College soccer and the YNTs - the writing is on the wall and it says "go pro ASAP."

No disagreement here that the trend among the Nats will be away from players who played college soccer, but that's a pretty elite group. There are many eligible MLS players who will never be given a thought for the Nats.

You will continue to see most kids opt for college over pro (at least for a year or two) for the simple reason that there simply are not a lot of professional opportunities for 18 year olds yet. If the opportunities were there, you would have kids jumping at them.

Even if the pro opportunities were there, however, you would still have some kids opting for college for the same reasons many baseball players choose college over signing a professional contract out of high school. They hope that three good years in college will improve their place in the draft and improve their chances of making it to the big leagues. They recognize that the probability of washing out if you start in the Rookie League out of high school is high. Moreover, the lifestyle just isn't that great.

Some also want the education. Soccer in the USA, more than baseball and other sports, attracts a lot of upper middle class kids whose parents would like to see them get at least a couple of years of college under their belts before pursuing their dream of soccer as career choice. They can always go to college later, but will they?

 

One big question is how successfully elite players will be identified. In cases like Geoff Cameron, Tim Ream, etc., nobody seems to have much idea how good a player is until he actually sets foot in MLS.

Continuing on the question of how elite talent will be identified from college, the focus on U20 pros is actually a significant impediment for college players. Traditionally, that age group was the main launching pad for college players to make the jump. As that's happening less and less often, we naturally have a harder time discovering the Reams and Camerons early.

 

Its a slow movement not a fast one. American minutes in MLS is at an all time low and dropping. Pros from other countries are taking their minutes. Yes National Team and Professional players are an elite group. Saying most kids will opt for college. That's referring to most DA players that are not elite. The opportunities and roster spots for 18 yr olds are not alot today but significantly more than 3 yrs ago and alot less than 3 yrs from now. You do see alot of youth jumping at professional opportunites.......In Europe and Mexico. The youth prospects wanting to go pro are there but domestic roster spots are now limited. That will change. Anytime someone references baseball or football in reference to college doesn't understand the difference that soccer is an international sport where players travel, baseball and football are essentially american sports where we dictate development via college. The rest of the world dictates development and the limited play of college soccer doesn't develop the standard player needed to compete on the international stage.
College education and college soccer are mutually exclusive to maximize the ability to pursue professional soccer going forward.

 

Not true for baseball. MLB is loaded with Latinos who never went to college.

 

... or 10/21 with some college experience - 10/17 who had the opportunity to go to college. My estimation is that there will always be roughly half the team with some college experience. If we decide to field a full team of germans/US than all bets are off.

 

Will you help me determine # of college years for World Cup Rosters from 94-2010? I can't find what I did. Although not a perfect way to see college influence because its every 4 yrs. It does show that independent of the new German wave (post 2010) that the slow shifting away from college as the development tool for the National Team? If I remember correctly 94 team avg was well over 3.5 and 2010 team was something like 1.8 or 1.9. With total # of college players going from 23 to like 14 or 15.
I also see the new German wave differently than you do. Its telling us that young talent trained in a full professional continuum is a better way to prepare a top professional to be considered for National Team player and not a player that goes to college to learn the craft. In 2 years it went from 1.8 to 1.28. That in and of itself is telling players how they need to proceed.

 

I understand the difference between baseball or football in college and soccer in college. It does not take a rocket scientist, which I admittedly am not. Nonetheless, I disagree that college and a professional soccer career are mutually exclusive. While professional opportunities for college players may very well get fewer and farther between, you will continue to have kids who don't have professional prospects out of high school, who will get noticed for the first time on the college stage.

 

... and in spite of one of the most intense scouting and developmental systems anywhere in the world of any sport with millions possibly billions of dollars pumped into five levels of play (Rookie A, A, High A, AA, AAA) and an instructunal league in the fall, a draft that incudes 50 rounds for 32 teams - half the players still come from the college system. In spite of aluminum bats, NCAA restrictions for time, # of games played, MLB still recognizes college baseball to be an effective evaluation tool in terms of who will be successful at the next level. Is there some old, salty MLB exec/scout with the cigar who would like to change the rules for bats, or wished he signed pro at 18 instead of going to college for three years ? - yes. One thing to note is that development is a few years later in baseball which is why I suggested that GK and central defenders should always consider college, the young attacking phenom not so much.

One of the things missing in the anti-college chants is that while college may not be the development tool that everyone wants, but there is no question it is an extremely effective EVALUATION tool. All you have to look for is the number of Residency players who had average or less than average college careers to realize that college soccer saved some pro team lots of wasted money. This is something that other sports in this country recognize. College athletics weed out those who can't, highlight those who could, and showcase those who did.

This is why there will be a law of diminishing returns in terms of eliminating college players. Knowing that more players are in the pro system and that players are leaving early. We all know that 1/2 will choose pro rout, 1/2 will choose college rout (like baseball). What percentage of players played college soccer ? (50%) How many years did they play ? (Probably around 2+)

By the way, anyone bothered by the # of german/us players ? Kind of like filling a college roster full of transfers and foreign players - I don't think it works. Adding a couple here and there to bolster the group - I get. Not sure when you play in the World Cup, and possibly 1/3 of the players hear the stars and stripes with no emotional attachment, is making those guys play for the three letters on the front of their shirt. In the World Cup, that is what it is all about.

 

About that US roster - European-born, entirely European-trained players are irrelevant to the debate about college vs. pro for American players. Americans facing a choice between going pro vs. attending college don't have a third option of "go back in time and be born in Germany."

Notice that the "skipped college to go directly to MLS/USL" category includes only three players on the roster (Bradley, Howard, and Altidore).

 

Agreed, but this is my point. I believe it is wrong to think of college and pro as mutually exclusive even if the trend is toward pursuing professional opportunities earlier rather than later.

Of the top 10 players in the 2011 MLB draft, half were in high school, four came from a four-year university, and one was a community college student. The top three were from UCLA (#1 & #2) and UVA (#3). The top draft pick had been drafted number 28 out of high school in 2008, but elected to attend UCLA for 3 years. Number 2 enrolled early at UCLA so was not eligible for the 2008 draft. Number 3 was drafted number 318 out of high school in 2008. The number 1 draft pick may or may not have been a fool for not signing out of high school, but who can say that Number 3 didn't make the right move by going to college? Unlike baseball players who have to stay in college for 3 years before they are draft eligible, soccer players who go to college can leave and go pro at any point. As long as this is true, it remains an option.

Jack McBean, Kellen Gulley, Jack McInerney, Zach Pfeffer, and others like them may be on the right track by signing while still in high school, but how much was Kelyn Rowe hurt by spending two years at UCLA or Soony Saad a year at Michigan? I'm not sure we know the answer to those questions yet. I'm not sure we will ever know.

 

That's exactly the debate going forward. Pro for the elite American youth is their opportunity for me to advance in the MLS or do I have to go to Europe or Mexico or somewhere else to pursue top level full time residential professional training.
That's the debate we're having. The answer is in the roster. They made the roster in large part not because they couldn't go to college its because they didn't go to college.

 

This seems to imply that the main reason that Boyd, Johnson, Jones, Williams, and Chandler are national team players is that they "didn't go to college."

Maybe it's just me, but I think it has more to do with the fact that their upbringing and training took place in one of the strongest soccer countries in the world. There is no meaningful, single "pro development" phenomenon that encompasses Lionel Messi, the worst player to ever sign a professional contract, and everyone in between.

In fact, I'd argue that the current US reliance on German-born dual nationals highlights the fairly disappointing results of MLS based pro development in the fifteen years since Nino Da Silva signed his project-40 contract. The goal was to create a rival to the pro development systems of other countries; instead, we've ended up depending more on our ability to mooch off the products of those other systems.

 

Yes you are correct on both points. It more than implies that the main reason that Boyd, Johnson, Jones, Williams, and Chandler are national team players is that they didn't have college soccer training with all its restictions and limitations. They were selected over dozens of MLS players that did have college as the less than optimal player development training. The statistical heirarchy of elite player National Team selections are European Youth Professional Training, then MLS professional Training, Then college amateur training.

 

If it was about putting players in a "pro" environment, I'm surprised the NBA doesn't encourage every kid to go to the D-League instead of going to college. Maybe because playing meaningless games in front of 25 people in exotic places like Erie and Sioux Falls isn't good for development in spite of the coaching/players compared to playing real games in front of 10,000

Let's face it the german guys are german not american. I don't understand why we would include them as americans not playing college soccer. No more American than if Lionel Messi before playing for Argentina married an American supermodel and got citizenship (Shevchenko -who did just that - is too old). I would be surprised if any of the german players make the final 22in Brazil. I could easily give you four players who played in college that could be selected over those guys. I haven't seen anything from that yet. Jones, while effective, is a cancer and the other three players are ok, but nothing different from what we have produced and yes even some players that have played college.

Speaking of the supermodel thing - let's get the top players in the world at 20years old before they play for their country hooked up with some American supermodels, get them married and then get citizenship. Their children would be american as well so the lineage to a World Cup Championship would be perpetuated. At least there would be some connection to this country other than their father was in the military stationed in Germany 30, 25, 20 years ago. To me that is more ethical than the route we are going. Just Sayin'

 

I totally get your point. However, if they are considered Americans by birth (and nothing else) then they are eligible to play for our national teams. Does seem rather odd though. Issue comes down to is it better to develop and use our domestic guys or bring in anyone who is a "citizen" because they may make us more competitive. I vote for the former but no one in USSF asked for my input.

 

I stopped reading at 'NBA'.
To compare basketball and soccer in the US is not understanding their different historical paths as a sport and how that fits into the overall world construct on how and why they develop players differently.

 

Are you suggesting that comparing an American sports league such as the NBA with American soccer reflects a misunderstanding of sports in the United States, but comparing American soccer to foreign soccer is the appropriate focus of evaluating the status of soccer in this country?

 

Yes

 

Let's look at the NBA. In 1990, the rest of the world is way behind the US. With a little help from the Dream Team, the world loves basketball. So in looking to model the US system, did Spain and Argentina start building universities and offering scholarships? No, they used their own current system of "club" and national teams, sending some kids to US universities, moving club players to the NBA after developing within their own club system ( and only when mature enough,) and bringing in US coaches while developing their own. In essence, they did not copy our system but used a hybrid with emphasis on their current system - and lo and behold - Argentina wins the Olympics in 2004 and Spain the World Championship in 2006. The US now has to adjust to these changes and realize their national team has to spend more time together in order to win at the international level so therefore we start taking a little from them in terms of team building/chemistry/international play. Subsequently, the US wins Olympic Gold in 2008 (with a college coach)

I'm not sure why a hybrid system that includes one of the greatest developmental systems of all sports in history (US intercollegiate athletics) isn't appropriate or here. Why is soccer different from baseball, golf, basketball, hockey, swimming, fencing, track and field, etc.? We may be behind in soccer but to ignore a developmental system that is clearly a competitive advantage for the US to the rest of the world since it is strictly a US phenomenon - well, I don't get it. To ignore a competitive advantage in terms of facilities, zero cost to pro teams and the national federation, and the sheer number of players it allows access, is very short sighted.

 

Good Post. Soccer is different because it is the most popular sport in the world by far. We are competing with hundreds of countries. We do not set the International Standard as to how much and how often players should play as we do in other sports. Essentially the 10,000 hr rule. We presently have a hybrid system and will continue to do so. The slow shift is happening for one major reason. The many NCAA restrictions as to how long, how often, how they compete vs other top players. The International Player is becoming more prominent in the NBA because they have no restrictions on the amount of time they play in Europe. The elite are essentially developing in Europe and coming here to play in NBA not coming to play in NCAA. As I continue to say college soccer is not going away, its just proving over time that the quality they develop is slowly falling behind a more intensive, comprehensive, integrated development model. Your handle is limiting the objectivity you strive for. You're trying to make my point to be an absolute statement and it is not. Its a statistical correlation overtime.

 

I finished the college years analysis for World Cup Rosters from 1990-2010. I will post full details later. It shows the slow decrease of college influence in the development of our Nations elite player via WC Rosters over 20 Yrs. This also holds true for U20 or U23 rosters.
Summar:
Year - Total # Yrs - Avg # yrs - # who played college - # of 4 yr players - # of no college ==========================================================
1990 - 81 3.68 22/22 17/22 0/22
2010 - 42 1.82 15/23 4/23 8/23

 

Really. The number of teams has almost double from when the league started and the rosters have increased in size, yet according to you there are fewer Americans playing then ever in the League even though there are more americans than ever playing for professional teams outside the US. Doesn't seem very credible does it?

Here is another theory you might want to consider. Since the league has rapidly expanded, there MLS has allowed more foreign players into the league in order to keep the rapid expansion from diluting the player pool - especially since the number of people looking to sign American players is at an all-time high.

 

Not in the least. If you are not ready to play professionally, trying to do so prematurely will effectively end your career before it ever really got a chance to start.

 

Hey Dano, here is a question for you. When did Germany start mandating academies and why do you think the big wave of high quality young German players seems to be hitting around now? If you understand the critical years of development you would be able to estimate when this happened without looking it up. But since you keep pontificating about how college soccer makes so much big difference one way or an other I'd suggest you'd do a little research.

What college does is allow players who aren't ready to play first team soccer in MLS a chance to get games. Defenders for example need actual playing time to learn their trade, which is why virtually every National team defender has spent at least some time playing college ball. 10 reserve games filled with uneven talent isn't going to do this.

Forwards on the other tend to rely more on speed and the ability to beat defenders 1v1 which is why you see sometimes see very young attacking players playing at the highest levels. You don't really need games experience for this - just well selected parents who gave you good the right type of muscle fibers and taught you how to control a soccer ball with them at a young age.