Well, Klinsmann is in. 13 years ago Carlos Queiorz stated that he would have nothing to do with the re-construction of US Soccer (after he deposited his 600,000 dollar check) because "everyone who makes the decisions have never stepped between the lines." Has Klinsmann been given authority, or does he even want it, to tear the system apart from the club level to the National team? We don't know. I hope so. Even if he fails miserably I truly believe we would be in much better shape than we are now. I would gladly bet on it. I have tried to lay out the only way I can see where the wild wild west can be reeled in and the cowboys brought in line. Many others have chimed in, but I don't understand much how thought (weighing of the variables) they have actually put into it. Pay to play, 501c3 non-profits with Mommies rotating every two years telling soccer guys what to do, an invasion of extremely low level english soccer "coaches" on a 80,000 dollar a year holiday, etc.... Very serious measures are needed or any revolution will just be another farce in a long line of complete, total, blatant scams. "But Claudio Chevara has been anointed as the chosen one to lead us as a nation of "Barca" bred super talents" you say. He and Klinsmann will certainly create a transformation that will cure all ills, suffering, and corruption -- just as Marx, Stalin, and Lenin. Wait a minute. A "National Staff Coach" I was talking to yesterday responded that Claudio did a presentation recently at a big US Soccer gathering and most of the coaches ended up walking out. Based on the level of coaching I've seen at recent Regional Championships and the US Club Soccer National Cup, that may be in Claudio's favor. Maybe they didn't understand what he was doing because it actually results in developing a player who can play soccer. All this upheaval about Mexico? I don't get it. Just because Dos Santos finally tapped into his potential for a couple weeks, torched a left side of our defense that many other quick skillful players could have done the same to, and that Man U. has done wonders with Chicarito, doesn't mean the sky is falling. Our inability to play soccer when we have possession may mean the sky is falling, but not the emergence of two Mexican players (one of which I am still highly suspect of). Landon Donovan, Alex Morgan, Clint Dempsey on occasion, they can play soccer. Other than that I'm not sure what to say. Mexico is not the problem, and certainly not the solution. Rotten coaching -- rotten to the core, lousy coaching is the problem. But, there will not be a player development focused, educationally based solution in coaching until a soccer person, a leader, reels in all the Mommies and effeminate/emasculated males who are controlling the coaching charlatans. The revolution would have to be a bloody (not literally) massacre. A complete and total pillaging of the youth soccer village. We all know the problem. The corruption is out there for all to see. It is simple, most of you become part of the scam rather than standing up and doing the right thing. Nobody fights them. They sell you on a steady diet of "in spite of everything we have good intentions" and it works -- year after year. Claudio's honeymoon is over. Klinsmann is on the clock. I hope 6 months from now I'm not saying "Revolution my butt"
My hope is that he rebuilds it from the ground up. Many of my insiders say it's impossible, too many stakeholders. True. But let someone try to drag them into the 21st century for training youth kicking and screaming if need be. I'm all for it. I just see too many talented kids wasting away.
Sorry to say it, but every official announcement I have seen says that he has been hired as the "head coach of the US Men's Nation Team." That is a pretty limited role.
Bam! The nail on the head. Everything else is just BS. I see the same exact thing. Its discouraging. From all the US and US Club championships I have been watching, to the US Men's and Women's national teams, it has now become embarrassing. Play like Barca? If we could bring our first touch under control less than 10-15 yards downfield that would be a great first step. Mirror, did I say I expect the problems to be fixed in 6 months? If so, then let me try to be clearer. I am hoping to see a demolition, like the Sands, Dunes, etc... in Las Vegas. The strongholds of the do nothing US Federation, US Youth Soccer, pay to play non-profits controlled by Mommies and effeminate males. The strongholds of the Ians, Gareths, and Nigel invasion. The horrific state of crap coaching; the effect really, really bad refereeing has on the youth game, the .... Thanks rca, I just realized that. I guess to be a leader and do the right thing you must have specific things written precisely into your contract and have a title that signifies that particular role. You are right. In this culture, leading us in a direction that would solve most of the problems he currently has to deal with would be too much. The additional role would prevent him from developing an outside back that could prevent a fat, drunken, overrated little party boy that has played for 4 or more different clubs in the past couple years from lighting up the left side of our defense like Diego Maradona. There is just a trickle of hope existing in the United State's most cynical soccer guy. US Soccer and especially US Youth soccer needs a big enema. Juergen, if you need a few I will be happy to get them FedEx'd to you overnight.
True, but the last time around the rumors were that US Soccer would not give him the control that he wanted, so a lot of people are presuming that after the U17s not doing well at their WC this year, US Soccer has had a change of heart and considered that Klinsmann ought to have more of a role in the overall direction of this country's soccer. What others may not be aware of is that US Soccer had also been in contact with former Chilean national team coach, Marcelo Bielsa, about taking a position as technical director, at least according a news report out of Buenos Aires. Bielsa has been credited with the improvements to Chile's national program.
BTW I read an interesting article today that may articulate some of our problems, even though it has nothing to do with US soccer. http://www.leadersinperformance.com/...onal-football/ The article is written by Chris Sulley, the academy manager at Leeds United, and reflects a 10 month field research project of European football clubs. This particularly stood out in the article: Developing problem solving footballers
Erm, Pete, you basically said you expect change in 6 months right here. It will take JK 6 months of assessing before he can even provide adequate feedback. Now, he has been in USA for a long time, and should have an excellent opinion/foundation, and should start to see change soon. Canada hired Osieck years ago. Osieck was JK's coach in 1990. Osieck was assistant for Germany. Osieck sought to change the way Canada did things. He made some good changes, identified some excellent players that were otherwise not known here. JK, with the $$ behind him in USSF, should be able to make significant in-roads into the US system - which bodes well for Canada as I'd expect us to follow suit ... as we tend to do. You also won't see any change to the level/type of coaching nor reffing in 6 months either. Also - isn't it Reyna's role to effect this change in the US, not JK? I suspect JK will give plenty of feedback, specifically to the youth national teams.
Pete you have brought up great points in this and other threads, but you have to realize that your militant stance also is part of the problem. I have seen far to many coaches who feel the way you do, and consequently do not explain themselves well to the "mommies and effeminate males" who like it or not control not just many of the clubs, but the most important asset, the players!! You just telling them that you know best is not going to convince anyone. The first year my DD was on her current team, the parents did nothing but complain about our constant losses. All the coaching staff did was curtly explain that we were doing great and they knew what they were doing. This was true, but why should anyone believe that if they don't understand the game. It has taken me a year of explaining to every parent on our sideline that it is OK that we lost again 1-0 because we possessed the ball for 90 percent of the game and took 10 shots on target for every one of our opponents. These parents just don't get it, because they NEVER PLAYED or WATCHED the game. There is no way you will effect change unless you start at the bottom, and that means educating not just the coaches, but the parents as well. Now as for how to do that, your guess is as good as mine. I am afraid it is going to take another generation of players growing up and having their own kids until we really start to see any improvement.
Let me try again. http://www.leadersinperformance.com...t-practice-in-european-professional-football/
I read that on the other forum, Bird, and I would like/hope USSF would have the patience to see a 20 year time horizon through for development. Fund it, commit your best people to it, and wait and see what comes out twenty years from now.
I think USSF needs to have the conversation primarily with parents. About what to expect, what to demand of their teams and coaches. When I try to communicate this stuff to my parents, it's not as effective because I'm a biased source. But there's nothing from the federation to the parents telling them how their kids should be learning the game. Don't you think parents would rather shuttle their kids to multi-age open scrimmages than spending multiple thousands a year for their 9 year old?
I would much rather do that. I have been pushing for years for my kids clubs, as well as the Rec league that I am on a board for, to do this. I don't know why more people wouldn't want this. Much better to have multiple coaches available for teaching as opposed to the small club who has one coach take kids up through multiple years. Much better to have the kids gravitate to those on the same level as them regardless of age. It stinks just as bad to have your child be the best player on some teams as it does if your child is the worst player (I have had both) because there is no one on their level to push them. I have seen progress from some clubs toward this. The club I am at currently gets all kids from the same age group together once a week over the winter, regardless of team (we have 10 teams or more at some ages) and the kids seem to benefit from it. I would love to see some of these clubs stop entering U8, U9, and even U10 teams in leagues and just scrimmage interclub, or if not enough players, with another nearby club. These kids need more time on the ball, not more games. Until the parents understand that at U9, the kid should dribble a lot and learn to handle the ball under pressure, the situation won't get better. I would rather see the USSF spend money on having Claudio Reyna travel the country addressing club parents as opposed to creating wonderful, complicated plans that will never be implemented!!
Right and that club probably has an enlightened mind running the show. There's a saying "Stand for something or you'll fall for anything." Most soccer parents don't know what they don't know. A handful of conscientious ones actually look at the process very closely. But even the "good" clubs get seduced by the "dark side". So, again, the USSF needs to get ideas in the parents heads. The club admins have their own ideas or it's preaching to the choir.
A lot of really good points. Educating parents isn't enough because many of them don't really learn for the first 4-6 years and once they figure it out its too late -- little Johnny's future, his team, his club, possibly even his age group in that city has been destroyed. If the fed consistently rammed this stuff down the parents throats, and the State DOC's made it a constant mantra... maybe. There still is a huge void in having leverage over clubs if they don't have some sort of a technical skill educational element. I've mentioned how State DOC's could viably coerce his local clubs to have such a program but... With the advent of the academies, the clubs seem to be watering down a bit. This seems like an opportunity to sell a different approach.
I am not in favor of educating ignorant parents as a solution to our youth development problems. It has always been this way in all sports to more or less some extent. Children of athletes are much more likely to be elite athletes (because they have a family advantage others without parent-athletes don't have). The parent athletes just have to instill a passion for sports and know enough to teach their kids the basics until say age 10 when they start playing organized sports. The difference today is that parent athletes are much more rare, than in prior generations. Todays US population is very sedentary. Fact. Parent athletes lead their kids to sports by example. It is a lot more effective than pushing a kid to participate, while the parent watches. Which kid is going to develop faster: the kid whose parent watches him play or the the kid whose parents kick the ball around with him.
This is a repost from another forum on a discussion about the US youth system: "There is no "system". There are "systems", though often disjointed. Other than perhaps Germany since 2007, no country truly has a "system" in any sense. At best there are methods (best practices), scouting and sometimes a cultural preference for a manner of play. People get frustrated with elements in the loose structure that exists. These elements exist world wide. You have bureaucrats administering programs in every country who are more concerned with their own ease or parochial interests than in the mission. You have differences in philosophy. You have simple ineptness. These exist in human endeavors and as long as you breath you can expect to have to fight them and also be accused of being corrupt, inept and/or have the wrong philosophy if you seek to be involved in the process. In soccer in the US we have nothing any different. What we do have are two aspects that make the US (and Canada) different from parts of the world where soccer has been an established part of the culture for decades. First, we lack an educated population. That is changing, but the vast majority of decision makers at the local level (where you find most players) do not understand the game. You only need visit your local forum to see the inane rants of parents and teenage players to glimpse the nature of the problem, Worse, most simply do not care. We care. To us this matters. You need to understand that to vast majority of parents and players, this is a social activity and other elements of their lives are more important. The inertia you are seeking to overcome is overwhelming. We could have the most thoughtful, complete and integrated "system" and it would be no different given this issue. A system or bureaucracy can be constructed to channel people in a particular direction, but when you have such a low level of understanding as we currently do, any over arching system that tried would be so rigid it would fail and likely be worse. Second, the US Soccer Federation lacks the resources in capital, manpower and time to impose any system. It also lacks the will and legal ability. Mandates are largely unworkable and would not be attempted in any event. Almost 65% of the youth soccer in the US takes place outside of the sanctioning or control of the Federation or its Affiliates. Whether it is the local Parks and Rec league, the Hispanic or other ethnic league, High School or College, most are beyond the US Soccer Federation's reach. Further, most know that is the Federation sought to impose measures on them they can leave and there is not a blessed thing the Federation can do. Even for those within the Federation, if you do not like a stricture you can jump from one organization to another. If you do not like small sided games, jump from your State Association to US Club, USSSA, SAY or AYSO. Arguing that these various bodies be eliminated or forcefully combined by the US Soccer Federation would directly violate a number of Federal and State laws. An educational campaign for Reyna's plan is being contemplated. There has been discussion of an advertising campaigning call "Don't Boot It!" Educational campaigns are rarely effective and the money can be more effectively spent on coaching resources and education. For education to be effective you have to repeatedly deliver the message. Having people sign something one time does not work. They need to have the issues repeatedly explained. Given the general lack of understanding about the game, we do not have the resources to accomplish that task. All in all Xs direct answers to the questions were on target, though each of the organizations he cited ("Super Y. Red Bull. ECNL") operate or operated under Affiliates of the US Soccer Federation - Y League the United Soccer Leagues and it was also directly approved and given ODP status by the Federation in 1998, Red Bull and ECNL operate under sanctioning from US Club." Some great food for thought.
I am totally not trying to be facetious here, just to make a subtle point... If your kids possess 60-90% and had 10 shots on target and yet lost 1-0 - isn't that problematic? If you lost 4-3 that would be different, but... you understand what I'm getting at? I'm asking because I used to coach the same way for YEARS. I still feel bad for all the kids I taught to play the shape and triangle game, the possession game, etc. Some of those boys had real talent and a brilliant touch. I killed their careers. It wasn't until I was the low man on the totem pole at a unique youth club where 80% of the staff was former pro and WC players and coaches, where we had a former FIFA WPOY on staff, that I learned to look at player development differently. THE ONLY PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTIC those guys cared about at the youth level was SPEED. That's it. Everything else was about what type of quality on and off the ball the players could consistently put on the field based on what was taught at training. Our guys just typically flat out don't know what they're doing for the most part and need to take a second seat for a while to some more experienced guys.
Dear God, Thank you. This post proves your existence, that miracles are real, and that there is hope.
Elessar, What parts of that article do you agree with? Is it missing major issues that we should expect to be covered?
I Agree with: 1. We have disjointed "systems' 2. Bureaucrats all over the world govern in self-interest first instead of what is best for the sport. 3. We lack a soccer saavy population (which is changing, albeit slowly). 4. Most parents just see this as a social activity. Whereas, for me, if I have a kid with potential I want to give them the training and motivation to go as high as they want to. It's not trivial like a "social activity". 5. There is a lot of apathetic inertia to overcome. The parents don't care about their kid being an international soccer star. High school soccer star is enough. But pointy football and basketball parents dream bigger. 6. USSF lacks money and manpower to make meaningful changes as well as the WILL and legal ability to change things. 7. Mandates are largely unworkable because of the nature of the sport in this country. If you don't like who you play with (state assoc.) you can go elsewhere. 8. Parents need more, repeated contacts with USSF I disagree: 1. That an advertising campaign would be wholly ineffective. Not saying it's complete, but I'm not sure what's missing either.
Could you expand on this a little more, specifically regarding "I still feel bad for all the kids I taught to play the shape and triangle game, the possession game, etc. Some of those boys had real talent and a brilliant touch." Looking back what would you have rather spent more time on? I think I know what you're saying, but I feel like you started a thought but didn't quite finish it (not a criticism of you, just trying to make sure I understand fully). Pete Bond- please feel free to share your thoughts as well.
He was quite clear. The way I would summarize it is: Developing players instead of teams. To a soccer coach, speed doesn't mean only how fast you can sprint a known distance. There are a lot of different types of speed. Tactical speed is how fast you play and includes decision making as well as technical skills so "speed" measures more than just general athletic skills. The shape, possession and other wasted topics he referenced relate to team tactics.
Same with Ajax. They care about speed at youth level, but that's because they have a lot of skilled little kids, so they can select the fast and skilled ones. It's a business for them, so why train or develop those that will not possess top end speed down the road? But the problems we have in the US are different. So how do you see player development differently now?