Of the so called 32 players on ManU wikipedia roster 3 or 4 you never heard of or will never hear of, another 4 to 6 will never start for ManU and end up having a career in the lower league. Also those 10 players make 1% of the team total salary (if you include Jones in that list maybe 5%) where currently a GA players percentage of total pay is much grater. BTW RVP wasn't a regular till he was 20 and Evra at 22 your also you are using the best players in the world as a comparison. NCAA players have an ability to play 36 games a season (20+ in NCAA and 16 in PDL) that doesn't include National Team which is greater amount of games that any youth/reserve team plays outside of Germany/Spain who reserve teams play in the League. In terms of the National Team comparison your talking about a team who needs to beat Canada or Jamaica to qualify for a World Cup and has zero success at the International stage. All the caps show is the hype system of American soccer where success isn't judged on the field its judged in the papers (or even worse judged on unproven potential) so a player like Terrance Boyd who scored 8 goals in the Austria Bundesliga could be picked over Wondolowski who scores that many goals in a month. The funniest thing is if I started a thread saying that the Austrian Bundesliga is a better league than the MLS (which I'm not sure it is) I would get killed for saying so. Maybe if you started objectively looking at what you have and know the actual results in the real world would be better.
There's another issue with college which hasn't been mentioned here, and that is that the coaching isn't good. Yes, playing vs not playing is one factor favoring college, but simply playing isn't the only factor. What do American players struggle with most? Tactics, reading of the game, and a lot of that is due to American coaching. We even see that when a guy like Zusi gets called in to the NT. His reading of the game is slower than his Euro counterparts. Dempsey and EJ were furious with him in one game, I think at Guatemala, as he kept playing the wrong final pass. It's a different ballgame when the pace picks up and you get less time on the ball. And who's considered the best American college coach? Caleb. And how was he with our Olympic team? A disaster. It was largely his tactics and poor use of his players, stubborness, which saw us get bounced. I do think Caleb is a good coaching prospect, but when that's the creme de la creme of college coaches, that's a problem. But, I also think there's a huge problem with coaching within MLS too, especially at the academy/reserve level. I'm really starting to question FCD's academy for example. They keep bringing in all these great prospects we keep hearing about, yet basically none of them are being developed to the point they can get 1st team minutes on a non playoff team. Instead, FCD just cut a few of them, prospects we heard great things about. And that is happening across the league.
Again: you are missing the point. Look at whatever subset of field players you want on Man U's roster. ONE HUNDRED PERCENT of them got first-team minutes with a professional team at age nineteen or earlier. All of them. The ones you "never heard of" and the ones you have heard of. I don't know how much clearer I can make that. If your argument is that 22 or 23 is a normal time for a soccer player to turn pro, you are wrong. If you have to bring in the PDL to prove your point, you've already lost. Players go to the PDL because they know the NCAA system is not adequate. MLS players have the ability to play in 15-20 games a year, counting preseason, friendlies, reserve league games, and Open Cup/CCL games. That's fewer games than your hypothetical PDL scholar/athlete. But if you really think that makes up for full-time professional coaching and training, I think you're overrating the role of games in player development. So the US national team is bad, so it doesn't mean anything that GA players get capped...but it also doesn't mean the 4-year college players who don't get caps are even worse? For the record: Wondolowski does have more caps than Boyd--although it's true Boyd has been called in more recently. Probably that has something to do with the fact that he'll be 23 in 2014 and 27 in 2018. Wondo will be 31 in 2014 and 35 in 2018. Wondo could still make the 2014 squad--but if he'd come out of college two years sooner, maybe he could have made the 2010 team as well.
Very few of Manchester United players played first-team minutes at 18 for top division club they played minutes on loan or for a 3rd or 4th division in what ever country they came from. Which has been my point the whole time. MLS doesn't have a 4th division to allow players to develop so instead we have a college system. My point is that most soccer players in the World don't become a everyday professional until after 21 (this is why we have U-21 and the Senior in National football). A college graduate is basically 21/22 which fits that age so this assumption that we have to be professional at 18 years old to be successful is wrong. Second point and more important is only the exceptional player gets paid top money at 18 to 21 where in comparison a GA make the equivalent to an average MLS player who has played in the league for 5 years. - My guess is you don't believe Bebe should be paid the same as Nani The only point that I do find valid with bringing up Manchester United is of their 32 squad players, players such as Michael Keane, Sam Johnstone and Ben Amros probably get paid less in a year than Andew Wenger and Kelvyn Rowe. That is one of the reason why Oriol Rosell left Barca Reserves for Sporting KC because he makes more money here because MLS pays for hype.
This is not true. Just so there's no confusion: here are the players I'm talking about and their age when they first played for a top-division professional team, with earlier professional debuts noted if appropriate. De Gea - 18 (Atletico Madrid) Rafael - 18 (Man U) Evra - 21 (Monaco, Ligue 1); 19 (Nice, Ligue 2) Jones - 18 (Blackburn) Ferdinand - 18 (West Ham) Evans - 20 (Man U - also started a Champions League game at 19) Valencia - 19 or earlier (El Nacional) Anderson - 16 (Gremio) Rooney - 16 (Everton) Giggs - 17 (Man United) Smalling - 19 (Fulham) Lindegaard - 20 (OB) Chicharito - 18 (Chivas) Vidic - 18 or 19 (Red Star Belgrade) Carrick - 18 (West Ham) Nani - 19 (Sporting Lisbon) Young - 19 (Watford, Prem.); 18 (Watford, Champ.) Welbeck - 18 or 19 (Man U) Van Persie - 18 or 19 (Feyenoord) Henriquez - 18 or younger (U. de Chile) Scholes - 19 (Man U) Cleverly - 21 (Wigan); 19 (Leicester City, promoted from League 1) Fletcher - 19 (Man U) Powell - 18 (Man U); 16 (Crewe, League 2) Kagawa - 21 (Dortmund); 17 or 18 (C. Osaka, J-2(?)) Macheda - 17 (Man U) Buttner - 17 or 18 (Vitesse) Bebe - 20 (Man U); 19 or younger (Estrela, Port. 3rd) Keane - No top flight appearances yet, aged 19; 18 (Leicester City, Champ.) Johnstone - No top flight appearances yet, aged 19; 19 or younger (Scunthorpe, League 1) Amos - 20 (Man U); 19 (Peterborough, Championship) Fabio - 18 (Man U) So if you limit it to top division minutes, you push a few players up to 20 or 21. But for the 19-year-olds, there are no fourth division teams on the list; only two players started out as low as League 1; and only a few more started in either Ligue 2 or the Championship. This is only the case if you think "everyday professional" means "starting every week." If you really don't see the value to a professional athlete of training with top players instead of non-professionals, training full time every day instead of part time, and training nine months a year instead of three, then I don't know what else to say. Manchester United and other first division clubs in top leagues are signing these kids at 17 and 18 and 19. Why do they think it's a good idea to sign them then then instead of waiting and letting them "develop" in League 1? Could it be that a player is more valuable than the minutes in the first year of their contract? Do you think a 21-year-old player is more valuable to an MLS team after two years of full-time professional training with that team's coaches and that team's other players? Or after two years of part-time college training with mostly players who aren't planning on turning pro, playing a few more games?
Again I'm not sure your reading what I wrote I'm not talking about players getting a couple of minutes drafting isn't about development its about having a first team everyday player since GA's are being paid comparable salaries to full-time regulars. Again breaking down Manchester United, I also added the amount of games they played under that season that you had when they broke in the league: Player who were regular in a top division side under the age of 20 Rooney - 17 (Everton) - 33 games De Gea - 18 (Atletico Madrid) - 19 games Jones - 18 (Blackburn) 28 games Nani - 19 (Sporting Lisbon) - 25 games Anderson - 16 (Gremio) - first pro game was 2006 played 3 games Scholes - 19 (Man U) - 17 games Giggs - 17 (Man United) - 2 games Welbeck - 18 or 19 (Man U) - 3 games at 18 26 games in 2010 Buttner - 19 (Vitesse) - 19 games Ferdinand - 18 (West Ham) - 15 games Carrick - 18 (West Ham) - 8 games You should not all these players have a market value of $15,000,000+ where the MLS GA's might have a market value of $200,000 except an exception where I fully agree the MLS should sign them. Players who were regular in a top division side later Vidic - 18 or 19 (Red Star Belgrade) no games at 18 first seson played 1st team he 20 played 22 games Chicharito - 18 (Chivas) no games at 18 7 games in 2006 when 20. Rafael - 18 (Man U) - 16 games Kagawa - 21 (Dortmund) - 18 games Fletcher - 20 first game in EPL 20 Young - 19 (Watford, Prem.) - first EPL game was in 2006 when he was 21 Valencia - 21 (Wigan) - 21 games in EPL Evra - 19 (Nice, Ligue 2) - was 22 when made first division Evans - 20 (Man U - also started a Champions League game at 19) - 15 games Cleverly - 21 (Wigan); - first gmae in EPL 25 games Van Persie - 19 (Feyenoord) - 10 games Smalling - 19 (Fulham) - 12 games Player who have yet establish themselves as a regular on a top division side Henriquez - 18 or younger (U. de Chile) - 17 games in league regarded equal/less then the MLS Lindegaard - 20 (OB) - 1 game Bebe - 20 (Man U) - 2 games Macheda - 17 (Man U) - 4 games Keane - No top Flight Johnstone - No top Flight Amos - 1 game Fabio - 18 (Man U) - 11 games Powell - 18 (Man U) has played one game at top leval Again were talking about a team valued at $500,000,000 where an MLS is valued at $10,000,000. Sure 5% of Manchester United budget is signing players under 20 and again if the MLS has a similar system its probably good business because who knows one or two kids who choose not to go to college may turn out to be a decent player. The fact is the average age of Manchester United roster is 26.6 years old and only 2 or 3 players who are currently under 21 including the reserve/youth side will play regularly for the team. No I don't there is no proof that a player playing 2 seasons in the MLS or 2 seasons in College at that age makes a difference.
I agree. Luis Silva (23) and Austin Berry (24) who became 23 and 24 during their rookie seasons show that there is no merit to the argument that two years of more MLS is better than college soccer. Bright Dike and Zusi had to develop to get where they are today but Silva and Berry are ready to go, so this shows that a the four year college soccer players who turn 23 in their rookie years are not losing out but instead are getting better and better to the point they can be immediate stars in MLS. In contrast Luis Gil is no where close to Luis Silva in talent and Jack McInerney is not as good as Bright Dike. I really do not think that Luis Gil needed to go pro to develop if he had not gone to Arsenal he should've token a scholarship and joined the college game. I hope Commissioner Garber takes note of these developments and instead of wasting money on teenage "phenoms" he can actually pay MLS veterans a decent salary or invest in better foreigners.
So your argument is that a player isn't worth signing to a full first-team contract unless they're ready to be an immediate full first-time starter? Then why did all of those first-division teams sign all of those players who, you claim, wouldn't be regular starters until a few years later? What did Man U. think they were getting for their money for that first year or two? Your premise is that unless a player is starting now, in the first year of a four-year contract, he isn't worth a starting salary. That seems incredibly short-sighted. The teams making the decisions think it does. And, frankly, common sense seems to indicate that practicing your craft--whether it's soccer or anything else--full-time for nine months a year while competing with people better than you are is better for your development than practicing twenty hours a week, three months a year while competing with people who aren't as good as you are. Where is your evidence that this is not the case?
LOL, you think Gil would've been better off only playing/practicing 4 months a year in college as opposed to starting 33 games and playing 54 overall the past 2 years and practicing against grown men on one of the best teams in the league? Silva is 24, Gil just turned 19 last month, Gil's talent level is much higher than Silva was when he was 19. Where is this fact that Bright Dike is better than McInenery? Are you saying McInerney was better off playing college this season than scoring 8 goals and starting 18 games in MLS? Do people even realize the restrictions the NCAA places on college soccer (and all sports for that matter) in regards to playing games and practice?
You might e better off listening to feedback than being defensive. Your findings have been debunked pretty convincingly. That a 4-year player is the best bet is absurd and goes against everything EVERYONE actually in the position of drafting these players thinks. From the article I linked in this thread. Success and failure rate of players drafted by age: Of the 48 exceptional draft picks (rounding to nearest year) eight were younger than 20, seven were 20, 12 were 21, 15 were 22, 5 were 23 and just one was older than 23. By percentage of the total amount of players selected of the same age it broke down like this: Younger than 20 – 30 selected – 8 exceptional – 26.6% of total picked 20 – 17 selected – 7 exceptional – 41.1% of total picked 21 – 34 selected – 12 exceptional – 35.2% of total picked 22 – 41 selected – 15 exceptional – 36.5% of total picked 23 – 27 selected – 5 exceptional – 18.5% of total picked Older than 23 – 8 selected – 1 exceptional – 12.5% of total picked There is clearly a drop off after 22 (as well with those younger than 20). However, to get a full picture we should also look at the failure rate by age: Younger than 20 – 30 selected – 9 failures – 30% of total picked 20 – 17 selected – 3 failures – 17.6% of total picked 21 – 34 selected – 6 failures – 17.6% of total picked 22 – 41 selected – 10 failures – 24.3% of total picked 23 – 27 selected – 6 failures – 22.2% of total picked Older than 23 – 8 selected – 3 failures – 37.5% of total picked The LOWEST success rate is players drafted at 23 or older and the HIGHEST failure rate are players drafted at 22 and 23. HIGHEST success rate are 20 year-olds, and 20-year-olds are tied with 21 year-olds for LOWEST failure rate. This is data from ALL first round picks between 2000 and 2011. It's not handpicked.
I'm not defensive I just think I'm correct First of all your article is flawed by using term exceptional and failures second you posting this without any financial context if the exceptional player made $400,000 more than the failure does that still make the exceptional/exceptional. The other problem with your theory is many Seniors are 21, so if we say half of the 21 were seniors than according to your own data seniors and GA's are 50/50. Also your theory has nothing to do with age it has to do with what age at the time is the best talent and because we have GA's and the MLS is willing pay them starter salaries now the best talent tends to be young. If my idea was implemented it doesn't mean GA's or the top prospect wouldn't get drafted it just means they get drafted when they finish their senior year of university. So using the Gil example the fact he's young and played so many game only has value if RSL/MLS are willing to sell him now - He hasn't won RSL any games so far by replacing another player and hasn't proven that his value is going to go up or he's going to be a star in the league. So my analysis is the difference would be minimal if Gil played since he has or went to College and started his MLS career at 21. If we use a current example in sophomore Walker Zimmerman who is regarded by many as a automatic GA in this season. He's a 19 year old CB who has played well on a college team that didn't qualify for the National Tournament (so 50+ best team in the country). Based on previous GA he'll probably be offered $100,000-$125,000. I can't think of a MLS team who would have him starting as their CB in 2013 so my guess he'll play 5-10 games in 2013 as 19-20 year old, maybe 10-15 games as a 20-21 year old CB in 2014 and then hopefully a starting CB in 2015. So the league is basically paying an extra $200,000-$250,000 where they could wait till he's a SR offer him a contract and like Berry or Hedges have done this season be an everyday starter. So I'm basically saving the league a quarter million and your objecting why because you think two years on a MLS bench will make him a better player than being Captain and the number one player on his college team. Where is the emoticon for shaking my head.
Gil and McInernery only has value to the league if they sell them otherwise they have the same value to any player in the league who provides the same statistical output
The statistics I presented in the first post - seniors or GA drafted in the same position basically have the same statistical output during their MLS career yet GA's are paid 2 to 5 times more.
Thats just flawed logic right there. Then again after reading this thread thats all you can provide. That and facts which Chapka then uses to prove how wrong you are.
How is this flawed logic last season in 2012 Gil made $196,614.33 in comparison Zusi made $138,812,50. In McInerney case he made $140,166.67 just $20,000 less than Chris Pontius made with DC and more then Alan Gordon. So you're telling me if you were a MLS team trying to win next season you have Gil/McInernery rather then Zusi/Pontius in your lineup. If that's the case I think your logic is flawed.
in my opinion there is no reason to get rid of the draft at the current moment. It is perfect for churning out journeymen MLS players. That being said the academies are the future of youth development in America. The goal is to eventually be churning out world class players, not just journeymen. This can only come from academies and developing talent at a younger age. Remember that Messi and C. Ronaldo were already the best players in the world by the ages of 22. The peak of a soccer players carrer is usually about age 26 to 28. Soccer is not football, it is not basketball. Talent must be developed at a much younger age. This is why college soccer must eventually be replaced as the primary source of new MLS players if we are ever going to start producing world class players.
When signing a player to a multi-year contract, if all you care about is how he performs in the first year of the contract, I think your logic is flawed.
Funny. I don't think my analysis is perfect, which is why I constantly look for feedback and ways to adjust it. You seem to have gone in looking for a finding and have handpicked the data to back your position. Subjectively speaking, what you are demonstrating -- and what I agree with -- is that MLS needs to improve its reserve league. What I will never agree with is that college soccer, with its four month schedule and bastardization of the rules, is even remotely the best place for a young American (Or, since I'm posting from Toronto, Canadian ) to be.
My fellow Canadian I never said MLS needs to improve its reserve league I think a proper reserve league is commercially impossible based on the revenue of the league especially if they are not selling players as part of the leagues business model. What they can do is is like other American pro sports is make USL Pro teams farm clubs to MLS teams although I don't think USL Pro teams would want this. In terms of college play I just look at the stats which show for $30,000-$40,000 you can get a decent product for your buck although they need to get rid of the unlimited substitution (what are they 9 years old).
Having and NHL/MLB style draft where unaffiliated kids could come out would be great but MLS would need affiliates which it doesn't right now.
So a very talented 20 years old would voluntarily be stuck in a US college on some scholarship and waiting for a draft?? LOLOLOLOL GA might be a failed system, but college is still shite.
Just because you say something many, many, many times doesn't make it true. Or do I need to break out the list of successful players who have spent time in college and/or the list of players passing up pro contracts to go to college and slap you with it them yet again?
Considering the number of players who played in college and MLS and made (or are making) more than that, I have no idea what your point is (as usual).