I've been a member/reader on Big Soccer for a while and recently started contributing to the fan-driven content on the House of Houston web site to get some content out. A big part of my goal is to give our sport more attention than it typically receives from media outlets, and see where things go from there. I wanted to hit on the topic of youth development as it applies to the big picture for American soccer, and I believe the Dynamo and all MLS clubs have a huge role to play in helping reform how we bring young talent through in this country. Now that we have a financially viable and successful league with rapid academy growth in recent years, it's time to turn the screws on the American soccer landscape and fix issues that have impeded us at the grassroots levels in this country. https://houseofhouston.com/2020/03/31/houston-dynamo-franchise-transform-mls-american-soccer/ It's a bit of a read, but hopefully a nice distraction for you and welcome all discussion.
Good find KB. I posted this same link yesterday afternoon in our Houston Dynamo 2020 Season thread. Go to post # 2140 https://www.bigsoccer.com/threads/2020-season.2104826/page-86 @ OP Perhaps this topic needed its own new thread., however with the 2020 Season thread it is a catch all of information for us to navigate to and kick around the topics while the season is on hiatus.
That guy said the game was founded in England. So how can you trust him? Doesn't he realize that Seattle invented soccer?
I have a lot of issues with this article, not the least of which is that if I were the editor I'd draw a big x on the first 2/3rds of it and send it back. I'd also add a note that it doesnt address the flaws of the Dynamo, historically and recent past and how they need, and could, change to achieve the stated goal the title suggests. I'd also toss out the title as it doesnt describe the material adequately. Or suggest the other way around.
Dynamo's problem has never been pay to play. One could have seen the Dynamo as the solution to the same problem a decade ago. They didn't step into the breach and take over with free soccer. That's because you have to compete for talent, offer opportunity, and invest. The vague theoretical opening remains open. You have to put in the right money and effort to take advantage of it. Otherwise, traditional club expense or not, people will vote with their feet. We should be in a situation where we can offer better, more direct opportunity and quality training, as good or better. The players are not responding like we are. And they are making professional first teams when they end run us. Cappis, the other Servania, McKennie, and others have passed through town -- just not to play for the Dynamo. The talent is there. But to be taken seriously the program needs to develop players and give them first team chances. We stall out at RGV level both in seeming development level and where opportunity leads. A pro team should be able with a pile of kids to train some up to pro level. Presumably part of the issue is since the beginning this has been a bought-veteran team as opposed to a team that tries to make Holdens and Camerons. The best young players we have had were transfer signings and draft picks, not anyone we built from scratch. To me the whole Quill Problem underlines a lack of local trust in our development scheme. I get the sense that they are trying to deal with the coaching quality and effort end, at least as PR. Problem remains, you are competing with the Texans who are producing name brand pros who go on to college and pro, including abroad. You have Dallas up the road putting HGP into the first team. Ambitious select kids aren't stupid. When I was a kid I could see which clubs were winning and losing -- duh -- and which ones at the back end were producing pro and college players. You lose the appeal of being a pro pipeline if the pipeline actually heads down to the valley and then oblivion.
Correct. The concept of having our pipeline team be down in the valley, which has it's pros and cons, with an owner that is not all in for said talent growth but to have his own winning USL team, the path to the pros become an obstacle course over a clear cut road to MLS contracts. We shoulda made a team in New Orleans, which the sport of soccer is actually very strong in Louisiana, or perhaps just a local Houston 2 side and have them play in the USL. Canetti thought the Valley route was the way to go and it was not well planned on many fronts.
I'd agree but word it slightly different as we have essentially re-created an affiliate relationship, instead of a captive farm team, by the nature of the setup and the motives of RGV. The whole idea was to escape the sort of situation where a young player of promise might be sitting behind some 25 year old MLS-no-hoper seen as a better way to win in USL While I think a properly scouted USL team would win under its own sharp eye for talent, winning is not the point. A stream of impact first team players is. It's an interesting question of whether it's properly sited. I think the money and effort going in matter more. But I could see where a particularly starved site run by a profit oriented owner might be more concerned with revenues and winning than what we need. Personally I'd just as soon have them in town as a loss-leader. We have strong teams, better than any state or regional site save Dallas could offer, and a pro age team might get you access to quality tryout players who were Texans or college kids not originally in our system. But then you have to fund the team and take the initial hit before you make the money back on transfers out later on. This does not sound like the Dynamo, but that shouldn't be the test. A lot of the good USL II teams are right underfoot of the parent team. Seattle, Dallas. I think it makes it far easier for the parent to monitor, enforce development wishes, and identify helpful players. As opposed to watching tape or requiring a plane ride. The coach just walks over to their practice and watches. Much less games. But my point, to be fair, was more that this whole conversation acknowledges a failure. I want FCD's factory that creates players ready for first team signature right when they turn pro. If you're talking too much about the bridge in between, RGV, any replacement, to the exception of the Dynamo itself, you're screwing up. The scenario should be less of producing people for RGV and whether they get favored -- though this is a concern -- but instead that they maybe play at RGV as an amateur and then skip straight to here as a professional. That few players go pro and most go direct to USL says something about the scouting and development machinery. Then, like I was saying, another layer on this is the "reality check" that players can see where the pipeline heads. You kind of need to commit to some first teamers making it, who see at least some PT even if they bounce back and forth, to sell to the academicians that this goes someplace and often enough to Houston. Otherwise, if they see as many Texans in college and USL and MLS, they are as rational of a choice as here. They may not have the obvious pipeline, but for many kids they don't need the brand name, might fear being locked-in, and want a practical guarantee. More kids need to make our team so the recruits behind them can see themselves in that process. Otherwise we have gone years between HGP and that suggests we can't develop or aren't interested, neither of which would be attractive.
Found this: Good news, getting the youth in the core sector of our great city to be playing the sport and with our club's colors at such an early age is ideal in my book! https://www.houstondynamo.com/post/2020/06/08/diesel-s-skill-builders-program-partnering-houston-isd