2019-20 Development Academy

Discussion in 'Youth National Teams' started by TheFalseNine, Jul 17, 2019.

  1. ussoccer97531

    ussoccer97531 Member+

    Oct 12, 2012
    Club:
    --other--
    Read this twitter thread. NYCFC doesn’t seem to care about their fans and growing their brand.

     
  2. Clint Eastwood

    Clint Eastwood Member+

    Dec 23, 2003
    Somerville, MA
    Club:
    FC Dallas
    I interrupt the anti-FCD circle-jerk in this thread, to remind folks that FCD did actually win that damn tournament you were talking about this week. I know you thoroughly enjoyed their loss early in the tournament, and quickly came here to tell everybody about it...……………...but I thought for at least the sake of some sense of honesty, we should post that they won the damn tournament.
    [​IMG]
     
    Pl@ymaker, Stupid_American and Pegasus repped this.
  3. dougtee

    dougtee Member+

    Feb 7, 2007
    more like sima silver amirite clint
     
  4. Stupid_American

    Stupid_American Member+

    Jan 8, 2003
    New York, NY
    Club:
    Columbus Crew
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Results from the tournament:

    Match #1: versus SIMA Gold (1-3)
    Match #2: versus Valencia CF (1-1)
    Match #3: versus Jacuipense (2-0)
    Final: versus SIMA Gold (4-1)

    Seth Wilson (GK) was awarded the Golden Glove and Nico Carrera (CB) was given the Best Defender award (LINK).
     
    Pl@ymaker repped this.
  5. STANDFAST

    STANDFAST Member

    United States
    Jun 8, 2018
    Both matches that FCD played SIMA gold are posted on You Tube. Search SIMA gold and they come right up. Each half is posted separately. Gotta give FCD credit. The players learned from the first match and were much more prepared for the athleticism of SIMA in the final.
     
  6. Runhard

    Runhard Member

    Barcelona
    United States
    Jul 5, 2018
    It's great to see Wilson get the golden glove. Looking forward to following him in Europe.
     
    STANDFAST repped this.
  7. ielag

    ielag Member+

    Jul 20, 2010
     
    Pl@ymaker and ussoccer97531 repped this.
  8. ussoccer97531

    ussoccer97531 Member+

    Oct 12, 2012
    Club:
    --other--
    I like this idea.

    It allows the team to have the best possible players for U-15 level. I think that teams at U-13 and U-14 level still are a little too hesitant to cut players who aren't improving. Most of these MLS academies with U-12, U-13, U-14 academies are only changing a few players per season on their rosters. If you want the best roster, there should be a lot more turnover than there is at these levels. I understand that it might not be viable, but thats why starting the team at U-15 is a good idea. The best kids from the affiliates at U-15 level can be brought into the MLS academy.
     
    focusondev repped this.
  9. jeff_adams

    jeff_adams Member+

    Dec 16, 1999
    Monterey, Ca
  10. gogorath

    gogorath Member+

    None
    United States
    May 12, 2019
  11. David Kerr

    David Kerr Member

    Liverpool
    United States
    Oct 18, 2019
    Apparently more MLS clubs yet to be named are taking the Chicago Fire route of cutting their u19 team in favor of just moving players straight into a USL team. Thoughts?

    Personally I think it's solely for financial purposes of not having to spend money on a u19 team and its ridiculous that standout u17 players not ready for USL will be trapped at their own age group's level instead of playing up with the u19's. I think it's a big step back.
     
    STR1 and USSoccerNova repped this.
  12. STANDFAST

    STANDFAST Member

    United States
    Jun 8, 2018
    Many just stop going to regular school and take the online path. This is especially true if the kid is on the pro/Europe path. Some of these players miss upward of 30-40 school days a year. Very difficult to perform well in traditional school especially if the kid naturally struggles.
     
  13. bpet15

    bpet15 Member

    Oct 4, 2016
    No doubt there is a financial aspect to this, as there should be when running a professional club.

    I think this can be beneficial to players if it is done right. If they get it wrong, it will hurt development. If these clubs take the approach that the USL team is, in essence, a U19 team, then I see no issue at all. U17 players that are top prospects, but may not be able to compete against men yet can still train with the USL team for development purposes.

    The issue I see is that there are still some silly roster rules in MLS and USL, so I don't know how feasible it is to utilize your USL team as a U19 team with a few other players that may be a bit older. These clubs will no doubt still move players to USL when they don't make the match day squad for the MLS side, so there should always be a mix on match day.

    I'm on the fence and need to put some more thought into it. I can see both sides of the argument at the moment. Definitely so good and some bad possibilities.
     
  14. focusondev

    focusondev Member

    Barcelona
    United States
    Nov 15, 2019
  15. focusondev

    focusondev Member

    Barcelona
    United States
    Nov 15, 2019
    As long as you have good coaches at the affiliates under the U12-14 age groups, then this model would be preferable. a close relationship with the academy would help to ensure that the training standards are kept high. Academies can focus more on U15, U17, and U19, and save a little more money doing it this way as well.
     
    ussoccer97531 repped this.
  16. focusondev

    focusondev Member

    Barcelona
    United States
    Nov 15, 2019
    forgot to mention that they have a good residency program as well.
     
  17. David Kerr

    David Kerr Member

    Liverpool
    United States
    Oct 18, 2019
    The big problem is when you have kids who are late bloomers. If they develop and break out at an older age they are screwed if there is no u19 team. Not all teenagers are immediately ready for USL minutes while being ready for the u19 DA level which is harder than the u17 level. Chicago Fire has a lot of players who are too good for the level they are at and have no choice but to play u17 games because there is no u19 team and that is a major problem.
     
    ussoccer97531 and BraveUpNorth repped this.
  18. David Kerr

    David Kerr Member

    Liverpool
    United States
    Oct 18, 2019
    An example of this is Brendan Aaronson. If Philly did not have a u19 team for him to play with while he was physically underdeveloped and not at residency then he most likely would not have become a professional soccer player
     
    ussoccer97531 repped this.
  19. bpet15

    bpet15 Member

    Oct 4, 2016
    Absolutely. This is an area that our clubs have to get better at. They have to be able to identify these types of players and find a solution that bides the time, while continuing to develop. That said, a program should not be devised around the chance that there are a couple of late bloomer possibilities.

    These late bloomers are such a small part of the equation, it should not take many resources for a club to put together something specifically designed for a couple of players.

    There are built in opportunities for players like this with non-MLS DA clubs that would gladly take them for 6 months, or even a season - almost like a youth loan. The issue is that MLS and non-MLS club relationships are pretty shit, outside of a few areas.
     
    USSoccerNova repped this.
  20. don Lamb

    don Lamb Member+

    mine
    United States
    Aug 31, 2017
    I like it, but it seems like this USL emphasis should be bumped a year later so that it is aligned as an alternative to the college route. If a player is not ready for USL, they could go to college and either focus on a different career or a different path to professional soccer.

    So, it would seem like the final age for youth teams should be U18 instead of U17. Of course, a top player could progress to the USL or MLS route whenever they are ready, but it seems a tad early to cut off youth programs at U17. I don't fully understand it, so good chance I'm missing something here.

    The gap from U17 to USL seems pretty big, but the gap from U18 to USL seems more reasonable. This would of course require a complete restructuring of the DA's age groups, so it wouldn't be an easy adjustment.
     
  21. jeff_adams

    jeff_adams Member+

    Dec 16, 1999
    Monterey, Ca
    Yeah, I think there would need to be an age group realignment. Maybe have 3 teams. U-15s, U-16s and U-17/18s.

    About half of the homegrowns that my local MLS team (SJ Earthquakes) have signed went to college first on scholarships. Having that extra year in the U-18 academy would be very important for their development. Otherwise it’s a year of high school soccer and maybe an adult league team.
     
    don Lamb repped this.
  22. David Kerr

    David Kerr Member

    Liverpool
    United States
    Oct 18, 2019
    Brendan Aaronson, Evan Rotundo, Ethan Dobbelaere, Richy Ledezma, Alex Mendez, and Uly Llanez are all examples of why you should have a u19 team. You are dooming kids who grow slower
     
    TxEx repped this.
  23. The Hideaway

    The Hideaway New Member

    Chelsea
    United States
    Sep 23, 2019
    having lived this recently, I can tell you there is a problem with virtual schooling and MLS academy parents. too many parents think their kids are pro/stars and take them out of school just because they are in an MLS DA program. these are not stars. just average/good MLS DA players. they do so because they fail their regular schooling and virtual school is easier.
     
    Zamphyr repped this.
  24. bpet15

    bpet15 Member

    Oct 4, 2016
    Do most of the Academies do online/virtual schooling? I am only familiar with the FCD kids which actually go to school. There is a cooperation agreement with the local school district and all the players attend the same Junior High and High School.

    I don’t have an issue with 17 year old pros doing online school, but think younger kids need the structure of actual school/classes.
     
    Pegasus and Dirt McGirt repped this.
  25. The Hideaway

    The Hideaway New Member

    Chelsea
    United States
    Sep 23, 2019
    in my state, there is an online virtual school option - the kids sit in front of a computer for three hours instead of schooling. these are 14 year olds and most are just average to above average players that do not project as pros (at least not at 14 - maybe some will develop). its not the club that is at fault. it is parents that put MLS soccer academies ahead of education. the MLS club does not request report cards or seem concerned about the kids schooling.
     

Share This Page