If youth soccer/sports is broken, then how can it be fixed?

[Guest]

The people on this forum are trying to solve for the tiny, tiny percentage of participants who care about the national team or playing professionally. Maybe a slightly higher percentage interested in college scholarships. For the vast majority of youth players and parents, those are not a concern and they don't want a system designed to maximize those goals for a relatively small number of people. For these folks, they just want access for the most players, the more teams the better, reasonably priced fun activities for their kids. The goals of the elite few are not aligned with the large majority.

[Guest]

I was one.

I was independent.

Please tell us how it worked. How did you recommend players? How did you adjust your evaluations based on the systems players were in. how much input did a DoC have in recommending a player?

Thanks

[Guest]

Please tell us how it worked. How did you recommend players? How did you adjust your evaluations based on the systems players were in. how much input did a DoC have in recommending a player?

Thanks

Yes we got recommendations, but we also had a presence at as many clubs ourselves first hand. I took in practices, and games, several times a week. We had a staff of over a dozen at every Showcase. Truthfully, when GDA was in place it was easier because more often teams were playing a similar alignment and style so envisioning a player in a role was easier. It's harder when you are looking at a disparate level of play and styles.

[Guest]

Yes we got recommendations, but we also had a presence at as many clubs ourselves first hand. I took in practices, and games, several times a week. We had a staff of over a dozen at every Showcase. Truthfully, when GDA was in place it was easier because more often teams were playing a similar alignment and style so envisioning a player in a role was easier. It's harder when you are looking at a disparate level of play and styles.

its all very subjective. That is the nature of soccer.

[Guest]

What exactly is broken? Seems like there is a lot of choice out there with plenty of clubs and leagues of various levels. Choose what works for your kid and everything will work out fine, no?

[Guest]

Call for the resignation of William Shakespeare and Pinocchio!

[Guest]

Apples and oranges.

You don't go to a Showcase to play a game. You go to a Showcase to show yourself in front of scouts.

The fact that is not understood makes the rest moot.

I get it, but how many of the schools that attend recruit nationally and not regionally? I don't have the data, but I'd say 95%+ of D1 schools will offer kids within their region except for the teams in the Top 10 who recruit nationally and from the USYNT.

In the original post, I mentioned 2-3 Champions League-style events where the Top 2 teams in the state would go. You could easily make one a regional showcase weekend where the top 3-4 in the state go and play regionally in front of those schools against the best from the other local states. So maybe Stanford or UCLA won't take the trip to the East Coast. I'd guarantee you that schools from the East Coast like Duke, UNC, UVA, etc. would be there looking at talent in the Northeast.

Want to help out the bottom teams? Put them in a regional showcase-style tournament as well that will likely be attended by local lower-level D1s and high-level D3s.

Just my opinion.

[Guest]

Showcases are for showcasing talent and getting recruited. The top leagues where most progms shop have made it easier/more efficient for programs.

Also, few MLSN teams, especially pro teams, want to play locally.

1) it's generally not worth their time. Yes some MLSN pay to plays are poor and not much better than others out there but in general, they do play at a higher level. There aren't even many outside clubs that could give them quality games.

2) they run the risk of losing to a "lower" team, which isn't a good look. At the end of the day the pay to plays are all for profit business (even if disguised as a non profit ).

MLSNs carrot is the pro teams. If they pulled out the pay to plays would have to stand on their own, and not all would be able to

I agree that showcases are still important so that it is easier/more efficient to get seen, just not as many, and more regionalized so there's less travel. Most schools will recruit regionally anyway.

I understand both points but if it was a state-only league, you'd still get the 7 current NJ MLS Next Teams in addition to another 3 that could be competitive. Where it gets tricky for the boys side in the state is that there are quality teams right over the bridge in NY that could offer just as much, if not better competition.

As for the MLS pro teams, I think a side league of just the pro teams would be beneficial where they can still get home/away against DC, Philly, New England, etc.

[Guest]

I get it, but how many of the schools that attend recruit nationally and not regionally? I don't have the data, but I'd say 95%+ of D1 schools will offer kids within their region except for the teams in the Top 10 who recruit nationally and from the USYNT.

In the original post, I mentioned 2-3 Champions League-style events where the Top 2 teams in the state would go. You could easily make one a regional showcase weekend where the top 3-4 in the state go and play regionally in front of those schools against the best from the other local states. So maybe Stanford or UCLA won't take the trip to the East Coast. I'd guarantee you that schools from the East Coast like Duke, UNC, UVA, etc. would be there looking at talent in the Northeast.

Want to help out the bottom teams? Put them in a regional showcase-style tournament as well that will likely be attended by local lower-level D1s and high-level D3s.

Just my opinion.

My kid’s team has 6 players within 3 hours, 9 under 6 hours, and the remaining 13 from beyond that.

[Guest]

I get it, but how many of the schools that attend recruit nationally and not regionally? I don't have the data, but I'd say 95%+ of D1 schools will offer kids within their region except for the teams in the Top 10 who recruit nationally and from the USYNT.

In the original post, I mentioned 2-3 Champions League-style events where the Top 2 teams in the state would go. You could easily make one a regional showcase weekend where the top 3-4 in the state go and play regionally in front of those schools against the best from the other local states. So maybe Stanford or UCLA won't take the trip to the East Coast. I'd guarantee you that schools from the East Coast like Duke, UNC, UVA, etc. would be there looking at talent in the Northeast.

Want to help out the bottom teams? Put them in a regional showcase-style tournament as well that will likely be attended by local lower-level D1s and high-level D3s.

Just my opinion.

its a great idea, but how and who selects these teams and based on what? Money talks. every team my kids were on had some parent or group who was willing to overpay for access. Who is going to pay for it?

[Guest]

its a great idea, but how and who selects these teams and based on what? Money talks. every team my kids were on had some parent or group who was willing to overpay for access. Who is going to pay for it?

Top 2-3 teams in the standings of the state league at the end of each season (Fall/Spring) Is it realistic in today's environment? Unfortunately, we all know that the answer is no for a lot of reasons. As you said, $$ drives a majority of the decisions.

I'd just love to see everything consolidated, easier to follow/understand for parents, more affordable, and invites to showcases/events based on qualifying for them rather than the systems we have now. I think there's a happy medium between what we had 25 years ago and what we have now, as there are pros/cons to both eras.

[Guest]

My kid’s team has 6 players within 3 hours, 9 under 6 hours, and the remaining 13 from beyond that.

Interesting. I won't ask what school but there's always going to be schools with a higher academic prestige where kids will travel farther and the pull may be greater (ex: the Ivy Leagues). Maybe that's the case for your kid. I'd also be curious to ask their coach how the introduction of these national events a few years ago has changed their recruiting philosophy.

[Guest]

Get rid of PDA and MFA B,C, and D teams.

[Guest]

Get rid of PDA and MFA B,C, and D teams.

Why? What would that do?

[Guest]

Interesting. I won't ask what school but there's always going to be schools with a higher academic prestige where kids will travel farther and the pull may be greater (ex: the Ivy Leagues). Maybe that's the case for your kid. I'd also be curious to ask their coach how the introduction of these national events a few years ago has changed their recruiting philosophy.

Not the op but it's not hard to take a look at some miscellaneous rosters. It runs the gambit. CA schools are largely local because the player pool is so vast. Small and less prestigious tends to be more local, bigger more broad