US SOCCER

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.

Direct personal action sometimes open windows. My kids had a coach who for years paid his best forward out of his coaching fee, and the manager covered all his travel costs. Later on a different team, one of the soccer dads, who was a semi-retired marketing consultant, brought in 2 kids from his son's high school out in the sticks. We knew about one player before he moved out there, but the other was a true diamond in the rough. Both became starters. The dad worked out a fee-split deal with the club, where they essentially split one scholarship and he picked up the rest.
 
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.
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.
With all due respect, I think the "pay to play" criticism which most people are posting here is not a criticism of capitalism or of "rich" white people. At least that's not where I'm coming from when I bash pay to play. Don't conflate economic or societal ideology with criticism of the results that the system of youth soccer produces in the United States.

For me it's not about a socialistic desire to provide "opportunity for everyone." It's much more practical. If you desire to see the US become a respected power in international soccer, it will require the expansion of the talent pool. Often I hear criticism of US soccer along these lines: How can under-developed, economically strapped country X with a population of just 50 million, produce so much more success on the pitch than a relatively wealthy country of 300 million with a collective obsession with youth sports? The answer to me, lies in part that we don't pull from our full population. We pull from the middle to upper classes because our system has evolved into a pay-to-play model that puts a premium on college recruitment. That's not a model which will put our national teams on par with the European or South American powers. Don't construe that as a slight against suburban white youth players. It's just that without drawing from our entire population, and ESPECIALLY the minorities of the inner cities and the rural south (which are the talent gold mine for most American sports) we will always have limited results on the pitch. The comments by MWN and others hi-liting the need for monetary compensation for clubs who develop youth players and for MLS to stop strangling the market by hoarding the transfer fees are really insightful. Pay-to-play is fine for helping middle to upper class Americans who want to give their kid exposure to the game and enhance their chances at playing in college. The market dictates the structure. But that goal doesn't align with results in international competition.

Now, if you think that aspiring for results at the international level for our national teams is a senseless goal to begin with, I can't necessarily argue with that. Who cares? But if we, as soccer fans, want to discuss what can be done to improve our chances in the World Cup, it would be silly to ignore the inherent weaknesses of our P2P youth structure.
 
With all due respect, I think the "pay to play" criticism which most people are posting here is not a criticism of capitalism or of "rich" white people. At least that's not where I'm coming from when I bash pay to play. Don't conflate economic or societal ideology with criticism of the results that the system of youth soccer produces in the United States.

For me it's not about a socialistic desire to provide "opportunity for everyone." It's much more practical. If you desire to see the US become a respected power in international soccer, it will require the expansion of the talent pool. Often I hear criticism of US soccer along these lines: How can under-developed, economically strapped country X with a population of just 50 million, produce so much more success on the pitch than a relatively wealthy country of 300 million with a collective obsession with youth sports? The answer to me, lies in part that we don't pull from our full population. We pull from the middle to upper classes because our system has evolved into a pay-to-play model that puts a premium on college recruitment. That's not a model which will put our national teams on par with the European or South American powers. Don't construe that as a slight against suburban white youth players. It's just that without drawing from our entire population, and ESPECIALLY the minorities of the inner cities and the rural south (which are the talent gold mine for most American sports) we will always have limited results on the pitch. The comments by MWN and others hi-liting the need for monetary compensation for clubs who develop youth players and for MLS to stop strangling the market by hoarding the transfer fees are really insightful. Pay-to-play is fine for helping middle to upper class Americans who want to give their kid exposure to the game and enhance their chances at playing in college. The market dictates the structure. But that goal doesn't align with results in international competition.

Now, if you think that aspiring for results at the international level for our national teams is a senseless goal to begin with, I can't necessarily argue with that. Who cares? But if we, as soccer fans, want to discuss what can be done to improve our chances in the World Cup, it would be silly to ignore the inherent weaknesses of our P2P youth structure.
To those poor countries soccer is probably the best way out of the poor house, but here we have so many different opportunities to choose from.
Lets not forget the dominance of the USWNT team in recent years, how do you explain that?
What percentage of those playing in the world cup would give it all up to come and live in the USA?
There are far more important things worry about other than our international soccer success.
We are 20 trillion in debt with a bullet, we have no idea who is in our country.
 
To those poor countries soccer is probably the best way out of the poor house, but here we have so many different opportunities to choose from.
True. And this is one reason US Soccer will never quite rise to the levels Brazil and Argentina experience. And that's not a bad thing at all.
Lets not forget the dominance of the USWNT team in recent years, how do you explain that?
That one is easy. Women enjoy a FAR, FAR, FAAAAAARRRR greater freedom and support system in America to pursue athletic glory. Title 9 is just part of it, but the big thing is culture. Women are strongly discouraged from playing sports in 99% of the rest of the world.
There are far more important things worry about other than our international soccer success.
As I said, I can't argue that improving US national team performances are significant beyond the sport itself. And I think "worry" is overstated here. Still, success in economics, success in standards of living, success in peace, and success in reducing crime isn't mutually exclusive of success in sports. This IS a soccer forum. So we debate soccer. This thread is specifically about US Soccer and how it performs. To say "We have bigger issues than soccer" is irrelevant, and actually begs the question, "then why are you arguing on a soccer forum?" ;)
We are 20 trillion in debt with a bullet, we have no idea who is in our country.
As a rule, I leave these questions for the off-topic forum. And I stay far, far away from that place! :D
 
True. And this is one reason US Soccer will never quite rise to the levels Brazil and Argentina experience. And that's not a bad thing at all.

That one is easy. Women enjoy a FAR, FAR, FAAAAAARRRR greater freedom and support system in America to pursue athletic glory. Title 9 is just part of it, but the big thing is culture. Women are strongly discouraged from playing sports in 99% of the rest of the world.

As I said, I can't argue that improving US national team performances are significant beyond the sport itself. And I think "worry" is overstated here. Still, success in economics, success in standards of living, success in peace, and success in reducing crime isn't mutually exclusive of success in sports. This IS a soccer forum. So we debate soccer. This thread is specifically about US Soccer and how it performs. To say "We have bigger issues than soccer" is irrelevant, and actually begs the question, "then why are you arguing on a soccer forum?" ;)

As a rule, I leave these questions for the off-topic forum. And I stay far, far away from that place! :D
That's a good rule that I should follow, but if you think politics isn't part of international soccer you are way off.
 
but if you think politics isn't part of international soccer you are way off.
Yeah, but that's a different kind of 'politics.' The sleaze of American governmental politics has nothin' on that swamp.

For the record, I view my interest in seeing the US succeed at soccer on an international stage comes from a deep patriotism. I believe my country is the best, and things like the Olympics and World Cup are a great stage to show what a diverse country without limitations for their people can do when they unite for a common purpose.
 
Yeah, but that's a different kind of 'politics.' The sleaze of American governmental politics has nothin' on that swamp.

For the record, I view my interest in seeing the US succeed at soccer on an international stage comes from a deep patriotism. I believe my country is the best, and things like the Olympics and World Cup are a great stage to show what a diverse country without limitations for their people can do when they unite for a common purpose.
I love watching US soccer no matter how they do, hopefully things will get better when your daughter in in goal on the National team.
 
I wonder if you had offered Messi, DeMaria, etc and their families the option to move to the US when their kids were 10 years old and set them up with lower/middle income lifestyle in the US vs taking the chance that their kids would be best in the world at soccer and staying in Argentia - Would they have moved here?
 
I wonder if you had offered Messi, DeMaria, etc and their families the option to move to the US when their kids were 10 years old and set them up with lower/middle income lifestyle in the US vs taking the chance that their kids would be best in the world at soccer and staying in Argentia - Would they have moved here?
I heard they took Messi away when he was 11 and hasn't lived there much since.
I would imagine they would have taken the sure thing.
 
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?

They would do that because they have invested a ton of money on developing youth, yet when they leave they are not compensated at all. Have you heard of Weston McKennie?

What am I missing? Are you wumming?
 
Why did the mnt fail to qualify, and why does the USA continue to have trouble qualifying for world cups and Olympics, so why is it so hard for USA t o compete on the world stage??

The answer is simple... it’s because we don’t field a good team. Basically, we are not putting our best players on the pitch.

We have good players. We have the talent. But when you choose the same old recycled players for the next qualifying match, the same old Omar Gonzales and the same Michael Bradley's and Jozy Alitodore’s; players who lose on a continuous basis then it becomes insanity.

We have the youth in the pipeline.. they just need the opportunity. When the old farts at US soccer retire and younger more soccer I.Q. minded coaches come in.. they will Scout and field a more younger progressive mnt team. It will happen.

Kickball is over.
 
Yeah, but that's a different kind of 'politics.' The sleaze of American governmental politics has nothin' on that swamp.

For the record, I view my interest in seeing the US succeed at soccer on an international stage comes from a deep patriotism. I believe my country is the best, and things like the Olympics and World Cup are a great stage to show what a diverse country without limitations for their people can do when they unite for a common purpose.
Who do you play for?
 
Why did the mnt fail to qualify, and why does the USA continue to have trouble qualifying for world cups and Olympics, so why is it so hard for USA t o compete on the world stage??

The answer is simple... it’s because we don’t field a good team. Basically, we are not putting our best players on the pitch.

We have good players. We have the talent. But when you choose the same old recycled players for the next qualifying match, the same old Omar Gonzales and the same Michael Bradley's and Jozy Alitodore’s; players who lose on a continuous basis then it becomes insanity.

We have the youth in the pipeline.. they just need the opportunity. When the old farts at US soccer retire and younger more soccer I.Q. minded coaches come in.. they will Scout and field a more younger progressive mnt team. It will happen.

Kickball is over.
It’s not. Watching Russia play kickball in the WC against Spain. And pack the back.
 
Last edited:
Spain’s fault too... Spain didn’t attack st all. They sat back and passed a thousand times. That doesn’t mean Russia is good.. and it certainly doesn’t mean Russia won cause you’re saying they played with their hearts unlike the USA. In my opinion Spain gave this game away. And certainly Russia wasn’t the better team either... it was just that, a non attacking game.
 
Back
Top