Fixing high school soccer

[Unregistered]

High school soccer is something that has long been a controversial topic in youth soccer circles--and one that makes many people turn up their nose. The complaints are many, and many of them are currently true:

* The Laws of the Game are ignored.
* Many of the coaches are retreads, who know little about the modern game.
* Too many games, too much focus on winning at all costs, very little focus on development.
* Inappropriate focus on physical fitness (and training regimens that are more appropriate for the cross-country team)
* Over-emphasis on bootball, less on technical soccer.

As a result, the pecking order for progression into NCAA or professional soccer seems to be:

* Elite academies and programs (including MLS DAs, certain ECNL clubs for girls, etc.)
* ODP and similar (fading in importance)
* Ordinary club soccer, particularly premier divisions.
* High school soccer.

A lot of conversation in the soccer community seems to focus on how to further marginalize the high school game. DA prohibits participation in HS. OYSA and ECNL accomodate it, but generally consider it to be a lesser level of soccer. It's defenders often defend it for it's social aspects in ways that make it sound like rec--representing your school is fun, playing with your friends and classmates is fun. (And it is fun to do these things).

For that reason--I'm going to make a suggestion.

HS soccer shouldn't be denigrated. It shouldn't be marginalized. It shouldn't be put down.

Instead, it should be fixed--and given that many club coaches double as HS coaches, the club community is in a position to do so.

If you look at football, basketball, and baseball--the HS game is extremely important to the development of players in these sports. Why?

* Playing for school and classmates, rather than an empty sideline with nobody but parents, is indeed a major incentive.
* Not long ago, soccer was a novel sport, one that most people cared nothing about. Football and basketball were kings, soccer was as popular at HS as the chess club. And the number of coaches in the country that understood the game well was very limited.
* Times are changing now. Soccer is becoming very popular as a generation of parents who learned to love the game are now passing it on to their kids. The growth of the MLS, and the easy availability of top-rank European soccer on TV, is turning more and more of the US into soccer culture.
* One of the biggest complaints about club soccer is the pay-to-play nature of the sport. HS sports are far less expensive for participants--there generally isn't the travel involved (other than long bus rides).
* Soccer is far less expensive for school districts than football.
* Concerns about CTE have presented a threat to American football; many parents (including yours truly) won't let their kids play (organized tackle) football for that reason.
* The HS model does work for other sports. Perhaps soccer is different--there is a distinction often discussed between tactical soccer (playing to win) and pedagogical soccer (playing to teach) that doesn't seem to exist for other sports; you don't often hear of basketball coaches refusing to run fastbreaks because "kids need to learn to play the halfcourt game". The problem with bootball is that it's bad soccer--this is mainly an issue because there are lots of bad teams that don't know how to defend it, so it frequently works at lower levels of the game.

Of course, high-quality high-school soccer might pose a threat to the pay-to-play business model, especially at the older age groups; so it's entirely possible that various directors of coaching might have a vested interest in keeping the scholastic game second-class. And there is a longstanding US cultural prejudice, often reflected in some of the anti-Timbers rants in this forum, that pro sports teams have no business involving themselves in youth sports (whereas club academies are the norm in the rest of the world).

But we ever get to the point where the Friday homecoming game is played with a round ball rather than a pointy one, and the "captain of the football team" is a striker or midfielder or keeper, not a quarterback, then that will be a big sign that the US has arrived as a soccer country.

[Unregistered]

High school soccer is something that has long been a controversial topic in youth soccer circles--and one that makes many people turn up their nose. The complaints are many, and many of them are currently true:

* The Laws of the Game are ignored.
* Many of the coaches are retreads, who know little about the modern game.
* Too many games, too much focus on winning at all costs, very little focus on development.
* Inappropriate focus on physical fitness (and training regimens that are more appropriate for the cross-country team)
* Over-emphasis on bootball, less on technical soccer.

As a result, the pecking order for progression into NCAA or professional soccer seems to be:

* Elite academies and programs (including MLS DAs, certain ECNL clubs for girls, etc.)
* ODP and similar (fading in importance)
* Ordinary club soccer, particularly premier divisions.
* High school soccer.

A lot of conversation in the soccer community seems to focus on how to further marginalize the high school game. DA prohibits participation in HS. OYSA and ECNL accomodate it, but generally consider it to be a lesser level of soccer. It's defenders often defend it for it's social aspects in ways that make it sound like rec--representing your school is fun, playing with your friends and classmates is fun. (And it is fun to do these things).

For that reason--I'm going to make a suggestion.

HS soccer shouldn't be denigrated. It shouldn't be marginalized. It shouldn't be put down.

Instead, it should be fixed--and given that many club coaches double as HS coaches, the club community is in a position to do so.

If you look at football, basketball, and baseball--the HS game is extremely important to the development of players in these sports. Why?

* Playing for school and classmates, rather than an empty sideline with nobody but parents, is indeed a major incentive.
* Not long ago, soccer was a novel sport, one that most people cared nothing about. Football and basketball were kings, soccer was as popular at HS as the chess club. And the number of coaches in the country that understood the game well was very limited.
* Times are changing now. Soccer is becoming very popular as a generation of parents who learned to love the game are now passing it on to their kids. The growth of the MLS, and the easy availability of top-rank European soccer on TV, is turning more and more of the US into soccer culture.
* One of the biggest complaints about club soccer is the pay-to-play nature of the sport. HS sports are far less expensive for participants--there generally isn't the travel involved (other than long bus rides).
* Soccer is far less expensive for school districts than football.
* Concerns about CTE have presented a threat to American football; many parents (including yours truly) won't let their kids play (organized tackle) football for that reason.
* The HS model does work for other sports. Perhaps soccer is different--there is a distinction often discussed between tactical soccer (playing to win) and pedagogical soccer (playing to teach) that doesn't seem to exist for other sports; you don't often hear of basketball coaches refusing to run fastbreaks because "kids need to learn to play the halfcourt game". The problem with bootball is that it's bad soccer--this is mainly an issue because there are lots of bad teams that don't know how to defend it, so it frequently works at lower levels of the game.

Of course, high-quality high-school soccer might pose a threat to the pay-to-play business model, especially at the older age groups; so it's entirely possible that various directors of coaching might have a vested interest in keeping the scholastic game second-class. And there is a longstanding US cultural prejudice, often reflected in some of the anti-Timbers rants in this forum, that pro sports teams have no business involving themselves in youth sports (whereas club academies are the norm in the rest of the world).

But we ever get to the point where the Friday homecoming game is played with a round ball rather than a pointy one, and the "captain of the football team" is a striker or midfielder or keeper, not a quarterback, then that will be a big sign that the US has arrived as a soccer country.

Your an idiot and reaching really far on your assumptions. 3/4 of the things you are saying are not accurate

[Unregistered]

Your an idiot and reaching really far on your assumptions. 3/4 of the things you are saying are not accurate

Which 3/4? :) Disagree if you like; perhaps I'm putting too much stock in national trends and ignoring what's going on locally.

But this forum is full of complaints about the subject.

[Unregistered]

Two thoughts.

First, I wouldn't worry too much about anyone who says YOUR an idiot. Learn to spell and we might take you seriously.

Second, I think this is an interesting premise but one thing I have come to learn is how much money trumps everything. I don't believe for a second that GDA was formed to improve the game. I don't believe for a second that ECNL launched a boy's side to improve the game. They both want not just a bigger piece of the pie - they want the entire pie.

As youth soccer - especially girls youth soccer - has exploded in the US, the potential to make money off of millions of parents who believe the next Abby or Alex lives right down the hall has become too tempting to resist. There's no way clubs will support elevating the HS game - if they do, they will lose players (dollars). That's why you see GDA banning HS soccer - not out of concern for players' well being, but again out of that desire to own the whole pie, not just the biggest slice.

At the end of the day the only thing you can do is find the best place for your kid and be happy with it. My DD loves HS soccer and her coaches are excellent. They demand a high level of play and when HS season ends and club starts, she feels ready and well prepared. She also loves playing in front of her HS friends, family, and teachers. She has very high aspirations and the ODP coaches were after her to do GDA for two years straight (she's not trying out this year because she's sick of the sales pitch), but the no HS rule was a non starter for her.

[Unregistered]

High School Soccer can not be fixed. The main reason is those in charge of High School soccer don't care about it. Same with College soccer the NCAA does not care to make it better. The rules of both HS AND COLLEGE SOCCER about how often you can practice how long you can practice, length of season and so on are all set up for Men's Football and Basketball and that will never change.

Instead I propose eliminating HS and College soccer all together. In its place all DA's required to have a school or partnership with a school to structure their day to work for soccer training. This is when we know this country is serious about soccer. When we completely remove better players from the nonsense of HS and College soccer.

[Unregistered]

There are many often times legitimate complaints, like the tired trope of the history teacher with no experience being the coach. But in reality it varies all over the board and is different town to town. We also happen to be in a town with very good coaches who also coach strong club teams. They know the game. School and parent support is very good. But certainly we play other schools where that isn't the case. The quality of a program is dependent on so many things that are tough to always control like how much the athletic director or school administrators care about soccer or sports in general, the quality of the local player pool (some towns have tons of club players and others don't), if a town is more of a football town and soccer just isn't a thing etc.

The other problem is, as someone said, USSF and leagues like ECNL and the clubs are partly to blame in the marginalization if HS soccer. Their attitudes then carry over to their parents (how many sovver snobs postbon this board? ) then their kids. Money is a big reason why they do it. Soccer is insanely expensive and sadly pay to play has become almost the only way (save the rare scholarship or free MLS DA club). Other sports still have high school performance as a means to discovery by college coaches and it's encouraged (football, basketball, track etc) bit instead USSF and others snub it. Me personally I'd love to see more stories of underprivileged but talented kids getting a shot at college through soccer instead of middle to upper income kids whose families can afford club soccer and probably college as well.

[Unregistered]

High school soccer is something that has long been a controversial topic in youth soccer circles--and one that makes many people turn up their nose. The complaints are many, and many of them are currently true:

* The Laws of the Game are ignored.
* Many of the coaches are retreads, who know little about the modern game.
* Too many games, too much focus on winning at all costs, very little focus on development.
* Inappropriate focus on physical fitness (and training regimens that are more appropriate for the cross-country team)
* Over-emphasis on bootball, less on technical soccer.

As a result, the pecking order for progression into NCAA or professional soccer seems to be:

* Elite academies and programs (including MLS DAs, certain ECNL clubs for girls, etc.)
* ODP and similar (fading in importance)
* Ordinary club soccer, particularly premier divisions.
* High school soccer.

A lot of conversation in the soccer community seems to focus on how to further marginalize the high school game. DA prohibits participation in HS. OYSA and ECNL accomodate it, but generally consider it to be a lesser level of soccer. It's defenders often defend it for it's social aspects in ways that make it sound like rec--representing your school is fun, playing with your friends and classmates is fun. (And it is fun to do these things).

For that reason--I'm going to make a suggestion.

HS soccer shouldn't be denigrated. It shouldn't be marginalized. It shouldn't be put down.

Instead, it should be fixed--and given that many club coaches double as HS coaches, the club community is in a position to do so.

If you look at football, basketball, and baseball--the HS game is extremely important to the development of players in these sports. Why?

* Playing for school and classmates, rather than an empty sideline with nobody but parents, is indeed a major incentive.
* Not long ago, soccer was a novel sport, one that most people cared nothing about. Football and basketball were kings, soccer was as popular at HS as the chess club. And the number of coaches in the country that understood the game well was very limited.
* Times are changing now. Soccer is becoming very popular as a generation of parents who learned to love the game are now passing it on to their kids. The growth of the MLS, and the easy availability of top-rank European soccer on TV, is turning more and more of the US into soccer culture.
* One of the biggest complaints about club soccer is the pay-to-play nature of the sport. HS sports are far less expensive for participants--there generally isn't the travel involved (other than long bus rides).
* Soccer is far less expensive for school districts than football.
* Concerns about CTE have presented a threat to American football; many parents (including yours truly) won't let their kids play (organized tackle) football for that reason.
* The HS model does work for other sports. Perhaps soccer is different--there is a distinction often discussed between tactical soccer (playing to win) and pedagogical soccer (playing to teach) that doesn't seem to exist for other sports; you don't often hear of basketball coaches refusing to run fastbreaks because "kids need to learn to play the halfcourt game". The problem with bootball is that it's bad soccer--this is mainly an issue because there are lots of bad teams that don't know how to defend it, so it frequently works at lower levels of the game.

Of course, high-quality high-school soccer might pose a threat to the pay-to-play business model, especially at the older age groups; so it's entirely possible that various directors of coaching might have a vested interest in keeping the scholastic game second-class. And there is a longstanding US cultural prejudice, often reflected in some of the anti-Timbers rants in this forum, that pro sports teams have no business involving themselves in youth sports (whereas club academies are the norm in the rest of the world).

But we ever get to the point where the Friday homecoming game is played with a round ball rather than a pointy one, and the "captain of the football team" is a striker or midfielder or keeper, not a quarterback, then that will be a big sign that the US has arrived as a soccer country.

Truly American sports (American Football, Baseball & Basketball) are tied hand in hand with academic HS and colleges programs (baseball a little less) so if one wishes to play further in life in those sports they must play in HS and College. They are the most popular sports in the USA by miles.

Soccer is a recreational, participation sport that can be played as a novice by youth and adults during your youth years parents need only pay more money to a club and they (will) create an acronym that makes you think you are relevant and special, but you still can't play a lick outside of Oregon without getting buried by stonger players/teams. It is what it is.

HS Soccer is just plain recreational fun representing your high school Until the country has actual local clubs that can create players that can play, don't expect HS Soccer to change.

Club Soccer is solely responsible for the deplorable level of play at the HS Level.

You are not an idiot, just clueless.

[Unregistered]

OP --- Your post is interesting, thought-provoking and well written.
While others have their opinion and some have poked holes I appreciate the time you took to write about this topic. The debate is interesting.
Thanks

[Unregistered]

High School Soccer can not be fixed. The main reason is those in charge of High School soccer don't care about it. Same with College soccer the NCAA does not care to make it better. The rules of both HS AND COLLEGE SOCCER about how often you can practice how long you can practice, length of season and so on are all set up for Men's Football and Basketball and that will never change.

Instead I propose eliminating HS and College soccer all together. In its place all DA's required to have a school or partnership with a school to structure their day to work for soccer training. This is when we know this country is serious about soccer. When we completely remove better players from the nonsense of HS and College soccer.

Another soccer elitist chimes in proposing throwing the baby out with the bath water. Sure that's fair - take soccer away from the hundreds of thousands of kids in the country just to make the NT better, oh and give more money to the clubs in the process so kids have to now pay to play all year long instead of a partial season when HS isn't in session. That should do wonders towards building a soccer culture in the US also. Great solution.

Instead take the handful of players who can maybe go pro or NT players out of the system and leave HS and college for the rest of the players who just want to play for their schools. That's the issue with DA - it's too big (yes I know because of geography) but the majority of players it ensnares in the process are not interested or simply don't have the skills to ever play at the highest levels. I agree college especially is no place for players 18-24 to develop but again banning college soccer because a few players need to be more focused only on soccer is no solution. Some kind of residency program (which some MLS academies are starting) is the say to go. We should do the same for NT.

[Unregistered]

"Club Soccer is solely responsible for the deplorable level of play at the HS Level. "

This comment doesn't make any sense. You would think club soccer kids, having trained, played and had professional coaching for years more than recreational players who also appear on the team, would improve the play.

It's a weird mix, with emphasis on wins. Recipe for problems as the OP lays out.

[Unregistered]

Your an idiot and reaching really far on your assumptions. 3/4 of the things you are saying are not accurate

No, you're an idiot.

[Unregistered]

"Club Soccer is solely responsible for the deplorable level of play at the HS Level. "

This comment doesn't make any sense. You would think club soccer kids, having trained, played and had professional coaching for years more than recreational players who also appear on the team, would improve the play.

It's a weird mix, with emphasis on wins. Recipe for problems as the OP lays out.

You lack the ability to realize that a local club has thousands of the rec players & and a very, very small percentage of the 'club' membership could ever be considered as a higher skilled player.

It's easy to 'develop' top players, it's called natural selection and happens without any club involvement, our local clubs instead focus on feeding the rec parent coach participation model-it's easy cash flow, with no overhead costs, no coaching education, no fields of any quality, no equipment, no concern for 90% of their membership as long as the bi-weekly checks keep cashing for coaching the top 5% of it's membership and running seasonal camps for the hopeless membership. The emphasis is to have the front office and classic coaches get paid and without a rec base to fund these guys it's a real world challenge.

Nearly 99% of HS players have previously participated in some level of 'club' soccer; we have no elementary of Jr. HS teams to speak of. HS players are the product of decades of neglect from poorly run clubs and their paid leadership, who have never worked with them(rec players) unless the kid was willing to go their week long camp and pay $175 learning how to do toe taps and play numbers soccer with water breaks.

"Club Soccer is solely responsible for the deplorable level of play at the HS Level. "

Who else could be to blame? Please elaborate.

[Unregistered]

High school soccer is something that has long been a controversial topic in youth soccer circles--and one that makes many people turn up their nose. The complaints are many, and many of them are currently true:

* The Laws of the Game are ignored.
* Many of the coaches are retreads, who know little about the modern game.
* Too many games, too much focus on winning at all costs, very little focus on development.
* Inappropriate focus on physical fitness (and training regimens that are more appropriate for the cross-country team)
* Over-emphasis on bootball, less on technical soccer.

As a result, the pecking order for progression into NCAA or professional soccer seems to be:

* Elite academies and programs (including MLS DAs, certain ECNL clubs for girls, etc.)
* ODP and similar (fading in importance)
* Ordinary club soccer, particularly premier divisions.
* High school soccer.

A lot of conversation in the soccer community seems to focus on how to further marginalize the high school game. DA prohibits participation in HS. OYSA and ECNL accomodate it, but generally consider it to be a lesser level of soccer. It's defenders often defend it for it's social aspects in ways that make it sound like rec--representing your school is fun, playing with your friends and classmates is fun. (And it is fun to do these things).

For that reason--I'm going to make a suggestion.

HS soccer shouldn't be denigrated. It shouldn't be marginalized. It shouldn't be put down.

Instead, it should be fixed--and given that many club coaches double as HS coaches, the club community is in a position to do so.

If you look at football, basketball, and baseball--the HS game is extremely important to the development of players in these sports. Why?

* Playing for school and classmates, rather than an empty sideline with nobody but parents, is indeed a major incentive.
* Not long ago, soccer was a novel sport, one that most people cared nothing about. Football and basketball were kings, soccer was as popular at HS as the chess club. And the number of coaches in the country that understood the game well was very limited.
* Times are changing now. Soccer is becoming very popular as a generation of parents who learned to love the game are now passing it on to their kids. The growth of the MLS, and the easy availability of top-rank European soccer on TV, is turning more and more of the US into soccer culture.
* One of the biggest complaints about club soccer is the pay-to-play nature of the sport. HS sports are far less expensive for participants--there generally isn't the travel involved (other than long bus rides).
* Soccer is far less expensive for school districts than football.
* Concerns about CTE have presented a threat to American football; many parents (including yours truly) won't let their kids play (organized tackle) football for that reason.
* The HS model does work for other sports. Perhaps soccer is different--there is a distinction often discussed between tactical soccer (playing to win) and pedagogical soccer (playing to teach) that doesn't seem to exist for other sports; you don't often hear of basketball coaches refusing to run fastbreaks because "kids need to learn to play the halfcourt game". The problem with bootball is that it's bad soccer--this is mainly an issue because there are lots of bad teams that don't know how to defend it, so it frequently works at lower levels of the game.

Of course, high-quality high-school soccer might pose a threat to the pay-to-play business model, especially at the older age groups; so it's entirely possible that various directors of coaching might have a vested interest in keeping the scholastic game second-class. And there is a longstanding US cultural prejudice, often reflected in some of the anti-Timbers rants in this forum, that pro sports teams have no business involving themselves in youth sports (whereas club academies are the norm in the rest of the world).

But we ever get to the point where the Friday homecoming game is played with a round ball rather than a pointy one, and the "captain of the football team" is a striker or midfielder or keeper, not a quarterback, then that will be a big sign that the US has arrived as a soccer country.

Yes, this is something that should be discussed. Turning kids away from friends and community is, wait for it....... Un-American. This whole GDA stuff euro and ridiculous money grab. Say yes to girls playing for there schools and community!!

[Unregistered]

On the boys side, if that is still allowed on this website, most of the players who have a future in the sport aren't allowed to play high school soccer anyway.

[Unregistered]

On the boys side, if that is still allowed on this website, most of the players who have a future in the sport aren't allowed to play high school soccer anyway.

The standard career path for a NFL player is HS football, NCAA football, NFL football. (The NFL has an age minimum of about 20; you can't be drafted until two years beyond HS). Nobody cares how good a football prospect is at age 11--they aren't physically developed yet. Competitive youth football is a thing in Texas--but the local football leagues catering to middle-school children seem more rec- and dev- focused.

The standard career path for a NBA player is HS basketball, often with AAU on the side, one year in college, and then on to the NBA. Some players do Europe instead of NCAA ball (the NBA has a one-year past high school requirement), but that's unusual. Every once in a while, one hears about 11-year-olds who can dunk, but in general, nobody cares about how good an 11-year-old is. Michael Jordan was infamously frustrated about a HS coach who--even though he was obviously the best player at his high school in the 9th grade--would not let freshmen play varsity. (This tale has morphed into the "Jordan was cut in high school" legend; he was merely denied a spot on varsity as a freshman due to school rules).

The standard career path for a pro baseball player is HS baseball; a stint in the minors, and if you make it, the majors. Some play college ball, but still are expected to play in the minors before making the big leagues; college ball (with its use of metal bats) is generally not considered adequate preparation. Baseball is the sport that cares the least about what you do as a kid.

Soccer is unique among team sports in seeing children signed to professional contracts. It's unique (in the US) in havingpro teams run youth academies. And it's unique in that it cares very much how good a player is good at age 11; middle school is when they start narrowing the funnel.

Now, there may be good reasons for that. The US dominates in hoops and baseball, and American football is exclusively a US sport--so traditional US sporting culture (which values high-school sports as a public good, and still demands strict amateurism out of collegiate athletes--a guy recently quit NCAA football rather than shut down his for-profit Youtube channel, when the NCAA ruled that making money off of videos of him playing football was considered non-amateur) dominates these. And traditional US sporting culture generally disapproves of subjecting middle-schoolers to professional training regimens.

Another argument often heard is that the other sports simply cannot be played at a high level until one physically matures--and that size and strength matter far more. Until you know who is going to be fastest, strongest, tallest--and this won't be revealed until well after puberty--the funnel cannot be narrowed. The skills of soccer, OTOH, can be mastered at a young age, and according to much received wisdom, skill at manipulating the ball HAS to be learned in early childhood--otherwise it's too late. In other words, the other sports have an attitude of "show me your good athletes, and I'll turn them into star quarterbacks, first basemen, or small forwards". In soccer, it seems to be "show me your technically sound soccer players, and I'll make the good athletes and teach them teamwork".

Which would work against a development path in which high school is the principal training ground.

One other point, which drives a whole lot of the arguments in this forum, is the belief that the best way to train elite players is to a) group them with other elite players, and not have them waste their time kicking around with the C-teamers, and b) subject them to intense, high-quality training. This, of course, discourages the HS environment, where one's teammates are determined by geography, not skill.

Just some food for thought.