


----------



## Kante (Aug 9, 2019)

(2 of 3 - hit the 10k character limit w/ the article)

would recommend subscribing since it's only $39/yr and seems to be the most informed and insightful info available on DA inner workings. also, articles - like the one below - require a lot of legwork, and this kind of effort and product should be compensated. 

here's the link to join: https://www.socceramerica.com/join/
__________

(here's continuation of article)

Last season, the Boys DA had already introduced a tiered schedule, while not altering the divisions. The weighted schedules were designed so higher rated teams played more games against teams rated similarly while skipping games against lower rated teams. (MLS teams in particular had complained about traveling to games against teams that didn't provide strong enough competition.)

When told at a meeting in mid-June, which coincided with the year-end Showcase, that changes were coming in the U-18/19 league, many directors thought that simply meant schedule changes similar to last season – not a split into two divisions. Such specifics, they say, weren’t revealed at the meeting.

*• Eliminating local rivalry games. *Directors of teams in the Red Division were disappointed with this as well. One said his club’s preference is to play against local rivals and traditional regional opponents, because they’ve created healthy relationships with those clubs and want to continue to be good partners in development. Another lamented losing local rivalries that have been around for years. A Blue Division director pointed out his team is no longer playing a nearby longtime rival while added to his team's schedule is a game hundreds of miles away, without another nearby DA club, which means a long trip for one game.

Also, last season’s results show that many of the local rivalry matchups that have been scratched don’t coincide with U.S. Soccer’s aim of eliminating games that aren’t meaningful competition. Especially glaring is in the Northwest, where Crossfire Premier’s demotion ends its games against the Seattle Sounders, Portland Timbers and Vancouver Whitecaps following two straight seasons of winning a division that also included MLS club San Jose Earthquakes and two other teams that were placed in the Red Division: De Anza Force and Sacramento Republic.

*2018-19 Crossfire Premier Results*
*U-18/19 Northwest Division vs. MLS teams*
*T4-4, W2-1, W1-0* vs. Seattle Sounders
*L2-4, W2-0* vs. Vancouver Whitecaps
*W3-2, W4-1, W2-1* vs. Portland Timbers
*L1-2, T1-1* vs. San Jose Earthquakes. 

(Crossfire’s U-18/19 results in 2018-19 against MLS opponents outside the Northwest Division were: 3-2 over the Los Angeles Galaxy, 4-3 and 2-1 over Real Salt Lake, 4-1 over Atlanta United, and a 4-1 loss to NYCFC.)

The DA had already used unbalanced schedules last season. It could have continued to use unbalanced schedules and kept the existing single-tier structure. Or it could have kept the local rivalry games in place in the tiered division system – scheduling Blue vs. Red derbies.

*• Vague description of criteria for evaluating clubs for tiering. *Every director from a Blue club complained about this. ("No one knows how they decided," said one.) They said they were given no precise description of how teams were rated above or below each other. U.S. Soccer has spent millions of dollars on club evaluations by the Belgian company Double PASS, said one director, but ratings of other clubs besides his own weren’t made available so he could see how the clubs chosen for Red or Blue were rated and specifically whether Red clubs were rated higher by Double PASS than his club.

Not knowing exactly how U.S. Soccer weighs clubs’ results against player development frustrates the directors of clubs that have supported their players’ move to MLS clubs knowing their teams’ results would suffer.

None of the directors of Blue Division I spoke with said they were given specific reasons for their club’s demotion. One director, on the other side of the country from Crossfire, said that the nebulous criteria has ignited all sorts of speculation. Such as that Crossfire is being punished for seeking solidarity payments for *DeAndre Yedlin*. (Other clubs that have pursued or endorsed the pursuit of solidarity payments, which U.S. Soccer has historically resisted the implementation of, include the Dallas Texans, Nomads, Weston FC and Real So Cal, which are in Blue Division, and Sockers FC, which is in the Red Division.)

The solidarity payment issue may not have had anything to do with the tiering process, but the fact that club directors believe it might have been is an example of how little faith they have in their governing body.

Last Thursday I had asked Development Academy Director *Jared Micklos* to address the Crossfire situation and he said that he felt it wasn't appropriate to comment on a specific club. (Since then, we learned that Micklos is leaving U.S. Soccer, for which he also served as Youth National Teams Director.) He had told me that factors used in determining Red teams from Blue teams included using data over the past few years across all age groups.

That explanation has not satisfied Blue Division directors who believe they can point out inconsistencies in how different clubs were judged by their performances in the most recent season vs. over the past few years. There is no shortage of Blue Division clubs pointing out their record over the past several years, despite perhaps a poorer record last season, was more impressive than clubs who were placed in the Red Division. (I didn't speak to anyone from Georgia's Concorde Fire, but another director pointed out that Concorde lost the U-16/17 final on PKs, to Solar FC, yet Concorde was placed in the Blue Division.)

*• No guarantee that there’s a path to promotion. *When 44 teams get demoted to a lower division, there’s going to be a massive amount of discontent. But U.S. Soccer could have alleviated that to some extent if it offered them a precise path into the top tier – instead of what’s barely a sliver of hope by offering “teams may be moved for the 2020-21 season accordingly.”

Why not simply announce a minimum number of teams that would be promoted next season? Such as four teams -- each team that finishes highest in each of four Blue Division regions. This could be done even if the DA doesn’t end up judging four teams worthy of relegation, because the two divisions are already unbalanced at 36 to 44. The DA could have announced something such as: At least four teams, but no more than eight, will move up.

Even if the DA decided MLS teams would be relegation-proof, it still has enough wiggle room to allow the up and down movement of non-MLS teams.

*• A perception of inferiority. *One director of told me of getting called by a player who was upset that his club was demoted and he wouldn’t be playing against MLS teams. But the player was a 16-year-old whose team wouldn’t be affected, because -- at least for this season -- the tiering is being used only at U-18/19.

The director said that having tiered divisions in the oldest age group implies that a club is also inferior to the other clubs at the lower age groups and believes that’s not necessarily the case. Especially because it's common that non-MLS clubs field players in the younger age groups who move to MLS clubs for the latter part of their youth career.

*• Favoritism toward MLS clubs. *One understands why U.S. Soccer would go to great lengths to keep MLS clubs from leaving the academy, and non-MLS clubs not only value the chance to play against MLS clubs, many of them cooperate with MLS clubs and don't begrudge players who have pro aspirations from moving on. It also helps their reputation if they can point to players who have moved on to pro clubs.

But now there's a feeling that amid U.S. Soccer's quest to appease MLS clubs it's neglected to appreciate the commitment of the amateur clubs, many of which existed long before MLS came around. The amateur clubs get no compensation for helping produce players who make their way to MLS teams or the U.S. national teams. Amateur clubs, who do not have the financial backing of MLS owners, have gone to great efforts to make the DA work. They deserve more respect from U.S. Soccer -- and from MLS clubs, which I imagine would have to spend even money on their youth programs if they went off on their own. And would all the MLS youth clubs have enough competition, especially at the lower age groups, without the amateur clubs?

One Red Division director, with a long history in the DA, said he believed there are clubs that ended up in the Blue Division that are better run than some MLS clubs.

U.S. Soccer should have thought much more about how they could serve and reward the amateur clubs while balancing the needs of the MLS clubs.

(continued in next post)


----------



## Kante (Aug 9, 2019)

(3 of 3 - hit the 10k character limit w/ the article)

would recommend subscribing since it's only $39/yr and seems to be the most informed and insightful info available on DA inner workings. also, articles - like the one below - require a lot of legwork, and this kind of effort and product should be compensated. 

here's the link to join: https://www.socceramerica.com/join/
__________

(here's continuation of article)

*• No voice for the amateur clubs. *One Blue Division director use the word "dictatorship" while describing the DA leadership. ("Ivory tower" is another common expression I've heard U.S. Soccer House described as before this controversy.) He said that in past years there was more communication, and face-to-face meetings as a conference at the showcase events. And discussions about growing the game and improving the league. Now he feels the amateur clubs have no voice and no input.

One imagines that if the DA leadership had presented its clubs with the details on how it was planning the split divisions and asked for feedback, the clubs would have relayed their desires. Such as a path to promotion and maintaining local rivalry games.

And perhaps U.S. Soccer and MLS clubs would have been able to make some compromises. And the nation's governing body wouldn't be facing so much animosity by a large part of its constituency.

*The quest:* No one will argue against the quest for "meaningful competition." The concept of having the nation's most elite players on the top teams grouped together makes solid player development sense. But it won't work in practice if there is no clear criteria -- as in promotion and relegation -- or if geographic realities aren't better addressed. Or if the federation's motives are viewed with suspicion.

*The future*: The letter sent by the DA to its clubs on July 31 announcing the new schedule, the new U-18/19 divisions, and the plans for the future said that, after the 2019-20 season, "U.S. Soccer will consider expanding the two-tier format to other age groups." One Red Division director said that's optimal because it would push clubs to uphold higher standards. A couple MLS academy directors I spoke to before this U-18/19 divisions were announced said they expected tiered divisions at U-16/17 to be a likely and satisfactory prospect for their clubs. Another Red Division director of an amateur club said he needed to analyze how this coming season plays out, look at the overall competition, travel and costs, to determine whether the tiered divisions should be applied to U-16/17.

But the splitting divisions at the younger age groups is of great concern to the Blue Division clubs -- especially if MLS clubs are guaranteed upper division spots. That scenario would create more player retention challenges and force them to question the value the of staying in the DA. Playing against MLS teams is a big attraction for players on non-MLS clubs. They also point out that it benefits MLS clubs, who use those games to scout players.

One amateur club director said he understands why U.S. Soccer wants to keep the MLS teams in the DA, because without them, the DA loses its appeal for the amateur clubs. His solution is to keep the U-16/17 divisions intact, and have MLS teams play U-16/17 players in the U-18/19 league (which is already common). The pro clubs' strongest U-18/19 players should be already in a pro environment, e.g. on USL teams, anyway (which is also already happening).

U.S. Soccer faces challenges incomparable to the youth systems of soccer powers it aims to emulate because the USA is so much larger and its amateur youth clubs face much higher costs. However it goes forward with its DA format, U.S. Soccer is unlikely to satisfy all the clubs. But it's got plenty of experience now to reflect on if it wants to create a smoother transition to upcoming changes. Even the amateur club directors who weren’t against the tiered division per se say they felt U.S. Soccer implemented the transition without consideration for challenges their clubs face.

U.S. Soccer at least should strive to govern in a way that prevents the level of strife that has become too common in the American soccer community.


----------



## A Board (Aug 10, 2019)

Wow! Thank you for the recap. Pretty much sums up what most have been thinking. US Soccer needs to hire someone with some basic business sense. First rule of marketing is WIIFM? (What's in it for me?) from the clients perspective. I am not sure the Tier 2 Clubs will see the value of spending scarce resources on DA with that system.


----------



## Not_that_Serious (Aug 10, 2019)

Great recap. As I mentioned in another topic, and you posted, real club talent is pushed to USL. D3 has already been talked about being where the MLS clubs will settle. All the USL clubs will have own youth teams soon as well - according to some USL coaches and league admins. If you look at who is running USL, you can see MLS ties and thus a lot of moves that benefit them financially. That is why, as mentioned, older pro teams aren’t that strong


----------



## Iknownothing (Aug 12, 2019)

What I see happening in the future is...  the non-MLS clubs will just leave and create their own version of the DA league. USsoccer will then be left only with MLS clubs in their DA league. Honestly what’s the point for non-MLS clubs to stay in when MLS just steals all their players. I mean does MLS really develop better than non-MLS clubs?  No... cause every non-MLS club that’s in the DA league is doing the same drills MLS clubs do. It’s mandated by USsoccer for all clubs to practice the same drills and do the same things. It’s madness. What I see happening is some smart Americans who are all just fed up with USsoccer and MLS consistent failures with development will take things into their own hands by being coaches, mentors, and soccer agents. It will be free enterprise. No more Untied States Postal service delivering our mail. It’ll be done by FedEx and UPS. Bigger and faster. No pun intended lol. But these guys will coach, develop our youth, be mentors, soccer agents all in one. I mean why not?  You know what US Soccer is? I mean what is it?  I know it’s in Chicago and no one wants to work there. They can handle scouting our country so let our country do it. Hold open tryouts for the MNT... air it on tv like American Idol and let people call in and vote. Idk. I’m just being stupid, but I do see in the near future people taking things in their own hands. How to be a soccer agent?  Google it everyone and help our broken system. Someone please stand up.


----------



## zacksmack (Aug 13, 2019)

If I was ECNL, I would be reaching out to every non MLS team in the DA and pitching the benefits of their league/program.


----------



## timbuck (Aug 13, 2019)

Iknownothing said:


> What I see happening in the future is...  the non-MLS clubs will just leave and create their own version of the DA league. USsoccer will then be left only with MLS clubs in their DA league. Honestly what’s the point for non-MLS clubs to stay in when MLS just steals all their players. I mean does MLS really develop better than non-MLS clubs?  No... cause every non-MLS club that’s in the DA league is doing the same drills MLS clubs do. It’s mandated by USsoccer for all clubs to practice the same drills and do the same things. It’s madness. What I see happening is some smart Americans who are all just fed up with USsoccer and MLS consistent failures with development will take things into their own hands by being coaches, mentors, and soccer agents. It will be free enterprise. No more Untied States Postal service delivering our mail. It’ll be done by FedEx and UPS. Bigger and faster. No pun intended lol. But these guys will coach, develop our youth, be mentors, soccer agents all in one. I mean why not?  You know what US Soccer is? I mean what is it?  I know it’s in Chicago and no one wants to work there. They can handle scouting our country so let our country do it. Hold open tryouts for the MNT... air it on tv like American Idol and let people call in and vote. Idk. I’m just being stupid, but I do see in the near future people taking things in their own hands. How to be a soccer agent?  Google it everyone and help our broken system. Someone please stand up.


They've already created their own league on the girls side -  It's called DPL.


----------



## Kante (Aug 16, 2019)

an outstanding interview with the crossfire premier doc about the u18/u19 ussda tiers. if you read nothing else on this subject, read this interview. 

https://www.socceramerica.com/publications/article/83318/crossfires-bernie-james-details-his-disappointmen.html


----------



## foreveryoung (Aug 17, 2019)

Kante said:


> an outstanding interview with the crossfire premier doc about the u18/u19 ussda tiers. if you read nothing else on this subject, read this interview.
> 
> https://www.socceramerica.com/publications/article/83318/crossfires-bernie-james-details-his-disappointmen.html


I hope he has a plan in the works to leave the DA.  I hope all the non MLS clubs do.


----------



## BruceDern (Aug 19, 2019)

Qoute: 
"Crossfire's Bernie James details his disappointment in how U.S. Soccer runs the Boys DA
Twelve years ago, the U.S. Soccer Federation dramatically changed its approach to boys youth soccer."


----------



## Iknownothing (Aug 19, 2019)

I’m disappointed too all of it.


----------



## timbuck (Aug 20, 2019)

foreveryoung said:


> I hope he has a plan in the works to leave the DA.  I hope all the non MLS clubs do.


They should all just go back to their local leagues and play in the top division. Play in the most competitive tournaments around.  And if players feel they need to play for an MLS academy, they should be encouraged to tryout.  Or find a European league/club to affiliate with and totally ruin US Soccer's plan.


----------



## Iknownothing (Aug 20, 2019)

We need to get rid of the rule that states you cant leave the Country until your 18..  unless you have an European passport.  Let it be a free system. Let a player choose.  Let a youngster choose Europe if he’s that good and got teams looking at him.  Right now a players only option is MLS because Europe isn’t looking at our 14 yr olds. The only option is MLS and that’s only the case if it’s in the kids neighborhood. This would also force MLS academies to develop instead of just recruiting knowing they couldn’t just swap kids out every other season.  MLS academies would now have to compete like the rest of the world for talent. Idk..  it’s all dumb. We can’t run soccer like the NFL, NBA, and MLB.  It’s different. It’s a different pathway. F it.


----------



## justneededaname (Aug 20, 2019)

I think the DA has outlived its usefulness. Before the MLS teams were bought in to their youth academies and there were not many MLS teams around, the DA was useful. Today, MLS teams could just play in their local leagues through U14 and then have an MLS-only league that starts at U15. For the other clubs, go back to the college showcase tournaments and the national championship series as the way to showcase players for college coaches.


----------



## justneededaname (Aug 20, 2019)

Iknownothing said:


> We need to get rid of the rule that states you cant leave the Country until your 18..  unless you have an European passport.  Let it be a free system. Let a player choose.  Let a youngster choose Europe if he’s that good and got teams looking at him.  Right now a players only option is MLS because Europe isn’t looking at our 14 yr olds. The only option is MLS and that’s only the case if it’s in the kids neighborhood. This would also force MLS academies to develop instead of just recruiting knowing they couldn’t just swap kids out every other season.  MLS academies would now have to compete like the rest of the world for talent. Idk..  it’s all dumb. We can’t run soccer like the NFL, NBA, and MLB.  It’s different. It’s a different pathway. F it.


This is a FIFA rule, not a US rule so it is unlikely to change. Here is a good breakdown of the transfer rules for minors:
https://www.thomascooperlaw.com/guide-fifa-rules-international-transfer-minors/

Europe is most definitely looking at our 14 year olds. I personally know multiple who go over regularly so the clubs that are watching them can get a close look. Unless they have a legitimate (ie: non-soccer, or at least pretends to be non-soccer) reason to move to Europe, they can't. But they are definitely being tracked.

As for opening up the exploitation of minors to the system of free-enterprise. I just do not see how that is a good idea. These rules exist for the protection of children the same way that we have other rules for the employment of minors.


----------



## oh canada (Aug 20, 2019)

Since there are good clubs/teams in each tier, I really don't see US Soccer and college scouts ignoring good players in the "other" tier.  Especially since there are geographic limitations.  And the "other" tier is still under the US Soccer umbrella (unlike on the girls side where the "other" tier is ECNL and US Soccer is not scouting those players).   I have a boy in DA and a girl in ECNL.  With the girls, same number of college scouts come to watch the ECNL games as the DA games--most of the time the same exact scouts.  I expect that will be the same going forward with this if they lower the ages.

If MLS continues to grow at the rate it is, then eventually yes it could have its own league.  But right now the country is still too big and there are not enough teams to keep travel costs down.  And remember, MLS is a pyramid-scheme.  The league is not profitable, but the value of franchises keeps going up because there is no shortage of rich dudes wanting to own their own team.  Eventually, that bubble will burst just like the dot-coms.  This article is a great summary:  https://deadspin.com/is-mls-a-ponzi-scheme-1797509617


----------



## justneededaname (Aug 20, 2019)

oh canada said:


> But right now the country is still too big and there are not enough teams to keep travel costs down.


I am not sure that is true anymore. If you look at the Colorado Rapids U18/19 schedule. They only play 4 non-MLS teams. Three of those involve flights to play the away game. Real Salt Lake plays the same four non-MLS teams and has to fly to all of them. It would be very little cost difference to swap out those 4 non-MLS teams with Sounders, Timbers, Galaxy, and LAFC (and in a couple of years Austin FC).

Also, Audi is giving up to $1,000,000 in 2019 to the MLS academies through the Audi Goals program. Currently that money is supposed to go towards making it easier for players to access the academies and academy education programs, but I am sure they could pitch it to Audi for travel costs for next year. That money split evenly among the MLS DA teams could probably come close to covering the U15 and U17 travel costs to have them travel with the U18/19s.


----------



## oh canada (Aug 21, 2019)

justneededaname said:


> I am not sure that is true anymore. If you look at the Colorado Rapids U18/19 schedule. They only play 4 non-MLS teams. Three of those involve flights to play the away game. Real Salt Lake plays the same four non-MLS teams and has to fly to all of them. It would be very little cost difference to swap out those 4 non-MLS teams with Sounders, Timbers, Galaxy, and LAFC (and in a couple of years Austin FC).
> 
> Also, Audi is giving up to $1,000,000 in 2019 to the MLS academies through the Audi Goals program. Currently that money is supposed to go towards making it easier for players to access the academies and academy education programs, but I am sure they could pitch it to Audi for travel costs for next year. That money split evenly among the MLS DA teams could probably come close to covering the U15 and U17 travel costs to have them travel with the U18/19s.


Fair points.  St. Louis now announced as joining in 2022 too.  And, more to come.  

The Audi money an easier sell if going toward education than travel, however.  But still a valid point.


----------



## OCsoccerdad7777 (Aug 25, 2019)

New article posted on DA website regarding the tiers.

http://www.ussoccerda.com/20190821-New-DA-Cup-Restructured-Regular-Season-Mark-New-Era-for-Boys-DA

"At the conclusion of the season, the new structure will be evaluated and teams may move up or down tiers for the 2020-21 season. Additionally, U.S. Soccer will consider expanding the tiered competition structure to other Boys age groups based on data and feedback from clubs."


----------



## full90 (Aug 25, 2019)

I agree the DA has served its purpose and should be shelved. MLS clubs can transition to make up the DA (and could even bring in affiliate clubs in certain areas that don’t have MLS). They can all do their own thing with residences and all that from u15 and up. 
Other clubs move back to traditional club programs and funnel top kids to MLS or Europe, which is happening anyways. These hybrid DA clubs who have 90% of the kids who want to go to college and want high school years to be filled with hard classes, homecoming, track in the spring, ASB and all can’t compete with MLS clubs anyways and the kids don’t even want to be pros but do want to play at a high level in their area. Then those non mls clubs can focus on getting kids to college and building their business with a high rate of alums playing at the next level and every once in a while sending a unicorn up to an mls team.


----------



## oh canada (Aug 26, 2019)

From the press release, are not these two consecutive sentences conflicting?

_The Academy is guided by the principle of increased training sessions and *fewer*, but more meaningful games. The DA Cup *adds* a number of significant matches to every club's schedule at each stage of the competition, while_

Are they removing regular season games from the calendar?  If not, how many games throughout the season will DA teams be playing at u15 (14/15 year old kids) now?


----------



## jpeter (Aug 26, 2019)

oh canada said:


> From the press release, are not these two consecutive sentences conflicting?
> 
> _The Academy is guided by the principle of increased training sessions and *fewer*, but more meaningful games. The DA Cup *adds* a number of significant matches to every club's schedule at each stage of the competition, while_
> 
> Are they removing regular season games from the calendar?  If not, how many games throughout the season will DA teams be playing at u15 (14/15 year old kids) now?


The DA cup fall group stage games are the first 5-7 games of the season and the first stage.  Regular schedule after that: 26-28 games total + showcases or DA cup, playoffs depending on how well a team does?

Second stage is the 32 team winter cup in Dec or showcases for those teams that didn't get out of the group stage, either way 3 additional games

8 group winner from winter cup advance to Spring Cup for 3 or more games.

Playoffs is 3 games group stage+ knockout rounds (2-4 additional games depending on age group)

The number of games in DA has actually decreased over the years as regular season used to be 30+ until 18-19.


----------



## 3leches (Aug 26, 2019)

MLS teams want more meaningful games yet lose all the time to non-MLS academies. How are those games not meaningful ? Or is it just embarrassing ?


----------



## thedudeabides (Aug 28, 2019)

timbuck said:


> If a true "Academy" system is what we want and building professional level soccer players is what we want -  Then all acadamies should be residential with world class facilities.  And they should be fully funded -  Player fees, housing, uniforms, travel, etc.
> If MLS teams are the only one's that can afford this type of set up - So be it.  Sure, some kids in areas that don't have an MLS club nearby might get missed.  Or they may have to move to an MLS city to be part of the academy.  Not much different than the way the rest of the soccer world does things.


----------



## BruceDern (Dec 16, 2019)

3leches said:


> MLS teams want more meaningful games yet lose all the time to non-MLS academies. How are those games not meaningful ? Or is it just embarrassing ?


Can you give more examples, trying to make sense of it...thx


----------



## RedDevilDad (Dec 17, 2019)

BruceDern said:


> Can you give more examples, trying to make sense of it...thx


In SoCal the non-MLS DAs can be more competitive... some.  
Also, I assume LAG would rather play other MLS or MEX teams than beat Nomads 5-0, Surf 7-1 and 8-0...   (actually U18/19 scores in recent years)
Of course there are anomaly teams but the presumption is that the top teams tend to be the fully-funded MLS teams with a clear pathway to MLS/pro. Yes, there are great clubs that charge and great clubs that develop apart from a pro path.... while I don't personally like it, I do think it's fair for the top clubs to say we'd rather play each other... If I own an MLS club, it's not my responsibility to develop other clubs or even develop the national team.  I would want what is best for me to make good players I can sell off or save on signing fees.


----------

