Don't waste your time with this individual known as EOL.
MarkM owes me a beer for wasting their time.
Last edited:
USWNT
- Thread starter soccerobserver
- Start date
MarkM owes me a beer for wasting their time.Dude, this individual has no hat, lost his ad-homonyms, repeats their self like a self imposed homeless person. Now you owe me a 6 pack of Pliny the Elders.
The problem doesn't lay in US Soccer but the NCAA. The NCAA has opted out of any governance or control by anybody ... other than the NCAA. The principles articulated in the NCAA policy and procedures manuals are focused on "student athletes" and fairness and economics between the members schools. The NCAA's approach is basically to say, all athletes are "Students" first and "Athletes" second ... and we want all of our members to have a fair shot of attracting these students and operating their various varsity sports efforts in a manner that meets the economic needs of the lowest common denominator.
If US Soccer approached the NCAA and said "Folks, we need you to change the rules to help us develop college soccer as a legitimate training ground for the pros" the NCAA would look at them with a blank stare, laugh hysterically and then tell them to "Not let the door hit you, where God split you."
A quick read of the "Principles for Conduct of Intercollegiate Athletics" (Article II) and you will appreciate the depth of the problem.
http://www.ncaapublications.com/s-13-Manuals.aspx
Wait till the studies start flowing.....now do you owe me a 6pack if Pliny?Dude, this individual has no hat, lost his ad-homonyms, repeats their self like a self imposed homeless person. Now you owe me a 6 pack of Pliny the Elders.
No.
We never agreed on anything. But, finding one is much harder than drinking one.
Dos Equis
GOLD
The NCAA is a challenge for every sport to work with, no doubt. The reason I focus on US Soccer is related to their abandonment of their mission statement ("to make soccer, in all its forms, a preeminent sport in the United States and to continue the development of soccer at all recreational and competitive levels") when it comes to college soccer.
It is worth making the argument that the change of the college season could benefit the student athlete in terms of stress and health, attract more top players to college (on the mens side), and improve the overall student/athlete experience. One of the few advantages the US has over other countries is our university system, one that is used by many sports to advance their sport, generate interest, and continue player development. US Soccer puts their effort and energy into a structure (DA/USL/MLS) that does not encourage high-level education and, at best, less than 5% of kids will get a low level pro opportunity, and less than 1% will ever get a cap on a National team. Word is the MLS may even abandon the DA. The current system is not helping the overall sport, but narrowly focused on producing national team players, and doing a pretty poor job of that (the best go to Europe). They should direct more resources into promoting and improving the college path in the US, making that path more pro-development. The college coaches are behind it.
NCAA Lacrosse gets more attention and TV time than men's soccer, though I understand it is mostly East Coast driven. A May based NCAA soccer tournament, supported by US Soccer, in a decent warm weather venue, could be made into a big draw, and also provides a perfect transition into national team camps and international competition dates in June.
outside!
DA
NCAA may talk the talk about "student athletes", but they are also motivated by money. Since soccer is the biggest sport in the world, there is good reason to believe it's popularity will increase in the US. If the NCAA continues on it's present course, college soccer will become irrelevant to future US soccer fans which means less money for the NCAA.
Don't most universities expect their student-athletes they recruit to be already developed?
Dos Equis
GOLD
No. Making youth development even more of a business is the wrong direction to go in the US. Having a more robust college game (like on the women's/girls side) reduces the need for youth soccer development to go in that direction. Those payments are immaterial to the overall cost of youth soccer, and will further hurt the game, not help it.
Just my opinion. We need to take advantage of our strengths and change the conversation, not try to copy European systems based on a very different reality. As I recall, the 2002 World Cup roster was mostly college players (the now defunct IMG Academy had a couple additions), and they did the best of a US team in any World Cup. US Soccer changed the direction, how has that worked out ? Has the current system produced a roster with the likes of (former college) players Claudia Reyna, Brian McBride, Pablo Mastroeni, Cobi Jones, Clint Mathis, Steve Cherundolo, Eddie Pope, and Eddie Lewis (among others)?
The women/girls side tends to be more heavily based on college players because they have no other avenue after high school and youth soccer.
Dos Equis
GOLD
How is the avenue(s) US Soccer has paved and advocates working out for the our men? After 20 years, all those players who skipped college making a good living in soccer, and on the path to decent professional careers? Are we more competitive on the international stage, or even within Concacaf?
The whole point is disconnecting elite men's soccer from the ability to get a college degree hurts the popularity and development of the sport in the US, and there is no evidence to prove otherwise. But by all means, let's keep trying to implement a system desigend to find and develop a U.S. Messi. And let's export that great strategy to the women's side, and really screw up the sport here in the US for good.
I'm not disagreeing with you, just pointing out that there is really not a viable path for US women as professional players, outside of the few that are selected for National Team service. I'm more in favor of broadening the pyramid, and I have become dismayed over the years watching as different factions of the US Soccer leadership have made boneheaded decisions that reduce or eliminate pathways for player development.
For example, why eliminate the opportunity for players to play HS soccer? That costs USSF absolutely nothing - they get those players for free. Why is there no MLS or NWSL team in San Diego?
MakeAPlay
DA
The longer that I am on this forum the more I agree with you. We started on the opposite sides of the ECNL vs. Open league debate many moons ago and now it is rare that you post something that I don't agree with 100%.
Dos Equis
GOLD
Agree 100%.
Dos Equis
GOLD
So much has changed since then . . . simpler times.
Dos Equis
GOLD
Watch he movement off the ball. Every Spain player making themselves an option. Taking advantage of all the open spaces, and one-touch passing into them knowing their teammate will be there.
For us, better lineup, but Morgan is a turnover machine, and Horan is five yards behind the play and slow. Best first hald players for us were Lavelle, Rapino and Ertz. We are missing speed and need Press in there. Good she is in now.
For us, better lineup, but Morgan is a turnover machine, and Horan is five yards behind the play and slow. Best first hald players for us were Lavelle, Rapino and Ertz. We are missing speed and need Press in there. Good she is in now.