You're correct on Horan. I had my ECNL founding years and when Horan left for PSG wrong. Let's see how the other three go here in the next year. Sullivan probably is the most likely of that trio to make the WC roster. You are also correct that ECNL products will feature more and more as we move along. Do we also take into account that it is primarily ECNL players who have made up the bulk of YNT rosters that failed to qualify for WCs or turn in less than stellar performances when they did qualify (U-17 best finish was pre-ECNL, didn't qualify to two WCs in ECNL era; U-20 Champions once in ECNL era, 4th place finish best so far after that)
I just blipped through the posts on this thread - they seemed to focus on power&politics. The ECNL has a few basic disagreements with the DA rules (see https://www.socceramerica.com/publi...he-development-academy-fc-stars-director.html). To those who think the rift is all about power&politics(&money), these are just the footballs in that game. For others - the issues represent a philisophical rift that merits having different organizations. In summary, the main issues include: a. the substitution rule, specifically at U-14, U-15 => ECNL thinks the DA rule discourages spreading playing time around. b. the play on no other clubs or high school teams rule. ECNL thinks the DA is wrong about this - esp. for high school - in the u.s. high school sports are still a big deal socially for students, and without that restriction, bench players who are shorted minutes in a DA game could get minutes in a game in another league. c. The two year age grouping in DA. ECNL Clubs are mostly one-year age groups. ECNL has to reduce say 6 age group teams to say 4. Lumping teams means ultimately fewer players in the highest competetive bracket. And in general the younger players in the lumped age group will be bench players and not get game experience. There is also the pay-to-play issue ( the DA thinks that its organization will mitigate that somewhat) and the number and frequency of games players play (the DA thinks that its approach moves away from the game- after-game-after-game environment in ECNL). For a more detailed look - please read the article.
I agree with both sides for the specific players they each are trying to address. In my opinion the DA is too big. It should be condensed down so that the fewer players who would be served by the objectives of the USSF are collected into the DA. For the vast majority of female soccer players, the ECNL or other leagues would best serve their needs. I think the USSF was imprudent in the manner in which they structured and implemented "their" program. They could have invested the same funds to heavily subsidize and put forward a program either layered over the ECNL or using the ECNL for a competition platform to minimize travel. I have more specifics on how to run and find it. However there has to be acceptance that it couldn't be offered to every child due to the huge geographic challenges of our vast country. For those in areas not served directly by the ussf there must be additional scouting and initiatives such as pdp or NTC type of programs. However our population is so large that I am sorry to say this, but if we best served a subpopulation we would produce a better team than if we stretched our reasources thin trying to make sure every child had the same opportunity.