Interesting Arena comments on youth development and youth national teams

Sandon Mibut · Jan 18, 2004

In the most recent Soccer America, which I just got a couple days ago, there is a very nice interview with Bruce Arena conducted by Mike Woitalla.

Arena touched on a number of issues, including some that are of interest to the regular here on this board.

There is no link to the article that I could find, so I took the time to transpose the quotes, that are relevant to this board, as I think they merit some discussion and should be out there for public consumption. This is not the complete interview but I didn't see the need to post the stuff that's not germain here.

All type-o's are mine.

Arena's comments are in italics and the rest are mine.

On the importance of the Olympics in terms of preparing guys for the Sr. team

"In 1996, the only real positive thing we got out of it was we were able to have Eddie Pope ready for the national team, and I guess Brian Maisonneuve and maybe Frankie Hejduk.

Oddly enough, from the Olympic team in 2000 that was so successful, very few of those players have been able to deliver at our level. You had the overage guys – Hejduk, Brad Friedel and Jeff Agoos – and maybe Landon, but Landon didn’t play much.

It’s really not a direct correlation. It helps somewhat. The most important thing for me is that we have a league that gives the players experience on a daily basis. To me, that’s more important than an age group competition."

I would guess a lot more players will come out of the current pool, especially since so many already are and others are close. I mean, it’s hard not to see Onyewu and Marshall, as future nats.

On MLS and player development.

"The next step should be starting reserve and youth leagues.

That’s to me the most critical technical requirement of MLS for the next five years. They can’t shy away from it. That is a necessary requirement of having a professional league – you play a major role in player development.

You don’t rely on a residency program in Bradenton, Fla. It makes no sense.

Until our top young players are affiliated with professional clubs, we’re going to be behind. The Bradenton concept is a great concept given that we have nothing else, no alternative.

The alternative in the future has to be MLS clubs. Because all they’re doing is playing against each other in Bradenton everyday. You only improve to a certain degree in that environment. "

He’s said this before but he makes no uncertainly qualms about it here. Clearly, he is using his bully pulpit as national team coach to make a statement to MLS. I’m sure he’s said this to Garber behind closed doors, but he’s basically saying MLS is screwing up and hurting US soccer if it doesn’t have reserve/youth teams in five years. Pretty strong statement by BA.

Somewhere, Dan Loney and the rest of the “Pros Develop Pros” advocates are smiling.

On whether top players like Landon Donovan would be better in MLS or Europe.

"Obviously, one of the premier leagues – England, Spain, Germany – would be a more challenging environment. Because of the format of MLS, regular season games aren’t that important. There’s not as much pressure….

In Europe, you play for your life everyday. We have found in many situations that makes a player a better player.

But if you look at Landon: At this point in time, Landon is better off in the MLS environment. He is not ready, he doesn’t want to deal with the European kind of soccer environment at this time. That’s fair enough. He’s 21. Landon, when he enjoys his living environment, his soccer is better.

That means MLS is clearly a better option. At some point maybe he’ll feel otherwise. The mental state of players is critical to how they perform on the field."

Is it me, or did he just call Landon a pu$$y? Basically, he’s saying Landon should go to Europe because he’ll be challenged more and play in more games that count but right now, he’s too soft to deal with living over there and his game will suffer if he doesn’t live where he’s comfy.

I’m guessing he’s happy to see Bocanegra go and that younger guys like Casey and Onyewu are toughing it out overseas.

On the performance of the US at the U17 and U20 world championships.

"The youth national teams have been qualifying for the world championships, which is a plus.

Personally, I’ve never put much weight into whether we compete to win the world championships. The pedigree of our players aren’t as good as the pedigrees of the players from the nations that are so successful in those competitions…

They (the U20 team) did a good job and were a little unlucky in the last game. It’s (a) good lesson for those players: international soccer is not over until the final whistle blows. A game can be 94, not 90 minutes long.

Hopefully they’ll remember that experience as they move to the next levels.

Otherwise, I think the professional experience on that team was certainly noticeable, as was the gap between the pros and collegians on the team. Hopefully, next time the U20 team, will come close to being a full professional group.

Overall, we were real pleased with how the team performed."

Those comments about the pedigree and not expecting to win should rile a few folks up. I can already here Whip now! I know what point he’s making about the pedigrees and the pro environment and all, but it’s kind of depressing, albeit practical, to admit from the jump we don’t have a chance to win.

On college soccer

"Again, until our professional league has reserve teams and youth teams, college soccer is still a good option for this massive pool of players we have. Is it the best environment? No. Everyone realizes that.

However, what are the alternatives. The Conveys, the Beasleys, the Donovans, don’t go to college but there are hundreds of others who don’t have that opportunity but still have promise and can use college soccer as a way of getting into professional soccer. We can pluck out a few of the talented ones.

But we know there are a lot of issues with college soccer that don’t allow players to develop the way they need to develop."

Again with the reserve and youth teams – I think he’s trying to make a point!

On the progress of youth soccer the past few decades

"Everything’s better, no question about it. It’s one thing looking at it from a standpoint of the youth level – we can all agree every environment in the country is better.

However, where I sit, you know it still has to improve, so we’re critical of where we are while we’re real positive about the progress we’ve made.

If we ever aspire to be a soccer-playing country that can compete with the Brazils, Argentinas, Italys, etc., on a consistent basis and eventually conquer them, we need to have our youth development for our top players at the professional club level, not with amateurs.

They have to be identified earlier. There’s got to be more players in the system. It’s nice to have 30, 40 players in Bradenton, but we need hundreds of players in those types of environments and the only way we can do it is to get your professional clubs involved.

Arena is certainly not shying away from the point that Bradenton is not the answer. I wonder how Ellinger feels about that!

I think that since Korea and the run we had there and the performance of Bradenton alums there, there has been a thought process among some in US Soccer and MLS that what we’re doing is working and I think Arena is trying to convey that, for all the progress we’ve made, what we’re doing is just a stop-gap and for us to take another leap, things need to change and that has to be led by the pros developing our top youth players.

In France, after they failed to qualify for the World Cup in the post-Platini era, the FFF mandated that all first and second division teams have “centers of excellence” which are academies for each team.

I really think that’s the model that we need to follow and that US Soccer needs to mandate it. It’s tricky, because of the economics, but until the clubs are forced to do this, I don’t see it happening on its own.

The interview concludes with some Arena comments on youth coaching, emphasizing, repeatedly, that parents should keep it simple.

Thoughts?

Peretz48 · Jan 18, 2004

Unfortunately, I have not seen the article. I agree with most of Arena's points. Having been around club soccer for some time, I am concerned about early development. We do not have a European or South American soccer culture, so we can't simply rely on kids playing in the streets, copying their older brothers, and emulating the pros. Instead, we have to rely on structured programs. Many of the recreational programs do nothing to teach fundamental skills because many of the coaches are volunteer parents with little or no soccer background.

Kids should be started at 5 or 6, and while not force-fed soccer, should come under the guidance of someone who has some soccer skills so that they not only begin to master fundamental skills, but also view soccer as something they really enjoy doing. Many of the kids who start at 9 or 10 have already chosen many other interests, sporting & otherwise. Kids should want to work with the ball on a consistent basis, on their own, and this will happen when soccer is really what they love. All the professional programs that Arena talks about are certainly needed, but the raw material must also become much better, i.e., the early development from 6-12.

BWogs · Jan 18, 2004

I agree with what Arena has to say about professional youth teams, but I just think it is too unrealistic at the moment. How can you ask the investors of the MLS, who are losing money, to invest and lose more money? I think MLS needs to start making money before you can expect the investors to open up their wallets.

WarrenAbao · Jan 18, 2004

Originally posted by BWogs
I agree with what Arena has to say about professional youth teams, but I just think it is too unrealistic at the moment. How can you ask the investors of the MLS, who are losing money, to invest and lose more money? I think MLS needs to start making money before you can expect the investors to open up their wallets.
Click to expand...

Another chicken vs. egg soccer issue, isn't it?

Do MLS I/Os put off the implementation of reserve systems for the time being because it's too costly and try to increase revenue through other means, with the hope that a profit can be made that way and reserve systems can be started later on when it's affordable?

OR...

Do MLS I/Os dig even deeper into their wallets and implement reserve systems now, with the hopes of finding and training potentially better players for the league, which improves the level of play of the league (and possibly making the league marginally more popular as a result) and increases the quantity and sale value of players to other leagues?

Bill Archer · Jan 18, 2004

Arena isn't saying anything that everybody doesn't already know.

Arena also knows that MLS can't afford this right now. If that means they are somehow "screwing up" (an odd choice of terms) or "hurting us soccer" then so be it. None of it will matter either way if MLS can't survive. Everything else has to take second place.

Bradenton is an interim step. Nothing more. It's not the best possible arrangement, but it's better than nothing and it works because Nike and USSF pick up the tab. It's not the goal, just a step along the way. The other possible alternatives right now are a) nothing and b) not much.

Arena uynderstands the deal - right now, all that matters is getting MLS sustainable. Arguing about youth systems and developmental teams is like rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic.

sch2383 · Jan 18, 2004

Wow, calling Landon out for the second time in less then a year. He did it last year and Landon responded, I hope this happens again.

Bill Archer · Jan 18, 2004

And I completely disagree that he's calling Donovan anything (let alone a "pussy)or "calling him out".

Quite the contrary, he seems to me to be saying that MLS is the right place for Landon right now, that maybe someday he'll go to Europe but that he's doing just fine for himself.

Attacking Minded · Jan 18, 2004

Originally posted by Sandon Mibut
Thoughts?
Click to expand...

I'm sure all those close to BA know what he thinks and how he feels about these issues. However what these statements do is solidify the common understanding in the soccer community. While in private and on these boards people would have said these things, BA's comments make it much more of a given. The question isn't really what should the future be like but how to get there.

cl_hanley · Jan 18, 2004

Originally posted by Bill Archer
And I completely disagree that he's calling Donovan anything (let alone a "pussy)or "calling him out".

Quite the contrary, he seems to me to be saying that MLS is the right place for Landon right now, that maybe someday he'll go to Europe but that he's doing just fine for himself.
Click to expand...

Yet, in the same breath, he also states:

"Obviously, one of the premier leagues – England, Spain, Germany – would be a more challenging environment. Because of the format of MLS, regular season games aren’t that important. There’s not as much pressure….

In Europe, you play for your life everyday. We have found in many situations that makes a player a better player. "

Reading between the lines, Bruce would like to see Donovan go overseas of his own accord...to me that's obvious. Is Donovan just that extra special case that doesn't need the Euro league intensity to improve? I don't think for a second that Bruce believes that, but at the same time, he knows it's crucial that Donovan makes his own decision.

Blong · Jan 19, 2004

Originally posted by Bill Archer
.

Arena also knows that MLS can't afford this right now.

Click to expand...

I think this topic can be looked at in two very different categories: Reserve teams and Youth teams.

The way I see it, Reserve teams would definitely be the cheaper of the two, and far easier to implement. Just expand the roster to around 30 players, and travel everyone to all the games, playing a reserve match for each senior match. Just coming up with liberal guesses as to the costs involved in this, I haven't been able to see it costing more than $1mm per team, above current operating costs. I know it's easy for someone like me to sit here and say that MLS can afford that, but it's not exactly a ridiculous price to pay.

Youth teams, on the other hand, is much more tricky, and likely more expensive. But the thing is, as far as identifying and developing young talent, this type of thing would be more important for US Soccer, and possibly more lucrative in the long run. Things that would have to be worked out for this: Player rights issues/Superdraft , amateur status(for NCAA), infrastructure for housing/education/training of young players, etc.

Just thinking out loud....

diablodelsol · Jan 19, 2004

Originally posted by Blong
I think this topic can be looked at in two very different categories: Reserve teams and Youth teams.

The way I see it, Reserve teams would definitely be the cheaper of the two, and far easier to implement. Just expand the roster to around 30 players, and travel everyone to all the games, playing a reserve match for each senior match. Just coming up with liberal guesses as to the costs involved in this, I haven't been able to see it costing more than $1mm per team, above current operating costs. I know it's easy for someone like me to sit here and say that MLS can afford that, but it's not exactly a ridiculous price to pay.

Youth teams, on the other hand, is much more tricky, and likely more expensive. But the thing is, as far as identifying and developing young talent, this type of thing would be more important for US Soccer, and possibly more lucrative in the long run. Things that would have to be worked out for this: Player rights issues/Superdraft , amateur status(for NCAA), infrastructure for housing/education/training of young players, etc.

Just thinking out loud....
Click to expand...

I'm not sure that youth teams would be more expensive than reserve teams. Parents right now are shelling out huge amounts of money to get their kids on the right clubs that get the right exposure. I would think that if you eliminated those costs and increased exposure, kids and parents would be jumping at the chance.

As far as the draft - MLS creates its own draft rules. It would be as easy as allowing players who were affiliated at one point w/ an MLS youth team to opt out of the draft and sign directly. Or have 10 "regional drafts" and an overall draft. Players could chose to enter either one or both but would under no obligation to enter either of them.

The Wanderer · Jan 19, 2004

Arena basically states what most of the informed posters know. We won't get to the elite level long term without reserve teams and that Bradenton is just a stop-gap. Given full health though we should be able to put out a first 11 that will be competitive and occasionally get results against the world's best. Throw in the goalkeeping edge and that makes us a very, very tough side to beat.

The youth teams are doing a good job developing players and realistically we don't have much of a chance of winning the U20 and U17 WCs until 99% of our players have that professional edge. We've seen how we can somewhat close the gap at the U23 level, but at the lower age groups the elite teams seem to have that edge that puts them over the top.

FIXXXER · Jan 19, 2004

Originally posted by Sandon Mibut
You don’t rely on a residency program in Bradenton, Fla. It makes no sense.

Until our top young players are affiliated with professional clubs, we’re going to be behind. The Bradenton concept is a great concept given that we have nothing else, no alternative.

Arena is certainly not shying away from the point that Bradenton is not the answer. I wonder how Ellinger feels about that!

I think that since Korea and the run we had there and the performance of Bradenton alums there, there has been a thought process among some in US Soccer and MLS that what we’re doing is working and I think Arena is trying to convey that, for all the progress we’ve made, what we’re doing is just a stop-gap and for us to take another leap, things need to change and that has to be led by the pros developing our top youth players.

Click to expand...

Interesting notes and comments from Bruce. Isn't Ellinger in charge of youth development from U-17's down? If that's the case with the Federation, then I'm sure Bruce is not happy b/c that takes away some of his power. To say that Bradenton is not the answer, considering our situation in the US, is short sighted. I agree with the points that the pool could be bigger there, yadda yadda, but I don't think there is much argument in the results that have come out of Brandenton. When time permits, I'd like to take a look at all the alums there and see where are they now and what they have done for US Soccer.

All this does make me wonder about the relationship of Ellinger and Arena. It would be nice to have them on the same page.

The Wanderer · Jan 19, 2004

Re: Re: Interesting Arena comments on youth development and youth national teams

Originally posted by FIXXXER
Interesting notes and comments from Bruce. Isn't Ellinger in charge of youth development from U-17's down? If that's the case with the Federation, then I'm sure Bruce is not happy b/c that takes away some of his power. To say that Bradenton is not the answer, considering our situation in the US, is short sighted. I agree with the points that the pool could be bigger there, yadda yadda, but I don't think there is much argument in the results that have come out of Brandenton. When time permits, I'd like to take a look at all the alums there and see where are they now and what they have done for US Soccer.

All this does make me wonder about the relationship of Ellinger and Arena. It would be nice to have them on the same page.
Click to expand...

I don't think that there is any indication of a strained relationship between Ellinger and Arena. Ellinger has to know that although the stated goal of his U17 team is to produce results and attempt to win the whole thing, the cards are stacked heavily in the elite teams' favor. As such, the goal should be to graduate as many players as possible to the senior team. That doesn't always coincide with results.....

One thing that we can see is that Ellinger needs to start learning to pick better defenders and that defense, in particular defensive distribution, must be a future focus of his U17 team.

Martin Fischer · Jan 20, 2004

Re: Re: Interesting Arena comments on youth development and youth national teams

Originally posted by FIXXXER
Interesting notes and comments from Bruce. ... . To say that Bradenton is not the answer, considering our situation in the US, is short sighted.
Click to expand...

Actually, Arena said that Bradenton is a decent answer considering the situation. In addition, he is saying that we should work towards something better. Not the same thing as your paraphrase.

Originally posted by FIXXXER
I agree with the points that the pool could be bigger there, yadda yadda, but I don't think there is much argument in the results that have come out of Brandenton.
Click to expand...

The results from any youth soccer program is not to win championships at the youth level but to perform at the senior level.

Originally posted by FIXXXER
When time permits, I'd like to take a look at all the alums there and see where are they now and what they have done for US Soccer.
Click to expand...

That would be valuable. However, even if every single player was a success professionally, the program would still not be ideal because the numbers are too small. There is simply no getting around that fatal flaw with the current system.

Originally posted by FIXXXER
All this does make me wonder about the relationship of Ellinger and Arena. It would be nice to have them on the same page.
Click to expand...

I have no idea if there is a problem here, but if there is, one of them needs to go. And everyone should be able to figure out which one should go.

GersMan · Jan 21, 2004

you all seem to be ignoring the fact that ELLINGER has stated one residency program in Bradenton is not the answer.

Just a small detail to mention in light of this brewing conjured feud/controversy.

bmurphyfl · Jan 21, 2004

I can understand the value of each MLS team having youth academies but I don't understand reserve teams. Wouldn't the players that would be signed to those reserve teams likely to be currently playing in the A-League? If so, what is the developmental value of having them being on an MLS reserve team rather than playing each week with an A-League team?

Youth Academies - Yes
Reserve Teams - Luxuries for wealthy teams.

Murf

voros · Jan 21, 2004

Originally posted by bmurphyfl
I can understand the value of each MLS team having youth academies but I don't understand reserve teams. Wouldn't the players that would be signed to those reserve teams likely to be currently playing in the A-League?
Click to expand...

No what they'd be are guys like Brian Carroll, David Stokes, Memo Gonzalez, backup goal keepers, and other youngsters not seeing a lot of playing time with the first team. Each team is currently around an average of 22 players deep, meaning that in each game, there are at least 8 players on the roster who won't play at all. It's also useful for guys rehabbing injuries and new players coming into the squad (would have been perfect for guys like Jonathan Bolanos and the two River Plate kids for the Metros).

lurking · Jan 21, 2004

Originally posted by voros
No what they'd be are guys like Brian Carroll, David Stokes, Memo Gonzalez, backup goal keepers, and other youngsters not seeing a lot of playing time with the first team. Each team is currently around an average of 22 players deep, meaning that in each game, there are at least 8 players on the roster who won't play at all. It's also useful for guys rehabbing injuries and new players coming into the squad (would have been perfect for guys like Jonathan Bolanos and the two River Plate kids for the Metros).
Click to expand...

Expanding the rosters by 4 or so and more liberal loan arangements with the A-league would do this.

Carroll and Stokes by the way did have stints in the A-league on loan. A little more roster padding and more teams could do it.

lurking · Jan 21, 2004

Originally posted by Sandon Mibut
"Obviously, one of the premier leagues – England, Spain, Germany – would be a more challenging environment. Because of the format of MLS, regular season games aren’t that important. There’s not as much pressure….

In Europe, you play for your life everyday. We have found in many situations that makes a player a better player.

But if you look at Landon: At this point in time, Landon is better off in the MLS environment. He is not ready, he doesn’t want to deal with the European kind of soccer environment at this time. That’s fair enough. He’s 21. Landon, when he enjoys his living environment, his soccer is better.

That means MLS is clearly a better option. At some point maybe he’ll feel otherwise. The mental state of players is critical to how they perform on the field."

Is it me, or did he just call Landon a pu$$y? Basically, he’s saying Landon should go to Europe because he’ll be challenged more and play in more games that count but right now, he’s too soft to deal with living over there and his game will suffer if he doesn’t live where he’s comfy.

I’m guessing he’s happy to see Bocanegra go and that younger guys like Casey and Onyewu are toughing it out overseas.

Click to expand...

I like how a guy like Arena, who has never faced the pressure of playing or coaching in Europe likes to tell other people what is best for them. Donovan didnt take to it, it wasnt his thing. Hes happier in MLS. And when the chips are down the kid pushes himself to greatness.

Personally I think Europe is overated, I think the club situations for foreigners tend not to be ideal, the schedules ruinous, and that MLS is just fine and dandy for our players. Not to mention that it becomes harder to assemble our team. More than seeing our guys go abroad, Id rather see our league improved so that the level of play is elevated. And Donovan staying here is a big part of that.

I love that kid personally. I love the fact that building up what we have here is more important to him right now than trying to win approval of euros. I love the fact that he loves the team in situation and hes in, and that situation is more important to him than a bigger payday. Arena should be thankfull every day that a kid like Donovan is in MLS pushing Americans on and inspiring American kids.

Originally posted by Sandon Mibut
"Everything’s better, no question about it. It’s one thing looking at it from a standpoint of the youth level – we can all agree every environment in the country is better.

However, where I sit, you know it still has to improve, so we’re critical of where we are while we’re real positive about the progress we’ve made.

If we ever aspire to be a soccer-playing country that can compete with the Brazils, Argentinas, Italys, etc., on a consistent basis and eventually conquer them, we need to have our youth development for our top players at the professional club level, not with amateurs.

They have to be identified earlier. There’s got to be more players in the system. It’s nice to have 30, 40 players in Bradenton, but we need hundreds of players in those types of environments and the only way we can do it is to get your professional clubs involved.
Click to expand...

And this is again the crap that annoys me about Arena. "We cant compete until"itis. Yes it would be nice to have all those things he mentioned, but dont give me this defeatist crap. His job is to win. Period. Setting low expectations for yourself, and giving your teams excuses before you start is self defeating.

Saying that things can be improved is fine, but putting artificial limits on where we can go with the current setup is self defeating. Its the other teams jobs to stop us, not our job to stop us for them.

Could our youth system get better? Yes. Could some of our players benefit from going abroad? Perhaps. But you have to put your faith in the guys you have, you have to believe in them. And to me this says that deep down Arena doesnt believe in our players. And that pisses me off, because i think hes selling them short.

kayasoleil · Jan 21, 2004

Re: Re: Interesting Arena comments on youth development and youth national teams

Originally posted by lurking
Could our youth system get better? Yes. Could some of our players benefit from going abroad? Perhaps. But you have to put your faith in the guys you have, you have to believe in them. And to me this says that deep down Arena doesnt believe in our players. And that pisses me off, because i think hes selling them short.
Click to expand...

Selling them Short? A bit of reality check might be in order for you. Deep down, maybe Bruce is able to accurately discern the technical and tactical capabilities of our players vs the players from countries where soccer is king. I am sure you have watched plenty of our players play- outside of a handful (or two), we are pretty feeble compared to say the top 1000 brazilians, or spanish, or italians, or...; and most of the time difficult to watch if you fancy high quality play that is seen elsewhere.

We are getting better, that is obvious. But believing in players because of something other than acute evaluation is largely worthless.

Bruce is right on, as most will acknowledge, even if it is pie in the sky in the short term. But I am certain that Bradenton will become one of a few within a few short years, even if Phil does not write the first check.

MasterShake29 · Jan 21, 2004

Originally posted by Sandon Mibut
"Obviously, one of the premier leagues – England, Spain, Germany – would be a more challenging environment. Because of the format of MLS, regular season games aren’t that important. There’s not as much pressure….

Click to expand...

I think the Donovan comment could also be interpreted as him wishing MLS would have a more meaningful regular season. Relegation is one way but we all know that isn't happening anytime soon, so it seems to Arena is wishing for a reduction in the number of teams making the playoffs (or none at all). Good man.

cl_hanley · Jan 21, 2004

Re: Re: Interesting Arena comments on youth development and youth national teams

Originally posted by lurking

Personally I think Europe is overated, I think the club situations for foreigners tend not to be ideal, the schedules ruinous, and that MLS is just fine and dandy for our players. Not to mention that it becomes harder to assemble our team. More than seeing our guys go abroad, Id rather see our league improved so that the level of play is elevated. And Donovan staying here is a big part of that.
Click to expand...

I'm 100% in the "better competition is king" camp. Obviously individual mentalities play a role in determining the development of a player no matter what league he plays in, but facing top quality defenders in practice every day and intense games once a week cannot be undervalued. Everybody points to the World Cup where Donovan had a string of outstanding games, and he did make us proud, but one month at the biggest show on earth where everybody is hyped beyond belief in an all-or-nothing format pales in comparison to the daily struggle of maintaining your form and position in a top league for months and months.

Other than the feasiblity of implementing the changes Bruce is talking about, he's dead on. He wants to put the best team on the field as much as you or I.

denver_mugwamp · Jan 21, 2004

Originally posted by bmurphyfl
I can understand the value of each MLS team having youth academies but I don't understand reserve teams. Wouldn't the players that would be signed to those reserve teams likely to be currently playing in the A-League? If so, what is the developmental value of having them being on an MLS reserve team rather than playing each week with an A-League team?

Youth Academies - Yes
Reserve Teams - Luxuries for wealthy teams.

Murf
Click to expand...

Murf, I would have to agree with you about youth academies being more important than reserve teams. And I'm also thinking that they're less expensive since buying another team worth of plane tickets in a big country like the US is gonna be a whole lot of bucks. Setting up a residency program, which might be even having players stay with host families, is not going to be too difficult. But I think there's a way to do this without really breaking the bank. Have each team start a U-14 youth program. Two years later each team has to have a U-16 program. Continue on up until the first players reach the reserve level and then start reserve teams. I think it could work.

Hoje · Jan 21, 2004

I read in an article a while back that LD was a very hyper-active child and that his mother introduced him to soccer to help with his development and maturation. (I probably have the story wrong.)

If he goes to Europe and becomes depressed with his environment it will surely effect his performance. He's still young...within the next few years he'll get married and then he'll be ready for Europe. All elite athletes need a strong support network.