SOCCERMINION
SILVER ELITE
"IN THE US, THE RICH KIDS ARE NOT TOUGH ENOUGH AND THE POOR KIDS CANNOT AFFORD THE PROPER TRAINING" - ANONOMOUS.
US SOCCER
- Thread starter Dominic
- Start date
SOCCERMINION
SILVER ELITE
Here’s a thought I’ve had. While Spain v russia might be too soon to signal the death of the possession game, we’ve seen quite a few possession teams (spain, Argentina, Portugal) under perform and quite a few kickball teams over perform (Russia, Iran, Morocco). Could it be that the non possession teams all really know how to play defense? In the US qualifiers one of the things the Americans really struggled with was their defensive line. Could that be cultural too? Here what position do all the really good kids want to play? How much time do US coaches devote to defense versus shooting? What are scholarships and mls salaries for defenders v strikers? Now, granted all countries have an issue that the rock star wants to play up front. But Messi and Ronaldo have shown having that rock star isn’t enough. And we in particular are an individualist nation that places a strong emphasis not only on winning but on individual achievement. If this is even a little true than most of the reforms implemented or being thrown about right now won’t help.
With respect I find your thoughts and questions perplexing, but I will do my best to respond. Argentina and Portugal lost to teams that play a possession style in the round of 16. Yes, Spain lost, but to a team that going forward and in the future will not be able carry on in that manner. In fact Russia got beat by a possession team in Uruguay. Spain beat themselves by not being more aggressive early on and letting this game go to Pk's where anyone can win. And with some help without the VAR being called upon. In games leading up to the Spain vs Russia match VAR had been called upon for handballs in the box and the initial calls were overturned. How did Iran and Morocco over perform? They didn't. I can not say that Possession teams vs Non-possession teams play better defense. But any team that lines up 10 players behind the ball (like Russia and Iran) throughout the tourney will be quite hard to score on, especially if they don't try to connect passes anywhere from the backline to the midfield line. Russia's and Iran's approach was go long on everything. Side note- Russia's games leading up to the tourney were not the best of results they went 1-3-1. In regards to USMNT we do not have the quality of players or depth in the back. We have a few solid players, but were not always used and were replaced with familiar faces. Though were the wrong choices for sooo many reasons. I do like the interim USMNT coaches selections in the last few months. He's taking chances on youth. Time spent on shooting vs defense. Thats like, "...asking me how a watch works" (Sicario). The better salaries in the MLS go to marquee players, but goal scorers always make more whether they deserve it or not. Though there are some exceptions. For example Sergio Ramos does earn more than Karim Benzema. If your referring to college scholarships I would think are given based on need of the program or a must have player. Defenders are worth their weight in gold as much as prolific goal scorers. Rock star, huh. I find Ronaldo and Messi to be polar opposites. Ronaldo seeks the spotlight and Messi does not (at least not in the manner of a rock star). There are many other contrasts I can make about each of these players but not necessary.
Last edited:
younothat
PREMIER
1) US diverged from European style football with a rugby style game out of Canada that the Ivy league universities started to play, this eventually morphed into American Football and the game took off while "soccer" did not
2) Ah so the golden age for US soccer was the 1920's (3rd place in the WC in the 30's)
3) American Soccer always have had a weird structure; US soccer federation was/is dysfunctional or battling the league associations to appease FIFA
4) The depression 29+ caused many teams to fold due to financial reasons and the US entered a dark age of soccer
5) Short lived US leagues burned money and eventually flamed out while the rest of the world like South American and Europe built "sophisticated" league and stadiums
6) US women did well partly due to Title 9 effectiveness and because the development of the women game was well behind the men's game across the world.
7) Blame the things that smashed soccer in the US; The soccer wars put USA on the sidelines for a half a century, while the global game grew and acquired fans, money, stadiums, etc
US is now trying to play catch up but there so far behind will may never catch up?
I dunno do all these things in the past really affect the future? I would hope not and we can move forward but the status quo does need some changes.
Improved Coaching education, open leagues, promotion/regulation to enable real soccer pyramids, pay to play changes, building more soccer infrastructure, USSF working together with high schools, soccer associations to get along, share, and make soccer better for everybody without $$ being the priority is what I hope will be some of these changes. That and the NCCA Men's college game needs to change to a 9-10 month program if these players want to compete at a higher level or go pro.
outside!
DA
Since the women don't really matter.
The single most important thing that will help US Soccer is for it to increase in popularity. The women's game is essential for this.
I agree that the popularity must increase. I disagree that the woman's game is essential. Here is why:
We have to understand that the US National Teams are their own beasts. American's will watch the Stars and Stripes compete at the Olympics and World Cup because of national pride. Put a "National" team in an International Competition and millions will tune in. Example: more than twice the people watched the US Curling Team win Gold on late night Olympics coverage than watched the WPSL final in prime time coverage. National teams draw.
Professional women's team sports are DOA (Basketball, hockey, soccer, etc.). The American public at large has never supported professional athletes that don't represent the best of the best and the TV ratings and attendance numbers bear this out. Individual women sports are moneymakers (tennis, golf). That said, you will always get some support, but professional women's soccer is unsustainable as a business model.
While we need to continue to support and subsidize the WSPL as a means to provide training opportunities for the USWNT, its a money pit and always will be.
The only way soccer is going to grow in the US is for the professional level (MLS) to put out a much, much, much better product and for the USMNT to have success in various International competitions. When the Galaxy or LAFC can beat Manchester City then Americans will watch.
The Federation is really stuck because the MLS structure will retard the growth of the sport for years to come and the USL is lucky Our best hope for the USMNT will be to send talent outside the US (Pulisic, Lederman, etc.) and let the real professionals develop American players.
outside!
DA
So you are saying it is acceptable to ignore slightly more than half of the potential future US Soccer fans? We can ignore the future mothers of the next generation of players (the ones who will be signing their children up for sports and driving them to practices)? Seems a bit myopic.
I believe that anything that is done for non-professional soccer in the United States should benefit both genders equally. If DA had rolled out GDA concurrently with DA (instead of violating California's Fair Play Act), there may have never been and ECNL and the resulting fight for the slice of the pie. All soccer in the US has benefited tremendously from the success of the WNT.
I believe that anything that is done for non-professional soccer in the United States should benefit both genders equally. If DA had rolled out GDA concurrently with DA (instead of violating California's Fair Play Act), there may have never been and ECNL and the resulting fight for the slice of the pie. All soccer in the US has benefited tremendously from the success of the WNT.
Not myopic. Your logic is flawed. My two points were somehow lost when you read my post. Let me try to restate this.
Point 1: Professional sports (MLS, NWSL/WPSL, NBA, WNBA, MLB, NFL, etc., etc.) are for-profit entertainment businesses. These businesses fail when the entertainment value of their product is not embraced by the American public. History has demonstrated that the American public does not financially support "sports entertainment" (e.g. soccer) unless those participating in the sport represent the best within the sport. For this reason, historically speaking, in the U.S. there has never been a financially viable woman's "team sport" league because the public doesn't support women's sports as women's sports are viewed as not representative of the highest level of athletic ability in that sport.
Please note, the WNBA and WPSL have yet to turn a profit and both are heavily subsidized. In the case of the WNBA, the NBA subsidizes it; and in the case of the NWSL and WPSL, the USSF, the Canadian Soccer Association (CSA) and the Mexican Football Federation (FMF) subsidize it by paying the National Team players additional monies and putting money towards the league. In the case of the WNHL, you guessed it, the NHL subsidizes it.
The USSF's subsidizing of the NWSL and WPSL is smart because the USWNT, has a whole lot of players that play/train in the NWSL and thus, the ROI is there.
Where your logic goes off the rails is the belief that female viewership of a sport is somehow tied to the gender playing the sport. It is not. By your logic, the NFL would not be the most popular sport in America, followed behind Baseball and Basketball because women who represent half of the population are not represented by the NFL, NBA and MLB. In fact, women represent nearly 45% of the NFL fanbase. How on earth can this be since women do not participate in these sports in any appreciable numbers? The reason is simple: gender is inconsequential when it comes to establishing fan bases for sports entertainment.
Point 2:
The US "National Teams," whether men or women are supported by the America public because of national pride. It is the mission of the USSF to advocate and attempt to grow "soccer" at the youth level, at the adult level and at the disabled/special needs level. It is also the mission of the USSF to fund and field the National Teams. It is not the mission of the USSF to run a professional soccer league, as doing so would invalidate its 501(c)(3) status.
The USSF only brings in about $120M per year on average. That isn't a lot of money in the grand scheme. It pushes its youth affiliates (US Youth Soccer, US Club, AYSO, etc.) to move the ball in the youth world. The fact the USSF even created the DA league was questionable.
But from a pure business point of view, the Men's World Cup is a 4.5 Billion dollar business (Revenue to FIFA) and that money is used to fund the Youth World Cups for both genders, whereas the Women's World Cup is a 100 Million dollar business.
Nearly half of that 4.5 Billion is coming from women interested in the men's games.
Finally, the USSF serves all youth athletes, regardless of gender. I agree that it should promote amateur participation in soccer by girls and boys equally. However, I understand that beyond amateur participation in soccer by girls, there is no viable career path, except for a very small handful of female elite athletes that can make the 24 slots in the USWNT.
When it comes to college, male soccer players are discriminated against and female soccer players have more scholarship opportunities. Do you think this is fair? Should the men be treated equally as the women from just a pure scholarship standpoint?
Mystery Train
GOLD
I've consulted my tarot cards, a psychic medium, and my Magic 8 ball, and all signs point to 'yes" on a gender debate fully hijacking this thread in 3 . . . 2 . . . 1 . . .
jpeter
PREMIER
Huh? Women having been doing fine in the Olympics & World Cups.
Men not so much so there needs to more changes for those programs.
The one size fits all doesn't really work, & there is no way to really treat each program the same. The college opportunities and WNT are fine according to our sophomore daughter & she would agree with our son that on the mens side you pretty much need to play overseas or Mexico to get enough training or experience to make it international or professionally.
outside!
DA
Oh, I understand now. You are one of the people that think the reason that male soccer players get fewer scholarships than female soccer players is due to Title IX. The real reason is the 85 full ride scholarships given to football and the old, male, football/basketball coach mafia that runs the NCAA. That explains why you fail to see the benefit of equally supporting both genders when it comes to non-professional soccer in the United States and how that will help grow the profitability of the MLS.
The best way to make more fans for the MLS is to increase the popularity of soccer. The best way to do that is have more people play the sport. Most kids that play the sport competitively for more than a few seasons become soccer fans. Many of their parents do as well.
I agree that the NCAA season should be longer, but it should be longer for both genders. All of your statistics ignore the still vast amount of historical inertia that has held back women's athletics. The US is far ahead of the rest of the world when it comes to encouraging our young women to participate in sports, but we still have a long way to go. Of course men are bigger and faster and stronger than women, but the amazing design of the game of soccer means that optically the women's game is still entertaining to watch. The final of the 2015 Women's World Cup was a much better game to watch than yesterday's Spain/Russia game.
The best way to make more fans for the MLS is to increase the popularity of soccer. The best way to do that is have more people play the sport. Most kids that play the sport competitively for more than a few seasons become soccer fans. Many of their parents do as well.
I agree that the NCAA season should be longer, but it should be longer for both genders. All of your statistics ignore the still vast amount of historical inertia that has held back women's athletics. The US is far ahead of the rest of the world when it comes to encouraging our young women to participate in sports, but we still have a long way to go. Of course men are bigger and faster and stronger than women, but the amazing design of the game of soccer means that optically the women's game is still entertaining to watch. The final of the 2015 Women's World Cup was a much better game to watch than yesterday's Spain/Russia game.
Fundamentally, I agree that the more kids play soccer, the more fans we ultimately will get. I also agree that the better the WNT and MNT do in the World Cup and Olympics the more popular the sport will get.
I do believe that the NCAA should treat the various sports for each gender equally and the total number of athletic scholarships should be balanced. Now, this means that if a schools is going to offer Football (M), Soccer (M&W), Basketball (M&W), then it needs to balance the athletic scholarships through other sports Golf (W), Field Hockey (W), etc., to make up for the imbalance. Having 9.9 scholarships available for men v. 14 for women ultimately harms the goal of increasing popularity.
When it comes to watching soccer games, I'll confess, I do not watch the MLS. I can't watch it for more than 10 minutes because the level of play is horrible. I'll watch the Premiere league, and other European first division leagues, but the MLS with its low quality of play is just painful. Its double when I attempt to watch college soccer (men or women) or WPSL/NWSL. I will tune into every US WNT and MNT game I can ... because 'MERICA.
Ultimately, I believe the reason that domestic viewership of the NWSL was 93k, the MLS was 260k per game domestically and 450k for Premiere League games on NBC is that soccer fans don't watch poor quality soccer, unless its the National Team. This has nothing to do with history, just the fact that sports is entertainment the public will always gravitate towards the highest examples of that sport for entertainment. Thus, you can invest all you want in women's amateur and professional soccer, the ROI will never come close to investing those same dollars in the men's game because the public won't watch/support (including women).
InTheValley
SILVER
Those who want to impose promotion & relegation (P/R) at the youth level don’t understand we already have the most perfect possible system of P/R. It’s called capitalism. When clubs aren’t consistently competitive in DA/GDA/ECNL, they get relegated and replaced by other clubs that are likely to be more successful.
What they want, instead, is forced, annual P/R at a team level, which would only cause instability to the point that it would destroy elite comp soccer and turn it into daddy ball. Seriously, this is such a dumb idea I wish people would stop talking about it. By way of example, let’s say Legends’ U16/17 GDA team has a couple bad injuries and gets relegated. What happens? First, the entire team leaves for other GDA/ECNL teams that will get them college exposure they will no longer receive at Legends. Second, coaches get laid off because the revenue for an entire team just vaporized. Third, players in other age groups start leaving because the coach who got laid off also coached their team, so now you have more lost revenue. Fourth, Legends can’t find a solid replacement because coaches realize that youth soccer is a bad industry when your career and primary source of income to feed your family literally depends every year on whether a 15 year old girl blows out her knee, or players get the flu on the wrong day. This new job instability causes pretty much every decent coach with half a brain to leave the business. Ultimately, Legends goes down. Congratulations, you just killed off a stable, successful club so that AYSO all stars of Fresno could have a shot in GDA. Over the next couple years, pretty much all stable clubs go down simply because one of their teams crashes out of DA, GDA or ECNL. Professional coaches are replaced by daddy ball because only them (and child molesters) find sufficient value coaching youth soccer.
It gets worse. Now that it’s in GDA, AYSO of Fresno's player costs just went from $150 to $10,000 annually to pay for all the tournaments, travel and field costs. Because the parents can’t afford it and aren’t sufficiently committed, the team folds after the first of 4 expensive trips. In the end, it doesn’t matter because the remaining GDA teams in SoCal also quit because they aren’t paying $10,000 to play the likes of AYSO Fresno. The entire GDA collapses. The same thing happens to ECNL and DA. Congrats, you have now killed off every elite youth league in the country.
It gets still worse. This new era of P/R causes all the remaining clubs to fight for their existence by abandoning long-term development to focus solely on winning tomorrow’s game lest they run the risk of Legends’ fate. Every 14 year old boy in America who hasn’t gone through puberty yet is kicked off the team or quits from lack of playing time because they aren’t big or fast enough yet to win the games needed to stay in DA and continue that revenue stream. In the end, everyone gets worse at soccer as all the good coaches find something else to do, and no one even tries to develop players long term, because that’s just suicide. Players quit left and right because they’re tired of either having to bounce from club to club, or having their teammates and friends constantly replaced by players from relegated teams. MLS team abandon DA because, really, what’s the point? Money drains out of youth soccer.
Ultimately, those arguing for team P/R
just want their kid to play at the highest level, with the best coaches, against the best competition, on the nicest fields, at the best tournaments, without having to pay for it or doing any of the heavy lifting to make the league successful. But in the end, you always get what you pay for.
What they want, instead, is forced, annual P/R at a team level, which would only cause instability to the point that it would destroy elite comp soccer and turn it into daddy ball. Seriously, this is such a dumb idea I wish people would stop talking about it. By way of example, let’s say Legends’ U16/17 GDA team has a couple bad injuries and gets relegated. What happens? First, the entire team leaves for other GDA/ECNL teams that will get them college exposure they will no longer receive at Legends. Second, coaches get laid off because the revenue for an entire team just vaporized. Third, players in other age groups start leaving because the coach who got laid off also coached their team, so now you have more lost revenue. Fourth, Legends can’t find a solid replacement because coaches realize that youth soccer is a bad industry when your career and primary source of income to feed your family literally depends every year on whether a 15 year old girl blows out her knee, or players get the flu on the wrong day. This new job instability causes pretty much every decent coach with half a brain to leave the business. Ultimately, Legends goes down. Congratulations, you just killed off a stable, successful club so that AYSO all stars of Fresno could have a shot in GDA. Over the next couple years, pretty much all stable clubs go down simply because one of their teams crashes out of DA, GDA or ECNL. Professional coaches are replaced by daddy ball because only them (and child molesters) find sufficient value coaching youth soccer.
It gets worse. Now that it’s in GDA, AYSO of Fresno's player costs just went from $150 to $10,000 annually to pay for all the tournaments, travel and field costs. Because the parents can’t afford it and aren’t sufficiently committed, the team folds after the first of 4 expensive trips. In the end, it doesn’t matter because the remaining GDA teams in SoCal also quit because they aren’t paying $10,000 to play the likes of AYSO Fresno. The entire GDA collapses. The same thing happens to ECNL and DA. Congrats, you have now killed off every elite youth league in the country.
It gets still worse. This new era of P/R causes all the remaining clubs to fight for their existence by abandoning long-term development to focus solely on winning tomorrow’s game lest they run the risk of Legends’ fate. Every 14 year old boy in America who hasn’t gone through puberty yet is kicked off the team or quits from lack of playing time because they aren’t big or fast enough yet to win the games needed to stay in DA and continue that revenue stream. In the end, everyone gets worse at soccer as all the good coaches find something else to do, and no one even tries to develop players long term, because that’s just suicide. Players quit left and right because they’re tired of either having to bounce from club to club, or having their teammates and friends constantly replaced by players from relegated teams. MLS team abandon DA because, really, what’s the point? Money drains out of youth soccer.
Ultimately, those arguing for team P/R
just want their kid to play at the highest level, with the best coaches, against the best competition, on the nicest fields, at the best tournaments, without having to pay for it or doing any of the heavy lifting to make the league successful. But in the end, you always get what you pay for.
jpeter
PREMIER
What?
Capitalism for non profits is oxymoronic but no DA clubs in the southwest have ever been relegated in 10+ yrs yet no matter there competitiveness, the same bottom of the bracket teams are going through year after year.
Earning what you get is a capitalist concept that goes along with promotion & regulation so funny that you bring that up.
Open up the leagues, create a real reachable soccer pyramid, and promote clubs that perform on the field. The establishment is not getting it done so let's change, regulation & promotion is one tool to get that done.
InTheValley
SILVER
You really are dense, aren’t you? In the right context (youth soccer club being one of them), a non-profit can be the best possible legal form in which to maximize income. This is probably beyond your ability to comprehend, so I’ll dispense with the details other than to say that non-profits can essentially push profit in the form of coaching fees to the same dudes who run the show, and without having to worry about the government taking a big chunk of it. They also avoid employment taxes on the back end when they label the comp as coaching fees rather than wages. And the real beauty is they can use unpaid volunteers to do most of the work that would otherwise need to paid for. In reality, a non-profit can be almost the purest form of capitalism because things like taxes, minimum wage obligations and workers comp don’t get in the way of doing what you want with your revenue. At Blues, the coaching fees those guys pay themselves exceed $600,000 a year. Slammers pays about $1.5 million in coaching fees. You’re even dumber than than you write if you think people aren’t making boatloads of money through non-profits. Just ask Kenneth Copeland.
It’s easy to make up crazy theories that have no basis in reality when you have no concept of business administration or even basic economics, and you think that people will just throw millions of dollars away just so others can freeload off of their money and hard work. You may as well propose that we stop making the laws of gravity apply to our players. You and the others who think promotion/relegation is a solution are the real reason men’s soccer sucks in the US. There are just too many dumb people involved in the sport.
It doesn't matter what happens things won't change. But there is hope within the current system with some minor tweaks that won't need the approval nor the endorsement of the tools from USSF.
1. We have our world class teenager in Pulisic and there are some solid youth players coming up. He needs to be surrounded by some solid players that actually care playing for Merica! You know those that get major goosebumps when songs like God Bless the USA, Party in the USA, Stars Spangled Banner, etc. (No more Julian Greens!)
2. Clubs Directors work together to create a better local gaming circuit. Once upon a time CSL Premier was the league and now is well just another league. SCDSL had no business coming in, SDDA was a kneejerk to SCDSL and Surf exodus. So if Directors are serious about development towards a common goal of having a great national team, they should work together, stop the poaching and depleting clubs for some quick $$$. Monopolies are not good for long term quality competition. Better quality LOCAL gaming has a better pool of players available for DA, College, etc.
3. Clubs need to hire Team Managers no more Parents at this position! These managers since it would be a greater expense if given to a team individually, have this managers manage an entire age group or 2. These Managers would be the ones ensuring the kids are properly place in the team they belong. This would actually break off the cronism and bullshit going on during tryouts in which the team manager has teams preselected.
4. People start casually going to MLS games or Xolos games or whatever other live soccer game you could catch. Parents will see first hand how good their kid really is(or not), and kids will learn a thing or 2 from the actual pros.
5. Gaming League Directors stop seeding teams blindly! Run round robin qualifiers for your top 2 brackets at age group taking the best team or 2 from each participating club the first 2-3 weeks after the roster freeze. This is not about P/R, but about finding a balance in the brackets. Not only the entire league will benefit, but it would be a fun environment in which league games would be fun to watch week in and week out.
6. 2002 Quarterfinals was about RunDMB, Eddie Johnson and the great Landon Donovan playing for the love of the red, white and blue, lets recreate that back for 2022 and beyond!
1. We have our world class teenager in Pulisic and there are some solid youth players coming up. He needs to be surrounded by some solid players that actually care playing for Merica! You know those that get major goosebumps when songs like God Bless the USA, Party in the USA, Stars Spangled Banner, etc. (No more Julian Greens!)
2. Clubs Directors work together to create a better local gaming circuit. Once upon a time CSL Premier was the league and now is well just another league. SCDSL had no business coming in, SDDA was a kneejerk to SCDSL and Surf exodus. So if Directors are serious about development towards a common goal of having a great national team, they should work together, stop the poaching and depleting clubs for some quick $$$. Monopolies are not good for long term quality competition. Better quality LOCAL gaming has a better pool of players available for DA, College, etc.
3. Clubs need to hire Team Managers no more Parents at this position! These managers since it would be a greater expense if given to a team individually, have this managers manage an entire age group or 2. These Managers would be the ones ensuring the kids are properly place in the team they belong. This would actually break off the cronism and bullshit going on during tryouts in which the team manager has teams preselected.
4. People start casually going to MLS games or Xolos games or whatever other live soccer game you could catch. Parents will see first hand how good their kid really is(or not), and kids will learn a thing or 2 from the actual pros.
5. Gaming League Directors stop seeding teams blindly! Run round robin qualifiers for your top 2 brackets at age group taking the best team or 2 from each participating club the first 2-3 weeks after the roster freeze. This is not about P/R, but about finding a balance in the brackets. Not only the entire league will benefit, but it would be a fun environment in which league games would be fun to watch week in and week out.
6. 2002 Quarterfinals was about RunDMB, Eddie Johnson and the great Landon Donovan playing for the love of the red, white and blue, lets recreate that back for 2022 and beyond!
jpeter
PREMIER
You're fluent in lies, excuses and bullshit but reality is promotion / regulation has been working just fine for youth soccer for a while now.
Coast soccer (CSL) has been doing it for many years, in my son's age group the premier teams won national cup, npl, crl and are going for national champions playing for clubs (TFA, Oxnard, Santa Barbara) without the so called millions.
Get real you're trying to protect your bubble and are afraid of real competition, you want to take the easy way out and play in closed leagues, where the main admission requirement is what you pay.
InTheValley
SILVER
Your logic is truly frightening. You must be an anti-vaxer and climate change denier too.
Let me get your “logic” straight: you believe P/R is a key to producing great youth soccer players. You also believe CSL has used P/R with great success for many years. Therefore, CSL must be producing all the best players who are signing at Power 5 schools or pro contracts, right?
My god, man, CSL is definitive proof why P/R is the dumbest possible solution for producing great soccer players - because it doesn’t produce any great soccer players! You’re essentially arguing that Venezuela is proof that socialism works.
If you think I’m the one afraid of competition, why is it that your kid is the one still wearing floaties in the CSL kiddie pool? DA is fully funded at most clubs, so what are you waiting for? You can’t even use unemployment as an excuse Karl Marx.
jpeter
PREMIER
Cal South has CRL where you earn you way in, National league Pacific conference, and there are others that goto national champions with us club but yeah there all using qualifications and promotions to get better competition. If you don't finish high enough you don't get invited back pretty simple concept unless you go through play in or other qualifications.
DA would be well served to do the same: every season top 4-5 promoted, let's the rest qualify and include outside comp. Top 12-14 in each age group starting say U14.
Yes having a son play for a MLS academy is nice but when there always trying to find better comp since only about a dozen games are so where close over the 30 development can be hit & miss.
The rest of the stuff you wrote is in your head or something?
