Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:All of the points people are making here are interesting, but I don't think they are realistic or constructive. Soccer and youth sports in the US are different than the rest of the world. That's a strength ! We should lean into our strengths and not try to imitate something we are not and will never be. The US formula can work in other sports. It works fairly well in women's soccer. Focus on what we can be great at and design our strategy, development, and rosters based on those strengths. Differentiate based on strengths, not a watered down version of somebody else.

Women's soccer works because of title ix. Now that pro leagues are starting to gain traction in europe, I doubt the US keeps its edge on the women's side

People have been predicting the demise of women's soccer for years. Last time I checked they just won a gold medal in the olympics and have a young roster with a fantastic new coach. No reason to think they won't remain competitive for the next 5-10 years.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:All of the points people are making here are interesting, but I don't think they are realistic or constructive. Soccer and youth sports in the US are different than the rest of the world. That's a strength ! We should lean into our strengths and not try to imitate something we are not and will never be. The US formula can work in other sports. It works fairly well in women's soccer. Focus on what we can be great at and design our strategy, development, and rosters based on those strengths. Differentiate based on strengths, not a watered down version of somebody else.

Most on DCUM dismiss whats required to improve our youth soccer for what they would like the answers to be.

Mainly because true high level soccer is alien to the majority.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:All of the points people are making here are interesting, but I don't think they are realistic or constructive. Soccer and youth sports in the US are different than the rest of the world. That's a strength ! We should lean into our strengths and not try to imitate something we are not and will never be. The US formula can work in other sports. It works fairly well in women's soccer. Focus on what we can be great at and design our strategy, development, and rosters based on those strengths. Differentiate based on strengths, not a watered down version of somebody else.

Women's soccer works because of title ix. Now that pro leagues are starting to gain traction in europe, I doubt the US keeps its edge on the women's side

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The problem with soccer in our country is that coaches at "top" clubs think that they need big and tall kids to win. They remove all creativity from the players. Possession, possession is all they say. The minute the players dribble or get creative they are taken out only to be told not to do that again. I have seen this at Bethesda, Potomac, SYC, etc. We have the worse teachers of soccer coaching and suppressing all creativity and talent. They promote win win at all cost. Cost of development. Most directors of these clubs have been trained in the same ineffective soccer philosophy. It will take a long time to change this culture. Then, add the $$ component to travel $occer and there you have it.

Could have stopped at your first sentence.
The focus on winning at early ages.
Instead of teaching and developing.
Their egos come first for the 'W'

Granted, the majority don't have the knowledge and experience to teach development properly.

Coaches can’t teach possession properly because players do not have the technical skills to execute possession play properly. And based on the threads, many parents don’t really understand what possession is.

Possession is not only quick passes, it’s continuing to possess and move the ball (eg, dribble long, quick dribble and pass, 1 v 1) and frankly, there are not many players who can quickly decide to do something else and execute it under pressure. If a players go-to is to dribble all the time, telling that player to stop is not stifling their creativity, it’s forcing them to think of other options.

Because coaches and parents want to win, even players with the technical skills don’t have the opportunity to make mistakes and learn to use their skills under pressure. They always use their safest option (quick pass or boot) or their go to (like dribbling).

It’s maddening that parents keep their kids on winning teams when their players aren’t learning anything new or getting better.

It's not just parents and coaches that want to win. Players want to win too Being on a team that loses every game is demoralizing especially at 8 or 9. Most kids wont grasp the concept of its ok to lose as long as they are individually developing . By nature for most winning is important. Other wise they Will stop playing if all they do is lose but 'develop'

Anonymous wrote:All of the points people are making here are interesting, but I don't think they are realistic or constructive. Soccer and youth sports in the US are different than the rest of the world. That's a strength ! We should lean into our strengths and not try to imitate something we are not and will never be. The US formula can work in other sports. It works fairly well in women's soccer. Focus on what we can be great at and design our strategy, development, and rosters based on those strengths. Differentiate based on strengths, not a watered down version of somebody else.

Anonymous wrote:All of the points people are making here are interesting, but I don't think they are realistic or constructive. Soccer and youth sports in the US are different than the rest of the world. That's a strength ! We should lean into our strengths and not try to imitate something we are not and will never be. The US formula can work in other sports. It works fairly well in women's soccer. Focus on what we can be great at and design our strategy, development, and rosters based on those strengths. Differentiate based on strengths, not a watered down version of somebody else.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:One major difference between England and the US is the accessibility of professional academies. In England, it's much easier to join a professional academy, and if selected, participation is free. These academies offer a comprehensive 4-5 day-a-week schedule of training and matches, with the added benefit of playing against equally skilled or even stronger opponents. For example, London alone is home to over 10 professional academies.

You get signed to professional academies at 8 and 9 years old in England after being scouted.
You don't just join

It is hard as hell to get in at U8 and only gets harder each above age group to join/stay.

That's correct about the terminology. Initially, players are invited by a club to development centers or centreof excellence, known as the pre-academy, from ages U6 to U8. A select few are then signed to the U9 level. While it's true that many aspire to join, only around 18 players per club are signed at U9 each season, making it a highly competitive process.

That's why it wouldn't work here. All of those parents with kids not chosen aren't just going to tell their kids soccer is over, they'll find private clubs who will organize leagues (i.e. exactly what we have now). I'm also not sure MLS teams desperately trying to grow fanbases want a kid's first association with the club to be getting cut as a 9 year old.

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.

Anonymous wrote:All of the points people are making here are interesting, but I don't think they are realistic or constructive. Soccer and youth sports in the US are different than the rest of the world. That's a strength ! We should lean into our strengths and not try to imitate something we are not and will never be. The US formula can work in other sports. It works fairly well in women's soccer. Focus on what we can be great at and design our strategy, development, and rosters based on those strengths. Differentiate based on strengths, not a watered down version of somebody else.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The problem with soccer in our country is that coaches at "top" clubs think that they need big and tall kids to win. They remove all creativity from the players. Possession, possession is all they say. The minute the players dribble or get creative they are taken out only to be told not to do that again. I have seen this at Bethesda, Potomac, SYC, etc. We have the worse teachers of soccer coaching and suppressing all creativity and talent. They promote win win at all cost. Cost of development. Most directors of these clubs have been trained in the same ineffective soccer philosophy. It will take a long time to change this culture. Then, add the $$ component to travel $occer and there you have it.

Could have stopped at your first sentence.
The focus on winning at early ages.
Instead of teaching and developing.
Their egos come first for the 'W'

Granted, the majority don't have the knowledge and experience to teach development properly.

Coaches can’t teach possession properly because players do not have the technical skills to execute possession play properly. And based on the threads, many parents don’t really understand what possession is.

Possession is not only quick passes, it’s continuing to possess and move the ball (eg, dribble long, quick dribble and pass, 1 v 1) and frankly, there are not many players who can quickly decide to do something else and execute it under pressure. If a players go-to is to dribble all the time, telling that player to stop is not stifling their creativity, it’s forcing them to think of other options.

Because coaches and parents want to win, even players with the technical skills don’t have the opportunity to make mistakes and learn to use their skills under pressure. They always use their safest option (quick pass or boot) or their go to (like dribbling).

It’s maddening that parents keep their kids on winning teams when their players aren’t learning anything new or getting better.

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'

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The problem with soccer in our country is that coaches at "top" clubs think that they need big and tall kids to win. They remove all creativity from the players. Possession, possession is all they say. The minute the players dribble or get creative they are taken out only to be told not to do that again. I have seen this at Bethesda, Potomac, SYC, etc. We have the worse teachers of soccer coaching and suppressing all creativity and talent. They promote win win at all cost. Cost of development. Most directors of these clubs have been trained in the same ineffective soccer philosophy. It will take a long time to change this culture. Then, add the $$ component to travel $occer and there you have it.

Could have stopped at your first sentence.
The focus on winning at early ages.
Instead of teaching and developing.
Their egos come first for the 'W'

Granted, the majority don't have the knowledge and experience to teach development properly.

Coaches can’t teach possession properly because players do not have the technical skills to execute possession play properly. And based on the threads, many parents don’t really understand what possession is.

Possession is not only quick passes, it’s continuing to possess and move the ball (eg, dribble long, quick dribble and pass, 1 v 1) and frankly, there are not many players who can quickly decide to do something else and execute it under pressure. If a players go-to is to dribble all the time, telling that player to stop is not stifling their creativity, it’s forcing them to think of other options.

Because coaches and parents want to win, even players with the technical skills don’t have the opportunity to make mistakes and learn to use their skills under pressure. They always use their safest option (quick pass or boot) or their go to (like dribbling).

It’s maddening that parents keep their kids on winning teams when their players aren’t learning anything new or getting better.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:One major difference between England and the US is the accessibility of professional academies. In England, it's much easier to join a professional academy, and if selected, participation is free. These academies offer a comprehensive 4-5 day-a-week schedule of training and matches, with the added benefit of playing against equally skilled or even stronger opponents. For example, London alone is home to over 10 professional academies.

You get signed to professional academies at 8 and 9 years old in England after being scouted.
You don't just join

It is hard as hell to get in at U8 and only gets harder each above age group to join/stay.

That's correct about the terminology. Initially, players are invited by a club to development centers or centreof excellence, known as the pre-academy, from ages U6 to U8. A select few are then signed to the U9 level. While it's true that many aspire to join, only around 18 players per club are signed at U9 each season, making it a highly competitive process.

That's why it wouldn't work here. All of those parents with kids not chosen aren't just going to tell their kids soccer is over, they'll find private clubs who will organize leagues (i.e. exactly what we have now). I'm also not sure MLS teams desperately trying to grow fanbases want a kid's first association with the club to be getting cut as a 9 year old.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:One major difference between England and the US is the accessibility of professional academies. In England, it's much easier to join a professional academy, and if selected, participation is free. These academies offer a comprehensive 4-5 day-a-week schedule of training and matches, with the added benefit of playing against equally skilled or even stronger opponents. For example, London alone is home to over 10 professional academies.

You get signed to professional academies at 8 and 9 years old in England after being scouted.
You don't just join

It is hard as hell to get in at U8 and only gets harder each above age group to join/stay.

That's correct about the terminology. Initially, players are invited by a club to development centers or centreof excellence, known as the pre-academy, from ages U6 to U8. A select few are then signed to the U9 level. While it's true that many aspire to join, only around 18 players per club are signed at U9 each season, making it a highly competitive process.