|
|
Post by Soccerhouse on Apr 14, 2020 9:27:41 GMT -5
I think it's time to start a new thread revisiting the age mandate -- thread is of course a bit....
|
|
|
|
Post by straightred on Apr 14, 2020 9:32:05 GMT -5
"Even with that (20%) drop"... Your arguments are getting better and better.
The relative drop (from 2013 - 2018) in soccer participation was only matched by tackle football. But Footy is gonna enlighten us all today I'm sure.
|
|
|
|
Post by footyfan on Apr 14, 2020 10:00:05 GMT -5
Enlighten me, please. I guess I'm just dumb. Per this SFIA data set used by Aspen Institute, the popularity of outdoor soccer among kids aged 6-12 in the US has gone down year over year since 2008 (note: closer look at other SFIA data sets shows a one-year jump in 2010). The decrease in participation since the year mandate reverted back to calendar year(Jan 1-Dec 31) in 2016 may have encouraged some kids to leave, but the trend was already there. This is part of a larger concern that kids are quitting almost all sports. In 2008 45% of kids played a sport regularly. By 2018 that dropped to 38%. Current theories are specialization, high costs and negative experiences (e.g. adults abusing referees/umpires; adults pressuring kids to play) Have we heard any of those occurring in youth soccer? Notes on my further reading: -Interesting to me that this data set comes from a sports/fitness trade association, known as Sporting Goods Manufacturing Association(SGMA) until 2012, and not the sports themselves(except tennis and golf). Not saying that's bad, just weird. -Also interesting to see that gains/progress made in baseball and basketball were associated with grass roots efforts by the pro leagues, MLB and NBA. Where is MLS? Additional links that provide some of the insights above: www.aspeninstitute.org/blog-posts/staying-in-the-game-progress-and-challenges-in-youth-sports/www.aspenprojectplay.org/tom-farrey-sfia-data-columnI've stated before my opinion that I don't think either mandate is bad. The original birth year mandate until mid 80s was fine. Shuffling to school year caused a ruckus but from mid/late 80s until 2016, it was fine. Changing back to birth year caused a ruckus but it's fine. The issue has always been the turmoil from the change. 91% of the voters at the 2015 US Soccer AGM approved of the change so whoever they were, you need to convince them or talk directly to USSF. My kids will hopefully overcome larger hurdles in life if we switch back to school year, so if you take your complaint to those responsible parties (hint: they aren't on this message board) I'll be sure not to complain here. |
|
|
|
Post by soccerlegacy on Apr 14, 2020 11:38:24 GMT -5
Enlighten me, please. I guess I'm just dumb. I've stated before my opinion that I don't think either mandate is bad. The original birth year mandate until mid 80s was fine. Shuffling to school year caused a ruckus but from mid/late 80s until 2016, it was fine. Changing back to birth year caused a ruckus but it's fine. The issue has always been the turmoil from the change. 91% of the voters at the 2015 US Soccer AGM approved of the change so whoever they were, you need to convince them or talk directly to USSF. My kids will hopefully overcome larger hurdles in life if we switch back to school year, so if you take your complaint to those responsible parties (hint: they aren't on this message board) I'll be sure not to complain here. This has always confused me. Where was the a need to change it? Who makes up the US Soccer AGM, and why didn't they poll the consumers of the youth sport (i.e. the parents, players) before make a large sweeping change like the age mandate? or even a modification to the change, like rolling it out over years ( grandfathering older teams and starting with only the younger ages). Why was it deafeningly quite when they first made the announcement and there were polls, petitions, and the like... all asking questions and speaking out against it? But, if like you say, everyone was fine with it within the first half, of the first season... then they should have no problems changing it back if they ever decided to,either (again, other that that first half of the first season)... |
|
|
|
Post by atlfutboldad on Apr 14, 2020 12:02:13 GMT -5
Is the AGM in any way connected to the group who picked Cordeiro or his predecessor?
Also, the past 3 springs have not failed to surprise. Exciting times indeed!
|
|
|
|
Post by atlfutboldad on Apr 14, 2020 12:40:24 GMT -5
Some people in the country seem to have *more information*, but people with actual clout aren't willing to come out and say it. Only sort-of hack reporters. Some are saying "its a done deal" and others are saying "will see if they make an announcement". 343coaching.com/podcast/soccer-by-3four3/episode-256-development-academy/IMO this could be the biggest step forward in US Men's soccer in quite some time. Professional academies could be training our national team players, each their own way.
The 2nd path to YNT should be an overhauled version ODP, taken over by USSF in which the MLS/USL players should skip preliminary tryouts. State pool size should be based on population (minimum 18 players).
|
|
|
|
Post by greenmonkey on Apr 14, 2020 15:54:04 GMT -5
IMO this could be the biggest step forward in US Men's soccer in quite some time. Professional academies could be training our national team players, each their own way.
The 2nd path to YNT should be an overhauled version ODP, taken over by USSF in which the MLS/USL players should skip preliminary tryouts. State pool size should be based on population (minimum 18 players).
and ... continue on the same path for USWNT that the ECNL and colleges like UNC and Stanford continue training our national team players each in their own way? |
|
|
|
Post by Soccerhouse on Apr 14, 2020 16:11:35 GMT -5
athletic now reporting its over
|
|
|
|
Post by atlfutboldad on Apr 14, 2020 16:18:39 GMT -5
IMO this could be the biggest step forward in US Men's soccer in quite some time. Professional academies could be training our national team players, each their own way.
The 2nd path to YNT should be an overhauled version ODP, taken over by USSF in which the MLS/USL players should skip preliminary tryouts. State pool size should be based on population (minimum 18 players).
and ... continue on the same path for USWNT that the ECNL and colleges like UNC and Stanford continue training our national team players each in their own way? Yep, girls want to go to UNC and Stanford and South Carolina and USC and UCLA...because they produce USWNT and NWSL players. Hence the colleges hire better coaches if they want to attract better players and win games.
And those schools recruit from ECNL primarily (and from their own ID camps of course...so there's always a pathway to the top schools for non-ECNL players).
The girls pro academy model doesn't need to be our model. Play in college 3-4 years, excel and prove that you're committed to playing soccer. NWSL and USWNT will look at you.
Its OUR pathway.
|
|
|
|
Post by atlfutboldad on Apr 14, 2020 16:24:53 GMT -5
And if Tophat can't get back into ECNL immediately it'll be a rough year for them and a crazy tryout season. But they'll bounce right back once they're back in.
|
|
|
|
Post by atlfutboldad on Apr 14, 2020 16:30:15 GMT -5
Jeez...no wonder they're cutting it, its 1/3 of the freaking development budget. They should DOUBLE or TRIPLE the scouting budget instead.
|
|
|
|
Post by Soccerhouse on Apr 14, 2020 16:35:59 GMT -5
Still don't understand where that 9 million went? financial aid? if so that's not a bad thing.
|
|
|
|
Post by 04gparent on Apr 14, 2020 17:32:51 GMT -5
and ... continue on the same path for USWNT that the ECNL and colleges like UNC and Stanford continue training our national team players each in their own way? Yep, girls want to go to UNC and Stanford and South Carolina and USC and UCLA...because they produce USWNT and NWSL players. Hence the colleges hire better coaches if they want to attract better players and win games.
And those schools recruit from ECNL primarily (and from their own ID camps of course...so there's always a pathway to the top schools for non-ECNL players).
The girls pro academy model doesn't need to be our model. Play in college 3-4 years, excel and prove that you're committed to playing soccer. NWSL and USWNT will look at you.
Its OUR pathway.
(Girls focused) I am all for 1 top league for girls... I agree that USSF should have worked with ECNL from the start. I think that one top league should have some way of doing pro / rel which may happen now... If you were to read the article the author states he doesnt know the girls game that well so his article is primarily regarding boys. The statement that those schools primarily recruit from ECNL isnt factual during the DA era (short era if its going away). One top league will benefit everyone clubs, parents, colleges, etc. Also if you think 6 clubs in Atlanta having ECNL will stop club hopping you are a little naive. Before DA the quality of college signings for Concorde and Tophat were higher than their peers. Things can change of course. The landscape in Atlanta via mergers has changed so it will be interesting to see what shakes out. Lastly, I doubt there will be tryouts in June like normal. I doubt the fall season will start in August / September. There may not even be club soccer this fall. No vaccine no mass gatherings and thus no soccer. I hope I am wrong. |
|
|
|
Post by soccermaxx72 on Apr 14, 2020 18:29:11 GMT -5
Will now be interesting to see how many current DA programs knew this was happening?
I’m assuming UFA was in the know.
|
|
|
|
Post by atlfutboldad on Apr 14, 2020 19:29:07 GMT -5
Christian Lavers said he doesn't believe in pro/rel, called it "too destabilizing". I agree.
|
|
|
|
Post by soccergurl on Apr 15, 2020 8:47:08 GMT -5
Will now be interesting to see how many current DA programs knew this was happening? I’m assuming UFA was in the know. you wrong, ufa no think they no what happening with da they scared so they run |
|
|
|
Post by soccermaxx72 on Apr 15, 2020 8:59:44 GMT -5
Will now be interesting to see how many current DA programs knew this was happening? I’m assuming UFA was in the know. you wrong, ufa no think they no what happening with da they scared so they run Me no think you right but me not know any more than you, lol |
|
