That alone would create a failing grade. Canceling a practice is pickup soccer. Anything is possible but the devil's in the details. This could be a charade or one of the single most important steps for US Soccer. Hopefully European Double Pass takes a hard line on play for pay. Everything should be on the table.
If you read the article the major takeaway is that there aren't the correct economic incentives for the majority of our clubs and I don't think they will be able to fix it because the solution has been so obvious for so long that what is preventing it are entrenched interests.
Read the article and Play for Pay is definitely on the table and being discussed in how the clubs are funded and resourced. The article talks at length about the need for the team to have a reason for existence with a ROI or incentive system. DP CEO Schoukens concludes “Why should [the academies] do this [work without reward]?” he said. “There is always the intrinsic motivation, but there is also the extrinsic motivation. By the end, people can be idealists, but at a certain moment, that ends.” All we can say at this point is they all know its a major impediment and we'll see how they figure it out. A lot of moving parts as the article details.
My major concern is that USSoccer has a large task force guiding Double Pass. They could manipulate or just ignore major recommendations which Double Pass seem to be pushing. Simple solution end Play for Pay starting with DA with a combination of funding from MLS, USSF, and Corporate Funding. Money is there IMHO.
Double Pass will run up against the big elephant in the room, that being the near 5B/Y industry which is youth soccer. There's too many people getting their fingers buttered for change to happen unless the USSF is willing to draw a hard line and make serious changes in our landscape. And until that happens there will be little incentive for clubs to develop the best players they can as the pay to play model and making a living off wealthier suburb kids who's families can pay the fees directly opposes a model where you have to survive by identifying and developing the best players possible and earning fees off them. And MLS isn't a solution to this problem. While their academies are free to play, that's only 20 on a continent larger than Europe and with a 300M+ population. Even 30-40 MLS teams won't come close to solving the issue, especially with youth player movement restrictions. MLS "affiliates", which is more a marketing term than anything else are not free to play. Every last SJ Earth Quake affiliate in the Bay Area charges the same fees as non-MLS academies, 1500-2000 per year and have a strong reputation here of using the "affiliate" status to leverage banking those fees while skimping on development. That's the norm across this nation. All one has to do is look at the NFL/NBA and recognize colleges nation wide do much of the scouting of 16-18 yr olds and develops them for them, tentacles across this country. Our soccer landscape will need to come up with its own version of what the NCAA means to the NFL/NBA. Since NCAA soccer is not our future, that responsibility needs to be handed over the clubs, MLS and non-MLS alike, with incentives provided to do the leg work, the scouting and development that the NCAA provides for other sports. And I personally don't see it happening with a closed system and single entity model. Part of what allows the NCAA to flourish in basketball/football is free market competition for the signatures of HS standouts. Many players gravitate towards the best and proven colleges. The coaches, and their track record plays a big part, have to get out and recruit the top players, state their case, compete for them. Our soccer landscape is absent that element. While the model MLS has is good for it in some respects, it's anti-development. But MLS is somewhat free to do what it wants, it's on the USSF to mandate changes to our system/landscape. That MLS/SUM/USSF are joined at the hip makes that tough, but it'll be interesting to see if the USSF is willing to step out more on its own and force changes to the landscape. If the USSF, after Double Pass is done is not willing to do what's best for our landscape as a whole and not just what's in MLS' best interests, this will be an incredible waste of time and money.
I don't think we can do away with pay to play system in the near future or ever. That's why I'm not high on this double pass deal. Even MLS clubs can only fund their academy teams, that is what six teams (4 academy teams, 2 Pre-academy) out of maybe 200 for a big club like FCD? Unfortunately 99% of players have to pay to play in this country.
While I don't necessarily agree NCAA can replicate soccer development in a land of international standards you're post is a very good summary of how lack of incentive for true development hurts. I think a very good start but not a total solution is for the DA to have 1-2 top quality free of charge Double Pass certified teams, with the best coaches and facilities in each US metro area. That creates a player and club incentive to work for those top training spots with the club getting something in return for getting their players there. Its a start.
At some point we have to start having all top players play for free. Starting with the DA. I really don't care if their female players or all those bottom feeders have to pay. I know its harsh but at some point moving toward a free system we shouldn't worry about all those still paying but celebrate those working hard for those teams that don't charge. The key is where do we start and who pays for it.
People don't realize the crazy amount of money involved in US Youth Soccer. It's more than $5 billion a year. You may think $5 billion doesn't seem like a lot, until you realize the annual turnover of Bundesliga is only half of that. And it's roughly the same amount of combined annual revenue of top ten clubs in the world. So you are talking about Real, Barca, United, Bayern, Juve, Chelsea... you add all their revenues, and it is about the same as that of US Youth soccer. So Double Pass can't fix US system.
We can't do it immediately. What the USSF can do however is allow solidarity payments for youth development of all clubs. The USSF can also confront the issue of MLS poaching young talent in their vicinity and enforce payments to the non-MLS clubs the kids sign from, essentially forcing MLS to start paying small fees for all the talent it poaches for free, which starts creating a system where clubs across the country begin seeing a ROI for development, otherwise known as incentives. If you're a non-MLS club and develop someone like Lletget who West Ham offered a payment to Santa Clara Sporting Club when he signed for them but they turned down, allow those fees and allow them within our system so whether or not it's West Ham or an MLS team signing a player, those youth clubs see compensation. It's on the weak minded USSF to do that though. US labor laws don't prevent it either. But as lawyers Christian Hambleton andMichael K. Wheeler pointed out in an article for the Vanderbilt Journal of Entertainment & Technology Law, youth soccer players fit neither the definition of “employment” nor “work” as laid out in the 1938 Fair Labor Standard Act. They concluded: “Players voluntarily sign up to for their club teams either through the pay-to-play model or the scholarship model … As long as the player’s decision is voluntary, it is incidental that he develops and hones his skills while at the club’s soccer facility. The Court made it clear that as long as the activity is voluntary, it cannot be considered work, even if there is a benefit to be gained in the process of the voluntary activity.” In other words, the transactions of a youth soccer club, regardless of whether that club follows a pay-to-play or scholarship model, do not fall under the jurisdiction of U.S. labor law.
This, this, a hundred times this! Very well said. I think you concisely summarized the problems and the solutions.
What's in MLS's best interests would be an improvement over what we have now, of course you and I and MLS probably all have different ideas of what that is. Where is this alleged $5 billion going (which comes from Kevin Payne who works for the youth soccer club industry group?). How much of that are club fees paid by parents? Then it's probably travel, equipment, food, private training, etc.... As any good economic study would do it probably scores secondary effects.
socialQUOTE="didi11, post: 33581096, member: 233956"] People don't realize the crazy amount of money involved in US Youth Soccer. It's more than $5 billion a year. You may think $5 billion doesn't seem like a lot, until you realize the annual turnover of Bundesliga is only half of that. And it's roughly the same amount of combined annual revenue of top ten clubs in the world. So you are talking about Real, Barca, United, Bayern, Juve, Chelsea... you add all their revenues, and it is about the same as that of US Youth soccer. So Double Pass can't fix US system.[/QUOTE] Those $5Billion numbers are thrown around like lake effect snow. Along with $7Billion for all youth sports. Your point is valid no matter what specific numbers are. We have parents that have chosen that organized sports that they pay for is of value to their growing child. Although alternate viewpoints exist, organized sports have a significant positive correlation to health, education, psycho-social, incomes etc. Its hard to breakdown such a perceived and real cultural phenomenon, soccer or otherwise. Where are all these sports teams supposed to get their money to exist. At this point I don't care that so much money is being paid for personal benefits to the player, my care is that for the top players that play can't earn a free top level training environment in any significant number.
Thought experiment, USSF collects a large portion of those club fees through new/increased player registration fees and then redistributes them to clubs based on their rating and the production of pro players.
New estimates, call the OMB, call the GAO, call the NBER! http://goalnation.com/the-vision-of-youth-club-soccer/
Good idea. My issue for years is there is a way to start to solve this situation one team at a time and powers that be are too lazy to start the long arduous process of solving this issue. Through the yrs on this board there's probably been 10 or so quality solutions that would work in some form. Just like yours.
Now its $3-4B. Payne estimates the youth soccer business in this country at $3 to $4 billion annually. Either way Youth soccer is a big business.
I don't believe for a moment that non-DA academies are going to be shying away from the pay-to-play model any time soon. How can they? Hell, even in Europe there is some pay-to-play. Balls, paint, refs, etc. all cost money. Even if youth training fees and the like start getting disbursed in the US, that is a drop in the bucket and a non-reliable source of revenue. I think the Double PASS findings will be more about pro academies and DA non-affiliated clubs. MLS will have to lead this. Already the gap between MLS squads and non-affiliated clubs widens each year, and perhaps after the next TV contract there will be enough money to pull the MLS teams out of the DA and they can go it alone. After that, perhaps the best way to get pay-to-play to wither away is to start a robust affiliate system where, at least at the younger levels, the MLS clubs fund the affiliates. This doesn't solve every issue, but it would increase the number of fully-funded teams AND have them in a pro pipeline. I can't see pay-to-play dying out ever at lower levels, but with cash filtering down from MLS, it can spread the number of fully funded clubs across the landscape. Honestly, though, although pay-to-play is a problem, it is not THE problem. The biggest problem is that these coaches coach to win rather than coach to develop players. That CAN change over time as parents become educated about how great soccer players are actually produced, but that will take time. A lot of it. Like probably a generation. It will also take properly training coaches to teach the game well rather than win at all costs. That too will take time as coaches who were trained properly in their youth become coaches, and the dinosaurs collecting a paycheck retire. Double PASS can't change American culture, but they can provide the blueprint to help get US soccer there and give them the knowledge about what to do when they do finally get there. I would hope that no one here would expect this to be a quick fix. Hopefully the USSF also realizes this.
Are you sure that for most parents it isnot more than a good pass time spell for their kids? I cannot believe that in these days of internet real interested parents do not look for characteristics of the worlds best academies.
Let me throw some simple numbers and math, then everybody would agree on the size of US Soccer. The registered young players are around 4 million in US. If each player spends $1250 on soccer related stuff (club fees, practice/fields, tournaments, kits, food, drinks, travel), that is $5 billion. Now you agree $5 billion is not some crazy number, is it? I do not know one single soccer player who plays club soccer (however low level) whose family spends less than $2500 a year. Also, the solidarity payment model wouldn't change US system. Again, it's because the number doesn't work: Let's say you got ALL the solidarity payments of Bundesliga, that has to be less than 10% of total revenue, no? OK, that is only about $300 million - it doesn't even cover 10% of US Youth soccer revenue!
In some respects yes, in others no. When I look at our top youth NT prospects, outside Miazga you're looking at Pulisic, Zelalem, De La Torre, Akale, Perez, who had nothing to do with MLS academies. Then you consider two of the top young strikers to enter MLS over the last two years, Morris and Larin, and they're largely products of non-MLS clubs and the NCAA. Porter too if he didn't blow out his knee on NE's parking lot. So I'd argue MLS and it's "affiliates" going at it alone is exactly the opposite of what we should do, especially given the MLS youth player restrictions. We're such a vast nation that talent, especially elite talent is coming from non-MLS situations. We should continue to encourage that and increase incentives for all those non-MLS clubs. And when MLS academies/teams do separate themselves as proven development institutions, we should want as much top talent as possible going to those proven academies, which of course is anti-parity, anti-single entity and anti-player movement. Until MLS changes its structure and/or the USSF implements larger landscape changes, there's not an argument for a league with 20 and eventually 30 teams covering a continent this large and who controls player movement to go at it alone. The MLS structure doesn't even come close to maximizing the talent it does get its hands on. The idea a guy like Pulisic can trial in numerous countries before settling on Dortmund while MLS would have sold him a single team to sign as a HG means development, through and through is not a main priority to MLS but rather maximizing profit by controlling wages/movement through single entity is the priority. So MLS can do what it wants as a business but the greater issue is development across this nation, the landscape. No way should that be put mostly in MLS' hands when their model is anti-development, unless you luck out and grew up within 75 miles of Dallas or some other luck of the draw scenario. Whether its overseas multi-tier leagues with pro/rel or our major sports here using the NCAA for development/player identification, someone else needs to take on that role outside the 20-30 MLS teams. Just has to or our landscape will always underachieve.
This discussion is becoming a bit like the Pro/Rel discussion. We're not going to eliminate every pay for play spot in the US by the end of the month. In fact why would we want to. It vicariously funds a massive number of clubs, players, and leagues. Its not perfection but its a base of revenue to build upon. My issue is how do we end play for pay for the top end player. Every player is going to pay something to someone to play a sport no matter what it is. For me, how do we increase the number of free spots from a few hundred to a few thousand. That's my initial goal. Its not to end an entire system that funds millions of players. Its not ideal but we all know its not going to end in its every form. The sucky player can pay for all I care so they become a better citizen but how do we get the great player a free top notch training environment as soon as possible.