U.S. Soccer has split the Boys Development Academy’s U18/19 league into two divisions for the 2019-20 season https://t.co/cAG9AYVRjL pic.twitter.com/apwJFRfZ47— Mike Woitalla (@MikeWoitalla) August 2, 2019
Chicago deleting their U19 team is obviously bad for all reasons, but maybe it's a signal that they're reconsidering their overall approach, and therefore a sign of better things to come. One can hope.
I think they aligned those divisions well. I think Barca should be in the top division. San Diego Surf should be in the second division, but there's not a lot to argue about with how they aligned it, aside from that.
The majority owner Precourt is known as a major league cheapskate. They don't have a USL team or even an affiliation to one. So how many players can make the jump from U-17 straight to MLS? Damn few..... I don't know all the MLS rules, but I think I recall they have a rule that states that if teams don't use their 3 DP spots, the team owner has to pay a "fine" to the other owners that is divvied up. I would like to see this same rule applied to the teams that dissolved any academy teams. If Precourt doesn't want the hassle, then fine him and let the other owners fund development. Cincinnati and Minnesota also don't have U-19 teams, but all MLS academies pretty much started with younger age groups and trained them up. I wouldn't expect Nashville or Miami to start with U-19 teams either. Isn't this the first case of a team erasing an age group they had the year before?
Yeah...…………….in the grand scheme of things I'm not sure it matters. To me this is a first step to much bigger changes in the next couple of years. I'm sure that a club like Barca will still be playing the teams in the top tier in various showcases, tournaments, and events this season. I see a lot of spazzing out on social media about which division certain clubs are in. I mean, really? We're going to spend our emotional energy on whether Crossfire should be in the 1st or 2nd tier? Come on. By the way, folks might not recognize the RISE team in the lower central division. The Houston Texans recently merged with rise. They kinda served two different regions of the area (Texans were more north Houston and Rise was southwest and central). This is now a huge operation throughout metro Houston. By some estimates, almost 5,000 kids will now play under this RISE-Texans umbrella.
Looking at the schedules, it appears teams will play cross division games in season. For example, FCD and Solar both have a first set of games against Inter Miami and Orlando City. They also play Atlanta United and North Carolina FC. None of those teams are in their division. (Edit to add, was told these are the Cup games) This seems like a way for US Soccer to run off the non fully funded DA teams. Stick some in the lower tier and make them travel more or stick them in the first tier and make them travel more. So now parents on a Solar have to pay for trips to Miami for regular games? By the time kids are in the U18/19 age group they often have their college soccer, or lack of it, career figured out. You see a lot of seniors and juniors opting out of DA due to travel and they already have a college plan in place. Add to the fact they can then play HS soccer. Some of these clubs have problems with numbers at the U18/19 age group for these reasons and this will make it worse. A mass exodus at Christmas from these teams for seniors who want to play HS could probably be expected. It would make more sense to simply have MLS fully funded teams to be the only top tier teams at U18/19 and let them travel from Texas to Toronto for one game and let the other lower level DA teams stay more local. Or remove them from DA all together.
Precourt is the Columbus, not Austin owner. Andrew Hauptmann is the majoirty owner of the Fire, and, yes, he is a cheapskate. But he recently sold 49% to Joe Mansueto, who is absurdly rich because he founded Morningstar. And there's some evidence that the Fire as going to spend as they/MLS/Mansueto just dropped $66M to get out of their Bridgeview lease. And that likely means a Chicago stadium somewhere in there. So money is about to be spent ... though maybe not on the academy for a while. Just as much of a problem here is Nelson Rodriguez, the GM/technical director/whatever of The Fire. The dude wants to drop the academy completely (MLS wouldn't let him), he advises his own players to go to college instead of signing with the Fire, he though Andrew Gutman sucked, etc. He has some weird thing with development where I think he may actually think that players just shouldn't be going pro until they are 22. I think he is as bring a problem as Hauptmann. The hope for the Fire is this: I can't really believe that Mansueto is here to not run the thing. If nothing else, he's going to see his massive asset is being mismanaged at some point. I think he likely funded the lease buyout directly or indirectly and it really wouldn't shock me there's something contractually binding where Mansueto can buy out the rest of Hauptmann's share in the future. I imagine Garber is chomping at that bit. The Fire should be a flagship and they are a joke right now.
The USSF/MLS love affair continues out in the open for everyone to see. This decision will change the landscape of our youth system and many of the longstanding non-MLS clubs that have a history of developing college, pro and NT players will cease to exist. The one complaint we hear over and over is how expensive youth soccer has become. Our wonderful federation just made it exponentially more expensive for kids not part of a MLS Academy. I would also bet there are quite a few MLS clubs who don't really care about their Academy that won't like the new expenses that come along with this.
Probably not with the travel now getting farther and farther away. Solar use to travel to Denver once or twice a year and Kansas City. Now they are traveling to Miami or Orlando, Minnesota, Utah and points in between. The lower tiered Texans team now has to travel to Michigan, Ohio and Indianapolis for regular season games. ( this assumes home and away games with those in their new tier) Why would a parent want to pay $700 or more for these weekends on top of the already 3 to 4K they are paying upfront for dues etc. So now instead of costing 7 to 8K a non funded team my be 10 to 12K. Would make sense if parents revolt and these teams have a hard time fielding players. They should make DA only for fully funded DA teams. Let everyone else play in local leagues and travel for showcases. The elite players will make their way to DA teams and the rest won't have to pay so much.
Because MLS clubs have so much influence on the Federation. To be fair, there is an issue of the really good clubs needing to find better games week in and week out. I think everyone realizes that is an issue that needed to be addresses, but to handle it in this fashion is amazing...or just typical USSF. The only positive for me is the fact this is only being implemented in the U19 age group. I've come to expect the poor decisions USSF makes to be across all the age groups. I won't make any firm predictions, but the next couple of weeks could be interesting. It would not shock me at all to see some of these clubs get together and tell the DA to get bent. If I were these clubs, I would wait until all the scheduling is finalized and then show your cards. Make it as painful as possible. I find it hard to put blame on the clubs - notice in the twitter feed above that Crossfire mentioned they didn't know this was happening and only found out when the schedules were released. Academy contracts have been signed by now and it won't be hard for parents to get out of those agreements since they knew nothing about the additional expenses. I think this is definitely a "stay tuned" event. Both the DA offices and ECNL offices need to make sure they can properly handle the flood of calls.
Richie Ledezma, Sebastian Soto, Taylor Booth, and now Duke have all left RSL. First team and even USL minutes have been hard to come by for players who signed with RSL (Ochoa, Arriaga, Vazquez) directly from academy and the academy players are starting to notice— J.R. Eskilson (@JREskilson) August 2, 2019
Wonder if it runs deeper than that. These non-MLS clubs would be smart if they started actively recruiting players with a pathway to Europe that isn't blocked by some USL or HG deal. I wonder if Barca didn't have this discussion with him. Those that aren't signed on a pro contract and want to get to Europe would be wise to keep their options open upon turning 18.
Agree. If a kid is getting National team call ups, getting noticed by Euro clubs and that is the path the kid wants, then going to MLS DA club is not the best move. Blaine Ferri did that with Solar a few years ago and he is doing well in Germany. FCD had no say in what he did or was allowed to do.
Yeah, I can't imagine the ECNL or USYS passing up a chance to rake in registration dolla....err, putting the development of those poor kids first.
Duke is a player that I've been impressed by, but I haven't seen much other praise for his game and he hasn't looked better than a talented kid who still needs work, so I wasn't 100% sure that I was right on that evaluation. I might still be wrong, but I think this is a player who could emerge in the next few years, and maybe he heads to Europe eventually. I can't find what part of 2001 he's born, so he may be eligible to sign in Europe this window and didn't have good enough options. Most of these players are signing in Europe at 18 instead of 19.
Looked at U16/17 Cup schedules. Not sure if this is accurate but if so, let the speculations begin. Numbers represent 2018/2019 U16/17 conference rank.
Absolute joke that Chicago doesn't have an U19 team. The Fire and the Houston Dynamo are without question the two worst run MLS clubs. They are the 3rd and 4th largest markets in the US. Both cities have a long history of producing players, and good youth teams that have won national championships (Houston Texans, Sockers FC)... Even with those advantages the MLS teams have some of the worst attendance in the league, and their academies are terrible. Just a joke, and a waste of talent
Elton Chifamba '03 has been training with the first team of Columbus Crew.Although the Crew are not a great team to develop players, could Chifamba be the next HG player? https://t.co/wOdBYt9Udr— Lucas Aguirre (@luksarus) August 2, 2019
After asking around, I've also heard the U19 Fire team this year disbanded because they only had 6-8 '01/02 players maximum they could have fielded this upcoming season. I think a few years ago, there may have been a mass exodus in following another coach to a local club, but unsure on the details behind that, but explains why their numbers at that age group went down. They could have played up half of the U17 team, as they predominantly played up last season. They would have to play up 2 years this season. Would have been a slight disadvantage until they would be use to the physicality as they had to get used to this past season. May be the better direction to get players more experience at the higher levels. I'm sure they also could have recruited to get players from other clubs (ie Sockers/FCU) but I believe there is an understanding the they really aren't going to "poach" more than a few kids at a certain age group at a time. Not saying I agree with how they are handling their situation, but I believe their hands may be tied a bit.
I remember Araujo saying on the Scuffed Podcast that one of the reasons he went to Barca AZ is because he could pick where he went next whether it be a MLS deal or to Europe.
One of the Fire coaches went to FC United and a number of players followed him. But that was several years ago, they certainly had time to rebuild the age group. Then again at that point they may have thought the academy was going to be scrapped altogether so no real reason to.