Opinions?

[justneededaname]

This assumes that Surf are perfect at talent identification. They may have players in their club with better long term potential but overlook them for what can help them just win games at the U15 level. Another short-sighted strategy that plagues our youth development system.

I disagree. I do not think the B through whatever teams at the big clubs (it is not just Surf) are loaded with undiscovered talent. They are loaded with kids that love soccer. They are loaded with parents that think their kid is an undiscovered talent. The "undiscovered" talent is on smaller (ie: cheaper) club teams, and a lot of people at the big clubs know who they are, just for whatever reason (cost, ability to get players to training, parents preferring the community of their current team, pressure from their existing club not to abandon their team) they have not moved to the big club.

I think the problem with our youth development system in not identifying the talent. It is what is done to train and nurture that talent.

Another problem is that many of the would be diamonds are playing basketball and have never set foot on a soccer field. But that is a different discussion.

 

[MWN]

https://www.thenation.com/article/us-soccer-latino-neglect/

My opinion (actually its not an opinion but fact) is the article completely misses the elephant in the room and takes a turn down an easy lane of bias. Can we all agree that the world revolves around money? Club soccer is not immune. Money, money, money. The MLS is in business to make money. The players at the professional level all want money. Even the vast majority of "Clubs" need money to pay for fields, coaches, refs, etc.

Why doesn't the clubs or MLS teams invest millions of dollars to go find these diamonds in the rough? Bias? NO!!!! White coaches with English accents? NO!!!! Its money, or lack thereof.

This author and many of you need to appreciate that this is a simple economic problem. In the United States of America we have yet to adopt FIFA's "Training and Solidarity Payments." We have stripped the financial incentive out of prospective development. The only incentive an MLS team has is they get to label the player a "homegrown player" skipping the draft and receiving some salary cap relief. Without making training and solidarity payments we (the US of A) put ourselves at a serious disadvantage to the rest of the world.

Its stupid and the author is stupid ignorant for not appreciating this fundamentally basic fact. There is no financial incentive to reach into the barrio or ghetto or countryside or anyplace else to find these diamonds because there is no freaking money to be made.

Sorry, if I'm come off as a bit short tempered, but its absolutely criminal that we have so-called experts writing about why we are not "investing in youth talent" to be competitive to the rest of the world and none understand that the fundamental economic concept of "investing" requires a "return on investment." We have stripped virtually all incentive away to invest.

Give the clubs an incentive to invest and they will, because it all comes down to money.

 

[oh canada]

Getting the kids to and from soccer practice (finding someone to drive if both parents work, or having a reliable vehicle) is much more of an obstacle than club fees, particularly as you get into the higher levels where driving distances increase away from local community-based clubs.

We're on the same page. Wanted to especially highlight the above quote as I completely agree that soccer is unique in this regard and it's a complete discriminator in favor of middle/upper class (mostly white) families who have one parent either not working, working part-time, or working from home, who can drive kids 3-5x/week to their club requirements (and usually sit, hover and watch every practice). If you live 20 miles + away from a US Soccer DA club (which US Soccer says you must play at), that's a 60-90 minute round trip commute at least with SoCal traffic, usually before typical work day end of 5pm. (btw, at $4.25/gallon of gas, add another $100/week or $5K/year in cost.) Not like a kid can hop on a bus/subway and commute on his/her own in SoCal like many of the inner-city athletes do back east. So, totally agree, commute is a bigger turnoff than cost even.

Kids who want to play basketball can play and train in the neighborhood and play at their neighborhood school (no driving necessary); kids who want to practice baseball, same....football, same...track/cross country, same. With its 4x/week practice requirements, ban on high school soccer, and pay-for-play network of clubs, US Soccer is the most discriminatory "big" sport in the USA and US Soccer doesn't care, even with its men's team nosediving into irrelevance. And girls watch out...US Soccer's DA project is ruining the men's program. Why should the effect on the female's side be any different?

 

[justneededaname]

Kids who want to play basketball can play and train in the neighborhood

Not at the highest level. At the highest level there is as much, if not more, travel and cost in basketball than in soccer. If you think poor inner-city kids are getting to the top of basketball by only playing in the neighborhood, you are buying into a myth.

Take Zion Williamson for example. "He competed in youth leagues and played for the Sumter Falcons on the Amateur Athletic Union (AAU) circuit." (his wikipedia page) Playing on the AAU circuit can cost up to $4000 a summer. It involves an insane amount of travel. But that is where the best of the best learn their trade and are identified by college and pro scouts.

For one of my children, the nearest flight one basketball team is at least a 30 minute drive from where I live. I have not looked into an AAU team yet, because, well, I don't want to deal with the costs (that and while he loves basketball, I know won't make it).

As for the high school aspect of it ... anecdotally, I know the basketball players face similar pressures. At the last tournament, I "listened in" on four high school players having a conversation about how to deal with their high school coach not wanting them to play AAU and their AAU coach not wanting them to play high school.

 

[oh canada]

Not at the highest level. At the highest level there is as much, if not more, travel and cost in basketball than in soccer. If you think poor inner-city kids are getting to the top of basketball by only playing in the neighborhood, you are buying into a myth.

Take Zion Williamson for example. "He competed in youth leagues and played for the Sumter Falcons on the Amateur Athletic Union (AAU) circuit." (his wikipedia page) Playing on the AAU circuit can cost up to $4000 a summer. It involves an insane amount of travel. But that is where the best of the best learn their trade and are identified by college and pro scouts.

For one of my children, the nearest flight one basketball team is at least a 30 minute drive from where I live. I have not looked into an AAU team yet, because, well, I don't want to deal with the costs (that and while he loves basketball, I know won't make it).

As for the high school aspect of it ... anecdotally, I know the basketball players face similar pressures. At the last tournament, I "listened in" on four high school players having a conversation about how to deal with their high school coach not wanting them to play AAU and their AAU coach not wanting them to play high school.

All true, but 99% of the top basketball players can and still are playing for their high schools. HS coaches are still viewed as better skill, technique and situational coaches than AAU coaches. And, winning city, state and regional basketball competitions still carries weight in the BB world, especially NY, LA and DMV. Plus, it's not US Basketball threatening the removal of local opportunities via high school. It's the shoe companies.

 

[watfly]

1) the issue of being pay to play as a barrier to Latino involvement is vastly overstated....there are plenty of Latinos playing club ball and various organizations (including our dear friend Luis') that cater to this particular community, but 2) in hitting the higher levels there is definitely a financial barrier since you are competing with kids that can afford camps and trainers, and pay for the tournaments, driving and intermediate costs it takes to get up to those levels, so you have to be all the more talented to get there. Getting the kids to and from soccer practice (finding someone to drive if both parents work, or having a reliable vehicle) is much more of an obstacle than club fees, particularly as you get into the higher levels where driving distances increase away from local community-based clubs.

100%. From what I've seen there are plenty of scholarships for talented Latino kids in Southern California. Most top teams in Socal are loaded with Latino kids, many from lower income families. As you say, the bigger hurdles are transportation and parents schedules which impacts these kids' ability to attend practice on a consistent basis.

I do find it curious that there aren't more Latinos on the MNT, considering how their numbers dominate Socal Soccer. Do I think having more Latinos would make a significant improvement to our MNT, no not necessarily. That's not to slight Latinos, but a condemnation of US Soccer's fundamentally flawed operation and development of the National Teams.

 

[MWN]

I disagree.

US Soccer doesn't care, even with its men's team nosediving into irrelevance. And girls watch out...US Soccer's DA project is ruining the men's program. Why should the effect on the female's side be any different?

The DA League was created over 10 years ago because US Soccer understood it has a major problem, which is:

1. The Professional Leagues (MLS and USL) have substandard training and economics model.
2. The Professional Leagues (MLS and USL) lacks effective youth training academies.
3. The Professional Leagues (MLS and USL) have no financial incentive to invest in youth players because of the lack of Solidarity and Training compensation, which the Players selfishly oppose.

Because the rest of the developed soccer world doesn't have 1, 2 or 3 holding player development back, the DA was created in an attempt to jump start higher level youth development. Its not a "silver bullet" because of 1 and 2 above.

US Soccer has now realized that the MLS and USL are not capable of fixing this, as a result, the push is now to pave the way for players to exit the US as quickly as possible. Unfortunately, on this front US Soccer doesn't have any weight because of Article 19. We are in a catch-22 for men. The rest of the world with their more fully developed professional and youth academies have kids go pro at age 15/16. Our 16 year olds are stuck on some U17 team playing with good (but not elite) cannon fodder. By the time our kids reach 18, they are already 2-4 years behind the development curve.

This is not a DA problem per se, but the reality of have a system that contains no monetary incentives.

The DA has never been the problem because its simply a league created to fix a deeper problem (lack of financial incentive to develop youth players). The problem is the MLS and the Players Association that fights against Solidarity and Training Fees. The good news is that US Soccer is no longer standing in the way like it did under Klinsman, see, https://the18.com/soccer-news/jurgen-klinsmann-mls-criticism and https://ftw.usatoday.com/2019/01/miguel-almiron-sebastian-giovinco-luciano-acosta

The other good news is the MLS is "FINALLY" getting it: https://www.goal.com/en-us/news/mls...e-a-selling-league/1t0nqp9ilsaay16bud5gjjajfl

Once the MLS and US Soccer go to war with the Players then things will change.

With regard to you other question "why should the effect on the female's side be any different?" The short answer is the economics of the men's game and the female game internationally are vast distances apart. There is little to no money in women's professional soccer, so aside from a few European leagues, the U.S. College system remains the best post youth development system for women at this time. European academies (subsidized by the men's programs) are starting to make inroads.

The DA, ECNL, NPL, etc. exist to showcase female talent for college. So, in a nutshell, the proper path for International grade (i.e. potentially help us win a world cup) is:

Boys/Mens Path = Youth (DA/ODP/NPL) --> Professional Academy @ 16/17 --> Pro Team --> USMNT
Girls/Women's Path = Youth (DA/ECNL) --> College -- Semi-Pro Team (NWSL) -- USWNT

... and let me add that its all Pay-To-Play because there is no financial incentive for the Youth and Professional Academy (unless, that Professional Academy is outside the US).

 

[MWN]

Out of curiosity, how many of you are aware of:

https://alianzadefutbol.com/

Heard of David Zavala? (https://alianzadefutbol.com/en/undi...the-allstate-sueno-alianza-national-showcase/)

Should US Soccer and the MLS continue to support and attend this type of tournament or try to take it over?

 

[oh canada]

I disagree.



The DA League was created over 10 years ago because US Soccer understood it has a major problem, which is:

1. The Professional Leagues (MLS and USL) have substandard training and economics model.
2. The Professional Leagues (MLS and USL) lacks effective youth training academies.
3. The Professional Leagues (MLS and USL) have no financial incentive to invest in youth players because of the lack of Solidarity and Training compensation, which the Players selfishly oppose.

Because the rest of the developed soccer world doesn't have 1, 2 or 3 holding player development back, the DA was created in an attempt to jump start higher level youth development. Its not a "silver bullet" because of 1 and 2 above.

US Soccer has now realized that the MLS and USL are not capable of fixing this, as a result, the push is now to pave the way for players to exit the US as quickly as possible. Unfortunately, on this front US Soccer doesn't have any weight because of Article 19. We are in a catch-22 for men. The rest of the world with their more fully developed professional and youth academies have kids go pro at age 15/16. Our 16 year olds are stuck on some U17 team playing with good (but not elite) cannon fodder. By the time our kids reach 18, they are already 2-4 years behind the development curve.

This is not a DA problem per se, but the reality of have a system that contains no monetary incentives.

The DA has never been the problem because its simply a league created to fix a deeper problem (lack of financial incentive to develop youth players). The problem is the MLS and the Players Association that fights against Solidarity and Training Fees. The good news is that US Soccer is no longer standing in the way like it did under Klinsman, see, https://the18.com/soccer-news/jurgen-klinsmann-mls-criticism and https://ftw.usatoday.com/2019/01/miguel-almiron-sebastian-giovinco-luciano-acosta

The other good news is the MLS is "FINALLY" getting it: https://www.goal.com/en-us/news/mls...e-a-selling-league/1t0nqp9ilsaay16bud5gjjajfl

Once the MLS and US Soccer go to war with the Players then things will change.

With regard to you other question "why should the effect on the female's side be any different?" The short answer is the economics of the men's game and the female game internationally are vast distances apart. There is little to no money in women's professional soccer, so aside from a few European leagues, the U.S. College system remains the best post youth development system for women at this time. European academies (subsidized by the men's programs) are starting to make inroads.

The DA, ECNL, NPL, etc. exist to showcase female talent for college. So, in a nutshell, the proper path for International grade (i.e. potentially help us win a world cup) is:

Boys/Mens Path = Youth (DA/ODP/NPL) --> Professional Academy @ 16/17 --> Pro Team --> USMNT
Girls/Women's Path = Youth (DA/ECNL) --> College -- Semi-Pro Team (NWSL) -- USWNT

... and let me add that its all Pay-To-Play because there is no financial incentive for the Youth and Professional Academy (unless, that Professional Academy is outside the US).

Yes. This is why I tell my friends with young soccer boys who "want to go pro" that they should start googling a European city that they want to move to.

My point about the effect on the female side was more re player development. I can't yet id a male impact player that came through the DA system (10+ years in operation and running). So why should the expectation be any different for developing girls under the DA iron grip? Who's to say that girls not running track wouldn't be faster and better soccer players because of it...or girls playing high school basketball become better headers of the ball in their soccer pursuits...or girls playing high school soccer become better because they play a different position? Or girls don't burn out because they're practicing 3x/week instead of 4x. Big brother U.S. Soccer can't know what's best for all kids, especially minorities when they don't have that representation within their own ranks. These decisions should be left to families and the local club/high school coaches and trainers of that player, and other mentors in their communities. But US soccer wants us all to believe they know best for all and expect compliance or else face consequences (e.g., youth national team disqualifications). Can you imagine if USA Basketball said all high school kids must play AAU and cannot play for their schools...and dictated to all the AAU clubs that they must practice 4x/week...and play a man-to-man defense only...and can only sub 3 players!? And, US Soccer has the gall to make these demands without a proven track record of success (on the men's side at least).

When you really stop and reflect about how invasive US Soccer policies are on family decisions, it should be offensive to all moms and dads. Yep, youth soccer participation is falling dramatically and diversity is lacking. Is anyone really surprised?

 

[Emma]

Yes. This is why I tell my friends with young soccer boys who "want to go pro" that they should start googling a European city that they want to move to.

My point about the effect on the female side was more re player development. I can't yet id a male impact player that came through the DA system (10+ years in operation and running). So why should the expectation be any different for developing girls under the DA iron grip? Who's to say that girls not running track wouldn't be faster and better soccer players because of it...or girls playing high school basketball become better headers of the ball in their soccer pursuits...or girls playing high school soccer become better because they play a different position? Or girls don't burn out because they're practicing 3x/week instead of 4x. Big brother U.S. Soccer can't know what's best for all kids, especially minorities when they don't have that representation within their own ranks. These decisions should be left to families and the local club/high school coaches and trainers of that player, and other mentors in their communities. But US soccer wants us all to believe they know best for all and expect compliance or else face consequences (e.g., youth national team disqualifications). Can you imagine if USA Basketball said all high school kids must play AAU and cannot play for their schools...and dictated to all the AAU clubs that they must practice 4x/week...and play a man-to-man defense only...and can only sub 3 players!? And, US Soccer has the gall to make these demands without a proven track record of success (on the men's side at least).

When you really stop and reflect about how invasive US Soccer policies are on family decisions, it should be offensive to all moms and dads. Yep, youth soccer participation is falling dramatically and diversity is lacking. Is anyone really surprised?

I'm not going to look it up but two comes off the top of my head - Weston McKennie and Christian Pulisic both came thru the DA system.

 

[MWN]

Yes. This is why I tell my friends with young soccer boys who "want to go pro" that they should start googling a European city that they want to move to.

My point about the effect on the female side was more re player development. I can't yet id a male impact player that came through the DA system (10+ years in operation and running). So why should the expectation be any different for developing girls under the DA iron grip? Who's to say that girls not running track wouldn't be faster and better soccer players because of it...or girls playing high school basketball become better headers of the ball in their soccer pursuits...or girls playing high school soccer become better because they play a different position? Or girls don't burn out because they're practicing 3x/week instead of 4x. Big brother U.S. Soccer can't know what's best for all kids, especially minorities when they don't have that representation within their own ranks. These decisions should be left to families and the local club/high school coaches and trainers of that player, and other mentors in their communities. But US soccer wants us all to believe they know best for all and expect compliance or else face consequences (e.g., youth national team disqualifications). Can you imagine if USA Basketball said all high school kids must play AAU and cannot play for their schools...and dictated to all the AAU clubs that they must practice 4x/week...and play a man-to-man defense only...and can only sub 3 players!? And, US Soccer has the gall to make these demands without a proven track record of success (on the men's side at least).

When you really stop and reflect about how invasive US Soccer policies are on family decisions, it should be offensive to all moms and dads. Yep, youth soccer participation is falling dramatically and diversity is lacking. Is anyone really surprised?

To place any blame on the DA means you don't fully appreciate how professional development is supposed to work. On the men's side professional international players leave the youth system and join the professional academies at 15/16. These now 16 and 17 year olds are training next to the field the First Team is training on, using the same facilities as Messi, Ronoldo, etc. They eat, drink and sleep soccer in a residential environment. In the US, only a few MLS team have anything that approaches this. The DA was never intended to be a professional system, like the youth academies in Europe, this is for the MLS teams to implement. Professional quality development is within the sole domain of the professional teams. The DA was always intended to be a stop gap measure while the MLS teams worked on profitability.

You asked about "Male Impact Players" with US DA pedigree: Christian Pulisic (2008–2015 PA Classics), short stint at IMG's USYNT program then off the Europe at 17; Tyler Adams (New York Red Bulls Development Academy - Turned pro at 16, skipped college, now in Europe; and same can be said for Josh Sargent DA --> US Residential Academy at IMG --> Europe. These players are all young and will come in their own as impact players when they reach their peak (age 26-27).

Note, the DA was formed a little over 10 years ago. Most the 26+ aged generation of US Soccer players never had an opportunity to go through the program because they were already 17/18. The younger generation has (e.g. Pulisic, Adams, Sargent, W.McKinnie (FC Dallas), etc.), and the younger generation has forgone their "Homegrown Player" contracts and high-tailed it to Europe for "real, professional, development."

The DA is just a league that local clubs participate in, putting their "best" players on a Team to play with and against sub-par players that would never get sniffed at for a professional contract. Contrast that to Europe where the best play with, and against the best. The training, education, and food are all paid for by an professional club that treats them as an investment (lottery ticket).

Edit: my ultimate point is that the DA has very little impact with the USMNT, its too far removed.

 

[justneededaname]

but 99% of the top basketball players can and still are playing for their high schools.

By "their" I am going to guess you mean the public high school to which they are assigned based on their home address. While I have no data to support this, I expect this number is actually significantly smaller. Zion, for example, is from North Carolina. He went to a private high school in South Carolina (I expect they have a great basketball program).

If you look at the top basketball 10 prospects on 24/7 sports (https://247sports.com/Season/2020-Basketball/CompositeRecruitRankings/?InstitutionGroup=HighSchool), nine of them go to private schools and one goes to a public school (that is definitely not in the inner-city). One goes to a private school, Prolific Prep, that sounds like the basketball equivalent of the Barca Academy.

 

[espola]

I'm not going to look it up but two comes off the top of my head - Weston McKennie and Christian Pulisic both came thru the DA system.

Came up through? McKennie spent his formative adolescent years in Germany and Pulisic is from a family of soccer players and likely would have been international material without the existence of DA.

 

[Emma]

Came up through? McKennie spent his formative adolescent years in Germany and Pulisic is from a family of soccer players and likely would have been international material without the existence of DA.

With any program, the program shouldn't get full credit bc the family and individual play a large part. Oh Canada said there were no players that came through there. According to Wikipedia, Pulisic was at a DA club from 08-15 and McKennie was at FC Dallas (A DA club) 09-16. Those are a significant amount of years. You made me look it up even though I said I wouldn't. Thanks Espola.

 

[espola]

With any program, the program shouldn't get full credit bc the family and individual play a large part. Oh Canada said there were no players that came through there. According to Wikipedia, Pulisic was at a DA club from 08-15 and McKennie was at FC Dallas (A DA club) 09-16. Those are a significant amount of years. You made me look it up even though I said I wouldn't. Thanks Espola.

Since USSF has declared DA to be the top youth program, they get full credit for any young diamonds whether their program made any difference in their development or not. Both players cited had unusual development routes connected with play in Europe. Their presence in DA programs is coincidental.

 

[MarkM]

I'm not going to look it up but two comes off the top of my head - Weston McKennie and Christian Pulisic both came thru the DA system.

Tyler Adams and Josh Sargent too.

 

[MarkM]

Came up through? McKennie spent his formative adolescent years in Germany and Pulisic is from a family of soccer players and likely would have been international material without the existence of DA.

Formative adolescent years are from ages 6 to 8 years old? Huh? That's when he developed?

 

[MWN]

Came up through? McKennie spent his formative adolescent years in Germany and Pulisic is from a family of soccer players and likely would have been international material without the existence of DA.

Logic doesn't work. McKennie's so-called-formative years was from age 6-9 playing little kid soccer. His formative years were at FC Dallas. Pulisic would not have developed further without an opportunity to hone his skills in the DA. That said, both McKennie and Pulisic's "real development" occurred once outside of the US playing/training in professional youth academies, which we simply don't have in the U.S. and will never have until Training and Solidarity Payments are allowed and financial incentives created.

 

[MarkM]

Since USSF has declared DA to be the top youth program, they get full credit for any young diamonds whether their program made any difference in their development or not. Both players cited had unusual development routes connected with play in Europe. Their presence in DA programs is coincidental.

I guess if someone stood on European soil from ages 6 to 8, that deserves full credit for soccer development. Makes sense.

 

[MWN]

... and for the record, this all comes full circle to a major point the article missed. Without professional academies that have financial incentives to invest tens of thousands of dollars training players, the less wealthy kids will be left on the sideline. There isn't a single MLS team out there that would look at an immigrant kid and say ... "nope, too brown." The reality is our system is and will remain "Pay-To-Play" because that is how the MLS Players (union) wants it, until we can give MLS teams a genuine incentive to invest in players, the only money at the table belongs to the parents of little Jimmy and Jenny.