I agree MLS has gaps in their development and that regularly scheduled stretch objective level games are lacking. The advantage of MLS of almost full year training against professional players without the formal game structure. I like that high level College get games but don't think the packed schedule of sometimes 3 games a week against some wide range of college team talent is ideal either. I don't like the informal pickup level of spring ball and PDL. You emphasize games I emphasize training. You don't mind spring ball and PDL and I think it should have no role in development. Both have gaps my take is that the gaps are smaller for MLS development compared to NCAA college ball. This doesn't discuss the HG roster and budget limitations though and the gimmicky role its taken over time. Even if I think professional development is better the huge limitations of the HG initiative makes me less enthusiastic that HG program is the incremental step toward better MLS professional development. In some ways the HG program is not really a true professional development program.
A revised list. Again, this is the entire MLS cohort for these age groups. Non-US-eligible players are crossed out. Oscar Sorto will probably be added as a 1994 after MLS Cup. Changes: Crossed out Hernandez as not eligible Cordon and Makubuya cut by Toronto Added Mobi Fehr I expect a few more names will drop off December 2. 1993 * Omar Salgado, VAN * Luis Gil, RSL *Jonathan Top, FCD *Jimmy McLaughlin, PHL *Jose Villareal, LAG Victor Pineda, CHI Jon Kempin, SKC * Andy Najar, DCU * Doneil Henry, TOR *Cristhian Hernandez, PHL Caleb Clarke, VAN 1994 Richard Sanchez, FCD Kellen Gulley, CHI Mobi Fehr, unattached Bryce Alderson, VAN 1995 *Zach Pfeffer, PHL *Jack McBean, LAG Kellyn Acosta, FCD *Diego Fagundez, NER
Erick Marscheider, HOU (citizen?) Carlos Salcedo, RSL (likely will sign this offseason, citizen?) McBean is a '94.
Yours is not an unreasonable position. I think if you had a more first hand view of training sessions you'd come to a different conclusion. Both training and playing are important and if you are not getting both your are not developing. What many people, and for that matter many players, don't realize is that you can train very effectively in small groups. So if you are around a few dedicated players you can still get effective training for many things. I was talking to one of the Galaxy assistant coaches and he told me that he was amazed that the only player who would work out on his own was Beckham. Sure there are some tactical elements, but if you are dedicated you can study these on film and don't necessarily need to learn things in a group tactics session. On the other hand the higher the level of player you are, the more difficult it is to find high level games. For younger players it is not hard - just play against more mature players. But by the time you get to where everyone is mature, you run out of options.
I do not believe for a second the inconsistent nature of voluntary workouts with only a few players is any thing that a top development director would want for youth at this stage. Free play is important when you're young but at this age its important to have intensive training sessions against other competitive players in an environment without wasted time or effort. I've heard enough top development youth directors to know that a sporadic individual training is fine but not in any significant amount. Top training occurs with the full group in a quick paced, demanding and competitive environment without alot of wasted time, emphasizing effort and quality. This really can't occur if coaches let the players of this age decide if they practice and what is accomplished. Alot of misguided trust would need to exist. I just don't see alot of players calling each other up after class and say hey you want to get together to kick the ball around alittle. A true 10 month professional regimine has the importance of being required for all and supervised in some fashion not willy nilly for those who want to.
You've never been around people in a top program have you? You really think kids at Akron or Maryland text each other in the after class and see if anyone wants to kick around and put a couple shirts on the ground? Let's see how Woodberry does. Sure it is not the ideal world. But just because it is not the ideal world doesn't mean that dedicated players can't make it work.
That's exactly what happens or they have their scheduled times to meet up and play. However, the level of play once everyone is together is very debatable.
I don't doubt it happens or that it should happen is some very small way. Its just not the way to develop players in any longterm significant way the majority of the year.
Please stop the I've been around top college programs stuff like its a badge of honor. I don't demean you for BEING around a top college program with all its oddities and development failures known to the world. If we can keep it to the points I think we and the readers would be more appreciative. You've toned down your rhetoric lately and made valid points about development. We still disagree on many salient points, I'm ok with that. I like that you bring a different perspective and when you address the idea and not me as a person in a thoughtful and moderate tone, I have begun to enjoy some of your posts. Keep up the good work.
100% agree. I was usually one who helped organize these meet ups and they were fun and could be intense but the consistent training needed is better than these. One of the positives of doing these is players feel more free to try new moves and ideas. These are not the best way to develop players.
We're good at talking about nothing. Apart from Luis Gil's 5-minute cameo, have any YNT eligible players even gotten suited up in the playoffs?
Villarreal and McBean dressed in LA's playoff game. In the SJ series, McBean was dropped from the 18. Against Seattle, McBean returned to the 18 and Villarreal actually got on the field for six minutes.
Thank you Landon Donovan and your bodies inability to process enough potassium after severe physical activity.
Another update. This is only signed players, no Academy players. All players in the cohort are included, but non-US eligible players (cap-tied or known not to have a green card) are crossed out. Additional names welcome. 1993 * Omar Salgado, VAN * Luis Gil, RSL *Jonathan Top, FCD *Jimmy McLaughlin, PHL *Jose Villareal, LAG *Shane O'Neill, COL Victor Pineda, CHI Jon Kempin, SKC Eric Marscheider, HOU Charles Renken, POR * Andy Najar, DCU * Doneil Henry, TOR *Cristhian Hernandez, PHL Caleb Clarke, VAN 1994 *Jack McBean, LAG Richard Sanchez, FCD Kellen Gulley, CHI Mobi Fehr, unattached Bryce Alderson, VAN 1995 *Zach Pfeffer, PHL *Marco Delgado, CHV Kellyn Acosta, FCD *Diego Fagundez, NER
What is strange that the only players getting on the field are back ups of Donovan and Morales while all of MLS stiffs aren't surrendering any minutes. May be it's a secret MLS policy that every team must have some number of stiffs on the field. Like MFL league forcing teams to have some number of youth players on the field?
My rhetoric has not changed. What I think has changed is that I think you are taking a more realistic view of the development process. You were once a lot more gung ho about kids signing with MLS and going "pro" as soon as possible and now are less so because it is not a "real pyramid." My point is that if your comments were grounded with actual experience with youth academy teams, youth national team players, college coaches, professional teams etc. you could put what you read in better context and your statements wouldn’t be as unrealistic as I sometimes find them to be. My views aren’t mainstream, but they are based on watching kids as they moved from grade school to being discussed here. I’ve talked them, their parents, coaches and even did some training on occasion. As time goes by, I’m more confident in my beliefs, but I’m perfectly happy to adjust them when better information comes along. I once upon a time bought into the belief that the 3 month period of high school play each year was a primary factor in our kids being behind. Then I went out took and took a first had look at the different environments and told my kid not to worry about academy and go play high school ball for a couple of years. Not only was High School ball a far better social experience, it was better from a soccer development standpoint. Now would there have been High school programs where this would not have been the case – absolutely. But since I had first hand knowledge I was able to realize the type of program was far less material to the decision as compared to the type of competition, actual time in competition, type of practice, amount of practice, travel, cost and other considerations. When you pontificate simply based on the questionable face value claims you read about, I bring up your lack of ability to put these claims in context.
A couple of things: First, I’m not sure where anyone on this board has ever said college is ideal. Second, college soccer is an overly general term as well. Some programs are almost indiscernible from college club teams in their expectations of players while others are extremely demanding and voluntary is in name only. There are only about a dozen schools that have averaged getting two or more players drafted over the past 5 or 10 year period. Part of it has to do with the athletes they recruit and part of it has to do with the culture of the program. Assuming you had you had the necessary training at a young age to be considered, in order to play professionally you need 3 things: A certain level of athletic ability; The drive to train to limit your deficiencies and accentuate the one or two areas where you excel; and a place to play so you can get accurate feedback on what to practice and and get people at a higher level to see you. Good coaching serves as a guide and a good training environment makes it easier. However, the primary factor of success is the determination of the player to train diligently. There is plenty of opportunity for a determined player to get the level of practice needed in a good college environment to succeed. Take Eddie Lewis as an example. He wasn’t exceptionally big, quick, or fast. But he was left footed so Sigi Schmid, who was his college coach at UCLA at the time, said he told Lewis the one place where he could be the best player on the field was crossing the ball. So Sigi suggested that Lewis work on becoming the best crosser he could. Lewis did just that, eventually going from UCLA, to MLS, to League 1 to the Premiership. It wasn’t the UCLA practice sessions that make him a Premiership player, but instead what Lewis himself did in those practices and outside them to develop his crossing ability. The point being is that there is more than enough a player with the true desire to become a professional can in a good college environment. In contrast, there is far less a player do on his own to actually play in competitive games. The other point I’m making is that MLS (and often outside of MLS) isn’t always the perfect development environment people believe it to be. If you’ve been a captain of a team you realize the practices revolve around the needs of the starters and not the squad players at the periphery of the team. The starters get the focus of the reps and the focus of instruction because these are the players that will win or lose the next game. The content and volume of the practice is based on their needs and everyone else is there to support them. A kid who a coach believes will be a key contributor in the future may likely get some special attention, but the rest will likely have to find a way to sink or swim on their own. Take Tristan Bowen and Gysi Zardes. Both are athletic players born in 91 who were part of the Galaxy Academy. Bowen rarely trained with the academy players and was clearly a much more accomplished player. Yet it wasn't until he got loaned out Bowen never really had a chance to play much in real games nor was he ever central to any coaches plans in practice. Zardes in contrast got a couple of Academy seasons and then got an 3 years of college where he was a main man. Yet even staying at least a year too long in college (I can't for the life of me see why he didn't come out last year), I expect Zardes to show better next year.
I'm not trying to diminish your own personal observation for your limited sample size of one. Every one needs to make personal choices based upon their personal experiences. By your own admission it was the best decision for your situation. It may not be the best for everyone throughout the country. Your rhetoric has previously been that your personal experiences is more common than realized and should be instituted by more. I do not think you can make that case. Sometimes when you are involved specifically with institutions it restricts objectivity. I do believe your rhetoric has been toned down. That's my choice to make. I too have adjusted my viewpoint based on an array of changing facts and will continue to change as MLS changes. I look forward to more of you measured posts, even if we disagree.
Not exactly. I'm certainly not the most connected guy in the US soccer world but I got involved in youth soccer at National level some time ago and got to know people along the way. So I learned early on the environment, concerns and issues vary considerably from are of the country to the other. I also keep in contact with people so I have a reasonable understanding the current issues in many areas of the country. On the other hand, what players need to develop really doesn't change.