DA vs ECNL vs everything else

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:^You are arguing my point. America has the athletes. We have no problem with physically gifted American soccer players that have speed, size, strength. We have more kids playing soccer than any other sport in the US. It's keeping some of them in it that's needed.

How do they get that intelligence? It starts at the BEGINNING. It doesn't start at the end of the line with a U17 DA or USMNT coach.

The kids need to be watching a lot of European/S. American soccer from a young age. They need to be encouraged in creativity. They need trainers that understand how a soccer player develops.

I still don't see that at any travel Club in the area. Then at 11/12 these kids filter into pre-DA--still missing key pieces of development and missing a true understanding of the game. It doesn't work when just a few kids on the team 'understand'. The entire team has to have that soccer IQ. They need to know where to be to support their teammates. They need to make the pass fully confident that their teammate will be in the right place by the time the ball gets there.

With your rational would do you think Pulisic at age 14/15 and 120 lbs soaking wet 5'7" was one of your so-called dream athletes? He was one of the tiniest kids on his team when he started out. Yet, he is better than 99% of soccer players on the planet. Speed, brains, and competitiveness. The average Professional soccer player in the World is 5'11"; in Spain 5'10". The athletic attributes alone don't get you anywhere in soccer, nor does skill alone. Yes- you need a combo of both. But, you can't tell in the early years which kids will have that physicality down the road. We are still picking the most dominant players in the little kid leagues. Our time-line for a US soccer athlete is that they are fully-developed by U14/15 and that is the age when most kids quit soccer completely. So--why learn skill when these players can get by on pure physicality/kick-and-run and be SELECTED for those attributes up until then. Our definition of "athlete" for Football/Baseball/Hockey doesn't translate to the ideal soccer athlete and the type of agility/speed needed with the intelligence. Americans have in their mind that we will fill the field with 6'2" and over players and dominate everyone in the world if we could just get those players from other sports. We have the players, we just ignore them and their specific athleticism that fits the sport.

Wrong again. The elite athletes in soccer here are not spending nearly enough time playing and watching. 90 percent of this occurs outside training. And I love the use of Pulisic. He is the exception that proves the rule. He is an elite athlete and incredibly intelligent. And a unicorn among Americans. It is you, not I, looking for athletes out of American central casting.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^You are arguing my point. America has the athletes. We have no problem with physically gifted American soccer players that have speed, size, strength. We have more kids playing soccer than any other sport in the US. It's keeping some of them in it that's needed.

How do they get that intelligence? It starts at the BEGINNING. It doesn't start at the end of the line with a U17 DA or USMNT coach.

The kids need to be watching a lot of European/S. American soccer from a young age. They need to be encouraged in creativity. They need trainers that understand how a soccer player develops.

I still don't see that at any travel Club in the area. Then at 11/12 these kids filter into pre-DA--still missing key pieces of development and missing a true understanding of the game. It doesn't work when just a few kids on the team 'understand'. The entire team has to have that soccer IQ. They need to know where to be to support their teammates. They need to make the pass fully confident that their teammate will be in the right place by the time the ball gets there.

With your rational would do you think Pulisic at age 14/15 and 120 lbs soaking wet 5'7" was one of your so-called dream athletes? He was one of the tiniest kids on his team when he started out. Yet, he is better than 99% of soccer players on the planet. Speed, brains, and competitiveness. The average Professional soccer player in the World is 5'11"; in Spain 5'10". The athletic attributes alone don't get you anywhere in soccer, nor does skill alone. Yes- you need a combo of both. But, you can't tell in the early years which kids will have that physicality down the road. We are still picking the most dominant players in the little kid leagues. Our time-line for a US soccer athlete is that they are fully-developed by U14/15 and that is the age when most kids quit soccer completely. So--why learn skill when these players can get by on pure physicality/kick-and-run and be SELECTED for those attributes up until then. Our definition of "athlete" for Football/Baseball/Hockey doesn't translate to the ideal soccer athlete and the type of agility/speed needed with the intelligence. Americans have in their mind that we will fill the field with 6'2" and over players and dominate everyone in the world if we could just get those players from other sports. We have the players, we just ignore them and their specific athleticism that fits the sport.

Wrong again. The elite athletes in soccer here are not spending nearly enough time playing and watching. 90 percent of this occurs outside training. And I love the use of Pulisic. He is the exception that proves the rule. He is an elite athlete and incredibly intelligent. And a unicorn among Americans. It is you, not I, looking for athletes out of American central casting.

No, the PP is correct. We tend to ascribe athletic attributes from our sports and project them on to soccer and believe it will all work out.

Then on top of it, you have people who like a PP claims they just picked up Lacrosse in high school and went on to play it in college. Soccer requires far more technical training that MUST be done at earlier ages. Any kid who has thrown a ball, played baseball, a little hockey or anything sport involving throwing and catching can pick up lacrosse. But there are almost no sports played that naturally translate to feet not only being the means of getting around but also the way to manipulate the object at the same time.

Our experience of "just play a bunch of sports and you can just pick up and play what you want in high school" doesn't work in soccer. Also, the rest of the world does not share the same fascination of school and college sports the way we do. In Europe the bar is set at playing soccer professionally. We have set the bar to play soccer in college. That bar is to low to develop world class soccer players.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^You are arguing my point. America has the athletes. We have no problem with physically gifted American soccer players that have speed, size, strength. We have more kids playing soccer than any other sport in the US. It's keeping some of them in it that's needed.

How do they get that intelligence? It starts at the BEGINNING. It doesn't start at the end of the line with a U17 DA or USMNT coach.

The kids need to be watching a lot of European/S. American soccer from a young age. They need to be encouraged in creativity. They need trainers that understand how a soccer player develops.

I still don't see that at any travel Club in the area. Then at 11/12 these kids filter into pre-DA--still missing key pieces of development and missing a true understanding of the game. It doesn't work when just a few kids on the team 'understand'. The entire team has to have that soccer IQ. They need to know where to be to support their teammates. They need to make the pass fully confident that their teammate will be in the right place by the time the ball gets there.

With your rational would do you think Pulisic at age 14/15 and 120 lbs soaking wet 5'7" was one of your so-called dream athletes? He was one of the tiniest kids on his team when he started out. Yet, he is better than 99% of soccer players on the planet. Speed, brains, and competitiveness. The average Professional soccer player in the World is 5'11"; in Spain 5'10". The athletic attributes alone don't get you anywhere in soccer, nor does skill alone. Yes- you need a combo of both. But, you can't tell in the early years which kids will have that physicality down the road. We are still picking the most dominant players in the little kid leagues. Our time-line for a US soccer athlete is that they are fully-developed by U14/15 and that is the age when most kids quit soccer completely. So--why learn skill when these players can get by on pure physicality/kick-and-run and be SELECTED for those attributes up until then. Our definition of "athlete" for Football/Baseball/Hockey doesn't translate to the ideal soccer athlete and the type of agility/speed needed with the intelligence. Americans have in their mind that we will fill the field with 6'2" and over players and dominate everyone in the world if we could just get those players from other sports. We have the players, we just ignore them and their specific athleticism that fits the sport.

I definitely intended to agree with that point from PP, which is why I would label Pulisic an elite athlete. World class speed, agility, vision.

Wrong again. The elite athletes in soccer here are not spending nearly enough time playing and watching. 90 percent of this occurs outside training. And I love the use of Pulisic. He is the exception that proves the rule. He is an elite athlete and incredibly intelligent. And a unicorn among Americans. It is you, not I, looking for athletes out of American central casting.

No, the PP is correct. We tend to ascribe athletic attributes from our sports and project them on to soccer and believe it will all work out.

Then on top of it, you have people who like a PP claims they just picked up Lacrosse in high school and went on to play it in college. Soccer requires far more technical training that MUST be done at earlier ages. Any kid who has thrown a ball, played baseball, a little hockey or anything sport involving throwing and catching can pick up lacrosse. But there are almost no sports played that naturally translate to feet not only being the means of getting around but also the way to manipulate the object at the same time.

Our experience of "just play a bunch of sports and you can just pick up and play what you want in high school" doesn't work in soccer. Also, the rest of the world does not share the same fascination of school and college sports the way we do. In Europe the bar is set at playing soccer professionally. We have set the bar to play soccer in college. That bar is to low to develop world class soccer players.

I definitely US intended to agree with that point from PP, which is why I would label Pulisic an elite athlete. World class speed, agility, vision. And I agree with the point about developing players for soccer in college vs world class players. But that goes back to the broader point about the men's player pool. Not nearly enough time playing and watching soccer outside of practice. and frankly, not much practice. And I will compare the time spent in soccer to sports like football (3-4 hour practices four to five days a week plus games) and basketball (good players routinely spend 30-50 hours per week playing). Yes, I know, that is a ton of time playing sports. But that is exactly my point about the player pool. Unlike their global counterparts, these are not kids looking to make it or break it in soccer as their only means to a different life. It is a classically amateur pursuit in this country. There is absolutely nothing wrong with that, unless, somehow, you think you will produce a global soccer powerhouse. No coaching or managerial system will transform these kids into world class soccer players. It has to begin in the player home.

[Anonymous]

Here in the US, there are lot of garbage coaches that try to coach at young ages unfortunately. This is the biggest hurdle for American soccer.

[Anonymous]

PP makes a major point. In Mexico, Argentina, Brazil, Germany or Spain, if a kid wants to make a living playing a professional sport, soccer is the ticket. In the US you can make a living fishing for Bass or bowling. The best athletes are drawn to the leading sports: basketball, football, baseball and hockey. There is to much competition in the US.

[Anonymous]

Problem too is that the sport is seen as a cash cow and is not as accessible as the other sports on basic cable. Sometimes they’ll show EPL games but even that isn’t particularly the league with the best style of play across the board.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:PP makes a major point. In Mexico, Argentina, Brazil, Germany or Spain, if a kid wants to make a living playing a professional sport, soccer is the ticket. In the US you can make a living fishing for Bass or bowling. The best athletes are drawn to the leading sports: basketball, football, baseball and hockey. There is to much competition in the US.

That's not the point that PP was making, and it's no part of why the US is not yet a soccer powerhouse today. There are more than enough elite athletes playing youth soccer as their primary sport here to make up a world class pool, if they had the training available to their coounterparts in other countries.

I don't necessarily agree that the drive has to come from the "ticket out of poverty" factor. Many of the top German players, as just one example, came from comfortable backgrounds. I do agree we'd be better if there was no college soccer option or if college soccer could be professionalized like college football and basketball (not that I approve of the way the corrupt NCAA handles these sports, mind you, but it does allow the players to continue to develop during their college stints).

[Anonymous]

There needs to be a pathway to the pros through USL and NASL, rather than going to college to play soccer. Set up pro/rep and tie it to MLS. And ultimately yes, the cream of the crop need to go abroad, NOT just to Europe, but to Mexico and South America.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:There needs to be a pathway to the pros through USL and NASL, rather than going to college to play soccer. Set up pro/rep and tie it to MLS. And ultimately yes, the cream of the crop need to go abroad, NOT just to Europe, but to Mexico and South America.

Add PDL to the other leagues above. Also we need to educate people because I’ve seen too many posts where people have said that the older age groups are said and done and will not develop further. That is just wild and asinine.

[Anonymous]

I disagree that our women are doing "just fine". Have you watched the women's UEFA? The British women's "PL"? And I've been watching our younger women's/girls' teams. Of course they can beat the weaker "fish", but like China pounded our U17s, and I watched in FL our U20s play England's U20s. The only reason it ended in a tie is they had an own goal. Title 9 and the athleticism has long since kept US women winning, but the tide is turning, and most people have blinders on with no idea what's coming.

[Anonymous]

Of the two clubs, Loudoun and FCV, I get the sense that FCV is more serious as it relates to girls soccer but I also get the since that the FCV culture is a bit more aggressive. I have read a few past posts about FCV but most of it appears to be from parents who are just petty. Can someone please provide insights or share experiences about FCV. It seems like an amazing club that focuses on training/development and does a great job of prepareing serious players for the next level. I also hear from parents that say they would never take their girls there without explaing why, almost like they signed a NDA to refrain from making negative comments.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Of the two clubs, Loudoun and FCV, I get the sense that FCV is more serious as it relates to girls soccer but I also get the since that the FCV culture is a bit more aggressive. I have read a few past posts about FCV but most of it appears to be from parents who are just petty. Can someone please provide insights or share experiences about FCV. It seems like an amazing club that focuses on training/development and does a great job of prepareing serious players for the next level. I also hear from parents that say they would never take their girls there without explaing why, almost like they signed a NDA to refrain from making negative comments.

FCV will bring in any number of kids from the outside and cast off anyone on the bottom half of the squad. This will happen at any age. The only kids at FCV who are safe are top 5 players, everyone else is expendable in favor of outside talent.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Of the two clubs, Loudoun and FCV, I get the sense that FCV is more serious as it relates to girls soccer but I also get the since that the FCV culture is a bit more aggressive. I have read a few past posts about FCV but most of it appears to be from parents who are just petty. Can someone please provide insights or share experiences about FCV. It seems like an amazing club that focuses on training/development and does a great job of prepareing serious players for the next level. I also hear from parents that say they would never take their girls there without explaing why, almost like they signed a NDA to refrain from making negative comments.

FCV will bring in any number of kids from the outside and cast off anyone on the bottom half of the squad. This will happen at any age. The only kids at FCV who are safe are top 5 players, everyone else is expendable in favor of outside talent.

In competitive youth soccer, this is what you are paying for within reason. You are not paying top dollar for an inflexible roster. You want to train with and against the best talent available.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Of the two clubs, Loudoun and FCV, I get the sense that FCV is more serious as it relates to girls soccer but I also get the since that the FCV culture is a bit more aggressive. I have read a few past posts about FCV but most of it appears to be from parents who are just petty. Can someone please provide insights or share experiences about FCV. It seems like an amazing club that focuses on training/development and does a great job of prepareing serious players for the next level. I also hear from parents that say they would never take their girls there without explaing why, almost like they signed a NDA to refrain from making negative comments.

FCV will bring in any number of kids from the outside and cast off anyone on the bottom half of the squad. This will happen at any age. The only kids at FCV who are safe are top 5 players, everyone else is expendable in favor of outside talent.

In competitive youth soccer, this is what you are paying for within reason. You are not paying top dollar for an inflexible roster. You want to train with and against the best talent available.

Except when the turnover runs contrary to the selling point of "development" as the PP eluded to in the bolded statement above.

[Anonymous]

^^ So yes, if you believe player development is a place that collects already developed talent then yes FCV is for you.