Dinosaur might be coming on a bit strong, but I agree with everything else in your post. It matches my son's experience ... not what we expected, because nobody told us ahead of time what you have just written.
I agree; my son's team and coaching is much better than our state odp. Our coaches don't promote odp at all. However, there is the feeling that you have to do it to have that so-called "star" on the resume. Wish there was another way.
I notice a lot of clubs, though, are selling how many ODP players they have on their rosters to attract players to their club.
If a club boasts a large number of ODP players, couldn't that actually discourage kids from coming to that club, if the perception was that there were few roster positions available?
Hope so. Not everybody belongs at a particular club. If upon seeing the quality of team, a player feels they could not compete, they probably could not and it saves everybody time and effort if they go elsewhere. Clubs at that level want players who hunger for challenge and accomplishment at high levels. The players should know that tryouts never truly end, and if a better player arrives, someone who was on the team the previous year will be gone. That level of competition is only for a few. Players without the confidence to challenge for a position on a team wouldprobably never make the team in the first place, and would be intimidated by the level of comeptiton if they were so unfortunate as to be selected.
I don't believe it does at the younger age groups, as most parents want to see their kids get a piece of the action. If the perception is that the club develops ODP players, then parents are more likely to bring their kids to that club. Older kids may be different.
Could you please post a link for that article directly. Went on the www.ussoccer.com website, but could not find it. Thanks.
Exactly. That is the difference between community level teams/high school teams, and elite teams. In the latter, seniority doesn't matter. Perform or be gone.
Good points, which I agree with. But there are parents, players, and clubs that would find that mentality "elitist". And the clubs that do this are the ones most often accused of "recruiting", or "stealing" players from other clubs.
Hackworth articulates in that article ODP's current philosophy -- that African immigrants and Hispanic kids are better players than other Americans. It's been fairly evident that this is ODP's belief from the direct evidence of its selections, but I hadn't heard Hackworth directly articulate that policy before. American nonHispanic kids will increasingly need to follow the path of fellow ODP rejects Charlie Davies, Johann Smith, Brandon Manzonelli, and Gabriel Ferrari -- and head off to Europe. The Europeans don't appear to have the same mindset as Hackworth.
You are right, there will always be nay sayers and complainers. They rarely accomplish anything of value. You cannot "steal" something that no one owns. Players are not possessions, they are not slaves. They cannot be "stolen". They can be recruited, but will only be recruited when the player (or player's parents) see something of greater value with the "recruiter." If you do not want your players being recruited, give them more of what they want than other organizations and in the process educate them. If you cannot give them what they want, why should anyone expect them to stay? There is nothing wrong with recruiting. There is something wrong with not developing a player. Too often people, usually those who are not developing players and as a result lose players, confuse the two. If you recruit and do not develop, there is a problem. It happens, but far more rarely than alledged. What is worse is unethical recruiting - promising what you cannot deliver, promising and delivering something that can destroy a player's future eligibility, and promising something unrelated that is improperly bundled together, such as play for my club and I will get you on to the ODP team I coach. In the case of unethical recruiting it is not the recruiting that is bad, but how it is done. A difference many gloss over, which is only contributes to the problem for it often leads to rules that are unenforceable and solve nothing. Development is most likely to happen when players combine who have similar interests and ability. To attract such players, you normally must inform them of the opportunity. Most ultimatley learn through the "grapevine" where to go, but still you must communicate the good points your program offers, for many will not know. Communicating = sales = recruiting. As an aside, the only ones that seem to ever have a problem with recruiting are those who lose players and rarely gain any. If they offered something worthwhile they should gain bodies. That they don't is a storng indication that something is wrong with their program. Elitism is only a label. How you become an elite is the issue. If you earn it, it should be seen as praise. If you have gifted on you or inherit it, it is not even faint praise. The two are confused by weak minds, who often aspire to elitism, fail and in the end condemn out of frustration and envy.
Yeah, that's why the Americans come in the top ten in 1V1s, 2v2s, 3v3s down there. America is not for Americans, John. You are right.....
MY apologies, it was the Soccer America article. I must have had too many beers and forgot where I was.
The consensus seems to be that in most places, ODP is for talent identification and not for development. Given that there are six advertised benefits for the program and the first two are: six advertised benefits 1. Development as a player. The opportunity to train and play with the best player's in one's age group. 2. Quality instruction from nationally licensed coaches. that seems rather pathetic. It also sounds like the talent identification process itself isn't working all that well. I imagine it's hard for the honchos back at the home office to tell how well the regional and state coaches are doing with that. Excellent conditions for breeding petty corruption and incompetence... That Socceramerica article was a very interesting read. A pretty damning indictment of the state of youth development in the US, if the views expressed there are at all accurate. JohnR seems to be blaming reverse racism in the ODP for the failure to find players that have gone to Europe such as Davies, J. Smith, Manzonelli, and Ferrari. I'm a bit skeptical--the general incompetence people talked about on this tread would be enough to explain it. Anyway, Davies is a college junior whereas the kids in the article are U-17. Ferrari is part Brazilian, has lived and trained in Brazil, and should count as "Hispanic" for this argument. And there's a bias in this measurement--how many African immigrant kids have the resources or connections to go off and trial in Europe like Manzonelli?
The U.S. advanced to the 2002 WC quarterfinals with Clint Mathis, DaMarcus Beasley, John O'Brien, Tony Sanneh, Eddie Pope, Landon Donovan, and Brian McBride, among many others, coming from the very background that Hackworth says isn't good enough to provide the players that he needs. This is the American sense of soccer inferiority at its saddest. FYI, I do not assert reverse racism. That would not be correct. I don't think that race has anything to do with this; it is instead perceptions of immigrants vs. native-born Americans. Two of my four examples of overlooked players are African American.
I love your thought process....You need to be speaking and sharing with our bosses up here!!!!!!!!!!! LOL. Everything you just wrote I couldnt agree with more. And almost to a T, is what we have either done or are doing now. But yet, we get crap for it. We have alot of people up here in high places that do not respect the road we have taken. The I-35 North road that is. Heck, I can print off the recruiting rules posted on our states web site and tell you what would or could happen to parents and coaches that 'recruit'.
That's a small sample of games. Were you paying attention to what happened four years later, with a similar group of players? Given the number of youth players in this country, and the resources expended on coaching, there should be more top-quality players produced. Unless you think American's can't play the game. Who is the one with a sense of inferiority again? I should also point out, for those who didn't read the article, you're completely distorting what Hackworth and his assistants have said and done. There are multiple quotes there about achieving a blend of players with different backgrounds and attributes. Which, if you look at the roster, is what he has got. There's nothing in the article saying native-born players aren't good enough for his team.
OU boasts about the number of National Merit Scholars they attract. Would you rather your child go there or to Stanford? BTW: Before OU fanatics slam me, I'm an alum.
Funny how different people can read the same article and/or thread discussion and come up with different impressions. I didn't see racism in either the article or in JohnR's replies. If you would go look in depth in these forums, you'll see discussions about street soccer, our best athletes going to basketball and/or football, etc. And you'll see JohnR contributing to those discussions. A good example is over in Peter Wilt & Youth Soccer. I particularly liked: I think JohnR is objecting to the thought process that if we as a country would turn our kids loose on the streets with soccer balls, we would suddenly be WC contenders. We've clearly produced world class players without that process. And if we convert to it without understanding what is really going on in the countries whose success we perceive is based solely on it, we are sunk.
We've produced damn few world class players with our current process, out of a very large number of youth players. The soccer culture we have now is much better than what was there 20 years ago, but it still sucks. If you look at even our best players, they still have on average poor ball control and first touch compared to the best players of the top countries. It's surely not an accident that Freddy Adu has better moves than anyone currently on the USMNT. I don't think "turning the kids loose in the streets", i.e. lots of spontaneous play at a young age, is by any means a complete answer. But I'd be surprised if it's not a big part of it. Uh, nobody was accusing JohnR of being racist, or criticizing his body of posts in general. He had a number of interesting things to say upthread.
I'm not sure what to make of Freddy as an overall lesson. He is in a category of one, as far as I can tell. Here's my perspective. We have a State ODP player in the area who is better on the ball than the national pool guys his age I have seen. His two internationally capped foreign coaches l;augh at some of the things he does. Quote from one them to me: "He can do anything he wants with the ball." You can make good arguments as to why he shouldn't be in the national pool in terms of his athleticism and aggression, but please don't tell me he doesn't love the ball. That's the part that got to me from Hack's comments, the notion that kids of some backgrounds love the ball and others do not. Yes, this kid is smaller at age 15 than any of the African Bradenton guys were at age 12, Freddy Adu included, but please don't cast this as a morality play whereby this boy doesn't work on the skills and they don't. That's not fair to him. Or to others like him.
Agreed. I do think a player can become very, very useful without a ton of free play as a youth. From what I know of their histories, McBride and Bocanegra come to mind. Not to mention Jay DeMerit -- perhaps he won't ever help us at USMNT, but perhaps he will, and Lord knows he came to the sport late. But it sure is a great background to have for any player, and critical for creative/playmaking type roles.
If this were true, he would be playing for the USMNT. Seriously you can't believe that? As I have posted before, Americans need to look for the best American players period. Trying to find a certain ethnicity or cultural background is a**-backward. Pick the best skilled competitors and be done with it. Certainly ODP does not recognize real talent, it gets the talent recognized by others. In that sense it works.