U.S. soccer dev program adding clubs in oregon

[Unregistered]

Not intended as a swipe.

FC (made semis) and NEU (with a solid DA) are pooling their best with an A licensed coach from NEU, a B licensed coach from FC, both of them with extensive coaching experience at the college, club, and HS level. Excited about what that program will offer those players.

Not really interested in pimping our program on here, but perplexed why you are taking swipes at anything non-alliance.

Your club had a good weekend - why not enjoy it?

Actually, that's good to hear, and my remarks here shouldn't be interpreted as a swipe. My biggest concern about e.g. NEU is size more than quality--does it have enough players to field a credible DA team?--but if it's partnering with other clubs in a joint endeavor, many of those concerns vanish. None of the constituent Crossfire clubs would merit a DA program as presently defined on their own, but a joint DA program serving the south side makes sense.

Actually, thinking about it some more--I guess one of my concerns with DA as currently implemented (this applies somewhat to ECNL as well) is its elite nature--if DA clubs are meant to be elite clubs, stuffed to the gills with kids with pro potential, then I'm not sure there are enough kids in the area to form six teams. OTOH, if "DA" were defined to simply mean focused on development rather than winning games--a program of more frequent training, less travel, and no six-games-in-a-weekend tournaments, but the opportunity were extended to all sufficiently motivated players, not just the already-elite ones, including at older ages at least through U14) then I would whole-heartedly support the formation of more. (In practice, many clubs, including Westside, tend to treat their non-A teams as development-focused; but a "DA" designation would make that more explicit--my SS's team had lots of parents whining about why "that kid" got playing time; he got playing time because the coach is trying to help him improve, rather than putting the best IX on the field at any given time).

That seems to be more like how foreign soccer academies work--they are designed to give large number of players the opportunity to excel, rather than filtering out the chaff when they are young and seemingly protecting the elite players from being troubled by less-talented teammates. (This is particularly important at U12 and below--many talented kids this age simply don't have the attention spans or maturity to put up with hard-*** coaches, intense training sessions, or long repetitive drills--but will once they hit puberty. And many hotshot U12s and below are early bloomers physically, who may falter when their peers catch up to them in physical development).

But right now, the DA team at Westside (and elsewhere) is being marketed as only-already-elite-players-need-apply. If you try out for Westside's DA and get cut, they'll happily roll your application over to the Copa and Samba teams, there's even a box to check on the application form to request it. But lots of kids might benefit from DA style training and explicitly less focus on winning tourneys, not just those who happen look like Messi while in elementary school.

Apologies if you mistook my remarks as a slam on NEU. I've dished out some grief to FCP this past weekend, mainly because this forum seems filled with obnoxious parents therefrom who need a good helping of crow, but both are good clubs that I bear no ill will towards.

[Unregistered]

Is making the state cup final the qualifier to be allowed to focus on development? Should the folks who actually train our kids quit trying to improve their methods until you deem the kids good enough to be worthy of improved training?

The DA is supposed to be a better way to train and develop players. Read the syllabus linked earlier in this thread. A player who embraces the philosophy of the program William ful be better after spending a year in the training. The DA isn't the only game in town, but I can appreciate the written program plan. Frankly, I'm not sure what else a player should be looking for from a club experience. Now it's on the clubs to execute the plan.

This site is riddled with trophy chasing parents. Wins are great if they're a byproduct of skilled play. Focus on developing skills and field IQ, and less on U11-U14 game results to provide the guidance for where the kids should be playing.

Bingo!

Go watch a BU11/12 final this weekend it will be terrible! No one will play a ball to their GK, no building out of the back and no switching of the play through the back. It will be painful to watch

[Slow Xavi]

Actually, that's good to hear, and my remarks here shouldn't be interpreted as a swipe. My biggest concern about e.g. NEU is size more than quality--does it have enough players to field a credible DA team?--but if it's partnering with other clubs in a joint endeavor, many of those concerns vanish. None of the constituent Crossfire clubs would merit a DA program as presently defined on their own, but a joint DA program serving the south side makes sense.

Actually, thinking about it some more--I guess one of my concerns with DA as currently implemented (this applies somewhat to ECNL as well) is its elite nature--if DA clubs are meant to be elite clubs, stuffed to the gills with kids with pro potential, then I'm not sure there are enough kids in the area to form six teams. OTOH, if "DA" were defined to simply mean focused on development rather than winning games--a program of more frequent training, less travel, and no six-games-in-a-weekend tournaments, but the opportunity were extended to all sufficiently motivated players, not just the already-elite ones, including at older ages at least through U14) then I would whole-heartedly support the formation of more. (In practice, many clubs, including Westside, tend to treat their non-A teams as development-focused; but a "DA" designation would make that more explicit--my SS's team had lots of parents whining about why "that kid" got playing time; he got playing time because the coach is trying to help him improve, rather than putting the best IX on the field at any given time).

That seems to be more like how foreign soccer academies work--they are designed to give large number of players the opportunity to excel, rather than filtering out the chaff when they are young and seemingly protecting the elite players from being troubled by less-talented teammates. (This is particularly important at U12 and below--many talented kids this age simply don't have the attention spans or maturity to put up with hard-*** coaches, intense training sessions, or long repetitive drills--but will once they hit puberty. And many hotshot U12s and below are early bloomers physically, who may falter when their peers catch up to them in physical development).

But right now, the DA team at Westside (and elsewhere) is being marketed as only-already-elite-players-need-apply. If you try out for Westside's DA and get cut, they'll happily roll your application over to the Copa and Samba teams, there's even a box to check on the application form to request it. But lots of kids might benefit from DA style training and explicitly less focus on winning tourneys, not just those who happen look like Messi while in elementary school.

Apologies if you mistook my remarks as a slam on NEU. I've dished out some grief to FCP this past weekend, mainly because this forum seems filled with obnoxious parents therefrom who need a good helping of crow, but both are good clubs that I bear no ill will towards.

All good . . . temperature rose when I saw all the negative comments on here today about a bunch of clubs at a time when I think folks could be celebrating.

More broadly, I don't know where the USDA path is taking us as a country. Reasons for optimism in terms of emulating what appears to be the European tendency in academies (I can't figure out if Latin America is going this way).
Flip side, is that our men's youth national team are not improving (relatively).

I also worry about systems that get too focused on mandating inputs as opposed to incentiving outcomes, particularly for things that take a long-term to gauge (such as player development). We think we know what inputs drive positive development outcomes, but until there are controlled studies, not sure we are making those mandates with any certainty.

Grateful though that a number of kids will have an opportunity to participate in this in Portland and that our little club has a solid partner.

Cheers.

[Unregistered]

Bingo!

Go watch a BU11/12 final this weekend it will be terrible! No one will play a ball to their GK, no building out of the back and no switching of the play through the back. It will be painful to watch

Have you watched any BU11/12 games?

Even at the sub-elite levels, many teams are more than capable of playing it out of the back, using their keepers, and otherwise passing the ball. Granted, there's a lot of bootball being played--and many U11 teams are quite good at playing long-passing games (i.e. their "boots" are collected by their own teammates in scoring position, rather than sent out of bounds or to the other team)--but many teams ARE trained to pass first, keep it on the ground, and make backpasses to avoid pressure.

[Unregistered]

I also worry about systems that get too focused on mandating inputs as opposed to incentiving outcomes, particularly for things that take a long-term to gauge (such as player development). We think we know what inputs drive positive development outcomes, but until there are controlled studies, not sure we are making those mandates with any certainty.
Cheers.

What inputs are those? Right now, the inputs seem to be "how does the kid look in a two-hour tryout"? Which is at best a proxy for the things that really matter, in no particular order:

* Athletic ability (many parts of which cannot be improved with training; you can't make slow kids fast, for instance).
* Emotional maturity, and ability to put up with rigorous training. Also not easily taught. And generally not reliably observable in young children (who, after all, will grow up).
* Various facets of learned skill--basic technique and touch, tactical knowledge and awareness, and the pearl of great price--the deep real-time knowledge of the game that marks a Cruyff or an Iniesta.

Some of these things can be taught or learned, either in group training, in informal play, or in solo practice. Others simply cannot be--there's no school that can teach you to think like Johan Cruyff.

We assume that if a kid can run the fastest lap at a tryout, or juggle the most times, or show the best moves in a small-sided game, that they must exhibit these attributes. And given limited resources--maybe that's the best we can do.

[Unregistered]

Actually, that's good to hear, and my remarks here shouldn't be interpreted as a swipe. My biggest concern about e.g. NEU is size more than quality--does it have enough players to field a credible DA team?--but if it's partnering with other clubs in a joint endeavor, many of those concerns vanish. None of the constituent Crossfire clubs would merit a DA program as presently defined on their own, but a joint DA program serving the south side makes sense.

Actually, thinking about it some more--I guess one of my concerns with DA as currently implemented (this applies somewhat to ECNL as well) is its elite nature--if DA clubs are meant to be elite clubs, stuffed to the gills with kids with pro potential, then I'm not sure there are enough kids in the area to form six teams.

no one's saying there are six squads worth of future pros. (which i think you have come around to.) we are saying, it would be nice to have six teams worth of players who DON'T SUCK. that's what extra training and relatively fewer, more meaningful, games is aiming at.

my main question for Rene is, if you're pooling with FCP, why not do the right think and merge with them. quit diluting and consolidate already. Same to all the Crossfire teams, just officially become one club, streamline it.

[Unregistered]

no one's saying there are six squads worth of future pros. (which i think you have come around to.) we are saying, it would be nice to have six teams worth of players who DON'T SUCK. that's what extra training and relatively fewer, more meaningful, games is aiming at.

my main question for Rene is, if you're pooling with FCP, why not do the right think and merge with them. quit diluting and consolidate already. Same to all the Crossfire teams, just officially become one club, streamline it.

For us less in the know, would you please expand on your points on dilution? How does the FCP-NEU joint venture dilute?

[Unregistered]

For us less in the know, would you please expand on your points on dilution? How does the FCP-NEU joint venture dilute?

theit joint venture undoes a little of the dilution of the talent pool. it's theoretically taking the three good players from each club, at that age, and putting them on a team that will have 6 good players. but there are clubs like thelo, sesc, foothills, and others that pop up here are there that contribute to the dilution.

[Unregistered]

theit joint venture undoes a little of the dilution of the talent pool. it's theoretically taking the three good players from each club, at that age, and putting them on a team that will have 6 good players. but there are clubs like thelo, sesc, foothills, and others that pop up here are there that contribute to the dilution.

*here and there...

[Unregistered]

Quasi- 'DA' - 04 League is coming to Oregon and it don't look good

Let's keep this simple. None of the clubs who are fielding teams for the Oregon '04' boys USDA league have instantly become Development Academy 'Clubs' in Oregon.

There is only 1 USDA club in Oregon at present the 'PORTLAND TIMBERS' and they field teams at u14, u16 & u18. Yes, it's likely they will soon field a u12 team in the near future and their sister arm the 'PORTLAND THORNS' in 2017 will take the mantle for Oregon's entry into the G DA at the respective G DA age groups.

I digress, next years version for these 7 clubs registered, at the '04' age group, will feature a league were they get to play each other 4x each over the course of the year (with no outside play allowed) what a shock to the system for the hoodwinked clubs who actually thought they were errrrrr.. 'Academy' club....

This has nothing to do with development or what's best for the 04 age group in Oregon, it's a sham, like all the other acronym dependent leagues (FWRL, ECNL, WCDA etc,...) no sizzle and no steak. Just the stupid DOC's jumping at a chance for club prominence disguised in a label, it's all we can do to pump up our dismal on field product.

Hook, Line & Sinker!

When it does, if ever evolve into an 'Academy' like league there will be only one Academy Club (PORTLAND TIMBERS) from Oregon getting the top players and the other 7 clubs will again go back to their established role as providers of players to the only program that can teach them the game to this generation of future Pros.

Enjoy Oregon!!

[Unregistered]

For us less in the know, would you please expand on your points on dilution? How does the FCP-NEU joint venture dilute?

it seems to me like the consolidations should be, as deemed by whoever sanctioned the USSDA U12s:

FC Portland (far west PDX, but for some reason affiliated with UofP, seems like they should have concentrated on being the 5th quadrant club.)

Eastside (far east)

Wash Timbers (Vancouver)

Crossfire (South PDX)

Westside (West Obviously)

BSC (probably should be merged with central Portland clubs since Westside has their target right in the name, maybe between Raleigh Hills and 82nd Ave. So, Lincoln, Wilson, Cleveland, Benson, Franklin, Madison high schools)

and Capitol (for lack of a better term, the rest of Oregon)

[Unregistered]

theit joint venture undoes a little of the dilution of the talent pool. it's theoretically taking the three good players from each club, at that age, and putting them on a team that will have 6 good players. but there are clubs like thelo, sesc, foothills, and others that pop up here are there that contribute to the dilution.

Is dilution really bad? Since it's not practical to train and travel each week to Seattle or CA with a consolidated group of the top talent, wouldn't it be better to spread them out and have them lead teams that play against each other throughout the year?

What is the benefit of creating a super team and beating up on non-super teams? Does super team goalie get better by saving 0-1 shots on goal each game? The same goes for every position really. To maximize growth and development I'd think you'd want to put kids in situations where they're struggling to succeed most of the time.

[Unregistered]

When it does, if ever evolve into an 'Academy' like league there will be only one Academy Club (PORTLAND TIMBERS) from Oregon getting the top players and the other 7 clubs will again go back to their established role as providers of players to the only program that can teach them the game to this generation of future Pros.

they've always been feeders for pro teams, and they're not exactly pretending they won't be in this system. they all know they're not getting a U14 academy side in the future, and that the best thing for them, in terms of publicity, would be for them to get the most u12 players from their team into the u14 timbers squad. this is the way it should be. or, those not serious about making the u14 timbers, and then the u16 and 18s, and senior team, should just play for fun.

[Unregistered]

Is dilution really bad? Since it's not practical to train and travel each week to Seattle or CA with a consolidated group of the top talent, wouldn't it be better to spread them out and have them lead teams that play against each other throughout the year?

What is the benefit of creating a super team and beating up on non-super teams? Does super team goalie get better by saving 0-1 shots on goal each game? The same goes for every position really. To maximize growth and development I'd think you'd want to put kids in situations where they're struggling to succeed most of the time.

it's only bad because the one good player at a diluted team doesn't ever get to be in a position where they will ever face the thought of not starting, even though they weren't at training all week. and it's only bad because the son or daughter of the guy who started the "club" will never feel that kind of pressure. it's bad because someone was already talking about how we only play bootball, well where did they learn it from?

it's also bad because like you point out, there are too many DOCs who get paychecks, so they'll never be struggling. it's bad because a coach who doesn't have an actual DOC looking over his shoulder will never get in trouble for bootball.

you know, now that you mention it, we should probably just keep doing things the way we've been doing it. moar leagues, moar clubs, two clubs per household.

[Unregistered]

Let's keep this simple. None of the clubs who are fielding teams for the Oregon '04' boys USDA league have instantly become Development Academy 'Clubs' in Oregon.

Why not? If they follow the outlined curriculum, then why can't they be considered Development Academies? They're not promising to produce the best tournament teams in the state. It seems they're simply creating a plan to maximize the development of young players.

Of course there will be more teams at the younger age as there are more players who are interested in testing the limits of their genetics and will to succeed. As those limits are found, players will gravitate towards the opportunities that best suit them.