How other MLS teams structure their Academies

[Unregistered]

Half the teams in DA are already very weak. The soccer talent is just not there and now will never be.

But your kid is? News flash: if he is not playing up and excelling he will never play on the Revs u16 team.

[Unregistered]

Teams and players. I know part of the reason for DA's large size is geography. But part of it is to saturate markets to kill 2nd place contenders. There's not enough player and coaching talent to claim the league is consistently top notch, because it definitely is not. Something much smaller would be better to train the talent that should be trained, not just the ones willing to write a check and give up HS.

Sorry, but in a country of 330 million, there is plenty of talent out there to develop. The Netherlands, a country with a population of 16 million, has no problem filling it's various academies and developing talent that plays in the top European leagues. I've heard all the arguments about our best athletes going to other sports, but that rings hollow. The US is a very athletic team... it relies on size and speed too much and lacks the technical skill that other soccer-powerhouse countries have in spades. So, if we have a problem with a lack of world-class technical skill on the ball, and we have a population of 330 million to draw from (i.e. plenty of talented athletes), it would seem to me we have a problem of development.

Does DA solve that problem? What would, other than the usual response of "residential academies".

[Unregistered]

Limiting the numbers of players that participate in DA and subjecting them to the same "development" program isn't a solution either. And why people in the DA and GDA threads keep offering this as the fix baffles me.

It's like a business that is losing money with every widget it sells thinking they will miraculously make money by selling more of them. Sell less and cut your losses. Sure. Great idea. But that isn't what is being promoted. What is being represented is the elite league isn't elite enough. Rid the truly elite of the riff raff and development will skyrocket. I don't buy it for a second.

[Unregistered]

Limiting the numbers of players that participate in DA and subjecting them to the same "development" program isn't a solution either. And why people in the DA and GDA threads keep offering this as the fix baffles me.

.

They think the problem is the riff-raff, i.e. players that are not on the same level as the chosen ones. They think their kid would be "going pro" if they weren't being inhibited by supposedly lesser players. Basically these parents are stark raving mad.

[Unregistered]

Sorry, but in a country of 330 million, there is plenty of talent out there to develop. The Netherlands, a country with a population of 16 million, has no problem filling it's various academies and developing talent that plays in the top European leagues. I've heard all the arguments about our best athletes going to other sports, but that rings hollow. The US is a very athletic team... it relies on size and speed too much and lacks the technical skill that other soccer-powerhouse countries have in spades. So, if we have a problem with a lack of world-class technical skill on the ball, and we have a population of 330 million to draw from (i.e. plenty of talented athletes), it would seem to me we have a problem of development.

Does DA solve that problem? What would, other than the usual response of "residential academies".

Then make DA only about NT level and do something different for them, using ECNL or other for scouting. The bulk of the efforts should be on development at the younger ages. Yes there are plenty of players out there, but they're being trained by cra* coaches at the younger ages. Many never get to reach their potential because of pay to play, or they move to other sports where their friends play or that have a more lucrative professional path (even if they never achieve it they still aspire to it). Yes moving DA to U12 is a step in the right direction. But if kids aren't learning properly from 6-11 you get what you get into the system

[Unregistered]

They think the problem is the riff-raff, i.e. players that are not on the same level as the chosen ones. They think their kid would be "going pro" if they weren't being inhibited by supposedly lesser players. Basically these parents are stark raving mad.

No I happen to know my kid is not NT material. I think the system is inefficient for what it is trying to accomplish. Nor is it in line with the goals of most players in the system who are in it to better their opportunities to play in college (like my kid). If ENPL were up five years ago (and reaches the same level as ECNL) my kid probably would have gone down the path - he just wanted to play good soccer and have a chance to play in college. That is all - no NT, no pro career (even though s passionate about the sport). Training with a group of more highly skilled players is better than training with 6-8 really good players and 12 so-so ones. Same goes with competition - would it be better to play the Red Bulls (even if you lose badly) or Seacoast? If have no problems with multiple layers of the pyramid; it's just that top of the pyramid is too big to almost being a rectangle

[Unregistered]

Limiting the numbers of players that participate in DA and subjecting them to the same "development" program isn't a solution either. And why people in the DA and GDA threads keep offering this as the fix baffles me.

It's like a business that is losing money with every widget it sells thinking they will miraculously make money by selling more of them. Sell less and cut your losses. Sure. Great idea. But that isn't what is being promoted. What is being represented is the elite league isn't elite enough. Rid the truly elite of the riff raff and development will skyrocket. I don't buy it for a second.

I know- "more meaningful" games is a joke.

[Unregistered]

They think the problem is the riff-raff, i.e. players that are not on the same level as the chosen ones. They think their kid would be "going pro" if they weren't being inhibited by supposedly lesser players. Basically these parents are stark raving mad.

NO- the point is the development model is not sufficient for ANY player.

[Unregistered]

Sorry, but in a country of 330 million, there is plenty of talent out there to develop. The Netherlands, a country with a population of 16 million, has no problem filling it's various academies and developing talent that plays in the top European leagues. I've heard all the arguments about our best athletes going to other sports, but that rings hollow. The US is a very athletic team... it relies on size and speed too much and lacks the technical skill that other soccer-powerhouse countries have in spades. So, if we have a problem with a lack of world-class technical skill on the ball, and we have a population of 330 million to draw from (i.e. plenty of talented athletes), it would seem to me we have a problem of development.

Does DA solve that problem? What would, other than the usual response of "residential academies".

Get coaches from European academies (the real coaches, not the "community outreach" coaches) to come over and start training 7-10 year old players who show promise and who have families that are dedicated to the sport.

It's the latter part of this that could end up being a problem. When kids in Europe are asked to train at one of the academies at a young age, the parents understand the commitment involved and are willing to give the child up for the prospect of a professional career. The players also understand the commitment and many are very focused on their path at even at 7-10 years old. Very few US parents would be willing to let a soccer academy dictate their kid's life so early on and most kids are unwilling to focus so extremely on one activity until they are 12-13 years old. This difference in mentality is part of the reason we might still struggle producing world class players, even with a training system equal to that in Europe.

Then there's geography. There may be enough players and families with the right mentality to succeed to form a dozen club teams, but they are spread all over the US with no realistic way to train together or form elite leagues.

So there you go. Top European coaches to train young kids, along with a change in mentality in both young players and their parents. Easy!

[Unregistered]

The start rule at age 16 and up allows too many players the promise of play time when in theory they shouldn't be on the team at the DA level.

[Unregistered]

Get coaches from European academies (the real coaches, not the "community outreach" coaches) to come over and start training 7-10 year old players who show promise and who have families that are dedicated to the sport.

It's the latter part of this that could end up being a problem. When kids in Europe are asked to train at one of the academies at a young age, the parents understand the commitment involved and are willing to give the child up for the prospect of a professional career. The players also understand the commitment and many are very focused on their path at even at 7-10 years old. Very few US parents would be willing to let a soccer academy dictate their kid's life so early on and most kids are unwilling to focus so extremely on one activity until they are 12-13 years old. This difference in mentality is part of the reason we might still struggle producing world class players, even with a training system equal to that in Europe.

Then there's geography. There may be enough players and families with the right mentality to succeed to form a dozen club teams, but they are spread all over the US with no realistic way to train together or form elite leagues.

So there you go. Top European coaches to train young kids, along with a change in mentality in both young players and their parents. Easy!

For the most part, the European training splits from the US at age 12. This is the age when many players commit to academy structured training.

Why shouldn't US soccer players dedicate 10 x more training to soccer by this age?

The average Olympic Swimmer trains 5 hours per day and 6 days per week. Usually 30 minutes stretching/weight lifting in the AM followed by 2-3 hour swim practice. 30 minutes dry land in the PM followed by 2-3 hour swim practice.

How can US soccer players in academy develop with 4.5 hours/WEEK? And with 4 months OFF? And FORBIDDEN to train on their own?

[Unregistered]

How can US soccer players in academy develop with 4.5 hours/WEEK? And with 4 months OFF? And FORBIDDEN to train on their own?

Why in the world do you let any coach tell you what your kid can and can't do?

[Unregistered]

Professionals....the top of the pyramid are not all identified at the youth ages. There is no country or system that can identify the chosen few and train only them. Identification is very imprecise. So the development net has to be cast fairly wide, with many more kids trained well, playing a lot on their own, and eventually ending on the top of the pyramid.

In the US kids play a fair amount until middle school. Recess, pickup, town, club, odp, clinics and summer camps etc give plenty of time on the ball. And the kids at this age that put the time in are pretty darn talented, arguably equal with their overseas peers. Then it changes. Right when other countries are ramping up expectations we dial them back. Many of our best players begin to have less time on the ball the older they get and the further up the development pyramid they climb. Clubs are incentivized to get kids into colleges, and attract the next group of u-littles to keep the wheels of commerce rolling. Parents and players shift focus from improving at the sport they love, to benefiting from it in the form of college scholarships, admissions help, etc. Soccer is now secondary.

Until we find a way, within the constraints of the US system, to keep a huge swath of players motivated to participate and improve their skills and techniques through the crucial teen years, the results when compared to true soccer countries will remain disappointing.

[Unregistered]

The start rule at age 16 and up allows too many players the promise of play time when in theory they shouldn't be on the team at the DA level.

Agreed. The DA should really reduce the max roster size limit. What they are doing with the U12s is perfect, rosters of 24 divided into two teams of 12 for games, 9v9 with three subs. Every kid on those rosters is going to get enough playing time for proper development.

Unfortunately, most of the U13 teams have 20 on their rosters for 11v11 games. Sure, you might have a couple playing up with the U14s, but could also have some U12s playing up with the 13s. With rosters of that size, you are going to have some players with much less than adequate playing time for optimum development. You would think at least the bottom three on the roster would be designated as DPs, so they could get playing time elsewhere, but a quick look at a bunch of rosters shows that almost all the players are FT, so the system is not really being used correctly.

[Unregistered]

Professionals....the top of the pyramid are not all identified at the youth ages. There is no country or system that can identify the chosen few and train only them. Identification is very imprecise. So the development net has to be cast fairly wide, with many more kids trained well, playing a lot on their own, and eventually ending on the top of the pyramid.

In the US kids play a fair amount until middle school. Recess, pickup, town, club, odp, clinics and summer camps etc give plenty of time on the ball. And the kids at this age that put the time in are pretty darn talented, arguably equal with their overseas peers. Then it changes. Right when other countries are ramping up expectations we dial them back. Many of our best players begin to have less time on the ball the older they get and the further up the development pyramid they climb. Clubs are incentivized to get kids into colleges, and attract the next group of u-littles to keep the wheels of commerce rolling. Parents and players shift focus from improving at the sport they love, to benefiting from it in the form of college scholarships, admissions help, etc. Soccer is now secondary.

Until we find a way, within the constraints of the US system, to keep a huge swath of players motivated to participate and improve their skills and techniques through the crucial teen years, the results when compared to true soccer countries will remain disappointing.

Agree and agree with above that most are in the DA system for college exposure. USSF needs to tap into the very small group that wants to dedicate themselves to the sport as a career. I don't know if it's through a national residency program or at the MLS clubs (which probably makes more sense).