Not disagreeing, but on another level, the biggest incentive for the USSF to get its act together is if fans demand it.
True, and I think they are genuinely trying. They aren't perfect obviously, but I don't believe they have a policy of sitting back and hoping for dual nationals.
Considering how dramatically the USSF's national team revenue has grown in the past decade, I would've expected a pronounced upgrade in YNT coaching and activity. What I've seen hasn't looked like anything of the sort.
I expect this will always be the case (as it is in most countries). Other than the Olympics, investing in youth isn't a potential revenue generator. Rather, it's an attempt to impact the senior team somewhere down the road, which in turn can have a huge impact on revenues.
You kinda answer your own question(s) so to speak. Youth programs are difficult things to invest in. They mostly (aside from the Olympics as you point out) don't generate very much revenue by themselves. What they DO do is make the senior national team better...but even that affect isn't seen until farther down the road, so it's hard to see when/how much revenue is impacted by the investments made in youth programs...which in turn turns FA's off from investing in said programs. It's the age-old chicken or the egg quandary. You invest in the youth programs in order to develop more revenue later, but the FA will be loathe to invest in youth programs without seeing some kind of revenue-generating effect from said programs! What's also difficult to quantify is the improvements made in both the youth programs and the senior team and whether or not these improvements match up (e.g if youth programs are improving, is the senior team improving along with is or at a greater or lesser pace?).
This goes back to the matter I raised in another thread -- what kind of measurements does it make sense to use when evaluating YNT programs, and how do those measurements connect to a broader mission? (And, further complicating matters -- how is that mission defined?) Realistically, we must probably also admit that, for better or for worse, there are more stakeholders in the output of YNT evaluation than just fans of the MNT. There are youth clubs that have expenses; there are colleges that want to compete; there are pro teams and agents that want relatively easy means of evaluating a large country's talent pool; and there is the Mexican Fed. Obviously, the values of those and other stakeholders differ based on their goals. Not all of them care as deeply as others the degree to which the YNTs feed the MNT, and suggesting that they necessarily should is probably not realistic. Of course, the relative weight of their input I am sure varies greatly -- and I'm not privy to the politics that govern that conversation.
Looking at federations that have successfully improved their player development, two that stand out for me are Germany and Japan. To put things simplistically, Germany made intelligent reforms thanks to a detailed assessment of the weak links in their pyramid, and Japan built up their system largely by importing high-quality foreign training. We have neither the internal expertise of the Germans nor the humility of the Japanese to invite the expertise of others. Which kind of suggests that we're f***ed.
Japan is a great parallel, since their "modern" soccer era is about as long as ours. (The current J-League is only a few years older than MLS I believe.) The one thing they don't have, however, is the entrenched culture of amateurism -- even if it's arguably an idealized version of amateurism, given the way the NCAA treats revenue sports -- that we do. That probably complicates matters for as as much as many other factors.
While the NCAA thingy can pose some problems, that alone should not be a major obstacle in improving youth soccer in the U.S. What Japan has done is not only import outside coaching expertise, but then focus on development right from the start- at the youngest ages, with primary focus on technical development. Ten years ago the Japanese women were just another country striving to reach the upper echelons of women's soccer. And now...
From all my years I have seen little to suggest we don't have the humility..... ......but we are awash in entrencehd self serving politics that does everything possible to keep outsiders out, and keep the people here in charge and entrenched at youth levels.
I'd argue that the culture of amateurism goes well beyond college soccer and the NCAA. That's part of it, certainly, but it's a much broader issue that's tough to boil down.
As we all know, Bruce Arena is modest to a fault. More seriously, I don't necessarily disagree with this, but would you also say that the insiders also have the mentality that they deserve to be in charge?
Winston Churchill had a great quote about Americans, "You can always count on Americans to do the right thing...after they have tried and failed at everything else." I often think of this when I look at American youth soccer. The solutions aren't complex, but the urgency to solve the problems just isn't there right now. The DA was a really good idea because it created competition between trophy ball/high school and the DA, but even that moves forward at a glacial pace. The MLS homegrown rule was a good idea, but MLS academies are still way below what they need to be. At the end of the day, the best thing that has happened to us is that other countries are improving faster than we are. We used to be able to qualify for World Youth Cups with crap youth coaches like John Ellinger and John Hackworth. The teams would play in a way that was unwatchable, but would still qualify because the competition was so weak. Now those guys wouldn't get close to qualifying at the under 17 level. You have to be good now to make it to the under 17 World Cup. Better competition forces everybody to get better.
Bruce is our special one. Second part. Absolutely. I went on rants about this back in the day. We stayed with the game when it was nothing so we want ours! Have had big time youth directors/coaches mock our nat programs, try and undercut them, poison parents and kids against it, lie, etc...u name it. One guy, to my face, told me he would openly work against US Soccer to see it fail to protect his fifedom. Big time VA club. That is why I said entrenched. They are going nowhere until they are dead. The worst part? Many know they aren't soccer savy by world standards. They admit it...they have humility in that regard...they just don't give a shit. That's why I always just say.....time. Only in time will it really change when these guys die off, or if MLS ever becomes serious and powerful enough in the youth game. Both a long way off. Just like baby boomers are going to selfishly bleed this country dry, so are these guys.
It's looking like we're going to really heavy in the holding and attacking midfield and light in the backline again.
Well, perhaps, but it's too soon to tell if we're just going by MLS playing time. Here's a view of our holding and attacking midfielders' accomplishments at 2013 qualifying time. Luis Gil -- 67 appearances in MLS Benji Joya -- 130 minutes in Liga MX Jose Villarreal -- 128 minutes in MLS Caleb Stanko -- Freiburg II Danny Cuevas -- bit player for Santos Laguna U20 Victor Pineda -- 3 years as a pro, 0 appearances for Chicago Kellyn Acosta -- 1/2 year as a pro, wasn't eligible to play in 2012 Wil Trapp -- just signed pro a few months prior Mikey Lopez -- just signed pro a few months prior Danny Garcia -- just signed pro a week or so prior Even an area of the team that was viewed as a strength had very little pro experience during qualifiers. This group has 18 more months and a lot can happen during that time. Here's hoping a few defenders come out of the woodwork.
What's the deal with Cuevas? Why is he a "bit" player at Santos? Is he really not all that good? He also came off the bench at the U20 WC Is he not really a starting quality player?
What I meant is that he wasn't even a starter for Santos Laguna's U-20 team. Santos Laguna is going to give playing time at the U-20 level to what they feel are their best prospects at that age level. Since most players at that age level won't make it as Liga MX players, being a bench player among your own age cohort isn't a great sign. I think we saw some good qualities from Cuevas, but he also exposed himself as rather a one-dimensional player. I'd guess that he'll eventually pop up on an Ascenso MX team, or perhaps an MLS club will take a flyer on him if he comes cheap.
He does better, shows he learned or he goes back to Kearney to wax nostaligic to the NYT's every few years. He got his free pass.