|
Post by rifle on Aug 3, 2019 11:45:35 GMT -5
The way of USSF seems to be
money and control > merit and quality
Imagine being a good coach. You can’t get a high level license unless you’re working in a DA program. You also can’t do a great job and EARN your way up. Altruism aside, what’s the point of trying to work in a rigged system?
|
|
|
Post by guerillaman on Aug 3, 2019 11:54:51 GMT -5
It's just rather disturbing that Atlanta United, Concorde and UFA will not play each other as a regularly scheduled structured games at u19 ---
THAT IS WHAT IS WRONG WITH SOCCER IN THIS COUNTRY --- THE ARROGANCE OF ANY CLUB THAT THINKS THEY ARE TOO GOOD FOR THE LOCAL COMPETITION
|
|
|
Post by soccer3 on Aug 3, 2019 13:27:06 GMT -5
I find this to be hilarious. Big clubs whining because they are being shut out of the top of the pyramid. It's the same "excellence by declaration" that they have been selling to since DA/ECNL came into play. MAYBE this will help open up the pyramid for everyone since now just about all non MLS clubs are being shutout. If you are good enough then you are good enough, size of club, location of club etc shouldn't matter. #promotionandrelegation
|
|
|
Post by 4theloveofsoccer on Aug 3, 2019 14:29:00 GMT -5
It's just rather disturbing that Atlanta United, Concorde and UFA will not play each other as a regularly scheduled structured games at u19 --- THAT IS WHAT IS WRONG WITH SOCCER IN THIS COUNTRY --- THE ARROGANCE OF ANY CLUB THAT THINKS THEY ARE TOO GOOD FOR THE LOCAL COMPETITION I completely agree. I will add it has been like this since the creation of DA, those teams do not play any other teams except those who are in the DA program. ECNL, NL, PL, SCCL etc. they all play against each other in local and national events/tournaments. Now MLS is excluding themselves, will DA exclude themselves as well to other leagues or will they open up and play against teams in other leagues.
|
|
|
Post by Soccerhouse on Aug 4, 2019 9:31:33 GMT -5
And on top of that --- all the money is being dumped into MLS academies - money from MLS, money from local corporate sponsorships and money from national sponsorships.
Not having a "local" professionals making millions on the game also hurts, look how nba players give back to their communities and or home towns -- sponsor/pay for AAU teams, build new gyms etc. MLS americans just don't make enough $$$ to help grassroots soccer financially.
|
|
|
Post by justwatching on Aug 4, 2019 12:35:58 GMT -5
Theoretically, it seems like this should eventually work its way out. If the MLS academies are supposed to be the highest level destination clubs for our youth available in the US then the separation of divisions within DA should give further differentiation from the other local clubs and incentive for kids to move on to these locations. You would likely get fewer players turning down MLS academy offers to play at other academies. I understand the MLS clubs are not always the most desirable for reason such as wanting to have the chance to play in Europe, wanting more playing time with local academies, etc. but for 98% of players I would suspect playing at a MLS academy is where they would want to play for the added exposure, resources, coaching, etc.
I certainly understand the clubs' disappointment but in this new model they should shift gears from competing with the MLS academies to feeding the MLS academies. They can always have their shot in the playoffs against them if they really want to argue supremacy. I would think non-mls clubs like Barca and others that offer full funding, exposure to professional environments, residency programs and able to recruit across the country would have the biggest problem with being in the "lower" division.
Not sure how much of the disappointment is ego and how much is truly disappointment in the division of DA.
Also, IMHO I think this is a much better solution for keeping DA credibility than the MLS completely separating from DA and forming their own league.
|
|
|
Post by atv on Aug 4, 2019 13:39:32 GMT -5
No ego here. I am just sounding out the overwhelming thoughts of several others around the country. Would love to see competition in a pure, open free market competitive system that incentivizes “real” competition and promotion relegation. A system that promotes players and teams based on merit and drives startup clubs, hard work, and dreams. However, from my personal POV, Boys ECNL will definitely get stronger. There is blurred delineation between DA 2nd tier and Boys ECNL. There are no strong arguments for kids to make a longer trip to play for 2nd tier DA versus Boys ECNL. No incentive to switch.
|
|
|
Post by footyfan on Aug 4, 2019 14:12:37 GMT -5
You can swap out "USSF"/"MLS" for "US Club Soccer"/<<insert youth team here>> and it's the same thing. Non merit-based leagues, making it more difficult for teams to play each other. It's all about the clubs making it easier for themselves, not about the player development [or parents' mental health ].
|
|
|
Post by footy on Aug 4, 2019 18:40:14 GMT -5
I'm trying to figure out how this playoff system makes any sense:
"Sixteen red division teams and 8 blue division teams will automatically qualify for the 32-team postseason playoffs. They will be joined by the eight highest ranked teams from the new DA Cup, which will merge with showcase competition."
|
|
|
Post by soccerguru on Aug 4, 2019 22:19:56 GMT -5
seriously justwatching, Theoretically we can produce energy from a cold glass of water by dropping a piece of nickel in the jar.
It will work it's way out by "incredible" soccer players deciding to forego playing for any pompous MLS club where signing homegrown contracts to kids for 75k a year and watch them churn in the "so-called" MLS machine during their PRIME Learning years. 16-21 year old development is where MLS is losing the battle with other countries. Look at our very own AU homegrowns. Besides Bello (who should of went to Europe), which player has received substantial minutes.
This separation of divisions because MLS is superior is the work of pompous a**holes.
There are some great players in the AU academy, and there are some equally great players at the other clubs also. That is why these issues are separated on the pitch weekend and week out.
|
|
|
Post by atlfutboldad on Aug 5, 2019 0:35:42 GMT -5
Is every club in the upper tier fully funded? If this is the top tier of US U19 soccer, it should be.
|
|
|
Post by justwatching on Aug 5, 2019 8:41:59 GMT -5
seriously justwatching, Theoretically we can produce energy from a cold glass of water by dropping a piece of nickel in the jar. It will work it's way out by "incredible" soccer players deciding to forego playing for any pompous MLS club where signing homegrown contracts to kids for 75k a year and watch them churn in the "so-called" MLS machine during their PRIME Learning years. 16-21 year old development is where MLS is losing the battle with other countries. Look at our very own AU homegrowns. Besides Bello (who should of went to Europe), which player has received substantial minutes. This separation of divisions because MLS is superior is the work of pompous a**holes. There are some great players in the AU academy, and there are some equally great players at the other clubs also. That is why these issues are separated on the pitch weekend and week out. I hear you soccerguru but don't agree with you. There certainly could be some arrogance associated with this decision or perhaps it is a method to further funnel talent to the MLS academies over the next few years. The MLS academies have resources that other clubs cannot compete with so they should have the best players there and in my opinion that should be the ultimate destination club for them. That will help grow the culture by all the area kids striving to "make it" to the local professional club much like Europe (European professional clubs' U19s & U23s are playing in professional leagues). I'm not saying there are not some fantastic players at non-MLS/non-professional affiliated clubs but the highest level players should be filling the MLS's academies (being that it is the top tier professional league we can offer in the states). Potentially, this helps build the MLS following, develops better players (if you start at an early age) and strengthens US soccer in the long term by making the domestic professional league stronger. Perhaps, I am wrong and this is strictly a decision where the MLS thinks it is better than everyone else. But I am trying to look at it through a different lens and see how this might benefit the overall state of US men's soccer.
|
|
|
Post by oraclesfriend on Aug 5, 2019 9:40:04 GMT -5
seriously justwatching, Theoretically we can produce energy from a cold glass of water by dropping a piece of nickel in the jar. It will work it's way out by "incredible" soccer players deciding to forego playing for any pompous MLS club where signing homegrown contracts to kids for 75k a year and watch them churn in the "so-called" MLS machine during their PRIME Learning years. 16-21 year old development is where MLS is losing the battle with other countries. Look at our very own AU homegrowns. Besides Bello (who should of went to Europe), which player has received substantial minutes. This separation of divisions because MLS is superior is the work of pompous a**holes. There are some great players in the AU academy, and there are some equally great players at the other clubs also. That is why these issues are separated on the pitch weekend and week out. I hear you soccerguru but don't agree with you. There certainly could be some arrogance associated with this decision or perhaps it is a method to further funnel talent to the MLS academies over the next few years. The MLS academies have resources that other clubs cannot compete with so they should have the best players there and in my opinion that should be the ultimate destination club for them. That will help grow the culture by all the area kids striving to "make it" to the local professional club much like Europe (European professional clubs' U19s & U23s are playing in professional leagues). I'm not saying there are not some fantastic players at non-MLS/non-professional affiliated clubs but the highest level players should be filling the MLS's academies (being that it is the top tier professional league we can offer in the states). Potentially, this helps build the MLS following, develops better players (if you start at an early age) and strengthens US soccer in the long term by making the domestic professional league stronger. Perhaps, I am wrong and this is strictly a decision where the MLS thinks it is better than everyone else. But I am trying to look at it through a different lens and see how this might benefit the overall state of US men's soccer. Well one point that could be made in your favor regarding this is that in Europe the U19 teams don't have players paying to play. We should strive for that here as well and if the MLS teams can do it then so be it. I am not someone who will spout all of the evils of pay to play because, while I think it is problematic, I don't have a solution to offer at the moment so it would be a waste of breath, but I do think it would help this age group. That being said I think that players can have different paths to the top and not all top players will be in MLS u19 programs based on many factors including family logistics.
|
|
|
Post by Soccerhouse on Aug 5, 2019 10:31:00 GMT -5
We only have what 24 professional "top tier" mls clubs for the country essentially equivalent to the size of all of europe and a population equivalent to the following countries combined. Germany (81.7 million) France (63.6 million) United Kingdom (62.2 million) Italy (59.7 million) Netherlands (16.8 million) Belgium (11 million) Czech Republic (10.6 million) Austria (8.1 million) Switzerland (7.3 million)
|
|
|
Post by crossbar on Aug 5, 2019 13:32:59 GMT -5
I certainly understand the clubs' disappointment but in this new model they should shift gears from competing with the MLS academies to feeding the MLS academies. They can always have their shot in the playoffs against them if they really want to argue supremacy. I would think non-mls clubs like Barca and others that offer full funding, exposure to professional environments, residency programs and able to recruit across the country would have the biggest problem with being in the "lower" division. If "regular" clubs are supposed to shift from competing with MLS academies to feeding them, then the business model needs to be re-worked, and there needs to be some sort of compensation built into it. These funds should trickle back to not just the home club, but also to the parents who were paying for participation at that level.
|
|
|
Post by justwatching on Aug 5, 2019 15:36:12 GMT -5
I certainly understand the clubs' disappointment but in this new model they should shift gears from competing with the MLS academies to feeding the MLS academies. They can always have their shot in the playoffs against them if they really want to argue supremacy. I would think non-mls clubs like Barca and others that offer full funding, exposure to professional environments, residency programs and able to recruit across the country would have the biggest problem with being in the "lower" division. If "regular" clubs are supposed to shift from competing with MLS academies to feeding them, then the business model needs to be re-worked, and there needs to be some sort of compensation built into it. These funds should trickle back to not just the home club, but also to the parents who were paying for participation at that level. I agree with the solidarity payments if the player signs with a professional club but not sure I see the reasoning behind making a payment to clubs/parents for another level of amateur competition (Wouldn't ask a college to pay a club a fee. You just take the acceptance to the team and whatever scholarship is offered and think all of the preparation, time, and money finally paid off). I do think the professional/MLS club could promote the clubs that are feeding them and the feeder clubs should promote their ability to send players to these academies which would likely boost the club's revenue and increase their incentive to develop kids. It could be used just to build their brand like clubs do by promoting the number of college signings they get each year. Also, please understand that I do not necessarily agree or disagree with the split of the tiers, these are just my thoughts on how the split could be strategically used to advance the men's game.
|
|
|
Post by rifle on Aug 5, 2019 18:50:38 GMT -5
Until these clubs vote against the status quo in domestic club and pro soccer, nothing changes. Hopefully one of the dozens of lawsuits will remove the MLS death grip on every club outside its walls.
|
|
|
Post by diceshooter on Aug 6, 2019 14:55:41 GMT -5
I was not happy when I saw the "tiers" announcement. I know coaches and other parents who were livid. More than anything, I was insulted by the arrogance of U S Soccer.
However, my kid didn't really care. He didn't care that his team was put in the "second tier;" instead, he was excited about his team and his teammates and looking forward to the challenges of playing and trying to win.
Funny.
|
|
|
Post by Soccerhouse on Aug 7, 2019 12:50:24 GMT -5
Interestingly - Jared Micklos, U.S. Soccer's Development Academy Director since October 2014 and Youth National Teams Director since the fall of 2018, says he will be leaving U.S. Soccer in the near future. His departure will add to the list of more than 15 vacancies in U.S. Soccer's national team coaches and administration departments....... Micklos continued to oversee the Development Academy, and most recently led the implementation of a two-tiered format for the Boys DA's U-18/19, which was announced last Wednesdaywww.socceramerica.com/publications/article/83219/another-us-soccer-departure-jared-micklos-da-a.html
|
|
|
Post by atv on Aug 8, 2019 6:41:45 GMT -5
More coverage from Soccer America
COMMENTARY The DA's new tiered format: The stigma of relegation without a clear path for promotion by Mike Woitalla @mikewoitalla, 3 hours ago It’s one thing for clubs to get demoted into a lower division. It's an even more bitter pill to swallow when they aren’t presented with a clear path for promotion into the top tier. That’s one of the reasons why U.S. Soccer’s splitting of the Boys Development Academy’s U-18/19 league into two divisions has sparked so much outrage. * * * * * * * * * * Beginning with the 2019-20 Boys DA season that kicks off on Aug. 31, the oldest age group will be comprised of the 36 teams in the higher Red Division and 44 teams in the lower Blue division. MLS clubs are only in the Red Division, where they are joined by 14 non-MLS clubs (three USL clubs and 11 non-pro clubs).
This season's U-15 and U-16/17 age group divisions will remain the same as during 2018-19 season, although U.S. Soccer has informed its DA clubs that it will "consider expanding the two-tier format to other age groups" after the 2019-20 season.
As for this season's Blue Division teams' chances of earning a move to Red Division, the only hope they have been given by U.S. Soccer is that: "At the conclusion of the 2019-20 season, the U-18/19 tiers and structure will be reevaluated, and teams may be moved for the 2020-21 season accordingly."
That the MLS clubs were all placed into the top tier -- including 2020 expansion club Inter Miami, which just launched its academy -- is another reason for discontent from the demoted clubs’ directors, who believe the tiered system was introduced to placate MLS clubs that threatened to leave the DA. Also common is the assertion by directors that a number of non-MLS clubs – not necessarily their own -- are more qualified than some of the MLS clubs for the Red division.
Which brings us to another complaint: U.S. Soccer provided only a vague description of the criteria it used to split the teams: "Each U-18/19 team was scheduled into a tier based on performance history, player production, market and the ability to provide meaningful games."
I spoke with a dozen DA club directors representing clubs that were placed into both the Red and Blue Divisions. Some asked not to be quoted by name because they did not have authority from their board to do so. Others cited fear that their clubs would be punished by U.S. Soccer if they were critical of the governing body. This has been something I have encountered on several occasions in recent years when reporting on other DA-related issues. (I do not know whether it’s true that U.S. Soccer would retaliate against critics within its own membership, but that there’s a perception that it would is in and of itself concerning.)
Here are some of the reasons the club directors gave for being upset. They include feedback from directors who believe their teams were unfairly demoted, and from directors who don’t dispute their clubs’ ranking but are frustrated with how the transition was implemented and are concerned about possible future implications.
• The late announcement of the new format. Example: A club that does not charge its players for DA travel set its budget earlier in the year based on last season’s conference alignment. The tiered format created new geographic divisions, requiring farther travel to different states, at a cost that exceeds its planned budget – while taking off its schedule games against local rivals.
Example: The late announcement came after players and parents signed up for a season that now looks different from what they had been promised – such as games against MLS teams and expectations on where they would travel. “It makes me look bad in front of our parents,” said one director.
Last season, the Boys DA had already introduced a tiered schedule, while not altering the divisions. The weighted schedules were designed so higher rated teams played more games against teams rated similarly while skipping games against lower rated teams. (MLS teams in particular had complained about traveling to games against teams that didn't provide strong enough competition.)
When told at a meeting in mid-June, which coincided with the year-end Showcase, that changes were coming in the U-18/19 league, many directors thought that simply meant schedule changes similar to last season – not a split into two divisions. Such specifics, they say, weren’t revealed at the meeting.
• Eliminating local rivalry games. Directors of teams in the Red Division were disappointed with this as well. One said his club’s preference is to play against local rivals and traditional regional opponents, because they’ve created healthy relationships with those clubs and want to continue to be good partners in development. Another lamented losing local rivalries that have been around for years. A Blue Division director pointed out his team is no longer playing a nearby longtime rival while added to his team's schedule is a game hundreds of miles away, without another nearby DA club, which means a long trip for one game.
Also, last season’s results show that many of the local rivalry matchups that have been scratched don’t coincide with U.S. Soccer’s aim of eliminating games that aren’t meaningful competition. Especially glaring is in the Northwest, where Crossfire Premier’s demotion ends its games against the Seattle Sounders, Portland Timbers and Vancouver Whitecaps following two straight seasons of winning a division that also included MLS club San Jose Earthquakes and two other teams that were placed in the Red Division: De Anza Force and Sacramento Republic.
2018-19 Crossfire Premier Results U-18/19 Northwest Division vs. MLS teams T4-4, W2-1, W1-0 vs. Seattle Sounders L2-4, W2-0 vs. Vancouver Whitecaps W3-2, W4-1, W2-1 vs. Portland Timbers L1-2, T1-1 vs. San Jose Earthquakes.
(Crossfire’s U-18/19 results in 2018-19 against MLS opponents outside the Northwest Division were: 3-2 over the Los Angeles Galaxy, 4-3 and 2-1 over Real Salt Lake, 4-1 over Atlanta United, and a 4-1 loss to NYCFC.)
The DA had already used unbalanced schedules last season. It could have continued to use unbalanced schedules and kept the existing single-tier structure. Or it could have kept the local rivalry games in place in the tiered division system – scheduling Blue vs. Red derbies.
• Vague description of criteria for evaluating clubs for tiering. Every director from a Blue club complained about this. ("No one knows how they decided," said one.) They said they were given no precise description of how teams were rated above or below each other. U.S. Soccer has spent millions of dollars on club evaluations by the Belgian company Double PASS, said one director, but ratings of other clubs besides his own weren’t made available so he could see how the clubs chosen for Red or Blue were rated and specifically whether Red clubs were rated higher by Double PASS than his club.
Not knowing exactly how U.S. Soccer weighs clubs’ results against player development frustrates the directors of clubs that have supported their players’ move to MLS clubs knowing their teams’ results would suffer.
None of the directors of Blue Division I spoke with said they were given specific reasons for their club’s demotion. One director, on the other side of the country from Crossfire, said that the nebulous criteria has ignited all sorts of speculation. Such as that Crossfire is being punished for seeking solidarity payments for DeAndre Yedlin. (Other clubs that have pursued or endorsed the pursuit of solidarity payments, which U.S. Soccer has historically resisted the implementation of, include the Dallas Texans, Nomads, Weston FC and Real So Cal, which are in Blue Division, and Sockers FC, which is in the Red Division.)
The solidarity payment issue may not have had anything to do with the tiering process, but the fact that club directors believe it might have been is an example of how little faith they have in their governing body.
Last Thursday I had asked Development Academy Director Jared Micklos to address the Crossfire situation and he said that he felt it wasn't appropriate to comment on a specific club. (Since then, we learned that Micklos is leaving U.S. Soccer, for which he also served as Youth National Teams Director.) He had told me that factors used in determining Red teams from Blue teams included using data over the past few years across all age groups.
That explanation has not satisfied Blue Division directors who believe they can point out inconsistencies in how different clubs were judged by their performances in the most recent season vs. over the past few years. There is no shortage of Blue Division clubs pointing out their record over the past several years, despite perhaps a poorer record last season, was more impressive than clubs who were placed in the Red Division. (I didn't speak to anyone from Georgia's Concorde Fire, but another director pointed out that Concorde lost the U-16/17 final on PKs, to Solar FC, yet Concorde was placed in the Blue Division.)
• No guarantee that there’s a path to promotion. When 44 teams get demoted to a lower division, there’s going to be a massive amount of discontent. But U.S. Soccer could have alleviated that to some extent if it offered them a precise path into the top tier – instead of what’s barely a sliver of hope by offering “teams may be moved for the 2020-21 season accordingly.”
Why not simply announce a minimum number of teams that would be promoted next season? Such as four teams -- each team that finishes highest in each of four Blue Division regions. This could be done even if the DA doesn’t end up judging four teams worthy of relegation, because the two divisions are already unbalanced at 36 to 44. The DA could have announced something such as: At least four teams, but no more than eight, will move up.
Even if the DA decided MLS teams would be relegation-proof, it still has enough wiggle room to allow the up and down movement of non-MLS teams.
• A perception of inferiority. One director of told me of getting called by a player who was upset that his club was demoted and he wouldn’t be playing against MLS teams. But the player was a 16-year-old whose team wouldn’t be affected, because -- at least for this season -- the tiering is being used only at U-18/19.
The director said that having tiered divisions in the oldest age group implies that a club is also inferior to the other clubs at the lower age groups and believes that’s not necessarily the case. Especially because it's common that non-MLS clubs field players in the younger age groups who move to MLS clubs for the latter part of their youth career.
• Favoritism toward MLS clubs. One understands why U.S. Soccer would go to great lengths to keep MLS clubs from leaving the academy, and non-MLS clubs not only value the chance to play against MLS clubs, many of them cooperate with MLS clubs and don't begrudge players who have pro aspirations from moving on. It also helps their reputation if they can point to players who have moved on to pro clubs.
But now there's a feeling that amid U.S. Soccer's quest to appease MLS clubs they've neglected to appreciate the commitment of the amateur clubs, many of which existed long before MLS came around. The amateur clubs get no compensation for helping produce players who make their way to MLS teams or the U.S. national teams. Amateur clubs, who do not have the financial backing of MLS owners, have gone to great efforts to make the DA work. They deserve more respect from U.S. Soccer -- and from MLS clubs, which I imagine would have to spend even money on their youth programs if they went off on their own. And would all the MLS youth clubs have enough competition, especially at the lower age groups, without the amateur clubs?
One Red Division director, with a long history in the DA, said he believed there are clubs that ended up in the Blue Division that are better run than some MLS clubs.
U.S. Soccer should have thought much more about how they could serve and reward the amateur clubs while balancing the needs of the MLS clubs.
• No voice for the amateur clubs. One Blue Division director use the word "dictatorship" while describing the DA leadership. ("Ivory tower" is another common expression I've heard U.S. Soccer House described as before this controversy.) He said that in past years there was more communication, and face-to-face meetings as a conference at the showcase events. And discussions about growing the game and improving the league. Now he feels the amateur clubs have no voice and no input.
One imagines that if the DA leadership had presented its clubs with the details on how it was planning the split divisions and asked for feedback, the clubs would have relayed their desires. Such as a path to promotion and maintaining local rivalry games.
And perhaps U.S. Soccer and MLS clubs would have been able to make some compromises. And the nation's governing body wouldn't be facing so much animosity by a large part of its constituency.
The quest: No one will argue against the quest for "meaningful competition." The concept of having the nation's most elite players on the top teams grouped together makes solid player development sense. But it won't work in practice if there is no clear criteria -- as in promotion and relegation -- or if geographic realities aren't better addressed. Or if the federation's motives are viewed with suspicion.
The future: The letter sent by the DA to its clubs on July 31 announcing the new schedule, the new U-18/19 divisions, and the plans for the future said that, after the 2019-20 season, "U.S. Soccer will consider expanding the two-tier format to other age groups." One Red Division director said that's optimal because it would push clubs to uphold higher standards. A couple MLS academy directors I spoke to before this U-18/19 divisions were announced said they expected tiered divisions at U-16/17 to be a likely and satisfactory prospect for their clubs. Another Red Division director of an amateur club said he needed to analyze how this coming season plays out, look at the overall competition, travel and costs, to determine whether the tiered divisions should be applied to U-16/17.
But the splitting divisions at the younger age groups is of great concern to the Blue Division clubs -- especially if MLS clubs are guaranteed upper division spots. That scenario would create more player retention challenges and force them to question the value the of staying in the DA. Playing against MLS teams is a big attraction for players on non-MLS clubs. They also point out that it benefits MLS clubs, who use those games to scout players.
One amateur club director said he understands why U.S. Soccer wants to keep the MLS teams in the DA, because without them, the DA loses its appeal for the amateur clubs. His solution is to keep the U-16/17 divisions intact, and have MLS teams play U-16/17 players in the U-18/19 league (which is already common). The pro clubs' strongest U-18/19 players should be already in a pro environment, e.g. on USL teams, anyway (which is also already happening).
U.S. Soccer faces challenges incomparable to the youth systems of soccer powers it aims to emulate because the USA is so much larger and its amateur youth clubs face much higher costs. However it goes forward with its DA format, U.S. Soccer is unlikely to satisfy all the clubs. But it's got plenty of experience now to reflect on if it wants to create a smoother transition to upcoming changes. Even the amateur club directors who weren’t against the tiered division per se say they felt U.S. Soccer implemented the transition without consideration for challenges their clubs face.
U.S. Soccer at least should strive to govern in a way that prevents the level of strife that has become too common in the American soccer community.
|
|
|
Post by krazykickers on Aug 9, 2019 18:45:31 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by gaprospects on Aug 9, 2019 21:57:02 GMT -5
I said when this came out that I wanted to hear what TA had to say about it, well, here's his thoughts (toward the end of this SDH interview). In summary, he understands and sympathizes with the clubs that have gripes about their placement and doesn't agree with USSF's placement of a lot of teams, but he's looking forward to what he believes will be a better, more challenging season for his U19's
|
|
|
Post by soccerguru on Aug 10, 2019 10:30:12 GMT -5
How is it going to be more challenging when (by final playoffs) 2/4 best teams in the country are no longer on their schedule?
|
|
|
Post by rifle on Aug 10, 2019 17:48:33 GMT -5
US Soccer federation is disgraceful at every level. It’s AMAZING that the women’s national team has been so successful in spite of it.
|
|
|
Post by Soccerhouse on Aug 12, 2019 21:27:18 GMT -5
Heard a rumor that because of the timing of the changes - NCFC will fully fund their age groups travel expenses for the 2019-2020 season. (could be rumor)
|
|
|
Post by soccerworld1974 on Aug 12, 2019 22:51:05 GMT -5
US Soccer cannot get out of its own way. Who are the ones who are making these decisions?
|
|
|
Post by Soccerhouse on Aug 16, 2019 15:58:50 GMT -5
More from Crossfire leadership. You can’t make this stuff up...
|
|
|
Post by atlfutboldad on Aug 16, 2019 16:24:13 GMT -5
Maybe non-MLS DA clubs need to form their own club-centric league and drop out of DA? USSF went all-in with MLS.
|
|
|
Post by ga3v3 on Aug 16, 2019 19:28:41 GMT -5
I find it very ironic that the same clubs that have been supporting a league that shuts out 99% of the other clubs and denies promotion/relegation are now complaining that they have been shut out of the top tier or relegated to the second tier.
Who cares how good you are- if your not one of the selected few you can’t compete
|
|
|
Post by footyfan on Aug 17, 2019 12:31:18 GMT -5
I find it very ironic that the same clubs that have been supporting a league that shuts out 99% of the other clubs and denies promotion/relegation are now complaining that they have been shut out of the top tier or relegated to the second tier. Who cares how good you are- if your not one of the selected few you can’t compete This comment all day long. If any of you are at a club in SCCL or SCCL-P. Please sit down(NPL and ECNL are more like meritocracies but still plenty political) I also agree that this transition should have been gradually done and communicated better throughout. There is no doubt about that. It's billionaires' arrogance on full display. My guess is that USSF/MLS and eventually USL(and maybe NISA, NPSL, UPSL) are looking 10 + years out and they want the first choice for player development at 15+ to be the local pro/pdl team. I agree there should be at least another USL team(and/or perhaps that NISA Atl team) as an option for youth development and for fans to follow in Atlanta. Or let some of the better youth clubs reach up into USL-2, USL-1 and become pro entities. That's the only way forward for pro soccer in USA.
|
|