Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

My DC played u12 in Europe this summer. In some countries, offsides is not played until u12 and throw-ins are not done until u12 either. The focus is different - make the game more organic and fluid. Fewer whistles, fewer rules, keep the ball at kids' feet and get them touches and thinking about making runs and playing into space....

How about primarily 7v7 or 9v9 until U17 except for few big competitions a year? Another tidbit from girls soccer in Europe. Results secondary to development. Less games vs. training. Allowing players to play creatively and have fun doing so.

That sounds like fun, small sided play, and fewer games. You're trying to encourage more kids to play right? The less games, more training is a US soccer mandate that doesn't work in our culture.

Anonymous wrote:Most importantly, the professional clubs subsidize the youth not the other way around. And monetization for these clubs (and their investors) via development of youth players not from milking families in volume.

Nice idea, but flawed. On the women's side, these clubs are struggling to keep their heads above water. Look at Spirit, they jettisoned their academy because it is a boat anchor in the current economic situation they face.

Anonymous wrote:

-Signed parent of youth players in both boys and girls youth soccer with DA and ECNL experience.

Thanks for the signature. It adds credibility to your post.

Thanks for the snark.

The boys and girls I saw playing in Europe had plenty of fun - your expertise aside. Training to game ratio is important if the goal is development. But if we want more cheap plastic trophies and medals, lets keep adding leagues, cups and championships so that everyone has one.

The reason clubs struggle is that there is no incentive for investors to get involved and no way to monetize development of players and clubs. Switch the model and you may see some big changes.

Anonymous wrote:

My DC played u12 in Europe this summer. In some countries, offsides is not played until u12 and throw-ins are not done until u12 either. The focus is different - make the game more organic and fluid. Fewer whistles, fewer rules, keep the ball at kids' feet and get them touches and thinking about making runs and playing into space....

How about primarily 7v7 or 9v9 until U17 except for few big competitions a year? Another tidbit from girls soccer in Europe. Results secondary to development. Less games vs. training. Allowing players to play creatively and have fun doing so.

That sounds like fun, small sided play, and fewer games. You're trying to encourage more kids to play right? The less games, more training is a US soccer mandate that doesn't work in our culture.

Anonymous wrote:Most importantly, the professional clubs subsidize the youth not the other way around. And monetization for these clubs (and their investors) via development of youth players not from milking families in volume.

Nice idea, but flawed. On the women's side, these clubs are struggling to keep their heads above water. Look at Spirit, they jettisoned their academy because it is a boat anchor in the current economic situation they face.

Anonymous wrote:

-Signed parent of youth players in both boys and girls youth soccer with DA and ECNL experience.

Thanks for the signature. It adds credibility to your post.

Anonymous wrote:Megan Rapinoe wouldn't be among the top five best American players. Can we be a little logical here?

Ok then who is better? I can't believe you wouldn't include her.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I wouldn’t say it’s something that we don’t do, but they are much better on the tactical side.

We seem to believe that shape and movement can not be taught before 13 and that nearly everything up until then should mostly technical.

We stand in lines at early ages dribbling through cones and they are getting more touches in and learning soccer space and movements doing rondos are the same age.

Once the European Womens side hits critical mass we will be forever behind.

+1000 on the not learning shape and movement. Little kids learn it in basketball, so I think they can learn it at a young age in soccer.

Passing and trapping a ball with a clean first touch with proper body shape are also technical skills. We don’t focus on that nearly enough. Shooting is also technical.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I wouldn’t say it’s something that we don’t do, but they are much better on the tactical side.

We seem to believe that shape and movement can not be taught before 13 and that nearly everything up until then should mostly technical.

We stand in lines at early ages dribbling through cones and they are getting more touches in and learning soccer space and movements doing rondos are the same age.

Once the European Womens side hits critical mass we will be forever behind.

+1000 on the not learning shape and movement. Little kids learn it in basketball, so I think they can learn it at a young age in soccer.

Megan Rapinoe wouldn't be among the top five best American players. Can we be a little logical here?

Anonymous wrote:I wouldn’t say it’s something that we don’t do, but they are much better on the tactical side.

We seem to believe that shape and movement can not be taught before 13 and that nearly everything up until then should mostly technical.

We stand in lines at early ages dribbling through cones and they are getting more touches in and learning soccer space and movements doing rondos are the same age.

Once the European Womens side hits critical mass we will be forever behind.

I wouldn’t say it’s something that we don’t do, but they are much better on the tactical side.

8:35 and 10:03 are right on. We just have the advantage of having opened sports to women sooner than other countries. That's it. We are disadvantaged in so many other ways.

I have nephews and nieces in two of the countries you mentioned, several of whom play soccer on a competitive level. These are middle/upper middle class kids and they pay next to nothing to play. They don't need a rec league starting at age five because they play at recess, at the park, after school, etc at a much higher level than any American rec league. At a certain age, they join the the youth teams subsidized by the city and by the professional teams.

My nieces complain bitterly about the unfair treatment girls receive. They talk about fewer opportunities, worse practice time, worse fields, and so on. But they find a way to play... with boys, with much older girls, on multiple teams, and so on. Of course they are dying to play in the US for college.

But it's only a matter of time before several of these countries beat the US.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:CULTURE OF SOCCER.

People in other countries speak soccer the way people here speak football or baseball. There's no need to teach the equivalent of U9 parents in other countries the offside rule, they all already know it. Etc.

You'd be surprised.

My DC played u12 in Europe this summer. In some countries, offsides is not played until u12 and throw-ins are not done until u12 either. The focus is different - make the game more organic and fluid. Fewer whistles, fewer rules, keep the ball at kids' feet and get them touches and thinking about making runs and playing into space....

How about primarily 7v7 or 9v9 until U17 except for few big competitions a year? Another tidbit from girls soccer in Europe. Results secondary to development. Less games vs. training. Allowing players to play creatively and have fun doing so.

Most importantly, the professional clubs subsidize the youth not the other way around. And monetization for these clubs (and their investors) via development of youth players not from milking families in volume.

That’s where the previous post regarding breaking up monopoly is spot on. Promotion relegation at professional level is a must to try to break pay to play. Any reasons given that promotion relegation would not work in US are brainwashed answers coming from the US SOCCER / MLS mafia. Women could set example for men with a pro league with promotion relegation and local/regional investment and show how it could be done. The rest of the world playing women’s soccer is making it possible. Make it happen!

No one should be scared to be respectfully critical of the system if they are really interested in improving it for their own experiences and to give real opportunities to kids and families of all income levels.

-Signed parent of youth players in both boys and girls youth soccer with DA and ECNL experience.

Anonymous wrote:CULTURE OF SOCCER.

People in other countries speak soccer the way people here speak football or baseball. There's no need to teach the equivalent of U9 parents in other countries the offside rule, they all already know it. Etc.

You'd be surprised.

My DC played u12 in Europe this summer. In some countries, offsides is not played until u12 and throw-ins are not done until u12 either. The focus is different - make the game more organic and fluid. Fewer whistles, fewer rules, keep the ball at kids' feet and get them touches and thinking about making runs and playing into space....

Anonymous wrote:Giant professional men’s professional clubs are now fielding women’s teams. You all cry about pay for okay but don’t have a solution.

The solution is simple. The USSF should mandate an open professional league with independent clubs. Break up the monopoly.

The answer to the headline of this topic is:lose. (Usually to us).

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I watched the NWSL final last week and noticed that the best player was a Brazilian not named Marta. In the World Cup this past summer, the USWNT had a dominant performance but it was clear that many other countries were not only on our level but surpassing us as it relates to technical abilities. France, the UK, Spain, Japan, Brazil, Germany, etc, are clearly in strong positions. I have traveled to these countries for business and I don't know that they have a youth soccer program any where near the size of what we have here. Parents in those countries are not dedicating Saturday mornings to soccer games for their kids. Does anyone know what they are doing to develop world class players that can come to the US and win MVP in the final in the US pro league which features the country's best talent? I am certain parents are not forking out $5,000+ a year for travel soccer and yet, if you review the rosters of any elite college team, you will see that a quarter to a third of the players are international. Please, help me understand.

Please Megan Rapinoe is the best female soccer player ever! As long as the USA has her we will dominate.

Urggh..have you seen Sam Kerr?

Have you seen Tobin Heath??

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I watched the NWSL final last week and noticed that the best player was a Brazilian not named Marta. In the World Cup this past summer, the USWNT had a dominant performance but it was clear that many other countries were not only on our level but surpassing us as it relates to technical abilities. France, the UK, Spain, Japan, Brazil, Germany, etc, are clearly in strong positions. I have traveled to these countries for business and I don't know that they have a youth soccer program any where near the size of what we have here. Parents in those countries are not dedicating Saturday mornings to soccer games for their kids. Does anyone know what they are doing to develop world class players that can come to the US and win MVP in the final in the US pro league which features the country's best talent? I am certain parents are not forking out $5,000+ a year for travel soccer and yet, if you review the rosters of any elite college team, you will see that a quarter to a third of the players are international. Please, help me understand.

Please Megan Rapinoe is the best female soccer player ever! As long as the USA has her we will dominate.

Urggh..have you seen Sam Kerr?