Timbers Academy

[Unregistered]

Women are even less developed than our Men's side.

The US boast the top female athletes in the WORLD. Argue all you want, no disputing this.

Many factors contribute to this situation in the USA--a democratic society and a country that doesn't discriminate against women to the extent they must be only mothers and childcare homemakers. Title IX ensures that women be provided the same acess to sports as men. etc..etc...etc..

Don't ever confuse for one second the reality of our great strong athletic women translates into soccer development in the united states....it doesn't.

Brasil, Germany, Sweden, Norway and (China) have passed the US Women in terms of tactical and technical ability....The first 4 countries I listed our footballing nations with the idealogy to allow women compete and play. All boast Far less superior athletes than our american lean, muscular machines we put on the world stage. Instead they boast Marta of Brazil, German's with more saavy in their little toe than the entire US side.

In the 2003 World Cup Semis here in Portlandia the Germans put a clinic on the field with better tactics/technique and a football organzation.

Since then it's been a downhill slide for the 90's dream team of athletic women 95 & 99WC Champ, 96 Gold. Guess what-- the countries that actually know how to play/develop/coach this wonderful game and have been playing organized soccer professionally (Men's) nearly 100 years longer than us Yanks in the states.

So spare me the rhetoric that 'we' americans are developing great female soccer players. In less than 10 years the countries listed above have passed us and left us in the dust.

Our u17 womens' didn't even qualify for the WC--should I list who did go...Mexico?

Our U20's were bumped out by a throw together team from the african contient this summer.

So there is your development theory in action for the women.

[Unregistered]

The US boast the top female athletes in the WORLD. Argue all you want, no disputing this.

Many factors contribute to this situation in the USA--a democratic society and a country that doesn't discriminate against women to the extent they must be only mothers and childcare homemakers. Title IX ensures that women be provided the same acess to sports as men. etc..etc...etc..

Don't ever confuse for one second the reality of our great strong athletic women translates into soccer development in the united states....it doesn't.

Brasil, Germany, Sweden, Norway and (China) have passed the US Women in terms of tactical and technical ability....The first 4 countries I listed our footballing nations with the idealogy to allow women compete and play. All boast Far less superior athletes than our american lean, muscular machines we put on the world stage. Instead they boast Marta of Brazil, German's with more saavy in their little toe than the entire US side.

In the 2003 World Cup Semis here in Portlandia the Germans put a clinic on the field with better tactics/technique and a football organzation.

Since then it's been a downhill slide for the 90's dream team of athletic women 95 & 99WC Champ, 96 Gold. Guess what-- the countries that actually know how to play/develop/coach this wonderful game and have been playing organized soccer professionally (Men's) nearly 100 years longer than us Yanks in the states.

So spare me the rhetoric that 'we' americans are developing great female soccer players. In less than 10 years the countries listed above have passed us and left us in the dust.

Our u17 womens' didn't even qualify for the WC--should I list who did go...Mexico?

Our U20's were bumped out by a throw together team from the african contient this summer.

So there is your development theory in action for the women.

Very well said.

[Unregistered]

Women's Player Development

I don't agree at all about women's athletes in other countries being superior to USA athletes. What is painfully obvious is that the USA teams like to place players from certain club teams and/or colleges on the rosters. NOT THE BEST PLAYERS. How about taking a forward then making her a mid and now a defender. This type of stupid coaching should have gone out 20 years ago. But, it's still reality on USA teams. Defenders, like any other position, take years to develop, not a few months practicing with the respective women's teams. The problem with USA teams is the coaching and the good old boys school of thought. Please don't correct by saying that forwards are always the best athletes on a team, more 20 year old nonsense. Get a handle on the players representing the USA and how they are selected.

[Unregistered]

I don't think switching a players position has been the end all to the USA team. I think it's the fact that other countries know how to play real soccer while in the USA we play more of a boot ball style. Go watch Brazil and see the short passing, the give and gos, the movement without the ball. Then watch us. The womens team tries to win off size and brute force. Instead of developing players we tend to develop size. Size is never going to beat skill.

[Unregistered]

If you know women's soccer, you know who April Heinrichs is. Here is her take.

April Heinrichs: "I went out to the field early yesterday to watch the German U17 pool team warm up. I wanted to watch where they are technically. I've been with some of our U20s and U18s and briefly seen some of our U17s. Germany had a combination of 17 and 18 year olds and you could see a difference physiologically. Some have filled out and some haven't, which is typical of both (countries). Some were technically gifted and proficient, which is also true of the U.S. teams, and some struggled to kick a ball over distance, which is also true of us. In essence, from an observation perspective, technically speaking we are similar to Germany.

"We are developing younger players, catching them at younger ages every year. If we changed the jerseys, you wouldn't see a big difference between the teams. When they started to play, we had a couple of very physical players, some players that very competitive - and Germany had this also. At this age group there are a lot of similarities but I think we separate ourselves somewhat physically. One could say we rely on that as the stakes get higher. Maybe bringing three people (Heinrichs, coaching education director Dave Chesler and development director Jillian Ellis) will help us focus on some strengths and weaknesses, but overall I'd say you couldn't really tell the two teams apart."

TDS: What are some challenges right now on the youth side of the women's game?

April Heinrichs: "There is a list of things that come to mind. We are focusing on winning at all costs, thinking about winning too early in players' careers, to the detriment of players and their love and passion for the game. It hurts their technical development and their psychological development. Also, too many parents are touting their child as the next Mia Hamm. We know in child development, early identification can be good and bad for psychological development. To feel like you've arrived at age 14 or 16 can often send a message whose by-product includes not getting expert feedback and not being self-aware of the need to keep improving.

"We have the games-to-training ratio backward. We need more training. Even at that, the training is often focused on the team, when at younger ages it should focus on the player. I don't know the actual number, but we will be focusing on this, at what point should we focus on the player, until 14 or younger. Too many coaches are focusing on the team concept. Players need to get more touches on the ball and parents need to be less worried about passing. Some of the the things you hear yelled most often at games are "pass it" and "kick it." People are focused on winning and comparing. These are all dangerous things. We've created a culture where youth players are feeling a tremendous pressure to win. We have to reverse that."

[Unregistered]

And let's not forget the classic American high school season where soccer players spend three months taking ten steps backwards as they deal with incompetent coaches, team mates with few soccer skills, and a competitive win-at-all-costs environment that counters everything Heinrich articulates so well. At ages when other countries' players (U15-18) are committed to year-round academies and club training programs, many of our players are training 50% less. Not to mention all the multi-sport athletes on club soccer teams who don't even come to the limited training sessions scheduled (at least this is true in my kid's club). And don't get me started on this state's ODP, which intends to supplement club soccer training... We've got a lot to overcome before we will compete globally in this sport.

[Unregistered]

"We have the games-to-training ratio backward. We need more training. Even at that, the training is often focused on the team, when at younger ages it should focus on the player. I don't know the actual number, but we will be focusing on this, at what point should we focus on the player, until 14 or younger. Too many coaches are focusing on the team concept. Players need to get more touches on the ball and parents need to be less worried about passing. Some of the the things you hear yelled most often at games are "pass it" and "kick it." People are focused on winning and comparing. These are all dangerous things. We've created a culture where youth players are feeling a tremendous pressure to win. We have to reverse that."

She makes some good points.

Individual technical training first (younger), team training later (older):

It's sound development philosophy that most clubs aspire to, but many do not adhere to consistently under the pressure to win games at young ages. This results in fewer technical players.

One aspect of the DA that I applaud is the 5 training sessions/game rule. Makes total sense.

[Unregistered]

And let's not forget the classic American high school season where soccer players spend three months taking ten steps backwards as they deal with incompetent coaches, team mates with few soccer skills, and a competitive win-at-all-costs environment that counters everything Heinrich articulates so well. At ages when other countries' players (U15-18) are committed to year-round academies and club training programs, many of our players are training 50% less. Not to mention all the multi-sport athletes on club soccer teams who don't even come to the limited training sessions scheduled (at least this is true in my kid's club). And don't get me started on this state's ODP, which intends to supplement club soccer training... We've got a lot to overcome before we will compete globally in this sport.

Totally agree. Lets make High School soccer a Rec. sport. Let's create year-round academies along the lines of the USDA. Let's look at some kind of change with the NCAA system which is modeled after american football and is totally inappropriate for soccer development at a very crucial ages.

[Unregistered]

"We have the games-to-training ratio backward. We need more training. Even at that, the training is often focused on the team, when at younger ages it should focus on the player. I don't know the actual number, but we will be focusing on this, at what point should we focus on the player, until 14 or younger. Too many coaches are focusing on the team concept. Players need to get more touches on the ball and parents need to be less worried about passing. Some of the the things you hear yelled most often at games are "pass it" and "kick it." People are focused on winning and comparing. These are all dangerous things. We've created a culture where youth players are feeling a tremendous pressure to win. We have to reverse that."

She makes some good points.

Individual technical training first (younger), team training later (older):

It's sound development philosophy that most clubs aspire to, but many do not adhere to consistently under the pressure to win games at young ages. This results in fewer technical players.

One aspect of the DA that I applaud is the 5 training sessions/game rule. Makes total sense.

I agree, as a whole and as parents we must demand that our clubs look long term rather than short term. Sadly, I think it is the parents who drive the market and put emphasis on the wins at U10/U11. The clubs only care because they want more people at their club, the more they win the more parents flock. I have even seen kids sit on the bench because they are on the A winning team rather than "play" on a B team or a team that wins less. Winning at all costs sucks the fun out of any sport and leads to less creative and more aggressive play.

[Unregistered]

Girls DA

I will try to explain this the best I can.

The DA’s goal is to develop the best youth boy’s soccer players America can. Send them to MLS directly or after 4 years of college. These boy players from the DA are to have an impact on MLS, US MNT soccer and around the world.
What does the DA get out it? Increased interest in the MNT and better quality in MLS. This simply translates to more butts in the seats at MLS games and MNT games, corporate sponsorships, and TV money.

What would the DA get out of offering a girls program? The women are already one of the best if not the best WNT in the world year in and year out. There is no return on investment in any women’s professional league. There is no money in women’s professional sports. The general population, the ones buying tickets, promoting corporate sponsorship, and TV money just don’t care to watch.

So here is the deal with women’s sports. Parents you are flipping the bill for youth girls soccer even at the highest levels. Women’s soccer is a great title nine sport in college, cheap sport to operate so cut men’s baseball & wrestling and add women’s soccer. At the professional level no one cares. At best the teams are a nice right off like the WNBA and filler on the FOX.

[Unregistered]

I will try to explain this the best I can.

The DA’s goal is to develop the best youth boy’s soccer players America can. Send them to MLS directly or after 4 years of college. These boy players from the DA are to have an impact on MLS, US MNT soccer and around the world.
What does the DA get out it? Increased interest in the MNT and better quality in MLS. This simply translates to more butts in the seats at MLS games and MNT games, corporate sponsorships, and TV money.

What would the DA get out of offering a girls program? The women are already one of the best if not the best WNT in the world year in and year out. There is no return on investment in any women’s professional league. There is no money in women’s professional sports. The general population, the ones buying tickets, promoting corporate sponsorship, and TV money just don’t care to watch.

So here is the deal with women’s sports. Parents you are flipping the bill for youth girls soccer even at the highest levels. Women’s soccer is a great title nine sport in college, cheap sport to operate so cut men’s baseball & wrestling and add women’s soccer. At the professional level no one cares. At best the teams are a nice right off like the WNBA and filler on the FOX.

I wish it was possible to support men's and women's soccer fully in this country. Un fortunately they both suffer. We get female college soccer instead of men because american football changes the title ix balance so radically. The public then associate soccer with women and have no experience with how the game is played by men. The women's game if fine, but let's be honest, the men's game, played at a high level can be breath taking. In this way the women's game (in college) hurts the men's.

[Unregistered]

I wish it was possible to support men's and women's soccer fully in this country. Un fortunately they both suffer. We get female college soccer instead of men because american football changes the title ix balance so radically. The public then associate soccer with women and have no experience with how the game is played by men. The women's game if fine, but let's be honest, the men's game, played at a high level can be breath taking. In this way the women's game (in college) hurts the men's.

WOW! that's is all I can say.. And Ladies be happy these guys are not running things and your ix is protected. This is a very simplified few of title ix from some very ignorant people

[Unregistered]

explain title 9

WOW! that's is all I can say.. And Ladies be happy these guys are not running things and your ix is protected. This is a very simplified few of title ix from some very ignorant people

Women’s soccer is a title ix sport. AD's across the county did not add sports to their universities as the measure was intended. They just cut men's sports, baseball, wrestling, men's soccer, and added women's soccer. The men’s sports I mentioned do not bring in money to the school so why not cut 3 or more from the men’s side and women’s soccer, then build a new weight room for football.

The added bonus is you don’t have to win at women’s soccer it is an under the radar sport for college AD’s. You have it, you meet title ix and the booster’s and alumni who write the checks don’t care if it is winning they just care if the football and basketball team is winning. The charge for the soccer coach is to graduate players to improve the graduation rate.

Hey, it is great for girl’s soccer but don’t expect U.S. Soccer to add a DA for girls soccer. For that matter don’t expect the women’s pro league to make it either.
If you disagree explain why.

[Soca lova]

Maybe missing something here

I wish it was possible to support men's and women's soccer fully in this country. Un fortunately they both suffer. We get female college soccer instead of men because american football changes the title ix balance so radically. The public then associate soccer with women and have no experience with how the game is played by men. The women's game if fine, but let's be honest, the men's game, played at a high level can be breath taking. In this way the women's game (in college) hurts the men's.

One point I havent seen here is concerning transfer fees. FIFA rules prohibit any team from both charging a player to play and transferring that player for a fee. If the timbers ever expected to develop a player worthy of transfer fees they would have to develop them for free. Just a different angle to consider.

[Unregistered]

One point I havent seen here is concerning transfer fees. FIFA rules prohibit any team from both charging a player to play and transferring that player for a fee. If the timbers ever expected to develop a player worthy of transfer fees they would have to develop them for free. Just a different angle to consider.

I believe the MLS DA teams are free for the players selected. Correct me if I'm wrong.