US Men's National Team Discussion

Definitely need USSF, MLS, whomever to properly develop kids from a very young age, not the fecking high schools and colleges. US will never achieve any relevance wishing on college development.
 
Haven't had a chance to read through the thread apart from the OP, but I will give my thoughts. I played out in the US for about a year and also did some coaching.

The standard of coaching was really dreadful especially at grassroots level. One coach would toughen his players (these were 12 year old kids) by kicking the ball at them. I was doing a coaching lesson for others and he point blank asked in front of a crowd of other coaches how to toughen them up and said that was his current method, and I didn't raise too many eyebrows from the rest of them. Even the coaches at my level were pretty bad, and had no real idea how to structure a session.

Also there is no real links into elite youth football unless you are from a financially well off background. In England for example, you play for the best youth local team, scouts will attend games and you will get invited to trials for a number of clubs or you can then represent your district or county and give yourself a better chance of getting trials.
 
Again, the system of developing soccer/football players in the United States is completely broken and when you're 12 to 18, there's a complete disconnect when trying to funnel players to the top.

I call complete bollocks on "top athletes are choosing X sport over soccer". The population of kids who play soccer in America outdraws other sports. The way kids are identified, scouted, selected, developed, and moved up the chain to MLS or Europe is broken. Soccer doesn't require a player to be the best athlete. Paul Scholes, Pirlo, Beckham, Kroos, etc. Just think of all the players in the Premier League and really say to yourself, self that's a top tier athlete playing football. The best athlete might be Adame Traore at Wolves for all we know, but he's not the best footballer in the league. Arguably, you put KDB and Traore side by side, ask a person who has zero soccer/football knowledge but ask them, who is the better footballer based on physic, they'll obviously choose Traore.

A decent example of a good development program in a sport that you wouldn't expect really the US to be good at is USA Hockey. Why? Because there's a system in place for junior players and then minors. Colleges and universities are able to develop players then send them into a pro setting. It's a progressive system of improvement and identification, something completely lacking with US Soccer.
 
limerickcitykid said:
Millions of kids in the USA play pick up soccer. There are millions and millions of immigrants from Mexico, Europe, Africa and South America and just about all of them and all of their kids play soccer.

This whole idea of playing football on the street with your shit mates is what creates professionals is complete non-sense anyway. Playing and training with the best kids in the country with the best coaches in the country is what creates the best players. Not kicking a ball at cars in the street.
Click to expand...

Sorry, simply not true. It will not make them turn into professional players, but street football does have an impact on the nation overall quality, even if it's minimal, because kids can experiment things, they are learning actively the basics of shooting, passing, tackling, etc, even if it's in a rough way.
Once in a football congress hosted in Hungary, they questioned Puskas why did Hungary stop producing talent, because despite never being a top national team, they always produced some very good generational talents. He told everyone to be quiet a bit and asked "Do you ear any ball bumping on a wall or on the floor? There's your answer."
 
NinjaZombie said:
If you are a young promising American athlete who is serious about being a professional sportsman, why would you choose football over the other more mainstream American sports? You'd stand to make better money as an average NBA player than a top MLS player for one.

It's similar to how Phillip Neville chose football over cricket, despite being, by all accounts, a more promising cricket player than a footballer.

He's made more money and is more famouse as a middling Premier League player than he would have made and been if he was a top cricket player.
Click to expand...
Disagree on the boldened. He came up at around the same time as Freddie Flintoff, and even according to the latter, he was the better player. And having just checked, Flintoff even called him a cricketing genius as recently as a couple of weeks ago.

He would have likely been the cornerstone of that 2005 England side, and arguably would have made him much more well-loved by the nation as a whole. Especially since he was (harshly IMO) regarded as a bit of a joke after Euro 2000.
 
The biggest problem with football in North America is that it has become too much about business with little to do with developing the best players...

For example, I live in Niagara Falls. In this region there have been two players who have "made it". Russell Theibert (Vancouver White Caps) and Kofi Opare (Colorado Rapids). I've played with and against kofi several times and played with Russell once. While they are both very good players, they aren't even close to being the best players in the region. There is just way too many undiscovered talent. And there's a few reasons for that.

In Europe and South America, the best players are found and picked up by clubs and developed in hopes of one day making it to the first team. Clubs spend millions on developing these kids. Meanwhile in North America, we have so many different levels of play, and the higher the level of play, the more money it costs. So if a kids parent doesn't have the money to spend on these "elite" programs, they remain undiscovered talent playing in the local leagues. The only reason Kofi made it was because one of my teammates (Chris Grassie) had just got hired on the coaching staff at Michigan Wolverines and he got Kofi a scholarship. Otherwise, Kofi would have remained playing in our local league (his brother, who I would argue was better, continued playing on our team as he was too old for college).

I have a few friends now who have signed their kids up for the "elite" programs. They are paying well over $2000 for their sons to play and that doesn't include travel and hotels. They say it's a great program and their kids are learning so much, but if this was Europe, they wouldn't be paying anything. So if your parents can't afford it, you get left behind.

There are also too many "clubs" now. When I grew up playing each city had two "allstar" teams. An A team and a B team. If you didn't make either of those teams, you played house league. So that meant that all the best players in each city were on one team. That was the highest level. Soccer wasn't nearly as big as it is now, but it would have been a hell of a lot easier to find the top talent. Now in Niagara Falls alone we have Niagara United Soccer Club, Niagara Falls Titans and Club italia. And I haven't even gotten into the "elite" programs as there are a couple of those too. So now all the talent is spread out.

Oh, and if you want to train with the Toronto FC program, you better open your wallet up even more...

Bottom line is North American will never catch up to Europe as long as this is how things are done. With the amount of kids we have playing the beautiful game I can guarantee you that most are slipping through the cracks. The top talent should be recruted and not cost money for their development. United this happens, we will always be a step behind...
 
TheReligion said:
This isn't about the MLS in particular, although I'm sure part of the explanation will dovetail to that, but why hasn't US football really kicked on from hosting the World Cup in 1994 to present day?

In the present day it feels we are no further along in the development of the sport despite having small peaks and troughs in between. Some time ago the US were tipped for potential greatness given the investment in grass roots football and the rise in popularity in comparison to traditional household sports such as baseball, basketball and the NFL. That, along with a huge population, top quality facilities and sports science is still yet to yield a batch of truly world class talent and international "golden era". Why? Will it ever come?

In my opinion the MLS could be responsible for this given the desperation for bringing over older pros from around the world in the twilight years of their careers. Initially I can see why this was done; to attract the world to the MLS, but now does it need a different approach and does this hinder the development of home grown American talent?

The contrast between the men's and women's team is again quite interesting. It's likely men would sooner play a traditional American man's sport as touched on above however the women's game does show they do have something so why have they not been able to transfer it to the men's game to a degree in terms of development?
Click to expand...

To be quite honest, it's supply and demand. Yes you have strong pockets of support throughout and that does yield some alright players but the demand isn't there when compared to other top teams. NFL, NBA and baseball to an extent are so high up the ladder that it's hard to care about soccer unless it's a world cup and the U.S does well.

Secondly, it's the system of clubs vs franchises that doesn't do well when transposed to soccer. Every other U.S sport revolves around franchises but the world wide soccer system is just so different from that. Clubs in Europe snap up players after school and they can start playing when they're 18. That's pretty rare here as most have to go through college and collegiate soccer can't come anywhere close to Football and Basketball.

For instance, where I live, the Duke and UNC basketball rivalry is such an ingrained part of culture it's really difficult to see people care for soccer in the same sense.

One thing to note though is the U.S is massive and you really have to think of it as a continent. I say this because there are pockets where soccer is bigger than it is in other places but it won't get noticed on a national level until and unless it's absolutely massive.

And of course some blame lies on the MLS. I see no reason to support my local team if they can never get promoted and it's all basically a franchise system with money talking. I get that it's difficult to have a premier league style traveling teams system when you're as big as the MLS but maybe they should do four conferences completely independent of each other with a champions league type thing going on.

People love playing Fifa though.
 
SadlerMUFC said:
The biggest problem with football in North America is that it has become too much about business with little to do with developing the best players...

For example, I live in Niagara Falls. In this region there have been two players who have "made it". Russell Theibert (Vancouver White Caps) and Kofi Opare (Colorado Rapids). I've played with and against kofi several times and played with Russell once. While they are both very good players, they aren't even close to being the best players in the region. There is just way too many undiscovered talent. And there's a few reasons for that.

In Europe and South America, the best players are found and picked up by clubs and developed in hopes of one day making it to the first team. Clubs spend millions on developing these kids. Meanwhile in North America, we have so many different levels of play, and the higher the level of play, the more money it costs. So if a kids parent doesn't have the money to spend on these "elite" programs, they remain undiscovered talent playing in the local leagues. The only reason Kofi made it was because one of my teammates (Chris Grassie) had just got hired on the coaching staff at Michigan Wolverines and he got Kofi a scholarship. Otherwise, Kofi would have remained playing in our local league (his brother, who I would argue was better, continued playing on our team as he was too old for college).

I have a few friends now who have signed their kids up for the "elite" programs. They are paying well over $2000 for their sons to play and that doesn't include travel and hotels. They say it's a great program and their kids are learning so much, but if this was Europe, they wouldn't be paying anything. So if your parents can't afford it, you get left behind.

There are also too many "clubs" now. When I grew up playing each city had two "allstar" teams. An A team and a B team. If you didn't make either of those teams, you played house league. So that meant that all the best players in each city were on one team. That was the highest level. Soccer wasn't nearly as big as it is now, but it would have been a hell of a lot easier to find the top talent. Now in Niagara Falls alone we have Niagara United Soccer Club, Niagara Falls Titans and Club italia. And I haven't even gotten into the "elite" programs as there are a couple of those too. So now all the talent is spread out.

Oh, and if you want to train with the Toronto FC program, you better open your wallet up even more...

Bottom line is North American will never catch up to Europe as long as this is how things are done. With the amount of kids we have playing the beautiful game I can guarantee you that most are slipping through the cracks. The top talent should be recruted and not cost money for their development. United this happens, we will always be a step behind...
Click to expand...

I think there are some limitations in the system that don't allow for it and you need some organic demand first (chicken and egg problem) but I agree with you overall. As long as MLS is a retiring ground for former stars and just a money business it will never prosper. I fear certain European leagues going down that route as well.
 
How many US players go to europe for development ? In order for the US national team to have sucess in world cups their players need to know how european and south american players play.

Donovan didn't see what he could do in europe for a long time and was reluctant to commit to permanent moves, only accepting loan deals.
 
Still not sold on the selection of managers for the MNT nor the leadership within USSF, but good to see the young talent coming through looking class in their respective leagues. Got a good crop developing: Cannon, Dest, Miazga, McKennie, Pomykal, Pulisic, Reyna, Sargent.

But the keeper position is garbage.
 
MrMarcello said:
Still not sold on the selection of managers for the MNT nor the leadership within USSF, but good to see the young talent coming through looking class in their respective leagues. Got a good crop developing: Cannon, Dest, Miazga, McKennie, Pomykal, Pulisic, Reyna, Sargent.

But the keeper position is garbage.
Click to expand...

You forgot Chris Richards at Bayern.
 
It's odd that we're so short of options at keeper when historically that's where we've been strongest. Who knows what will happen with Steffen - signing with City was an absolutely awful decision, but he seems talented.

The main problem will remain our development setup - if you're not from a wealthy family, you stand little to no chance of being properly developed unless you live in an MLS city and are lucky enough to be discovered by an Academy team. USL is coming on nicely, but it's probably still 5-10 years away from being a reliable pipeline. It's madness that in our current system you could be 21-22 before you get your first taste of professional coaching or playing at a proper club.
 
MrMarcello said:
Still not sold on the selection of managers for the MNT nor the leadership within USSF, but good to see the young talent coming through looking class in their respective leagues. Got a good crop developing: Cannon, Dest, Miazga, McKennie, Pomykal, Pulisic, Reyna, Sargent.

But the keeper position is garbage.
Click to expand...
Zach Steffen isn’t garbage.
 
MrMarcello said:
Average keeper for me. Nothing in the Friedel-Howard-Keller level. Perhaps could rise to that level but highly doubtful.
Click to expand...
You’re name checking average players like Miazga. If Steffen is garbage then so is Miazga.

He’s also barely below them while only being 25. He can easily have a mid-table career which is really all those keepers ever were. At that age Howard was looking out of his depth at United, Keller was getting relegated in the Championship and Friedel was back at Columbus.
 
limerickcitykid said:
You’re name checking average players like Miazga. If Steffen is garbage then so is Miazga.

He’s also barely below them while only being 25. He can easily have a mid-table career which is really all those keepers ever were. At that age Howard was looking out of his depth at United, Keller was getting relegated in the Championship and Friedel was back at Columbus.
Click to expand...

Fair enough on Miazga. The rest is nonsense. Those three keepers were a class above at their stage of each respective career to Steffen. I understand you're on the defense for a City player, la.

Btw, Friedel would have been in Newcastle in 1995 if not for the stupid work permit rules. He then spent a year as the starter for Galatasaray (loaned by USSF) then back to MLS for 1.5 years in which he was the voted the top keeper in 1997, then off to Liverpool were he didn't perform well when given the chances. The rest of his career was pretty damn good from there on. If Steffen can even partially mirror that upward trajectory then he'll have a solid career.
 
Wait, there was a "golden generation"??
 
Bastian said:
Wait, there was a "golden generation"??
Click to expand...

Haha, not really. Just that the US Soccer actually started producing players who played in Europe, regardless of their role, club, or development. Jurgen Klinsmann challenged the Federation and youth players to test themselves in Europe and to bypass MLS or college if possible. MLS and US Soccer didn't like that at all and while Jurgen, was right, their egos and ignorance couldn't tolerate him any longer when results started going south.

Playing in Europe at any club and level that can play in European competition (CL or EL) is beneficial for all American players because the competition and coaching are so superior to the US. Plus the pressure on players in Europe is much greater and helpful when going into international play.
 
The US (and my country, Canada) will never be big in soccer. The biggest problem is that our countries have taken a relatively cheap sport to play and made it expensive for "elite players".

In Europe, if you are a top talent, you are recruited by your local club to play in their school boy program and then hopefully get a spot on the youth team.

In Canada (and I'm assuming the US) if you are a top talent you can't just play in your local league. Scouts don't look there. you have to join an "elite team". Two of my friends have put their sons in the elite league and it is costing them thousands of dollars for their kids to be in this program. The team itself plays out of the US in an American league with a ton of travel. These are 11 year old boys. So if your family doesn't have the money to go on one of these elite teams, you just play for your local travel team. Again, the scouts don't look there.

I have been playing this game for over 40 years and I'm still playing (if we get a league this year). Before I started playing in the over 35 league, I was playing in the local mens league. In our region (Niagara) there have been 2 players who have "made" it. Kofi Opare (LA Galaxy, DC United Colorado Rapids) and Russell Theirbert (Vancouver WhiteCaps).

I was team mates with Kofi in the past, and have played with Russell once. Both are very good players but I can tell you without a shadow of doubt that there have been better players in our region who just played in the local mens league. Undiscovered talent that didn't go for it, and the scouts never came to look. The only reason why Kofi made it was because one of my teammates got a job as assistant coach with Michigan Wolverines and he got Kofi a scholarship.

So in conclusion, until North America starts acting like the rest of the world and recruits the best players without charging them thousands of dollars, we will never be anywhere as good as the rest of the world. We may have the talent to be, but my guess is that talent has gone undiscovered...
 
SadlerMUFC said:
The US (and my country, Canada) will never be big in soccer. The biggest problem is that our countries have taken a relatively cheap sport to play and made it expensive for "elite players".

In Europe, if you are a top talent, you are recruited by your local club to play in their school boy program and then hopefully get a spot on the youth team.

In Canada (and I'm assuming the US) if you are a top talent you can't just play in your local league. Scouts don't look there. you have to join an "elite team". Two of my friends have put their sons in the elite league and it is costing them thousands of dollars for their kids to be in this program. The team itself plays out of the US in an American league with a ton of travel. These are 11 year old boys. So if your family doesn't have the money to go on one of these elite teams, you just play for your local travel team. Again, the scouts don't look there.

I have been playing this game for over 40 years and I'm still playing (if we get a league this year). Before I started playing in the over 35 league, I was playing in the local mens league. In our region (Niagara) there have been 2 players who have "made" it. Kofi Opare (LA Galaxy, DC United Colorado Rapids) and Russell Theirbert (Vancouver WhiteCaps).

I was team mates with Kofi in the past, and have played with Russell once. Both are very good players but I can tell you without a shadow of doubt that there have been better players in our region who just played in the local mens league. Undiscovered talent that didn't go for it, and the scouts never came to look. The only reason why Kofi made it was because one of my teammates got a job as assistant coach with Michigan Wolverines and he got Kofi a scholarship.

So in conclusion, until North America starts acting like the rest of the world and recruits the best players without charging them thousands of dollars, we will never be anywhere as good as the rest of the world. We may have the talent to be, but my guess is that talent has gone undiscovered...
Click to expand...
Wow. Then I would suggest the scouts aren’t actually scouts at all.

It’s hard to get scouted even here I’m the UK but if your good enough you will be found eventually.

The clubs over there need to do more to find talented kids by the sound of it.
 
RUCK4444 said:
Wow. Then I would suggest the scouts aren’t actually scouts at all.

It’s hard to get scouted even here I’m the UK but if your good enough you will be found eventually.

The clubs over there need to do more to find talented kids by the sound of it.
Click to expand...

It's all about the money here. In the "elite program" that I talked about, the guy who is the coach, that is his job. But his salary isn't paid by a club. It's paid by the parents who are paying for their kids to play. My friends are paying around $5000 per year for their sons to play in this program. To put that into perspective, I pay $150 for my son to play.

It used to be that each city had an "allstar" team. An A team and a B team. So all the best players in the city were on the A team. If you didn't make either of these teams, you played house league. At that time talent was easy to find, but the talent pool wasn't as big because there weren't as many people playing as there are now.

Soccer is actually very popular here. In my over 35 league alone we have 20 teams. 10 in each division. For regular mens soccer there is PSL which has around 30 teams (3 divisions) and that stays within our region. Then there's a rec league that has another 15 teams...
 
RUCK4444 said:
Wow. Then I would suggest the scouts aren’t actually scouts at all.

It’s hard to get scouted even here I’m the UK but if your good enough you will be found eventually.

The clubs over there need to do more to find talented kids by the sound of it.
Click to expand...

You've got to consider the size and population density here, though. It's just impossible to cover it all effectively. The whole of England is like 60% the size of the state of California, and there are 49 other states to cover, as well.

The shit part is, given this, the scouts know their best chance of finding good players is to look for the higher levels of play - which are usually in the more expensive travel leagues. By the time kids are teenagers, they'll have missed a load of potential development if they didn't make it into one of those programs - which is in part why we struggle to produce good players often enough as a country. Too many slip through the cracks and are never polished.
 
forevrared said:
You've got to consider the size and population density here, though. It's just impossible to cover it all effectively. The whole of England is like 60% the size of the state of California, and there are 49 other states to cover, as well.

The shit part is, given this, the scouts know their best chance of finding good players is to look for the higher levels of play - which are usually in the more expensive travel leagues. By the time kids are teenagers, they'll have missed a load of potential development if they didn't make it into one of those programs - which is in part why we struggle to produce good players often enough as a country. Too many slip through the cracks and are never polished.
Click to expand...

Exactly. There just aren't enough professional teams with academies, and the government doesn't put anything into development. I just looked at what it would cost to sign my son up for Toronto FC youth program and it's $400/week. TFC shouldn't be charging kids to join their youth system. They should be scouting them and there should be no charge for these kids to play...
 
SadlerMUFC said:
The US (and my country, Canada) will never be big in soccer. The biggest problem is that our countries have taken a relatively cheap sport to play and made it expensive for "elite players".

In Europe, if you are a top talent, you are recruited by your local club to play in their school boy program and then hopefully get a spot on the youth team.

In Canada (and I'm assuming the US) if you are a top talent you can't just play in your local league. Scouts don't look there. you have to join an "elite team". Two of my friends have put their sons in the elite league and it is costing them thousands of dollars for their kids to be in this program. The team itself plays out of the US in an American league with a ton of travel. These are 11 year old boys. So if your family doesn't have the money to go on one of these elite teams, you just play for your local travel team. Again, the scouts don't look there.

I have been playing this game for over 40 years and I'm still playing (if we get a league this year). Before I started playing in the over 35 league, I was playing in the local mens league. In our region (Niagara) there have been 2 players who have "made" it. Kofi Opare (LA Galaxy, DC United Colorado Rapids) and Russell Theirbert (Vancouver WhiteCaps).

I was team mates with Kofi in the past, and have played with Russell once. Both are very good players but I can tell you without a shadow of doubt that there have been better players in our region who just played in the local mens league. Undiscovered talent that didn't go for it, and the scouts never came to look. The only reason why Kofi made it was because one of my teammates got a job as assistant coach with Michigan Wolverines and he got Kofi a scholarship.

So in conclusion, until North America starts acting like the rest of the world and recruits the best players without charging them thousands of dollars, we will never be anywhere as good as the rest of the world. We may have the talent to be, but my guess is that talent has gone undiscovered...
Click to expand...

Pin this, sticky it, print it...I completely agree with every word.

Priority 1 in this country is to make money and way in the distance is priority 2 to develop players.
 
RedDevilCanuck said:
Gifted players here in North America have to go straight to Europe around 16 to get coaching that will make them better.
Click to expand...

I played with one of those guys a few years ago. He was from the Soo and had gone to Portugal for a bit around that age. Was absolutely head and shoulders above almost everyone in the entire league. His instructions to us were 'ball to feet and let me do the rest'. He usually did.
 
Saw someone say "Americans don't like what they are not good at". Nice jab. You could also say, like most humans, we see no reason to get good at something we don't like and you pretty much have the bottom line. Until the US decides that they like the game, in mass, nothing will change.

Parents (especially fathers when it comes to sport) want their kid to be the next Tom Brady, Mike Trout or LeBron James and so push their kids in that direction. I suspect they overrule their kids desires in many cases (mine for sure). Plus, try to tell mom that Jr is on track to be good but needs to go to Europe to do so and see how far that goes. Until a couple generations of parents that played and love the sport, and see a track for their kids to develop in the US, it's going to continue to be a game kids play until someone notices you have the potential to be an athlete and transitions you into one of the major US sports.

Times are changing though; the decreased popularity of baseball and concussion issues in throwball are again opening that window of opportunity ever so slightly. Unfortunately, as many have pointed out already, the USSF and MLS seem unwilling or incapable of taking advantage of this. Maybe if someone like Pulisic can have success on the world stage and help get the USMNT out of the group stages (assuming we can get in!) as well as hosting the 2026 WC (can't keep us out of that one!), popularity will surge enough that parents will demand a better structure to developing their kids to be the next CP.
 
I’ve not coached or played in the us but I know a few coaches who e gone out there to coach grass routes. Feedback is pretty similar to other posts here.

There is some phenomenal talent in the younger youth age groups ie tiny tots of ages 8 up to 13 and 14 but there are big hurdles to their development after that age, mainly:
1. Coaching is generally pretty poor especially in the 16+ environment.
2 Professional “soccer“ structure basically means you have to relocate to Europe if you want to make it on the international stage and very few kids and their families are willing to do that. This is a problem even in areas where there is a good youth setup all the way to U18.
3. Soccer is still not seen as an elite sport in the US unless it’s women’s football. It’s us culture that once you get into high school the career minded sportsman will align themselves with basketball, American football or baseball.

Another observation - I’ve spent a lot of time in the US and they look at sports as athletic competition rather than sports that require huge amounts of aptitude and natural ability. To be a top level “soccer player” is much more skills based that say the NFL players require. Soccer players can be more diminutive in figure but those types of people aren’t given much focus in American sports culture in general.
 
MrMarcello said:
McKennie is open to leaving Schalke. Where is a good fit for his skillset? Should he go to England?
Click to expand...

He's a classic midtable player, isn't he? Good athleticism, very good in the air, but mediocre on the ball. Could see him look well at Frankfurt, but the US tax will probably price him out of a move anywhere else but England.
 
Unfortunately, the development of youth players from 12 to 16 then transitioning into a proper youth academy/reserve team by 18 and then signing a pro contract will never happen in the United States, primarily because of college and MLS.

The MLS and US Soccer have a terrible inferiority complex, in addition, to a for-profit business structure and mentality.

Male soccer players who accept college scholarships actually have their growth stunted. When you're a 17 to 22 year old kid playing college soccer, you have weekly restrictions on how long you can practice and games and travel. It's completely ass backwards. At the time when these American players are supposed to be training and playing everyday for hours at a time etc with their sole focus on football, they are studying and have classes for half the day, practice, then study/do class work, socialize, eat what they want and are free to do whatever. Compared to European or SA players 17 to 22, they are fully dedicated to the sport because they are more or less a professional footballer in every sense of the word.

So US hasn't really had a golden generation and just because they turn out some decent, young talents (not including Pulisic), it doesn't mean jack shit if they ply their trade in MLS. The competition of MLS is Championship level at best, which is only for a handful of MLS teams, the rest are lower Championship or Scottish Premiership outside of Celtic and Rangers.
 
SadlerMUFC said:
Exactly. There just aren't enough professional teams with academies, and the government doesn't put anything into development. I just looked at what it would cost to sign my son up for Toronto FC youth program and it's $400/week. TFC shouldn't be charging kids to join their youth system. They should be scouting them and there should be no charge for these kids to play...
Click to expand...
The lack of professional teams is due to a lack of interest in the sport. Whilst it is growing, there isn't enough money to be made for smaller teams at this time. I really do hope that the CPL can offer that for smaller Canadian teams and eventually have them integrate into that setup as part of a bigger footballing pyramid, and I hope that the lower American professional leagues get more exposure. Until that happens, though, it'd be difficult for those teams to have enough money to invest youth development let alone run as a pro team.

Regarding TFC specifically, that does worry me. We have a ton of Canadian talent around in Toronto and the GTA, but the fact that we want to make money off of their parents/guardians disappoints me. Until we open ourselves up, we might have to continue relying on other academies/teams to supply us our best young players (Osorio, Edwards, Shaffelburg).
 
edcunited1878 said:
Unfortunately, the development of youth players from 12 to 16 then transitioning into a proper youth academy/reserve team by 18 and then signing a pro contract will never happen in the United States, primarily because of college and MLS.

The MLS and US Soccer have a terrible inferiority complex, in addition, to a for-profit business structure and mentality.

Male soccer players who accept college scholarships actually have their growth stunted. When you're a 17 to 22 year old kid playing college soccer, you have weekly restrictions on how long you can practice and games and travel. It's completely ass backwards. At the time when these American players are supposed to be training and playing everyday for hours at a time etc with their sole focus on football, they are studying and have classes for half the day, practice, then study/do class work, socialize, eat what they want and are free to do whatever. Compared to European or SA players 17 to 22, they are fully dedicated to the sport because they are more or less a professional footballer in every sense of the word.

So US hasn't really had a golden generation and just because they turn out some decent, young talents (not including Pulisic), it doesn't mean jack shit if they ply their trade in MLS. The competition of MLS is Championship level at best, which is only for a handful of MLS teams, the rest are lower Championship or Scottish Premiership outside of Celtic and Rangers.
Click to expand...
Isn’t it also that they have to go to university/college as part of the journey to be a pro soccer player?
In Europe you might do your A levels (high school diploma) part time from 16-18 years old but you’re training full time to be a football player and would go straight into being a full time football player after that. Everyone signs a pro contract at 17.

Us kids are playing a fraction of the training and game time that non US football players are at ages 16-18 which is where you really need to push on to get to an international level
 
TheReligion said:
This isn't about the MLS in particular, although I'm sure part of the explanation will dovetail to that, but why hasn't US football really kicked on from hosting the World Cup in 1994 to present day?

In the present day it feels we are no further along in the development of the sport despite having small peaks and troughs in between. Some time ago the US were tipped for potential greatness given the investment in grass roots football and the rise in popularity in comparison to traditional household sports such as baseball, basketball and the NFL. That, along with a huge population, top quality facilities and sports science is still yet to yield a batch of truly world class talent and international "golden era". Why? Will it ever come?

In my opinion the MLS could be responsible for this given the desperation for bringing over older pros from around the world in the twilight years of their careers. Initially I can see why this was done; to attract the world to the MLS, but now does it need a different approach and does this hinder the development of home grown American talent?

The contrast between the men's and women's team is again quite interesting. It's likely men would sooner play a traditional American man's sport as touched on above however the women's game does show they do have something so why have they not been able to transfer it to the men's game to a degree in terms of development?
Click to expand...

Funny enough but there's a brilliant podcast series that goes into this exact topic, focusing on the events leading up to and including the 1998 World Cup - it's called American Fiasco. In total I think it's about 4 hours long, but for me it's a masterclass in storytelling.

https://www.wnycstudios.org/podcasts/american-fiasco
 
Prodigal7 said:
Isn’t it also that they have to go to university/college as part of the journey to be a pro soccer player?
In Europe you might do your A levels (high school diploma) part time from 16-18 years old but you’re training full time to be a football player and would go straight into being a full time football player after that. Everyone signs a pro contract at 17.

Us kids are playing a fraction of the training and game time that non US football players are at ages 16-18 which is where you really need to push on to get to an international level
Click to expand...
As has been stated elsewhere, there are a whole host of reasons, but I'll springboard off this question/post. Aside from the fact that, probably, the number 1 reason is that not enough Americans care about the game to do anything...

College (American) football and basketball programs nationwide, at multiple competition levels (NCAA divisions 1 and 2, NAIA, and at least one other), allow pretty much a full scholarship for every slot on the team, less so for baseball, but I'll address that. This is not the case for any other sport. For many parents, and kids, they see the best way to pay for college is to get a football or basketball scholarship, so that's where the emphasis goes. Additionally, the NFL has an age limit that pretty much guarantees an NCAA player will stay in school for three years, and the NBA's rule will at least get a college one year of service.

Amateur football is almost exclusively played at the high school (grades 9-12) and middle school (grades 6-8) levels. There are lower levels where skills are taught, but plenty of kids never start until they're in high school. It's from high schools where colleges get their talent, and from colleges where the NFL gets its talent. A significant percentage of the money that funds this system is public taxpayer-funded high schools, though private schools contribute their fair share.

Amateur basketball is played at all levels, but the real talent plays club ball. They may, and probably do, play high school ball as well, but that's not where the scouts are looking. Lots of time and money is spent at the club level on what I call "cannon fodder." Most club players won't play organized ball past high school. Some of them may go on to play small-college ball. A very few will play big-college and go on to the NBA. The "cannon fodder" exist only to give the stars games to showcase their talents and to pay the bills.

Baseball is interesting, because the best high school-age players get drafted and sent to MLB-affiliated minor league teams with the expectation of working their ways up to the Major League. Much like basketball, the real talent is developed and scouted in clubs outside of the high school structure. Still, lots of time and money is spent to develop players that will never make it.

Soccer, on the other hand, doesn't get the same respect. NCAA only allows division 1 mens' teams 9.9 scholarships (yes, that's partial) while women's teams get 12. Division 2 gets less. Not too much hope there, you play because you love it. And if you're looking for a scholarship, you'd better be really good, or you'd better play football or basketball.
 
Prodigal7 said:
Isn’t it also that they have to go to university/college as part of the journey to be a pro soccer player?
In Europe you might do your A levels (high school diploma) part time from 16-18 years old but you’re training full time to be a football player and would go straight into being a full time football player after that. Everyone signs a pro contract at 17.

Us kids are playing a fraction of the training and game time that non US football players are at ages 16-18 which is where you really need to push on to get to an international level
Click to expand...

You're exactly correct. In university/college, you're a student-athlete. You have to have passing grades and attend class to be eligible to practice, let alone play - that's the same thing in A levels/high school. The youth academies in MLS or IMG Academy don't really offer schooling or proper education. IMG Academy is a paid academy where you have to pay almost $90K per year for training and 'schooling'. That's absurd.

The commitment towards school/education and football training is 75% education and 25% training, at least. There's no such thing as part-time education and then other time devoted to football. Loads of European youth kids, and I think Rashford is one of them, trained pretty much full time in the academy but still got their education A levels and maybe even a little more education.

The US kids are as you said not playing even a fraction or training as much as their SA and European counterparts. And their coaches and training techniques/methods/ideology is already sub-par.
 
RUCK4444 said:
Wow. Then I would suggest the scouts aren’t actually scouts at all.

It’s hard to get scouted even here I’m the UK but if your good enough you will be found eventually.

The clubs over there need to do more to find talented kids by the sound of it.
Click to expand...
I disagree.

More and more, kids in the UK are not "found" they go through the academy system from a very young age. You need to have the advantage of being in that system otherwise you won't be getting in.

Look at Oliver Gill. His parents aren't athletes, we can't make an argument that he got his football skill from genetics.

He had the advantage that his father is David Gill, (now former) Chief Executive of Man Utd, he got to spend his young life in the Man Utd youth set up, become a good footballer (he won the Reserve Player of the Year award) before leaving to pursue a career in finance.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I'm guessing if you aren't in an academy these days by the age of 12, you probably won't be getting into a premier league team. These players are surely made, not found.
 
rcoobc said:
I disagree.

More and more, kids in the UK are not "found" they go through the academy system from a very young age. You need to have the advantage of being in that system otherwise you won't be getting in.

Look at Oliver Gill. His parents aren't athletes, we can't make an argument that he got his football skill from genetics.

He had the advantage that his father is David Gill, (now former) Chief Executive of Man Utd, he got to spend his young life in the Man Utd youth set up, become a good footballer (he won the Reserve Player of the Year award) before leaving to pursue a career in finance.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I'm guessing if you aren't in an academy these days by the age of 12, you probably won't be getting into a premier league team. These players are surely made, not found.
Click to expand...
Sure there are some that have the benefit of having access to an academy but you still need to hold a place down.

If your not playing to a very decent standard by 12 you will no doubt not make it, hell even if you are then the odds of making it are extremely remote.

I agree there should be more scouting at grass roots level. A few of my mates kids have been spotted and invited to Cardiff’s academy though.

It can always be improved though for sure.
 
edcunited1878 said:
Haha, not really. Just that the US Soccer actually started producing players who played in Europe, regardless of their role, club, or development. Jurgen Klinsmann challenged the Federation and youth players to test themselves in Europe and to bypass MLS or college if possible. MLS and US Soccer didn't like that at all and while Jurgen, was right, their egos and ignorance couldn't tolerate him any longer when results started going south.

Playing in Europe at any club and level that can play in European competition (CL or EL) is beneficial for all American players because the competition and coaching are so superior to the US. Plus the pressure on players in Europe is much greater and helpful when going into international play.
Click to expand...

I've said this before but I found Bradley's move back to Toronto from Roma extremely baffling.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.