I actually think it's the late bloomers from poor families that have the hardest time. There are likely some kids at u11 that could be great, but aren't bigger / faster than their teammates and so aren't getting scholarships to the bigger leagues.I don’t know why people keep saying kids from poor families get locked out of pay to play. I know 3 kids playing in the top flight getting scholarship before u11. You just need to have thick skin and ask for a discount.
It’s possible to be good at soccer and also be brilliant in school. I don’t see a point of playing club soccer if you don’t have the goal of making the top team. You don’t need to make soccer your career but you have to want to kick ass.I'd like to reiterate the "silver lining" aspect for myself that, although my son could be an elite athlete (and is probably the most pure athletic player on his team, if not the entire club as his age group), he's not an elite soccer player (at least at this point), and I don't think soccer will be a career path for him. As such, I'm not going to push sports on him; I think he'll be able to do just fine in a STEM related career path. In that sense, I'm somewhat glad we're not in a country where he may have gotten funneled into a dedicated sports program at a young age (based on athleticism), and had other opportunities reduced as a result. There are a lot more jobs for software developers, for example, than professional athletes.
I think the sentiment is that it is unequivocally a disproportionate burden for families without sufficient resources, not that it is impossible for all of them.I don’t know why people keep saying kids from poor families get locked out of pay to play. I know 3 kids playing in the top flight getting scholarship before u11. You just need to have thick skin and ask for a discount.
I'd like my son to make a top team; don't get me wrong. He's good, and likes to win, but is not top-tier good at this point.It’s possible to be good at soccer and also be brilliant in school. I don’t see a point of playing club soccer if you don’t have the goal of making the top team. You don’t need to make soccer your career but you have to want to kick ass.
I actually think it's the late bloomers from poor families that have the hardest time. There are likely some kids at u11 that could be great, but aren't bigger / faster than their teammates and so aren't getting scholarships to the bigger leagues.
If your son is a 99 percentile player, you will likely make that sacrifice and ask for a discount. If parents are crazy enough (willing to make the drive), kids will play club soccer poor or not. The problem with this country is the lack of unstructured play opportunities not pay to play.I think the sentiment is that it is unequivocally a disproportionate burden for families without sufficient resources, not that it is impossible for all of them.
For example, I am in a position where I can pay club fees, travel costs, etc. If I was not, my son would not be playing club. Yes, in the hypothetical, I might have been able to ask for a discount and made the other cost and time work, but I would not have done so, even if I thought my son was good. I know the general odds of having a successful career in sports, and that's not something I would sacrifice for in that position, given other options. I suspect that's the case for a large number of families where money is tight.
Point taken on Kobe and Jordan. Hear you.I don't think you can say that Kobe & Jordan would have made excellent soccer players. They were both 6'6", which is nowhere near an ideal soccer height. They may have been, but their height alone would have been a major impediment and restrict where they could be effectively used on a soccer field.
The problem on the pro soccer side is that the kids being produced in the US are not good enough to break into the teams in Europe, even the lower leagues which pay better than the MLS. You can earn a very good living in the English Championship with an average salary of $500K per year, for example. This is a systemic issue which goes back to coaching (being mediocre) and pay to play (as a barrier to playing at a decent level to advance) ... imvho.
The average NBA players is 6'6". the average EPL player is 5'11". If we take your 80% stat, we could easily say that 80% of the NBA & NFL players would never make good soccer players. For NBA, it would be the "shorter" players, and for NFL we're talking RB, WR, corners, maybe some special teams, but definitely ruling out DL, OL, TEs etc. - way too big.
There's (apparently) 2.3M youth (male) soccer players in the US. There's 1M HS football players. Basketball has greater numbers than both, 4M+ from what I could find.
My kid's longest stint was at a mixed ethnicity, mixed socio-economic class club. He's also played for a majority minority letter league club.If your son is a 99 percentile player, you will likely make that sacrifice and ask for a discount. If parents are crazy enough (willing to make the drive), kids will play club soccer poor or not. The problem with this country is the lack of unstructured play opportunities not pay to play.
I'll suggest that pay to play to takes up most of those unstructured (or low cost/low structure) opportunities. They take up all the field space and they take up most of the kids that would play unstructured. My kid shows up to a park with his friends during club break and there's no space because these private trainers show up at 8am to block off their space so they can charge a couple parents 100$ an hour for cone drills.If your son is a 99 percentile player, you will likely make that sacrifice and ask for a discount. If parents are crazy enough (willing to make the drive), kids will play club soccer poor or not. The problem with this country is the lack of unstructured play opportunities not pay to play.
Sounds like a first worlder comment. You do know that poor kids have to work earlier, i.e its not a part time job to have a few bucks but an actual job to help put food on the table. I knew one kid working a 40 hour week while going to HS. He was excellent and should have been playing at the top team, but couldn't practice or travel. I know another who had a college scholarship but he had to go to work to support the family. These are not uncommon examples.I don’t know why people keep saying kids from poor families get locked out of pay to play. I know 3 kids playing in the top flight getting scholarship before u11. You just need to have thick skin and ask for a discount.
I get the visa issues, but if the kids being produced were of sufficient quality they would be starting in MLS and USL teams at 17/18. The volume suggests they aren't good enough, never mind to even consider overseas.Point taken on Kobe and Jordan. Hear you.
Disagree on the transition issue at U18. Under U18 it's virtually impossible for an American to break into Europe unless they hold dual citizenship like Pulisic (Mexico and Canada have the same issue). Over 18 it's also a caps and immigration issue. Restrictions on the number of foreigners on certain leagues, double taxation under the US tax code, immigration limitations since Europe penalizes us right back with our restrictions. Unless the kid transitioning out of 18 is really really special and has already proven themselves, it's just easier for the lower level European team to save the cap and look local somewhere in the Schengen area. They used to be willing to burn that spot for US GKs for example (since US GKs were better at the handling sports...see the career of our own local Ian Feuer), but even that's becoming rarer now since US keepers (like Turner) have been shown to have issues with their feet and Europe is full timing their own keepers earlier and earlier. Our academy teams have done well (not great but well) against the European academy teams....that's not where the problem is...it's that its more economical for European teams to hire their own if they don't have dual EU citizenship and here in the US there's not a robust lower league for them to break in. Also if you compare all the EU+Britain slots against our own, there's a lot to chose from.
Except for generational talent they don’t start in the European first leagues either and come off the bench in second leagues. I get though the us doesn’t have generational talent. No mjs. That’s because of financial incentives and we don’t have access to European academies again for the same reason. Ours aren’t numerous so not a wide net and don’t start until 13I get the visa issues, but if the kids being produced were of sufficient quality they would be starting in MLS and USL teams at 17/18. The volume suggests they aren't good enough, never mind to even consider overseas.
I don't see a problem with the pro leagues loosening their rules or starting their own farm leagues. TBH, the college system, makes far more sense for them given how wide the funnel is and would, imo, be far more economical (solidarity payments) than having to pay for it all out of their own pockets.The only thing charging a solidarity payment would do is cause the NBA and MLB to loosen the rules to bypass college. The NFL would have to start its own farm league but if the solidarity payment is high enough it might make sense.
The low salary thing isn't as "bad" anymore. I looked at the MLS salaries (yeah, I was bored) and while 30% are paid < $100K, 60% are paid > $150K, 51% are paid > $250K and 31% are paid > $500K.Different build required for football/hockey (except maybe GKs who many QBs would probably be outstanding). I agree there's a pull of professional athletes away from the pool (why pick soccer with it's low salary if there are opportunities that offer more), but that pool, given the limits of academy slots in Europe, is equivalent at least to Uruguay, Portugal, Croatia and the Netherlands which still outperform us. Jordan and Kobe would have made excellent soccer players if they had started early but I doubt Shaq would have (the big feet alone would have been a problem)
But I don't think it's as much of a limit as generally stated. The bigger issue is the talent left on the floor early on (because academies don't start until U13 and it's pay or play before then, so the talent in say for example Latino League is getting left on the table) and the transition from U18 to U21 (because we don't have a robust minor league to develop these talents). The other limiting factor is we have way fewer academies than Europe as a whole but that might not be an issue if the MLS pyramid scheme can stop from collapsing ;-)
I don’t disagree that life is hard without money but my point is just there are scholarships to be had if a player is good enough. I don’t think that much talent is getting left on the table due to financial situations. My kid has played in Hispanic Sunday leagues. Most of the good players there also play club soccer. One of the requirements for a club to access MLS next is it has to give out scholarships.Sounds like a first worlder comment. You do know that poor kids have to work earlier, i.e its not a part time job to have a few bucks but an actual job to help put food on the table. I knew one kid working a 40 hour week while going to HS. He was excellent and should have been playing at the top team, but couldn't practice or travel. I know another who had a college scholarship but he had to go to work to support the family. These are not uncommon examples.
At least as far as the generational talent issue, it’s the wide net problem. You looking to catch that blue lobster, it behooves you to cast that net as far and wide as possible.I don’t disagree that life is hard without money but my point is just there are scholarships to be had if a player is good enough. I don’t think that much talent is getting left on the table due to financial situations. My kid has played in Hispanic Sunday leagues. Most of the good players there also play club soccer. One of the requirements for a club to access MLS next is it has to give out scholarships.
One of the other aspects of this (which might be implicit in the previous discussion) is that people like me are the parents paying for the scholarships, in that I'm paying $4000+/yr for my kid to play on a second tier team in the local club. As I've noted, I'm unlikely to continue doing this when he's in HS; it's something we can do now, and like a lot of parents when your kid is young there's unknown potential, but at this point it's fairly clear that he's not on the top tier track. So money from parents in my position will start to dry up around HS, unless clubs are using dues from younger teams to fund scholarships for older teams. In either case, the funding is going to bias to higher demographic areas.At least as far as the generational talent issue, it’s the wide net problem. You looking to catch that blue lobster, it behooves you to cast that net as far and wide as possible.
As to the mls next scholarship requirements, that’s exactly one of the reasons Laufa blew up. You need a supporting base to support those scholarships and those neighborhoods simply wouldn’t/couldn’t pay $2000-4000 for an ea2 team with inflation the way it’s been the last couple years (pre Covid the rates were closer to $1000-2000 but everything from insurance to coaches salaries went up). It’s why it’s been so difficult to get a girls ecnl team in the downtown triangle. That means the economics for scholarships are white teams in suburban neighborhoods that must attract paying customers to support those scholarships. It’s probably one of the reasons as well there’s no mls next team on the valley floor.
I don’t have a problem with the club using my dues to help out underprivileged kids. Do it for America man!One of the other aspects of this (which might be implicit in the previous discussion) is that people like me are the parents paying for the scholarships, in that I'm paying $4000+/yr for my kid to play on a second tier team in the local club. As I've noted, I'm unlikely to continue doing this when he's in HS; it's something we can do now, and like a lot of parents when your kid is young there's unknown potential, but at this point it's fairly clear that he's not on the top tier track. So money from parents in my position will start to dry up around HS, unless clubs are using dues from younger teams to fund scholarships for older teams. In either case, the funding is going to bias to higher demographic areas.
If you want to have a wide net, it's going to take money from the professional leagues to fund opportunities in areas where there are not enough "suckers" like myself to pay for opportunities which probably won't pan out for our kids. Plus, as Grace correctly noted, there's a balance with costs also: even for someone like myself in a relatively good middle class financial position, there is a limit that I'm willing to pay, and it's a lot closer to that now than when we started looking at club soccer. I don't know that continuing to squeeze the middle class parents with marginally talented kids is a sustainable strategy to capture the best players nationally.
Meanwhile the endowments of these universities have grown even faster.I would say that it would be fairer to say that the US population in general hates the cost of college, but are willing to pay (something). The cost has increased a way faster clip over the last 20 years than reasonable.
Yet, European players are starting to dominate American players. Look at the top players in the NBA and the recent draft.Probably sorta a "duh", but the more people who train in a sport generally (within a selection group), and the more quality training they get, the better the average outcomes from that group for top talent will be on average. You can see examples of this across the board: US with basketball, Europe and South American with soccer, etc. The US has one of the best women's soccer teams in the world, for example, because of the relative higher opportunity for girls/women to train and compete in sports in the US.
I've never bought the argument that our best athletes play other sports. We have the largest soccer participation in the world, there are plenty of great athletes that stay with soccer. Also great athletes don't necessarily make great soccer players. Great soccer minds make the best soccer players.I don't think you can say that Kobe & Jordan would have made excellent soccer players. They were both 6'6", which is nowhere near an ideal soccer height. They may have been, but their height alone would have been a major impediment and restrict where they could be effectively used on a soccer field.
The problem on the pro soccer side is that the kids being produced in the US are not good enough to break into the teams in Europe, even the lower leagues which pay better than the MLS. You can earn a very good living in the English Championship with an average salary of $500K per year, for example. This is a systemic issue which goes back to coaching (being mediocre) and pay to play (as a barrier to playing at a decent level to advance) ... imvho.
The average NBA players is 6'6". the average EPL player is 5'11". If we take your 80% stat, we could easily say that 80% of the NBA & NFL players would never make good soccer players. For NBA, it would be the "shorter" players, and for NFL we're talking RB, WR, corners, maybe some special teams, but definitely ruling out DL, OL, TEs etc. - way too big.
There's (apparently) 2.3M youth (male) soccer players in the US. There's 1M HS football players. Basketball has greater numbers than both, 4M+ from what I could find.
Soccer players make great football players. You just can't replicate the body control, footwork and overall coordination these kids learn as youth soccer players as compared to kids who grew up playing youth football. While maybe you can't bulk up to lineman size, plenty of soccer kids bulk up in high school. Weight training is a huge part of high school football. Many excellent DA/MLS Next players that my son has played with, and including my son, have moved on to football. They weren't the top 2% of soccer players, but, mostly didn't have the same "soccer culture" passion as the cream of the crop. These kids are now dominating in football.I'm not sure the builds for football and soccer are that different. For linemen, sure, but receivers or cornerbacks would make excelent forwards / wingers and linebackers could play defense. Football players are big because they train to get big, but most NFL running backs would fit right into a soccer pitch if they trained running for 90 minutes rather than short bursts of 10 seconds.
Basketball popularity and participation in Europe is somewhat similar to soccer in US.Yet, European players are starting to dominate American players. Look at the top players in the NBA and the recent draft.