Personally, I don't think that the MLS DAs will reach their potential until we make better use of the PDL system. Most 18 year olds are not ready to turn professional. There needs to be a bridge between when a player is 18 and when he is ready to turn professional. I don't expect for the college system to go away, but we can still keep players affiliated with MLS teams through the PDL. I am not sure why this is not taken more seriously than it already is. Several MLS teams already have PDL teams. I would like to see DAs field more PDL teams. It is as if they are saying that development stops at 18 or that, if they haven't made it by that point (which very few players have) that the support goes away and it is now up to the colleges, who history has proved care very little about player development. Is this really in our country's or in our players' best interest? If the DAs are trying to create Division I college players, they should support them even while they are at college and continue to help them to get better - that is, if they truly are Development Academies. I would think that, if they provided this kind of support while the player was in college, that they would be more attractive to players looking to be successful, if nothing else, at the Division I level. Fewer would participate at this level since it is a larger age group but, fewer players would be good enough to participate at this level. Just trying to fill in the obvious gaps with systems that are already in place.
Another very good post. I've always liked Germany's system where reserve teams play actual competitive league games in 4th division. Possibly the MLS reserves could enter regional PDL leagues then have college players join the league for most of the summer. I too am a gap filler. (that didn't sound right) I think we have such a disjointed system that to have our best no matter where they play to compete at least during the summer allows competitive evaluation of all top domestic players 17-21, no matter if the are professional or amateur or MLS academy, first team or in college.
The reason there aren't more PDL teams is likely due to the MLS Reserve league. Frankly, I wonder why the MLS reserves can't be in both PDL and MLS reserve league? Whitecaps ran both last summer, and it seemed to go well. PDL is a good league but it is far too short.
The reason there aren't more PDL teams is likely due to the MLS Reserve league. Frankly, I wonder why the MLS reserves can't be in both PDL and MLS reserve league? Whitecaps ran both last summer, and it seemed to go well. PDL is a good league but it is far too short.
I agree. Why can't their be MLS reserve games straddling either side of the PDL season. So MLS reserves could play official reserve league games in the spring and fall, while competing in their respective PDL regional divisions in the summer.
I have a feeling it has to do with travel and squad size. Currently the reserves travel with the first team and play the day after. That means bench players can get in the games as well as the "left overs". If you did the PDL way, your "18" could be on the other side of the country, leaving you with at most 12 players to play in the PDL (and seems like not all teams use the 30 roster spots). As well as not keeping the bench very sharp.
DA players can play PDL as well. MLS could also expand roster size to 40 to accommodate a better reserve situation.
Personally, I don't think that MLS need to expand their roster size or combine with the reserve games. This is a different level than the reserve level. These are guys that are trying to become reserves (or 1st teamers). The reason that they would work with PDL is because that is the level of support that the club can provide for them. If the clubs want to supplement the PDL season with other games, then great (MLS under 23 tournaments, local friendlies, etc). I just would like for some kind of serious player development going on while they are in college. I am not saying that there aren't some good college coaches, just that player development is not the college's mission. It would benefit everybody if players stayed connected to a player development system during that important window. Player development does not officially end at the age of 18 whether the system chooses to support players after that age or not.
Ya, it's not easy. Honestly, when MLS salary cap goes up, and more and more homegrown players are signed fewer and fewer college players will get signed. There'll always be a few college players signed based simply on the fact that no way MLS can uncover all the gems, almost none have a youth residency, and the country and player registration is so massive. So while college soccer needs support etc, it will be relied-upon even less so I don't see MLS really getting too involved there if at all. They'll just continue to send scouts here and there in fewer numbers over the years. The market that may need to be scouted, as far as university goes, is the Canadian soccer college market...untapped, and players not eligible for draft, and even less chance of being seen by the MLS teams pre-age 18.
I think it depends on what you mean by "college" kids since many MLS academy programs are letting there players go to college to get some experience before they sign them. In general, I think the kids who are getting signed right away are primarily those with no interest in going to college. Unless a kid is so good that they can play on the first team right away, they are probably better off getting regular game experience at the college level.
How has the quality of Canadian Youth Soccer players &/or Canadian College Soccer players worked out for Canadian MLS clubs or National Team so far. While it may be an untapped market it may not be one worth tapping! Of course, you are joking. College soccer has few players capable of moving to the next level. Playing with and against lesser competition with few good coaches, even fewer good referees and a very limited season is no way to develop ones soccer skills, tactics and with the ridiculous substitution & time out rules, player stamina and problem solving abilities. College soccer is for the academic not the competitive player.
Although I agree with a lot of what you say, your conclusion ignores the critical point that for most Americans, college soccer is the only game in town.
But playing much few games in the reserve league often against academy kids is better. After a few years we'll see how some of the more marginal kids (meaning not ready to play first team games) signed directly out of HS compare to academy signings of kids that got playing experience in college.
That is but one of the myriad problems weighing down college soccer as a professional development environment. Other factors include: 1) Lack of competition in training 2) Lack of meaningful or competitive games 3) Lack of appropriate training facilities 4) Lack of quality coaching 5) Referee mediocrity 6) Too short training and competitive seasons 7) Banality in substitution and times out rules 8) etc. If you are saying the USA system is flawed and there is currently no good place for U-18/U-20 to hone their craft then I agree wholeheartedly. However, IMO college soccer has very little to contribute now and even less so in the future. Currently, professional signings of youth players by MLS is anecdotal; therefore it has little impact on the youth player pool. But professional soccer has a real stake in youth development and therefore things will change. However, College soccer with the NCAA and their draconian rules and heavy handed methods will not change. College soccer is and will remain for the Academic not for the soccer player with a realistic hope for a professional future.
College soccer will continue to supply cheap, limited skilled workers. There will be exceptions, as with everything, and they will continue to be rare. My tag line for the college soccer heads never changes and they have no answer. For the vast amount of players, the end results are appallingly poor. Skill, vision and technical ability are not necessary. It's ironic that college is where we find our cheap, limited, mostly unskilled labor.
I agree the college soccer is inadequate and the opponents of this view will next put up a pic of Clint Dempsey as rebuttal. The point is that to produce the quantity of the highest level players with the greatest # playing in the highest tier leagues giving us a shot at the ultimate, WC success, WILL not materialize thru the high school-college-draftMLS route. For the size of our country and the talent pool we picking from to form a WC squad is shameful. the highest tier countries are picking players that are starters on first teams from the top 4 leagues in the world. We picking from the scraps. Players like Dempsey are to be congratulated bc they did it despite the ball and chain and they are by definition "genius". Just imagine where he and Landon would really be today if they had grown up elsewhere at were entered in to system at 12. Obviously no guarantees but I would take that bet any day. Everyone on these blogs wants the best for our nation to compete effectively and we recognizing the hurdles and yes we taking steps in right direction. One of the things that will slow down the process is the old mentality of college being the primary route. I am for keeping it bc it as an alternative for those who want to use it for whatever reason.
You primarily get out of college what you put into it. If you put in players with skill and vision you get players out like Ramos and Reyna. If you put in National team players like Nelson and Elliot into 4 years of college you get out Premier League level players out. If you send one Farfan twin into the Mexican development system and keep one Farfan twin to college you still get pretty much the same player out. Clearly the better the environment, the better it is for the players. But as long as players are playing games and picking up experience they will continue to develop and the differences in environment are overstated.
1) Depends on where you go and what your current level is. But clearly there is a lot of competition at top programs. 2) Compact season obvious problem, though somewhat mitigated by PDL season and Spring games. 3) I have no idea what you are talking about here. The training facilites at most of the programs are fantastic. Many of the fitness centers are state of the art and better than what you will find at professional clubs around the world - especially those outside of the top level of the top leagues. 4) Agree that many could be better. 5) Referees are often poor. 6) Biggest problem is the limited training sessions especially in the offseason. Players have to work on their own and most are not mature or dedicated enough to do so. 7) Red herring. If anything this helps the top players deal with the quickness of the professional game. The top players will play the entire game and they are better off facing fresh defenders than a bunch of tired ones. One of the training principles is to put players in tougher environment than they face. I'm pointing out the obvious problem of the alternatives. Like it or not. College soccer not only has provided a vast majority of our professional and national team players a place to develop their game, but it has also attracted and motivated a lot parents to keep their children active in the sport. I'm not sure you are aware of this, but unlike many other areas of the world, soccer coverage does not the first seven pages of the sports section or 70% of the broadcast time on the sports news broadcasts.
You and I are going to have to agree to disagree about this one. As a former long-time high school and club coach who worked very, very hard on his ability to teach the game, I think that the environment can make all the difference in the world. So when I look for an environment to choose for a player, I look for one where the people involved have accountability for developing better players and are judged by that. College really doesn't have any kind of accountability system for developing players and it shows. You are always going to be able to name exceptions, but I watched Claudio Reyna a lot in college (most of his home games). He did not develop anywhere like he could have. He was not challenged anything like he could have been. It reminded me of when I used to watch Mia Hamm in high school. Both players would drift in and out of the game and turn it on when they decided to. Mia talked throughout her career about what a wake up call it was when she went down to North Carolina (the best available option for her at the time) and had to learn how to play almost from scratch and now Claudio is the primary voice advocating for creating better environments for our players. Having said that, I recognize that the vast majority of players are not going to be professionals so why not have college soccer as a goal for them. My feeling is that, since college soccer is not going anywhere anytime soon, we might as well learn how to work with it. That is why I advocate for developing the 18 - 23 age group through systems that are already in place like PDL, DAs and MLS. I think that it is possible to support players while they are in college without messing up their eligibility. Player development does not end at 18, most players who turn pro are not ready to turn pro at 18 and it is not the college's mission to further player development. Those are three facts that, along with the reality that college soccer is not going anywhere any time soon, that we need to take a long and hard look at.
You named the exceptions. One each decade. I'd hardly call Elliott an EPL talent player either. Piss poor return be any metric. Any. Bonetti hit most of the points. The game simply isn't geared to teach pros. I think saying you get out what you put into is a very simple way to look at it. You basically are what you are going in and stay that ways the other way to put it. College does virtually nothing to heLp players be pros.
I really can't see a scenario where any future " big time " talents will ever go the college route. Hyndman, Flores, Pelosi to name a few are going striaght to the pro ranks
Good post. Its just the way the world of soccer works. Its funny now that the US is starting to become a player on the International stage of football but some still want to emphasize college or HS soccer. That's so 4 yrs ago, a long time when things are changing so fast.
I don't disagree that college is not the right environment for producing pro players. That said, Bonetti is right about college soccer not going away. Over time, fewer and fewer future pros will come out of college soccer, but there will always be a few. And if there weren't any, why not attempt to make the best out of an admittedly poor structure, i.e., coordinate college soccer with PDL, NPSL, DAs, etc., so that those college players who are still passionate and ambitious can still develop their games. And maybe they won't make it to MLS, but there's USL, NASL, etc. Also, while the vast majority of players show pro potential before entering college, the randomness and diversity of growth curves being what they are will always produce a few very late maturers, from which we may find some future pros. I had a friend in high school who was 5'5" in his senior year. He was a sprinter, not a soccer player. Anyhow, his best time for 200 meters in high school was 23.5 seconds, not an especially fast time for a sprinter. He came back after his freshman year, now 5'10" tall. With his added height, weight training, etc., his 200 meter time dropped to 21.6 seconds. Still not Olympic level, but darned good for a DIII runner. We won't see many soccer players have that sort of growth or improvement in college, but there will always be a few who were never on any nat'l youth teams who suddenly join the 'potential pro' conversation once they complete their growth spurt and physically mature, or once they fully grasp the tactical dimensions of the game. Even if a better environment (at least the best we can do given college soccer's limitations) doesn't yield any future pros, we owe it to all the players to provide the best environment possible, just because we should allow them to have the best and most enjoyable experience possible.
If your definition of "big time" is confined to the Gil, Fagundez, Altidore, Bradley types - players who are already prepared to make a significant contribution at an MLS level at 18 or younger - then that may be an accurate statement. Players like that will not consider the NCAA, nor should they. However, American players like that are very rare. For players outside of that very select few, college will continue to be a viable option. Also, you obviously can't reliably tell who's going to be a big time talent at age 17. For example, in 2003, Stuart Holden, Sacha Kljestan, Benny Feilhaber, and Brad Guzan all entered college soccer. Who were the "big time" talents who passed up college to sign directly with MLS in that same year? Eddie Gaven, Mike Magee, Arturo Alvarez, and Memo Gonzalez. Similarly, it's very possible (I'd say likely) that there's at least one youth player who's a better prospect than Pelosi on his way to college now. We just don't know who it is yet.
