I was blown away by the intensity at the school my kid goes to when they added football. The soccer team plays in front of a handful of parents and 1-2 kids, the football team gets a crowd. They even got a cheerleading squad for them.

Even my soccer kid talks about wanting to go to football games!

Anonymous wrote:Don't mistake not liking it with not understanding it

Thank you. It isn't rocket science. You get the ball and try and generate opportunities to score. We understand it just fine. At its core, it is not that different than many American field sports like lacrosse, hockey, and even volleyball and basketball (albeit often with more players and a bigger field). Possess the ball, move the ball, create mismatches/numbers advantages, and generate high-quality scoring opportunities. How you do it is generally the same -- move without the ball to strategically-advantageous open space, utilize crisp and accurate ball movement. Even football is the same (albeit much more structured and without the continuous in-game flow).

I don't like it (I don't hate it, but I don't watch it at the professional level) b/c the rules (offsides) depress scoring opportunities and archaic traditions (clock management/transparency) are non-sensical and frustrating.

Anonymous wrote:Hosting the World Cup is going to go a long ways. The world will see how America as Ms love soccer and if only our boys can pull off a deep run …

It will give a boost to soccer for the summer which is positive for sure. But then as soon as football starts up in August everyone will forget all about it. Kind of like the olympics this year.

People have to realize how far down soccer ranks in this country compared to other sports. Soccer is not just below football, baseball, basketball, but also below NHL hockey and even NASCAR and golf in media revenues. It is a very niche sport. Once you get out of our soccer world bubble you realize soccer has such a long way to go.

Anonymous wrote:Hosting the World Cup is going to go a long ways. The world will see how America as Ms love soccer and if only our boys can pull off a deep run …

They said the same thing in '94.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The problem (that won't be fixed) is that youth soccer is a huge business with lots of money to be made. So, the focus is on winning. Not the slow-burn developmental process that they embrace in Europe. No, we can't waste time doing small-sided games and 5v5 matches to build our soccer IQ...we need to scrimmage ASAP because we have super important tournaments coming up!

It's all to build the profile of the club and never about the players. Win tournaments now! Because money is there to be made. Its only and always about the money here. So you gotta find a way to deal with the system and make it work in your advantage...focus on what you can control.

The goal of that slow burn is to sell a player to another club. The US gets lots of things wrong, but at least our kids aren't binding themselves to clubs in a way to allows the club to control their rights. We also value participation over a focus on the elite. Our incentives are different, but don't pretend European clubs care about what is best for kids

They are certainly about developing better soccer players. And yes...the top academies in Europe are openly trying to develop players to make their 1st team as a pro or sell them at a later date. I don't see how that negates that they are still trying to develop players in a proper way. The point is we aren't...we are just trying to win so the club can get bigger. Those aren't the same things. We don't really get anything right.

That's the difference. European clubs want quality and will cull their teams every year because kids without potential are not worth wasting resources. Pay to play lets more kids, including those who don't have a hope of playing in college let alone pro. If you care about producing professional players, Europe is better. If you don't and you just want your kid to enjoy playing, the US is better. I'd be willing to bet that most people would prefer their kid be allowed to continue playing even if it means the national team can't be as talented as it would be under a European system because most people, even those with kids in ECNL or MLSnext, do not actually care about professional soccer or the national teams

This is uninformed...by a lot. I don't think you understand how many teams exist in Europe at the youth and adult level. You are talking about the top academies only like that's it. They have so many more options for kids at all levels in Europe than here for cheaper, less travel, better development, and better competition. I lived in the UK for a long time and this isn't "trust me bro". We are not doing anything better in the US when it comes to soccer...and we are paying so much money for it.

9% of kids who are part of team's academy in the UK play professionally at any level there. That is less than one in ten. And by professionally, I don't just mean the Premier League. This includes, The Championship, League One, and Two in England as well as the full time professional leagues/teams in Scotland, Wales and NI.

This is fact and it is not only about the "top academies." Kids will be accepted at a young age and possibly/dropped within a year. Maybe another club will pick them up. Maybe they won't.

Dude you don't get it...you are still talking about "top academies". A "team's academy" IS A TOP ACADEMY in Europe. There are soooooo many more teams in the UK than that. School teams...grassroots...cat 2/3. The original point was that the UK is better to be a pro and the US is better if you want your kid to just enjoy playing. That is incredibly misinformed by someone who probably has never been to Europe. Europe is doing better than the US at all levels of soccer...for cheaper and better competition.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The problem (that won't be fixed) is that youth soccer is a huge business with lots of money to be made. So, the focus is on winning. Not the slow-burn developmental process that they embrace in Europe. No, we can't waste time doing small-sided games and 5v5 matches to build our soccer IQ...we need to scrimmage ASAP because we have super important tournaments coming up!

It's all to build the profile of the club and never about the players. Win tournaments now! Because money is there to be made. Its only and always about the money here. So you gotta find a way to deal with the system and make it work in your advantage...focus on what you can control.

The goal of that slow burn is to sell a player to another club. The US gets lots of things wrong, but at least our kids aren't binding themselves to clubs in a way to allows the club to control their rights. We also value participation over a focus on the elite. Our incentives are different, but don't pretend European clubs care about what is best for kids

They are certainly about developing better soccer players. And yes...the top academies in Europe are openly trying to develop players to make their 1st team as a pro or sell them at a later date. I don't see how that negates that they are still trying to develop players in a proper way. The point is we aren't...we are just trying to win so the club can get bigger. Those aren't the same things. We don't really get anything right.

That's the difference. European clubs want quality and will cull their teams every year because kids without potential are not worth wasting resources. Pay to play lets more kids, including those who don't have a hope of playing in college let alone pro. If you care about producing professional players, Europe is better. If you don't and you just want your kid to enjoy playing, the US is better. I'd be willing to bet that most people would prefer their kid be allowed to continue playing even if it means the national team can't be as talented as it would be under a European system because most people, even those with kids in ECNL or MLSnext, do not actually care about professional soccer or the national teams

This is uninformed...by a lot. I don't think you understand how many teams exist in Europe at the youth and adult level. You are talking about the top academies only like that's it. They have so many more options for kids at all levels in Europe than here for cheaper, less travel, better development, and better competition. I lived in the UK for a long time and this isn't "trust me bro". We are not doing anything better in the US when it comes to soccer...and we are paying so much money for it.

9% of kids who are part of team's academy in the UK play professionally at any level there. That is less than one in ten. And by professionally, I don't just mean the Premier League. This includes, The Championship, League One, and Two in England as well as the full time professional leagues/teams in Scotland, Wales and NI.

This is fact and it is not only about the "top academies." Kids will be accepted at a young age and possibly/dropped within a year. Maybe another club will pick them up. Maybe they won't.

After pre-academy, kids sign 2 or 3 year contracts
So you’re making up stories with the one year dropping scenario unless it's extreme cases.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is no catalyst to change the culture. There needs to be a phenomenal American male player that can capture attention in the same way Jordan and LeBron did. They also have to win on the international stage. Donovan and pulisic couldn't do either. Alex Morgan did great things for women's soccer but in order for the change to happen in America, it has to be a male player. I'm a girl dad and not being a chovinist but it is what it is. Sports culture in America is based around male sports. Until we get that dominant american male soccer player whose talents are likened to Maradona, Pele, messi, ronaldo, no change will happen to soccer culture in America.

England hasn't won anything since 1966

Argentina hadn't won anything for many moons

The USA wins at many Olympics sports and we still don't care about them

Not sure how the comment relates at all. It's not about winning necessarily...it's about building a culture. Say what you want about the English and Argentinian national teams, but they def have a culture of loving soccer. Olympic sports don't even belong in the conversation...of course no one cares about archery and break dancing.

You're not sure how the comment relates when they are responding to a PP who said winning will change the feelings towards soccer and the culture?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The problem (that won't be fixed) is that youth soccer is a huge business with lots of money to be made. So, the focus is on winning. Not the slow-burn developmental process that they embrace in Europe. No, we can't waste time doing small-sided games and 5v5 matches to build our soccer IQ...we need to scrimmage ASAP because we have super important tournaments coming up!

It's all to build the profile of the club and never about the players. Win tournaments now! Because money is there to be made. Its only and always about the money here. So you gotta find a way to deal with the system and make it work in your advantage...focus on what you can control.

The goal of that slow burn is to sell a player to another club. The US gets lots of things wrong, but at least our kids aren't binding themselves to clubs in a way to allows the club to control their rights. We also value participation over a focus on the elite. Our incentives are different, but don't pretend European clubs care about what is best for kids

They are certainly about developing better soccer players. And yes...the top academies in Europe are openly trying to develop players to make their 1st team as a pro or sell them at a later date. I don't see how that negates that they are still trying to develop players in a proper way. The point is we aren't...we are just trying to win so the club can get bigger. Those aren't the same things. We don't really get anything right.

That's the difference. European clubs want quality and will cull their teams every year because kids without potential are not worth wasting resources. Pay to play lets more kids, including those who don't have a hope of playing in college let alone pro. If you care about producing professional players, Europe is better. If you don't and you just want your kid to enjoy playing, the US is better. I'd be willing to bet that most people would prefer their kid be allowed to continue playing even if it means the national team can't be as talented as it would be under a European system because most people, even those with kids in ECNL or MLSnext, do not actually care about professional soccer or the national teams

This is uninformed...by a lot. I don't think you understand how many teams exist in Europe at the youth and adult level. You are talking about the top academies only like that's it. They have so many more options for kids at all levels in Europe than here for cheaper, less travel, better development, and better competition. I lived in the UK for a long time and this isn't "trust me bro". We are not doing anything better in the US when it comes to soccer...and we are paying so much money for it.

9% of kids who are part of team's academy in the UK play professionally at any level there. That is less than one in ten. And by professionally, I don't just mean the Premier League. This includes, The Championship, League One, and Two in England as well as the full time professional leagues/teams in Scotland, Wales and NI.

This is fact and it is not only about the "top academies." Kids will be accepted at a young age and possibly/dropped within a year. Maybe another club will pick them up. Maybe they won't.

Hosting the World Cup is going to go a long ways. The world will see how America as Ms love soccer and if only our boys can pull off a deep run …

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is no catalyst to change the culture. There needs to be a phenomenal American male player that can capture attention in the same way Jordan and LeBron did. They also have to win on the international stage. Donovan and pulisic couldn't do either. Alex Morgan did great things for women's soccer but in order for the change to happen in America, it has to be a male player. I'm a girl dad and not being a chovinist but it is what it is. Sports culture in America is based around male sports. Until we get that dominant american male soccer player whose talents are likened to Maradona, Pele, messi, ronaldo, no change will happen to soccer culture in America.

On this note, I think a deep run into the World Cup led by a superstar is what could make a change...that is the only tournament the general American follows. (This won't help our children, but maybe our grandchildren.) Pulisic is playing really well at AC Milan right now but is in Serie A and most Americans don't have a clue what that is. For the national team he hasn't been good enough to drag that team to greater heights. Even if he helped Milan win the Champions League I doubt that would move the needle much here in the States.

Pulisic is crushing it, and every American soccer kid would love his career. But he's not the guy to turn things around.

This is the model to follow though. Our best talent has to go to Europe to play as teenagers.

Maybe we need to recognize who we are. We have athletes and money but to really develop talent they have to go to Europe. Like Tyler Adams too and the kid from PA.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is no catalyst to change the culture. There needs to be a phenomenal American male player that can capture attention in the same way Jordan and LeBron did. They also have to win on the international stage. Donovan and pulisic couldn't do either. Alex Morgan did great things for women's soccer but in order for the change to happen in America, it has to be a male player. I'm a girl dad and not being a chovinist but it is what it is. Sports culture in America is based around male sports. Until we get that dominant american male soccer player whose talents are likened to Maradona, Pele, messi, ronaldo, no change will happen to soccer culture in America.

On this note, I think a deep run into the World Cup led by a superstar is what could make a change...that is the only tournament the general American follows. (This won't help our children, but maybe our grandchildren.) Pulisic is playing really well at AC Milan right now but is in Serie A and most Americans don't have a clue what that is. For the national team he hasn't been good enough to drag that team to greater heights. Even if he helped Milan win the Champions League I doubt that would move the needle much here in the States.

Pulisic is crushing it, and every American soccer kid would love his career. But he's not the guy to turn things around.

This is the model to follow though. Our best talent has to go to Europe to play as teenagers.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Everything comes from the culture but unfortunately culture is not something you can just change the way you want. It evolves organically. US does not have a strong soccer culture like in other parts of the world, especially on the mens side. It's not a numbers thing, it's a fabric of society thing. All the points people are making stem from having a soccer culture. More money coming in brings incentives for better quality coaching, better quality players, better systems, and so on. How do we make the US have a strong soccer culture? Good luck with that one.

We have a strong soccer culture.
It's just a bad soccer culture.

A lot of our soccer culture is an attempt to replicate or Frankenstein football, basketball, baseball, hockey cultures.
Can't work. Won't work. Doesn't work.

How many people in DCUM can tell stories of playing pickup and unofficial community soccer almost every day of their young lives with friends?

How many people with kids playing soccer in the DMV can name the DC United starting lineup?
Can the kids in the DMV playing soccer name the DCU starting lineup?

No.

Because we don't have the right soccer culture to be top tier.

The girls can name the Spirit starting lineup.

No they can’t. They know Trinity. That’s it.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is no catalyst to change the culture. There needs to be a phenomenal American male player that can capture attention in the same way Jordan and LeBron did. They also have to win on the international stage. Donovan and pulisic couldn't do either. Alex Morgan did great things for women's soccer but in order for the change to happen in America, it has to be a male player. I'm a girl dad and not being a chovinist but it is what it is. Sports culture in America is based around male sports. Until we get that dominant american male soccer player whose talents are likened to Maradona, Pele, messi, ronaldo, no change will happen to soccer culture in America.

England hasn't won anything since 1966

Argentina hadn't won anything for many moons

The USA wins at many Olympics sports and we still don't care about them

Not sure how the comment relates at all. It's not about winning necessarily...it's about building a culture. Say what you want about the English and Argentinian national teams, but they def have a culture of loving soccer. Olympic sports don't even belong in the conversation...of course no one cares about archery and break dancing.

Anonymous wrote:There is no catalyst to change the culture. There needs to be a phenomenal American male player that can capture attention in the same way Jordan and LeBron did. They also have to win on the international stage. Donovan and pulisic couldn't do either. Alex Morgan did great things for women's soccer but in order for the change to happen in America, it has to be a male player. I'm a girl dad and not being a chovinist but it is what it is. Sports culture in America is based around male sports. Until we get that dominant american male soccer player whose talents are likened to Maradona, Pele, messi, ronaldo, no change will happen to soccer culture in America.

England hasn't won anything since 1966

Argentina hadn't won anything for many moons

The USA wins at many Olympics sports and we still don't care about them

Anonymous wrote:There is no catalyst to change the culture. There needs to be a phenomenal American male player that can capture attention in the same way Jordan and LeBron did. They also have to win on the international stage. Donovan and pulisic couldn't do either. Alex Morgan did great things for women's soccer but in order for the change to happen in America, it has to be a male player. I'm a girl dad and not being a chovinist but it is what it is. Sports culture in America is based around male sports. Until we get that dominant american male soccer player whose talents are likened to Maradona, Pele, messi, ronaldo, no change will happen to soccer culture in America.

On this note, I think a deep run into the World Cup led by a superstar is what could make a change...that is the only tournament the general American follows. (This won't help our children, but maybe our grandchildren.) Pulisic is playing really well at AC Milan right now but is in Serie A and most Americans don't have a clue what that is. For the national team he hasn't been good enough to drag that team to greater heights. Even if he helped Milan win the Champions League I doubt that would move the needle much here in the States.

Pulisic is crushing it, and every American soccer kid would love his career. But he's not the guy to turn things around.