What are they signing?

[Unregistered]

You have to look at the big picture. It would be unwise to interfere with the decisions of others, if their decisions had no affect on others, but this is clearly not the case.

This expansion into the GDA is just another step in the direction that Youth soccer has followed for the past 30 plus years. Families and children involved in this are in the same place as the Rec parents and players who had team mates leave for travel, travel parents and players having team mates head off to Premier , Premier parents and players losing team mates to Elite levels of Premier , and now this. The difference this time is the separation from High School sports , which is not totally unexpected.


Each and every time a new lane has been added to the road , families and players are affected, some positively, but the majority in a negative fashion. Relationships are disrupted, anxiety and anger rise to the surface , and an uncertain future awaits. However what is almost a given is that the landscape is sure to change again and again.

Yes, much better to just wipe out all these silly levels and keep everyone at rec with randomly chosen teams. Separating kids by ability, as you say, just creates negative feelings and anxiety. We don't want our children experiencing those feelings.

[Unregistered]

The evidence? At least two national organizations fighting each other for player participation. The best system would not have a decline of membership. Stealing participants from a neighbor is not progress, just restructuring for sake of enhanced revenue.
It isn't my job to offer up alternatives. That's what families pay for every time they write a check, and a percentage goes up the ladder to the top. No one said anything about elimination, just perhaps a more focused approach to what is really best for the Youth player. Hands down, the pay to play model is actually an obstacle to achieve wide range growth and development for the child.

What makes it apparent? Well for one, interfering with the social development of children by continuing to separate and discriminate among the masses to achieve the Impossible Dream.

The problem is that the classification of children as elite is totally based on the opinion of adults, who have structured and engineered a system that feeds the revenue stream of the chosen beneficiaries at the expense of the families and children who participate.

It is easy for you to throw insults, but you don't even know my background, or that of my children. You assume opinions are given without experience, knowledge and reality .

We have so many of the so called " elite " class here cheering on the demise of the CJSA. Most of them, I suspect, have only lifted a finger long enough to write a check to try and gain an advantage for their own child, and the sport and everyone else is just a pathway to be tread on , and even trashed. Put some real time into the sport, into working with children on ALL levels over many years and it might knock some sense into you. Sense, not cents, as money has become the great equalizer in youth soccer.

Sorry, but the European academy system is even more cutthroat about identifying, selecting, and separating "Elite" talent from the rest. Same with Ivy league universities in this country with regards to student achievement. Same goes for the military when selecting candidates for Special Forces, Navy Seals, Delta Force.

Better get used to this now and accept it as this is how the world works. It isn't fair. Not everyone gets a trophy. The best eventually rise to the top and the rest find other paths. That shouldn't devalue the contributions of efforts of the least of us, as our self-worth and value as a member of society isn't based solely on the level of achievement in arbitrary occupations and endeavors.

[Unregistered]

Yes, much better to just wipe out all these silly levels and keep everyone at rec with randomly chosen teams. Separating kids by ability, as you say, just creates negative feelings and anxiety. We don't want our children experiencing those feelings.

I never said or implied that. Children should be exposed to those feelings, but it should not be imposed by adults with their own ulterior motives. Allow the child to experience the negative aspects of life naturally, at their own speed, among their own peers, and leave adults out of it as much as possible.

There was a time when the social lessons learned by children were nearly completely without adult intervention, except for traditional scholastic and cultural settings. Conflict resolution, adaptability , negotiation skills, etc much of this has now been taken off the table and is in the hands of meddling adults. No wonder they need a " safe space" by time they get to college.

[Unregistered]

Sorry, but the European academy system is even more cutthroat about identifying, selecting, and separating "Elite" talent from the rest. Same with Ivy league universities in this country with regards to student achievement. Same goes for the military when selecting candidates for Special Forces, Navy Seals, Delta Force.

Better get used to this now and accept it as this is how the world works. It isn't fair. Not everyone gets a trophy. The best eventually rise to the top and the rest find other paths. That shouldn't devalue the contributions of efforts of the least of us, as our self-worth and value as a member of society isn't based solely on the level of achievement in arbitrary occupations and endeavors.

Here we go, Europe again. we keep hearing America should be more like them, but Europe as we know it is crumbling , on many fronts. In regards to soccer, or football, how many native English players now play in the EPL compared to ten years ago.

I never mentioned the word fair. I never said everyone should get a trophy. Try and follow the bouncing ball . I didn't realize that 9 and 10 year olds apply to Colleges and Universities and the Armed Forces. Why would any reasonable adult think that treating children as young as 8 or 9 the same as young adults is proper conditioning ?


Sorry, but the best doesn't always rise to the top. There are hurdles, obstacles unable to be conquered not by the person's own design. And then there are the advantage seekers who have gamed the system , and care not for sport, but for ego.

[Unregistered]

So many philosophers and experts on TS. Who knew?

[Unregistered]

Why not?

Are you going to wear their cleats and live the rest of their lives for them?

What makes you believe any of them are chasing a pot of gold?

That's just your speculation, tainted with your bias against GDA and/or Oakwood in general.

All that matters in the end is that they believe what they are doing will make their lives better. Who are you to judge that?

Nothing against OW. They are a strong club. Just not strong enough to pull GDA off successfully. They will struggle. The girls will struggle. That is fine if that is what they want. But, to be able to call themselves GDA players they will give up the opportunity to grow in other ways... to be leaders in their high schools and role models for their teammates. They give up that sense of community with schoolmates and teachers. Yes, the GDA girls will be their social structure but it is not the same. For that .001% player that can make the NT okay, it may be worth it. The feast of the girls will make these concessions to support that other player. I challenge you to ask current NT players about what they thought of their high school experience. Most speak of it quite fondly. You can't convince me that these girls signing are doing so without feeling that they have to make a hard choice. Like being between a rock and a hard place. Hopefully most realize that they are only doing this for recruiting purposes because NT will only be a reality for 1 or 2 kids in the entire club. The disturbing thing is that there is already a means in place for getting recruited. One that requires less choices/sacrifice. I don't care what your choice is. I just feel bad for these kids.

[Unregistered]

The evidence? At least two national organizations fighting each other for player participation. The best system would not have a decline of membership. Stealing participants from a neighbor is not progress, just restructuring for sake of enhanced revenue.
It isn't my job to offer up alternatives. That's what families pay for every time they write a check, and a percentage goes up the ladder to the top. No one said anything about elimination, just perhaps a more focused approach to what is really best for the Youth player. Hands down, the pay to play model is actually an obstacle to achieve wide range growth and development for the child.

What makes it apparent? Well for one, interfering with the social development of children by continuing to separate and discriminate among the masses to achieve the Impossible Dream.

The problem is that the classification of children as elite is totally based on the opinion of adults, who have structured and engineered a system that feeds the revenue stream of the chosen beneficiaries at the expense of the families and children who participate.

It is easy for you to throw insults, but you don't even know my background, or that of my children. You assume opinions are given without experience, knowledge and reality .

We have so many of the so called " elite " class here cheering on the demise of the CJSA. Most of them, I suspect, have only lifted a finger long enough to write a check to try and gain an advantage for their own child, and the sport and everyone else is just a pathway to be tread on , and even trashed. Put some real time into the sport, into working with children on ALL levels over many years and it might knock some sense into you. Sense, not cents, as money has become the great equalizer in youth soccer.

OK........

Let's see. I've coached recreation, club travel, premier and high school soccer for well over 30 years now.

I've started up two travel programs at established clubs and served some 15 years total as Board Member, President and Chief Bottle Washer for three different soccer clubs, one of the CJSA District Boards and served on two committees over the years for the CJSA itself.

So, I've put some "real time" into the sport and continue to do so. I've been here before there was CFC, Yankee United, and I even suspect Soccer+. I've seen the evolution of our soccer structure take place into what it is today.

I do not believe this GDA thing is about enhanced revenues for the USSF and it may be far less a power struggle from the perspective of the primary participants behind the two organizations than many here choose to believe. I do think, at the core of this situation, lies a philosophical difference on the best way to find, select and evolve NT players (the USSF goal) and its differing overall objective from ECNL. I don't think that the NT is on the ECNL radar at all. They are about college recruitment and placement.

I further think that the two organizations have taken up "turf protection" as their primary task now. Frankly, there is a viable solution that keeps both organizations focused to their goals and to find synergy. They will come around to it at some point.

But you are wrong about the whole stealing kids thing. That hardly began with ECNL and GDA. That goes back to the very early days of premier soccer and the birth of regional clubs. It's a finite population of players. Player movement needs to be along a ladder that is accomplished by individual improvement. I do believe that is within the USSF values. I'm not as sure it's in the ECNL organizational values. Certainly not as deep.

Pay to play came about because "clubs", not town programs, became businesses. They became businesses because there was a clear consumer market that wanted the opportunity to pay their way to what they perceive as a higher level of soccer.

You fault the wrong people by faulting the CJSA and USSF. The CJSA is guilty only of not being able to adapt to this changing structure quickly enough. I think the USSF's issues lie within its rules and policies that allow independent leagues to simply spring up, and thus giving clubs the ability to sidestep USSF state organizations.

But at the root of this are parents who are willing and wanting to pay their way into a premier uniform. You want to change the system to do what's best for youth soccer? Change the perspective of the parents who write the checks.

[Unregistered]

Why not?

Are you going to wear their cleats and live the rest of their lives for them?

What makes you believe any of them are chasing a pot of gold?

That's just your speculation, tainted with your bias against GDA and/or Oakwood in general.

All that matters in the end is that they believe what they are doing will make their lives better. Who are you to judge that?

Very well said. I love how people come on here to bash other clubs and players. Mind your business. If you don't like Oakwood or GDA don't participate in it, that simple. People come on here just to make the club look bad because they perceive a threat.

[Unregistered]

Very well said. I love how people come on here to bash other clubs and players. Mind your business. If you don't like Oakwood or GDA don't participate in it, that simple. People come on here just to make the club look bad because they perceive a threat.

Not the poster - I don't see it as a threat. It's a free market and any club that can compete will be fine. What I don't care for is USSF essentially using many of these kids, forcing them to make tough and unnecessary choices, when USSF couldn't care less about 99.9% of them. I don't blame clubs like OW who are just trying to survive in the ever changing world of youth soccer. If BDA had been successful that would be one thing. Adding GDA will just water the system down even more and with very little benefit. That's the frustration - I'm not angry bro:)

[Unregistered]

Not the poster - I don't see it as a threat. It's a free market and any club that can compete will be fine. What I don't care for is USSF essentially using many of these kids, forcing them to make tough and unnecessary choices, when USSF couldn't care less about 99.9% of them. I don't blame clubs like OW who are just trying to survive in the ever changing world of youth soccer. If BDA had been successful that would be one thing. Adding GDA will just water the system down even more and with very little benefit. That's the frustration - I'm not angry bro:)

Exactly!

[Unregistered]

Exactly!

These posts will all look so different in a year!

[Unregistered]

These posts will all look so different in a year!

Well, one faction or the other will certainly be able to say "I told you so!" and either will be quite happy to do so.

[Unregistered]

These posts will all look so different in a year!

No they won't - BDA has been around ten years and look at how little it has accomplished. You think GDA will magically change women's soccer in one year? Plus people have a very short term focus. Even if this were the cure-all it will take time to see results. One year of poor results and everyone will be shi**ing all over OW, even if they are doing the right things (which remains to be seen). It will be brutal.

[Unregistered]

OK........

Let's see. I've coached recreation, club travel, premier and high school soccer for well over 30 years now.

I've started up two travel programs at established clubs and served some 15 years total as Board Member, President and Chief Bottle Washer for three different soccer clubs, one of the CJSA District Boards and served on two committees over the years for the CJSA itself.

So, I've put some "real time" into the sport and continue to do so. I've been here before there was CFC, Yankee United, and I even suspect Soccer+. I've seen the evolution of our soccer structure take place into what it is today.

I do not believe this GDA thing is about enhanced revenues for the USSF and it may be far less a power struggle from the perspective of the primary participants behind the two organizations than many here choose to believe. I do think, at the core of this situation, lies a philosophical difference on the best way to find, select and evolve NT players (the USSF goal) and its differing overall objective from ECNL. I don't think that the NT is on the ECNL radar at all. They are about college recruitment and placement.

I further think that the two organizations have taken up "turf protection" as their primary task now. Frankly, there is a viable solution that keeps both organizations focused to their goals and to find synergy. They will come around to it at some point.

But you are wrong about the whole stealing kids thing. That hardly began with ECNL and GDA. That goes back to the very early days of premier soccer and the birth of regional clubs. It's a finite population of players. Player movement needs to be along a ladder that is accomplished by individual improvement. I do believe that is within the USSF values. I'm not as sure it's in the ECNL organizational values. Certainly not as deep.

Pay to play came about because "clubs", not town programs, became businesses. They became businesses because there was a clear consumer market that wanted the opportunity to pay their way to what they perceive as a higher level of soccer.

You fault the wrong people by faulting the CJSA and USSF. The CJSA is guilty only of not being able to adapt to this changing structure quickly enough. I think the USSF's issues lie within its rules and policies that allow independent leagues to simply spring up, and thus giving clubs the ability to sidestep USSF state organizations.

But at the root of this are parents who are willing and wanting to pay their way into a premier uniform. You want to change the system to do what's best for youth soccer? Change the perspective of the parents who write the checks.

There wasn't a " clear market" for Premier. The Premier market started in affluent areas , and if you were around you know it was designed to be supplemental to the Travel structure. Sunday games so as not to interfere. Clubs were orchestrated and designed as profit makers first, serving the children was secondary. USSF enabled the side stepping in order to open up an alternative revenue stream. When you do not have what it takes to generate revenue based on offerings , the alternative is to steal or purchase revenue production from another entity. Youth soccer participation in the country is falling. One of the major reasons is that it is just becoming too select, too niche, and way too expensive. If you think spending thousands and thousands of dollars a year on young children to kick a ball around is sound , you might have taken a good portion of the proceeds. Really, driving 4-5 hours a day to play a 80 minute game, IF you are even on the field for a decent amount of time , is advantageous for children?

Ladders are fine, if children are allowed access to the rungs. If they can't reach them because of obstacles beyond their control, the model is suspect, unless the aim is only appeal to a specific portion that can afford it. That appears to be the case.

The perspective of the parents who write the checks, as most ignorant consumers are, have been conditioned by the hands of those with ulterior motives . Only when they have seen first hand , mostly towards the end of the journey , the specifics of the charade , do they come to their senses. For many families, and for many reasons, the Youth soccer journey ends in the mid teens , however the chew them up and spit them out atmosphere created by adults is a major contributor.

So please answer this question if you would. As one who has coached in the scholastic and non-scholastic environments, in general, which model appears to show the most promise for serving the child athlete in all aspects of child development across all socio-economic strata and a diverse population.

[Unregistered]

These posts will all look so different in a year!

They already do look different. "They'll never sign High School players"... And they did. And more will sign. And some won't. The same naysayers to every post will find something else to pick apart anyway.