U-17 wnt

[Unregistered]

I think politics and string-pulling are part of it, due to the incentives of the club coaches. They want to grow their club back home, and getting one of their club players onto a YNT (or a D1 scholarship award) guarantees that. It is more important to get one of your club players onto the team than it is to find the best possible player for the YNT.

But I think the lack of identification is also part of it, although I would emphasize it's not necessarily an inability to identify, but it is almost certainly prioritizing performance now over potential later.

Remember coaches/clubs must win or die - at all age groups, at all times.

So, you are a coach, and you're picking your U-little roster, and you have to choose between some scrawny kid who MIGHT fill out later but who now has a terrific soccer IQ, and some kid who has the soccer IQ of a box of rocks but is right a terrific athlete (perhaps an early bloomer, or born early in the soccer year). Whom do you roster, remembering that you if you lose now, there will not BE a later? Lather, rinse, repeat for 8 or so years, and we get YNTs filled with kids who at one time were more athletic, if lower-soccer-IQ than their peers.

- a coach

Let's also acknowledge that moving forward USSF will lean very heavily to DA kids.

[Unregistered]

Let's also acknowledge that moving forward USSF will lean very heavily to DA kids.

Makes little differnce. They choose from a constrained pool rather then an expanded pool. Fail to see how that will help.

[Unregistered]

Makes little differnce. They choose from a constrained pool rather then an expanded pool. Fail to see how that will help.

It won’t help at all.

GDa and ECNL have spread the top level players out more than ever. Read about other states...GDA is not dominating and monopolizing the top talent everywhere.

[Unregistered]

There have been some fair critizisms of the team / game posted here.

No one is hating on the girls, and I, for one, am rooting hard for them to do well.

This post is also fair and makes a very good point. It’s is just one game. I haven’t watched this age group play much, so if style and tactics are typically different, then that’s good to hear. I suspect they will need to be to go anywhere in this tournament.

I have watched this group as well. Its not just one game. Its the whole process. Go look at the last u-17 cycle. Substitute Ghana for Cameroon.

the "its one game" approach is just wrong. The process is flawed if the aim is to produce great players. If the aim is to support the current infrastructure and line certain pockets, then have at it, but lets no complain about player quality. Sure we will luck into a few diamonds, this is a big country, but the current process is NOT designed to elevate the individual players tool box and the USSF do a lousy job of building TEAMS. they select individuals for a variety of reasons, not all soccer related, build human interest stories around some and then try an shoe horn them into a credible team.

When the Sh!t hits the fan in game, they look along the bench, take off a technical player and sling on an athlete.

Rinse repeat.

[Unregistered]

I truly am sorry for you and your kid. Sticks and stones. You can't stand in one place up top and expect to get picked up by a NT. A good mark and your daughter is toast.

You have no idea who I am or how far off base you are, but keep trying to bring what has become a good discussion ( largely due to your absence) back to my kid vs yours

[Unregistered]

You have no idea who I am or how far off base you are, but keep trying to bring what has become a good discussion ( largely due to your absence) back to my kid vs yours

btw if you do know how I am, then please tell everyone. Im fine with you sharing it

[Unregistered]

It won’t help at all.

GDa and ECNL have spread the top level players out more than ever. Read about other states...GDA is not dominating and monopolizing the top talent everywhere.

I think you miss the point. there are not many top level players.. period because the system is not creating them. you could put the GDA and ECNL and every other league together into one , nothing would change.

is College/NWSL producing high level technical soccer ...answer NO

if you dont build a players technical foundation early at perhaps the expense of wins...the die is largely cast.

[Unregistered]

I think you miss the point. there are not many top level players.. period because the system is not creating them. you could put the GDA and ECNL and every other league together into one , nothing would change.

is College/NWSL producing high level technical soccer ...answer NO

if you dont build a players technical foundation early at perhaps the expense of wins...the die is largely cast.

Get rid of those leagues is the answer or at a minimum the exclusionary travel. More good players will stay with the game longer and stay together longer with a chance to improve rather then getting shut out.

[Unregistered]

It won’t help at all.

GDa and ECNL have spread the top level players out more than ever. Read about other states...GDA is not dominating and monopolizing the top talent everywhere.

I am not picking on you, but this statement (and the oft-repeated "watering down" criticism of the status quo) is at least a gross oversimplification of the problem, is very likely misleading, and at worst, is flat wrong.

If you are willing to grant that in-born cognitive ability and physical potential are randomly distributed, then there should be 1,000 times as much talent born into the US male player pool than the Iceland player pool. (300M vs 300K people.)

But judging by the relative results of the Iceland and US MNTs, clearly this in-born talent is largely irrelevant, as its effect is dwarfed by what each country's player development machinery does with/to that talent. (Any objection that I have ever heard (e.g., "the USA is too geographically spread out," or "this costs a lot of money") is rendered moot, given that any reasonable-sized town like Boston has twice the population of Iceland in a smaller space, and we all know we spend a lot of money already.)

So, what is happening to squander all this talent? What the heck, let's gore several sacred cows by arguing:

(1) Town programs are not incentivized at all to develop players, even though they have the largest player pools of all. Talented kids don't develop good skills, and develop bad habits.

(2) Parents want wins now, not development later. They will actively take players away from development-focused clubs to win-at-all-costs now clubs.

(3) As a result, clubs' incentives to win at all costs all weeds out high-soccer-IQ but physical late-bloomers (can't gamble that the player will fill out, and can't wait anyway - gotta get gotsoccer points NOW or the parents will leave).

(4) Club cartel leagues which do not relegate, and which bar smaller clubs from entering, insulates big clubs from the costs of losing, and shields them from being embarrassed by competition.

(5) Big clubs' ability to dissolve losing squads and reshuffle them into new squads (perhaps with a change of coach) further insulates them from the cost of losing.

(6) The resulting consolidation of clubs, and the lack of viable independent clubs and leagues, limits choice, further shielding big clubs from the cost of losing.

(7) Lack of pick-up soccer culture doesn't force early physical bloomers from learning to play against physically superior opponents (i.e., older kids). Playing against physically superior opponents requires superior skills and/or IQ.

(8) Can't believe I'm saying this, but it is my personal observation that kids don't watch enough high-quality televised matches. How can you learn to play if you don't watch?

That was cathartic.

- a coach

[Unregistered]

Is it all that complicated. Are not European clubs incentivized to find and develop pro soccer players because you can make money on them through transfer fees?

I think if people could make money by finding and developing soccer talent here, then people would find and develop soccer talent here. Follow the money.

Not saying that is a good system but it is a system designed to find and develop soccer talent.

[Unregistered]

Is it all that complicated. Are not European clubs incentivized to find and develop pro soccer players because you can make money on them through transfer fees?

I think if people could make money by finding and developing soccer talent here, then people would find and develop soccer talent here. Follow the money.

Not saying that is a good system but it is a system designed to find and develop soccer talent.

I think it's a great system, because the financial incentives of the club and the development desires of the player are aligned. (Bonus points because it removes the corrupting influence of sports from education - a controversial opinion, no doubt, in our athletic (vs academic/needs) scholarship focused forum.)

I ruminated about something to similarly align the interests of club and player, like: a DA would "buy" the rights to a player from the club. But a couple of problems: unlike Europe, there's no contract tying a player to a club; and the amount of money would have to be big enough to outweigh the benefits to the club of keeping the player in order to attract more paying parents' players. On balance, I don't like my own idea, as there would probably be too many unintended consequences.

- a coach

[Unregistered]

I am not picking on you, but this statement (and the oft-repeated "watering down" criticism of the status quo) is at least a gross oversimplification of the problem, is very likely misleading, and at worst, is flat wrong.

If you are willing to grant that in-born cognitive ability and physical potential are randomly distributed, then there should be 1,000 times as much talent born into the US male player pool than the Iceland player pool. (300M vs 300K people.)

But judging by the relative results of the Iceland and US MNTs, clearly this in-born talent is largely irrelevant, as its effect is dwarfed by what each country's player development machinery does with/to that talent. (Any objection that I have ever heard (e.g., "the USA is too geographically spread out," or "this costs a lot of money") is rendered moot, given that any reasonable-sized town like Boston has twice the population of Iceland in a smaller space, and we all know we spend a lot of money already.)

So, what is happening to squander all this talent? What the heck, let's gore several sacred cows by arguing:

(1) Town programs are not incentivized at all to develop players, even though they have the largest player pools of all. Talented kids don't develop good skills, and develop bad habits.

(2) Parents want wins now, not development later. They will actively take players away from development-focused clubs to win-at-all-costs now clubs.

(3) As a result, clubs' incentives to win at all costs all weeds out high-soccer-IQ but physical late-bloomers (can't gamble that the player will fill out, and can't wait anyway - gotta get gotsoccer points NOW or the parents will leave).

(4) Club cartel leagues which do not relegate, and which bar smaller clubs from entering, insulates big clubs from the costs of losing, and shields them from being embarrassed by competition.

(5) Big clubs' ability to dissolve losing squads and reshuffle them into new squads (perhaps with a change of coach) further insulates them from the cost of losing.

(6) The resulting consolidation of clubs, and the lack of viable independent clubs and leagues, limits choice, further shielding big clubs from the cost of losing.

(7) Lack of pick-up soccer culture doesn't force early physical bloomers from learning to play against physically superior opponents (i.e., older kids). Playing against physically superior opponents requires superior skills and/or IQ.

(8) Can't believe I'm saying this, but it is my personal observation that kids don't watch enough high-quality televised matches. How can you learn to play if you don't watch?

That was cathartic.

- a coach

You responded to my post, and I don’t feel like you’re picking on me at all.

As a matter of fact, I agree on all your points and have made many very similar arguemnents before. Especially the way clubs currently profit (or lack of profit form truly developing a talent that evolves to elite level). Clubs are parasites off parents who make decisions largely based on the win / loss metric because “development” is so much harder to quantify especially for someone not knowable about the game.

My comment about talent being spread out amongst two leagues still stands, especially if a national program isn’t doing a great job of development. You better scout EVERYBODY so you don’t miss out on that dynamic difference maker. Especially true if we are way less of a “system” program like Iceland.

[Unregistered]

I think you miss the point. there are not many top level players.. period because the system is not creating them. you could put the GDA and ECNL and every other league together into one , nothing would change.

is College/NWSL producing high level technical soccer ...answer NO

if you dont build a players technical foundation early at perhaps the expense of wins...the die is largely cast.

I think your point is that come college and NWSL...its all about wins. As it should be.

Just my opinion as parent of a very motivated player....I think ultimately the player is responsible for developing their technical abilities. Sure, the club can certainly help by enabling development and facilitating and rewarding creative play even at the expense of wins. There are only so many contact hours between coach and player, though.

I've seen players make huge jumps in ability just using a half dozen cones, a wall, and a ball. A couple thousand touches are possible in as little as an hour. Compound that daily over a year....

[Unregistered]

I think your point is that come college and NWSL...its all about wins. As it should be.

Just my opinion as parent of a very motivated player....I think ultimately the player is responsible for developing their technical abilities. Sure, the club can certainly help by enabling development and facilitating and rewarding creative play even at the expense of wins. There are only so many contact hours between coach and player, though.

I've seen players make huge jumps in ability just using a half dozen cones, a wall, and a ball. A couple thousand touches are possible in as little as an hour. Compound that daily over a year....

With respect, it is combination play that breaks down bunkered defenses, which are those that consistently prove so problematic to the US WNT (nobody bunkers against the US MNT). And combination play, by definition, cannot be worked on in isolation.

- a coach

[Unregistered]

With respect, it is combination play that breaks down bunkered defenses, which are those that consistently prove so problematic to the US WNT (nobody bunkers against the US MNT). And combination play, by definition, cannot be worked on in isolation.

- a coach

Fair enough and valid point.

I misunderstood your comment that technical ability needs to developed early by the club or the die is cast...

I see combination play as something that can be more easily and quickly developed by a skilled player with exceptional touch. Certainly combination play does not need to be prioritized over individual technical skill and touch, no?

I certainly maybe wrong, but it would seem much easier to develop the combining skills once the individual skills are very strong.

Not arguing at all, trying to learn and I am open minded.