US SOCCER

Well, just today:

"Hope Solo calls US soccer a 'rich white-kid sport"
http://www.foxnews.com/sports/2018/06/28/hope-solo-calls-us-soccer-rich-white-kid-sport.html

One reason why the U.S. men’s national soccer team failed to qualify for the 2018 FIFA World Cup in Russia is that soccer in America is a “rich white-kid sport,” former U.S. women's team goalie Hope Solo said Wednesday.

Solo, a two-time Olympic gold medalist, was speaking at the Hashtag Sports conference in New York City. She said the sport in the U.S. is too expensive for Latino, African-American and rural kids to play -- adding that if she was a kid today her family wouldn’t be able to afford to help her advance in the game.

“We have alienated the Hispanic communities. We have alienated our black communities. We have alienated the underrepresented communities, even rural communities," Solo said, according to Sporting News. "So soccer in America right now is a rich white-kid sport.”

Although we have been very fortunate to be on mostly sponsored teams we always make sure the kids and I give back helping the organizations with volunteering, out reach activities, giving back, donating to the "friends of" associated charity arms. With that about 75% of my sons teammates over the years didn't have the means to pay club soccer fees, travel costs which can be $500-600+ for a weekend trip to play Seattle & Vancouver, etc. and without sponsorship they would have not be able to play or be his teammates.



 

ToonArmy

SILVER ELITE
Someone has to pay for the tracksuits and English accents they don't come cheap not in so cal the land of the mega club where you can at 7 years old join a D team in flight 4 for 3,000 a year and eventually ECNL for 6,000 a year. Or, ill use my hometown of Santa Ana as an example, play rec Mexican league for ref rees, go to Godinez hs win cif and state championships and go unnoticed into the working world and keep playing sunday leagues for the love of the game
 
Well, just today:

"Hope Solo calls US soccer a 'rich white-kid sport"
http://www.foxnews.com/sports/2018/06/28/hope-solo-calls-us-soccer-rich-white-kid-sport.html

One reason why the U.S. men’s national soccer team failed to qualify for the 2018 FIFA World Cup in Russia is that soccer in America is a “rich white-kid sport,” former U.S. women's team goalie Hope Solo said Wednesday.

Solo, a two-time Olympic gold medalist, was speaking at the Hashtag Sports conference in New York City. She said the sport in the U.S. is too expensive for Latino, African-American and rural kids to play -- adding that if she was a kid today her family wouldn’t be able to afford to help her advance in the game.

“We have alienated the Hispanic communities. We have alienated our black communities. We have alienated the underrepresented communities, even rural communities," Solo said, according to Sporting News. "So soccer in America right now is a rich white-kid sport.”

Although we have been very fortunate to be on mostly sponsored teams we always make sure the kids and I give back helping the organizations with volunteering, out reach activities, giving back, donating to the "friends of" associated charity arms. With that about 75% of my sons teammates over the years didn't have the means to pay club soccer fees, travel costs which can be $500-600+ for a weekend trip to play Seattle & Vancouver, etc. and without sponsorship they would have not be able to play or be his teammates.


Are we supposed to feel sorry for the Hispanic community or the USA?
 

Messi>CR7

SILVER ELITE
Great piece from Di Maria.

P2P is an easy scapegoat for people who want to grab headlines or run for USSF president. I don't know much about youth soccer in Mexico, but I assume they don't pay $3K a year for club soccer. There is obviously no lack of passion, yet Mexico historically doesn't fare much better than US in international competition. We're all here debating why US did not qualify for World Cup, but the sad thing is the CONCACAF teams that US couldn't beat in qualifying will end up 2-1-6 (W-D-L) in the World Cup. We really have a long long way to go.

I strongly believe culture has a lot more to do than anything else, and having a top notch local professional league is a must. I remember growing up in the 80s watching Lakers-Celtics, and all I wanted to do was playing basketball all day. I just don't see the same level of passion for soccer compared to other sports. I consider myself an avid soccer fan and can probably name the 22 starters on Barca and Real, but honestly and sadly I can't name more than three players from LAFC.
 
First, let me say that I am not a fan of pay to play and wish it didn't exist. However, people tend to use this as a crutch for what is wrong with soccer, but in reality, I don't think it is the problem. I have been around this game for a long time, playing, coaching and as a parent. I do not recall one situation I have been a part of in which a truly talented player was denied a chance to play on a team because they couldn't afford it. There are so many things that we need to fix in our system just to make the US competitive on the world stage, but pay to play isn't at the top.

Ask yourselves these questions. If we were to stop charging kids to play on top level teams, is there an immediate improvement? The bottom line is that youth soccer and academies have to be funded. In Europe, they are funded by people who purchase tickets to first team matches, buy concessions at first team matches and buy merchandise in the fan shop - the fans are the ones that are essentially "paying for the youth to play."

The only difference here is the fact that the non-MLS Academy teams do not have match day revenue and merchandise revenue to generate enough money to fund an academy. Instead of thousands of fans funding the academy, there are hundreds of parents that pick up the slack.

As stated before, I wish there was a way to get rid of pay to play, but I have yet to see a viable solution brought to the table. The most immediate thing that can be done is for our stupid Federation to get out of the way and let these youth clubs that develop and send players to Europe to start earning the payments that every other club in the world is entitled to.

Many will say that these clubs don't deserve these payments because they have already charged players to participate, and I somewhat agree with that notion. However, why can't a club use these funds to first pay back the parents of that kid and then put the rest to the further development of the club. That further development could be reduced fees, additional coaching, better fields, etc.

It is not an easy situation, but pay to play is not the main issue holding back our players and keeping our NT from competing on the world stage. Italy and Holland don't have pay to play at the highest level of youth soccer and they experienced the same failure as we did.
 

MWN

PREMIER
@Messi>CR7 and @texanincali,

What each of you wrote I agree with. But you also need to consider that in Europe/Latin America, etc., clubs are financially incentivized to "invest" in development players and are reimbursed/encouraged to move these players up to the higher levels. The FIFA Article 19 Training and Solidarity payments provide a decent source of revenue and in some cases a windfall to the smaller local clubs. Wen Germany’s Bastian Schweinsteiger moved from Bayern Munich to Manchester United in 2015, the village club he played for 17 years earlier, at ages 12 and 13, received $42,000. The failure of the Federation to adopt Article 19 RSTP simply makes pay-to-play the only option.

That said, I think 90% of the problem with World Cup qualifying has nothing to do with the youth system, rather, we have no top level (on an international basis) professional league. As long as we pull players to the National Team from the MLS, a league with teams that would be (2nd or 3rd level) in most countries, it will be hard. The good news, however, is we are getting more and more of our better talent out of the MLS and into the European leagues. Drawing from these players will be the difference.
 
First, let me say that I am not a fan of pay to play and wish it didn't exist. However, people tend to use this as a crutch for what is wrong with soccer, but in reality, I don't think it is the problem. I have been around this game for a long time, playing, coaching and as a parent. I do not recall one situation I have been a part of in which a truly talented player was denied a chance to play on a team because they couldn't afford it. There are so many things that we need to fix in our system just to make the US competitive on the world stage, but pay to play isn't at the top.

Ask yourselves these questions. If we were to stop charging kids to play on top level teams, is there an immediate improvement? The bottom line is that youth soccer and academies have to be funded. In Europe, they are funded by people who purchase tickets to first team matches, buy concessions at first team matches and buy merchandise in the fan shop - the fans are the ones that are essentially "paying for the youth to play."

The only difference here is the fact that the non-MLS Academy teams do not have match day revenue and merchandise revenue to generate enough money to fund an academy. Instead of thousands of fans funding the academy, there are hundreds of parents that pick up the slack.

As stated before, I wish there was a way to get rid of pay to play, but I have yet to see a viable solution brought to the table. The most immediate thing that can be done is for our stupid Federation to get out of the way and let these youth clubs that develop and send players to Europe to start earning the payments that every other club in the world is entitled to.

Many will say that these clubs don't deserve these payments because they have already charged players to participate, and I somewhat agree with that notion. However, why can't a club use these funds to first pay back the parents of that kid and then put the rest to the further development of the club. That further development could be reduced fees, additional coaching, better fields, etc.

It is not an easy situation, but pay to play is not the main issue holding back our players and keeping our NT from competing on the world stage. Italy and Holland don't have pay to play at the highest level of youth soccer and they experienced the same failure as we did.
What pisses me off the most is the whole "rich white kid" bullshit is that my white kid isn't rich, maybe rich compared to poor kids that may or may not be in this country legally.
That is not my/our problem, everyone can afford rec.
I wonder why these super soccer countries that don't have pay to play don't produce hundreds of Messy, Ronaldo or Neymar types, they only have 1 great player per team usually, if that.
Maybe Germany should adopt pay to play?
 
@Messi>CR7 and @texanincali,

What each of you wrote I agree with. But you also need to consider that in Europe/Latin America, etc., clubs are financially incentivized to "invest" in development players and are reimbursed/encouraged to move these players up to the higher levels. The FIFA Article 19 Training and Solidarity payments provide a decent source of revenue and in some cases a windfall to the smaller local clubs. Wen Germany’s Bastian Schweinsteiger moved from Bayern Munich to Manchester United in 2015, the village club he played for 17 years earlier, at ages 12 and 13, received $42,000. The failure of the Federation to adopt Article 19 RSTP simply makes pay-to-play the only option.

That said, I think 90% of the problem with World Cup qualifying has nothing to do with the youth system, rather, we have no top level (on an international basis) professional league. As long as we pull players to the National Team from the MLS, a league with teams that would be (2nd or 3rd level) in most countries, it will be hard. The good news, however, is we are getting more and more of our better talent out of the MLS and into the European leagues. Drawing from these players will be the difference.
Pretty much exactly what I said was he biggest issue. Adopting training and solidarity compensation will not rid ourselves of pay to play - but it should eliminate it at some of the higher levels.

I am convinced that the non-enforcement of this FIFA requirement has nothing to do with collective bargaining with the Frazier case, but everything to do with MLS clubs and owners admitting MLS will always be second choice for truly talented American youths.

They don’t play the US kids anyways - what’s the issue. I have heard rumors that there are some MLS clubs that will join the Crossfire, Sockers, Texans complaint/lawsuit, but haven’t seen any confirmation.
 
Pretty much exactly what I said was he biggest issue. Adopting training and solidarity compensation will not rid ourselves of pay to play - but it should eliminate it at some of the higher levels.

I am convinced that the non-enforcement of this FIFA requirement has nothing to do with collective bargaining with the Frazier case, but everything to do with MLS clubs and owners admitting MLS will always be second choice for truly talented American youths.

They don’t play the US kids anyways - what’s the issue. I have heard rumors that there are some MLS clubs that will join the Crossfire, Sockers, Texans complaint/lawsuit, but haven’t seen any confirmation.
Rumors that MLS teams will act against their own financial interests? Tell us more.
 

jpeter

GOLD
Pay to play is a problem, a big one that goes along with the whole entitlement mindset in youth sports.

Those in favor also don't want regulation & promotion either another problem.

If we don't change we won't keep up and will continue to miss the Olympics the World Cup and not showing well internationally.

A mayrid of closed leagues with no real soccer pyramid, without a way to advance within a pay to play system that don't reward players or teams on performance merits but does inrich the establishment is the state of youth soccer currently.

Earn what you get used to be American way, now we have a entitlement system created that has showed not to work well time & time again, time to change. Pay to play hasn't produce world class players yet for the us men's by now so it may never do so.
 
Rumors that MLS teams will act against their own financial interests? Tell us more.
That's what you took from that? Genius.

It's all about financial interest. Why are the European Academies free? Is it because the clubs have a financial incentive (benefit) to produce players? Is it because they have big hearts and want to help to kids out and give them something to do in their free time? Why is a MLS Academy and a non-MLS Academy any different?

If anyone needs to tell you more, that's an issue.
 
Pay to play is a problem, a big one that goes along with the whole entitlement mindset in youth sports.

Those in favor also don't want regulation & promotion either another problem.

If we don't change we won't keep up and will continue to miss the Olympics the World Cup and not showing well internationally.

A mayrid of closed leagues with no real soccer pyramid, without a way to advance within a pay to play system that don't reward players or teams on performance merits but does inrich the establishment is the state of youth soccer currently.

Earn what you get used to be American way, now we have a entitlement system created that has showed not to work well time & time again, time to change. Pay to play hasn't produce world class players yet for the us men's by now so it may never do so.
Pay to play will probably always be around. But why does it have to be so expensive?
$250 nike/adidas uniforms?
$650 EZ Ups
$100 benches
$750+ tournament fees
$14,000 for a coach to run a team? Plus "administrative" costs for DOC and other club members
Private training at $50+ an hour?
$112 for a referee team to run a 70 minute game?
"Big" tournaments in Las Vegas, Dallas and Del Mar (with $200+ hotel fees)
FWR playoffs in Honolulu?
Showcase events that cater to college scouts with free food, cigar bars and golf cart transportation
Edit: and $400 to get a “D” license to coach.

Aside from the coach and the referee - NONE of this stuff really helps to make a world class player. And there are some great coaches out there who will do it for a lot less.
 
Last edited:
That's what you took from that? Genius.

It's all about financial interest. Why are the European Academies free? Is it because the clubs have a financial incentive (benefit) to produce players? Is it because they have big hearts and want to help to kids out and give them something to do in their free time? Why is a MLS Academy and a non-MLS Academy any different?

If anyone needs to tell you more, that's an issue.
You said " I have heard rumors that there are some MLS clubs that will join the Crossfire, Sockers, Texans complaint/lawsuit, but haven’t seen any confirmation." Why would the MLS clubs do that?
 
That's what you took from that? Genius.

It's all about financial interest. Why are the European Academies free? Is it because the clubs have a financial incentive (benefit) to produce players? Is it because they have big hearts and want to help to kids out and give them something to do in their free time? Why is a MLS Academy and a non-MLS Academy any different?

If anyone needs to tell you more, that's an issue.
E-Genious is a well known, lying troll, pay no attention.
 
First, let me say that I am not a fan of pay to play and wish it didn't exist. However, people tend to use this as a crutch for what is wrong with soccer, but in reality, I don't think it is the problem. I have been around this game for a long time, playing, coaching and as a parent. I do not recall one situation I have been a part of in which a truly talented player was denied a chance to play on a team because they couldn't afford it. There are so many things that we need to fix in our system just to make the US competitive on the world stage, but pay to play isn't at the top.

Ask yourselves these questions. If we were to stop charging kids to play on top level teams, is there an immediate improvement? The bottom line is that youth soccer and academies have to be funded. In Europe, they are funded by people who purchase tickets to first team matches, buy concessions at first team matches and buy merchandise in the fan shop - the fans are the ones that are essentially "paying for the youth to play."

The only difference here is the fact that the non-MLS Academy teams do not have match day revenue and merchandise revenue to generate enough money to fund an academy. Instead of thousands of fans funding the academy, there are hundreds of parents that pick up the slack.

As stated before, I wish there was a way to get rid of pay to play, but I have yet to see a viable solution brought to the table. The most immediate thing that can be done is for our stupid Federation to get out of the way and let these youth clubs that develop and send players to Europe to start earning the payments that every other club in the world is entitled to.

Many will say that these clubs don't deserve these payments because they have already charged players to participate, and I somewhat agree with that notion. However, why can't a club use these funds to first pay back the parents of that kid and then put the rest to the further development of the club. That further development could be reduced fees, additional coaching, better fields, etc.

It is not an easy situation, but pay to play is not the main issue holding back our players and keeping our NT from competing on the world stage. Italy and Holland don't have pay to play at the highest level of youth soccer and they experienced the same failure as we did.
We know many kids who have been denied a chance to play club sports; parents that can't drive them around because they are working or don't even have transportation, can't afford to pay anytime beyond a nominal or registration fee. AYSO and Latin League are bigger draws partly because they are affordable and local. You would be surprised on how many players and parents don't even know what US soccer is doing or even heard of the Ussda, ECNL, or the other "elite" leagues.

Yes if the top levels teams had reduced fees or no fees there would be better competition even for roster spaces, when you have to earn a spot and continue to do so to say get playing time that brings out players and ups the competition level at least it has on the teams my kids have played for.

Getting rid of pay to play is not going to happen most likely but what we can do is go to merit based open system where players and teams earn the right to move on to the next level based on performances not politics or what you can afford to pay or not. Promotion and Regulation is the way of the world, but in the US we want or demand entitlements instead. Can't handle open competition or open markets, must protect something from somebody....

What is a club in the US anyway? a DBA franchise that charges customer's to wear a uniform? In Eupore, SA, or Mexico clubs are much different and they focus on players not creating more franchise branches, tourneys, or what new league they can be part of.

Hawthorne didn't have Space X when this was his hood. Much rougher than it is now. It's changed a lot in the past 10 years. Thanks to SapceX and Amazon and that new Rams stadium, folks who bought homes there when it was gang territory in the 90's could sell and buy a mansion in most other states.
Not splitting hairs but Northrop and later N/Grumman was there before Space x, Hawthorne was as little rougher around the edges but it was never a slum or anything really rough, been going to the Hawthorne airport since I was a kid so I have first hand knowledge. I'm from LA and we called Compton or South Central rough in the 80's and 90's but Hawthorne was a walk in the park in comparison.
 
We know many kids who have been denied a chance to play club sports; parents that can't drive them around because they are working or don't even have transportation, can't afford to pay anytime beyond a nominal or registration fee. AYSO and Latin League are bigger draws partly because they are affordable and local. You would be surprised on how many players and parents don't even know what US soccer is doing or even heard of the Ussda, ECNL, or the other "elite" leagues.

Yes if the top levels teams had reduced fees or no fees there would be better competition even for roster spaces, when you have to earn a spot and continue to do so to say get playing time that brings out players and ups the competition level at least it has on the teams my kids have played for.

Getting rid of pay to play is not going to happen most likely but what we can do is go to merit based open system where players and teams earn the right to move on to the next level based on performances not politics or what you can afford to pay or not. Promotion and Regulation is the way of the world, but in the US we want or demand entitlements instead. Can't handle open competition or open markets, must protect something from somebody....

.
Sounds to me like it is not the "rich white kids" that are demanding entitlements, anyone who doesn't want their kid to be involved in pay to play should probably go to a country that will fill their needs.
America isn't for everyone.
 
Pay to play will probably always be around. But why does it have to be so expensive?
$250 nike/adidas uniforms?
$650 EZ Ups
$100 benches
$750+ tournament fees
$14,000 for a coach to run a team? Plus "administrative" costs for DOC and other club members
Private training at $50+ an hour?
$112 for a referee team to run a 70 minute game?
"Big" tournaments in Las Vegas, Dallas and Del Mar (with $200+ hotel fees)
FWR playoffs in Honolulu?
Showcase events that cater to college scouts with free food, cigar bars and golf cart transportation

Aside from the coach and the referee - NONE of this stuff really helps to make a world class player. And there are some great coaches out there who will do it for a lot less.
Why does it have to be so expensive? Because that’s the price of dope. The market has determined the value of the items above, each of which is either perfectly priced or will soon become either unavailable or result in a new (typically higher) price. If they don’t provide appropriate value to you, spend your money on a different product.
 

jpeter

GOLD
Sounds to me like it is not the "rich white kids" that are demanding entitlements, anyone who doesn't want their kid to be involved in pay to play should probably go to a country that will fill their needs.
America isn't for everyone.
Opportunities for everyone is what the us is suppose to be about. When you cost out a larger segment of the population the opportunity is lost for them.

Considering that ayso and local Latin leagues have many more players than clubs do in socal I guess the choices and opportunities have been made.
 
Opportunities for everyone is what the us is suppose to be about. When you cost out a larger segment of the population the opportunity is lost for them.

Considering that ayso and local Latin leagues have many more players than clubs do in socal I guess the choices and opportunities have been made.
Are you sure about that last part?
 
Top