Kids aren't going to college (for the most part) and playing soccer there in hopes of becoming professional athletes. The vast majority of college soccer players know their future lies in a 9 to 5 job. The vast majority of college coaches aren't going to be trying to groom and produce pros. Guys who are talented enough to be pros for the most part are going to opt to bypass the NCAA, or only play there for a season or two (in many cases). (And yes, parents will continue to what their kids to get good and higher educations, and college programs will produce/have players who go on to become pros -- but for the vast majority of all college players, in every sport, they know their first job after college is not going to be as a paid athlete.)
There are players that want to play college ball just to enjoy the experience. Much like top club players that chose to play high school ball. More social, less pressure. It is a game after all....
Unless they don't live near an MLS club. There's a huge percentage of the country that isn't covered by MLS academies. A kid from almost anywhere in Upstate New York (where my school largely recruited from) isn't going to be in an MLS academy. That covers Buffalo, Rochester, Syracuse, and Albany, among others. Buffalo and Rochester both have metro populations over 1 million, Syracuse and Albany are both over 600,000. That's a lot of potential professional players who will almost certainly have to go to college to get noticed by MLS clubs. I know what you're trying to say, but statements like that neglect the reality of youth soccer development in this country.
Knowing that this lies in the future isn't going to stop them from chasing the pro dream while they can. If we're talking higher levels of D1 soccer, it's incredibly out of touch to think otherwise.
Certainly, but the (great) majority of players who are playing college soccer realize that they are not actually "chasing the pro dream." The "higher levels of D1 soccer" do provide the pros, for the most part. But for the most part, the vast majority of college soccer players aren't in "higher levels of D1 soccer." College and college soccer are both good things. But they are what they are.
While I agree that it is important to have more coverage by DA clubs and MLS clubs and improved scouting networks, I think things are improving and moving in the right direction. I believe that Empire United has a relationship with the Revs. And Jordan Allen of Rochester [formerly of the Rhinos and Empire] just signed with RSL as a home grown. http://www.empireunitedsa.org/index.html
I don't know. Because it's an EDUCATIONAL institution? Sure I get that pragmatics are everywhere but I don't think that should trump basic ethics. I can't but think that a college coach should have a delight in teaching. Cynical tactics for the sake of the win sounds like a pro thing and doesn't belong in college.
That's just shifting the blame from the coaches to the sports director. Same ethical problem. Why would a college only use wins as a metric? This speaks badly of a program IMO.
Boosters back winners. ADs make big paychecks based on delivering booster donations. ADs are EXPECTED to hang championship banners up in some sports. More banners = more donations. Sad cycle, but coaches are caught in the middle. Development is more important at Academies.
You make college soccer sound a lot more cutthroat than it is. There are 200 Division I soccer coaches, and each year, only a handful of them lose their jobs over results. Almost invariably, the ones that do lose their jobs get fired over long-term issues, not short-term ones. And in the long run, if you recruit good players and help them improve, you'll be rewarded.
What is the metric for college coaches and programs helping "good players improve"? Is it winning "more" games, or something else? Producing more pros? Do a lot of pros come out of "non-winning" college programs?
I think it is to early to define what makes top players choose which program in soccer. But I agree it will move towards the "what school will most likely help me make it to next level". Like you hear from the top Football and Basketball players now when they sign their letters of intent.
But you're referring to revenue generating sports like football and basketball. Soccer at most Division 1 institutions is a revenue loser. I think deejay is correct in this instance. College soccer is there primarily for the player, not the institution.
In case anyone is sincere in thinking that MLS is irrelevant to D-I coaches today, here's Elon College's newly released recruiting announcement, just posted by Sandon over in the college forum. As we see, the coach has a framed Gabe Latigue MLS jersey mounted prominently on his wall. Not that Latigue managed to stick on a roster for very long, or even managed get into a single game. Doesn't matter. Just getting into MLS was a tremendous reward after four years of sustained effort, a memorable accomplishment for both the player and the coach.
I think it has already moved towards that. Top prospects pick schools with good programs. Just look at the schools of players selected in the Superdraft year after year. Would it be nice is every school in division 1 was committed to playing the game in a way that would help long term player development instead of just winning? Yeah, it would. But there are 203 division 1 programs, meaning something like 1000 kids are graduating from division 1 programs every year. There only are 570 current MLS roster spots (19 teams*30 spots). Even with expansion and minor league affiliates, the vast majority of division 1 players will never play a single pro game. So while I get ArsenalMetro's frustration, I don't think we should really be expecting schools like Colgate to be focusing on pro development. Most top prospects already can and do filter to more renowned programs.
Our 2014 World Cup roster is likely to include guys who played at places like Chico State, Furman, West Virginia and Rhode Island. Our 2010 roster included guys who played at places like Illinois-Chicago, Cal Poly Pomona, and State Farm Community College. I sure hope coaches in those places weren't going f*** you to their pro ambitions. As ArsenalMetro pointed out, Colgate's coach was able to attract some talented and ambitious kids for a while. He also achieved good results for a while. But more recently, his program has taken a nosedive. Perhaps his failure to help the kids develop came home to roost?
Good point - there will always be late bloomers or overlooked players that weren't recruited by top programs, which is why it's a good thing those programs exist. And it would certainly be great for all programs to care about developing players. But I think our system is changing. A greater percentage of top prospects are bypassing college all together. And the top prospects that do go to college (whether they be MLS homegrowns or not) are gravitating mostly to top programs. And I think top programs are much more committed to playing attractive soccer now than they used to be. Entirely possible. If a coach fails to develop players, not only are other programs likely to beat him in the short term, but in the long term the recruiting of the program is going to suffer. Admittedly I don't know much about Colgate or the players there when ArsenalMetro was at school. But it did strike me as strange that he lamented only 4 players there attempting to have pro careers in recent years. For a Patriot League program, that seems like it should be on the higher end of the spectrum of expectations .
I agree with almost everything you've said, but it's worth noting that gravitating to top programs doesn't necessarily cut other programs out of the loop. As an example, look at UNC. Very few of their recent freshmen have gone on to stick in MLS, but their incoming transfers are a different story. Guys like Matt Hedges (three years at Butler), Michael Farfan (two years at Cal State Fullerton), Stephen McCarthy (three years at Santa Clara), and Jalil Anibaba (three years at Santa Clara) have all used UNC as a springboard to the pros. Admittedly, that's an extreme example, but it's not a completely isolated one. Iirc, most of Louisville's starters last year had transferred in, and nearly half of UCLA's did.
Did I mention Colgate by name? I'm creeped out. EDIT: I guess Patriot League and Upstate New York is sort of a dead giveaway. My issue with Colgate and Erik Ronning isn't with the number of players being brought through to the pro ranks. It's the fact that so many have gotten to that level even with the attitude of the coach being so dismissive. It makes me wonder about squandered potential. If Alex Weekes, Steve Miller, etc. could play pro ball when playing such a garbage style of soccer for four years, what could they have done if they played a good system?
This x1000 How many scouts do you think come to places like Asheville, Savannah, Mobile, Pensacola, Jackson? There is no telling how much talent we are losing out on.
Lets not forget the youth tourney's that do exist, heck the big one here in colorado pulls in over 480 national youth teams (Boys and Girls) so there is ways of scouting teams that travel.
Porter switched Yedlin from RW to RB at a U18 camp when Yedlin was struggling to make an impact as an attacker.
Yep here's story showing exactly this After starring with different regional sides in Minnesota, Miller graduated from high school a semester early and left for Creighton University in January 2011, a school which has a strong history of producing professional soccer players. “It was a really good fit,” Miller said. “The coaches there are really good at developing players. Once I got there I was really committed to trying to make a professional career out of it.” http://www.goal.com/en-ca/news/4175...w-eric-miller-landed-with-the-montreal-impact