|
|
Post by Futsal Gawdess on Apr 11, 2020 15:07:30 GMT -5
I personally would prefer more than 2 coaches of varying different backgrounds and pathway to coaching. Gives you a broader experience and access to a myriad of training. They could also double as scouts, recruiters, etc...
|
|
|
|
Post by Soccerhouse on Apr 11, 2020 18:45:17 GMT -5
Freaking vicious if they are terminating the DA given they are still tweeting from their account
|
|
|
|
Post by cleansheet on Apr 11, 2020 18:58:34 GMT -5
Freaking vicious if they are terminating the DA given they are still tweeting from their account Every league and club is still training virtually so they don’t have to give refunds. |
|
|
|
Post by atlfutboldad on Apr 11, 2020 22:59:20 GMT -5
At this point I'm simply not buying it... Its possible that DA may have been about to shut down, but after a leak they had to backtrack. So they could be in the process of setting up the replacement league (while washing their hands of the league management shenanigans). Meanwhile the clubs that are part may be munging because the USSF name leads all the credence to DA, without it, its just another league.
|
|
|
|
Post by atlfutboldad on Apr 11, 2020 23:14:47 GMT -5
Also, MLS and USL Championship academy clubs should probably be a part of the same league (possibly USL League One academy teams also). It would be incentive for clubs to actually start to pay to create more semi-pro/pro teams and paid academies. It appears EPL academy teams play in a league with EFL Championship/League One teams. We should build our structure using theirs as a model. www.manutd.com/en/matches/under-18s/2019-20/u18-premierleague-north/league-table |
|
|
|
Post by Futsal Gawdess on Apr 12, 2020 0:03:18 GMT -5
I concur since they are both Pro Leagues. In the UK, the various pro academies all fall under one of 3/4 categories. The different categories, allow for cheaper transfer fees within the Academy ranks and for the record, they keep a version of the Home-grown Rule we so love in the MLS 🙄🙄 As you would imagine the obvious powerhouses who choose to have an academy reside in Category 1, however, so do smaller clubs like Reading and Brighton. The FA gives these clubs real money to develop a pipeline for future players but don't make it mandatory. With all that said, we should refrain from trying to emulate or compare ourselves to other countries. At the end of the day, we need a system that is uniquely American and can adapt to what WE need and what the landscape calls for. Not 100% sure what that is, but we know money isn't the issue. Not based on what the USSF was spending on DA annually and the fact that IMG Academy charges over $70k+ per year (a little petty I know)...
|
|
|
|
Post by Soccerhouse on Apr 12, 2020 9:40:17 GMT -5
I've bounced back n forth.
Back in the GA United and Concorde only days - DA was special and didn't disrupt the landscape of youth soccer.
DA expansion down to u12, age group mandates, and DA club expansion really hurt the product.
Club complain all the time about not making money on DA, that is a good thing!!
I'm worried they will replace it with something "new" that costs more and players get less.. you have some coaches giving it all for these DA teams (yes, coaches give their all for non DA teams as well) -- i.e. professional coaches etc.
One very very nice thing about DA was you don't feel like your in the youth soccer club rat race. 25 tourneys a year (exaggeration), the you scratch my back and i'll scratch yours etc isn't there.
DA should not go away.
DA needs to be re-tooled.
1. Remove u13s
2. Make the u14s a pre -DA league -
3. DA starts at u15, and single year age groups up to the older age group which is 2 years, u15, u16, u17, u19.
4. If a club want to participate a club must also work to minimize cost and offer some sort of skin in the game financially.
5. Travel for more than 5 hours for a single game is not permitted (unless extreme circumstances is necessary).
6. Uniforms are always free
7. Every team has at least 2 coaches - head and assistant coach
8. training regimen remains the same
9. Substitutions - re-entry at half for all ages except u19s.
10. A roster can not exceed 20 players
11. High school soccer -- don't want to go here yet....
I expect MLS to create their own league and invite "others" to join.
given the current landscape of the MLS and first team salaries, spending 3-4 million a year on a youth program doesn't make much sense. Its great for a community, but they are businesses.
will be very very interesting.
|
|
|
|
Post by straightred on Apr 12, 2020 11:13:00 GMT -5
DA should not go away. DA needs to be re-tooled.... I think your current take and suggestions make a lot of sense. However, let's recap the DA's and USSF's stated missions: The DA's mission: to provide education, resources, and support to impact everyday club environments in order to develop world-class players. USSF's mission statement: to make soccer, in all its forms, the preeminent sport in the United States and to continue the development of soccer at all recreational and competitive levels. Ten plus years on the boys side and 3+ years on the girls side and I think you could argue the Development Academy system is not advancing the mission of the DA, and it may be working against the USSF mission. You mentioned the timing of the DA's release of the educational material about prioritization as odd given the rumor. I'd suggest this is the stuff USSF should be producing and publicizing, all the time, and it would reach a larger audience if they weren't simultaneously trying to run a national league. |
|
|
|
Post by atv on Apr 12, 2020 12:10:35 GMT -5
If there is a reorganization of US Soccer and end of DA I wouldn’t mind reverting back to school class ages versus birth year. At least for everyone except MLS academies.
|
|
|
|
Post by Soccerhouse on Apr 12, 2020 12:15:26 GMT -5
We all know the feds have failed miserably - nothing they have done has worked: from youth soccer to coaching education to the senior mens and womens teams. The problem is the soccer community doesn't have patience and truly allow a player to develop. Why develop an 04 for player this year for example when you can bring in a new 03 player from some other club or state. That is the method for most. the term development should be stripped from the english dictionary when it comes to soccer. every system has its flaws : as Futsal Gawdess mentions - coping europe isn't the solution, forcing one style of play isn't the solution. (maybe one day we get the doublepass review results of the DA, cost a few million I'm sure) allow teams from smaller clubs a chance to compete as well -- can't just have a system for the mega club. |
|
|
|
Post by Futsal Gawdess on Apr 12, 2020 12:53:04 GMT -5
One of the beautiful things about Social Media is you have an express lane to knowing how your customers,constituents feel and think. Through tweets and posts, USSF knows the angst they are fueling within youth soccer around the country, by not responding, yet - Crickets. I think this should once and for all give us a great insight as to the disconnect they have with their stakeholders...
|
|
|
|
Post by atlfutboldad on Apr 12, 2020 13:09:45 GMT -5
Not necessarily copying Europe, but a basic amalgamation of Europe, South America, Mexico and Asia...from an academy leagues perspective. Find out what works and implement the best ideas.
But no one should be mandating training rules (only limits) for the clubs. What works for one club may not exactly work for another. Learning from top clubs around the would really help the US clubs.
The goal as a player should be to get promoted to a better club (USL then MLS). Up to the family if they want to make the jump. Eventually moving to free participation.
|
|
|
|
Post by soccernotfootball on Apr 12, 2020 13:42:47 GMT -5
Will be worse Pyramid for 98% and then a Pyramid for MLS clubs - neither is good for youth soccer. Another league will be created for all the DA teams - could see a new US club league forming if boys ecnl isn’t the option. ECNL couldn't absorb all the DA clubs/teams - not w/o having a significantly longer timeline to work out the mechanics. That's not an option, IMO. |
|
|
|
Post by soccernotfootball on Apr 12, 2020 13:47:45 GMT -5
If there is a reorganization of US Soccer and end of DA I wouldn’t mind reverting back to school class ages versus birth year. At least for everyone except MLS academies. Could we all stop with the school age / birth year nonsense. The players are going into their 4th year playing birth year. Changing at this point would be just as (if not more) disruptive to players/teams/clubs - and everyone complained about that to begin with. The players adjusted almost immediately and had definitely adjusted by the end of the 1st half-season of the change. The only ones still lamenting are the parents. Enough already. |
|
|
|
Post by rifle on Apr 12, 2020 13:52:07 GMT -5
Lot of unexpected free time for clubs right now. I think it’s reasonable to think ECNL can absorb every DA club that wants in.
Might as well kill off USYS right now too and let US Club become the de facto federation for the youth game.
|
|
|
|
Post by rifle on Apr 12, 2020 13:56:02 GMT -5
If there is a reorganization of US Soccer and end of DA I wouldn’t mind reverting back to school class ages versus birth year. At least for everyone except MLS academies. Could we all stop with the school age / birth year nonsense. The players are going into their 4th year playing birth year. Changing at this point would be just as (if not more) disruptive to players/teams/clubs - and everyone complained about that to begin with. The players adjusted almost immediately and had definitely adjusted by the end of the 1st half-season of the change. The only ones still lamenting are the parents. Enough already. Spoken like somebody whose kid was born between January and August... for whom nothing changed except the teammates. The mandate was a force of destruction in youth soccer. The numbers don’t lie. Removing seasons of eligibility for many players.. or basically removing their team at 9th or 12th grade. Reverting would increase participation. |
|
|
|
Post by soccernotfootball on Apr 12, 2020 14:08:53 GMT -5
January - August... 8 months out of 12. You're talking about the majority of players out there. Regardless of how destructive it was, it's been almost 4 years. You're willing to be just as destructive to current players & teams because you thought school year was better? That speaks volumes...
|
|
|
|
Post by atlfutboldad on Apr 12, 2020 14:10:17 GMT -5
With regard to age year...mine would go down a year...and go from being a bubble player in 06 age group to very likely dominating every game against other kids in her grade level.
This past fall I watched her compete when she turned 13 vs where she was last spring when most of her teammates were 13. Spring 2019 would have been very different season had she been in fall 2019 state.
I'm hopeful she gets to play down next 2021 spring in ECNL (her 8th grade year) when most of her 06 teammates are playing HS ball. I'm already resigned to her playing ECNL composite as a U19 her senior year.
The old age system was more flexible. It was PURE GARBAGE that DA created the bio-banding b#llsh#t only for their league when they saw the situation the age mandate created. Remember...you can ALWAYS PLAY UP, but only in DA and trap year ECNL...can you PLAY DOWN.
|
|
|
|
Post by Soccerhouse on Apr 12, 2020 14:12:10 GMT -5
I thought it was the perfect opportunity for US Club soccer to say you know what, current age groups work just fine -- we are an academic model -- we are staying with our age groups.
The 8th grade year sucks for the younger half -- nothing positive about it
|
|
|
|
Post by atlfutboldad on Apr 12, 2020 14:15:18 GMT -5
I thought it was the perfect opportunity for US Club soccer to say you know what, current age groups work just fine -- we are an academic model -- we are staying with our age groups. The 8th grade year sucks for the younger half -- nothing positive about it Birth year mandate ONLY MATTERS for pro and international players (so maybe the top 1%). Academic year applies to the other 99% of club players. |
|
|
|
Post by soccernotfootball on Apr 12, 2020 14:17:10 GMT -5
My own player lost a year of Academy. Oh well, sucked at the time but everyone adjusted. There will always be players that are older/more mature or younger/ess mature in school year or birth year. Again - it's going into the 4th year. Stop FFS. It's done.
|
|
|
|
Post by rifle on Apr 12, 2020 14:24:15 GMT -5
January - August... 8 months out of 12. You're talking about the majority of players out there. Regardless of how destructive it was, it's been almost 4 years. You're willing to be just as destructive to current players & teams because you thought school year was better? That speaks volumes... Running kids out of the game they love(d) for no benefit whatsoever. Despite the time passing.. Still a mistake. Volumes indeed. |
|
|
|
Post by atv on Apr 12, 2020 14:28:10 GMT -5
If there is a reorganization of US Soccer and end of DA I wouldn’t mind reverting back to school class ages versus birth year. At least for everyone except MLS academies. Could we all stop with the school age / birth year nonsense. The players are going into their 4th year playing birth year. Changing at this point would be just as (if not more) disruptive to players/teams/clubs - and everyone complained about that to begin with. The players adjusted almost immediately and had definitely adjusted by the end of the 1st half-season of the change. The only ones still lamenting are the parents. Enough already. No sir. Would align better with high school and college recruiting. It was frankly a very bad decision to make this sweeping change for the very small percentage of players competing internationally. |
|
|
|
Post by soccernotfootball on Apr 12, 2020 14:28:21 GMT -5
January - August... 8 months out of 12. You're talking about the majority of players out there. Regardless of how destructive it was, it's been almost 4 years. You're willing to be just as destructive to current players & teams because you thought school year was better? That speaks volumes... Running kids out of the game they love(d) for no benefit whatsoever. Despite the time passing.. Still a mistake. Volumes indeed. For crying out loud, give me a break. If little Johnny or Susie quit playing the "game they love" because their school mate was no longer on the same team, did they even "LOVE" it to begin with? Give it a rest. |
|
|
|
Post by atlfutboldad on Apr 12, 2020 14:29:18 GMT -5
It won't stop when you have seniors left without teams their senior year. That's the cutoff. 8th grade and senior year are the issues. It's more than just people winging about the lost year. It's real and there's nids being left behind and quitting. Adding flexibility for would solve the problem...very, very simply. en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Relative_age_effectThe 2nd chart SPEAKS VOLUMES. |
|
|
|
Post by rifle on Apr 12, 2020 14:32:11 GMT -5
My own player lost a year of Academy. Oh well, sucked at the time but everyone adjusted. There will always be players that are older/more mature or younger/ess mature in school year or birth year. Again - it's going into the 4th year. Stop FFS. It's done. To clarify... I don’t look at this as a matter of one group of birth months having a physical advantage. You can’t change that by sliding the calendar. The “relative age effect” cited by USSF as justification is 100% grade A horseshiit. It’s about KIDS not having a team to play with because the majority of their classmates have gone to HS/College. I guess they should just go home and kick a ball against a wall... screw them. Right? |
|
|
|
Post by soccernotfootball on Apr 12, 2020 14:37:56 GMT -5
Anecdotally... I have friends with kids playing in age groups up and down from Academy up to HS. Again, this birth year is going into it's 4th year and I've yet to hear of a player that didn't have a team because all of their classmates left for HS or College.
I'm calling BS on that.
|
|
|
|
Post by soccernotfootball on Apr 12, 2020 14:43:44 GMT -5
With regard to age year...mine would go down a year...and go from being a bubble player in 06 age group to very likely dominating every game against other kids in her grade level. This past fall I watched her compete when she turned 13 vs where she was last spring when most of her teammates were 13. Spring 2019 would have been very different season had she been in fall 2019 state. I'm hopeful she gets to play down next 2021 spring in ECNL (her 8th grade year) when most of her 06 teammates are playing HS ball. I'm already resigned to her playing ECNL composite as a U19 her senior year. The old age system was more flexible. It was PURE GARBAGE that DA created the bio-banding b#llsh#t only for their league when they saw the situation the age mandate created. Remember...you can ALWAYS PLAY UP, but only in DA and trap year ECNL...can you PLAY DOWN. So you're for school year so your kid can dominate? Rather than blowing up everyone with changing again (a change you'd like so your player benefits), how about consider the fact that your kid is 06 and still maturing. Think of this way - by the time she's a HS senior and matured, she'll have the benefit of playing against more physically mature "older" players and be better for it. |
|
|
|
Post by atv on Apr 12, 2020 15:10:09 GMT -5
Like it or not, if they terminate DA, reverting back to school year age groups will be in the discussion at some point. There are college coaches who prefer this from a recruiting standpoint.
|
|
|
|
Post by footyfan on Apr 12, 2020 15:17:29 GMT -5
When y'all played club ball in the mid 80s, how did the switch to school year mandate affect you?
I was playing up a year so I went from being real young to being kind of young. I don't need anyone to explain to me how tough it was to be younger than the rest. My club also didnt have a 2nd teams so it was make the travel team, play rec or change clubs. The biggest issue for me was changing teams for the new school year mandate.
|
|
