Girls Development Academy

[mahrez]

USSF oversees the majority of the affiliated leagues such as USYS which USYS National League falls under or US Club Soccer which ECNL and NPL falls under.

From what I have read. Parents in the know are posting.....DAII will fall under US Club soccer and not directly under USSF like Girls DA will be.

For visual posters:
USSF ----> Girls DA
USSF ----> US Club Soccer ----> DAII
USSF ----> US Club Soccer ----> ECNL
USSF ----> USYS ----> National League
USSF ----> USYS ----> Coast Soccer League
USSF ----> USYS ----> ODP

...US Club ---> ENPL, NPL, id2
....USYS ---> Cal South ---> CSL, SCDSL, Presidio, CRL

According to ZW, LA Galaxy academy won't be fielding or having 2nd or B girls teams in any league. Doubt this proposed II alternative league is worth it for what 7-8 teams, too much work and $ for such a small group of teams for one area only.

 

[Realmadrid]

so it's 9 and galaxy is apart of it IF it happens...

The USDA said that the southwest model is being looked at for the country..

 

[NoGoal]

...US Club ---> ENPL, NPL, id2
....USYS ---> Cal South ---> CSL, SCDSL, Presidio, CRL

According to ZW, LA Galaxy academy won't be fielding or having 2nd or B girls teams in any league. Doubt this proposed II alternative league is worth it for what 7-8 teams, too much work and $ for such a small group of teams for one area only.

Thanks, I forgot about the Cal-South layer after USYS.

 

[Real Deal]

Okay, this rule regarding Development Players (from US Soccer Development player rules) is truly interesting:

"Areas to consider and avoid with DP: A DP is NOT a false promise, or a label, or a status given to a player to help keep the player in the club. A DP is NOT a means to protect a player from recruiting regulations. A DP is NOT a way to help spread or divide pay to play costs amongst a larger group of players. When misused, DP’s can cause confusion within the club and in particular for the player."

 

[Real Deal]

Kinda makes your head hurt, right?

I had a hard enough time back in the day with:
Black Team
White Team
Red Team

 

[chargerfan]

I had a hard enough time back in the day with:
Black Team
White Team
Red Team

Oh, the days before US Soccer realized how much $$$$$ they could make in girls soccer. Simpler times.

 

[mahrez]

Okay, this rule regarding Development Players (from US Soccer Development player rules) is truly interesting:

"Areas to consider and avoid with DP: A DP is NOT a false promise, or a label, or a status given to a player to help keep the player in the club. A DP is NOT a means to protect a player from recruiting regulations. A DP is NOT a way to help spread or divide pay to play costs amongst a larger group of players. When misused, DP’s can cause confusion within the club and in particular for the player."

At least now you know the difference between reality and marketing & why those clubs that tried to promote a entire 2nd team "as considered DP's" had to strike that wishful thinking. Any player that's registered to the Academy Club’s non-Academy between August 1 and March 1 of the current Academy seasonal year can be considered for a DP slot, this new proposed league does'nt help or change that & as you can see below, limited use for 0-3 players is what they expect. From the same document:

"U.S. Soccer Support and Guidance: U.S. Soccer’s technical staff and scouts will also evaluate training sessions and friendly games to determine individual player readiness for DA level games. The Technical Advisor may require a Training Center (TC) level or Youth National Team (YNT) level player to move to FT status if viewed to be best for the player’s IDP. U.S. Soccer reserves the right to refuse the addition of a DP player if it is determined that the club is mismanaging their allocation of the DP pool or if it is negatively impacting their FT players.

Academy-wide DP Averages for the 2015-16 Academy Season

Age Group
U-13/14 U-15/16 U-17/18
Avg # of DPs per team 2.85 3.22 1.30

Age Group
U-13/14 U-15/16 U-17/18
Avg # of DPs with zero games 0.13 0.20 0.15

 

[Real Deal]

At least now you know the difference between reality and marketing & why those clubs that tried to promote a entire 2nd team "as considered DP's" had to strike that wishful thinking. Any player that's registered to the Academy Club’s non-Academy between August 1 and March 1 of the current Academy seasonal year can be considered for a DP slot, this new proposed league does'nt help or change that & as you can see below, limited use for 0-3 players is what they expect. From the same document:

"U.S. Soccer Support and Guidance: U.S. Soccer’s technical staff and scouts will also evaluate training sessions and friendly games to determine individual player readiness for DA level games. The Technical Advisor may require a Training Center (TC) level or Youth National Team (YNT) level player to move to FT status if viewed to be best for the player’s IDP. U.S. Soccer reserves the right to refuse the addition of a DP player if it is determined that the club is mismanaging their allocation of the DP pool or if it is negatively impacting their FT players.

Academy-wide DP Averages for the 2015-16 Academy Season

Age Group
U-13/14 U-15/16 U-17/18
Avg # of DPs per team 2.85 3.22 1.30

Age Group
U-13/14 U-15/16 U-17/18
Avg # of DPs with zero games 0.13 0.20 0.15

Yes there were generally only 1 or 2 players from the White Team who got to guest on the Black Team... haha


But this time frame is confusing-- "between August 1 and March 1". So if a kid is registered tomorrow (March 4) to a non-Academy team, are they still eligible to be a DP?

 

[mahrez]

Yes there were generally only 1 or 2 players from the White Team who got to guest on the Black Team... haha


But this time frame is confusing-- "between August 1 and March 1". So if a kid is registered tomorrow (March 4) to a non-Academy team, are they still eligible to be a DP?

Nope that player is not eligible and DP's can't start the season on the roster either, than can only be activated after 1st week in Oct after about the 5th week of the season. Really a special case with narrow focus not meant to be marketed as a general use carrot for 2nd teams.

DA can be a good fit for starters or even the first ones off the bench but for the others playing 25% or less not so much unless the training can keep your player happy and improving.

 

[Real Deal]

Nope that player is not eligible and DP's can't start the season on the roster either, than can only be activated after 1st week in Oct after about the 5th week of the season. Really a special case with narrow focus not meant to be marketed as a general use carrot for 2nd teams.

DA can be a good fit for starters or even the first ones off the bench but for the others playing 25% or less not so much unless the training can keep your player happy and improving.

Ok wow. So do you think the time frame is true for the girls? (since there has technically not been an academy season)? If so, I think parents need to know this before they sign up for their DAII or whatever teams.

What a mess.

 

[NoGoal]

DA can be a good fit for starters or even the first ones off the bench but for the others playing 25% or less not so much unless the training can keep your player happy and improving.

Mahrez, you seem to know a lot about DA. Do you have a son playing Boys DA, because your posted above is exactly what a friend told him about DA. My buddy also told me the Boys DA league standings show which players start the most games and which players play the least. I looked for myself and he was right players 1-15 seem play the most games/minutes.

 

[NoGoal]

Mahrez, you seem to know a lot about DA. Do you have a son playing Boys DA, because your posted above is exactly what a friend told him about DA. My buddy also told me the Boys DA league standings show which players start the most games and which players play the least. I looked for myself and he was right players 1-15 seem play the most games/minutes.

Here is a link that shows....the number of players who start vs games played DA games. It even breaks down the percent of games the players starts. Posters should browse the combine age groups. You will notice.....the older birth year plays more than the younger birth year. Matter of fact the roster is dominated by the older player.

http://rlsc.ussoccerda.com/sam/teams/index.php?team=1655771

 

[mahrez]

Here is a link that shows....the number of players who start vs games played DA games. It even breaks down the percent of games the players starts. Posters should browse the combine age groups. You will notice.....the older birth year plays more than the younger birth year. Matter of fact the roster is dominated by the older player.

http://rlsc.ussoccerda.com/sam/teams/index.php?team=1655771

Yes during his HS years until the 2nd half of his senior year when he finally left to play for his school team, something he always want to do. DA was very good for him and he really grew and enjoyed the experience but would tell you that the no HS play rule is not necessary.

With the split age groups many would take a year off academy and come back when they were older or not, but my player never did that and he was one of those 90% players you see. He thought he played too much actually and would ask for sub's out of exhaustion sometimes but still remained in mostly. Notice that team has no DP's.

 

[NoGoal]

Yes during his HS years until the 2nd half of his senior year when he finally left to play for his school team, something he always want to do. DA was very good for him and he really grew and enjoyed the experience but would tell you that the no HS play rule is not necessary.

With the split age groups many would take a year off academy and come back when they were older or not, but my player never did that and he was one of those 90% players you see. He thought he played too much actually and would ask for sub's out of exhaustion sometimes but still remained in mostly. Notice that team has no DP's.

Thanks for the 411. IMO, a few parents (except starters + 1st 3 subs) are going to have a rude awakening this fall, if their DD's are playing Girls DA. By the looks of things the 16th- 26th rostered players will be practicing more and playing less. Even if the training is free/reduced on the Girls DA team.....Riding the bench will lead to problems.

 

[3thatplay]

Thanks for the 411. IMO, a few parents (except starters + 1st 3 subs) are going to have a rude awakening this fall, if their DD's are playing Girls DA. By the looks of things the 16th- 26th rostered players will be practicing more and playing less. Even if the training is free/reduced on the Girls DA team.....Riding the bench will lead to problems.

NoGoal is usually spot on, but the substitution rules state (page 15):

2. Substitutions: All U-15/16 and U-17/18 Academy games will have a maximum of five (5) substitutions per game with no re-entry across three “opportunities”. U-13, U-14 Academy games will have a maximum of seven (7) substitutions per game with no re-entry across three “opportunities”. TheU-12 Academy games will have unlimited substitutions with re-entry

So there will be slightly less disgruntled parents. "But he does state 16-26th..." (this is an EDIT)

The rules also state that for most age groups every rostered player must start 25% of the Academy games... With reimbursement to players that do not receive those starts. (page 11)

c. Should an Academy player not meet the minimum start requirement (not inclusive of the suggested playing time recommendations at U-12 and U-13(, the player may be entitled to a refund of all team fees excluding travel expenses from the Academy Club unless such refund is excused by Academy Staff for medical or disciplinary reasons. U.S. Soccer has the ability to apply a financial fine to the club or disallow the addition of new players. This may impact the end-of-year evaluation in the player development category should a club consistently be unable to fulfill the start requirement

 

[NoGoal]

NoGoal is usually spot on, but the substitution rules state (page 15):

So there will be slightly less disgruntled parents. "But he does state 16-26th..." (this is an EDIT)

The rules also state that for most age groups every rostered player must start 25% of the Academy games... With reimbursement to players that do not receive those starts. (page 11)
​

There should be less play time issues with the U13 and U14 age groups, because of the 7 sub limit along with it being a specific age group (no olders). College coaches aren't heavily recruiting these age groups anyway.

It's the U15/16 and U17/18 combined age group where I see red flags. Max 5 subs the ENTIRE game (not per half) and usually GKs and defenders are not subbed out unlike midfielders and forwards. The subsititution pattern will most likely be similar to the Pro game. Substitution will takes place during the 2nd half after the 60th minute or later. Meaning the subs that do get in will not be getting a lot of play time. Overall means less opportunities for bench players to be seen during showcase games. It will be interesting to see how this plays out. Note: 25% rostered players will need to play...it's obvious the top half of the standings teams will start the subs against the last 3-4 placed teams to meet the 25% rostered player rule.

It also states, start 25% of rostered players. The loop hole is....start the sub gs the bad teams and then sub them out at half-time or before and bring in my starters. Flip the subbing pattern to meet the criteria.

 

[espola]

NoGoal is usually spot on, but the substitution rules state (page 15):

So there will be slightly less disgruntled parents. "But he does state 16-26th..." (this is an EDIT)

The rules also state that for most age groups every rostered player must start 25% of the Academy games... With reimbursement to players that do not receive those starts. (page 11)
​

Restricting substitutions is a sign that the supposed "development" is a fraud.

 

[cheaper2keeper]

Restricting substitutions is a sign that the supposed "development" is a fraud.

Not if you truly only care about developing the top 1% of all the academies.

 

[timbuck]

I'd say a 22 player roster is more of a sign than sub restrictions.
Older kids (15+) should be match fit and not sub off and on after everytime they make a long run.

 

[younothat]

There should be less play time issues with the U13 and U14 age groups, because of the 7 sub limit along with it being a specific age group (no olders). College coaches aren't heavily recruiting these age groups anyway.

It's the U15/16 and U17/18 combined age group where I see red flags. Max 5 subs the ENTIRE game (not per half) and usually GKs and defenders are not subbed out unlike midfielders and forwards. The subsititution pattern will most likely be similar to the Pro game. Substitution will takes place during the 2nd half after the 60th minute or later. Meaning the subs that do get in will not be getting a lot of play time. Overall means less opportunities for bench players to be seen during showcase games. It will be interesting to see how this plays out. Note: 25% rostered players will need to play...it's obvious the top half of the standings teams will start the subs against the last 3-4 placed teams to meet the 25% rostered player rule.

It also states, start 25% of rostered players. The loop hole is....start the sub gs the bad teams and then sub them out at half-time or before and bring in my starters. Flip the subbing pattern to meet the criteria.

Playing time is/can be a issue even at those younger age groups, there were talking about this all week in the B2003 forum
http://glxy.ussoccerda.com/sam/teams/index.php?team=1654414

Between the two teams that played last week: 5 players not rooster-ed, 14 subs, two of which got into the game but the 2nd one only played 5 mins. Basically 17-18 players from two teams not playing that week. Yes there are 7 subs but about 0- to half of those are normally used and remember these is only 3 times plus half times that you can sub so multiple numbers would have to be subed to get 7 on which again doesn't happen much.

Subing for the last 5-10 minutes or only getting a 15 min start doesn't help players that much and what I've seen over the years my kid has been involved is players looking to move at the first transfer window due to lack of playing time among other things. The suggested playing time recommendations are just that and not guarantee of playing times, some follow those better than others.

The reports and audits the clubs receive sometime touch upon this and others times not so much but the stats are keep and the end of year totals can be interesting. The transfer process has a whole bunch of provisions that you can look up in the rules but if you don't have the 25% of time its a easy process but players may not train or otherwise participate with a Development Academy team that they are not officially rostered with prior to approval of a transfer request, that both team must agree to or if disputed there are other provisions.

The is also a sequence of Development Academy games that all clubs must conform to for example U-17/18 games must be played prior to U-15/16 games and b. U-14 games must be played prior to U-13 games. This makes adding 2nd teams to the mix highly unlikely simply not enough field space or time slots unless everybody is playing at complexes which they are not.

 

[espola]

I'd say a 22 player roster is more of a sign than sub restrictions.
Older kids (15+) should be match fit and not sub off and on after everytime they make a long run.

If a coach were to abuse an open substitution policy, that's a problem the program should address with that coach, not make all the other coaches' jobs more difficult.