PARENTS: you can stop this soccer madness in this country

[Unregistered]

Define "measurably" in your world.

Because, as someone who played as a kid through college, graduating more than 25 years ago, I can tell you there are 12 year old kids now with twice the skills I have.

No doubt whatsoever that players today are measurably better than two decades ago. Not even a discussion in my book.

Exactly, but that won't stop these self-serving narcissists from continuing to spout their nonsense every 15 minutes.

[Unregistered]

Not really disagreeing with you but only idiots think this is all about winning tournament games to accumulate GotSoccer points. GotSoccer is just the score keeper so that train of thought is just way too simplistic. With the advent of the ECNL, and now the DA, they are also no longer needed though. The real issues to discuss are why clubs want to accumulate them, what accumulating them does for their brand and why the parents really think that they matter. If you want to stop the lunacy in club soccer, start by putting some objectivity into the situation. That starts with education. Parents believe that GotSoccer points are important because they are told that you need them down the road to get into important showcase tournaments because they are also told that their kid attending those showcases is necessary for them to attract the attention of college coaches and land a soccer scholarship. That whole philosophy is the actual lie in club soccer because if your kid has talent the college coaches will find out about them anyways and if they don't attending a tournament isn't going to disguise that. Organizing tournaments are where the big money is in club soccer and clubs go to them not to help their players land a college scholarship but rather to promote the club brand. Its advertising.

As always, you are incisively brilliant in your analysis. Surprised you haven't been able to wrangle a huge job in the soccer industry, but of course who would want to give up that asst manager position you worked so hard to get at Jiffy Lube.

[Unregistered]

Define "measurably" in your world.

Because, as someone who played as a kid through college, graduating more than 25 years ago, I can tell you there are 12 year old kids now with twice the skills I have.

No doubt whatsoever that players today are measurably better than two decades ago. Not even a discussion in my book.

I call BS... the current USMNT is not as good as the 2002 team was...Not many on the current team would have made that squad

[Unregistered]

I call BS... the current USMNT is not as good as the 2002 team was...Not many on the current team would have made that squad

Fair point.

How many players today are party of this "pay to play" scenario? Should we wait a few more years before making a legit comparison? (asking)

[Unregistered]

Oh for ****'s sake. As far as that non-sequitur goes, does it really matter whether pay-to-play was or wasn't explicitly "designed to improve" the USNT? Don't be so obtuse...or maybe just disingenuous.

The highest levels of play in the US, however you'd like to define that, has not measurably improved over the last two decades commensurate with the exponential increase in financial investment. Clear enough?

I agree with this statement. Part of the problem is that the rest of the world hasn't remained static with their development models and they have all improved regarding skill and talent at the highest levels. The game today is faster paced than in years past... player telemetry tells you that if nothing else. So while I think the US has improved, it looks like we're falling behind because compared to many other countries, we aren't keeping pace.

Having said that, I think our base has improved significantly at the youngest levels. Others have said it and I agree, that 9-17yo players today are absolutely more skilled and athletic than players from 30 years ago (when I played).

So the question remains, why does our senior team not compete well at the highest levels of international soccer? I think it is a combination of college taking away much of the talent and putting us behind years compared to South American and European pros at that age. Our best often go off to college and balance academics and a compressed competitive schedule with too many games and too little training and recovery instead of playing agains the world's best professionals and training as a professional. Break the link to collegiate sports in this country and maybe we move the needle in the men's game.

[Unregistered]

I call BS... the current USMNT is not as good as the 2002 team was...Not many on the current team would have made that squad

Not true. The rest of the world has improved. We haven't gotten worse.

[Unregistered]

Can't help but wonder who started this thread....

[Unregistered]

I call BS... the current USMNT is not as good as the 2002 team was...Not many on the current team would have made that squad

Exactly my point. And to the subsequent post asking how many are from this pay-to-play genre, we're not that far from essentially being at a point where but for veterans, particularly on the women's, the answer is all of them.

Again, the financial investment had been MASSIVE four years, it's an inductee that one did NOT exist, and the output, the impact, can not be objectively characterized as more than negligible.

[Unregistered]

Define "measurably" in your world.

Because, as someone who played as a kid through college, graduating more than 25 years ago, I can tell you there are 12 year old kids now with twice the skills I have.

No doubt whatsoever that players today are measurably better than two decades ago. Not even a discussion in my book.

I think it's funny that your trip down memory lane is your best crack at defining measurably thinking it adequately refutes the argument.

[Unregistered]

Not true. The rest of the world has improved. We haven't gotten worse.

The argument isn't that we got worse genius.

[Unregistered]

The argument isn't that we got worse genius.

OK genius. One might have gotten that impression with the direct negative comparison to 2002.

[Unregistered]

...play in the US, however you'd like to define that, has not measurably improved over the last two decades commensurate with the exponential increase in financial investment. Clear enough?

Remarkably, as clear as I was, and it says what it says in plain English, some people lack the intellect or the honesty to read this and debate it as it's stated, its words, logic, stipulations and all, without distortion and deflection.

[Unregistered]

OK genius. One might have gotten that impression with the direct negative comparison to 2002.

Saying the rest of the world has improved and we haven't gotten worse is a non sequitur -- it has nothing to do with an argument about whether players on this NT would or wouldn't make the 02 side as a response to refuting that the US game hasn't measurably improved in twenty years commensurate to the financial investment made in that time. Try to keep up.

[Unregistered]

Saying the rest of the world has improved and we haven't gotten worse is a non sequitur -- it has nothing to do with an argument about whether players on this NT would or wouldn't make the 02 side as a response to refuting that the US game hasn't measurably improved in twenty years commensurate to the financial investment made in that time. Try to keep up.

Now that's funny. Not just not worse. We're better. And Hamm, Foudy, Chastain, et al would tell you that. Some of you are so obsessed with your personal prism critiques about "the landscape" that you presume you can just graft or cut and paste that on to any argument or conclusion. The quality of the logic displayed on this site is frightening, and leaves no doubt (using your kind of logic) as to why China and Japan are killing us in academics.

[Unregistered]

Remarkably, as clear as I was, and it says what it says in plain English, some people lack the intellect or the honesty to read this and debate it as it's stated, its words, logic, stipulations and all, without distortion and deflection.

Maybe some of us simpletons need clarification on your vague terms like "measurably" and "exponential" (when you don't define a starting point).