Youth Soccer in rest of the world

[Anonymous]

We moved from Europe last year to the US soccer system and it's been quite a change. Beside aforementioned differences in training, one of the biggest issues has been cultural.

Football in Europe is just part of life. It's something the kids do at recess, it's what they talk about at lunch, it's what they watch on the weekends with their parents and uncles and friends. The style of play, the discussion of tactics, the attempts to recreate their heroes in the neighborhood. It's a football culture that is all encompassing and leads to a higher 'soccer IQ' than kids here, eventhough many here are great athletes with some decent coaching. This has been the biggest adjustment for us.

[Anonymous]

What did it cost to play where you were in Europe as opposed to the clubs here? What age child or children?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:What did it cost to play where you were in Europe as opposed to the clubs here? What age child or children?

U12 and U10. I think we paid $150 USD per kid per year, but we also chipped in some money for an overnight tournament which was like $100 (I think we paid for the coach's hotel). There were some other incidental birthday gifts, Christmas present, pizza night kind of things, but generally not very much.

The overall club (600 players) was subsidized by the FA, the state and the local community. There was a stipend based on the number of players we had and number of licensed coaches. We also had a local sponsor that helped with the kit costs and the field was provided by our local recreation department.

[Anonymous]

yep. no government funded soccer here except in the public school system for HS and college soccer.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What did it cost to play where you were in Europe as opposed to the clubs here? What age child or children?

U12 and U10. I think we paid $150 USD per kid per year, but we also chipped in some money for an overnight tournament which was like $100 (I think we paid for the coach's hotel). There were some other incidental birthday gifts, Christmas present, pizza night kind of things, but generally not very much.

The overall club (600 players) was subsidized by the FA, the state and the local community. There was a stipend based on the number of players we had and number of licensed coaches. We also had a local sponsor that helped with the kit costs and the field was provided by our local recreation department.

In contrast, the USSF has a multi-million dollar budget surplus, which it refuses to use to make the cost of soccer more affordable.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:yep. no government funded soccer here except in the public school system for HS and college soccer.

Oh stop. Necessary things like health care triggers people into acting like we will become a socialistic nightmare and you think free soccer is gonna happen?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:yep. no government funded soccer here except in the public school system for HS and college soccer.

Oh stop. Necessary things like health care triggers people into acting like we will become a socialistic nightmare and you think free soccer is gonna happen?

In Europe, national associations. which are non-government entities, sponsor/invest in youth soccer. They also have independently run professional clubs that compete in open league. The clubs invest in youth soccer through their academies and transfer fees to smaller clubs. There 's no socialistic nightmare with the soccer there.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:yep. no government funded soccer here except in the public school system for HS and college soccer.

Oh stop. Necessary things like health care triggers people into acting like we will become a socialistic nightmare and you think free soccer is gonna happen?

In Europe, national associations. which are non-government entities, sponsor/invest in youth soccer. They also have independently run professional clubs that compete in open league. The clubs invest in youth soccer through their academies and transfer fees to smaller clubs. There 's no socialistic nightmare with the soccer there.

Free things in America are Socialism!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:yep. no government funded soccer here except in the public school system for HS and college soccer.

Oh stop. Necessary things like health care triggers people into acting like we will become a socialistic nightmare and you think free soccer is gonna happen?

In Europe, national associations. which are non-government entities, sponsor/invest in youth soccer. They also have independently run professional clubs that compete in open league. The clubs invest in youth soccer through their academies and transfer fees to smaller clubs. There 's no socialistic nightmare with the soccer there.

Free things in America are Socialism!

There's nothing free. Even "free" breakfast at a hotel is hidden in the higher cost you pay for your hotel room. Someone has to pay for free things either through paying higher taxes or higher cost of other items.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:yep. no government funded soccer here except in the public school system for HS and college soccer.

Oh stop. Necessary things like health care triggers people into acting like we will become a socialistic nightmare and you think free soccer is gonna happen?

In Europe, national associations. which are non-government entities, sponsor/invest in youth soccer. They also have independently run professional clubs that compete in open league. The clubs invest in youth soccer through their academies and transfer fees to smaller clubs. There 's no socialistic nightmare with the soccer there.

Free things in America are Socialism!

There's nothing free. Even "free" breakfast at a hotel is hidden in the higher cost you pay for your hotel room. Someone has to pay for free things either through paying higher taxes or higher cost of other items.

And the reality is, soccer is not culturally important enough to be "free".

And as a general attitude we do throw socialism around against anything that is a social good but collectively paid.

[Anonymous]

RantingSoccerDad wrote:Generally, youth soccer in the rest of the world has two levels:

1. Pro academy with costs paid by the club
2. Youth program with minimal costs, like rec soccer here

Here, we have this:

1. Pro academy with costs paid by the club
2. "Travel" soccer in which we all pay $2K-$gazillionK
3. Rec soccer with minimal costs

So when people campaign on an "end pay-to-play" platform, it's actually a little complicated. What you'd have to do is eliminate that middle tier. And it's going to be awfully difficult to do that -- imagine telling parents, "No, you can't spend $5K so little Suzie can be on a team that's better than your rec teams."

Incidentally, I'm starting to do some research on national team pay. What I'm finding so far is that U.S. teams get a good bit more than overseas teams. Does that leave the federation with more money to spend on youth programs? I'm trying to find out.

I respectfully disagree with your comparison of youth programs (non-pro academy programs) overseas with rec soccer here. Youth programs overseas (Europe) are still coached by professional coaches who are given tools by the national association (training, nutrition, etc) that are on the cutting edge of research. The pro academies have affiliations with these youth programs that identify players and funnel them into a professional pipeline as appropriate. The level of play is not at all comparable to Rec-level soccer here. A better comparison might be travel soccer here, but without the cost.

[Anonymous]

RantingSoccerDad wrote:Generally, youth soccer in the rest of the world has two levels:

1. Pro academy with costs paid by the club
2. Youth program with minimal costs, like rec soccer here

Here, we have this:

1. Pro academy with costs paid by the club
2. "Travel" soccer in which we all pay $2K-$gazillionK
3. Rec soccer with minimal costs

So when people campaign on an "end pay-to-play" platform, it's actually a little complicated. What you'd have to do is eliminate that middle tier. And it's going to be awfully difficult to do that -- imagine telling parents, "No, you can't spend $5K so little Suzie can be on a team that's better than your rec teams."

Incidentally, I'm starting to do some research on national team pay. What I'm finding so far is that U.S. teams get a good bit more than overseas teams. Does that leave the federation with more money to spend on youth programs? I'm trying to find out.

When people campaign on an "end pay to play" platform, they aren't taking about the middle and lower tiers, they are talking about ther top tier - aspiring professionals.

The difference is that while our entire country has less than 25 funded pro academies, other countries whose entire population is less than the number of youth soccer players in this country, have 3-4 times that number.

Independent clubs competing in an open market (promotion/relegation).

Training Compensation.

Solidarity Payments.

Federation involvement to mandate youth academies at pro clubs, and set standards.

Federation involvement to provide quality and accessible coaching education.

That's what it takes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

RantingSoccerDad wrote:Generally, youth soccer in the rest of the world has two levels:

1. Pro academy with costs paid by the club
2. Youth program with minimal costs, like rec soccer here

Here, we have this:

1. Pro academy with costs paid by the club
2. "Travel" soccer in which we all pay $2K-$gazillionK
3. Rec soccer with minimal costs

So when people campaign on an "end pay-to-play" platform, it's actually a little complicated. What you'd have to do is eliminate that middle tier. And it's going to be awfully difficult to do that -- imagine telling parents, "No, you can't spend $5K so little Suzie can be on a team that's better than your rec teams."

Incidentally, I'm starting to do some research on national team pay. What I'm finding so far is that U.S. teams get a good bit more than overseas teams. Does that leave the federation with more money to spend on youth programs? I'm trying to find out.

When people campaign on an "end pay to play" platform, they aren't taking about the middle and lower tiers, they are talking about ther top tier - aspiring professionals.

The difference is that while our entire country has less than 25 funded pro academies, other countries whose entire population is less than the number of youth soccer players in this country, have 3-4 times that number.

Independent clubs competing in an open market (promotion/relegation).

Training Compensation.

Solidarity Payments.

Federation involvement to mandate youth academies at pro clubs, and set standards.

Federation involvement to provide quality and accessible coaching education.

That's what it takes.

And American caring about soccer.

[Anonymous]

If it makes sense you don't need to write a book to explain it. This system works well in the rest of the world. The US is an aberration from the norm and given our population and how much money is spent on soccer infrastructure and training, the results of current US system are abysmal. You can put 2 and 2 together without having to write a book. As Zlatan said in reference to the top of the US soccer pyramid, the system is sh*t and those who run it do not have any interest in improving it.

[Anonymous]

Lack of ability to pay youth clubs training compensation and solidarity payments is because of the players, not the higher ups