United Soccer League Launches “USL YOUTH,” New Platform to Elevate the Youth Player Experience

[soccerpalace]

Looks like USL is looking to expand into Northern California. Maybe a good alternative for existing EA Boys and DPL Girls clubs.



TAMPA, Fla. (January 9, 2024) – The United Soccer League today announced the launch of USL YOUTH, a new brand and platform designed to elevate the youth player experience by inspiring, educating, and engaging the American “soccer generation.” The USL YOUTH brand will replace the Super Y League brand, aligning the USL’s youth soccer initiatives with the full USL ecosystem and completing the youth-to-pro pathway.

“USL YOUTH is an exciting evolution of our youth brand, building on the legacy of one of the longest-running youth competitions in the country and adding new energy to our youth soccer strategy,” said Joel Nash, USL Senior Vice President of Youth & Pre-Professional. “We want to meet players, coaches, and families where they are in their soccer journey and help them reach whatever level they aspire to. By connecting our youth soccer platform with the full USL ecosystem, we hope to give our members the opportunity to be part of a larger movement and help our professional and pre-professional clubs build their fanbases.”

The USL YOUTH platform focuses on building and engaging a vibrant youth soccer community connected to the USL ecosystem through events, content, and experiences.

As with the Super Y League, the centerpiece of the USL YOUTH platform remains a high-level national competition that complements our country’s existing youth soccer infrastructure and provides clubs with opportunities to face different opponents than they do in their regular leagues. The competition culminates with the USL Youth Finals, a tentpole event in the youth soccer calendar that gives players a unique “major tournament” experience and a chance to win a national championship.

Nearly 500 teams and more than 8,000 players participated in Super Y League in 2023. With the introduction of USL YOUTH, those numbers will rise in the coming years as the USL executes a strategic expansion plan in targeted areas of the country.

“We have received tremendous interest from clubs asking us to add new geographical regions to our competition, filling in the gaps in their calendar and complementing their existing leagues,” Nash said. “It will take time, but we are committed to growing the platform over the next few years and providing players, coaches, and clubs with a truly differentiated experience.”

Details of future expansion are expected to be announced in the first half of 2024.

Beyond the on-field competition, additional aspects of the new USL YOUTH platform include exclusive content, consumer products, and digital experiences, including new social media handles (@USL_Youth). Ahead of the 2024 competition kickoff, USL YOUTH will launch #ThisIsWhy, an original digital content series celebrating the passion of the American soccer generation and the journey from youth to pro.

“We want to inspire, educate, and engage the youth soccer community by telling stories that resonate beyond the competition on the field,” Nash said. “Through storytelling, like a player’s journey from the youth ranks to the USL Championship, or tips from a coach in the USL Super League, we will have a truly holistic impact on the game and the people involved at all levels. This is why we do it: to help players, coaches, and clubs develop talent and make memories that last a lifetime.”

United Soccer League Launches “USL YOUTH,” New Platform to Elevate the Youth Player Experience - USL Youth

Platform includes Super Y League rebrand, targeted expansion strategy, and new #ThisIsWhy storytelling initiative TAMPA, Fla. (January 9, 2024) – The United Soccer League today announced the launch of USL […]

www.usl-youth.com

 

[pmgrant72]

Wow! Just about the last thing that I can think that will "elevate" the game in Northern California. Should be like everywhere else in the world: local leagues with promotion/relegation with the strongest teams playing regionally and then nationally.

 

[Grace T.]

Wow! Just about the last thing that I can think that will "elevate" the game in Northern California. Should be like everywhere else in the world: local leagues with promotion/relegation with the strongest teams playing regionally and then nationally.

The rest of the world divides everyone into the academy and rec tracks. The academy players don't have to worry about getting fired based on making a mistake...they are measured on whether they hit their individual benchmarks and even the English academies ruthlessly teach possession at the youngest ages (what the mic game where TFA beat manchester united because manchester always played it out of the back). For the rec players, pro/rel works because the stakes aren't really very high. In the US we've tied soccer into college admissions and on the boys side have created a cannon fodder league to go up against the academies. Pro/rel doesn't work in that system: it distorts development by forcing coaches to take short cuts since soccer is a game of mistakes.

 

[whatithink]

The rest of the world divides everyone into the academy and rec tracks. The academy players don't have to worry about getting fired based on making a mistake...they are measured on whether they hit their individual benchmarks and even the English academies ruthlessly teach possession at the youngest ages (what the mic game where TFA beat manchester united because manchester always played it out of the back). For the rec players, pro/rel works because the stakes aren't really very high. In the US we've tied soccer into college admissions and on the boys side have created a cannon fodder league to go up against the academies. Pro/rel doesn't work in that system: it distorts development by forcing coaches to take short cuts since soccer is a game of mistakes.

The extended MLS Next league is really a funnel though to the true academies. The latter use them to pick players missed or late developers. That makes sense, assuming (!) that the MLS Next teams (non-academy) are picking the rest of the best and truly developing them, i.e. not about results etc. I'd expect that the academies also scout the ECNL esp. the top teams or conferences therein for talent.

The USL is no different to the MLS, i.e. its a farm league.

That said, the USL does seem to be trying to create a deep soccer league system with multiple tiers, more akin to what you see in other countries.

 

[pmgrant72]

The rest of the world divides everyone into the academy and rec tracks. The academy players don't have to worry about getting fired based on making a mistake...they are measured on whether they hit their individual benchmarks and even the English academies ruthlessly teach possession at the youngest ages (what the mic game where TFA beat manchester united because manchester always played it out of the back). For the rec players, pro/rel works because the stakes aren't really very high. In the US we've tied soccer into college admissions and on the boys side have created a cannon fodder league to go up against the academies. Pro/rel doesn't work in that system: it distorts development by forcing coaches to take short cuts since soccer is a game of mistakes.

Do you believe that an integrated pro/rel would actually make youth soccer worse? If that were true, our current system with innumerable "elite pathways" would be working great and churning out numerous world-class players. What percentage of DPL players end up playing college (D1 or otherwise), anyways? Based on the teams that play in DPL in NorCal, it would be very close to zero. If this is a competitor to DPL, do we need it?

 

[Grace T.]

Do you believe that an integrated pro/rel would actually make youth soccer worse? If that were true, our current system with innumerable "elite pathways" would be working great and churning out numerous world-class players. What percentage of DPL players end up playing college (D1 or otherwise), anyways? Based on the teams that play in DPL in NorCal, it would be very close to zero. If this is a competitor to DPL, do we need it?

Yes, we know it would be worse because of what happened to Coast. If coast were working it would have won out against the competitors. As I always say you can have your soccer developmental, competitive or accessible: pick 2. As long as it's used as a college sorting mechanism (even if it's only a small percentage that goes onto play college, the waves still ripple through the system), you can't have a pro/rel system that works....the stakes are just too high. To get there, you'd need to either: a) rework soccer so it's not a game that is dependent on someone making a mistake to score, or b) take college out of the system.

BTW, it's a fallacy to assume that therefore the current alphabet soup is the right one. Ideally, we would have a well integrated system with a clear path hierarchy where players are sorted by ability. But we can't have that as long as we don't have an integrated command structure and so long as other needs (such as fodder for academy teams and financial incentives for certain clubs) prevail.

 

[Larzby]

The rest of the world divides everyone into the academy and rec tracks. The academy players don't have to worry about getting fired based on making a mistake...they are measured on whether they hit their individual benchmarks and even the English academies ruthlessly teach possession at the youngest ages (what the mic game where TFA beat manchester united because manchester always played it out of the back). For the rec players, pro/rel works because the stakes aren't really very high. In the US we've tied soccer into college admissions and on the boys side have created a cannon fodder league to go up against the academies. Pro/rel doesn't work in that system: it distorts development by forcing coaches to take short cuts since soccer is a game of mistakes.

So.....in the infamous game where a weaker Swedish women's team beat the heavily-favored US women's team they did the much-maligned "park the bus" strategy and Hope Solo called them a "bunch of cowards." I didn't watch the game, but I heard the commentary afterward. The response was that people said that it is common for a much weaker team to employ that strategy, while the better team plays "good" soccer. So if this "ugly" soccer strategy allows a weaker team to beat a stronger team, doesn't that mean it's the better strategy? Is the point of the game to win or not? Are there any other sports where teams deliberately play a strategy that is known to make them susceptible to losing games against weaker teams? I have been flummoxed by this ----> though I only started watching/playing soccer 5 years ago so.....I have no idea, really.
I wonder whether maybe only a handful (or two handfuls) of teams at the very, VERY top of each age group should be playing "good" soccer and everyone else doing whatever it takes to win. If you learn how to "park the bus" REALLY, REALLY well, you can beat the USWNT even though they are way "better" than you. That sounds like the best strategy to me.
I often hear coaches claim that their teams are losing because they are "focusing on development over winning." That's probably true a lot of the time, but it would also be a really convenient excuse if a parent didn't know better.

 

[Grace T.]

So.....in the infamous game where a weaker Swedish women's team beat the heavily-favored US women's team they did the much-maligned "park the bus" strategy and Hope Solo called them a "bunch of cowards." I didn't watch the game, but I heard the commentary afterward. The response was that people said that it is common for a much weaker team to employ that strategy, while the better team plays "good" soccer. So if this "ugly" soccer strategy allows a weaker team to beat a stronger team, doesn't that mean it's the better strategy? Is the point of the game to win or not? Are there any other sports where teams deliberately play a strategy that is known to make them susceptible to losing games against weaker teams? I have been flummoxed by this ----> though I only started watching/playing soccer 5 years ago so.....I have no idea, really.
I wonder whether maybe only a handful (or two handfuls) of teams at the very, VERY top of each age group should be playing "good" soccer and everyone else doing whatever it takes to win. If you learn how to "park the bus" REALLY, REALLY well, you can beat the USWNT even though they are way "better" than you. That sounds like the best strategy to me.
I often hear coaches claim that their teams are losing because they are "focusing on development over winning." That's probably true a lot of the time, but it would also be a really convenient excuse if a parent didn't know better.

It’s literally what happened to the Manchester team when they played tfa. Tfa booted everything and pounced when they made a mistake. Manchester gk touched the ball as much as any field player. Tfa isn’t dummies. They teach their kids possession too. So why?

Because the Manchester team is a pro academy. Their goal is to develop top players for sale and not to win. Winning isn’t that important to them (it’s not unimportant…it’s just not the priority). Fact is it takes a lot longer to learn possession than counter or direct. Yeah the latter takes skill too but not as much as possession. And to learn the kids will make mistake. Only the game can teach that so the mistakes need to be made on the field. Add to that soccer is a low scoring game where goals (especially once the gk is old enough to cover the goal) come from mistakes.

Ps in my experience it’s usually the opposite…parents don’t understand what they aren’t booting it

 

[Karlton Athletic]

I wonder whether maybe only a handful (or two handfuls) of teams at the very, VERY top of each age group should be playing "good" soccer and everyone else doing whatever it takes to win.

Our lowly Tier 1 team parked the bus against an MLS Next team at the last tournament we played and beat them 1-0. There’s nothing unskillful about it: our boys had to be faultless in their defending for the entire game and were. It was the best they’d ever played even though the MLS Next team probably had 75% pocession.

Then, back in Tier 1 league play the next weekend, we went back to trying “good” procession based soccer.

There is no “right way” to play soccer.

 

[Grace T.]

Our lowly Tier 1 team parked the bus against an MLS Next team at the last tournament we played and beat them 1-0. There’s nothing unskillful about it: our boys had to be faultless in their defending for the entire game and were. It was the best they’d ever played even though the MLS Next team probably had 75% pocession.

Then, back in Tier 1 league play the next weekend, we went back to trying “good” procession based soccer.

There is no “right way” to play soccer.ly

Agree but it sort of misses the point. If you want to build future pros or even college players, winning shouldn't matter at all. Depending on the age, a parking the bus strategy is entirely the wrong thing to do if you want players to be able to play any style of game when they get older. It's better to take the loss like Manchester did and have the players learn through the experience, considering each game is a precious learning experience and there are few of them. There isn't a "right way" to play soccer, but there certainly is to teach it, and all the European academies including the English ones (and even ours) are unanimous in this. By doing that, your coach deprived the players of trying to use a possession strategy to hold onto the lead against better competition. If it's just rec and you don't care about the future, sure have at it and have fun: winning is fun and a memorable experience for the kids and teaches them great lessons about grit.

Part of the problem is it depends what we want from the system. The one we have tries to build future pros, college players, and rec players looking for trophies. It can't be all things to all people and do them all well.

 

[Karlton Athletic]

Depending on the age, a parking the bus strategy is entirely the wrong thing to do if you want players to be able to play any style of game when they get older.

I’d disagree with you there. If you only ever play possession football, that’s when you’re depriving them of other styles. Parking the bus against a better team is hard - one mistake and you’re done - so keeping an MLS Next team at arms length improved them as players, defensively, and helped them impose their possession game against other teams subsequently.

I’d also argue that in the professional world, we’re seeing the era of pure possession giving way slightly to a more direct style and the return of old school #9s. That may filter down to our level at some point.

 

[whatithink]

I’d disagree with you there. If you only ever play possession football, that’s when you’re depriving them of other styles. Parking the bus against a better team is hard - one mistake and you’re done - so keeping an MLS Next team at arms length improved them as players, defensively, and helped them impose their possession game against other teams subsequently.

I’d also argue that in the professional world, we’re seeing the era of pure possession giving way slightly to a more direct style and the return of old school #9s. That may filter down to our level at some point.

There's lots of styles. People tend to use certain ones as the example, e.g. they'll say look at Barca or Real or Man City, but their styles are not for everyone. Not so long ago people thought Barca were unbeatable with their exemplary players and style until up rolled Bayern in the Champions League, pressed them relentlessly and hit them with fast counters when they turned over possession and beat them 7-0 over two legs.

Generally, imho, the best teams press relentlessly when they don't have the ball. Then they focus on their strengths, which could be possession and patience based, say Man City, or which could be counter at pace (Brentford are a good example of that).

There's no one style or ideal style. At the top level, its about results so its about playing to your strengths and countering the oppositions' strengths. The same holds true at every level. You should look to have players who are technically good/competent and as importantly who are tactically good/competent. You have to be able to change based on the opposition and that is absolutely about developing players versus ones who can only do possession (which would make them one dimensional).

 

[whatithink]

Agree but it sort of misses the point. If you want to build future pros or even college players, winning shouldn't matter at all. Depending on the age, a parking the bus strategy is entirely the wrong thing to do if you want players to be able to play any style of game when they get older. It's better to take the loss like Manchester did and have the players learn through the experience, considering each game is a precious learning experience and there are few of them. There isn't a "right way" to play soccer, but there certainly is to teach it, and all the European academies including the English ones (and even ours) are unanimous in this. By doing that, your coach deprived the players of trying to use a possession strategy to hold onto the lead against better competition. If it's just rec and you don't care about the future, sure have at it and have fun: winning is fun and a memorable experience for the kids and teaches them great lessons about grit.

Part of the problem is it depends what we want from the system. The one we have tries to build future pros, college players, and rec players looking for trophies. It can't be all things to all people and do them all well.

Surely the Manchester coaches were delighted with the park the bus approach as that is exactly what will happen at the top level when playing for top teams. How their players coped and how they came up with solutions (or not) told them a lot about their players.

 

[watfly]

Parking the bus is more of a strategy than a style, but regardless I believe that focusing on teaching a style is misguided. Remember when "tiki taka" was all the rage and believed to be unbeatable. That mostly was a function of the quality players employing it. I still come back to touch and decision making (vision), without that styles, tactics and strategies are irrelevant. I think we need to focus more on the concept of "best odds" based soccer, i.e. creating numerical advantages and making the highest percentage decisions. You need to take what your given instead of trying to force a style. I'm a proponent of the idea that your keeper is your first attacker and your striker is your first defender (maybe that's Total Football?). I believe coaches way overcomplicate soccer with tactics and strategies, at least at the youth level.

 

[Grace T.]

I’d disagree with you there. If you only ever play possession football, that’s when you’re depriving them of other styles. Parking the bus against a better team is hard - one mistake and you’re done - so keeping an MLS Next team at arms length improved them as players, defensively, and helped them impose their possession game against other teams subsequently.

I’d also argue that in the professional world, we’re seeing the era of pure possession giving way slightly to a more direct style and the return of old school #9s. That may filter down to our level at some point.

I agree as to the professionals. That's why the ages are important. At the younger ages, though, at least on the attack, it needs to be ruthlessly possession based because that's the only way they'll learn it. Once they know how to do that, it opens up everything else up. From possession you can employ direct, counter, low block, mid block, high block, opportunity, but you can't go the other way into possession. It's the approach taken by all the European academies, and to a lesser extent, the MLS academies. Even teams like Manchester United which later on may not employ a purely possession based style. At the younger ages it's an easy test: is the GK involved in the goalkick and are they putting it on the second touch into an area where it can be possessed or where it can be challenged.

 

[soccerpalace]

Participating in a leagues does not guarantee superior player development; however, they do set certain standards and may offer a higher level of competition for players. The primary purpose of this post is not to advocate for the USL. Instead, it's to explore whether it would be beneficial for existing clubs that are not part of MLS Next or ECNL to consolidate their efforts into a single league, particularly if they already have an established relationship with the USL. Creating new leagues is not the solution. Similarly, it's not practical for clubs to be spread across different leagues.

I also watched the TFA and ManUtd highlights on youtube. Watch Here. Quite an exciting result for those players and families.

EA League​	DPL League​	Girls Academy​	USL C / 1 / 2​	USL W​	USL Academy Boys​
Solano Surf​	Solano Surf​	Almaden FC​	Oakland Roots (USLC)​	Academica SC (USLW) ​	Central Valley Fuego FC (USLA)​
Albion SC Silicon Valley​	Albion SC Silicon Valley​	Clovis Crossfire​	Sacramento Republic (USLC)​	California Storm (USLW)​	David Legacy / San Juan (USLA)​
Diablo Valley Wolves​	Diablo Valley Wolves​	Lamorinda SC​	Monterey Bay F.C. (USLC)​	Marin FC Siren (USLW)​	Marin FC (USLA)​
Elk Grove Soccer​	Elk Grove Soccer​	Los Gatos United​	Central Valley Fuego FC (USL1)​	Pleasanton RAGE (USLW)​	Newark 1974 FC (USLA)​
Walnut Creek Surf​	Walnut Creek Surf​	Sacramento United​	Academica SC (USL2) ​	Oakland Soul (USLW)​	NOVA Soccer Academy (USLA)​
Union Sacramento FC​	Union Sacramento FC​	San Francisco Elite​	Davis Legacy SC (USL2) ​	The Olympic CLUB (USLW)​	Sacramento Republic FC (USLA)​
Briseno Soccer​	Association FC​	Santa Clara Sporting​	Marin FC Legends (USL2) ​	San Francisco Glens (USL2)​	San Francisco Glens (USLA)​
Albion SC Hawaii​	Livermore Fusion​	Silicon Valley SA​	Monterey Bay FC 2 (USL2) ​	Stockton Cargo (USLW)​	​
Bay Area Surf​	Monterey Surf​	West Coast Soccer Club​	Project 51O (USL2) ​	​	​
TSP F.C.​	River Islands Surf​	​	San Francisco City FC (USL2)​		​
​	Albion SC Central Valley​	​	San Francisco Glen SC (USL2)​	​	​
			Almaden FC (USL2 2024)​

 

[sockma]

I agree as to the professionals. That's why the ages are important. At the younger ages, though, at least on the attack, it needs to be ruthlessly possession based because that's the only way they'll learn it. Once they know how to do that, it opens up everything else up. From possession you can employ direct, counter, low block, mid block, high block, opportunity, but you can't go the other way into possession. It's the approach taken by all the European academies, and to a lesser extent, the MLS academies. Even teams like Manchester United which later on may not employ a purely possession based style. At the younger ages it's an easy test: is the GK involved in the goalkick and are they putting it on the second touch into an area where it can be possessed or where it can be challenged.

Brain washing the kids at a young age to ignore advantage up top is not going to be good for them. Learning how to scan and make appropriate decisions quickly based on the available options is what we should be teaching our young players. Play possession if you don't have attacking numbers yet but if you recognize a good 1v1 match up for your forward, pass it quickly and risk a little. Field vision by quick and smart thinkers with great technical skills, strength and speed - that's what we need.

Lots of coaches forcing players to make bad decisions because it's "not possession" is bad for the player brain training. If a player sees a 2v1 situation up in the attacking top, they should pass it up even if it's riskier and a harder pass than playing to an open player 10-15 feet away.

 

[Grace T.]

Brain washing the kids at a young age to ignore advantage up top is not going to be good for them. Learning how to scan and make appropriate decisions quickly based on the available options is what we should be teaching our young players. Play possession if you don't have attacking numbers yet but if you recognize a good 1v1 match up for your forward, pass it quickly and risk a little. Field vision by quick and smart thinkers with great technical skills, strength and speed - that's what we need.

Lots of coaches forcing players to make bad decisions because it's "not possession" is bad for the player brain training. If a player sees a 2v1 situation up in the attacking top, they should pass it up even if it's riskier and a harder pass than playing to an open player 10-15 feet away.

Again the age is critical. That's why many national leagues have an integrated curriculum for their academies. Besides, at the U13 ages, the cognitive development isn't there for most players to make complicated risk/reward calculations...nor do they have the skill yet to send a lobbed ball on target. These calculations don't really get introduced into goalkeepers until around the age of 13 (my son took a tackett class on this when he was 12 and he couldn't understand most of it...his fellow 12 year old boys were asleep at the tables and Jeff discouraged them from going much younger)...by the look of the slovenly backpasses at the boys non-academy MLS Next and EA levels, most won't get it until around age 17, and the coaches that breakdown film this way are very few and far between (out of the GK coaches I know I think Jeff is the only one that does it, and for an extra charge and that's just 1 game a pop....team coaches outside the MLS Next level, somewhat rare). It's not "brain washing" (you always do s like this): it's teaching the kids the technical and tactical strategy they need to use a possession game, to build up their brain speed so they can make more complicated choices later on, and to not give them an easy exit or allow them to give into panic, because at that age if presented with responsibility or no responsibility they'll always pick no responsibility.

BTB, one of my kids recent teams was a fairly high latino club. His GK coach came out to see why my kid was always taking so many shots on the 1v1. He looked at the team playing and noted the defenders were afraid of the ball. They didn't want the responsibility for making a mistake, were terrified of receiving it, and when they got it they panicked and sent it up into a bad situation to get rid of it or messed up the short because they panicked, leading to the 1v1. Shouldn't have happened at a middle age school teams...at the youngers if you give them an out they'll always take the easier way, at least the boys will.

Neither the MLS nor the European academies stick to the strict possession when they get older. The MLS Academies have something called the US possession style which looks for those opportunistic plays and which uses the high press. Look, you can sit there and try to tell me Europe is doing it wrong, but considering where they are and where we are, that's just the height of American presumption particularly since even the boot ball English academies are drinking the kool aid. The 2 big ones that aren't on board is the US (because academies start later than Europe) and Mexico (who play the physical Mexican style)...neither paradigms of success.

 

[chipmonk]

It’s literally what happened to the Manchester team when they played tfa. Tfa booted everything and pounced when they made a mistake. Manchester gk touched the ball as much as any field player. Tfa isn’t dummies. They teach their kids possession too. So why?

Because the Manchester team is a pro academy. Their goal is to develop top players for sale and not to win. Winning isn’t that important to them (it’s not unimportant…it’s just not the priority). Fact is it takes a lot longer to learn possession than counter or direct. Yeah the latter takes skill too but not as much as possession. And to learn the kids will make mistake. Only the game can teach that so the mistakes need to be made on the field. Add to that soccer is a low scoring game where goals (especially once the gk is old enough to cover the goal) come from mistakes.

Ps in my experience it’s usually the opposite…parents don’t understand what they aren’t booting it

I had to go watch this because I've never seen TFA play that way. I'm no defender of how youth soccer is done in the US, but that is a terrible comparison and characterization of the TFA vs. MU game. TFA was unlucky not to win 4-0. You can watch the full thing here:

TFA dominated the game with their press in the middle 3rd, not by parking the bus and playing on the counter. I'm not sure MU had a single pass completed in the attacking third. Both team's center backs largely played long balls. Both teams rarely played the ball backwards in any area of the pitch. Yes each of the 4 times the TFA keeper got the ball, he played it long, but I don't think there was a single goal kick for TFA to start a build from the back that way.

It was largely a chaotic game where both teams tried to go forward quickly but TFA was much better at connecting passes in the midfield and again, the TFA midfield press dominant, so they had way fewer opportunities to try and build out of the back.

You seem to imply that MU keeper touched the ball as much as he did because he was being used as part of the build out. He did a decent job distributing to his backline when gathered the ball, but don't think the ball played was played to him intentionally a single time, there just so many shots, goal kicks and over hit through/direct balls from TFA that he had to touch the ball more than most of the MU field players.

Pro/Rel is also not what led to Coast's downfall

 

[Grace T.]

I had to go watch this because I've never seen TFA play that way. I'm no defender of how youth soccer is done in the US, but that is a terrible comparison and characterization of the TFA vs. MU game. TFA was unlucky not to win 4-0. You can watch the full thing here:

TFA dominated the game with their press in the middle 3rd, not by parking the bus and playing on the counter. I'm not sure MU had a single pass completed in the attacking third. Both team's center backs largely played long balls. Both teams rarely played the ball backwards in any area of the pitch. Yes each of the 4 times the TFA keeper got the ball, he played it long, but I don't think there was a single goal kick for TFA to start a build from the back that way.

It was largely a chaotic game where both teams tried to go forward quickly but TFA was much better at connecting passes in the midfield and again, the TFA midfield press dominant, so they had way fewer opportunities to try and build out of the back.

You seem to imply that MU keeper touched the ball as much as he did because he was being used as part of the build out. He did a decent job distributing to his backline when gathered the ball, but don't think the ball played was played to him intentionally a single time, there just so many shots, goal kicks and over hit through/direct balls from TFA that he had to touch the ball more than most of the MU field players.

Pro/Rel is also not what led to Coast's downfall

I had to go watch this because I've never seen TFA play that way. I'm no defender of how youth soccer is done in the US, but that is a terrible comparison and characterization of the TFA vs. MU game. TFA was unlucky not to win 4-0. You can watch the full thing here:

TFA dominated the game with their press in the middle 3rd, not by parking the bus and playing on the counter. I'm not sure MU had a single pass completed in the attacking third. Both team's center backs largely played long balls. Both teams rarely played the ball backwards in any area of the pitch. Yes each of the 4 times the TFA keeper got the ball, he played it long, but I don't think there was a single goal kick for TFA to start a build from the back that way.

It was largely a chaotic game where both teams tried to go forward quickly but TFA was much better at connecting passes in the midfield and again, the TFA midfield press dominant, so they had way fewer opportunities to try and build out of the back.

You seem to imply that MU keeper touched the ball as much as he did because he was being used as part of the build out. He did a decent job distributing to his backline when gathered the ball, but don't think the ball played was played to him intentionally a single time, there just so many shots, goal kicks and over hit through/direct balls from TFA that he had to touch the ball more than most of the MU field players.

Pro/Rel is also not what led to Coast's downfall

Apologies for the confusion. The reference was to the reference are there teams that deliberately pursue a strategy that causes them to lose. You are quite correct to characterize the TFA strategy as a high press and counter, not park the bus. I agree Manchester was lucky the score was not more lopsided. But there I think your characterization ends.

I'm not going to go back and watch the entire thing so let's just take the first ten minutes. You can see in the back and in the mid that manchester is forming the classic diamond shape. They are trying to form the diamond and to avoid the difficulty result from the press by passing within the diamond. There are literally 4 players forming a diamond off of every possession. It's basic 101 for how they teach possession play in England. They aren't very good at it, which means they keep losing the ball, which results in the TFA counter. The TFA counter is always ruthless, always with precision, but usually they don't look for a teammate....most of the play in the first 10 minutes is an attempt at a through ball (to have the TFA player run onto it) or over. The GK rolls or backpasses it short 4 times, punts once. There is a Manchester free kick where the player, who has a big leg, could have lobbed it into the attacking third (which they NEVER make it into the first ten minutes) but he passes it short to his player who returns it right back to him. TFA is pressing and countering and then lobbing into space. Manchester is trying to form their diamonds and retain possession in the mid and in the first ten minutes are never able to break up. The styles are night and day. Why? Are you telling me that Manchester thinks that what they are doing will produce a win,, especially against an American team? In what universe? So why the insistence on the diamond?