starbuck wrote:

Soccerinsanity wrote:I'm not saying high school teams would develop any of our kids. I'm saying that them playing in high school would bring attention to the sport as the high school sports get much, much more journalistic coverage. Soccer is missing a huge recruitment opportunity...think of the pictures that could be printed in the DMN, the video of skill moves with great goals that could be on TV---publicity missed for soccer.

I certainly understand your sentiment and point. I think it's valid. The only thing is you have to be careful what you wish for in this case. If soccer catches on and becomes a popular high school sport, it changes the local soccer environment dramatically. I think select would take a giant hit as it would inevitably move to mirror high school sports more. There would no longer be room for the type of player that might not have the option of school sports. Many of the club coaches wouldn't be able to make a living at club soccer if it was geared more towards an athletic environment. That would not necessarily be good since select offers this option for all players interested in soccer. Eventually though, I think, if it becomes a popular sport, it will move more towards the high school environment. I just believe we lose a valuable venue for many kids once it does.

I disagree sir and the club coaches do make a living of their customers where do you think the money all goes to...the league? nope and if that type of thing would happen schools like jesuit would suck up ALL the best players and dominate! oh wait a second doesnt jesuit already do that

omega striker wrote:

starbuck wrote:

Soccerinsanity wrote:I'm not saying high school teams would develop any of our kids. I'm saying that them playing in high school would bring attention to the sport as the high school sports get much, much more journalistic coverage. Soccer is missing a huge recruitment opportunity...think of the pictures that could be printed in the DMN, the video of skill moves with great goals that could be on TV---publicity missed for soccer.

I certainly understand your sentiment and point. I think it's valid. The only thing is you have to be careful what you wish for in this case. If soccer catches on and becomes a popular high school sport, it changes the local soccer environment dramatically. I think select would take a giant hit as it would inevitably move to mirror high school sports more. There would no longer be room for the type of player that might not have the option of school sports. Many of the club coaches wouldn't be able to make a living at club soccer if it was geared more towards an athletic environment. That would not necessarily be good since select offers this option for all players interested in soccer. Eventually though, I think, if it becomes a popular sport, it will move more towards the high school environment. I just believe we lose a valuable venue for many kids once it does.

I disagree sir and the club coaches do make a living of their customers where do you think the money all goes to...the league? nope and if that type of thing would happen schools like jesuit would suck up ALL the best players and dominate! oh wait a second doesnt jesuit already do that

Well, not sure about that....it might be tough for one school to accumulate all the athletes in the area. Besides, if the athletes in the area all decided to give soccer a chance, it would be the end for the "jesuit" type situation. More parity, but the larger public schools would dominate.

I know the coaches make a living in club soccer, but do you think they make it off the best players? In addition, if the best athletes (which would preclude a pay-to-play environment) decided to move to soccer, do you think the same coaches currently in club soccer would still be there? Not likely.

starbuck wrote:

omega striker wrote:

starbuck wrote:

Soccerinsanity wrote:I'm not saying high school teams would develop any of our kids. I'm saying that them playing in high school would bring attention to the sport as the high school sports get much, much more journalistic coverage. Soccer is missing a huge recruitment opportunity...think of the pictures that could be printed in the DMN, the video of skill moves with great goals that could be on TV---publicity missed for soccer.

I certainly understand your sentiment and point. I think it's valid. The only thing is you have to be careful what you wish for in this case. If soccer catches on and becomes a popular high school sport, it changes the local soccer environment dramatically. I think select would take a giant hit as it would inevitably move to mirror high school sports more. There would no longer be room for the type of player that might not have the option of school sports. Many of the club coaches wouldn't be able to make a living at club soccer if it was geared more towards an athletic environment. That would not necessarily be good since select offers this option for all players interested in soccer. Eventually though, I think, if it becomes a popular sport, it will move more towards the high school environment. I just believe we lose a valuable venue for many kids once it does.

I disagree sir and the club coaches do make a living of their customers where do you think the money all goes to...the league? nope and if that type of thing would happen schools like jesuit would suck up ALL the best players and dominate! oh wait a second doesnt jesuit already do that

Well, not sure about that....it might be tough for one school to accumulate all the athletes in the area. Besides, if the athletes in the area all decided to give soccer a chance, it would be the end for the "jesuit" type situation. More parity, but the larger public schools would dominate.

I know the coaches make a living in club soccer, but do you think they make it off the best players? In addition, if the best athletes (which would preclude a pay-to-play environment) decided to move to soccer, do you think the same coaches currently in club soccer would still be there? Not likely.

jesuit recruits with a huge incentive of the best education so if the best athletes get to go for free......guess what they will be playing for jesuit but with the "best" soccer players playing academy HS is really not necesarry

Soccerinsanity wrote:And that would be bad why?

JK, some of the coaches are really good and some aren't so good in club.

I doubt high school would ever preclude club. After all, baseball, volleyball, even the almighty football players in high schools play in outside club leagues.

Agreed....I don't think HS soccer would preclude club either. It would, obviously, supercede it though if soccer became more popular to the high school athletes. I think the fewer changes to the current club soccer environment the better for the popularity of club soccer. It allows more participation from a broader spectrum of players.

High school soccer, despite popular opinion, DOES develop players. At least 99.9% of them anyway.

For one, they get the opportunity to "play up" as freshmen and sophomores. For most, this is the first experience they have in that regard.

Playing against more physically mature players, and not relying on being dominant physically (within your own club age group)is a natural part of the player development process.

How do you think 17,18 and 19 yr olds are brought into the first team overseas? It's a progression.

Some state hs athletic associations are more 'restrictive' than others. In terms of training hours and number of games/length of season.

bear in mind too that the college season is also short and intense.

And that's the next step for 99.9% of the DA players. That's the reality.

Then there are the intangibles. The peer recognition, media coverage and the pride of representing your school. Opportunities to play different positions and the chance to assume a leadership role. Uniquely American.

Some players will obviously benefit more than others.

A U17/18 national pool caliber player in reality probably should not be playing hs soccer.

Before the advent of the DA everyone played high school soccer.

Some argue the coaching at hs is horrible. And in many cases it is.

But, to me, there's so much "overcoaching" going on in club that the players aren't learning to manage a game tactically on their own.

High school soccer has a lot to offer. It could and should definitely be better. No question.

Most would agree though that growing the scholastic game would go a long way in making the sport more popular (with mainstream school sports people) and consequently keeping more kids playing the game.

Instead of dropping out to go and play another sport.

This was a great discussion. It leaves me with some things to think about.

The conclusion I've drawn, is, yes there is a better way to develop.

I don't think having results oriented, high pressure (promotion/relegation) is the way to go.

Training to 'compete', yes.

Especially for the younger players. (U14 and below.)

In Spain, they don't play 11v11 until u15.

I think there needs to be more "soccer schools" put into place. Not necessarily forming teams for the sole purpose of chasing trophies and titles.

I know we can't necessarily be Spain, Germany or Brazil.

I think training "pools" of players with the sole purpose of developing high level technique and later tactical awareness would ultimately be more beneficial.

The players would be grouped by ability (technical and tactical)rather than age. With the more advanced players training occasionally with older players to sharpen their skill. More training and fewer games with less emphasis on the actual results.

This obviously would be a hard sell to most parents. With a different measuring stick for the clubs themselves.

it comes down to being a cultural issue. As a society, we equate individual success strictly based on team performance. That's fine for adults. Not for kids.

Preach it, LP. If we want to create better soccer players in the US, it can be no other way. If available, I would sign up little brother in a heartbeat.

I buy what Laimport is preaching too. Couple of points to remember though.

Any system needs to benefit the majority who will never play professionally or in college as well as the tiny percentage that make it.

It had better be fun. I have heard of kids getting really bored of endless 4v4. Have to balance the basic skill development with fun.

Laimport wrote:The conclusion I've drawn, is, yes there is a better way to develop.

I don't think having results oriented, high pressure (promotion/relegation) is the way to go.

Training to 'compete', yes.

Especially for the younger players. (U14 and below.)

In Spain, they don't play 11v11 until u15.

I think there needs to be more "soccer schools" put into place. Not necessarily forming teams for the sole purpose of chasing trophies and titles.

I know we can't necessarily be Spain, Germany or Brazil.

I think training "pools" of players with the sole purpose of developing high level technique and later tactical awareness would ultimately be more beneficial.

The players would be grouped by ability (technical and tactical)rather than age. With the more advanced players training occasionally with older players to sharpen their skill. More training and fewer games with less emphasis on the actual results.

This obviously would be a hard sell to most parents. With a different measuring stick for the clubs themselves.

it comes down to being a cultural issue. As a society, we equate individual success strictly based on team performance. That's fine for adults. Not for kids.

I totally agree. Way too much emphasis on winning by the parents and coaches. We all need to emphasize development and fun first.

toepoker11 wrote:

Laimport wrote:The conclusion I've drawn, is, yes there is a better way to develop.

I don't think having results oriented, high pressure (promotion/relegation) is the way to go.

Training to 'compete', yes.

Especially for the younger players. (U14 and below.)

In Spain, they don't play 11v11 until u15.

I think there needs to be more "soccer schools" put into place. Not necessarily forming teams for the sole purpose of chasing trophies and titles.

I know we can't necessarily be Spain, Germany or Brazil.

I think training "pools" of players with the sole purpose of developing high level technique and later tactical awareness would ultimately be more beneficial.

The players would be grouped by ability (technical and tactical)rather than age. With the more advanced players training occasionally with older players to sharpen their skill. More training and fewer games with less emphasis on the actual results.

This obviously would be a hard sell to most parents. With a different measuring stick for the clubs themselves.

it comes down to being a cultural issue. As a society, we equate individual success strictly based on team performance. That's fine for adults. Not for kids.

I totally agree. Way too much emphasis on winning by the parents and coaches. We all need to emphasize development and fun first.

I concur!

I agree with you, but what can I / we do about it to improve it? We can complain all day, but still be like a sheep and follow the heard. The way I see it the pay for play model instills many of the bad characteristics mentioned in this thread.

I'll have a pretty gifted U11 in the fall. I have played and have coached soccer. I'm really debating between :
1). Being a sheep and join a club spending alot of money. Hopefully coach will emphasize development
2). Starting my own team, additionally utilize some of my outside sources who played and coach in College, supplement with say Challenge or other camps.
3). Play rec, fusal, 3 v 3, Challenge camps, and work with him myself

Truthfully, I'm feeling a little bit like a sheep. I already work 50 hours a week.

34blast wrote:I agree with you, but what can I / we do about it to improve it? We can complain all day, but still be like a sheep and follow the heard. The way I see it the pay for play model instills many of the bad characteristics mentioned in this thread.

I'll have a pretty gifted U11 in the fall. I have played and have coached soccer. I'm really debating between :
1). Being a sheep and join a club spending alot of money. Hopefully coach will emphasize development
2). Starting my own team, additionally utilize some of my outside sources who played and coach in College, supplement with say Challenge or other camps.
3). Play rec, fusal, 3 v 3, Challenge camps, and work with him myself

Truthfully, I'm feeling a little bit like a sheep. I already work 50 hours a week.

I am not sure there is anything you can do about it on a personal level. If you pull your kid out of the system, he does not get to play competitive soccer. You have him play all the rec, futsal, etc that you want, but it is no match for a good game of 11 v. 11 on a full field. (Age 12 and up). The clubs own the system and will keep it that way.

If your son is gifted, odds are, you will not paying to play. I know a number of kids on scholarship because they are good. If he is valuable, he can find a place to play for free.


With regard to the changes suggested by LP, I agree but what would it look like?

1 CLUB XYZ starts in Plano and says "we are going to do it right.." They have no age groups but all players train together based upon ability. You have 8 year olds training with 10, 14 training with 11 etc... All based upon ability.

The parents want to see their kids play, so the club signs up 5 XYZ teams for SDL for the U10 and under crowd. They do no assign any kid to any one team because it does not matter and each week the XYZ team is made up of different kids. The coaches don't yell during games and lose a lot of games because they play kids in their weakest spots. They never play tournaments as that includes keeping score and that is against the philosophy of the club. ( Parents have agreed to by into this)

At U10-U16, XYZ club has no presence in Classic LEague, Plano League of ARlington but just scrimmages amongst themselves each weekend. No need for uniforms, just pennies.

At U17, they form teams and start to compete in Showcase tournaments so coaches can look at them. They are either picked up by colleges by U18 or done with soccer.


Laimpart, Is that the type of club you are describing? I am trying to see how it would work in the real world. I may be wrong, and I do agree with your thoughts, but don't see how any parents would go for it.

Laimport wrote:The conclusion I've drawn, is, yes there is a better way to develop.

I don't think having results oriented, high pressure (promotion/relegation) is the way to go.

Training to 'compete', yes.

Especially for the younger players. (U14 and below.)

In Spain, they don't play 11v11 until u15.

I think there needs to be more "soccer schools" put into place. Not necessarily forming teams for the sole purpose of chasing trophies and titles.

I know we can't necessarily be Spain, Germany or Brazil.

I think training "pools" of players with the sole purpose of developing high level technique and later tactical awareness would ultimately be more beneficial.

The players would be grouped by ability (technical and tactical)rather than age. With the more advanced players training occasionally with older players to sharpen their skill. More training and fewer games with less emphasis on the actual results.

This obviously would be a hard sell to most parents. With a different measuring stick for the clubs themselves.

it comes down to being a cultural issue. As a society, we equate individual success strictly based on team performance. That's fine for adults. Not for kids.

Got a question for everyone.... What are you hoping to get out of this "development" for your bb? Are you hoping your bb will develop enough to play professionally? Develop enough to play in college? What is all this development you are looking for going to get your bb?

Less than 1% of the youth players go on to be professional players, and less than 10% go on to college.

If 90% of our youth players are not going to do anything with this development, then what's wrong with emphazing winning?

At least with winning kids can build up self esteem and a drive to achieve their goals. I could also argue that finding a way to win can teach our kids to be resourceful. All of these things can be used in adult life scenarios.

What is a kid that doesn't end up as a professional or college player going to do with all of this development in their adult life? Not to mention that you would have also stripped away their opportunity to feel like a winner at a young age. Those are feelings that I personally still remember and motivate me to continue to support my bb to play soccer and all other sports in hope that he can experience the same feeling.

BTW, if you think your bb is in the 10%, there is a 9 in 10 chance that you are wrong! But if he is, then yes, you are in the wrong league for development. You need to find a program like the one you have described from the South American countries and put your bb there. They are out there, you just have to look for them and your bb has to be good enough to be in them.

Great point 34Blast.

I am one of the sheep following your path #1 with all the usual supplements of living room skills etc. It is the best option available at present.

In terms of what we can do to improve it, I think that really needs to come from the top, US Soccer or the MLS clubs. Not quite sure how we influence them to produce some positive changes though.

The English FA are actually improving things there due to a recognition that English players are under-achieving in the professional ranks and on the international stage. Plus the government actually leans of the FA a little too. The FA set the rules that all the clubs must follow regarding team size, field size, published results etc. Plus they have a lot of very good rules around the professional clubs' academies that ensure soccer development and school education.

It's a combination of LP and Davito. The cultural shift will have to come from FC Dallas. When, who knows? But, it has to happen for our elite to evolve. The business model is to develop and sell player rights. The whole system pays for itself, once established. Which, of course, is the rub.

I think a few of you have taken my post the wrong way.

I'm not saying that the ideal club would necessarily be a 'rogue' organization per se.

They could field teams to play in Arlington/Plano...or just be an independent tournament team. (Ideal in my opinion for U11-13 ages.)

A club pass system vs team rostering would allow player movement between age groups and divisions.

Players could play up but not play down.

In other words, you could have say, a truly talented (not just bigger and faster) U13 'guest play' or play in a friendly u14 or u15 match.

Games would be more of an exhibition type (friendly) vs a do or die league match or tournament final.

I'm not suggesting taking away the competitive factor or denying a kid the opportunity to be a "winner".

The problem is we base everything on winning...instead of personal enrichment and achievement/mastering of the "curriculum" (skillful football.) Just like school.

My advice to an individual parent is to take part in soccer activities that will reward technique and emphasize skill vs being in a situation where "winning is the only thing that matters".

In other words, I would not concern myself with having my U11 on a top "d1" classic league team. That's not how I would measure development or success.

You can't buck the system altogether and create your own utopia. I get that.

But you can certainly educate yourself and 'circumvent' the current system.

Just don't confuse "competition" and achievement with "winning".

Focus on the small sided stuff and the acquisition of skill.

Don't buy into the myth that by not participating in high pressure select soccer (again at younger ages)your kid will be "left behind".

I know a kid that, at U15 is just now playing organized soccer (full sided 11v11)and he is way ahead of the bulk of the kids who HAVE played select ball since U10/11. Not only is he better technically...but tactically as well.

Laimport wrote:I think a few of you have taken my post the wrong way.

I'm not saying that the ideal club would necessarily be a 'rogue' organization per se.

They could field teams to play in Arlington/Plano...or just be an independent tournament team. (Ideal in my opinion for U11-13 ages.)

A club pass system vs team rostering would allow player movement between age groups and divisions.

Players could play up but not play down.

In other words, you could have say, a truly talented (not just bigger and faster) U13 'guest play' or play in a friendly u14 or u15 match.

Games would be more of an exhibition type (friendly) vs a do or die league match or tournament final.

I'm not suggesting taking away the competitive factor or denying a kid the opportunity to be a "winner".

The problem is we base everything on winning...instead of personal enrichment and achievement/mastering of the "curriculum" (skillful football.) Just like school.

My advice to an individual parent is to take part in soccer activities that will reward technique and emphasize skill vs being in a situation where "winning is the only thing that matters".

In other words, I would not concern myself with having my U11 on a top "d1" classic league team. That's not how I would measure development or success.

You can't buck the system altogether and create your own utopia. I get that.

But you can certainly educate yourself and 'circumvent' the current system.

Just don't confuse "competition" and achievement with "winning".

Focus on the small sided stuff and the acquisition of skill.

Don't buy into the myth that by not participating in high pressure select soccer (again at younger ages)your kid will be "left behind".

I know a kid that, at U15 is just now playing organized soccer (full sided 11v11)and he is way ahead of the bulk of the kids who HAVE played select ball since U10/11. Not only is he better technically...but tactically as well.

good stuff sir!

Thanks.

I'm pretty passionate about this.

Good point. This is the way it used to be. Kids playing after school...without adult interference.

Sure, there's pressure to do well and win that day. ("Peer pressure"...not parental/coach micromanagement of the process.)

But, tomorrow is a new game!

Another way would be to push classic back to u13 and keep them in in academy for two to three more years

That's a good idea.

It is a good idea in theory but not in the reality of today's academy. Right now academy is a mess of competing leagues with little or no oversight. As it is you have young kids playing in two or three leagues playing as much as 3 or 4 games a weekend. The reality is that the big clubs will not allow smaall sided at older ages because it means smaller rosters thus less money per team. They are pushing just the opposite. 11V 11 at academy.

Agreed. An 18 man roster at U11 is a total money grab.

my2cents wrote:It is a good idea in theory but not in the reality of today's academy. Right now academy is a mess of competing leagues with little or no oversight. As it is you have young kids playing in two or three leagues playing as much as 3 or 4 games a weekend. The reality is that the big clubs will not allow smaall sided at older ages because it means smaller rosters thus less money per team. They are pushing just the opposite. 11V 11 at academy.

here is the main problem, most of the parents pay way too much in the first place there is no 2nd or 3rd just that and then they get on here to B!tch about it!

Shouldn't smaller rosters mean more teams?

The reality is playing 11v11 makes it easier on the coaches.

Classic league is criminal at u11 and u12. Negligent at u13 and 14.

More teams overall but a coach can only handle the same amount of games and practices. Say a coach has two select teams under U 13 and it goes to small sided with a max roster of 14. That is 8 less players and at least a $16K pay cut. Why do you think they pushed thru the roster size increase. That meant 4 to 6K per team increase for coaches or the club..