A history of DA and the progression to MLS Next

good article and most are true. Interesting there is no mention of Klinsmann. It is a very positive remark for US Soccer/Sunil.
Perhaps this is the best we can do with the talents that we have (which is upper middle class kids that can afford to join clubs from U8 thru U15). I say upper middle class because spending $5000/year (club fee + travel + gas + time away from work 3-4 times a week) is only for families with at least $100k/year income.
We probably already reached our maximum results with the "pay for play" model.
Our talent pool is comparable to tennis while the rest of the world can rely almost 100% of their kids try soccer first. It is very rare that kids that have soccer talent will choose any other sports. Erling Haaland will be in NFL for sure :)
 
Concept and start was good.

Financial arrangements with USsoccer, SUM and regular or even MLS organizations not so much.

Spending $4 million+ on "academy" programs and not producing or signing first team players is a investment that's easy to question. Players leaving for free or peanuts to MX, Euro, and other leagues in all most lost multiple millions every year, regular clubs didn't have resources to complete.

At least some of those lessions have been learned hopefully with NEXT, PRO, U23 so yeah future for that does look interesting
 
lafalafa said:
Concept and start was good.

Financial arrangements with USsoccer, SUM and regular or even MLS organizations not so much.

Spending $4 million+ on "academy" programs and not producing or signing first team players is a investment that's easy to question. Players leaving for free or peanuts to MX, Euro, and other leagues in all most lost multiple millions every year, regular clubs didn't have resources to complete.

At least some of those lessions have been learned hopefully with NEXT, PRO, U23 so yeah future for that does look interesting
Click to expand...
Players leaving for Europe is one of the main reasons we have the pool that we have right now.

jojon said:
good article and most are true. Interesting there is no mention of Klinsmann. It is a very positive remark for US Soccer/Sunil.
Perhaps this is the best we can do with the talents that we have (which is upper middle class kids that can afford to join clubs from U8 thru U15). I say upper middle class because spending $5000/year (club fee + travel + gas + time away from work 3-4 times a week) is only for families with at least $100k/year income.
We probably already reached our maximum results with the "pay for play" model.
Our talent pool is comparable to tennis while the rest of the world can rely almost 100% of their kids try soccer first. It is very rare that kids that have soccer talent will choose any other sports. Erling Haaland will be in NFL for sure :)
Click to expand...

Given the way MLS Next is organized, except for the handful of players recruited into the MLS Academies at start and YoY thereafter, most of the pay or play clubs are being written off. Their main significance is what they do to get players ready at U11 and below. The article highlights that....the goal of the MLS academies is to train several hours every day....even the MLS Next with kids in regular school can't compete with the hours of Academy players in Europe which are off the academic track there.
 
Think of the millions diverted to corrupt officials such as Chuck Blazer and friends and how that money could have been employed to fix the weaknesses of the ODP system as it existed then. Following the example of the Bradenton residential camp in a broader way (say, for instance, feeder camps in each region) would have broadened the influence of what was being done right there. Instead, we had hit or miss programs that sometimes turned out well, but mostly just wasted good talent.

My experience with the DA programs from a San Diego County perspective is that the clubs who were in the program just used it as another recruiting tool, to the degree that some ODP coaches were dismissed for such behavior.
 
Dargle said:
Interesting read to understand how this all started.

sports.yahoo.com

How a controversial youth soccer overhaul put the USMNT on a path toward World Cup contention

Fifteen years ago, after diagnosing American soccer’s developmental ills, U.S. Soccer launched its Development Academy. Many believe, that solution is beginning to bear fruit.
sports.yahoo.com sports.yahoo.com
Click to expand...

Good article.

But as much as I want us to win.... "a World Cup contention" may be a bit much. I think we are a long ways from that... :D
 
jojon said:
good article and most are true. Interesting there is no mention of Klinsmann. It is a very positive remark for US Soccer/Sunil.
Perhaps this is the best we can do with the talents that we have (which is upper middle class kids that can afford to join clubs from U8 thru U15). I say upper middle class because spending $5000/year (club fee + travel + gas + time away from work 3-4 times a week) is only for families with at least $100k/year income.
We probably already reached our maximum results with the "pay for play" model.
Our talent pool is comparable to tennis while the rest of the world can rely almost 100% of their kids try soccer first. It is very rare that kids that have soccer talent will choose any other sports. Erling Haaland will be in NFL for sure :)
Click to expand...
Soccer in America is like a country club for members only and you best better have lot's of money to pay so your kid can play. This sport is only open for Upper Middle Class to only the Uppers. If you don't have any money for country club soccer, you best better have a very talented baller who can score so the rich dads at the country club can sponsor and pay so your kid can play. Pay to play system is not going to win a world cup, moo!

1668695395065.png
 
crush said:
Pay to play system is not going to win a world cup, moo!
Click to expand...

Agree with you. Unfortunately, pay to play will continue as long as soccer isn't the #1 sport in America in my opinion (which presumably will be forever - who is going to unseat American football?)

There are "free to play" for talented kids - MLS academies. What we need is more of them - MLS academies to start earlier, USL to have their own fully funded academies - but is there enough money in American soccer to warrant it? It's gotten pretty popular in recent years but it's still pretty far down the list for most American sports fans.

I just think there just isn't enough money in it (vs Europe for example). Maybe that'll change.
 
Socal-Soccer-Dad said:
There are "free to play" for talented kids - MLS academies. What we need is more of them - MLS academies to start earlier, USL to have their own fully funded academies - but is there enough money in American soccer to warrant it? It's gotten pretty popular in recent years but it's still pretty far down the list for most American sports fans.
Click to expand...
Expanding and adding "free" MLS academies will definitely produce better US soccer players.
However, I do not see any effort from US Soccer in implementing "free" or at least affordable play for U8-U13 to feed the MLS academies.
Imagine if all top colleges (Stanford, Harvard, MIT, UCLA, UCB, etc.) are free of tuition but there are only private K-12 education available and the only discussion by the government is about how to create more free colleges instead of free K-12 education.
 
aong cangkol said:
Expanding and adding "free" MLS academies will definitely produce better US soccer players.
However, I do not see any effort from US Soccer in implementing "free" or at least affordable play for U8-U13 to feed the MLS academies.
Imagine if all top colleges (Stanford, Harvard, MIT, UCLA, UCB, etc.) are free of tuition but there are only private K-12 education available and the only discussion by the government is about how to create more free colleges instead of free K-12 education.
Click to expand...
European academies are moving younger and younger. I think some countries are now as young as U8. The MLS is gradually doing the same. U12 LAFC and Galaxy play EA. The headwind is the expense, especially considering the MLS academies haven't been exactly a rip roaring success at producing pro players yet and even the European academies make a lot of mistakes when picking out players that young.

Eventually they'll be forced to do it, though, because the pay to play clubs have already been written off except as cannon fodder and recruitment pools (the AYSO rec players are a long forgotten afterthought). The reason why is because in Europe they have separate academic, sports and arts tracks. There's just no way you can have a kid on both tracks if the requirement is 4-6 hours of training per day (depending on the age). And if you don't put in those hours, you'll quickly fall behind the European counterparts.

Free/affordable play for the U8-U13 masses looks like AYSO. It's a model that failed because everyone was forced to play together (from the future superstar to the handicapped kid) and there just wasn't enough soccer knowledge in the US to furnish all those volunteer coaches. Coaches have to be paid to incentivize training, requiring decent fields with lights (like ECNL/MLS requires) is expensive. There are also the other incidental requirements such as travel (if you want to not dilute talent), uniforms, experienced 3 ref crews (given the constant complaints about ref quality or refs not showing up), cameras and medical trainers.

You can have your youth soccer competitive, developmental or accessible. Pick 2.
 
aong cangkol said:
Expanding and adding "free" MLS academies will definitely produce better US soccer players.
However, I do not see any effort from US Soccer in implementing "free" or at least affordable play for U8-U13 to feed the MLS academies.
Imagine if all top colleges (Stanford, Harvard, MIT, UCLA, UCB, etc.) are free of tuition but there are only private K-12 education available and the only discussion by the government is about how to create more free colleges instead of free K-12 education.
Click to expand...

Ideally you don't need a separate entity at U8-U13 feeding into MLS academies.
You'd want MLS academies to have free teams all the way down to U8.
And probably down to USL level as well.
And I agree, this still isn't a lot of teams but it's a lot better in that there is always a free option for the truly talented kids who don't have the financial means to go through years of club soccer.

I don't think US as a soccer market can yet support this level of investment however.
 
Grace T. said:
European academies are moving younger and younger. I think some countries are now as young as U8. The MLS is gradually doing the same. U12 LAFC and Galaxy play EA. The headwind is the expense, especially considering the MLS academies haven't been exactly a rip roaring success at producing pro players yet and even the European academies make a lot of mistakes when picking out players that young.

Eventually they'll be forced to do it, though, because the pay to play clubs have already been written off except as cannon fodder and recruitment pools (the AYSO rec players are a long forgotten afterthought). The reason why is because in Europe they have separate academic, sports and arts tracks. There's just no way you can have a kid on both tracks if the requirement is 4-6 hours of training per day (depending on the age). And if you don't put in those hours, you'll quickly fall behind the European counterparts.

Free/affordable play for the U8-U13 masses looks like AYSO. It's a model that failed because everyone was forced to play together (from the future superstar to the handicapped kid) and there just wasn't enough soccer knowledge in the US to furnish all those volunteer coaches. Coaches have to be paid to incentivize training, requiring decent fields with lights (like ECNL/MLS requires) is expensive. There are also the other incidental requirements such as travel (if you want to not dilute talent), uniforms, experienced 3 ref crews (given the constant complaints about ref quality or refs not showing up), cameras and medical trainers.

You can have your youth soccer competitive, developmental or accessible. Pick 2.
Click to expand...
Writing off pay to play clubs mean relying only on MLS to U8. I don't think it would happen due to cost. Too costly for parents and too costly for MLS clubs to make it free or affordable ($100/month or less).
I have more hopes for AYSO. US Soccer can take it over and giving out free coaching seminar/license for the volunteer parents (at least the AYSO extra/all-star/premier).
Another idea is to use existing structure. USA may have the best public school fields in the world. No need to build new fields. US Soccer can provide free FIFA coaching licenses to all PE teachers (I am sure most of them are willing). They can lead soccer practice at public middle/elementary schools 3-4x/week for a minimal fee. Since the PE teacher already have salary and benefit from school, $50/kid should be sufficient to add to their income.
US Soccer subsidy would only be coaching certification and maybe insurance because schools are really afraid of injury happen in their facility.
 
Socal-Soccer-Dad said:
Ideally you don't need a separate entity at U8-U13 feeding into MLS academies.
You'd want MLS academies to have free teams all the way down to U8.
And probably down to USL level as well.
And I agree, this still isn't a lot of teams but it's a lot better in that there is always a free option for the truly talented kids who don't have the financial means to go through years of club soccer.

I don't think US as a soccer market can yet support this level of investment however.
Click to expand...
Yeah, maybe US market cannot support it. Within this current system/environment, we may improve a little bit but the idea of winning a world cup is unrealistic.
Looking at youth basketball landscape, they are not necessarily affordable either. The difference between soccer and basketball is that you can pickup a basketball at 12 and become an NBA superstar. Giannis starts playing basketball at 13.
If Messi starts playing at 13, he may be good enough to play for UCLA but that is it. Even MLS level would be questionable for him.
 
aong cangkol said:
Writing off pay to play clubs mean relying only on MLS to U8. I don't think it would happen due to cost. Too costly for parents and too costly for MLS clubs to make it free or affordable ($100/month or less).
I have more hopes for AYSO. US Soccer can take it over and giving out free coaching seminar/license for the volunteer parents (at least the AYSO extra/all-star/premier).
Another idea is to use existing structure. USA may have the best public school fields in the world. No need to build new fields. US Soccer can provide free FIFA coaching licenses to all PE teachers (I am sure most of them are willing). They can lead soccer practice at public middle/elementary schools 3-4x/week for a minimal fee. Since the PE teacher already have salary and benefit from school, $50/kid should be sufficient to add to their income.
US Soccer subsidy would only be coaching certification and maybe insurance because schools are really afraid of injury happen in their facility.
Click to expand...

The main problem with AYSO is that they are very jealous of their turf (they could have been integrated into the system as part of the player development reforms) and their philosophy (everyone plays). Their materials and coaching seminars are already excellent (far better than the CalSouth stuff in my opinion, at least for the youngers). Can't see AYSO ever agreeing to sublimate their structure and philosophy to the wider US soccer goal. There's also only so much you can do with the materials if the parents have played.
 
Maybe if colleges paid their players what they're actually worth there would be incentive for youngers to do soccer over other sports.

This is truly what's holding things back. Top USA talent is forgoing college entirely to play for MLS teams. Which is dumb because MLS is not seperate clubs + has salary caps.
 
Carlsbad7 said:
Maybe if colleges paid their players what they're actually worth there would be incentive for youngers to do soccer over other sports.
Click to expand...
For virtually all women’s sports that number is zero, certain things like limited elite gymnastics, figure skating, and cheer excepted.
For men’s college soccer it ain’t much better

there’s a reason mls base salary is something like $65k last I saw it. That’s a lot of money for someone from Jamaica. Not for a us talent weighing med or law school alternatives.
 
Carlsbad7 said:
Maybe if colleges paid their players what they're actually worth there would be incentive for youngers to do soccer over other sports.

This is truly what's holding things back. Top USA talent is forgoing college entirely to play for MLS teams. Which is dumb because MLS is not seperate clubs + has salary caps.
Click to expand...
What are they actually worth?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top