Another US Soccer idea...

ray8 said:
"Implement and support Solidarity and Training Fee tracking and payments..."
That would involve the buying and selling of minors. Our laws differ in this regard from certain European countries.

"Leave the DA "club" system alone..."
The DA club system is a corrupt sham. A business system that at its nature is designed to develop pocketbooks.
Click to expand...

Disagree. Solidarity and training fees are paid by one club to another clubs pursuant to a schedule. There is nothing in the US legal system that prevents the USSF from setting up a system that lets these payments be made or collected. Moreover, minors can enter into binding agreements (provided their guardians approve) and be part of "collective bargaining agreements" in the US (see, actors, etc.). If the NGB (National Governing Body) aka US Soccer elected to enforce payments as part of the economy of soccer in the US, it would most likely survive any challenges. As somebody that practiced labor law for over 17 years, I'm not aware of any prohibition that cannot be properly addressed and circumvented.

See, https://medium.com/@terryblaw/would...solidarity-really-violate-us-law-2d9c37a48533
and http://lawofsport.blogspot.com/2016/06/training-compensation-and-solidarity-in.html

Also note, the challenges to solidarity and training fees have been grounded on a potential Anti-Trust violation and not labor law violations. The anti-trust claims is grounded on a stipulated consent decree and there has not been a contested judicial decision on the issue.

As its structured right now, I agree that the DA system has little upside and those clubs that operate a DA program are doing it purely as a marketing ploy to get money out of the parents of the lower levels. Its a carrot.
 
smellycleats said:
Thank you for the article. It clarified some things for me and it’s an interesting read. You don’t have to be a snide jerk about it
Click to expand...
I think you misunderstood me. You mentioned how difficult it could be to implement and I was actually agreeing with you. The article implies, to me, that it may not be feasible across the board.
 
xav10 said:
I think you misunderstood me. You mentioned how difficult it could be to implement and I was actually agreeing with you. The article implies, to me, that it may not be feasible across the board.
Click to expand...
Sorry to jump to that conclusion. I actually thought you were the same poster that said “so I guess you’re not a medical professionsl...” My apologies.
 
smellycleats said:
Sorry to jump to that conclusion. I actually thought you were the same poster that said “so I guess you’re not a medical professionsl...” My apologies.
Click to expand...
NP. I'm only a snide jerk to the poster beneath you, who calls himself Sheriff Joe, if you can believe it.
 
Getting back to the original topic, not yet sold on the idea of bio-banding. Sure, it takes out the physicality aspect...but you are then swinging the pendulum to the other extreme where the players that are 3 years older (but same physicality) are going to have a huge technical advantage over players 3 years younger.

Also, a player going through puberty could be shooting through their growth percentages in a matter of a year...are you going to be giving the kids a bone density x-ray every month? I think USSF may like the idea that they're forward thinking...but there are some realistic/logistical challenges here that they'll need to consider.
 
In theory- it is a really good idea. And in European Academy set ups- it probably makes sense if a kid is on a pro-track but is on the smaller side. And has the potential to get better by playing with kids of similar size.
But- do we really trust coaches in the US to do this “for the player”? We’ve all seen many teams sand bag tournaments and league play. Bring players from ECNL teams to play in a flight 2 game.
 
Again, bio-banding is purely a US Soccer Development Academy "training" and "tournament" tool to help coaches better evaluate talent based on maturity and biological age and not by their chronological age. Its only for the elite talent and has no place at the lower levels, as it would be a waste time/effort/money because those kids have no hope of being invited to a National Team camp. Discussions of "sand bagging" and any any team that plays in a league other than the DA are irrelevant.
 
MWN said:
Again, bio-banding is purely a US Soccer Development Academy "training" and "tournament" tool to help coaches better evaluate talent based on maturity and biological age and not by their chronological age. Its only for the elite talent and has no place at the lower levels, as it would be a waste time/effort/money because those kids have no hope of being invited to a National Team camp. Discussions of "sand bagging" and any any team that plays in a league other than the DA are irrelevant.
Click to expand...
You don’t think a DA coach would try to game the system somehow?
 
Looks like this year's top NBA prospect is coming from Europe now too.....

Whats wrong with our training methods? How come this country's having such a hard time producing in house stars?

My only guess is distractions. We have too much to choose from in the states and players lose focus.
 
Chalklines said:
Looks like this year's top NBA prospect is coming from Europe now too.....

Whats wrong with our training methods? How come this country's having such a hard time producing in house stars?

My only guess is distractions. We have too much to choose from in the states and players lose focus.
Click to expand...
Excellent question. Seems like it's getting to the point where we can't blame "we're not a soccer country," if it's happening in basketball.
 
timbuck said:
You don’t think a DA coach would try to game the system somehow?
Click to expand...

The powers that be at the DA have made it very clear that DA clubs receive kudos and points for developing players that get invited to National Training camps, and team standings, etc., are not important. For this reason, DA tournaments are typically "showcases," where teams play 4 teams over a 5 day period and not "tournaments" with a champion. The DA doesn't even keep standings until U15. Playoffs are limited to the top 3 teams from each region with a few wildcards thrown in. Coaches at the DA level are also encouraged to play players up.

The DA could really care less if clubs are at the top or bottom of the standings, as long as, those clubs are competitive and following the DA program. The DA also tracks where players move from/to, knowing that the MLS residential programs can often pick and chose from the non-residential programs.

Contrast this with club soccer, where clubs need wins to attract parents/players. Winning programs grow and trophies are critical because most parents in club/competitive soccer perceive winning programs with college opportunities, and they would be basically correct because winning programs also tend to garner more interest and make more appearances at college showcases. "Gaming the system" is a necessary evil given the importance of wins to the customer base and will continue to be an ever present issue because parents value team performance and trophies over player development. This system rewards direct play, kick ball, over the top as a primary strategy because it results in wins against weaker teams. At the DA level, Academy Directors and Technical Directors are talked to consistently about correct training and their coaches are counseled to train their players correctly.
 
MWN said:
The powers that be at the DA have made it very clear that DA clubs receive kudos and points for developing players that get invited to National Training camps, and team standings, etc., are not important. For this reason, DA tournaments are typically "showcases," where teams play 4 teams over a 5 day period and not "tournaments" with a champion. The DA doesn't even keep standings until U15. Playoffs are limited to the top 3 teams from each region with a few wildcards thrown in. Coaches at the DA level are also encouraged to play players up.

The DA could really care less if clubs are at the top or bottom of the standings, as long as, those clubs are competitive and following the DA program. The DA also tracks where players move from/to, knowing that the MLS residential programs can often pick and chose from the non-residential programs.

Contrast this with club soccer, where clubs need wins to attract parents/players. Winning programs grow and trophies are critical because most parents in club/competitive soccer perceive winning programs with college opportunities, and they would be basically correct because winning programs also tend to garner more interest and make more appearances at college showcases. "Gaming the system" is a necessary evil given the importance wins to the customer base and will continue to be an ever present issue because parents value team performance and trophies over player development. This system rewards direct play, kick ball, over the top as a primary strategy because it results in wins against weaker teams. At the DA level, Academy Directors and Technical Directors and talked to consistently about correct training and their coaches are counseled to train their players correctly.
Click to expand...

I like your posts. This is exactly one of the main premises of DA.
 
Good in theory, but with GDA being less than one year old will be interesting to see if it works out. Hopefully it does but consumers (that's you, parents of the 99% non-unicorns, this is a busine$$ remember) should remain skeptical until then.

I have to add that's it's majorly flawed to have # of invitees to the National Training camps as a barometer of success - as shown on the boys side the politics massively enhance chances of a call up and there's financial reason for US soccer to do so: "Look how good our DA program is, everyone invited plays DA....no no don't pay any attention to the Spanish C teams beating our A teams 10-zero, we're about development not results...."
 
futboldad1 said:
Good in theory, but with GDA being less than one year old will be interesting to see if it works out. Hopefully it does but consumers (that's you, parents of the 99% non-unicorns, this is a busine$$ remember) should remain skeptical until then.

I have to add that's it's majorly flawed to have # of invitees to the National Training camps as a barometer of success - as shown on the boys side the politics massively enhance chances of a call up and there's financial reason for US soccer to do so: "Look how good our DA program is, everyone invited plays DA....no no don't pay any attention to the Spanish C teams beating our A teams 10-zero, we're about development not results...."
Click to expand...

The premise of your post has a flaw, which is the USSF's mission appears to be misunderstood. Taking a step back:

The USSF is a non-profit 501(c)(3) organization recognized by the US Olympic Committee as the "national governing body" (NGB) for the sport of soccer in the US. As the NGB for soccer it is limited in what it can/cannot do and the constituency of its board. Because the USSF is a "non-profit" it cannot engage in "for-profit" activities that would generate "unrelated business income" without invalidating its status as a non-profit. The relevance of the foregoing, is that the USSF's hands are tied on many activities that would be perceived as engaging in a "for profit" operation, which is why the USSF's hands are also tied when it comes to the MLS, SUM and the other for-profit "professional" leagues.

To the extent you believe "...there's financial reason for US soccer to do so...." with regard to call-ups, the reality is much different. There is no "financial" incentive for US Soccer to call any players to the youth National teams. While "politics" may have a role for a few select athletes, the sole motivation of the US Youth National teams is national pride and to raise the profile of US Soccer to increase the value of the brand. To this end, US Soccer's youth national teams have the singular goal of playing in the following global tournaments (assuming they get out of CONCACAF):

2019 U17 World Cup (Peru) - Prize Money = $0.00
2019 U20 World Cup (Poland) - Prize Money = $0.00

As far as financial benefit for operating the DA, the USSF receives $50 for every DA player registered with the USSF and $50 for every coach registered in the DA. There are about 17,000 DA players registered between boys and girls in the US ... so $850k. The USSF receives nothing but expenses as a result of operating the DA. The only financial incentive would be to grow the DA base by adding coaches and players, thereby getting somewhere around $1,250 for every 25 player team added. The total amount received by the USSF in "youth" membership fees last year was roughly $4M of which the DA was about 20%. See, also, US Development Academy Report.

I just don't understand why many of you believe the USSF is money motivated, when all of its programs (except the US National Team) are financial losses. Can somebody explain the thought process here.
 
ATRTDT said:
The pressures off if they fail since most universitys don't come with a price tag. These kids can reach for their dreams earlier with minor financial impact on the tail end.
Click to expand...

MOST?? Is this new? This was not my experience. I believe the Scandinavian countries, and as of last year, Germany, don't charge undergraduate tuition. Other than that, please share more details since Scandinavia isn't known as a hot bed of soccer development. Germany? Now that is news.
 
MWN said:
The powers that be at the DA have made it very clear that DA clubs receive kudos and points for developing players that get invited to National Training camps, and team standings, etc., are not important. For this reason, DA tournaments are typically "showcases," where teams play 4 teams over a 5 day period and not "tournaments" with a champion. The DA doesn't even keep standings until U15. Playoffs are limited to the top 3 teams from each region with a few wildcards thrown in. Coaches at the DA level are also encouraged to play players up.

The DA could really care less if clubs are at the top or bottom of the standings, as long as, those clubs are competitive and following the DA program. The DA also tracks where players move from/to, knowing that the MLS residential programs can often pick and chose from the non-residential programs.

Contrast this with club soccer, where clubs need wins to attract parents/players. Winning programs grow and trophies are critical because most parents in club/competitive soccer perceive winning programs with college opportunities, and they would be basically correct because winning programs also tend to garner more interest and make more appearances at college showcases. "Gaming the system" is a necessary evil given the importance of wins to the customer base and will continue to be an ever present issue because parents value team performance and trophies over player development. This system rewards direct play, kick ball, over the top as a primary strategy because it results in wins against weaker teams. At the DA level, Academy Directors and Technical Directors are talked to consistently about correct training and their coaches are counseled to train their players correctly.
Click to expand...
Thanks for the links to the Solidarity articles. Interesting read.
However, it appears you've been wildly mislead as to DA's true nature. They do keep tables. They're just not public. They do not go from club to club evaluating their style of play. It's all about the wins. If you don't win you play teams that don't win at showcase.
Not sure what you mean by a club being competitive yet not winning, but DA clubs are no different in regard to the need for wins to attract players.
It's true you will see a more forward style of play at non-DA club games. Keep in mind, though, that DA is the new tier 1 club soccer, nothing more save for a patch. You could expect to see a more pleasing style of play because the players have a more talent, intelligence, etc. Same as before.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top