DA Spring Showcases

It is lunatic to continue incessantly restating the same exaggerated negativity to people that are perfectly happy. By the way if your greatest wish comes true and GDA ceases to exist at some point, our kids will still play and we will still be happy. Try promoting what you love instead of bashing what you hate and you might be happier too.
 
Dos Equis said:
By not inviting anyone from a top club that clearly has a large number of talented players to their camp, who exactly is "abandoning their top players?" I would claim US Soccer.

The DA and ECNL have given us choices, so that is an improvement from the state of affairs 10-15 years ago. But we can be critical of the choices the US Soccer makes, including within the DA, as they do not always seem to be in the best interests of soccer in the US, but rather in the best interests of US Soccer. Unfortunaely, the two are not the same.
Click to expand...
Those are your opinions. You have been around for a while, think pretty well, and may be into something, I give you that. On the other hand, I have a tendency to value more the opinion of professionals (US Soccer) that are around the problem full time, have most of the information and plenty of resources; and hire professionals from Belgium/France to help build US Soccer. The men side is a lost cause, but the women side still can be fixed. It is obvious that the development system in place before GDA was not going to help (see failure of younger teams in the last few years), and US Soccer needed to do something (GDA).
Now, put yourself in the shoes of US Soccer: you believe that the GDA program is the best/a good solution to the development problem. One of your main carrots to get clubs on board (these teams are more expensive for clubs, for a proof see what $lammer$ did) are calls to national team camps; why would US Soccer call players from a club that is trying to screw your development program? Note that those players have the option of moving to a conforming club, it is not like the players are leaving in Las Vegas.
 
Sorry, I did not finish and somehow the post went through ...

Now, put yourself in the shoes of US Soccer: you believe that the GDA program is the best/a good solution to the development problem. One of your main carrots to get clubs on board (these teams are more expensive for clubs, for a proof see what $lammer$ did) are calls to national team camps; why would US Soccer call players from a club that is trying to screw your development program? Note that those players have the option of moving to a conforming club, it is not like the players are leaving in Las Vegas.
Why would I take my girl to practice four days a week (although I know it is good for her development), when one that goes two days a week also gets the calls? Maybe my girl could play AYSO for the next two years, and still be better than most of the girls that get the call. Should US Soccer call my AYSO player? Obviously not, because she wont have reached her full potential.
At the end of the day we have choices (at least in SoCal): you can follow the directions of the federation (by the way, I am a soccer person and it is lunacy to say that the GDA program is not better than what we had before) and have the option to get the calls; or you can follow your own program (say futboldad1's) and be happy playing HS. But even for futboldad1 there is light at the end of the tunnel: once your futbolda1's program daughter gets to be 20 years old, if she is better than the players in the national team, she will get the call.
 
Avanti said:
Sorry, I did not finish and somehow the post went through ...

Now, put yourself in the shoes of US Soccer: you believe that the GDA program is the best/a good solution to the development problem. One of your main carrots to get clubs on board (these teams are more expensive for clubs, for a proof see what $lammer$ did) are calls to national team camps; why would US Soccer call players from a club that is trying to screw your development program? Note that those players have the option of moving to a conforming club, it is not like the players are leaving in Las Vegas.
Why would I take my girl to practice four days a week (although I know it is good for her development), when one that goes two days a week also gets the calls? Maybe my girl could play AYSO for the next two years, and still be better than most of the girls that get the call. Should US Soccer call my AYSO player? Obviously not, because she wont have reached her full potential.
At the end of the day we have choices (at least in SoCal): you can follow the directions of the federation (by the way, I am a soccer person and it is lunacy to say that the GDA program is not better than what we had before) and have the option to get the calls; or you can follow your own program (say futboldad1's) and be happy playing HS. But even for futboldad1 there is light at the end of the tunnel: once your futbolda1's program daughter gets to be 20 years old, if she is better than the players in the national team, she will get the call.
Click to expand...

Appreciate the additional thoughts. A few observations:

1) You are trusting the same professionals who implemented the boys DA 11 years ago, resulting in what you claim is a "lost cause", to do better with the girls DA. Our men's team not only failed to qualify for the world cup, but we have far fewer impactful players in major European leagues than we had pre-DA.

2) The girls program was doing fine -- look at how deep the talent the current team has, which has nothing to do with DA nor US Soccer (I believe mostly to do with college). The rest of the world is/was "catching up" because of increased investments by countries in women's soccer, and increased participation by foreign players in the NCAA. Most of our down periods are in part due to US Soccer keeping the roster unchanged for too long, and passing over the young talent to appease the veterans. Changing that culture has helped immensely.

3) You should not generalize so much about how non-DA players train, that is when the argument seems more ad hominem. I have never had a player train fewer than 3 times per week, and none play in the DA. My last remaining club player trains with her team 2 times per week, does strength training 2-3 times per week, does some form of private, and occasionally some yoga is thrown in (which I cannot support enough in terms of injury prevention). Her teammates who are committed to top D1 colleges generally train at least 2 times a week in addition to club practices.

I have never claimed to be a soccer person, because I find when I meet a "soccer person" who has played at a higher level, coached at a higher level, had more kids participate, been higher in club mamagement, or had kids who played at what they percieve to be a better club or a more prestigious league, they seems to have no interest in their opinions. I have had top European youth club coaches (including champions league winning programs) who have expressed more interest in my opinions, with my limited expereince in soccer, than a single US Soccer official ever had. I have been fortunate through this journey to get those experiences, and it has colored my views.

It really comes down to you trusting the federation a lot more than I do. I think a freer market promotes more creativity and innovation, and produces those outliers who become the elite players we need to succeed.
 
Dos Equis said:
Appreciate the additional thoughts. A few observations:

1) You are trusting the same professionals who implemented the boys DA 11 years ago, resulting in what you claim is a "lost cause", to do better with the girls DA. Our men's team not only failed to qualify for the world cup, but we have far fewer impactful players in major European leagues than we had pre-DA.

2) The girls program was doing fine -- look at how deep the talent the current team has, which has nothing to do with DA nor US Soccer (I believe mostly to do with college). The rest of the world is/was "catching up" because of increased investments by countries in women's soccer, and increased participation by foreign players in the NCAA. Most of our down periods are in part due to US Soccer keeping the roster unchanged for too long, and passing over the young talent to appease the veterans. Changing that culture has helped immensely.

3) You should not generalize so much about how non-DA players train, that is when the argument seems more ad hominem. I have never had a player train fewer than 3 times per week, and none play in the DA. My last remaining club player trains with her team 2 times per week, does strength training 2-3 times per week, does some form of private, and occasionally some yoga is thrown in (which I cannot support enough in terms of injury prevention). Her teammates who are committed to top D1 colleges generally train at least 2 times a week in addition to club practices.

I have never claimed to be a soccer person, because I find when I meet a "soccer person" who has played at a higher level, coached at a higher level, had more kids participate, been higher in club mamagement, or had kids who played at what they percieve to be a better club or a more prestigious league, they seems to have no interest in their opinions. I have had top European youth club coaches (including champions league winning programs) who have expressed more interest in my opinions, with my limited expereince in soccer, than a single US Soccer official ever had. I have been fortunate through this journey to get those experiences, and it has colored my views.

It really comes down to you trusting the federation a lot more than I do. I think a freer market promotes more creativity and innovation, and produces those outliers who become the elite players we need to succeed.
Click to expand...

The number of days of training was an exaggeration to make a point. Every player that plays at a high level, DA or not, trains many days per week. The point was that if the federation puts in place a program that they think is needed to improve development, and ultimately to improve the senior national team, they will not support actions that undermine that effort.
The men side is a lost cause, and there is nothing that the federation can do about it. You would need a large number of American young boys that have the dream of becoming professionals, and who work on it accordingly, including neglecting school in their teens. You would also need the crazy parents and the infrastructure (coaches, leagues, more dense populations) to support it. Nothing of this can be created by mandate, out of thin air, and ultimately without a strong economic incentive (professionalism). The US would need a pool of 50 to 100 Pulisic type of player to make some noise at the international level, it is not happening.
The women side is almost a lost cause at this point. One saving grace is that the economic incentive in the top European countries is not well developed yet, although it seems to me that even this has already surpassed what we have in this country. The second saving grace is the college incentive in the US, which does not exist elsewhere.
And I do not understand your faith on how soccer college can help the level of a national team, especially moving forward. I guess it is better than nothing (it was nothing in other countries up to this point), but think about how an American men team, mostly formed in college, would do against international competition ... A high level player is formed way, way before 18 years old. After 18 you can improve your trade somewhat, but you cannot do miracles. As soon as girls in certain European countries begin to follow the training diet of boys, and they do it with a sufficiently large pool of players (the first thing is already happening, the second is on its way and indeed pool size is the only advantage of the US at this point), you can stick the fork on the American women soccer team.
 
Avanti said:
Why would I take my girl to practice four days a week (although I know it is good for her development), when one that goes two days a week also gets the calls? Maybe my girl could play AYSO for the next two years, and still be better than most of the girls that get the call. Should US Soccer call my AYSO player? Obviously not, because she wont have reached her full potential.
Click to expand...
Wrong wrong wrong. You take the best player whether they play for the Legends of the Blues or AYSO Podunk. The better player. Even if that player only practices once a week because of who knows what. Just because a person pays a lot of money, practices 4 days a week, washes the coaches car, and keeps all the stats of every kid on the team they don't deserve it over a better player.
 
Avanti said:
Those are your opinions. You have been around for a while, think pretty well, and may be into something, I give you that. On the other hand, I have a tendency to value more the opinion of professionals (US Soccer) that are around the problem full time, have most of the information and plenty of resources; and hire professionals from Belgium/France to help build US Soccer. The men side is a lost cause, but the women side still can be fixed. It is obvious that the development system in place before GDA was not going to help (see failure of younger teams in the last few years), and US Soccer needed to do something (GDA).
Now, put yourself in the shoes of US Soccer: you believe that the GDA program is the best/a good solution to the development problem. One of your main carrots to get clubs on board (these teams are more expensive for clubs, for a proof see what $lammer$ did) are calls to national team camps; why would US Soccer call players from a club that is trying to screw your development program? Note that those players have the option of moving to a conforming club, it is not like the players are leaving in Las Vegas.
Click to expand...

The WNT are defending world cup champions, no. 1 in the world and haven't lost a game in 16 months, but they need fixing? You think I'm the one being unreasonably negative?

Everything @Dos Equis said is absolutely right. The U.S. has excelled on the women's side largely because soccer is easily accessible and fun for girls and there are more playing here than in the rest of the world combined, which has resulted in the richest soccer culture in the world. The fact that so many girls fall in love with the sport early is a huge advantage that no country besides China could ever conceivably match. But USSF is taking away that advantage by making the sport more expensive (and therefore less accessible) and less fun, which drives many of them out of the sport. The fact that USSF hired people from bad women's soccer countries to tell us we're doing it wrong and that GDA is like Harvard is mind-boggling to me.

It's no coincidence that the MNT's worst showing in almost 30 years comes about 10 years after it created the DA. The DA has arguably contributed to a single good player in 10 years, unless you count Yedlin who seems more interested in his next hairstyle than actual defending. By trying to professionalize youth soccer, USSF has imposed too many demands on kids and their families that just aren't not worth it for most. Today, if you want to play soccer at arguably the highest level as a 14-16 year old, you will need to miss 10-20 days of school a year (mine missed 22 playing DA and for the YNT last season). Your kid will be required to fly across the country for showcases 2-3 times a year to play teams worse than those down the street. In every division other than SoCal, you're probably flying 3-4x a year just to play league games, often paying $400 in travel to pummel teams. Your kid is also giving up giving up a lot socially. And if your daughter is really great, you should also note that at least five U17 regulars that USSF rode hard have torn their ACLs.

I get it that you love GDA. Your daughter's team is probably getting attention, and it feels good going from kiddie soccer to having college coaches and USSF scouts at games, but don't conflate those endorphins with the notion that GDA improves anything that already existed or will make the WNT better. Your daughter is doing well because of her hard work and ability, the efforts of her club and coaches, and because you have the resources to indulge her. Playing GDA has nothing to do with it. USSF is only bringing the failures of its boys' side to the girls.
 
Avanti said:
And I do not understand your faith on how soccer college can help the level of a national team, especially moving forward. I guess it is better than nothing (it was nothing in other countries up to this point), but think about how an American men team, mostly formed in college, would do against international competition ... A high level player is formed way, way before 18 years old. After 18 you can improve your trade somewhat, but you cannot do miracles. As soon as girls in certain European countries begin to follow the training diet of boys, and they do it with a sufficiently large pool of players (the first thing is already happening, the second is on its way and indeed pool size is the only advantage of the US at this point), you can stick the fork on the American women soccer team.
Click to expand...

I have said before, the pot of college gold at the end of the rainbow is a huge incentive for girls, whether that is just help getting into a great school, all the way up to free education. They have both more college teams and more scholarships per team (resulting in almost 2x the soccer scholarship $ versus men). The lack of multiple higher profile sports diluting the pool, nor professional academies pulling them away young, results in successful players staying in the game longer.

The same dynamics result in the best women's soccer coaches in the world being in the NCAA. There is no real professional club path for them, that is where the career and the money are.

Men's college soccer, and the men's game, is a whole different dynamic and conversation. I would argue over the past 10-15 years US Soccer has tried to take a European approach, modified to suit their interests and the American market, and the result has been the worst of both worlds.

Whatever the gender, the more US Soccer continues to fight and be at odds with the NCAA, and look upon the rest of the youth recreational and club soccer universe with disdain, versus cooperation with a goal of raising the level everywhere, the weaker the sport will become. The Harvard analogy, no matter how wrong, is just the best recent example.
 
My daughter will travel 7 times this year (flying some, driving some) for GDA. In 6 of those cases, some players need not miss school at all and others a couple class periods each time. Two days must be missed by all for the first showcase. In her specific case she’ll miss 6 days total for the year (not 10-20) which does require some planning ahead on her part but will not impact her grades negatively at all.

Travel costs will total about $3400 for the year (not $12-15k). Some of that we would have spent on any normal team for travel tournaments. Some is excess for GDA.

EOTL, try arguing without exaggeration.
 
We were up in Nor Cal for a tournament this summer and the DA Teams there said DA costs between $8-10k all in between fees and travel to Oregon, Washington, Utah, and Showcases. I think the costs vary by region and the spread of teams. Lucky to be in So Cal where it is pretty compact.
 
Woobie06 said:
We were up in Nor Cal for a tournament this summer and the DA Teams there said DA costs between $8-10k all in between fees and travel to Oregon, Washington, Utah, and Showcases. I think the costs vary by region and the spread of teams. Lucky to be in So Cal where it is pretty compact.
Click to expand...

We are in NorCal and that travel cost I gave considers league travel and showcases. With fees it’s about $6k total, but the fees are the same as a regular team. Travelling along with your kid increases the cost of course, so it could be $8-10k if you’re traveling as a family.
 
Soccerfan2 said:
My daughter will travel 7 times this year (flying some, driving some) for GDA. In 6 of those cases, some players need not miss school at all and others a couple class periods each time. Two days must be missed by all for the first showcase. In her specific case she’ll miss 6 days total for the year (not 10-20) which does require some planning ahead on her part but will not impact her grades negatively at all.

Travel costs will total about $3400 for the year (not $12-15k). Some of that we would have spent on any normal team for travel tournaments. Some is excess for GDA.

EOTL, try arguing without exaggeration.
Click to expand...
Thank you. You do not need to justify yourself to EoftheOtotheL. They no matter what you say or share will be arbitrarily spun and be made into a negative experience.
 
Last edited:
Soccerfan2 said:
My daughter will travel 7 times this year (flying some, driving some) for GDA. In 6 of those cases, some players need not miss school at all and others a couple class periods each time. Two days must be missed by all for the first showcase. In her specific case she’ll miss 6 days total for the year (not 10-20) which does require some planning ahead on her part but will not impact her grades negatively at all.

Travel costs will total about $3400 for the year (not $12-15k). Some of that we would have spent on any normal team for travel tournaments. Some is excess for GDA.

EOTL, try arguing without exaggeration.
Click to expand...

Good for you that your daughter's schedule only requires flying 3-4x, and she will only miss 6 days of school given her light travel schedule compared to other regions, but try having to fly 9x in one season and get back to me. In some regions, you can multiply your travel costs by 3 to account for the additional 5 or 6 extra flights and lodging costs, plus another $2,500 for a typical decent club's GDA fees, and now you're talking. Then you get to $12-15K when you're forced to accompany your kid to one of the showcases after she had to fly separately because, go figure, her school doesn't exactly revolve around USSF and we aren't home-schooling our daughter as part of a master plan to make her the greatest female soccer player in history (as an aside, you should read this article when you have the chance if you haven't already. https://www.nytimes.com/2018/09/05/sports/soccer/uswnt-bayern-munich-olivia-moultrie.html). Presto, you're right there in the $12k-$15k range.

It's swell you've gotten off so cheaply, and cute that you think your costs are exactly the same as everyone else's despite playing in the region with the least travel. Your daughter played in what, four states last year, including a quick AZ trip that hardly counts? What do you think it cost Nationals to play in 9 states, or 8 like the rest of the teams in their division? How much does it cost La Roca in the NW which only played in 5 states but flew at least 9x (4x to CA, 2x to WA, OR, FL, NC)? Or Quakes playing in 7 states, plus two trips to SoCal.

The irony here is that high cost elite soccer has been great for my daughter, and it seems to be going great for yours too. I can afford it, and it significantly reduced the number of kids against whom my daughter would otherwise have competed for scholarship dollars and even admission to her dream school. But just because it was good for my daughter doesn't make it good for youth soccer overall. To the contrary, USSF has created a structure that runs thousands of kids out of the sport (or at least its highest levels) every year due to the ridiculous unnecessary travel costs, and runs more off because the rigid commitments and inability to grasp that kids stop doing things that are no longer fun. Why does it do this? Because of the 1000+ girls who play in each age group, on average the two best will become WNT regulars and hopefully will be slightly better than if they played elsewhere (which is highly debatable). That's great for .2% of the kids in GDA, and bad for 99.8%. It's probably also bad for the .2%, because I'm pretty sure we are going to find that GDA put the US behind where it should have been, just like it already did with the men.
 
End of the Line said:
Good for you that your daughter's schedule only requires flying 3-4x, and she will only miss 6 days of school given her light travel schedule compared to other regions, but try having to fly 9x in one season and get back to me. In some regions, you can multiply your travel costs by 3 to account for the additional 5 or 6 extra flights and lodging costs, plus another $2,500 for a typical decent club's GDA fees, and now you're talking. Then you get to $12-15K when you're forced to accompany your kid to one of the showcases after she had to fly separately because, go figure, her school doesn't exactly revolve around USSF and we aren't home-schooling our daughter as part of a master plan to make her the greatest female soccer player in history (as an aside, you should read this article when you have the chance if you haven't already. https://www.nytimes.com/2018/09/05/sports/soccer/uswnt-bayern-munich-olivia-moultrie.html). Presto, you're right there in the $12k-$15k range.

It's swell you've gotten off so cheaply, and cute that you think your costs are exactly the same as everyone else's despite playing in the region with the least travel. Your daughter played in what, four states last year, including a quick AZ trip that hardly counts? What do you think it cost Nationals to play in 9 states, or 8 like the rest of the teams in their division? How much does it cost La Roca in the NW which only played in 5 states but flew at least 9x (4x to CA, 2x to WA, OR, FL, NC)? Or Quakes playing in 7 states, plus two trips to SoCal.

The irony here is that high cost elite soccer has been great for my daughter, and it seems to be going great for yours too. I can afford it, and it significantly reduced the number of kids against whom my daughter would otherwise have competed for scholarship dollars and even admission to her dream school. But just because it was good for my daughter doesn't make it good for youth soccer overall. To the contrary, USSF has created a structure that runs thousands of kids out of the sport (or at least its highest levels) every year due to the ridiculous unnecessary travel costs, and runs more off because the rigid commitments and inability to grasp that kids stop doing things that are no longer fun. Why does it do this? Because of the 1000+ girls who play in each age group, on average the two best will become WNT regulars and hopefully will be slightly better than if they played elsewhere (which is highly debatable). That's great for .2% of the kids in GDA, and bad for 99.8%. It's probably also bad for the .2%, because I'm pretty sure we are going to find that GDA put the US behind where it should have been, just like it already did with the men.
Click to expand...
Your posts are becoming bi-polar. You attack and criticize, praise, warn, say it was good for your kid, but bad for ours. You can afford the cost, but we can’t. Your all over the place.
 
My daughter is not in SoCal. The costs and days off I gave are for a higher cost region. La Roca and possibly a few others could be more. SoCal should be less than what I gave.
Playing ECNL in our area would not have been a cost savings.
 
Off topic a bit but does anyone have link for DA Winter Showcase list of scouts? Or schedule?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top