That's why the number of waivers would be limited. If too many players go, it undermines the 10-month program for the rest of the players. DA clubs generally roster about 22 players; if a few aren't available, they should still have enough to cover injuries and to provide some players some rest on two-game weekends. Now, I would certainly understand if a club declined to offer any waivers, deciding that it wanted all of its DA players to commit to the full 10-month program. But if the club is willing to offer the waiver, and if the waivers are sufficiently limited in number so as not to undermine the DA program for those who are making the full 10-month commitment, and if the player wants to use the waiver to play HS soccer, despite the concerns mentioned in your second paragraph, I don't see the problem. It's letting the players who want to make the full commitment to the 10-month DA do that, while also letting others play HS soccer to the extent it does not harm the club's ability to provide a higher level of training to those committing for 10 months. BTW, as far as I know, no one would be losing players mid-season. Rather, players receiving waivers would be joining the DA team in Nov. after playing HS soccer in the fall. Now, the letter copied in the first post in this thread was sent out by Match Fit, which is in NJ, which plays fall soccer. I don't know how it is being handled in regions where HS soccer is played in the winter or spring (and if anyone reading this does, please enlighten us!). It is possible that players in those regions simply won't be eligible for waivers; as I've noted in a previous post, the 10-month DA proposal is particularly controversial here in the Northeast (where we play fall soccer) due to the number of kids in DA who attend private schools that require them to play a school sport. That happens elsewhere but significantly less often.
It isn't about "winning titles" it's about squeezing every last $ out of the parents of the younger kids (10-16) who support these "academy teams"...
Problem is that hardly any of these kids turn out to be talented enough to "become a pro"....FC Dallas has had a "no high school soccer" rule in place for about 4 years....and have yet to produce a single player to make any sort of meaningful impact for the first team....They have added some academy players to their roster for this season.....at the specific orders of the ownership....here's betting not a one of them will make a blind bit of difference this season....the other self proclaimed "elite" clubs haven't done jack.
I'm skeptical about this claim. I Googled NV and it's a public school. While I know absolutely nothing else about NV per se, it simply seems mathematically unlikely to me that any public HS (or any club dominated by players at a single HS) could be at the level of a DA club, for the simple reason that the DA club can and will take the best players available throughout a region, while a public HS is limited to the players in its school district.
I didn't mean the HS club could compete with a same age DA, I'm saying there are a lot of kids that play for private clubs that play in the MIRL or National leagues against the DA squads and are competitive, and then have large groups that happen to attend the same HS too. 2 clubs that come to mind are FC Premier and Campton United who have had teams do quite well regionally and nationally, and the kids mostly go to a few area schools. I'm sure its that way in a lot of affluent suburban areas around the country that have top clubs and coaching.
That's exactly why I used the example I used. If any season coincides it is unfathomable for a player to quit one team for two months then come back as an active, cohesive, integrated player of the team you just left. Any true sportsman knows that if you commit to a team you commit to that team, its coach, teammates, and all its requirements for that season start to finish. It boggles my mind to think there are people who play sports that thinks its ok for a player to play both sides of the coin and not know how it affects the others around them.
My point is based on the assumption of having the DA and HS schedules conicide and conflict. If I'm wrong all bets are off. I absolutely understand some have 30 kids and that may be too large. With that said the solution isn't to allow anyone to play HS ball then return. That kills the comprehensive, competitive, intensive, integrated training methodology of the Development Academy System. The solutions lie else where. Don't have 30 rostered, possibly allow the 5 worst to play HS then earn his way back onto the team. If you're not commited or not good enough to play enough games in the DA then possibly the player shouldn't be playing DA soccer with its stated goals. No roster spot should be guaranteed and realize if you leave you may not get it back because others are trying hard to get them. I just don't understand the construct that if a player isn't getting enough playing time for his DA team and wants to play HS soccer that the world revolves around him enough for the DA team to then let him go play HS soccer and then save his roster spot that hundreds of area kids are competing to have. DA roster spots are limited and are valuable but some may want to give them up for the HS 'experience' and demand them back? Who thinks that way?
This sort of thing happens all the time. E.g., players leaving their MLS teams to play in the World Cup, or other such competitions. Or, on the other side of the coin, players joining teams for a limited time. Yet the Galaxy were still (very) interested in having Donovan come back after the WC, and Everton was interested in having Donovan play with them for a limited time. I'd also point out that the DA is supposed to be focused on individual development, not team success.
This clarifies things for me to some extent, but it also confuses them. Here's why. I was wondering how a club dominated by kids from a given HS could possibly be competitive with DA teams. You've clarified that your belief is based on the fact that these clubs "play in the MIRL or National leagues against the DA squads and are competitive." So your belief is not just a supposition unsupported by evidence. It's based on actual game play. That helps. But the part of your answer that confuses me is the same part--because my understanding was that DA teams generally weren't allowed to play non-DA teams (because part of what the DA is trying to do is reduce the number of games played at elite levels). I went to the DA's FAQ page, and it says: "Can Academy clubs participate in non-Academy competitions? Academy Teams are only permitted to participate in Academy Competitions (League games, Showcases, Playoffs and Finals Week) and non-Academy events approved by the Academy Technical Committee held during the following windows: Winter Windows: Christmas/New Year's Week Spring Window: Easter Week Summer Window: End of Season (July) to September 1 "Academy teams are not permitted to participate in competitions such as State Cup, Super Y-League and U.S. Club Soccer." And it sounds like you are talking about league play, which would not be consistent with that rule. So that's where I am confused.
On this point first - you can't compare what pro's are doing to what is being discussed for youth. Totally different. Second, your point earlier about giving exemptions to some DA kids for HS soccer and not others - how do you pick which kids? what does this do to team unity? How can you justify some being able to go and others not? By "you" I mean the DA of course. This would be deemed favouritism potentially and that is the end of your team right there and then. I watched a talented u12 team the other day get beat by a far less talented group - it was obvious why...team unity and attitude. @SUDano - great post about kids leaving the DA and going to HS team then demanding spot back. I say "sure, you can go, but don't expect a spot to be available when you are done." Commit to a team, and that's it.
You make a good point and I would imagine that is why the waiver policy appears to be limited to kids who are required to play sports at their private schools. (That's not exactly the way it's worded, but I think that's what's intended.) If you let some kids who are not subject to that requirement opt out of part of the season, while others are not, I can see how that could create some resentment. But if waivers are granted subject to this limitation, then I don't think there would any perceptions of favoritism regarding the kids granted those waivers, because their schools required them to play school sports. Their choice is not simply to play DA soccer or HS soccer; they would need to switch schools in order to play in the DA, and I don't think US Soccer wants to be forcing kids to leave their schools (which, in some cases, they may not have gotten into if not for their soccer abilities).
Curious, Why can't DA programs work within the constraints of high school seasons. Schedule games so that their is not a conflict between clubs and high school. As most play in a regional league that might be easily accomplished. That would allow the DA players that choose not to play high school to train and play scrimmages with their DA team, and possibly have guest players as a way to work their way onto a squad, but not have anything count toward official records. Not sure how many teams play fall rather than winter or spring, and obviously with some teams drawing from multiple states may present a problem for a few.
^b/c HS soccer is a lower level and generally so are the coaches. So why would USSF/DA want to encourage their "elite" players to go play there? YES THERE ARE ALWAYS EXCEPTIONS. Before anyone spouts off that Central Middle School beat some u16 DA team....
Because it allows the players to play for the excitement of the game rather than the doldrum of club. Don't get me wrong , I completely understand that generally the level of play at the DA is superior to HS, but HS offers options and experiences that have been well documented in previous posts. High school soccer is nothing if not exciting for both the player and fan.
"fan" @ HS soccer......don't make it sound like Friday Night Lights! I gotta say - 30 kids in an age group at DA is madness unless they are running a full and comprehensive reserve team schedule. I know what they are thinking "have a younger and an older group of players for both u18 and u16 thus having u15-16-17-18 teams rather than just u16 and u18 - helps with promoting players and having subs/reserves when the first team is down players.
Everything's changed this year, hasn't it? I was referring to the past several years before this new format. I think this set up also insulates these teams from negative results against non-DA sides that also helps to foster development.
Take a look at the DA rosters of Fire, Magic and Sockers in IL if you like. They all have over 30 kids in U-16 and not only are most sophs, but most are '95's with just a handful of '96s and 1 or 2 younger players. So, no I don't think that's the case here.
Not in youth sports or activities it doesn't happen. They want commitment for that time period. Comparing Landon Donovan going to the World Cup to a DA player who wants to play HS ball is apples and oranges. If the DA player went to play for the USYNT or a professional trial I'd agree with you. Its more like Landon Donovan leaving the Galaxy to play on a PDL team.
Here in Mass, up through age 14, you can be rostered on both town teams and club teams, and sometimes they get in each other's way. There's an elaborate set of rules designed to navigate who's supposed to get priority when that happens. (See, e.g., http://www.bays.org/node/63.)
I should have clarified, at the younger ages the dedicatiion and commitment expected isn't as high as older teens. Just see the coach at the older ages say, kid you have to commit to us or them, there's no inbetween.
I don't think anyone will question the importance of a high school education, but I'm not sure the same can be said about high school soccer. Apparently the tide has been shifting towards emphasizing club play and development leagues. Let's talk about high school soccer
The irony is that some of the better Academy players will be asking to be developmental players, especially in those areas with high school soccer in the Fall and Winter.
Haha. What it fosters DA teams from is the reality that they're still pay-for-play teams with salesman coaches who can be beaten by a well coached team from a soccer playing neighborhood. Having seen HS teams all over the country - there are a couple of things: 1. High school soccer experiences vary wildly, so even when people think they're comparing apples-to-apples . . . some places the high school team plays off campus in a drainage ditch in front of the mom who drew the short straw - a lot of other places, kids are playing high profile games in front of 1000's of fans on a semi-regular basis. Obviously, the developmental effectiveness of high school soccer is impacted by the quality of this environment. 2. The only place where there is no-direct-cost team selection and coaching in soccer is high school. Any effort by USSF to undermine it hurts the game overall, even if it makes more money for the Fed and for the people who make up the Fed (after all, that's what this is about). 3. Developing fewer kids in a more expensive way is pretty dumb. Presumably even the greediest, dumbest parents will see through this and the program will collapse . . . 4. There is NO CHANCE of any ROI for parents here. By the time they're done paying for DA the college scholarship will only recoup some of the cost for most kids (and what college coach wants to spend real money on a kid who's not THE STUD on their own team? fewer teams = fewer "studs")