Does anybody know if youth club soccer and academies and such are just as expensive or more expensive in Europe generally speaking? Or is it easier to afford getting your kid playing club soccer in Europe? The US just seems too expensive. Or hypothetically speaking could I have a daughter in the US, have her raised in Germany and playing club soccer in Germany, then have her return to the states when she's done with secondary education and get her into div I university or is that impossible?
You're assuming there's a club system in Germany that is reasonably comparable to the club system in the USA. Does anyone know if that is a good assumption?
I can try to explain that. It is within this age group that the disparity between how the European countries develop players and how we do begin to manifest itself. In lower entry levels, our players have just enough training and physicality to compete and be successful. At the U-20, their European counterparts at that point have stepped up their development and some are even professionals while we are stuck still playing college games. Once our players leave this age group, that means they are ready or almost ready to join the NWSL. Also, the really special talents (Brian, Johnston, Dunn) can make the jump immediately to the senior team. In past circles (as early as 2012), we have had just enough talented players to overcome this disparity in development but going forward if that doesn't change the gap will just continue to widen. The good news is USSF have acknowledge this problem and are working on ways to address it (like having college players train with NWSL teams). Now we'll see if this actually comes to pass. This is why most of us fans are praying that the NWSL sticks around because if it don't, there's a massive gap that the national team will have to over come when it comes to finding young players that are at least close to ready for the national team. It is not every day that you will find special talents. At some point they have to be created or at least horned.
Rose Lavalle, Mallory Pugh, Carlyn Baldwin, Taylor Racioppi, Makenzy Doniak, Lindsey Horan, are just a few of the players that "technically and tactically" improving. Again I can't change your mindset/opinion, so you'll see what you want to see. If you want to see that the US players are woefully lacking compared to all the other countries, then that is what you will see. I'm not claiming the US is head and shoulders better than everyone else at the U20 level or that the team has no flaws or room for improvement. But to allude to the US as being so far away from other countries that the future is grim is just off to me. Also ignoring the success of the U-23 team also isn't on the level. If other nations don't utilize it like the US, so be it, but for us, that is a means of furthering development. And the U-23 has been quite impressive with their play, and not doing so with "Kick & Run".
German's will always have an advantage at the u20 level, since several of their youth are all ready playing & starting at the very top level, 1st Div./Bundesliga. Their famed player, Marozsan, became a pro at the age of 14. Last year's u20WC star, Bremer, at age 16. Another, Dabritz, made her senior NT debut at 17 I'm sure their some sort of select type level at place. The very best get recruited by a pro club. Don't know if this means that every recruit gets some scholarship or still pays for youth training. Here is where the one German poster, can tell us so much more what's going on over there. Obviously the well known; FC Barcelona, which is worth $3.2 billion(makes 450 mill. profit annually) recruited Lionel Messi at age 12 in Argentina. Brought & paid for his entire family to come over and live in Spain. People from South America have told me that they got entire schools build on soccer, so your kid goes to class and learns for 3 hours, basic math, reading & writing. Then spends the rest of the day(3-4 hours) learning & playing soccer(can't beat that! lol) But whether in Europe or South America, girls soccer takes a back seat; only in the US & Canada will have the almost equivalent of boys & girls playing soccer(the biggest soccer org in the, USYSA, has it 52% boys, 48% girls as registered members)
Ok but what I still dont get is how it would work to have a U20 that cant play something different then kick&rush then gets onto the pro level and suddenly starts to play differently. It hasnt happened until now and nothing has changed in youth development. Why in the future?
That's the crux of the problem and I was about to right this long reply but decided against it. We are just arguing in circles at this point. If your premise is USA at all levels play kick and run, what difference does it make how long it takes a U20 to make the jump to the senior level? Because to you the senior level also play kick and run. Never mind that 3 years ago Johnston and Brian were hoisting the U20 trophy and this year one was nominated for a golden ball while the other was the key to a midfield finally showed up when the level of competition rose. So that really can be two thought paths here: 1. Either the senior level is still kick and run and therefore our U-20s can make the jump easily to the next level. Which begs the question, if our U20 is getting killed in their age group because their counterparts are so much better technically, why isn't our senior team than also getting killed because their counterparts should be even better technically than them. 2. The US actually is not all Kick and Run and this applies to the U-20 as well. They may play that way but still have latent technical skills which with 2-3 years of NWSL play or constant senior call ups should be horned enough for them to make the jump.
The US and European development systems will be different due to the desire of most players to maintain the NCAA eligibility. This is changing a little as some female players have opted to go professional in Europe, but I think this will be the exception rather than the rule as many parents and players see an economic advantage to going the college route. College sports is, for the most part, viewed as a development program by the professional sports system in the US. Even with lower tier D1 schools and some of the better D2/3 programs they "own" you with 4+ hours/day being devoted to the sport. Of course, that is not to say that is the primary purpose of NCAA sports as only about 3% of the athletes turn professional. As for the cost of club soccer in the US, well, nothing is free. Having been a U-13 volunteer coach (though in a different sport), it takes quite a bit of time to do it right. Being a good coach is much, much more than just showing up and throwing out a bunch of balls. If you truly want full-time, dedicated coaches who will push your child to the next level someone will have to pay for those coaches, either you as the parent, a professional club through a development program, or you can get someone else to pay for it through the tax system. Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying volunteer coaches are bad, nor that all full-time paid coaches are great. And when I said "coaches" I meant more than one. Again, having coached it is very difficult to effectively coach an entire team on your own when you get to the more avanced level. Something as "simple" as developing a goalie means you can't take the time to work with the rest of the team. As for a dump and chase, kick and run... whatever you want to call it... again, I don't know what games people were watching. As pointed out the US dominated ball control in almost every game. In those that they did not, they initially did control the ball but then started "dumping" the ball in order to chew up time when they were ahead. Nine of the goals were assisted, the defense assisted on three of them and accounted for one goal. That is hardly a dump and chase. If anything the US did a good job of changing their form of play based upon the circumstances. Japan, on the other hand, had a difficult go when they fell behind as their system required patience and time and was not suited to coming back from a large deficit. The only real criticism I have of the US play is that some players stuck around past their prime and may have cost younger, better players roster spots. On the other hand, the coaches may have seen leadership qualities in these players that transcended their play on the field, things we can't really see as spectators.
This is so incredibly true. And yet, the OP and some others continue to cling to the flawed premise that they just saw 3 weeks of kick&run from the USA. And that makes this entire thread garbage.
If you re-read my post, you'll see I wasn't commenting on which youth soccer system is better. Rather, I was asking of the US and German systems are comparable. What I was referring to is that there are different types of youth systems. That's been a major topic of discussion here on BS (e.g., in some countries, youth soccer development is run primarily by the professional teams. In the US, that certainly is not the case although for boys, for MLS is making a move in that direction. But even with that, for boys the vast numbers of players are not associated with the MLS development programs. This is even more true for girls. Rather, for boys and girls, the main developmental system is non-profit clubs; followed by college soccer. What my question about comparability was driving at is: What does Germany's girls youth soccer system look like? How many girls are playing soccer? How are they organized? How does that compare to the US? Apart from the quality of players the different systems produce, another interesting question is: What kinds of women's soccer fan bases do the different systems produce?
It is interesting to me that when France out passed, out possessed, and out pretty played Germany, your refrain in the game thread was sometimes a great team just needs to gut it out and win. Once Germany lost to the USA, it is all about how terrible the USWNT is and how they are never going to be any good again. How they USA didn't actually win, just all of the other teams played poorly. I seem to recall Germany losing the U20 WWC in 2012 to the USWNT U-20. I also seem to recall Germany losing the 2014 U20 WWC to Nigeria but for a terribly mistaken offsides call. (But of course that isn't possible because the calls always go against Germany. *cough* uncalled pk against Germany for handball in the box in the France game *cough* ). It is funny how you want to have it both ways. If it was an honest discussion it would be different but this is pure sour grapes, or in the vernacular of today, haterade. The USWNT has definitely evolved their game in the last few years. Are they passing like France? nope. Does the USWNT have a chance to ever do that with this coach? nope. Are the fans satisfied with the current style? nope. Does that mean we should be ashamed with the fact that the USWNT still wins?? nope. Evolution will happen in the game. Eventually a different style will win out. But it hasn't happened yet. Hell these things are not monolithic. After Barcelona and Spain 2010, every team in the men's game is not playing tiki-taka. And Spain isn't winning everything either. There are many elements that go into why a team will win.
And do not forget, just as other teams had injuries and missing top players, one of the USWNT's main attacking assets in the box is Alex Morgan. Coming into this tournament out of form from almost 2 years of injuries. She received through balls in the box and could not finish. Neither could ARod but we already knew that about her, she has 3 right feet when it comes to scoring for the NT.
1. Forget about Germany in this 2. You said it yourself. "Sometimes". The US "always" or "only" played like this. Im looking forward to the coming years and see how this plays out.
What is it going to take for you to stop repeating this lie? Do you think that if you keep saying it over and over again, it might make it true? Or are you just a lost cause?
At this point you're being trolled or someone is getting paid to keep traffic alive on this forum lol.
I don't think there is a way that football SHOULD go, the best style is what fit your players the most. It's not like the US didn't learn from other teams, we saw a lot of nice short passes against pressure and creativity in the midfield, but at the same time they kept their style of high speed/pressure and use it to destroy the opponents.
I like France's style a lot, I support the male team for years because of the GREAT Zidane. We could all learn some elements from them, sure. But I don't think it's the only way the US or any women's team should go because we got different players. During 2009-2013, many many teams tried to copy tiki taka, yet 99% of them failed. Why? Because it doesn't fit their players. Even Pep couldn't copy the success to Bayern by using the same style, the current tactic of Bayern Munich is quite different than his Barcelona as well, yet he is still changing. At the same time, France shouldn't totally abandon their style to switch to the US one as well, it would be dumb, too.