I agree in the sense that I think some of the selling club talk seems like disguised bias/hate for MLS. Teams are not going to raise up whole classes of HGP to completely sell. No one operates that way, nor does MLS view itself with that kind of self loathing or objective business model. Primary thrust is always to grow your own. You may want to sell the pricey ones, either initially or eventually, but teams that just handed out all their players would struggle to stay in business. They have to have their own product for me to watch. They have to keep players to pursue that. I do think some clubs abroad embrace selling club tactics but even they are usually based around extracting some value for a period of time before selling. This slows down how fast you have to churn players, gives you a current product to compete, and allows you to use their performance as club veterans to increase their value beyond mere youth player value. If the paradigm is to imitate some ok English club's system in the first or second division, they develop for themselves first, shed the weaker players by release or loan or not signing, and then only later sell the good ones. If they sold all their internal players they would go into a relegation spiral. They might have more money initially on the books but they would lose ticket sales. They would also have constant pressure to replace each class with a new class as good or better. None of this is sustainable.
The problems with paying traditional U.S. pay to play clubs as I see it are: Non profit status of the clubs. Windfall payments would make keeping the club's status difficult. Parents of active players pay the fees of these clubs. The clubs themselves are investing no dollars of their own into player development. There are no outside members paying dues for some type of tangible benefit, like watching competitive matches in their town at a stadium owned and funded by the club, or having a club bar or location to actively socialize. Parents are ONLY members of the club as long as their child (or children) make a team. If I am a parent and one of my kid's teammates hypothetically makes it big, I would expect that parents would be paid back for their tuition, fundraising, and travel expenses prior to the club receiving a dime.
The problem with this thinking is that there is supposed a relation between the payer (the buying club) and the player (the transfer object) in this matter. There isnot. The relation only exists by way of the rules between both clubs.
The relation is that my money was used to train ALL the players at the club, pay the coaches, rent the facilities, etc. We are talking about compensating for the cost of development? That is what the solidarity payments are right? We are talking about payments to not for profit businesses in the U.S., can you explain what you mean?
And? There is a difference between solidarity payments and training compensation. These are different from each other. Training compensation is a once only payment, payed by the first team that gives a pro contract to a player. Solidarity payments occur every time a player is transferred and has no link with development as such. An excellent expose on the subject by sports lawyers (in Dutch, use google tranlate) here: https://www.pro-agent.nl/tag/opleidingsvergoeding/ https://www.pro-agent.nl/opleidingsvergoeding-solidariteitsbijdrage-en-doorverkooppercentage-deel-1/ https://www.pro-agent.nl/opleidingsvergoeding-solidariteitsbijdrage-en-doorverkooppercentage-deel-2/ The solidarity payments are payed to clubs that had kids as member from the certain age. Amateur clubs in the Netherlands are no profit foundations run by members and funded by their contribution fee, sponsors and activities to raise money. Nobody has ever claimed money from either sources (TC/SP) for their contribution money etc. to the club after a kid makes it and brings in money to the club. Simply as you pay money to be member of the club and to be able to play matches. Training and development goes with it. SP are in fact a redistribution of the wealth of the buying club to the source(s) of the talents original surroundings. Training compensation is a once only payment to the developing clubs by the club offering the player his first pro contract. It is by no means a compensation for the costs of that particular player as the TC is calculated with the (probable) cost of that selling club's standing in mind. The fallacy lies in the often made error to link the payment with the player involved. The whole environment contributes to the development of a certain player, also the interactions with his fellow academy players. You cannot develop into a class player in isolation, so claiming the money as sole revenue of one player is first flawed for ignorance (it's a team sport, not a tennis player or a boxer) and second not what the payment was constructed for in the first place.
As someone who played (and paid) traditional select, the idea that they get a second windfall off us would be absurd. This training fee should be limited to teams not operating on a pay for play model.
I don't see where it threatens non-profit unless you get into conflict of interest issues -- teams encouraging players to sign with x instead of y to make more $ off the deal -- or people start redirecting the money corruptly -- which might be a risk if a club suddenly gets flush. But otherwise hospitals are often run on a non-profit model but they send you a bill that has a margin in it. It's not the best way to do medicine but there is precedent for it.
Are TC payments made to these amateur clubs? Can you join those amateur clubs in the Netherlands as a member with out a kid playing for said club? Can your child be cut from an amateur club in the Netherlands?
TC payments are made to all clubs a kid has played for from a certain age and the pay is proportionally to the time spent. Yup, amateur clubs in the Netherlands basically are all ages clubs. If there are ones that arenot, those are a rarity. I donot know any. It would be hilarious expensive to just have a club with all facilities just for kids or for grown ups. I donot understand this question.
Just use google translate to see how this amateur club is structured in my neighbourhood. https://www.spartaan20.nl/de-club/historie/1920-1950-oprichting-en-crisistijd/ When you look at the cost for membership you might get into a shock https://www.spartaan20.nl/contributie/
The vast majority of pay for play clubs that we are talking about in the U.S. are specifically for children's teams from around the ages of 4 to 18. The vast majority of pay to play clubs in the U.S. do not have members or allow membership to anyone but the children. The parents pay the yearly tuition for their kids. Their kids must tryout every year to make a team in their age group. If a kid does not make a team, they are not part of the club and the parents are not part of the club. Once your children are too old to play for a club team, they are out of the club. There may be minor sponsors for the clubs, but sponsorships, or fundraising contributions are tax deductible, because they are seen as donations. Are your club fees tax deductible? The vast majority of these pay to play clubs do not have facilities outside of maybe an indoor turf field for cold weather practices. Thise fields are only open when the coaches see fit for training. The vast majority of these clubs rent park fields from local communities for matches and practices, typically for 3-4 month seasons in the spring and fall. The only spectators at these games are parents or families of the children involved, or perhaps coaches from other clubs looking to poach players. I am not including MLS, USL, or other professional leagues because they are not amateur. When I say vast majority, I am confident that covers 99% of the pay to play clubs in the United States. The Dutch TC payments to amateur clubs is not an apples to apples comparison.
That's awesome. I wish that was the case here. I have no option to join a club either as a spectator or to play. Sure I can play in a league with a group of friends, but it's not the same. The clubs here may be around for a while, but they are not part of the community per se.
American parents drive me nuts with their talk, particularly on "participation trophies." I played one competitive season of soccer, where score and standings were kept, before playing select. Until then I was in YMCA ball where everyone got a trophy and results weren't kept. I was defensive MVP of my NCAA team. The two are not at odds. If anything, when I tried baseball and wasn't initially great at it, I felt like they were obnoxious about it for a 5 year old, who I thought turned out to have good hand eye coordination. Dad just didn't play catch with me. I say this because as I understand it Norway, king of winter sports, basically sets it up where you have sports clubs in the towns for small fees where you get instructed. They don't turn anyone away. If you're really into your sport still at HS age they go from fun meets to serious training. They do fine at a list of sports. I am fine with rewarding that effort with a fee. I am also fine with a fee if you're like some pro club running a free academy, though that is a more mercenary effort, let's be real. At least in the back of their minds was already making a buck in transfer, and this fee just gets them something if you sign your first deal elsewhere. I am ok with that if it was free. They gave you something for nothing, the process should throw them a bone. But traditional pay for play clubs like here, round peg square hole. You pay to play. We're square already. If you want to profit off my later success beyond the value you get shopping me as an alumnus, give it for free and take the back end payments. If they fudged this I wouldn't be surprised if it was to get USSF's vote. Allow the select teams in and US drops its objection kind of thing. But the rationale is wrong, doesn't logically follow the same.
Aha, hence your question about the cutting out of the club. Well, as you can see the club can be your club as long as you live, as you move up to other age groups in the club. A grand child can be in the same club as his father and grandfather and all playing.
Which would be awesome if we had that structure here. I would love to have a local club, outside of professional teams to root for. My son got to play in Catalonia, and I thoroughly enjoyed the small clubs within and around Barcelona. The fans were appreciative of good soccer and very knowledgeable. Plus I could have a beer or two in a proper stadium seat! The pay to plays in the U.S. are more mercenary in their approach, which to me belies their "non-profit" status. They really are not attached to any community nor create any community in particular.
As you can see from the member fees (those are year fees, not monthly ones) it costs us less to have three generation play in the club than in a USA P2P club for just one kid.
More related to the topic of this thread is this article (use google translate) in Voetbal International about the talents that started there and got on their way to the professional clubs: Spartaan'20 the secret of the purveyor to the royal household of pro clubs https://www.vi.nl/pro/overig/spartaan-20-het-geheim-van-de-hofleverancier-voor-bvos/share/f77380308b
From that article: ‘We moeten in de gaten houden welke jongens transfers maken en wanneer we recht hebben op een opleidingsvergoeding’ "We have to keep track of which guys make transfers and when we have a right to TC." So basically clubs that have talents moving on keep track of them in order not to miss out on TC/SP's.
Hi everyone, just as an fyi, we have created a thread on this topic over at yanks abroad. https://www.bigsoccer.com/threads/f...non-us-leagues-fr-caden-clark-thread.2113554/