Anonymous wrote:I'm searching for a job in Manhattan. Going to sell our house in VA and move there.
My DS is currently a U9 but I'm sure he'll make the red bulls academy next season

Anonymous wrote:I'm searching for a job in Manhattan. Going to sell our house in VA and move there.
My DS is currently a U9 but I'm sure he'll make the red bulls academy next season

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Agree with the poster about DCU’s limited development window. A more serious approach would cast a much wider net from younger ages, instead of basically just trying to form a regional all star team at U14. This approach also leads them to heavily focus on early developers, as they will tend to be the standout performers when they start scouting to form their U14 team.

Yes. Agree about all star teams and early developers. The problem is that these legacy clubs in the area that have the younger ages are making too much money to let go of their slice of the talent pool. They aren't going to give up that money easily and are fighting hard to stay relevant and keep parents paying those fees for football. To be very honest, that is the real battleground for DCU - prying kids away from the pay to play clubs at younger ages to lengthen the development pathway at DCU. But of course, they don't see that because this requires vision and investment in time and resources, something that DCU doesn't have for the academy. Shame because our area could pump out pros at a rapid clip if they were seriously identified and developed at young ages. The pay to pay clubs literally killed the development in our area because they are so focused on making cash. When these clubs started in the 80s and 90s they were hungry and had to develop players to differentiate themselves in the market. They could say we have or have produced the best players at a time when there wasn't much out there. Now, their only incentive is winning to bringing in more money. They say now, we have the best teams. But good teams don't sign pro deals. Individuals do. And pay to play systems aren't incentivized to develop the players. What this means for DCU is that they are pulling from a talent pool that hasn't been focused on their development as the priority. They have been focused on building good teams and if a few players develop individually as a byproduct (not the focus) then that's great. Imagine if it was set up where the kids start in a development system from day 1. DCU would have a much better player at 14 than they do now.

All that rambling and the other posts about dcu individual development problem because they start late at U14 is farm manure

Why, because using facts versus uninformed biased opinion, DC United Academy teams starts at U14, but many of their players start from U12 and U13 ages.

Red Bull U11 pre-academy team looking pretty good.

https://x.com/RedBullsAcademy/status/1851003494440059045?s=19

They start recruitement early, impressive.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Agree with the poster about DCU’s limited development window. A more serious approach would cast a much wider net from younger ages, instead of basically just trying to form a regional all star team at U14. This approach also leads them to heavily focus on early developers, as they will tend to be the standout performers when they start scouting to form their U14 team.

Yes. Agree about all star teams and early developers. The problem is that these legacy clubs in the area that have the younger ages are making too much money to let go of their slice of the talent pool. They aren't going to give up that money easily and are fighting hard to stay relevant and keep parents paying those fees for football. To be very honest, that is the real battleground for DCU - prying kids away from the pay to play clubs at younger ages to lengthen the development pathway at DCU. But of course, they don't see that because this requires vision and investment in time and resources, something that DCU doesn't have for the academy. Shame because our area could pump out pros at a rapid clip if they were seriously identified and developed at young ages. The pay to pay clubs literally killed the development in our area because they are so focused on making cash. When these clubs started in the 80s and 90s they were hungry and had to develop players to differentiate themselves in the market. They could say we have or have produced the best players at a time when there wasn't much out there. Now, their only incentive is winning to bringing in more money. They say now, we have the best teams. But good teams don't sign pro deals. Individuals do. And pay to play systems aren't incentivized to develop the players. What this means for DCU is that they are pulling from a talent pool that hasn't been focused on their development as the priority. They have been focused on building good teams and if a few players develop individually as a byproduct (not the focus) then that's great. Imagine if it was set up where the kids start in a development system from day 1. DCU would have a much better player at 14 than they do now.

All that rambling and the other posts about dcu individual development problem because they start late at U14 is farm manure

Why, because using facts versus uninformed biased opinion, DC United Academy teams starts at U14, but many of their players start from U12 and U13 ages.

Red Bull U11 pre-academy team looking pretty good.

https://x.com/RedBullsAcademy/status/1851003494440059045?s=19

They start recruitement early, impressive.

Yes. A proper academy system.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Agree with the poster about DCU’s limited development window. A more serious approach would cast a much wider net from younger ages, instead of basically just trying to form a regional all star team at U14. This approach also leads them to heavily focus on early developers, as they will tend to be the standout performers when they start scouting to form their U14 team.

Yes. Agree about all star teams and early developers. The problem is that these legacy clubs in the area that have the younger ages are making too much money to let go of their slice of the talent pool. They aren't going to give up that money easily and are fighting hard to stay relevant and keep parents paying those fees for football. To be very honest, that is the real battleground for DCU - prying kids away from the pay to play clubs at younger ages to lengthen the development pathway at DCU. But of course, they don't see that because this requires vision and investment in time and resources, something that DCU doesn't have for the academy. Shame because our area could pump out pros at a rapid clip if they were seriously identified and developed at young ages. The pay to pay clubs literally killed the development in our area because they are so focused on making cash. When these clubs started in the 80s and 90s they were hungry and had to develop players to differentiate themselves in the market. They could say we have or have produced the best players at a time when there wasn't much out there. Now, their only incentive is winning to bringing in more money. They say now, we have the best teams. But good teams don't sign pro deals. Individuals do. And pay to play systems aren't incentivized to develop the players. What this means for DCU is that they are pulling from a talent pool that hasn't been focused on their development as the priority. They have been focused on building good teams and if a few players develop individually as a byproduct (not the focus) then that's great. Imagine if it was set up where the kids start in a development system from day 1. DCU would have a much better player at 14 than they do now.

All that rambling and the other posts about dcu individual development problem because they start late at U14 is farm manure

Why, because using facts versus uninformed biased opinion, DC United Academy teams starts at U14, but many of their players start from U12 and U13 ages.

Red Bull U11 pre-academy team looking pretty good.

https://x.com/RedBullsAcademy/status/1851003494440059045?s=19

They start recruitement early, impressive.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Agree with the poster about DCU’s limited development window. A more serious approach would cast a much wider net from younger ages, instead of basically just trying to form a regional all star team at U14. This approach also leads them to heavily focus on early developers, as they will tend to be the standout performers when they start scouting to form their U14 team.

Yes. Agree about all star teams and early developers. The problem is that these legacy clubs in the area that have the younger ages are making too much money to let go of their slice of the talent pool. They aren't going to give up that money easily and are fighting hard to stay relevant and keep parents paying those fees for football. To be very honest, that is the real battleground for DCU - prying kids away from the pay to play clubs at younger ages to lengthen the development pathway at DCU. But of course, they don't see that because this requires vision and investment in time and resources, something that DCU doesn't have for the academy. Shame because our area could pump out pros at a rapid clip if they were seriously identified and developed at young ages. The pay to pay clubs literally killed the development in our area because they are so focused on making cash. When these clubs started in the 80s and 90s they were hungry and had to develop players to differentiate themselves in the market. They could say we have or have produced the best players at a time when there wasn't much out there. Now, their only incentive is winning to bringing in more money. They say now, we have the best teams. But good teams don't sign pro deals. Individuals do. And pay to play systems aren't incentivized to develop the players. What this means for DCU is that they are pulling from a talent pool that hasn't been focused on their development as the priority. They have been focused on building good teams and if a few players develop individually as a byproduct (not the focus) then that's great. Imagine if it was set up where the kids start in a development system from day 1. DCU would have a much better player at 14 than they do now.

All that rambling and the other posts about dcu individual development problem because they start late at U14 is farm manure

Why, because using facts versus uninformed biased opinion, DC United Academy teams starts at U14, but many of their players start from U12 and U13 ages.

Red Bull U11 pre-academy team looking pretty good.

https://x.com/RedBullsAcademy/status/1851003494440059045?s=19

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Agree with the poster about DCU’s limited development window. A more serious approach would cast a much wider net from younger ages, instead of basically just trying to form a regional all star team at U14. This approach also leads them to heavily focus on early developers, as they will tend to be the standout performers when they start scouting to form their U14 team.

Yes. Agree about all star teams and early developers. The problem is that these legacy clubs in the area that have the younger ages are making too much money to let go of their slice of the talent pool. They aren't going to give up that money easily and are fighting hard to stay relevant and keep parents paying those fees for football. To be very honest, that is the real battleground for DCU - prying kids away from the pay to play clubs at younger ages to lengthen the development pathway at DCU. But of course, they don't see that because this requires vision and investment in time and resources, something that DCU doesn't have for the academy. Shame because our area could pump out pros at a rapid clip if they were seriously identified and developed at young ages. The pay to pay clubs literally killed the development in our area because they are so focused on making cash. When these clubs started in the 80s and 90s they were hungry and had to develop players to differentiate themselves in the market. They could say we have or have produced the best players at a time when there wasn't much out there. Now, their only incentive is winning to bringing in more money. They say now, we have the best teams. But good teams don't sign pro deals. Individuals do. And pay to play systems aren't incentivized to develop the players. What this means for DCU is that they are pulling from a talent pool that hasn't been focused on their development as the priority. They have been focused on building good teams and if a few players develop individually as a byproduct (not the focus) then that's great. Imagine if it was set up where the kids start in a development system from day 1. DCU would have a much better player at 14 than they do now.

All that rambling and the other posts about dcu individual development problem because they start late at U14 is farm manure

Why, because using facts versus uninformed biased opinion, DC United Academy teams starts at U14, but many of their players start from U12 and U13 ages.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How come an expansion team is starting off ahead of a 30 year old club like DCU?

https://www.mlssoccer.com/news/san-diego-mls-makes-historic-announcement-for-training-facility-youth-academy

DCU's ownership and stadium woes kept them behind for a long time. Then when they did something it was Loudon United but then MLS changed what they were doing and DCU was left behind again.

Anonymous wrote:How come an expansion team is starting off ahead of a 30 year old club like DCU?

https://www.mlssoccer.com/news/san-diego-mls-makes-historic-announcement-for-training-facility-youth-academy

Anonymous wrote:How come an expansion team is starting off ahead of a 30 year old club like DCU?

https://www.mlssoccer.com/news/san-diego-mls-makes-historic-announcement-for-training-facility-youth-academy

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sour Grapes on steroids 😂

Does it sting less that your kid was rejected by slinging mud at the academy?
If you say enough times they're bad then that makes the rejection not as bad lol

Sad and pitiful

So do you have anything to counter the points in this thread?

He doesn’t. For mr “verified facts” guy, you’re either sore bc ur kid didn’t make the cut. Or ur a current or past family who is out to destroy DCU.

How is mr verified facts guy wrong asking for verified facts?
We so comfortable in fake news world now truth doesn't matter?

There have been many facts presented. He chooses to ignore them and always counters with questions, never counters with anything to prove otherwise. Read through this thread, not once was there a post outlining the advantages DCU provides over outside academies.

Interesting stuff.
Did the people in the know list the advantages all the other academies provide over dcu for kids from the DC area?

Yes

I see something about more homegrown players makes some academies better.

I understand when kids in premiere league or la liga academies get called up to the senior team its a clear success marker or when they get sold for big money.

What does homegrown do?
Do only homegrown players go to college or Pro?

Dcu academy kids who are signed (go pro) are considered homegrown. Homegrown players don’t count towards salary limits (I think but I may not have gotten the language right).

Everyone else goes to college or tries to get signed somewhere else.

I guess a concern is that DCU is not great at maximizing their homegrowns potential and appear to be ruining young players career with not the best decisions. Maybe asking for too much when the players want to go abroad? Like fletcher and akinmboni. Yet holding on to them and not doing anything to continue to develop them.

All homegrowns for the other 25 academies are maximized to professional potential fullness?

Are only homegrowns allowed to go pro?

I'm quite sure agencies, agents and managers have negative stories about every club to go with the positive ones.

Care to share some positive ones from DCU?

When you ask this question, they all scatter like cockroaches when the lights come on.

Or maybe they know whatever they say will make no difference 🤔

Kinda like politics or religion argument haha

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sour Grapes on steroids 😂

Does it sting less that your kid was rejected by slinging mud at the academy?
If you say enough times they're bad then that makes the rejection not as bad lol

Sad and pitiful

So do you have anything to counter the points in this thread?

He doesn’t. For mr “verified facts” guy, you’re either sore bc ur kid didn’t make the cut. Or ur a current or past family who is out to destroy DCU.

How is mr verified facts guy wrong asking for verified facts?
We so comfortable in fake news world now truth doesn't matter?

There have been many facts presented. He chooses to ignore them and always counters with questions, never counters with anything to prove otherwise. Read through this thread, not once was there a post outlining the advantages DCU provides over outside academies.

Interesting stuff.
Did the people in the know list the advantages all the other academies provide over dcu for kids from the DC area?

Yes

I see something about more homegrown players makes some academies better.

I understand when kids in premiere league or la liga academies get called up to the senior team its a clear success marker or when they get sold for big money.

What does homegrown do?
Do only homegrown players go to college or Pro?

Dcu academy kids who are signed (go pro) are considered homegrown. Homegrown players don’t count towards salary limits (I think but I may not have gotten the language right).

Everyone else goes to college or tries to get signed somewhere else.

I guess a concern is that DCU is not great at maximizing their homegrowns potential and appear to be ruining young players career with not the best decisions. Maybe asking for too much when the players want to go abroad? Like fletcher and akinmboni. Yet holding on to them and not doing anything to continue to develop them.

All homegrowns for the other 25 academies are maximized to professional potential fullness?

Are only homegrowns allowed to go pro?

I'm quite sure agencies, agents and managers have negative stories about every club to go with the positive ones.

Care to share some positive ones from DCU?

When you ask this question, they all scatter like cockroaches when the lights come on.