Women's CONCACAF World Cup Qualifying

[kickingandscreaming]

Yes, other countries definitely have a far deeper soccer culture than the US if you don't count the 400,000 girls, 40,000 collegians and roughly 300 professional Americans who play soccer. And if you ignore that the US has won half the WCs ever played. WTF are you talking about? Trying to mansplain that men's soccer is important but we should ignore the entire history of women's soccer when we decide what actually constitutes "soccer culture"?

The US has built a powerhouse of NT soccer based on having so many more girls play the sport at a higher level and for more years than any other country in the world. The US has the most dominant women's system by a mile and a half. But you want to abandon it because you have some fantasy notion that countries that have never won anything in their history are doing things right and we aren't? Do you even know what a country like Spain actually does on the girls side? Let me tell you. There is no soccer culture for girls. There is no hope of being a big deal playing HS. There is no hope of using soccer to leverage and help finance your college education. There are also maybe 5 remotely decent soccer clubs for girls in the entire country, compared to over 100 in the US. For most, there is no chance of ever being able to play at any remotely high level. And even if you want to play for most youth academies, I also hope you have 20,000 euros (See FC Malaga City Femenino | Elite Level Women's Football Programme), or live close to one of the very few that don't make you pay a fortune. And even then, please tell me the names of all these super great girls youth coaches in Spain. Or just one. There are also maybe ten 20 year old Spanish women who play competitive soccer in Spain, while there are more than 10,000 in the U.S.

Yes, the USWNT has been dominant. That doesn't mean it can't be better. Failing to look at potential challenges and weaknesses has been the downfall of dominant teams, companies, and empires throughout history. It also makes for interesting board discussions.

Your point that the soccer culture in a given country (Spain) may be significantly different for girls versus boys is a good one, but I contend that is more specific to the general cultural approach to girls' and boys' sports, which is part of the USA's advantage of being relatively more progressive in girls' sports. If so, this advantage will continue to wane unless opportunities for girls in sports do not grow in other countries as they have in the USA.

Also, your contention that the USWNT excelled due to superior athleticism, strength, and speed is an advantage that would be expected to shrink as well unless US women are somehow at a much higher relative world standing in those traits than US men.

Relative participation is the only advantage I see for the girls versus the boys in the US. Training is no better, and there is a bias toward the boys at the higher levels due to financial incentives. I'm not buying that this is the only difference that separates the relative rankings of the best National Team in the world (USWNT) and the USMNT.

Defining a good soccer culture is subjective. I'd say we will have a good one in the US when pickup games of various skill levels are as consistently available at local parks as pickup basketball games. This type of culture would solve more "underachieving" than anything else we could do and would be relatively cheap. I don't think much of the idea that some National Team level soccer players are being missed due to "pay-to-play". However, I believe the lack of opportunities to get out and play with other youngsters drives the underrepresentation of girls in lower socio-economic areas. I am confident that if an 8-year-old player were tearing it up at her local park, word would get out, and a club would come calling. Unfortunately, culture doesn't change particularly fast. We could certainly use one or two USWNT stars from these areas to light the fire of participation.

 

[paytoplay]

You talk so much about why pay-to-play is so bad. Instead, why don't you tell us how we can eliminate pay-to-play, including your thoughts on:

• Whether coaches should ever be paid, and if so, where the money will come from?
• Whether fields should be built or maintained, and if so, where will the money come from?
• Whether leagues should be formed, or clubs for that matter, and if so, who will pay for the administrators?

I agree that club soccer is expensive and that the majority of families who participate come from "mostly upper middle classes," to use your words. Instead of ranting, what is your solution to financial inequality?

What fields did the clubs build?? What pockets built the Great Park?
The formation of the clubs is parasitical. They feed off the work of the athletes. Your player might have a great coach, but I guarantee you her friend who plays for another club has an idiot for a coach. Organization is required, of course. But, we’re talking about soccer—you couldn’t design a sport better suited to minimalism. Instead, the club system introduces: travel!, expensive kits, dipshit coaches, literal pay to play, blackballing, etc. How would we be worse off if the players were still in some kind of tiered recreational system like AYSO? Especially in Southern California, why is it even necessary to travel 10 miles, let alone travel to AZ to find competition? What a wasteful system! You know it’s going to get worse too. I’m sure these guys will dream up some real doozies! That’s just like my opinion, man.

 

[GoldenGate]

Burn bridges? In other words, the gatekeepers have massive egos. They will resort to cancel culture if not shown the proper respect by the player’s parent or guardian. If the parent dares to say something on the internet, or if the parent’s name comes up in a conversation somewhere, that player will be punished on the field. Got it. The hard work is actually done by the highly skilled coaches and not the players risking acl tears or balancing school work with their athletics. Understood. So, pay to play soccer exists for the benefit of the club and not really for any player development. That’s what I thought. Thanks for the club perspective. It really lets us know what is important.

"Cancel culture" is nothing more than a fancy term used by people who don't want to be held accountable for their inappropriate behavior. Parents like you and crush complain incessantly and do nothing but criticize others, but you expect that there should be no repercussions.

You are nuts if you think pay to play exists "for the benefit of the club and not really for any player development". Pay to play exists because soccer costs what it costs. And the USofA has done pretty well for itself in terms of player development, better than every other country in the world. It has done so well, in fact, that it has won the last two WCs and was unlucky not to have won three.

 

[GoldenGate]

What fields did the clubs build?? What pockets built the Great Park?
The formation of the clubs is parasitical. They feed off the work of the athletes. Your player might have a great coach, but I guarantee you her friend who plays for another club has an idiot for a coach. Organization is required, of course. But, we’re talking about soccer—you couldn’t design a sport better suited to minimalism. Instead, the club system introduces: travel!, expensive kits, dipshit coaches, literal pay to play, blackballing, etc. How would we be worse off if the players were still in some kind of tiered recreational system like AYSO? Especially in Southern California, why is it even necessary to travel 10 miles, let alone travel to AZ to find competition? What a wasteful system! You know it’s going to get worse too. I’m sure these guys will dream up some real doozies! That’s just like my opinion, man.

There is no monolithic "system" of youth soccer in the US. You live in the only country in the world that has every conceivable price point and level of youth soccer for girls. There is absolutely nothing stopping your kid from playing AYSO, or school soccer, or inexpensive comp, or pickup games in the park if you're too cheap to pay for training from professionals.

 

[espola]

 

[outside!]

There is no monolithic "system" of youth soccer in the US. You live in the only country in the world that has every conceivable price point and level of youth soccer for girls. There is absolutely nothing stopping your kid from playing AYSO, or school soccer, or inexpensive comp, or pickup games in the park if you're too cheap to pay for training from professionals.

"Monolithic?", No, but there is a fragmented system that has a lot of unnecessary travel costs because of that fragmentation. Many people would like to participate but do not have the means. That does not mean they are cheap.

 

[Carlsbad7]

Pretty pathetic game on both sides.

 

[espola]

Pretty pathetic game on both sides.

USA got lots of just-missed shots.

It might be comforting to youth players and their coaches that even at the highest levels players will, after having worked the ball up the field with skill and teamwork, lob a softie right into the keeper's hands.

 

[GoldenGate]

"Monolithic?", No, but there is a fragmented system that has a lot of unnecessary travel costs because of that fragmentation. Many people would like to participate but do not have the means. That does not mean they are cheap.

Yes, many people do not have the means to pay for what elite soccer costs. They also don't have the means to pay for equestrian lessons. Or piano lessons. Or SAT prep. Or Ferraris. The fact that certain avenues of youth soccer are closed to people who lack the resources to pay for them has nothing to do with youth soccer, let alone suggest that youth soccer is broken or "too expensive". Why is it that people think things should cost what they cost for everything but soccer? Is youth soccer so important compared to any other activity that skilled and valuable coaches should just do it for free? Those with control over field space should give it away for free? People who run youth soccer clubs are "greedy" because they expect to be paid to run a business?

ECNL has just the right amount of travel for those who choose to participate in it. AYSO has just the right amount of travel for those who choose to participate. HS has just the right amount of travel for those who choose to participate. We know that because they continue to exist. We also know GDA did not have the right amount of travel because it collapsed largely because of the travel costs. You call it "fragmentation", but the appropriate word is "options".

 

[GoldenGate]

That is not an answer; it is just more ranting. Somebody has to pay for coaches, field fees and administration. Who, in your opinion, should have to pay these fees if not the parents of the players? You're the guy who objects to "pay-to-play." What is your solution?

The answer is always the same from anti "pay to play" people: anyone but them. The government should pay. Youth soccer coaches should pay by giving up their time and ability to earn a living and coach kids for free. Youth club admins should pay by giving up their time and ability to earn a living to run these clubs for free. Land owners should love soccer so much that they let everyone use field space for free instead of making money from it. Other parents should pay by foregoing their ability to use their financial resources to leverage their daughter's athletic ability into college opportunity. Instead, they should accept less qualified cheaper coaches, less qualified skilled teammates, and lower quality games against less skilled opponents.

 

[paytoplay]

That is not an answer; it is just more ranting. Somebody has to pay for coaches, field fees and administration. Who, in your opinion, should have to pay these fees if not the parents of the players? You're the guy who objects to "pay-to-play." What is your solution?

Good work. Youcan comprehend the part about my objection to pay-to-play I hate it. The clubs have hijacked the sport. Rentseekers. They add little value and are annoying. More salesman than mentor. For every decent coach, 10 more that suck. Those schmucks should be run out of town.

It’s the players themselves that are the value—their hard work, their learning from each other, paying for private training and private coaching, and their luck of both inheriting good genes and family support. The athletes pre-dated the clubs, contrary to what you think.

The solution is obviously to return to the era before the rise of the clubs. Elite players and useful coaches will gravitate to each other, with the incentive of seeing who’s best. To a large degree, they will develop each other. Health of the club won’t be an incentive. They won’t exist. It won’t be free soccer, but compared to now, play will be accessible, affordable and local. We may not get there, the world often ignores obvious solutions to problems. But, can the current system sustain itself? I hope something happens to disrupt it. I will be rooting for that.

Since the USA is not a socialist country, maybe the solution is not looking at other successful youth soccer systems, although I would prefer we do what Spain and France are doing. (I say, “not socialist,” except for the taxpayer-subsidized fields and public schools and colleges.) But, if I were a billionaire, I would create a superclub and drive the clubs out of business just for the satisfaction. That’s my dream.

 

[paytoplay]

Yes, many people do not have the means to pay for what elite soccer costs. They also don't have the means to pay for equestrian lessons. Or piano lessons. Or SAT prep. Or Ferraris. The fact that certain avenues of youth soccer are closed to people who lack the resources to pay for them has nothing to do with youth soccer, let alone suggest that youth soccer is broken or "too expensive". Why is it that people think things should cost what they cost for everything but soccer? Is youth soccer so important compared to any other activity that skilled and valuable coaches should just do it for free? Those with control over field space should give it away for free? People who run youth soccer clubs are "greedy" because they expect to be paid to run a business?

ECNL has just the right amount of travel for those who choose to participate in it. AYSO has just the right amount of travel for those who choose to participate. HS has just the right amount of travel for those who choose to participate. We know that because they continue to exist. We also know GDA did not have the right amount of travel because it collapsed largely because of the travel costs. You call it "fragmentation", but the appropriate word is "options".

Taxpayers of Irvine continue to pay for every soccer field and every improvement at the Great Park. Would be interesting if they started charging for the full price, instead of practically giving it away for free. And the school districts should do the same.

 

[GoldenGate]

Good work. Youcan comprehend the part about my objection to pay-to-play I hate it. The clubs have hijacked the sport. Rentseekers. They add little value and are annoying. More salesman than mentor. For every decent coach, 10 more that suck. Those schmucks should be run out of town.

It’s the players themselves that are the value—their hard work, their learning from each other, paying for private training and private coaching, and their luck of both inheriting good genes and family support. The athletes pre-dated the clubs, contrary to what you think.

The solution is obviously to return to the era before the rise of the clubs. Elite players and useful coaches will gravitate to each other, with the incentive of seeing who’s best. To a large degree, they will develop each other. Health of the club won’t be an incentive. They won’t exist. It won’t be free soccer, but compared to now, play will be accessible, affordable and local. We may not get there, the world often ignores obvious solutions to problems. But, can the current system sustain itself? I hope something happens to disrupt it. I will be rooting for that.

Since the USA is not a socialist country, maybe the solution is not looking at other successful youth soccer systems, although I would prefer we do what Spain and France are doing. (I say, “not socialist,” except for the taxpayer-subsidized fields and public schools and colleges.) But, if I were a billionaire, I would create a superclub and drive the clubs out of business just for the satisfaction. That’s my dream.

A 13 year old girl who can kick a soccer ball has zero value no matter how much you claim otherwise. Their ability to kick a soccer ball is worthless to others. Someone who can help that player develop to the point that they can leverage their ability into Stanford or UCLA, however, is incredibly valuable and deserves to be paid accordingly. You are clueless.

I love people like you who live a fantasy that girls youth soccer is so great in countries like Spain and France. The truth is you have no clue what things are actually like there. You don't know the first thing about the actual opportunities and options a girl has in either of those countries. You have no idea what levels of soccer are available to kids in those countries, let alone how much they cost. You can't identify a single coach in either of those countries who does a great job developing players, let alone one who is better at it than Baker or Deza who are in your backyard. You have no clue that a youth academy like Malaga FC charges kids 20,000 euros for a 10 month season, and at Alacante it is 1900 euros a month. You conveniently ignore that Spain and France have systems that drive virtually every teenage girl out of the sport by the time they're 18 years old, and that 99.99 percent of them cannot leverage their ability to play soccer into anything at all, whereas there are 40,000 American girls right now playing collegiately. You have no idea that a 16 year old girl in Marseille who wants to play soccer for fun doesn't even have a pathway to do that in most circumstances, unlike in the U.S. Did you know that there are maybe twenty 20 year old Spanish women who play soccer competitively, while there are 10,000 American women? You have no clue that the very few who do decide to follow the dream must give up everything, education, work experience, all of it, while 40,000 American women right now get to follow their dream of playing soccer and get an education at the same time.

 

[outside!]

Yes, many people do not have the means to pay for what elite soccer costs. They also don't have the means to pay for equestrian lessons. Or piano lessons. Or SAT prep. Or Ferraris. The fact that certain avenues of youth soccer are closed to people who lack the resources to pay for them has nothing to do with youth soccer, let alone suggest that youth soccer is broken or "too expensive". Why is it that people think things should cost what they cost for everything but soccer? Is youth soccer so important compared to any other activity that skilled and valuable coaches should just do it for free? Those with control over field space should give it away for free? People who run youth soccer clubs are "greedy" because they expect to be paid to run a business?

ECNL has just the right amount of travel for those who choose to participate in it. AYSO has just the right amount of travel for those who choose to participate. HS has just the right amount of travel for those who choose to participate. We know that because they continue to exist. We also know GDA did not have the right amount of travel because it collapsed largely because of the travel costs. You call it "fragmentation", but the appropriate word is "options".

I thought the point of this discussion was to find ways to improve US soccer. The fragmentation I am referring to is the many upper level leagues that cause local teams to travel and prevent them from playing one another. These leagues also dilute the talent. All of these leagues exist due to a lack of non-corrupt leadership from US Soccer and their primary purpose is to funnel dollars to the leagues, not to make better soccer players. No more than 1 or 2 SoCal teams per age group should ever have a reason to travel out of SoCal. Since the vast majority of games are played at facilities funded by the taxpayers, we should be able to demand some efficiency.

 

[paytoplay]

OK. You're a nut-job. Your solution for eliminating pay-to-play and increasing the overall level of soccer is to find a billionaire who will build a superclub and put all the other clubs out of business. I don't know what other teams that superclub will play. Maybe another team supported by another billionaire.

You and the other guy with a bunch of ad hominem attacks. Get a room.

 

[NorCalDad]

I personally have a bigger issue with win-now vs pay-to-play. The later is pretty much unavoidable. That said I think it's fair to acknowledge the downsides to pay-to-play, which there are many. For me, I wish pay-to-play produced a better product. Unfortunately the majority of players/parents do not value development over win-now and the clubs are catering to its customers wants. It's just unfortunate. This is why on the men's side so many players play in Europe instead of the MLS. I postulate that this is going to happen more and more on the woman's side over time. If that FCB vs PDA game didn't convince you, I don't know what will.

 

[GoldenGate]

You and the other guy with a bunch of ad hominem attacks. Get a room.

I'm sorry, but it appears that you still haven't identified a single awesome Spanish youth girls coach. I'm also still waiting for you to educate all of us on what options girls actually have to play soccer in Spain and France, and how much each of them cost. What options does a 14 year old girl in Malaga have to play soccer besides paying Malaga FC 20,000 euros a year?

Why do you hate the United States so much? Why is it so important that you tear down the greatest women's soccer power in the history of the world to pattern it after a country like Spain? You believe the country that has won two straight WCs and was unlucky not to win three, and which has won half of the WCs ever played, is a catastrophe. And we should abandon what we do to follow a country that has never won a single knockout stage game at the WC, Olympics or even the Euros in the entire history of planet earth? Think about that for a second.

 

[GoldenGate]

I personally have a bigger issue with win-now vs pay-to-play. The later is pretty much unavoidable. That said I think it's fair to acknowledge the downsides to pay-to-play, which there are many. For me, I wish pay-to-play produced a better product. Unfortunately the majority of players/parents do not value development over win-now and the clubs are catering to its customers wants. It's just unfortunate. This is why on the men's side so many players play in Europe instead of the MLS. I postulate that this is going to happen more and more on the woman's side over time. If that FCB vs PDA game didn't convince you, I don't know what will.

It is possible (and necessary) to emphasize winning and also develop players. I don't know why people think it is one or the other. The truth is winning is important because having fun is important, and there is nothing more fun than winning. If you want to win soccer games at the highest level, you need alphas, players who have a burning need to win, and that needs to be fed constantly. When you make children spend their youth dribbling through cones, juggling and making wall passes all day long, you deprive them of the most joyous part of the sport and drive most of the alphas out of it, while stifling the most important mental mindset for the rest. Seriously, people like you beat into little girls that winning isn't important their entire youth, but then you turn around and wonder why they don't win when they're adults? Meanwhile, the American youth clubs that you and your "beautiful game" buddies thumb your nose at for emphasizing winning over circus juggling keep cranking out winners.

Spain will not become an elite women's soccer power for this reason. They lack physical and mental alphas because their youth system drives them out of the sport. They're stuck with circus jugglers who fold every time against the countries that bring better and more mentally tough athletes. It is sad watching their body language when they have to defend a corner against a team like the US, England or Germany. They know they're losers, so they lose. They had 70% possession against Germany but were dominated and got mugged on a header. They had 60% possession and the lead against England but were dominated and got mugged again on a header. Passing the ball around the back and midfield all day isn't pretty soccer. It's an embarrassing fear of engagement.

 

[NorCalDad]

It is possible (and necessary) to emphasize winning and also develop players. I don't know why people think it is one or the other. The truth is winning is important because having fun is important, and there is nothing more fun than winning. If you want to win soccer games at the highest level, you need alphas, players who have a burning need to win, and that needs to be fed constantly. When you make children spend their youth dribbling through cones, juggling and making wall passes all day long, you deprive them of the most joyous part of the sport and drive most of the alphas out of it, while stifling the most important mental mindset for the rest. Seriously, people like you beat into little girls that winning isn't important their entire youth, but then you turn around and wonder why they don't win when they're adults? Meanwhile, the American youth clubs that you and your "beautiful game" buddies thumb your nose at for emphasizing winning over circus juggling keep cranking out winners.

Spain will not become an elite women's soccer power for this reason. They lack physical and mental alphas because their youth system drives them out of the sport. They're stuck with circus jugglers who fold every time against the countries that bring better and more mentally tough athletes. It is sad watching their body language when they have to defend a corner against a team like the US, England or Germany. They know they're losers, so they lose. They had 70% possession against Germany but were dominated and got mugged on a header. They had 60% possession and the lead against England but were dominated and got mugged again on a header. Passing the ball around the back and midfield all day isn't pretty soccer. It's an embarrassing fear of engagement.

@GoldenGate I generally like your posts, but you literally have no idea what you're talking about in this case. I know this thread is about the woman's side, but let's take a step back for a moment. Do you think direct play / bully ball works on the men's side 100% of the time? I would hope your answer here would be a resounding "no". My point is, once the European teams dial in girl's side, the USWNT will be playing catch up. In soccer there's not much more embarrassing than watching a bunch of "alphas" getting schooled by much smarter players. Not unlike that PDA vs FCB game posted earlier -- those "alphas" were schooled big time. So much so, I don't even know how to define "alpha" anymore.

In Spain the coaches loath juggling exercises -- they prize thinking and decision making. The US clubs I'm familiar with spend way too much time on juggling, especially when said club just plays boot ball anyway. Juggling in the US is just a time killer for many coaches.

 

[NorCalDad]

@GoldenGate I highly recommend you take a moment and read:

https://smile.amazon.com/gp/product/B08PL2S7H3/ref=ppx_yo_dt_b_d_asin_title_o04?ie=UTF8&psc=1

I wish coaches/DoCs would read this (I'm sure many do). It aligns with what Todd Beane preaches...and what I buy into big time.

I just don't understand your aversion to wanting coaching in the US to continually improve.

 

[Happened again]

@GoldenGate I generally like your posts, but you literally have no idea what you're talking about in this case. I know this thread is about the woman's side, but let's take a step back for a moment. Do you think direct play / bully ball works on the men's side 100% of the time? I would hope your answer here would be a resounding "no". My point is, once the European teams dial in girl's side, the USWNT will be playing catch up. In soccer there's not much more embarrassing than watching a bunch of "alphas" getting schooled by much smarter players. Not unlike that PDA vs FCB game posted earlier -- those "alphas" were schooled big time. So much so, I don't even know how to define "alpha" anymore.

In Spain the coaches loath juggling exercises -- they prize thinking and decision making. The US clubs I'm familiar with spend way too much time on juggling, especially when said club just plays boot ball anyway. Juggling in the US is just a time killer for many coaches.

You are living in la la land. Euro teams dial in their girls side? The point that GG is making ( admittedly I agree) is that building out of the back and possession without finishing in the final 3rd wins zero games. Spain did exactly that. Citing a PDA vs Barca game as the revelation that we are being overtaken at a rapid pace is silly. PDA is one of many, many clubs in the US. Play that game against another club that plays a similar style but finishes, that game ends differently. There are many out there, all over the country, in the GA,ECNL NPL..blah blah..they are out there. Play that game against a YNT with YNT coaches, and that game is different...I would guess. Are the Barca girls technically good..yep.

A very old senior team won bronze recently, the YNTs just came back from Europe, wreaking havoc against everyone. There are other regional youth tournanments going on us club teams doing very well. I think our position as the premier women's soccer country in the world is secure. Are others creeping up, showing improvement...of course - Austrialia, France, Japan, Spain...

To your point of the men's game...finishing in the final third is the key. Good teams know when to apply what to win games. Every game is different, every year is different, the leagues are different....even the world cup is different. Remeber when a possession team dismantled Brazil? Big, precise, finishing, patience, disruption. Soccer is fun though and these discussions are also.