MLS youth league

[Husky13]

I get what you are saying, but it really should be a non issue. My biggest issue with a stand alone U16 team is I think it would allow clubs to play U16 players in their own age group when they should be playing in the U17 age group. You are taking a pool of 25 players and creating one that’s 50 players. That waters it down.

If a U16 kid can’t make a U17 team, I doubt he is going to end up being a superstar. That said, there are examples of kids that drastically improved after U15. I would rather a coach be able to identify a kid or a couple of kids that have potential, let them train with the U17 team and play in a local league at the weekend. I would much rather have that than create another age group for the 2/3 late developers per team that could exist.

First of all, 2-3 late bloomers who turn into something off a U16 team would be a great success ….

Personally, I see pros and cons to a 2-year, U17 age group for my own (05) son. He will very likely make the U17 squad, but do I think that is best for his development? If the emphasis on our teams was true possession/quick passing/decision-making, then playing at U17 can help. Of my own son's strengths and weaknesses, quick passing/decision-making are strengths and he has done well playing up a year in friendlies already. But, how many truly creative players does the U.S. develop? The issue I see with the two year age group at this U17 level is that there are HUGE physical differences between kids who have already sprouted/filled out and kids who are just starting that process. You see more emphasis on just getting rid of the ball quickly before you get squashed. Playing on age, the game has more dimensions - the element of creative 1v1 dribbling in addition to passing becomes more realistic. We should want to keep developing that quality. We aren't developing many of those types of players in the U.S.

 

[MacDre]

I am assuming you are saying 10% is a good number of kids who should be academy.
Well, if all 95 clubs have an 08 team next year, that would be a little over 1600 08’s in academy. I know that is way less then 10% of all American 08 soccer players. So, if anything the US even narrows fewer kids down.

I was just approximating. The numbers may be lower than 10%. I have a 2007 girl that has played on a 2008 boys team since she was 5. Most of the boys she grew up playing with did not get selected for academy. Their soccer career is over. And for those that like rooting for the underdogs, 2 of my favorite 2008’s were selected-one is the smallest kid in Baja California and the other is an overweight kid that’s very entertaining. I think the selection process was fair but I’m sure 1 or 2 kids were overlooked.

 

[vegasguy]

Coach, sometimes the teams lose because the priority is development and not just winning another trophy. How often does a MLS team beat a Liga MX team?

Garber: Liga MX better than MLS for now

Commissioner Don Garber said that Major League Soccer can be one of the best leagues in the world, but still lags behind Liga MX.

www.espn.com

You know that article is from 2016. In the last 3years US has sent more under 20s to UK than MX. Seattle has developed Danny Leyva and you once said Xolos come here to win but you could not prove it. In terms of development the two countries are closer than you think.

 

[MacDre]

You know that article is from 2016. In the last 3years US has sent more under 20s to UK than MX. Seattle has developed Danny Leyva and you once said Xolos come here to win but you could not prove it. In terms of development the two countries are closer than you think.

I think the US is at least 20 years behind Mexico. Mexico has a soccer culture and the US doesn’t. The US is making progress but has a long way to go. I think if MLS and Liga MX combined North America would have the best league in the world though.

 

[messy]

I think the US is at least 20 years behind Mexico. Mexico has a soccer culture and the US doesn’t. The US is making progress but has a long way to go. I think if MLS and Liga MX combined North America would have the best league in the world though.

No you don't really think that. Is there one player in either league who could start on Man City or Liverpool or Barca or Athletico, etc etc?

 

[MacDre]

No you don't really think that. Is there one player in either league who could start on Man City or Liverpool or Barca or Athletico, etc etc?

You misunderstand me. I’m saying a huge part of the development problem in the US is the lack of soccer culture.
The Rayados played well against Liverpool.

Redirect Notice

www.google.com

 

[messy]

You misunderstand me. I’m saying a huge part of the development problem in the US is the lack of soccer culture.
The Rayados played well against Liverpool.

Redirect Notice

www.google.com

I agree about our culture...but combining the MLS and Liga MX personnel into one league...maybe the league would fit somewhere between the Portuguese league and the Belgian league?

 

[MacDre]

I agree about our culture...but combining the MLS and Liga MX personnel into one league...maybe the league would fit somewhere between the Portuguese league and the Belgian league?

Not merely combining personnel but pooling resources to create a superior environment to Europe. Mexico has the culture and the know how and the US has the resources. We would produce more and better players. We could also compete financially with the big European clubs for the best players in the world.

 

[vegasguy]

I agree with you on culture but that has always been a given. But it is growing in places like Atlanta, Seattle, Portland and Socal very fast.

20yrs behind in development is way dramatic and I think our youth development especially Sounders and FCDallas are producing players who are getting opportunities abroad at 18. Heck Jesse Gonzales made his one time switch back to USA and youth like Leyva chose Stars and Stripes although Leyva can still make a one time switch but I do not think he will in the long run.

I think LigaMX us run poorly and could use the structure of the MLS. They already stopped pro-rel which I hate but seems an obvious move to begin the first 3 country league. Next step is the improvement of pay structure on both sides and FMF USSoccer changing the roster structures.

 

[texanincali]

First of all, 2-3 late bloomers who turn into something off a U16 team would be a great success ….

Personally, I see pros and cons to a 2-year, U17 age group for my own (05) son. He will very likely make the U17 squad, but do I think that is best for his development? If the emphasis on our teams was true possession/quick passing/decision-making, then playing at U17 can help. Of my own son's strengths and weaknesses, quick passing/decision-making are strengths and he has done well playing up a year in friendlies already. But, how many truly creative players does the U.S. develop? The issue I see with the two year age group at this U17 level is that there are HUGE physical differences between kids who have already sprouted/filled out and kids who are just starting that process. You see more emphasis on just getting rid of the ball quickly before you get squashed. Playing on age, the game has more dimensions - the element of creative 1v1 dribbling in addition to passing becomes more realistic. We should want to keep developing that quality. We aren't developing many of those types of players in the U.S.

All fair points. However, there are HUGE physical differences in every age group starting at U11 and going up to professionals.

I really do understand your point, but I just don’t think we are missing out on quality professional players because of a dual age group. If kids are changing the way they play because of the size of opponents, their game wasn’t top class to begin with. The issue here is the conflicting end game of development. I will concede to you that it is probably better for a kid that wants to earn a scholarship to play his own age group and be one of the better players. It is not the way to develop top class professional players that will help build MLS and players to be sold to Europe to build our USMNT.

 

[MacDre]

I agree with you on culture but that has always been a given. But it is growing in places like Atlanta, Seattle, Portland and Socal very fast.

20yrs behind in development is way dramatic and I think our youth development especially Sounders and FCDallas are producing players who are getting opportunities abroad at 18. Heck Jesse Gonzales made his one time switch back to USA and youth like Leyva chose Stars and Stripes although Leyva can still make a one time switch but I do not think he will in the long run.

I think LigaMX us run poorly and could use the structure of the MLS. They already stopped pro-rel which I hate but seems an obvious move to begin the first 3 country league. Next step is the improvement of pay structure on both sides and FMF USSoccer changing the roster structures.

It’s gonna be a good day Coach because it’s early in the morning and I agree with you.

In terms of development, I think it’ll be at least 20 years before environments like FCD and Sounders are commonplace though.

 

[MacDre]

First of all, 2-3 late bloomers who turn into something off a U16 team would be a great success ….

Personally, I see pros and cons to a 2-year, U17 age group for my own (05) son. He will very likely make the U17 squad, but do I think that is best for his development? If the emphasis on our teams was true possession/quick passing/decision-making, then playing at U17 can help. Of my own son's strengths and weaknesses, quick passing/decision-making are strengths and he has done well playing up a year in friendlies already. But, how many truly creative players does the U.S. develop? The issue I see with the two year age group at this U17 level is that there are HUGE physical differences between kids who have already sprouted/filled out and kids who are just starting that process. You see more emphasis on just getting rid of the ball quickly before you get squashed. Playing on age, the game has more dimensions - the element of creative 1v1 dribbling in addition to passing becomes more realistic. We should want to keep developing that quality. We aren't developing many of those types of players in the U.S.

I agree with you. I understand the problem. I have even felt at times the strategy to contain my kid was to put her on her ass. Clean her clock so to speak. I was just fortunate for my kid to have the option of playing in Mexico.

My daughter is 12 and on the U15 team. They practice, travel, and play with the U17’s and the Xolo’s first team. My kid hates playing with kids her age because the game is too slow and simple. She holds her own against the bigger girls but she’s slower and weaker which is forcing her to develop creative solutions quickly under immense pressure. She’s also getting more time to develop at center mid because she’s too damn slow to be a winger with the older girls. I was concerned that she was going to get hurt but she’s already moving up on the roster at least she was before Covid.

I know it’s not realistic for all but I think your kid needs another environment. Keeping him in his comfort zone is going to kill his career because he’s not developing the “grit” to be successful at the highest levels. I think I recall reading an article about the problems Griezmann’s dad had finding a suitable environment for his undersized player.
Do you have any other development options?

 

[Husky13]

All fair points. However, there are HUGE physical differences in every age group starting at U11 and going up to professionals.

I really do understand your point, but I just don’t think we are missing out on quality professional players because of a dual age group. If kids are changing the way they play because of the size of opponents, their game wasn’t top class to begin with. The issue here is the conflicting end game of development. I will concede to you that it is probably better for a kid that wants to earn a scholarship to play his own age group and be one of the better players. It is not the way to develop top class professional players that will help build MLS and players to be sold to Europe to build our USMNT.

I'll boil it down to this: Many, many people complain that the U.S. keeps producing big/fast/strong athlete-types, but our best club teams and national teams still cannot compete and are left chasing the ball all game against top sides from Europe. While I hear the occasional argument that "other countries don't have basketball and football to suck away the best athletes", in general I don't hear (nor do I feel myself) that our problem is a lack of athleticism. Rather, we don't seem to produce players that keep their opponents off balance (defenders are forced to give creative dribblers a few feet of space so they don't get beat), ability to keep possession in tighter spaces in the attacking third, and break down opposing defenses with creative dribbling and passing.

Why don't we produce players with these qualities? I am not about to claim that the absence of a U16 single age group is the root cause! But, our funnel favors players who are physically advanced earlier than others - because of how U.S. coaches look at things, those earlier physically developed players are better able to "survive" against players that are a year older at an age where a year can make a supersized difference. What is one thing that can help mitigate against this? A single-year age group that changes the focus from having grown enough early on to physically match up (which is a short-term factor) to a much wider variety of factors.

 

[jayjay]

isn't this the Boys DA thread ? Maybe now MLS? Newsflash....Girls development is way different than Boys development.

 

[Husky13]

I agree with you. I understand the problem. I have even felt at times the strategy to contain my kid was to put her on her ass. Clean her clock so to speak. I was just fortunate for my kid to have the option of playing in Mexico.

My daughter is 12 and on the U15 team. They practice, travel, and play with the U17’s and the Xolo’s first team. My kid hates playing with kids her age because the game is too slow and simple. She holds her own against the bigger girls but she’s slower and weaker which is forcing her to develop creative solutions quickly under immense pressure. She’s also getting more time to develop at center mid because she’s too damn slow to be a winger with the older girls. I was concerned that she was going to get hurt but she’s already moving up on the roster at least she was before Covid.

I know it’s not realistic for all but I think your kid needs another environment. Keeping him in his comfort zone is going to kill his career because he’s not developing the “grit” to be successful at the highest levels. I think I recall reading an article about the problems Griezmann’s dad had finding a suitable environment for his undersized player.
Do you have any other development options?

I am actually not taking this view about a U16 age group solely out of personal interest. As I said, there are pros and cons for my own kid in playing U17. My biggest issue with the playing environment - not at our club but in the U.S. in general - is that coaches/scouts seem to gravitate towards kids who can bully past (or through) others because they grew earlier. We have a few of those players at our club (very highly regarded) who have or are flattening out now because their physical growth has stopped and other players (with other qualities) are catching up to them physically.

Because my kid didn't fit the mold of the favored (older, bigger) players at his club coming in, he had to swim against the tide (so to speak) - this has helped develop grit and forced him to overcome obstacles. So, in that sense, the environment has been very good for him. This past year, he also grew more than 6 inches, and now coaches started seeing his other qualities because increased size made it easier to display those. (He is still 10 months behind in overall physical growth, so until kids stop growing at age 17 or so, he won't completely catch up.) My beef is that a great coach/scout should be able to see those qualities and project ahead, it shouldn't be "wow, this player looks better than I thought" (because he predictably grew, because …. duh …. he was younger than other kids).

 

[MacDre]

isn't this the Boys DA thread ? Maybe now MLS? Newsflash....Girls development is way different than Boys development.

I get that girls are different from boys-patna, you’re merely stating the obvious. I stated earlier my girl has played with 2008 boys in Mexico since she was 5. 2008 boys are entering the academy in Mexico. All of my experience is with boys soccer. My daughter has only played with girls for approximately 3 months. Moreover, I’ve observed boys academy teams train daily for the past 7 years at Club Tijuana so I’m actually more familiar with boys than girls.

 

[MacDre]

I am actually not taking this view about a U16 age group solely out of personal interest. As I said, there are pros and cons for my own kid in playing U17. My biggest issue with the playing environment - not at our club but in the U.S. in general - is that coaches/scouts seem to gravitate towards kids who can bully past (or through) others because they grew earlier. We have a few of those players at our club (very highly regarded) who have or are flattening out now because their physical growth has stopped and other players (with other qualities) are catching up to them physically.

Because my kid didn't fit the mold of the favored (older, bigger) players at his club coming in, he had to swim against the tide (so to speak) - this has helped develop grit and forced him to overcome obstacles. So, in that sense, the environment has been very good for him. This past year, he also grew more than 6 inches, and now coaches started seeing his other qualities because increased size made it easier to display those. (He is still 10 months behind in overall physical growth, so until kids stop growing at age 17 or so, he won't completely catch up.) My beef is that a great coach/scout should be able to see those qualities and project ahead, it shouldn't be "wow, this player looks better than I thought" (because he predictably grew, because …. duh …. he was younger than other kids).

I feel your pain brotha. I have an undersized kid with a December birthday.

 

[SocalWestDad]

Some teams in ECNL have a team in the new MLS youth league. How is that possible? Can a non-mls team and a MLS academy team field both an ecnl team and a team in the MLS youth league?

 

[Son]

I am actually not taking this view about a U16 age group solely out of personal interest. As I said, there are pros and cons for my own kid in playing U17. My biggest issue with the playing environment - not at our club but in the U.S. in general - is that coaches/scouts seem to gravitate towards kids who can bully past (or through) others because they grew earlier. We have a few of those players at our club (very highly regarded) who have or are flattening out now because their physical growth has stopped and other players (with other qualities) are catching up to them physically.

Because my kid didn't fit the mold of the favored (older, bigger) players at his club coming in, he had to swim against the tide (so to speak) - this has helped develop grit and forced him to overcome obstacles. So, in that sense, the environment has been very good for him. This past year, he also grew more than 6 inches, and now coaches started seeing his other qualities because increased size made it easier to display those. (He is still 10 months behind in overall physical growth, so until kids stop growing at age 17 or so, he won't completely catch up.) My beef is that a great coach/scout should be able to see those qualities and project ahead, it shouldn't be "wow, this player looks better than I thought" (because he predictably grew, because …. duh …. he was younger than other kids).

US Soccer was trying to take early physical growth into consideration. At the three U14 regional camps last year, each kid was measured for peak height velocity to see where they were in terms of physical growth. When the kids went back to their teams, the teams administered the same peak height velocity testing.

I am not sure what US Soccer or the teams did with that data. Presumably they took into consideration boys who may not have hit their growth spurts yet. But looking at the selections for the next U14 camps and then the single U15 camp before the shutdown, it was clear the US YNT still favored more mature and physically dominant kids.

 

[WuTang]

Some teams in ECNL have a team in the new MLS youth league. How is that possible? Can a non-mls team and a MLS academy team field both an ecnl team and a team in the MLS youth league?

This was done before by some of the larger clubs. Usually, the first team is in the Academy and the 2nd team is in the ECNL. At our club that is the plan.

 

[Kante]

US Soccer was trying to take early physical growth into consideration. At the three U14 regional camps last year, each kid was measured for peak height velocity to see where they were in terms of physical growth. When the kids went back to their teams, the teams administered the same peak height velocity testing.

I am not sure what US Soccer or the teams did with that data. Presumably they took into consideration boys who may not have hit their growth spurts yet. But looking at the selections for the next U14 camps and then the single U15 camp before the shutdown, it was clear the US YNT still favored more mature and physically dominant kids.

the challenge is that US Soccer was taking the data in as a method to discount players who had early developer advantages, but didn't have a plan for how to systematically ID and support promising late dob/late developers at scale.

France has probably been the NT leader in supporting late developers in recent years. Mbappe has a 12/20 dob, for example.

And some teams in the EPL were doing things to ID and support late developers. However, in general, the whole system globally is skewed towards early dob/early developers. Just human nature to favor those players/students who respond the best early on to lessons.

But there's also a huge, obvious inefficiency/arbitrage oppty to be exploited by a country with a pop the size of the US.

This is the piece that's crazy making. The USMNT, by insisting on playing by the same rules/competing on the same terms as every other country, is just falling behind less slowly. If we want to get ahead, then we have to compete differently, leverage our unique strengths and not just copy what country "x" has done.

One of the biggest accomplishments, imo, of the USSDA, was the significant increase in Latino players in the upper ranks of the top DA teams. (But, with USSDA going away, that progress is being put at risk.)

The second biggest oppty next up is supporting the vast number of promising late dob/late developers to continue playing at high levels thru u17/u18.

How this is done? Not sure, but the MLS league and the ECNL, both look like - right now - big steps backward.