NWSL League infrastructure challenges for expansion

Discussion in 'NWSL Expansion' started by pressurecooker, Mar 20, 2015.

  1. chungachanga

    chungachanga Member

    Dec 12, 2011
    #26 chungachanga, Oct 13, 2015
    Last edited: Oct 13, 2015
    Honestly, I don't think it's that complicated. I didn't bring up college in the context of Horan, you brought it up.

    When it comes to Lindsey coming to NWSL, I meant in 2014, before she signed her second contract.

    And yes, I meant that she passed on college, not left it.

    The biggest advantage, like I seem to have said a few times, is in Title IX and college / high school system. There are probably more girls and teens playing organized soccer in US than anywhere else. US development is equal or better at every stage, with youth development being on another planet. Overall it's way better.

    US women's development doesn't have to be perfect in every area to be the best in the world. Overall, it has clear advantage.

    It would be nice if more college girls became full time pros. But Europe has much bigger problems, because they have similar league situations, far inferior youth systems, and generally less paid national team players on top of it.

    Like I said, it would be nice if some rich investor supported these out of college girls. Are you that rich investor? Do you have any other solutions? This whole discussion started because I said that your suggestion is not legal in the US. It's still not legal. So since you don't seem to have other solution, I have to think that our discussion is getting a bit pointess.
     
  2. chungachanga

    chungachanga Member

    Dec 12, 2011
    I might be misunderstanding what you want to say. If you mean that she made six figures, yes, I know. But US NT players were known to make 200k+ just from USSF some years, less in others.

    Plus there are endorsement opportunities for top players.

    And of course this year they also had the 2 mil from FIFA for the cup (for the whole team, not each of course).

    Horan's 'six figures' is likely just over 100k. I doubt it's 200k or something like that. Rapinoe made 14k per month in Lyon IIRC, which would've been around 100k per season, I doubt that Horan would make much more.

    I think if Horan comes back instead of choosing PSG, she likely makes NT and ends up with more money than she got in PSG. Maybe she even has some memorable performances and gets some endorsement opportunities.

    Or maybe she doesn't make NT and PSG would be better, who knows.
     
  3. lil_one

    lil_one Member+

    Nov 26, 2013
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Highly debatable statement. Simply more total numbers does not mean more top players. There are more boys playing soccer in the US than in most European countries as well, but that doesn't mean the USMNT is also going to be a top 5 program, nor that the US is doing a great job with development. (Somehow this has become a thread more on development, but it is offseason...so what else is there to talk about besides expansion?)

    Look at development as a pyramid with the bottom as primarily recreational players and the top as the elite, the NT players. The US has a huge number of players in the whole pyramid, but they are primarily at the bottom. The college and high school system does a great job of developing the middle of that pyramid, but not necessarily the top. We need a pro league, with salaries that will keep players in the pro league, to continue to develop the top of the pyramid. (although personally when I think of development, we need to be doing it from both directions: at the grassroots level and the top pro and semi-pro level.)

    The European countries and Asian countries that are pouring money into development are arguably doing a better job at developing the top end of the pyramid while perhaps doing worse than the US in the middle of the pyramid. But if the goal is a strong NT program, then what's more important?

    The rest of the world is catching up and in some cases has caught up, but just in a different way than the US has been developing players. Maybe its time we learn from them if we want to stay on top.
     
  4. chungachanga

    chungachanga Member

    Dec 12, 2011
    #29 chungachanga, Oct 13, 2015
    Last edited: Oct 13, 2015
    While I agree with your thinking when it comes to men's soccer, I'm not sure that it fits reality of women's soccer. I agree, there's something to be said for quality of development, and volume at youth level is far from everything. However -

    1. Is there really a ton of money being poured into women's soccer in these other countries, and are they really better at developing top players?

    It would be cool to see a fully pro women's league in the US, don't get me wrong. But who has that? Germany doesn't, nor France, nor England, nor Japan.

    Top national team level players earn solid money both in US and Europe, and the others have second jobs or are amateurs altogether. Ultimately women's soccer right now is an amateur or semi-pro sport everywhere, only a handful make a good living, and only select few make millions, those few are Americans.

    Youth development sees much more money in the US due to Title IX and high school / college system, plus investment from parents into youth soccer clubs.

    Men's soccer is different of course. It's way more popular worldwide, much bigger money. Clubs are scouting kids worldwide and investing a ton into academies. Some boys are dedicating themselves to soccer from a very early age at a pretty hardcore level, with academics becoming low priority. I think US high school / college system is actually a detriment for US men's soccer development -- although it's obviously much better at giving kids an education and something to do if their pro sports careers don't pan out.

    However, that's men's soccer. There's no such money in women's soccer, and I don't know that any country is really superior at developing these elite players than the US. I'd say that US high school / college / youth club system is about as good as it gets.

    So I just don't see why the sky will fall unless we make NWSL fully professional ASAP.

    Not that we can do that anyway. I think we've seen different women's leagues struggle enough to know that a fully pro league is not realistic right now -- not in the US, and even more so not in other countries. There's nothing we can do, and there's no hurry either.

    If there's going to be a pro-league somewhere 20 years from now, it's going to be in the US, as women's soccer popularity and financial potential is much greater here.

    2. There's volume and then there's volume. I couldn't find official recent numbers for men's youth participation world wide, but it's my impression that US probably leads in raw numbers in the world, at least in organized soccer (schools, clubs, etc). Maybe it doesn't lead if we add all the kids playing soccer in the street and parks without supervision, but still, US boys soccer participation is good and compares well to other countries.

    BUT women's soccer participation in US simply blows other countries out of the water. According to 2014 FIFA data, 53% of all women's soccer players in the world are in the US and Canada.

    http://www.fifa.com/mm/document/foo.../26/49/womensfootballsurvey2014_e_english.pdf

    That's soccer players at all levels - youth clubs, schools, colleges, amateurs, pros, adult leagues. Basically, US / Canada simply dominates in terms of women's soccer participation. Men's participation might look good or even better than other countries, but women's participation is on another planet compared to other countries.

    So men's and women's soccer is apples and oranges for that reason alone.
     
  5. cpthomas

    cpthomas BigSoccer Supporter

    Portland Thorns
    United States
    Jan 10, 2008
    Portland, Oregon
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    #30 cpthomas, Oct 13, 2015
    Last edited: Oct 13, 2015
    Very interesting and intelligent discussion from both of you, even if perhaps not the right thread. Just one addition here, the development of the middle of the triangle at this point is not occurring on high school teams in the vast majority of cases. There might be a very few high schools where it is, but the development of the middle, in addition to college, is occurring in the clubs. And, it's starting to occur in some NWSL teams' development academies although at this point they're very far from being fully mature programs.

    Interesting sidelight here. The club I'm associated with was strictly a volunteer-run rec club until about 7 years ago. It had 120 players. At that point it decided to become a fully competitive club and has been on that path since then. It now has three tiers of players: rec, development academy, and competitive and a very good paid and professional staff, all experienced soccer players and almost all with coaching licenses (above the E level). A total of 1,900 players in our little area of the city. I'm guessing this is not atypical of what's been happening here. How to winnow out the players who are really going to arrive at the top, that's the challenge for the future.
     
  6. holden

    holden Member+

    Dundee FC, Yeovil Town LFC, Girondins de Bordeaux
    Oct 20, 2009
    Los Angeles
    Club:
    Dundee FC
    From your comment it sounded like you were saying if she never went to PSG and had stayed in the US, which would've meant her only option was college or to not play anymore. If she joined the NWSL in 2014, she would still have to beat out the 5 players I mentioned previously. And after seeing her at the 2014 U-20 WWC, I don't think she would've beaten out any of them for a full NT roster spot simply by moving to the NWSL.

    Yes, and like I said, you need to develop players after college. It doesn't matter if you have a million more U-20s than any other country if you don't develop 22-25 year olds. It's no coincidence that the best NT teams are also the ones with a strong domestic league and an older average age.

    And now you're changing your statement. You say it's equal or better, not simply better at every stage. And that's the point, if they don't want to just be equal at the 22+ age, they need to support NWSL players better than any other league does.

    Of course not, many would argue that youth development in the US is far from perfect.

    You keep saying that, but 1 rich investor does nothing. Even multiple rich investors does nothing. There is a salary cap. You don't think Merritt Paulson would love to spend more money on his team? He would. But that's not a sustainable model for every team. And the NWSL does not want to turn into a league of haves and have nots with uncompetitive games like is seen in France. Which is why the salary cap remains and Paulson doesn't get to spend as much as he'd like.
     
  7. Blaze20

    Blaze20 Moderator
    Staff Member

    Seattle Reign FC
    Sep 22, 2009
    Club:
    Philadelphia Independence
    Not to butt in on your discussion but I think there is a difference between 1 rich investor and 1 rich owner. Paulson is an example of a rich owner. Obviously that does nothing for the league as the other teams won't be able to compete.

    However if there was 1 rich investor who didn't mind lose a couple million every year, that could be invested in every team to at least raise the minimum salary and improve other areas of the league.

    Anyway, carry on with the discussion
     
  8. holden

    holden Member+

    Dundee FC, Yeovil Town LFC, Girondins de Bordeaux
    Oct 20, 2009
    Los Angeles
    Club:
    Dundee FC
    Well, that's the USSF... Nobody else would have a vested interest in the success of the league to do that. Otherwise it's not a rich investor, but a rich benefactor. (An investor expects a return on their investment, a benefactor does not)
     
  9. Blaze20

    Blaze20 Moderator
    Staff Member

    Seattle Reign FC
    Sep 22, 2009
    Club:
    Philadelphia Independence
    Well let's call this entity a rich sponsor
     
  10. holden

    holden Member+

    Dundee FC, Yeovil Town LFC, Girondins de Bordeaux
    Oct 20, 2009
    Los Angeles
    Club:
    Dundee FC
    Well, even if there is a rich person willing to just throw away millions of dollars, why would they give it away to the NWSL? Let's say I was a billionaire that wanted to support professional WoSo... Why should I give it to the NWSL where I would have no control and no say over how it is run, when I can simply start my own California league, pay way more than the NWSL does to get the best non-allocated talent and have it run the way I want, plus I'd have the benefit of being able to go to games? Doesn't matter what attendance is, as long as I have a team in my own backyard to watch (after all, I'd just be throwing away money either way). Hmmm... I'm starting to sound a bit like MagicDan here, aren't it?
     
  11. chungachanga

    chungachanga Member

    Dec 12, 2011
    Well no, I'm not changing my statement. I've always said that US player development is better overall, not better at every stage. To quote my posts:

    Europe doesn't have professional women's soccer leagues, they have semi-pro leagues just like NWSL.

    Europe doesn't have any advantage in women player development.

    US develops women players after college just like other countries do, in a semi-pro league.


    You know holden, for a guy who's so nitpicky and keeps telling me how I should go back and read what you are saying, you sure aren't shining in reading comprehension yourself.
     
  12. chungachanga

    chungachanga Member

    Dec 12, 2011
    No one will just support NSWL like that, of course.

    The only reason why we are even talking about paying NSWL players more is because of your idea about USSF. That can't legally happen, and investors aren't likely to do it either. Gradual growth it is, MLS style.
     
  13. holden

    holden Member+

    Dundee FC, Yeovil Town LFC, Girondins de Bordeaux
    Oct 20, 2009
    Los Angeles
    Club:
    Dundee FC
    Well, you never said overall before today, other than to say "I think overall US women soccer doesn't have much to worry about" but you did not specify you meant development overall. But that's all really besides the point. The whole point of what started this discussion was my stating that you seem fine with the status quo, while I am saying there is room for player development to improve. It's not do or die as you have mistakenly attributed to me. I never stated anything of that sort. All I'm saying is that they can do better to support the players who are out of college but not yet on the NT.

    It doesn't matter if Europe has fully pro leagues or semi-pro leagues. I have never argued about that. Europe has rich clubs willing to spend more on players than any NWSL team can do to salary cap constraints. So for someone not on the USWNT or CanWNT they can (not will, but can) make more money in Europe.

    I never said they do. Only that the US does not have the advantage that you think it does.

    Sure, and the US does not have an advantage.

    I will admit that I did not see your changing to saying development overall today. But like I pointed out, you never talked about development overall prior to that. So I am still correct that you have changed your tune.

    My issue was that I posited a hypothetical situation based on your contentment with the status quo, that if everyone is happy with the status quo there really is no need for the NWSL (There have been 0 players to come back from Europe to play in the NWSL that have made the team, so it is a fallacy that one must be playing in the NWSL to make the USWNT. Christen Press made the team by being so amazing in Sweden they couldn't ignore her. Horan hasn't done that, she's a good player for sure, but not better than Press). And you completely ignored that and went off spouting about professional and semi-professional leagues, when that has nothing to do with anything I ever said. It's about there being no need for the NWSL in the current player development setup. You either make the USWNT out of college, or you make it in spite of it all as Press did.
     
  14. holden

    holden Member+

    Dundee FC, Yeovil Town LFC, Girondins de Bordeaux
    Oct 20, 2009
    Los Angeles
    Club:
    Dundee FC
    #39 holden, Oct 13, 2015
    Last edited: Oct 13, 2015
    No, we're talking about paying NWSL players more because many people (not just myself) believe that NWSL players should be paid more (read point #2 from the OP... that's what really started all this). The question is just how can that be done sustainably. I suggested that the USSF spread it's money more evenly rather than concentrate it solely on a few allocated players. I personally don't care if some of that money goes to green card holders. It doesn't have to be USSF players only. In fact, if USSF were more forward thinking, they would see that having those quality internationals that hold green cards in the league improves the competitiveness of the league thus improving their player development so paying them is not wasted money. Sadly, I think the powers that be are not that insightful. Which is why I think they'll want it to go to USSF players. The USSF has plenty of money to hire lawyers that are more knowledgable about the intricacies of the law regarding discriminating foreigners than I and I'm sure they could come up with some system where it is not targeted only to the USWNT 23ish player roster and spread out among more of their player pool. Because that's what it's about, not specifically giving the money to the NWSL.


    MLS could grow slowly without hurting player development because there was no player development to hurt. The USMNT isn't ranked #1. They did not win the MWC prior to the formation of the league, and have not had any chance of winning it since. The USWNT is fortunate that they can ride the coattails of their advantages at the youth level. But without advantages at the professional level, they are only equal. But why be equal when you can be better?
     
  15. chungachanga

    chungachanga Member

    Dec 12, 2011
    #40 chungachanga, Oct 13, 2015
    Last edited: Oct 13, 2015
    Here's part of my original posts in this thread:

    "I think overall US women soccer doesn't have much to worry about, relatively, since in other countries it's worse. US has high school system, clubs, college. US probably has more girls and young women playing organized soccer than the rest of the world combined. So while it might keep losing a bunch of talent because of low league salaries (at least for now), US talent pool is just so much bigger that I don't see how other countries could keep up."

    Does it sound at all like I'm saying that US has an advantage on pro league side? Did I say it anywhere? My argument has always been about overall advantage of the US, and I've always stressed that the main advantage is in Title IX and high school / college system.

    Frankly, I feel like this is just your insecurity talking. I explained why your idea about NWSL having special fund for US citizens was legally not feasible, and it seems like you were bent out of shape ever since. I don't know why, not like I was disrespectful there.

    All I see from you is nitpicking about this word or that word, this footnote remark or that, and telling me how I should read better or how I'm shady or how I'm proven wrong or how I'm changing my arguments. It's quite frustrating to discuss with you, if you want to know the truth. If you are trully interested in an intelligent conversation, you really should work on this attitude.

    And of course there is a need of NWSL -- like I've said before, Euro women soccer is not a money bag either. Few women would get a financially sensible opportunity to play there. Now they can at least play for the season and work as youth coaches or what not during the offseason. Removing NWSL would make no sense. Why remove it just because it's not perfect. I don't know why this is something that has to be argued about.

    I don't really see the point to continue and regurgitate previous points about why I think US women's soccer will continue to be the best. It's all been said before in much greater detail. Title IX, overall growing popularity, no one having anything better, etc. No one has to agree with me, it's my opinion based on the arguments I've mentioned a lot of times, but still just an opinion. No need to get bent out of shape about it.

    As to your last post about paying green card holders too, sure, I'm all for it, but there's probably a matter of money here. USSF only has so much money and has to prioritize. Taking money from national team players and giving them to Mexican citizens or German citizens is likely not very wise, not to mention it wouldn't fly in CBA negotiations with the NT. If there was a big bag of unused money somewhere, it might work.

    And no, USWNT is not equal with everyone else. Out of the 12 world cups and olympics with women's soccer, they've won medals in all I think, or at least close to all, and gold medals in 7. Clearly, having much more robust youth soccer system is paying off. It would be nice to have a financially stronger professional league too, but the sky isn't falling here.
     
  16. holden

    holden Member+

    Dundee FC, Yeovil Town LFC, Girondins de Bordeaux
    Oct 20, 2009
    Los Angeles
    Club:
    Dundee FC
    #41 holden, Oct 13, 2015
    Last edited: Oct 13, 2015
    Look man, I'm not trying to get in to a pissing contest here. All I said in response to your saying it's not legally feasible is "I'm sure there is some loophole their lawyers can come up with to make sure the money only goes to USSF players." If you think that's bent out of shape, well I don't know what to tell you as that is a rather civil response. You might disagree, and that's fine. You're entitled to your opinion, I'm entitled to mine.

    And when you say it is going to USSF players, I corrected you that I am not talking about USWNT members, hence my specific wording of "USSF players." That again is not being bent out of shape, it's about making sure you correctly understand what I am saying, especially when the whole point of the discussion is about supporting the non-USWNT players. I don't think that's an unreasonable thing to clarify in the context of this discussion.

    I never said you should read better, I said you should go back and reread something. I don't think it's an insult to suggest to reread something with a specific context in mind (I do it all the time, myself). It's like watching Memento again after you have watched the ending. You see it in a whole new light. That was my goal in suggesting you reread what I wrote.

    If I wanted intelligent conversation, I wouldn't be posting on an internet forum! (I'm joking, I'm joking... well sorta... ;))

    I didn't say to remove it because it's not perfect. I said from a developmental perspective it offers no advantage over European leagues. So in a hypothetical world where it doesn't exist, it's not a problem, the European leagues can develop the 22-25 year olds just as well.

    I agree. Just like there's no point in my having to keep pointing out how there is no advantage of development at the professional level in the US. You can disagree and that's fine, as long as you're disagreeing with what I'm actually saying. The confusing thing is, you don't seem to be disagreeing with what I'm saying at all.

    As I said on the first page:
    USSF has a very big bag of money of which only a very small part is being used on the USWNT... their more successful team. I must've posted it elsewhere, but to ensure that every player in the NWSL is making a living wage would hardly dent the USSF's total income.

    Found that post:
    Actually, that was just ensuring the minimum salary reached the poverty line. Players are still going to have to work extra jobs at that point. But even for players not on the minimum salary an extra $5770 would still help a lot.

    In a later post I did a calculation that if the USWNT members make an average of $125,000 (that was a number suggested to me by another poster, I thought it should be higher, but I'll go with the lower here), that would be a total of $3,125,000 and an average of $17,361.11 spread across all NWSL players. Of course every player isn't going to get paid the same amount (so not everyone is going to make over $15k), but it's to show how much that money could benefit every player in the NWSL if it wasn't earmarked for a select few.

    I was not saying USWNT as a team is equal to everyone else, I was saying development at the professional level is equal.
     
  17. holden

    holden Member+

    Dundee FC, Yeovil Town LFC, Girondins de Bordeaux
    Oct 20, 2009
    Los Angeles
    Club:
    Dundee FC
    I just realized I did in this sentence what I was talking about in this post... I guess I was right that clarification of the 2nd part of a sentence is important. :speechless: :ROFLMAO: Anyway that sentence should read "But without advantages at the professional level, they are only equal at the professional level." (See, I do go back and reread things with a different context in mind)
     
  18. SiberianThunderT

    Sep 21, 2008
    DC
    Club:
    Saint Louis Athletica
    Nat'l Team:
    Spain
    Three months isn't too long to dig up a thread, is it?

    Plush's comments seem a bit ambiguous to me... By "pool", does he mean the entire league, or the allocated players? Lauletta's comment seem to suggest the latter, in which case I would agree allocation is going to be an issue, but if Plush means the depth of the entire league, then I disagree.
     
  19. lil_one

    lil_one Member+

    Nov 26, 2013
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    I read the quote as talking about allocated players, but I could be wrong.
     

Share This Page