At this point, exactly one school has done what has been described: BYU. They've been playing in the PDL since 2003. To my knowledge, no one has followed their lead. The players are, to my knowledge, all BYU students, and it is, basically, a college soccer team, but one that doesn't compete in league play against Utah and Cal State Fullerton and other regional college teams during the fall, but that is in the PDL. The PDL is (largely) a U23 league, so you're not going to have a lot of older players. If we're going to have "more and more college teams playing in the lower divisions," we're first going to need a second one. Because, as far as I know, right now we have just the one.
LeBron James was unlikely to be a soccer player whether our lower soccer divisions were weak or strong.
Maybe it could be like college club teams? Not officially sponsored by the school. I'm not sure that would be legal according to NCAA, either, though.
I could see a college that doesn't have men's soccer sponsoring (or "allowing" ) a club team to play, but they wouldn't have the kind of support that a team needs at this level, assuming it's a few steps above "beer league".
Most universities, even ones that have varsity teams, have club teams as well. It's basically kids that couldn't make the varsity team, but my point is the university has no jurisdiction over what they can or can't do since they're not officially affiliated with the university in any way. I'm just wondering if there are any NCAA rules stopping varsity teams from competing in a similar manner in the off season.
Actually, the university does usually have some control over club sports. Some are partially supported by the athletic department or student activity funds. The school does have control over what they do if they provide money/facilities and certainly can control use of their name. Not that a bunch of students couldn't just do something on their own, but they won't get support from the school for anything they do. Here's an example from the school near me, Tufts: http://www.tuftsdaily.com/club-spor...interest-and-resources-1.2783681#.ULkxJNewWSo Tier 1 club sports at Tufts get funding (usually means there isn't a varsity version). Tier 2 get to scrounge because there is already a varsity team in that sport. NCAA rules do limit off-season play and limits the number of players from the same school on W-League and PDL teams. http://www.uslsoccer.com/docs/NCAA Guidelines.pdf I couldn't find the limit for soccer quickly, but there is one set up by the NCAA.
again, all these talk is nonsense, the ncaa is not gone create world champions, universities are for education. again, is our second and third division that need to be longer and stronger, is that simple.
They've created the vast majority of the best players this country has ever had/has now. Which is completely separate ... and we don't disagree that they need to be better.
just wondering what about the Bradenton soccer academy? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_IMG_Academy_alumni#Soccer
I take part of that last post back, a kid shouldn't be paying 50k a year for an elite academy. The academy should be little to no cost. I know they have school integrated but still
Can we (or me) all just accept that there is NO full proof plan for soccer development in our country? Various players, various coaches, various learning environments/playing philosophies, all attempting to coalesce with one another to maybe, hopefully, sooner or later, create a world class player(s). Maybe were all just over estimating where we are should (or wish) to be in relation to our experience levels and available resources.
The thing here in the US is...soccer is the only sport (besides baseball....KINDA) where going through college isn't the best/only way to make it to the pros. Besides that, going to college is just so ingrained in our culture that skipping it completely is simply not an option most parents are willing to even consider. If NFL or NBA doesn't work out, they have a degree or at least some credits towards a degree. Imagine being a 27 year old who has a career ending injury or who's career is over for whatever reason. They have no skills, no assets outside of soccer. Never even had a real job, per se. They can't even coach college because most schools (wrongly) require at least a bachelor's degree. Now I'm not saying this isn't the best way forward because it is, but we do need to be realistic about the different circumstances in this country. College is just so ingrained in our culture. But with astronomical student loan debt and so much unemployment/undermployment for grads I feel that the college bubble may be about to burst.
Exactly. These things cost money. No way around it. One way or another there are expenses to be covered. It's just the reality and many people don't want to deal with the REALITY of the situation regarding academies, et al.
Everywhere else the pro club covers the full cost, rangin anywhere from 3M euros to 700,00. www.ecaeurope.com/Global/Research/ECA Report on Youth Academies.pdf
It's in investment, just like everything else in the professional world. Toronto just built it's new KIA facility, it seems like they are dedicated to grooming their own youth. In the long run you get starting 11 players instead of signing them from other clubs or taking them off of the scrap heap
That still doesn't answer where teams are going to get the millions of dollars it takes to invest. So, where are the teams going to get that money?
*cough* ... You've completely ignored the question at hand. You going to pay for it ? No ? Then where is the money going to come from then, eh ? I'm fully aware of how it is don elsewhere .... where they have the money to do it. That money isn't here yet. However, some clubs have found some help as I pointed out in your post. KIA is sponsoring it so TFC isn't underwriting the 21M$ cost of the place. In the long run you still haven't answered my question about how many clubs in soccer actually continually and regularly produce players for their starting 11 from their academies ?
There's the great myth that there are these teams made up entirely of home-grown players. It doesn't work that way. I was watching the UEFA Champions League Magazine show and the Celtic youth development guys were saying it's incredibly successful if they can get 3 or 4 guys who can actually play in the first team.
And this is true of even the clubs that have the world's best academies. Take, for example, Ajax, whose academy has been one of the 2-3 most productive in the world for decades. I quickly went through the lineup that the first team fielded against PSV yesterday. Although 8 of 11 spent time in the Ajax academy, 4 of those 8 were actually in the Ajax academy for less than 2 years (2 of whom had U-17 caps before even they got to Ajax), which means Ajax really only developed 4 of 11. That's the first-team contribution from the world's most famous academy. Let's look at Manchester United, probably England's most productive academy. Yesterday, against Reading, only 2 of their starting 11 spent any time in their academy. But Manchester United can afford to buy players, right? Fine, let's go to West Ham, a feeder club with a highly regarded academy. Their lineup against Chelsea yesterday also contained exactly two players from their own academy.