Landon Donovan was right

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Every sport in USA is structured as hell, almost year-round play. There's no incentive to go out and play in the street when you have gaming inside and air conditioning. American youth is sucked up by four way more popular sports before a boy thinks of soccer after the age of 8. Girls gravitate to it because only basketball takes athletes away. Don't blame just the kids either... i see the sidelines heaving with heavy-set parents who very likey never usher their kids outside because they too sit on their phones all day.

i think everyone is trying to find fault when there is no fault. Soccer is just a fringe sport in America, it's just the way it is.

The facts are most boys would rather play basketball, baseball or football and it's likely because that's what one of their parents grew up playing or watched or whatever reason.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The current youth soccer scene is not great.

But he blames the culture, not the landscape.

Has there ever been fewer opportunities for players to stay on a quality team in youth and develop?

Have there ever been fewer chances to play college soccer?

Have there ever been this many leagues, this big of a disconnect between “elite”?

ECNL, MLSNext, NAL, ECNL RL, EDP…

It’s ridiculous.

Yes youth soccer is in a bad position right now, but to blame the parents who pay for all of this to keep going is ludicrous.

If MLS chose 10-15 years ago to implement pro-rel, we would see so many more opportunities for players to develop and advance following a proper professional roadmap.

But the pressure isn’t on MLS teams to win and develop. The pressure is on them to develop, sign, and sell for profit.

It’s a shame that we think we are caught up to the rest of the world, while parents are still paying $2k-4k a season for their kids to call themselves elite. Where’s that $$ really going? To the clubs? Sure.

But to the leagues, the tournaments, and the facilities, that’s where it all goes. Fields in the dmv are impossible to come by. Leagues all have their hands out looking to expand. Tourney fees are insane. Everyone wants their piece, but it’s up to the parents to change that? Not seeing that. Maybe Landon was a little isolated during his playing days and hasn’t seen how far we have fallen, I get that parents (I’m not one, I’m a coach, for the record) can be a lot to deal with when their kids are involved, but everyone is playing in the same sandbox.

There are several small grass roots clubs in the DMV with good coaches who understand youth development and care about the kids welfare.
They are routinely abandoned by parents who pull their young kids from that environment to chase a brand name label big club.
Seeking winning and trophies and bragging rights. The unfortunate foundation for US soccer 'culture'

These clubs that you mention --- they cannot deliver the college recruiting. As a result they are worthless.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I recently when down an internet rabbit hole to understand why the US doesn't have better soccer players. The most interesting theory, that I think is likely on point, is that soccer in the US is too structured. Kids only play in leagues but don't play in organic street games like they do in many parts of the world. It's in those informal settings that kids develop the best skills. Think of basketball in the US - many of the top players grew up playing in their streets or neighborhood courts, they weren't shuttled around every weekend to be coached.

ummmm -- the best basketball players play AAU -- they play games every weekend and travel extensively --- practice extensively with coaches.

ummmm — the best basketball players still play on their own, too.

Sure -- when not playing required time with AAU team. There is not a lot of time for a kid with a full schedule.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I don’t buy any of these arguments that it’s the league structures, or parents, or money, as the reason for US soccer failures. All of these same things exist in the US for other sports where we still excel in spite of these things. If these were the problem then we’d be struggling in those sports too. It has to be something else that makes soccer different in the US compared with football/basketball/baseball. Sometimes the obvious answer is the correct one.

Often those who push sports the furthest have the most limited opportunities outside of that sport. Americans have a lot of other opportunities whether they be other athletic pursuits, academic or work related.

Until pro players stop losing what? 50 percent of their pay to transfer fees to clubs, I just feel like criticizing "pay to play" is a form of victim blaming. Club academies are only free if they feel they can essentially garnish your future wages indefinitely. Wish there were more Mbappe free transfers to break the culture and less Harry Kane transfers.

Side not, "pay to play" really should mean coaches trying to get side cash in training and US Soccer trying to get their cut by over charging coaches for licenses.

[Anonymous]

American soccer fed tried to make it their own. Not having pro/rel was a disaster. It create zero grass roots fanbase in the area of a promoted (or almost promoted) team. Next you'll cite "distances", which is a good point, and can easily be mitigated by regional conferences. Hockey does an almost perfect job of this. There's no easy fix, but trying to fit the NFL model into soccer was terrible idea. Now MLS is just the retirement ground for old used up Europeans. Sad.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The current youth soccer scene is not great.

But he blames the culture, not the landscape.

Has there ever been fewer opportunities for players to stay on a quality team in youth and develop?

Have there ever been fewer chances to play college soccer?

Have there ever been this many leagues, this big of a disconnect between “elite”?

ECNL, MLSNext, NAL, ECNL RL, EDP…

It’s ridiculous.

Yes youth soccer is in a bad position right now, but to blame the parents who pay for all of this to keep going is ludicrous.

If MLS chose 10-15 years ago to implement pro-rel, we would see so many more opportunities for players to develop and advance following a proper professional roadmap.

But the pressure isn’t on MLS teams to win and develop. The pressure is on them to develop, sign, and sell for profit.

It’s a shame that we think we are caught up to the rest of the world, while parents are still paying $2k-4k a season for their kids to call themselves elite. Where’s that $$ really going? To the clubs? Sure.

But to the leagues, the tournaments, and the facilities, that’s where it all goes. Fields in the dmv are impossible to come by. Leagues all have their hands out looking to expand. Tourney fees are insane. Everyone wants their piece, but it’s up to the parents to change that? Not seeing that. Maybe Landon was a little isolated during his playing days and hasn’t seen how far we have fallen, I get that parents (I’m not one, I’m a coach, for the record) can be a lot to deal with when their kids are involved, but everyone is playing in the same sandbox.

For everyone bashing pay to play, there are more people happy to pay for their kid to get the experience. I have yet to hear any realistic proposal that address that. MLSnext is the closest thing we have, but club teams focus on older kids most of whose parents have paid for them to develop to the point that an academy will take them. Even people who complain about tourney fees and field access and facility costs would scoff at the European model that reserves serious training for kids who clubs view as having potential worth investing in.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:American soccer fed tried to make it their own. Not having pro/rel was a disaster. It create zero grass roots fanbase in the area of a promoted (or almost promoted) team. Next you'll cite "distances", which is a good point, and can easily be mitigated by regional conferences. Hockey does an almost perfect job of this. There's no easy fix, but trying to fit the NFL model into soccer was terrible idea. Now MLS is just the retirement ground for old used up Europeans. Sad.

Cities aren't subsidizing $500 million stadiums for clubs who risk relegation. Ownership groups are not paying hundreds of millions for a club that can be relegated. If you want to see the effect risk of relegation has on franchise value, look at how much MLS clubs are worth relative to the status of the MLS https://www.forbes.com/lists/soccer-valuations/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I recently when down an internet rabbit hole to understand why the US doesn't have better soccer players. The most interesting theory, that I think is likely on point, is that soccer in the US is too structured. Kids only play in leagues but don't play in organic street games like they do in many parts of the world. It's in those informal settings that kids develop the best skills. Think of basketball in the US - many of the top players grew up playing in their streets or neighborhood courts, they weren't shuttled around every weekend to be coached.

I went down an internet rabbit hole and came up with an entirely different conclusion: US soccer isn't structured enough. As posters have pointed out, youth soccer development in Europe is led by the academies of professional clubs. In England's case, the English FA imposed technical standards and invested over $2B in youth development at its academies in the ten years between 2012 and 2021. A small nation like Portugal has a robust landscape of professional academies that bring kids into their systems at young ages in an attempt to develop them into excellent players over time, and often times sell them.

I think it's the quality and standards provided by professional clubs that is the difference. Here, we have MLS Academies as the top tier. Some have residential programs and strong youth development programs but not all of them. Their are only 26 in the entire United States. And maybe it happens in other areas, but I don't know that any other professional teams in the US subsidize their own academies. In DC United's case, their youngest team is U14, much, much older than European professional academies. In Europe, there would be multiple professional clubs, at varying levels, in a population center this size. The standards and expectations at the professional academies would be much higher than those at our local clubs. I don't know that this sort of tiered professional landscape is even possible here thanks to the prevalence of other sports.

I picked a 10 player starting lineup (we're talking about field players, right?) for Manchester City and checked Wikipedia to see at what age they started at a professional academy: Walker 7, Dias <11, Akanji <12, Lewis 8, Rodri <10, Foden 4, DeBruyne 6, Doku <10 (he joined his 4th club, Anderlecht, at 10), Haaland 5, Silva ?.

[Anonymous]

I think social media has some fault in all of this. Parents letting their kids have social media profiles or creating one for them and putting the cart before the horse. I do not think it helps getting players and their parents acclimated to the grind that is genuine soccer development. Social media just amplifies this soccer culture of following the big clubs, winning, more tournaments, FOMO, etc.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I don’t buy any of these arguments that it’s the league structures, or parents, or money, as the reason for US soccer failures. All of these same things exist in the US for other sports where we still excel in spite of these things. If these were the problem then we’d be struggling in those sports too. It has to be something else that makes soccer different in the US compared with football/basketball/baseball. Sometimes the obvious answer is the correct one.

So your whole argument wishes to disregard the fact that soccer development and excellence isn't the same as it takes for baseball, American football and ice hockey?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Every sport in USA is structured as hell, almost year-round play. There's no incentive to go out and play in the street when you have gaming inside and air conditioning. American youth is sucked up by four way more popular sports before a boy thinks of soccer after the age of 8. Girls gravitate to it because only basketball takes athletes away. Don't blame just the kids either... i see the sidelines heaving with heavy-set parents who very likey never usher their kids outside because they too sit on their phones all day.

i think everyone is trying to find fault when there is no fault. Soccer is just a fringe sport in America, it's just the way it is.

The facts are most boys would rather play basketball, baseball or football and it's likely because that's what one of their parents grew up playing or watched or whatever reason.

Do you have the factual verifiable numbers to backup your argument?

Also, what does Quantity have to do with Quality?

[Anonymous]

The Olympics routinely shows that we have the best athletes. We don't have the best soccer players. That comes down to knowhow, culture, hunger, and system structure. A significant issue is the microwave society we live in. Everyone wants to win NOW. That results in picking big, fast kids - early developers usually. When those kids can no longer rely on their size and strength, they come what most who truly know the game recognized they would be all along - average. Nobody looked at Phil Foden or Kevin DeBruyne as kids and thought they were physically gifted or dominant as youth. They saw game IQ, potential, and dedication to excellence. In the US, those kids get put on the second team and forgotten in favor of the kid who is six inches taller and can score with raw size and few skills or smarts. We're great at collecting U11 trophies and not much afterward. (See SYC.)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Every sport in USA is structured as hell, almost year-round play. There's no incentive to go out and play in the street when you have gaming inside and air conditioning. American youth is sucked up by four way more popular sports before a boy thinks of soccer after the age of 8. Girls gravitate to it because only basketball takes athletes away. Don't blame just the kids either... i see the sidelines heaving with heavy-set parents who very likey never usher their kids outside because they too sit on their phones all day.

i think everyone is trying to find fault when there is no fault. Soccer is just a fringe sport in America, it's just the way it is.

The facts are most boys would rather play basketball, baseball or football and it's likely because that's what one of their parents grew up playing or watched or whatever reason.

Do you have the factual verifiable numbers to backup your argument?

Also, what does Quantity have to do with Quality?

Sure, just look at the revenue generated by basketball, baseball, and pro and college football in the US compared with soccer in the US. Soccer just isn't as popular in the US as the other sports. Not by a little but by a lot. The other sports are part of the culture here in a way soccer is not. Especially for mens soccer. It doesn't mean anyone is doing something wrong. It's just the facts. Cultural popularity is what drives everything else. Soccer has that in the rest of the world. It could change gradually over many decades but we are so far from that point today.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The Olympics routinely shows that we have the best athletes. We don't have the best soccer players. That comes down to knowhow, culture, hunger, and system structure. A significant issue is the microwave society we live in. Everyone wants to win NOW. That results in picking big, fast kids - early developers usually. When those kids can no longer rely on their size and strength, they come what most who truly know the game recognized they would be all along - average. Nobody looked at Phil Foden or Kevin DeBruyne as kids and thought they were physically gifted or dominant as youth. They saw game IQ, potential, and dedication to excellence. In the US, those kids get put on the second team and forgotten in favor of the kid who is six inches taller and can score with raw size and few skills or smarts. We're great at collecting U11 trophies and not much afterward. (See SYC.)

What you are describing also happens in other sports. You don't think coaches are choosing the biggest and fastest basketball and football U11 kids in order to win NOW? They are but somehow we are still able to excel in other sports. Same microwave society works fine for all these other sports but not soccer?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The Olympics routinely shows that we have the best athletes. We don't have the best soccer players. That comes down to knowhow, culture, hunger, and system structure. A significant issue is the microwave society we live in. Everyone wants to win NOW. That results in picking big, fast kids - early developers usually. When those kids can no longer rely on their size and strength, they come what most who truly know the game recognized they would be all along - average. Nobody looked at Phil Foden or Kevin DeBruyne as kids and thought they were physically gifted or dominant as youth. They saw game IQ, potential, and dedication to excellence. In the US, those kids get put on the second team and forgotten in favor of the kid who is six inches taller and can score with raw size and few skills or smarts. We're great at collecting U11 trophies and not much afterward. (See SYC.)

What you are describing also happens in other sports. You don't think coaches are choosing the biggest and fastest basketball and football U11 kids in order to win NOW? They are but somehow we are still able to excel in other sports. Same microwave society works fine for all these other sports but not soccer?

The difference being that there are plenty of 5'6" mens professional soccer players around the world. Same can't be said for the other sports. We push the smaller kids aside because they weren't big enough at age 12. Lest we forget the game is played on the ground. I'd also argue that reentry to the game is easier in basketball and football than it is soccer. Once a kid gets pushed out or not advanced in club soccer, the kid and the parents really have to navigate the political beast that is youth club soccer. Coaches in other sports will look at a kid with open eyes if he fits the team. Not saying there aren't politics there as well, just not as much. There are also pathways through HS and AAU in basketball. Youth soccer is dominated by clubs that are political beasts. Not tall, not rich, and not connected - long hill to climb in US youth soccer.