Fixing high school soccer

[Unregistered]

The standard career path for a NFL player is HS football, NCAA football, NFL football. (The NFL has an age minimum of about 20; you can't be drafted until two years beyond HS). Nobody cares how good a football prospect is at age 11--they aren't physically developed yet. Competitive youth football is a thing in Texas--but the local football leagues catering to middle-school children seem more rec- and dev- focused.

The standard career path for a NBA player is HS basketball, often with AAU on the side, one year in college, and then on to the NBA. Some players do Europe instead of NCAA ball (the NBA has a one-year past high school requirement), but that's unusual. Every once in a while, one hears about 11-year-olds who can dunk, but in general, nobody cares about how good an 11-year-old is. Michael Jordan was infamously frustrated about a HS coach who--even though he was obviously the best player at his high school in the 9th grade--would not let freshmen play varsity. (This tale has morphed into the "Jordan was cut in high school" legend; he was merely denied a spot on varsity as a freshman due to school rules).

The standard career path for a pro baseball player is HS baseball; a stint in the minors, and if you make it, the majors. Some play college ball, but still are expected to play in the minors before making the big leagues; college ball (with its use of metal bats) is generally not considered adequate preparation. Baseball is the sport that cares the least about what you do as a kid.

Soccer is unique among team sports in seeing children signed to professional contracts. It's unique (in the US) in havingpro teams run youth academies. And it's unique in that it cares very much how good a player is good at age 11; middle school is when they start narrowing the funnel.

Now, there may be good reasons for that. The US dominates in hoops and baseball, and American football is exclusively a US sport--so traditional US sporting culture (which values high-school sports as a public good, and still demands strict amateurism out of collegiate athletes--a guy recently quit NCAA football rather than shut down his for-profit Youtube channel, when the NCAA ruled that making money off of videos of him playing football was considered non-amateur) dominates these. And traditional US sporting culture generally disapproves of subjecting middle-schoolers to professional training regimens.

Another argument often heard is that the other sports simply cannot be played at a high level until one physically matures--and that size and strength matter far more. Until you know who is going to be fastest, strongest, tallest--and this won't be revealed until well after puberty--the funnel cannot be narrowed. The skills of soccer, OTOH, can be mastered at a young age, and according to much received wisdom, skill at manipulating the ball HAS to be learned in early childhood--otherwise it's too late. In other words, the other sports have an attitude of "show me your good athletes, and I'll turn them into star quarterbacks, first basemen, or small forwards". In soccer, it seems to be "show me your technically sound soccer players, and I'll make the good athletes and teach them teamwork".

Which would work against a development path in which high school is the principal training ground.

One other point, which drives a whole lot of the arguments in this forum, is the belief that the best way to train elite players is to a) group them with other elite players, and not have them waste their time kicking around with the C-teamers, and b) subject them to intense, high-quality training. This, of course, discourages the HS environment, where one's teammates are determined by geography, not skill.

Just some food for thought.

So what I am seeing is that if HS was also the career path for soccer like it is basketball, football and baseball maybe we would dominate the rest of the world in soccer like we do the other 3 mentioned? When HS and college was the prime path for women soccer we did as a country dominate. Let's get the greedy people's hands off our soccer players and put them in the hands of the ones who truly care, the teachers!

[Unregistered]

So what I am seeing is that if HS was also the career path for soccer like it is basketball, football and baseball maybe we would dominate the rest of the world in soccer like we do the other 3 mentioned? When HS and college was the prime path for women soccer we did as a country dominate. Let's get the greedy people's hands off our soccer players and put them in the hands of the ones who truly care, the teachers!

All youth paths for boys snd girls are strictly club.

Clubs produce all HS, college players & usnt.

HS is a 2 to 3 month break from the pathetic Oregon club landscape..

[Unregistered]

All youth paths for boys snd girls are strictly club.

Clubs produce all HS, college players & usnt.

HS is a 2 to 3 month break from the pathetic Oregon club landscape..

Dont agree that Oregon club soccer is pathetic but agree HS soccer is a fun little break from real soccer. Not only does HS soccer not help the player, it actually hinders development and is injury central. Hence the DA's ban on HS soccer. The DA wants to produce the best players. If anything, HS soccer is the "pathetic landscape".

[Unregistered]

Dont agree that Oregon club soccer is pathetic but agree HS soccer is a fun little break from real soccer. Not only does HS soccer not help the player, it actually hinders development and is injury central. Hence the DA's ban on HS soccer. The DA wants to produce the best players. If anything, HS soccer is the "pathetic landscape".

Club soccer is a train wreck of acronyms without any direction or value.

HS sports have always been and will always bethe staple of this society and culture for any high profile sporting activity for teenagers.

You may want to move to a country where sports and academics are not linked together. This is how we do it in the USA.

your ignorance is truly pathetic.

[Unregistered]

Dont agree that Oregon club soccer is pathetic but agree HS soccer is a fun little break from real soccer. Not only does HS soccer not help the player, it actually hinders development and is injury central. Hence the DA's ban on HS soccer. The DA wants to produce the best players. If anything, HS soccer is the "pathetic landscape".

Sick of this tired trope. Injury risk is ever present no matter where you play - although I will concede the intense HS schedule is too much and ramps up the likelihood of injury in total numbers but not injuries per game played. Also, HS affords players a chance to play different positions, learn new ways to cover for less talented teammates etc. It can be outstanding training for GK who now don't have a solid defensive line they might in club. then there are the other benefits of playing for your school, accolades etc. Those matter to most kids - it's the adults who think they don't.

Of course, not every HS program is good or has a good coach. Some kids willing want to play in DA. But to force thousands to make that choice for the sake of developing a national team is absurd - because face it, that's all USSF cares about. Don't be fooled into thinking they care about your kid unless they are on the NT radar. And in ten years of BDA the results have been mediocre at best. I wish ECNL had stuck it to USSF and launched ECNL boys sooner. They're not going to have an easy time of it convincing all the top female players to move over either and I find that funny.

Naturally HS soccer won't be as good as club. But who cares? Only elitist snobs like yourself. I want more kids playing the sport and enjoying, not less. It's how we build a soccer culture in the US. If you don't like it, don't watch it. We won't miss you in the stands.

[Unregistered]

No one is forced to give up high school soccer. The GDA is for the elite player that wants to develop to D1 and pro levels through US Soccer's system and pathway. Don't sign up for DA if you want to play HS soccer. Simple. The DA and HS are on two completely different paths now. Neither one is right or wrong. Similarly, don't sign up for ECNL if you don't want to pay to travel for more exposure & to play better competition. Silly to be angry with ECNL or DA for offering an option you don't like. There are so many different soccer options available. Find the best one for you and be happy. Talk with your wallet.

I'm not against high school soccer at all. I wish all sports still went through high school for college recruitment and weren't year round club situations like we have now. I also wish all the top teams from USYS, USClub, ECNL & GDA all played each other in some kind of national league but none of those leagues listens to me. Right or wrong, the reality is the path to college & pro soccer is definitely a club/academy path now and high school isn't on that path anymore. Doesn't mean that HS soccer is not still fun and a fun life experience for those that choose it. There is only so much time for other activities when you are a top athlete. Each players choices will be different and that is the way it should be.

[Unregistered]

High school soccer is something that has long been a controversial topic in youth soccer circles--and one that makes many people turn up their nose. The complaints are many, and many of them are currently true:

* The Laws of the Game are ignored.
* Many of the coaches are retreads, who know little about the modern game.
* Too many games, too much focus on winning at all costs, very little focus on development.
* Inappropriate focus on physical fitness (and training regimens that are more appropriate for the cross-country team)
* Over-emphasis on bootball, less on technical soccer.

As a result, the pecking order for progression into NCAA or professional soccer seems to be:

* Elite academies and programs (including MLS DAs, certain ECNL clubs for girls, etc.)
* ODP and similar (fading in importance)
* Ordinary club soccer, particularly premier divisions.
* High school soccer.

A lot of conversation in the soccer community seems to focus on how to further marginalize the high school game. DA prohibits participation in HS. OYSA and ECNL accomodate it, but generally consider it to be a lesser level of soccer. It's defenders often defend it for it's social aspects in ways that make it sound like rec--representing your school is fun, playing with your friends and classmates is fun. (And it is fun to do these things).

For that reason--I'm going to make a suggestion.

HS soccer shouldn't be denigrated. It shouldn't be marginalized. It shouldn't be put down.

Instead, it should be fixed--and given that many club coaches double as HS coaches, the club community is in a position to do so.

If you look at football, basketball, and baseball--the HS game is extremely important to the development of players in these sports. Why?

* Playing for school and classmates, rather than an empty sideline with nobody but parents, is indeed a major incentive.
* Not long ago, soccer was a novel sport, one that most people cared nothing about. Football and basketball were kings, soccer was as popular at HS as the chess club. And the number of coaches in the country that understood the game well was very limited.
* Times are changing now. Soccer is becoming very popular as a generation of parents who learned to love the game are now passing it on to their kids. The growth of the MLS, and the easy availability of top-rank European soccer on TV, is turning more and more of the US into soccer culture.
* One of the biggest complaints about club soccer is the pay-to-play nature of the sport. HS sports are far less expensive for participants--there generally isn't the travel involved (other than long bus rides).
* Soccer is far less expensive for school districts than football.
* Concerns about CTE have presented a threat to American football; many parents (including yours truly) won't let their kids play (organized tackle) football for that reason.
* The HS model does work for other sports. Perhaps soccer is different--there is a distinction often discussed between tactical soccer (playing to win) and pedagogical soccer (playing to teach) that doesn't seem to exist for other sports; you don't often hear of basketball coaches refusing to run fastbreaks because "kids need to learn to play the halfcourt game". The problem with bootball is that it's bad soccer--this is mainly an issue because there are lots of bad teams that don't know how to defend it, so it frequently works at lower levels of the game.

Of course, high-quality high-school soccer might pose a threat to the pay-to-play business model, especially at the older age groups; so it's entirely possible that various directors of coaching might have a vested interest in keeping the scholastic game second-class. And there is a longstanding US cultural prejudice, often reflected in some of the anti-Timbers rants in this forum, that pro sports teams have no business involving themselves in youth sports (whereas club academies are the norm in the rest of the world).

But we ever get to the point where the Friday homecoming game is played with a round ball rather than a pointy one, and the "captain of the football team" is a striker or midfielder or keeper, not a quarterback, then that will be a big sign that the US has arrived as a soccer country.

Most high school coaches are also club coaches.

In Europe, the real soccer is also played at the club level and it is recognized that school teams are rec level.

High school season is a fun school activity that lasts for about 3 months. You are trying to make it into something that it is not.

You will never replace football and basketball with soccer in the US. You barley get people watching a D1 men's college match.

[Unregistered]

Most high school coaches are also club coaches.

In Europe, the real soccer is also played at the club level and it is recognized that school teams are rec level.

High school season is a fun school activity that lasts for about 3 months. You are trying to make it into something that it is not.

You will never replace football and basketball with soccer in the US. You barley get people watching a D1 men's college match.

This. High school soccer is what it is. A fun high school activity like being in the high school musical. High school soccer isn't broken and doesn't need fixing. Just enjoy it for what it is or choose to play elite DA or other elite club soccer instead. It's a win win for both groups.

[Unregistered]

This. High school soccer is what it is. A fun high school activity like being in the high school musical. High school soccer isn't broken and doesn't need fixing. Just enjoy it for what it is or choose to play elite DA or other elite club soccer instead. It's a win win for both groups.

I agree 100% which is I posted the comments that you responded to.

[Unregistered]

Another soccer elitist chimes in proposing throwing the baby out with the bath water. Sure that's fair - take soccer away from the hundreds of thousands of kids in the country just to make the NT better, oh and give more money to the clubs in the process so kids have to now pay to play all year long instead of a partial season when HS isn't in session. That should do wonders towards building a soccer culture in the US also. Great solution.

Instead take the handful of players who can maybe go pro or NT players out of the system and leave HS and college for the rest of the players who just want to play for their schools. That's the issue with DA - it's too big (yes I know because of geography) but the majority of players it ensnares in the process are not interested or simply don't have the skills to ever play at the highest levels. I agree college especially is no place for players 18-24 to develop but again banning college soccer because a few players need to be more focused only on soccer is no solution. Some kind of residency program (which some MLS academies are starting) is the say to go. We should do the same for NT.

I agree with a lot of what you're saying. There is room for all levels of the game, including high school. What NEEDS to happen first is that there must be agreement as to what organizations/systems/teams go where in the hierarchy. If the US cares about putting out the best national teams, the best players need to go into the academy system (either club or nation/state) with the best coaches. Leaving system and style of play out of the equation for now, nobody disputes that players develop best when everyone is pushed to play consistently at a high level. You do that with the best players playing together. There should be a pathway between levels so that players can move up through the system and know where they are developmentally but it should be clear what the next step is and how to get there. We've all seen the pyramids posted on club and USSF websites. Imagine what would happen if everyone knew where they stood and it was clear what they needed to do to get to the next level?

Without that, there will continue to be too many clubs diluting the talent pool, too many teams claiming they are superior while being terrified to play the other factions lest they be found out, and parents arguing online about ECNL vs DA and nobody actually being able to claim they attract and develop the best players. It's no wonder that Oregon can't produce top tier talent. We're broken.

Developing more quality coaches so they can stop doing double or triple duty as club and academy and college coaches should also be a priority. That system doesn't produce the best players, either, just reinforces the crappy pay-to-play structure where they move the known, familiar talent up rather than seeking out and developing the best. (University of Portland womens' program and Timbers Academy boys, I'm looking at you.)

USSF and MLS being on the same page is paramount. As is USSF consolidating orgs under its umbrella. (No need for USYS and USCS both. What a waste.) People will struggle, then adjust when their role becomes clear in the hierarchy. Kids will love the game more when there aren't as many bickering voices to tune out and more heroes to emulate.

Super easy, right?

[Unregistered]

I agree with a lot of what you're saying. There is room for all levels of the game, including high school. What NEEDS to happen first is that there must be agreement as to what organizations/systems/teams go where in the hierarchy. If the US cares about putting out the best national teams, the best players need to go into the academy system (either club or nation/state) with the best coaches. Leaving system and style of play out of the equation for now, nobody disputes that players develop best when everyone is pushed to play consistently at a high level. You do that with the best players playing together. There should be a pathway between levels so that players can move up through the system and know where they are developmentally but it should be clear what the next step is and how to get there. We've all seen the pyramids posted on club and USSF websites. Imagine what would happen if everyone knew where they stood and it was clear what they needed to do to get to the next level?

Without that, there will continue to be too many clubs diluting the talent pool, too many teams claiming they are superior while being terrified to play the other factions lest they be found out, and parents arguing online about ECNL vs DA and nobody actually being able to claim they attract and develop the best players. It's no wonder that Oregon can't produce top tier talent. We're broken.

Developing more quality coaches so they can stop doing double or triple duty as club and academy and college coaches should also be a priority. That system doesn't produce the best players, either, just reinforces the crappy pay-to-play structure where they move the known, familiar talent up rather than seeking out and developing the best. (University of Portland womens' program and Timbers Academy boys, I'm looking at you.)

USSF and MLS being on the same page is paramount. As is USSF consolidating orgs under its umbrella. (No need for USYS and USCS both. What a waste.) People will struggle, then adjust when their role becomes clear in the hierarchy. Kids will love the game more when there aren't as many bickering voices to tune out and more heroes to emulate.

Super easy, right?

Op here - issue with DA is by necessity it is far too big and pulls in literally thousands of players that haven't a snowball's chance in hell of playing professionally or make the national teams. Those kids shouldn't be forced to chose (maybe now with boys ECNL and GDA fewer will, well see). A system that large is also very inefficient - too many players and coaches that aren't up to snuff and won't sufficiently challenge the nation's top 5% of players (random number I chose but probably in the ball park). Problem is our vast geography makes it very difficult to run say a league that is only MLS based. Maybe if and when more clubs add residency programs this can start to shift. A residency program would also be ideal for NT players. we don't need more layers - we have plenty - but some of the layers aren't the right size.

[Unregistered]

Op here - issue with DA is by necessity it is far too big and pulls in literally thousands of players that haven't a snowball's chance in hell of playing professionally or make the national teams. Those kids shouldn't be forced to chose (maybe now with boys ECNL and GDA fewer will, well see). A system that large is also very inefficient - too many players and coaches that aren't up to snuff and won't sufficiently challenge the nation's top 5% of players (random number I chose but probably in the ball park). Problem is our vast geography makes it very difficult to run say a league that is only MLS based. Maybe if and when more clubs add residency programs this can start to shift. A residency program would also be ideal for NT players. we don't need more layers - we have plenty - but some of the layers aren't the right size.

I don't disagree with you. For me the critical thing is agreement and clarity, from the governing body on down, regarding what layer goes on top and the order in which things go from there.