|
|
Post by OTPSoccer on Jun 18, 2019 21:53:20 GMT -5
The criticism of pay-to-play is loud and clear. But what I don't understand is why pay-to-play hasn't impacted the women's game? But the US men struggle and people point to pay-to-play as a contributing factor.
I'm not advocating for pay-to-play, trust me. It's just the current reality of our youth soccer environment, and while I'd like it to change, it just won't happen during the limited window of my child's youth career.
But our US Women thrive despite pay-to-play. And people point to pay-to-play as the reason the US men lag Europe / South America. Curious to hear other thoughts on the topic.
|
|
|
|
Post by atlfutboldad on Jun 18, 2019 22:26:58 GMT -5
But isn't DA, which is the path to the USMNT, subsidized based on need?
|
|
|
|
Post by rifle on Jun 19, 2019 6:02:44 GMT -5
Many of the rest of the world’s female players live in misogynistic societies (under soccer governance that is the same). It stands to reason that the competition will be catching up now that more women are actually allowed to compete. Regardless, pay to play.... I’m not an actuary, but I suspect that when 80% of potential athletes are left outside the fence of pay-to-play soccer, some good players are being excluded. The existing system MIGHT be able to find the best of the wealthy, but even that is questionable when the system is built for profit first. If you’ve never seen it, please consider the to be required reading: blog.3four3.com/2015/09/14/pay-to-play-and-the-link-to-promotion-relegation/We need a revolution. |
|
|
|
Post by footballer on Jun 19, 2019 6:05:26 GMT -5
Pay to Play is one of several issues hindering true growth of US soccer landscape.
Solving that issue is definitely a great starting point, and will help the growth of the sport tremendously on the youth side, however, solving pay to play issue by itself will not automatically guarantee usmnt a mention in the conversation of Great Soccer Nations.
Just look at the players in Mls academy, it's free for them, does not mean they wont get eating for breakfast, lunch and dinner by most la Liga, Liga mx or premier league teams.
Pay to Play is a clear issue and should definitely be on the table when discussing the way forward.
|
|
|
|
Post by rocko1989 on Jun 19, 2019 7:28:12 GMT -5
I am curious what solutions are out there to eliminate the Pay to Play model. I don't think "make it free" is a viable answer. Somebody somewhere has to pay for fields, coaches, officials, uniforms, insurance....
|
|
|
|
Post by soccerfutbolfam on Jun 19, 2019 7:50:37 GMT -5
Leaving Atl United out of this because the costs differ and aren't because of club fees or travel, but are different because some families move, kids live with other families and even if you live local, you have gas. So, while the 'cost' is different, there is still a cost and I don't have a kid playing there.
For the others - fees range from the various alphabet soup leagues. And really, we can't quantify or qualify which is best for moving kids on to college because a few are new and may be a way of bucking the old system. I don't know. I've been involved with soccer for about 6 years and it has changed every single year.
As a parent we hear -
take your child to a coach you like (when you may not even end up with that coach)
let your kid play with their friends (well, what if they aren't selected for the same team)
If you want your kid or your kid wants to play in college, they need to play at highest level possible.
I think the last one is the one in discussion here.
The irony of the WNT and MNT is not lost on me.
WNT definitely has more success than men.
AND girls are more likely to get a full ride in college.
So, the pay-off for pay to play seems more likely for a girl
MNT - well, not really showing much
AND boys - unless they are at AU are not going to get a full ride no matter how good they are
So, WHY are boys chasing that golden nugget rather than not.
Maybe to stay at a higher level of play - when from ECNL and SCCL perspective I have seen some really good teams at both levels and when I've watched some ECNL teams play SCCL teams the final score came down to some luck, maybe skill and a couple of questionable calls for the ref.
Now, the discussion about referees may need a different thread, so I won't chase that rabbit hole here.
Let's stick to cost. I did a little cost analysis and granted - it is LOW. But, a start. I took an average (I think) across the club costs (I know a couple of clubs add on to the club costs but I didn't add that here) and just added in a little for travel costs. many will pay more and some a little less. So, it's safe to say, my analysis is low and you could probably add $1-2k more for DA and ECNL...
**********************************************
DA - $6400
30 games
6 weekends of travel
1 Cali Tournament
Club Fees 1900
Travel (6*500) = 3000
Cali Tournament (airplane, hotel, food) = 1500
**********************************************
ECNL- 4800
22 games
5 weekends of travel
ENPL Play off
Club Fees 1600
Travel 2500
1 ENPL Play off (or major tournament 700
**********************************************
SCCL - 3500
28 games
3 weekends of travel
1 Tournament
Club Fees 1500
Travel 1500
Tournament 500
**********************************************
So, let's take the extreme low end - SCCL:$3500
If your kid plays U12-U18 in SCCL - your overall costs (not including gas to practice or uniforms) would be $24,500
**********************************************
For a boy - that should wake all of us up and be a gut punch. Not sure the pay off is there.
For a girl - is there if she gets a full ride
**********************************************
So, we all need to stop.
We need to stop listening to that coach offering a golden ticket.
We need to stop running around to find that 'best place/club' and start making it right where our kid likes playing with the kids they like playing with.
We need to stop the politics and vying for being the club and coach pet.
We need to stop talking down about other players and parents. This discussion that happens at practice, at games and at various training facilities is just absolutely disgusting.
We need to stop complaining about who gets what when and where
We need to stop berating the kids on the field.
**********************************************
We need to start letting the kids play.
We need to start letting them have fun.
**********************************************
When it comes to cost - at the end of the day, when your child walks off the field for the very last time - and it will come before you know it and for reasons you don't know - every parent needs to be prepared to ask themselves - was it really worth the minutes. The minutes going and coming. The minutes preparing and watching
and what matters most - is what your kid thought of you the whole time. That is one thing they are going to remember. What is your child going to think of what you value? Did you value their position, their play time or what you are getting out of it?
Or did you really really see them for who they are - a kid loving the beautiful game.
This game that teaches so much about life because it can be so incredibly unfair at times.
|
|
|
|
Post by justwatching on Jun 19, 2019 8:10:35 GMT -5
I think fixing pay for play allows some people access to the sport in an organized setting with coaches, academies, etc. that would not have access otherwise. I would suspect that would incrementally improve the US Soccer competitiveness. But I don't think just because it is free will make us soccer powerhouses. In my mind one of the larger problems is the lack of a "soccer culture" in the US. Other countries and cultures grow up loving soccer. Their families follow their home team (many more professional leagues/levels to follow however how many people in Atlanta/Georgia follow ATL UTD 2, Georgia Revs, ATL Silverbacks, Peachtree City MOBA, South Georgia Tormenta, Dalton Red Wolves, ...) for generations (from grandfather, to father, to child, etc.). That love for the game generates an atmosphere that is organic and not forced through training and practice, etc. It is more similar to basketball and football in the US. When we were kids every boy in our part of town would just show up and we played basketball at the park for hours or football in a big field until it got dark. I am sure to some extent this still exists today for football and basketball but not so much for soccer. There were no cell phones or email, we just knew to show up and someone would be there to play. The other thing outside of playing is loving the game enough to sit and watch for hours. Most American sports enthusiasts watch sports like football and basketball for hours every weekend during the season and lot attend local games whether they have a kid on the team or not but how much soccer are people consuming here?
I think creating a culture of loving soccer is another very important step in the US competing. We tell kids all the time, the time you are with the team practicing is not enough to make you great yet other than getting a personal trainer there are no other places that a kid can just go to play and learn to love the game. We can't expect greatness but not provide the tools to get there (close fields during summer and winter, lock goals to keep people off of fields, etc.). I think Atlanta has done a pretty good job of trying to create a more soccer loving culture with ATL United and the Marta soccer fields but I think that has to be replicated a thousand times over across the country and will take many years to show effectiveness.
Sorry for the long reply but wanted to share my thoughts. Getting rid of pay for play is excellent to help provide equity for access and would be a big win but don't think that puts the US anywhere near a tipping point for success in the world wide game.
|
|
|
|
Post by soccerdad76 on Jun 19, 2019 9:40:39 GMT -5
Most will agree pay to play stinks, I don’t think we need to beat that to death. What is the solution? At the moment it is don’t play organized club soccer, unless you are a special player and get recruited to AU. Clubs with senior teams in Europe cover a very small percentage of kids playing soccer, what do the majority of non-Messi/Mia kids there do?
I know this is over simplified, but most things in life cost money. Except for love... that’s free.
|
|
|
|
Post by atlfutboldad on Jun 19, 2019 10:23:58 GMT -5
My $0.02:
The only way to mostly eliminate pay to play...grow the soccer culture.
Soccer culture grows => more demand for soccer and more kids playing pickup/street soccer
More demand for soccer => more butts in seats at pro games
More butts in seats => more pro/semi-pro teams and leagues
More pro/am teams => more $$ to pay for academies
More street soccer => More natural talents are discovered by the academies
It all grows from there. In Europe, every town has a club or 2. That means a pro team that some of the fervent townsfolk go and pay to watch, which pays player and coach salaries. Then the coaches have time to devote to coaching the academy teams "free of charge" to develop their subsequent year's teams. If a player shines and gets picked up by a bigger club, the club gets a payday (more money to pay players and to run the academy).
The US probably has more clubs and more kids playing club soccer per capita than many countries in the WC, definitely on the women's side. What we have as the C/III leagues in GYSA are likely recreational teams in the rest of the world, not $1K a season. But overall our soccer culture sucks. It can be difficult to find a good flat place to go play pickup, you often get run off by the parks.
|
|
|
|
Post by mistergrinch on Jun 19, 2019 11:27:18 GMT -5
I've said this before, and it bears repeating. Pay to play isn't the issue for the MNT (and somewhat MLS).. it's the pay FOR play.
On the men's side, if you're a kid and if you're a good athlete and don't have a burning desire to live abroad.. you play football, baseball, basketball, hockey, tennis, golf, bowling, or any number of sports that pay better professionally than soccer in the US. When soccer is actually a rainbow with a potential pot of gold at the end, we will get the better athletes.
Of course, it's a bit of chicken/egg. We need the carrot to get the players, but until the quality of play (and popularity.. tickets and merchandise) improves to support it, well....
|
|
|
|
Post by newposter on Jun 19, 2019 11:36:32 GMT -5
Kids need to have options. DA limits those options to just DA. Location of teams, limits to when, where, how much soccer a kid plays are all detriments. Look at AAU in the other sports ie basketball, track, travel baseball and softball and the like. They don't limit play. DA does on the mens side. I think this needs to be looked at. It isn't working. The USWNT has been developed in the ECNL age.
|
|
|
|
Post by atlfutboldad on Jun 19, 2019 14:05:55 GMT -5
The USWNT has been developed in the ECNL age.
To be honest, primarily ODP. ECNL has been expanding year after year, but most of the USWNT predate the current 100-club ECNL. ECNL is more flexible and I've heard many ECNL (girls) parents say that they or their kid doesn't want to do DA. ECNL wasn't designed to discover the best players and put them together on the best teams. Big clubs wanted their first team to have elite high-level play and have more college exposure, that is all ECNL is about. There is always ways to get exposure, even at small clubs. But you won't get much NT exposure at smaller clubs.
DA is basically the same model as ECNL, with a completely different purpose/goal (feeding the USNT's). It's not a good model UNLESS they are providing scholarship/housing for the kids from outside the large cities. DA =/= the pro academies of Europe. DA should really start at U15 (same for ECNL travel), but its in USSF's interest to see that players are getting the best training possible prior to this, assuming you want the best possible players coming into U15. That's the part that's missing for low-income kids and remote kids. Plus players will grow/develop/light-come-on at different ages, your U13 superstar may be mediocre at U16. Does it make sense that they are kept and dropped at coach's whims when the training needs to be at a consistently high level to see the cream finally rise to the top.
|
|
|
|
Post by rifle on Jun 19, 2019 15:39:57 GMT -5
I referee rec soccer and club soccer. The level is clearly not the same. But guess what.. there are standouts and hopeless players in BOTH.
90% of youth club soccer is a for profit business, period.
How many parents who have kids that are NOT playing beyond youth/HS would... in hindsight... have been fine with their kid(s) playing on a rec team with a coach or two that had some soccer knowledge?
|
|
|
|
Post by rifle on Jun 19, 2019 15:46:55 GMT -5
I am curious what solutions are out there to eliminate the Pay to Play model. I don't think "make it free" is a viable answer. Somebody somewhere has to pay for fields, coaches, officials, uniforms, insurance.... Interesting. Rec soccer has all those same costs, except coaching (and directors, etc) for $200/season. Is camaraderie and “the elite team experience” worth a 15X (and up) premium for the 95% who don’t play in college or beyond? Edit: FWIW my kids don’t play anymore. Older one is off to college this fall, played ten years of club. The younger one is still a referee with me, but doesn’t play. My hindsight view isn’t negative. I never expected a college scholarship. The kids friendships from soccer are STRONG. My best friends are “soccer parents” that I met on the fields. We can afford the fees without major budget disruption. But overall it’s still kinda sour because of all the effort that was necessary outside the lines. Ugly, closed system. Pay to play is hindering the game in USA not helping. |
|
