|
Post by alacrity174 on Nov 2, 2017 13:48:34 GMT -5
Yep, play offs are interesting, especially the disparity in play. Some games are a mile a minute CCSC v NYFC and others are worse than watching paint dry.
|
|
|
Post by alacrity174 on Oct 24, 2017 9:11:12 GMT -5
Thankful Messi didnt grow up in England, would have been cast off at U10 probably. What everyone is missing and what is totally missed in the article is that this is just Premier League teams, every club (PL, Championship, Div1 and Div2), has an academy and so do a lot of semi pro teams which means if you don't make the Premier league team then there are literally hundreds of other opportunities, mostly even in the same town or area. Look at Dele he was at Milton Keynes and is now a star for Spurs and England. Harry Kane was released by Arsenal and signed by Spurs. There are many other examples, it's not like here in America where opportunities are few and far between. Also the pay to play scenario if you don't make a top league team is about $20 per month not $2000 per season
|
|
|
Post by alacrity174 on Oct 20, 2017 12:31:48 GMT -5
Pulisic is a huge exception. He was described as a perfectionist and probably compulsive by his mother. You don't think all those days he wasn't at a formal practice, he was in his back yard obsessing about juggling footwork and striking. How many of our kids work on these things on their own and can't put the Playstation controller down. What we need are soccer fields in the community that are not locked and not associated with any club that anyone can just go to and play. If something like this exists in metro Atlanta, please let me know. I'll take my kid in a sec. Freedom to be creative in a non stressed environment would be great. To be honest you don't need the soccer specific fields open all you need if you are a kid wanting to play is a ball and some shirts etc to mark out a goal. Yeah you can use cones or something for lines but mostly it is a big open field and some form of goal. The big thing is for the kids to want to play, 10 year old playing with 15 year olds, watching and l;earning, tying moves out, having fun. This in the end will make better players. Even a wall somewhere at home where you can kick a bal against and practice trapping etc is a good start, unfortunately most homes don't even have this
|
|
|
Post by alacrity174 on Oct 20, 2017 12:25:21 GMT -5
Buy what about all the complaining about playing the WWC on turf? I thought the USWNT never wanted to play on turf so why are they in a stadium with turf and football lines?
|
|
|
Post by alacrity174 on Oct 6, 2017 13:03:27 GMT -5
To be honest the higher level the game the easier it is to ref. Players know what is and isn't a foul, tackles are better timed. Lots of things that happen in lower level soccer just don't in DA as kids know the consequences.
DA has it's own assignor for Refs, except for U12 I believe.
|
|
|
Post by alacrity174 on Oct 3, 2017 13:10:32 GMT -5
I don't know, I think we more than showed, you don't need a billion dollar stadium to attract a sellout. Atlanta has been lucky -- we have a huge soccer population. We have a ton of immigrants from countries where Soccer is the number 1 sport. Arthur has invested obviously. Eales was hired Tata was hired Then the south americans came!!! and they play an extremely entertaining style. only time will tell, but as long as they put out a competitive product people will go. I said it before, I've already been to more atlanta united games than probably falcons and hawks games combined over the past 20 years! I still prefer bobby dodd, just had that feel and proximity to the field, yes sight lines weren't quite as good. But man, open air, I freaking love it. I've always been a fan of bobby dodd, just think its a really special place with great views of the city. I will always prefer grass over turf but Bobby Dodd on a summer afternoon is not a place I want to watch a game, the side we were on the sun was 100% in your face all game and the seating layout isn't that good, OK for a 100 year old stadium but not for a full time soccer team. MBStadium is a fantastic venue for soccer, just wish they could have kept to the promise of grass.
|
|
|
Post by alacrity174 on Oct 3, 2017 11:15:17 GMT -5
If coaches are coaching the kids properly - as showcased in the video above - there's not a problem. That video shows some nice soccer and there isn't any disruption of play. As to offside, the player still has to keep in mind the last defender. It's just now, the build out line will is used to denote where offside offenses can be called. The same principles are in effect. Positioning etc. has to change accordingly, but that's on the coach to take care of and have the kids understand. This is Real Madrid though and not TSC or SSA or Concord or any other GA club. Look at the way these kids play and already understand the game and then translate that to U9 in GA Soccer, there is no comparison. Most U9 kids in the US still don't know what a Goal Kick is hardly any goalkeepers take them, let's compare apples to apples and not say that just because Spain does it we should too, we are now coming back to the Soccer IQ mentioned earlier and Spain has it in buckets our kids on the whole don't
|
|
|
Post by alacrity174 on Oct 3, 2017 9:22:58 GMT -5
Ultimately, I could take it or leave it... I don't mind the concept of the build out line. I've seen too many games where a field player, whose turn it is to be in goal (many of which have no idea how to play goalie), can't get the ball out of the penalty box and teams just intercept and score at will. It frustrating and sad for the players and a team that plays proper soccer to lose a game that way. But if they are going with this concept, they need to think it through and apply sound logic to the rule. (I know... good luck with that, right?) As I found out this past weekend ( and as I think the OP mentioned) it also allows for the attacking team to be in an offside position and not get 'called' because of the build-out line. Crazy! In my daughters game, the team had two players about 5 yards past our last defender and a ball was booted up the field... allowing for a two-on-one against the goalie. Needless to say everyone yells 'offside' and the ref had to explain they are are not offside due to the new rule. So how does that teach anything properly?? If they had been just few feet farther up the field and past the line, then it WOULD have been called? So your teaching them to ignore the last defender and only focus on this line, but only when you're on that one quarter of the field, then when you pass that line... THEN you focus on the last defender in the final quarter of the field. How does that help when they move to U11 & up and there is no line anymore. These are 8-9 year olds, simplify the concepts, don't make them harder. Furthermore, as a defender you now can't safely push up the field because even though an opponent is in an offside position (as it use to be), they are no longer offside. This essentially forces them to have to maintain a position at the new build out line. How does that help the player "connect" with the rest of their team when they have possession? Instead of being able to play it back to the defender (because they now have to sit too far back), the midfielder or forwards have to turn into pressure. Not good soccer tactics in my opinion. So in conclusion, if they are going with the build out line, at least change the attacking portion to make sense. This is a good discussion and one I wish USSF would have had themselves. Possibly they did and still couldn't work out a rational idea. The problem as I see it is the more you change the game to fit one scenario the more you affect the rest and then have to adjust again and again. The only real way to attack this is to ensure the coaches are focused on development and not winning (at U9 really), and have an agreement or directive to hold their attackers until after the first pass. Offside at U9 is also a rediculous idea, if a team wants to sit an attacker on the penalty box and just kick it up to that player go right ahead, as a coach that wouldn't bother me at all, I would keep teaching my players to play the ball and move into space to receive. Trust me by the time the kids are playing U13 they will be fine and the "big kid" who sat at the penalty box will be nowhere to be seen.
|
|
|
Post by alacrity174 on Oct 3, 2017 8:48:44 GMT -5
I so hate this dumb build out line. It punishes teams who have a higher soccer IQ and/or have fast players. I think this might be more appropriate in Rec but not in Academy/select games. Here is some more info and a video to assist those going through this craziness. Glad all of my kids, nieces and nephews are too old for this nonsense. Guidelines for 9U/10U - 7v7 Play • Build-out lines should be equidistant from the penalty area lines and halfway line OR Build-out lines should be 8 yards from halfway line • When the goalkeeper has the ball in hand during play from the opponent, the opposing team must move behind the build-out line until the ball is put into play. This includes goal kicks. • Once the opposing team is behind the build-out line, the goalkeeper can drop-kick, pass, throw or roll the ball to a teammate. Punting is not allowed. • The ball is deemed in-play once it is released from the goalkeeper’s hands or kicked on goal kicks. The opposing team can cross the build-out line and play resumes as normal. • If a goalkeeper punts the ball, an indirect free kick should be awarded to the opposing team from the spot of the offense. If the punt occurs within the goal area, the indirect free kick should be taken on the goal area line parallel to the goal line at the nearest point to where the infringement occurred Visual Clip: Couldn't disagree more about high soccer IQ. Basically for teams that attempted to build out of the back at U9 the opposing team would gun up and steal the ball over and over again, exploiting easy goals. Then their parents would laugh and cheer about how awesome there kids were at soccer. Anyways, would be like me saying it is high soccer IQ telling a five year old to pay attention on goal kicks in U6 because they are great opportunities to score. I am in agreement with Futsal Gwadess on the rational for these new build out lines. A no punting rule at U9/10 would have been a better way in my opinion. Now you have no heading, and having to wait at an imaginary line 1/3 of the way up the field which has no bearing on the real game these kids will be asked to play in a years time. In this system basically what you have told the players is you get 1 free pass to a team mate inside this "DMZ" after that everything starts. The powersa that be seem to be trying to make the game more complicated for all involved instead of simpler.
|
|
|
Post by alacrity174 on Sept 26, 2017 12:06:37 GMT -5
My son is on an academy team for U10(under 10). His last game had 1 academy coach per team and 1 referee. As there are not 50 balls and 20 ball boys for such a match it is standard and customary for the players to retrieve balls for throw-ins, goal kicks, corners, etc. Players may need to run to retrieve a ball as far as a treeline, adjacent field, parking lot, etc. This had occurred numerous times in the last game. In the closing seconds of the game, my son's team had 3 of 5 field players run off field to retrieve the ball for what turned out to be the opponent as they were awarded the throw-in. To everyone's surprise, the kid picked up another ball on the sideline and threw it into play. That team effectively had a 5 on 2 and quickly scored the game equalizing goal. The other players were across the field getting the ball used all game for opponent's throw-in. Several parents reacted and the referee ended game immediately after following kick off. What can I as a parent do? The game is being recorded as a tie against a highly ranked team. Should the opposition coach be contacted and informed of situation so may forgo the dead play goal? If this is the sportsmanship of this particular academy system than I think I would prefer to return to the church league where I am certain no coach would want a goal allowed while opponent was retrieving the ball for their throw-in. Thoughts? Hey Michael, I have to echo what everyone else is saying. The rankings don't mean much. They are more for the parents than anyone else. Truth be told at this stage, what matters more is the integrity and development of your kid and those on the team. The parent in me feels for your son, especially to lose that way. However, I wouldn't waste my time trying to protest the game or get the outcome changed. However, the former player in me believes that this is a teachable moment for your son. First off, never get the ball for the other team and even if you do, don't send three players. Till you reach the U13s and above, the kids should be learning and unfortunately these are some of the lessons they learn in an academy setting. I always point out how Asad with the Atlanta United team always quickly takes free kicks, before the other team is set. Again, I don't condone, support or say they should be taught that way. I say it's more of a moment for the coach to teach his players how to deal with just this type of situation in future. I wish your son well and hope he continues his love of the beautiful game... Free kicks are a little different. If you get a free kick it is because the other team fouled you and removed an advantage, so taking the kick before the "other team is ready" is getting that advantage back. There is nothing in the LoTG which says the other team has to be ready unless the Ref has indicated a "Ceremonial restart". On the throw being taken, as others have said great teaching moment, again nothing in the LoTG that says the other team has to be "ready" for the throw, if the non throwing team decides to go get the ball that really is on them, not a lot the ref can do in that situation.
|
|
|
Post by alacrity174 on Sept 1, 2017 8:24:13 GMT -5
AGC is the Georgia Soccer President (don't know if he had the age group last year). 40 teams asked for CL-I, so I believe his logic was it is U19/give it to them. I'm unsure what he will do with State Cup seedings, which is part of the pushback on more than one CL-I/ATH-A division. I assume that by U19, at least half the teams won't even apply for State Cup since most if not all of the players will have graduated the week before. Unless it's a top team vying for a Regional/National title - it's why at least on the girls side, you rarely see the full deck of 16 teams playing State Cup. Or you just have a boat load of play in games? Time will tell. Or like happened this year you have teams of College players, who still qualify, form to play State Cup. Going to be very interesting again this year
|
|
|
Post by alacrity174 on Aug 22, 2017 10:31:22 GMT -5
Really enjoyed looking round, seats are going to be great for the games, just hope folks can sit for a while here, no need to stand for 90 minutes. Only negative is the turf.
|
|
|
Post by alacrity174 on Aug 22, 2017 10:28:27 GMT -5
@rec Check back and don't project feelings because of the lack of emojis. The post isn't about the sky falling...or the "intel" on one weekends of matches , it is about what will ECNL do to maintain it's relevance with the DA firmly in place. The dual roll of ECNL and DA seems to go against the purpose for both. Here's a nifty lil' email quote going out to the Concorde friends, "per Nancy Blasingame Concorde has decided that DA games will be taped and ECNL games will be up to individual teams." (to pay for themselves) It's the same thing with Keeper coaching. No more trainer for ECNL they are busy with the DA now. GB is currently listed on the board of the ECNL is he mentioning to the board meetings the shift in priority at his club? Could be the first sign that another ECNL focused club in town will get an influx of talent in years to come. SaveSaveIt's a DA requirement that all games be recorded, if Concord used to do this for ECNL girls last season I guess they decided to spend the cash on DA only this year. GB will always look out for his top teams.
|
|
|
Post by alacrity174 on Jul 11, 2017 11:04:50 GMT -5
I agree. Deal with the parents who are the problem. It's not difficult for a center ref to stop the game go to the offending coaches bench to warn them to handle it or the parents will be removed. If that doesn't work kick them out. I will cheer on my player appropriately but will not choose to be silent. That's just not reasonable or enforceable. I'd love to see them start kicking parents out when they don't comply... I'm all for removing the badly behaving parents but why are we putting this on the referee? The clubs should have a Field Marshall for this and not put the refs in a bad position, how do you think a 15 year old will deal with an unruly parent and then add in the stoppage time incurred which won't get played as on a weekend there is no wiggle room for games, now everyone is cheesed off as the teams only got a 30 minute half instead of 40 because a parent refused to leave. Every team knows who that parent is, if peer pressure doesn't work the club should be the enforcer not the ref, who is there to ensure the game is played within the LOTG not act as a kindergarten teacher.
|
|
|
Post by alacrity174 on Jun 28, 2017 14:14:29 GMT -5
Tormenta beat UFA 99 at State Cup 3-1, but UFA won 8-1 at Regionals? What on Earth happened between now and then? Guest players
|
|
|
Post by alacrity174 on Jun 7, 2017 10:31:03 GMT -5
I somewhat agree with the so called deficiencies, but not all. What I am more worried about is the writers inclination towards going backwards with regard to crowd behavior, does he really want to go back to 1970's English football thug culture or the South American throwing bottles of urine at players of the opposing team? If this is what it takes to win then I want nothing to do with it.
Regarding player development it seems such a simple ting right, but in every country where players develop young soccer is the main sport played, it is not competing with Football, Baseball, etc., etc, etc. Pro/Rel we have discussed many times over and right now it isn't practical for MLS, USL or any other flavor of soccer, in Europe and South America the clubs are identified with the town they are in and the fans from a very young age identify with one and stick with that team for life. It's just not like that here, with only 22 teams in MLS, USL with 30 and NASL with 9 we have a very small local catchment area. In Argentina a country 1/4 the size of the US they have 5 divisions of professional football with most towns having a soccer club of some description. It's not a wonder that other countries produce better players younger than us, just look at the makeup of ATL UTD as an example.
|
|
|
Post by alacrity174 on Jun 7, 2017 8:23:25 GMT -5
Here is my take on this, club soccer should be for the child to enjoy and learn abou the game of soccer and also some life lessons. The cost of this is whatever the next 4 years of club & H/S soccer costs. Regarding getting money for college, each Div 1 school has 9.6 scholarships to divide how they see fit, the majority of players get little to no scholarship money in state. If you go out of state you may get some but don't bank on anything above $4k.
In short youth soccer is for fun, college is for an education and do not expect any financial remuneration for playing soccer. If you want cash for college swap to Football or baseball here in the south.
This is only applicable to boys, girls soccer is a totally different animal.
|
|
|
Post by alacrity174 on May 19, 2017 13:30:57 GMT -5
Would love to see another Leicester City story. Maybe not a team that comes from the bottom up, but a middle of the pack time of run. Obviously good money is on Chelsea, Tottenham, Man City or Liverpool. the bigger question right now is who gets the 4th spot! Am I correct that man city is a lock, currently 3 points ahead of arsenal and have the tie breaker on them? Its just down to Liverpool or Arsenal and if Liverpool wins, they are in. In the BPL the ways to break a tie on points is 1. Goal Difference 2. Goals Scored If points, GD and GS are all equal then there is a 1 match playoff at a neutral ground. Current standings 3rd Man City Pts 75, GD=36, GF 75 4th Liverpool Pts 73, GD 33, GF 75 5th Arsenal Pts 72, GD 31, GF 74 With the final games on Sunday Arsenal v Everton - Will be a tough game for Arsenal to get 3 points, they need them or it could all be off Liverpool v Boro - Should be a nailed on win for Liverpool, Boro have nothing to play for already relegated but all they need is to match or better Arsenal result and they are 3rd
|
|
|
Post by alacrity174 on May 3, 2017 8:12:33 GMT -5
Watched the replay over and over and honestly didn't see any contact, especially not the amount that would have made the DC player collapse like he had been hit by a Mack truck. Still think PRO needs to look at their process, if the Ref see's the incident and gives a Yellow card, why do PRO come back and increase the sanction? In all other leagues the only time retrospective action is taken is if the Ref doesn't mention it in his game report.
|
|
|
Post by alacrity174 on Apr 6, 2017 10:17:33 GMT -5
There was an extensive article in the WSJ or NY Times a year ago adressing the men's v womens soccer equal pay dispute. It was pretty extensive but the ultimate point was the Men's WC brings in higher revenue, sponsorships and advertising dollars and that is reflected in the difference in pay. How come WNBA players dont make the same as NBA players? USMNT players play almost three times as many qualifying games vs the women (16 v 5). The product doesn't always determine a person's value...take the world's best Opera Singer and compare them to Miley Cyrus. One is vastly more talented than the other but the inferior product makes millions of dollars a year and is less talented. That argument doesn't hold water. We can disagree on the monetary reimbursement, but to say the argument doesn't hold water is not quite true. Personally I can't stand Miss Cyrus, however commercially she is very sucessful and has a much larger paying audience than any opera singer. Football players are compensated much better than most soccer players, is this fair considering the amount of games, playing time and skill level. I don't believe so but this is the reality of the situation where the NFL is more profitible than MLS right now, however MLS is a self sufficient league, whereas the women's equivalent is not. There are a myriad of reasons for this but in sports the main reason is the product you put out and in reality NWSL is an inferior product to MLS and even USL and NASL.
|
|
|
Post by alacrity174 on Apr 6, 2017 10:11:52 GMT -5
What exactly don't you understand? The level of play is clearly lightyears behind for womens soccer and this wasn't a 1 off but consistent. The only reason the USWNT pulls in any money is because people are somehow brainwashed into thinking the standard is much higher than it is in reality, NASL is superior product talent wise to NWSL and the USWNT. Equating level of play to worth is an absurd argument. Are you going to sit on the "Level of Play Board" and decide if the level of play is sufficiently beautiful to earn a pay check? Sports is entertainment. The goal of entertainment is to put butts in the seats. The USWNT has put butts in the seats and has won the World Cup, the Olympics, etc. The USMNT has not reached the semi-final of the World Cup since 1930 and the best finish in modern times was the quarterfinals. THe USMNT U23s did not qualify for the Olympics in Brazil. The USWNT is at the top level of world soccer when competing against other countries. The USMNT is not at the top level of world soccer. Interesting that you don't believe level of skill to worth isn't applicable, would you pay the AC tech in the middle of summer who came to fix your AC the same even if 1 was fully skilled and the other with no certifications? The NWSL is not a self supporting entity both US Soccer and MLS pay money to NWSL to support it, even the best of the US women's players are off to europe to play in their leagues rather than stay in a 10 team league here in the US. Add in that the USWNT is routinely beaten by U15/16 boys teams how can you say the USWNT is at the Top level of world soccer, I will agree that they are or at least were until recently, at the pinnacle of Womens soccer but if the pinnacle of one group is constantly losing to schoolboy teams then they clearly are not at the top level of world soccer. To argue differently really isn't being honest with yourself. If you look to other sports is there a women's team that is on parity with the male version? We can go round and round on the money side however the point really is that the USWNT isn't as good as portrayed and this is borne out by the results on the field.
|
|
|
Post by alacrity174 on Apr 5, 2017 13:47:44 GMT -5
So what you are saying is equality isn't equal, equal pay for the same job, but the USWNT can't compete with U15 boys, let alone an MLS team so the NWSL is in essence on a par talent wise to U15 RPL teams, possibly U15 NPL but I honestly think that is a push. So what exactly does the USWNT bring to the table soccer wise? I don't even understand what you are saying. My comment is very simple--the pay for the USWNT should be based upon the money that they bring in to US Soccer. If they are bringing in more money than the USMNT, they should be paid more than the USMNT. If they are bringing in less money than the USMNT, they should be paid less. If bringing in the same amount of money, they should be paid the same. What exactly don't you understand? The level of play is clearly lightyears behind for womens soccer and this wasn't a 1 off but consistent. The only reason the USWNT pulls in any money is because people are somehow brainwashed into thinking the standard is much higher than it is in reality, NASL is superior product talent wise to NWSL and the USWNT.
|
|
|
Post by alacrity174 on Apr 4, 2017 14:08:06 GMT -5
The fact that a group of talented teenage boys can beat the USWNT does not have anything to do with equal pay. I suspect the same result would hold true in basketball, hockey, track and field, etc. where both sexes compete. Pay is an entirely separate issue. If pay was based on results, the women's team would be much better paid than the men's team. However, pay should have more to do with what each team is bringing in ticket sales, TV contracts, apparel, etc. So what you are saying is equality isn't equal, equal pay for the same job, but the USWNT can't compete with U15 boys, let alone an MLS team so the NWSL is in essence on a par talent wise to U15 RPL teams, possibly U15 NPL but I honestly think that is a push. So what exactly does the USWNT bring to the table soccer wise?
|
|
|
Post by alacrity174 on Apr 4, 2017 13:51:30 GMT -5
What does this say about the standard of the USWNT though, if a group of U15 (14 & 15 year olds), can beat easily the cream of the crop of US women? It does kind of put into perspective the demands for equal pay etc with the USMNT.
|
|
|
Post by alacrity174 on Apr 3, 2017 14:23:20 GMT -5
How many times have you seen a team get scored on and then come roaring back and score themselves? Pep's Man City had Arsenal on the ropes on Sunday and couldn't finish them off, maybe we shouldn't take everything he has to say as gospel
|
|
|
Post by alacrity174 on Feb 28, 2017 15:03:59 GMT -5
The Chiefs club was Cobb FC East for a while but those two coaches weren't at Chiefs until later. Cobb East (The Chiefs), although under the Cobb FC banner for GA soccer were really a separate program run by the McNabbs. They have been moderately successful especially considering the locationand local competition. They made a wise choice in not joining the SSA umbrella when Bill Rucker came knocking and managed to get their own affiliation with GA soccer.
|
|
|
Post by alacrity174 on Feb 7, 2017 8:45:14 GMT -5
Is there a particular reason why girls typically commit to schools years in advance? Boys recruiting is usually much more up in the air; many top boys recruits for 2017 haven't signed anywhere. Money, girls soccer offers a lot more money to athletes than boys soccer does. All commits are only verbal until signing day for both boys and girls so value of committing early is dubious.
|
|
|
Post by alacrity174 on Jan 12, 2017 14:00:35 GMT -5
To be fair, these were pretty easy as only half real speed, I would have preferred to see the ones that take into account the revised interpretation of active player, there were some where the 2nd attacker was onside and first attacker was jogging, if he doesn't go towards ball at full speed and 2nd attacker comes through then as an AR you are told to hold the flag unless the 1st attacker touches the ball
|
|
|
Post by alacrity174 on Jan 10, 2017 12:59:41 GMT -5
This is a silly comparison. If anyone of Xavi or Iniesta's technical ability and IQ came through the US's system he would never make it to college without getting a contract somewhere, either in the US or abroad. And any player that shows that kind of technical aptitude will have already stood out on tape and in person to pro scouts. These sorts of exercises are only about adding to the scouting profile of the player, not the only thing they are making judgments from. I know you know that though, which leaves me to believe you are just looking for something to shout about. I'm not looking to "shout" about anything, like you I am just expressing my thoughts on the subject. I would counter that a Xavi or Iniesta would probably have never attained their level of play had they lived here in the US, if they did they probably would have been dismissed at 13 or 14 years of age because they weren't "athletic" enough, not fast enough or not tall enough. We put too much emphasis on "work rate" and athletic ability and not enough premium on technical ability or soccer intelligence. 75-80% of the Region Pool have birthdays in the first 6 months of the year, why do you think that is? What was the real reason for the birth mandate change? It certainly wasn't for a developmental advantage. Having someone that is physically mature because they have an earlier birthday is going to help us on the world stage? They are totally revamping the women's program because the rest of the world has closed the gap on us and they understand that technically our players simply aren't good enough. We probably have the best fitness and exercise science specialists at our disposal here in the US but the days of getting by on effort, team spirit, blue collar work rate, speed, etc simply aren't enough anymore and you see that in our YNT's and not doing well or advancing in major tournaments. The best players at their respective sports are good because they dedicated thousands of hours on their own developing their craft, even if they didn't have "wow" factor athletic ability: take Peyton Manning, Tom Brady, Wayne Gretzky, John Stockton and many others, they certainly weren't athletic specimens but they had mastery of their craft and had a high IQ to go along with it, not to mention the countless hours they invested in their skills outside of practice. That level of ability isn't coached, it's typically the result of the work they did on their own. Our biggest roadblock is cultural....most kids don't go out and play on their own and develop the creativity they need to excel at the top levels in soccer. When I was growing up parents had to drag us inside, now its the opposite parents have to drag their kids out of the house: too much social media, TV, computers, Playstation, etc. We would go to the park and play 3 v 3 for hours until the sun went down, no coaching just using some bookbags for goals and trying new things. Look at the kids in the inner city that play basketball, they literally carry a basketball around everywhere they go, they are always dribbling, working on moves, crossovers, going to play pickup, etc. That's why we typically produce the best basketball players. Now imagine if you went to a local park and saw dozens of soccer kids playing pick up or out there dribbling through cones, emulating moves they see on TV, etc....that more so than coaching, private training or more practices would have the biggest positive benefit in soccer development and having a larger pool of players that can play at the highest levels. Finally something I agree with 100%, all this focus on athleticism is what is killing soccer here in the US. As you said Xavi, Iniesta or even Messi would never have played on a top team here they would have been on a CIII team and likely have lost interest in soccer very early on. Your example of kids playing the game because they love it is also spot on, we should be promoting this, not stopping players playing, there is nothing wrong with a pick up game where the pitch is as big as you need it with coats for goalposts and 15 a side, this is where the small kids learn to beat the bigger kids, where skills are learnt and practiced and where the true love of the game comes in. Back to the original point of what is wrong with a vertical jump, simply put it has nothing to do with soccer, if you are trying to head a ball from a dead stop and just looking to go up, you were in the wrong position to start with and the better player will already have his run up and will probably beat you to the ball anyway.
|
|
|
Post by alacrity174 on Jan 3, 2017 12:54:22 GMT -5
Crystal Dunn has signed with Chelsea ladies of the English Womens Super League, joining Alex Morgan in European soccer. Who will be next and can NWSL survive if the top players keep defecting? www.bbc.com/sport/football/38501063
|
|