A kid can still join an MLS academy and leave for Europe. Dallas had no say in what Weston McKennie ultimately decided. Soto, Ledezma, Booth, Llanez, Mendez, Gloster, Reyna, etc. all did the same too. So I don’t really get your point. And having an MLS HG contract as a fall back option isn’t the worst thing. The Galaxy will also pay for a college education at Cal State Dominguez Hills for their HG’s too.
Technically, you are right. However, MLS teams have started offering contracts (USL or HG) to kids at much younger ages as a way to force the player to make a decision. I haven’t heard of any kids that have turned down a contract offer and been allowed to stay within the clubs Academy. I’m sure there may be some out there, I am just unaware. Typically, you turn down a USL or HG deal, you’re pretty much done with the club. At a non-MLS Academy, a kid seems to have more freedom to travel to Europe for a week or even a month if needed - many times during the season. This doesn’t happen at MLS Academies, as they won’t allow it. You can certainly get to Europe from a MLS Academy, my point is that there will be many more roadblocks compare to playing in a non-MLS Academy.
Yup. There are plusses and minuses to both the MLS and non-MLS academy pathways. I think the development opportunities for kids at MLS academies are almost always superior (with a few exceptions). That gap is only going to keep growing as MLS builds its development pathway. That's where the money really is. However being at a non-MLS academy does provide a kid with more flexibility to train/move abroad at 18 (for most kids). If you're in DFW you have good options in both directions. You have FCD for one pathway. You have Solar or the Texans for the other pathway. Central midfielders: Paxton Pomykal went the MLS academy and HG signing route. Weston McKennie went the MLS academy and sign abroad route. Blaine Ferri went the non-MLS academy and sign abroad route. I have faith that two of the three will be playing for the full USMNT really soon, and Blaine is charging up from behind (he's younger than the other two). You can add a player similar in age to Blaine Ferri into that mix in Thomas Roberts. What's great is that kids have multiple, good options. That's what's important. And competition pushes all clubs to improve their programs. Solar being good can only lead to FCD improving. It does FCD no good to stomp their way thru their local competition every year. I do think that's what this tiered DA approach is all about. Doing away with all of the noncompetitive games that teams like FCD play in the DA. The gap between FCD and Solar isn't great. But the gap between them and RGV Toros or San Antonio was great. You travel all the way down to RGV only to play a noncompetitive game. No point. So the new format has flaws. The old format had flaws. But I think the idea at least to have more competitive games within the tiers is a good one.
This is always going to happen when non MLS academy teams have no mens teams. The kids have to move when they become pros. MLS teams want the players to become pros for their mens teams. The "roadblock" is an MLS team wants the player to play for them, the non MLS academy player has to move. For the non MLS academy team, saying a player from their academy is playing in the Bundesliga helps get more players than getting first in DA for the 1999 age group. This was the point of contention the Players Association had with training compensation. The fact that their salary would be impacted by playing with a youth team that had no mens team which forced them to play somewhere else as an adult. The only criticism I have is the branding of lower and upper tier. This seems like a pilot program that they are trying at the U-19. USSF trying new things should be good for as much as they get criticized for it.
It may be only for unique cases, but there's the Chris Richards route. Whether it was a release clause or just understood, he was with the academy and it seemed engineered for him to go overseas ASAP. He got a short time with Dallas and an in on a trial with Bayern and Dallas got an easy ROI.
Understood, but an MLS team could claim HG rights of a local non-MLS player, couldn’t they? The roadblock I’m speaking of isn’t turning pro, it’s the path to Europe, if the player wants to go that is somewhat blocked. My understanding is HG deals are 3 years plus 2 option years. That means a kid that signs a HG deal at 17 quite possibly wouldn’t be able to maneuver for a move to Europe until they are 22. Of course, the club could sell them, but they don’t have to. I’m also unclear how a situation below would play out. Say a kid is offered a HG or USL deal a couple months shy of their 17th birthday. This player really wants to get to Europe at 18 and signing a deal would significantly delay that path. What happens is the kid turns down the HG or USL deal? I can’t see a situation where a MLS Academy would let the kid stick around when there is no future. Any examples of the happening?
I don't know, but I'm guessing, that this is what's happening with Foster-Hernandez at the Galaxy. He is highly regarded and has Kleiban as his agent so I don't expect him to sign with the Galaxy. He's still with the Galaxy academy, although he hasn't had as much time with the USL team as I would expect. So it's probably a balancing act. The Galaxy want to stay on good relations with him, and they'll get the training compensation in any case, but they probably won't go out of the way to play him.
No, the player has to have 1) spent a year in the MLS academy and 2) be a part of the MLS teams territory. The only way around that is if an MLS team in a less talented region uses a waiver (teams like SKC have a lot, while FCD, Los Angeles, and New York have like 0) or the player is from a territory not covered by an MLS team like North Carolina and Alabama and the player still spends at least a year in an MLS Academy. As for the the "path" the problem is two fold. 1) MLS teams can't sign youth players to contracts like in Europe where they get transfer fees on players with youth contracts which is due in large part to the way US deals with amateurism/professionalism and sports. 2) Most importantly, the player cannot move to Europe unless he is 18. A 16 year old in Europe says he doesn't want to play for Bundesliga team and wants to go to the EPL can do so as long as the EPL team pays some fee. Otherwise, the 16 year old is chilling until a team pays for him. A 16 year old American player says he wants to go to the EPL. He has to do something until he turns 18. If you are an MLS team and a 16 year old wants to go to Europe. That is a spot you are wasting on your team because he is going for 0 unless he signs a pro contract. And playing him just for his MLS rights is kind of pointless when the success rate of being an established pro when going to Europe is like 15% (if Weston McKennie is the baseline) or 25-30% (if Hyndman is considered a success). The biggest attraction for American players is that they are pretty much free. If European teams spend money, they get the players. The problem is that they often don't.
With solidarity payments, there’s more incentive for the MLS club to still develop a player even if he’s going to leave. A majority of kids in MLS academies will never sniff a HG contract but they still play them on their teams. So if a club can still financially benefit off a player, most will still try to leave on good terms.
Thanks for the info. Just to be sure I understand correctly. FCD can’t sign a kid from Solar to a HG deal until that player has spent 1 year in the FCD Academy? I thought that rule only applied to kids from outside the HG territory.
I looked for Chifamba tape a little while ago but couldn't find any. I've never seen him play but from the way you guys talk about him and compare him to Nyeman, we have the '03 Kante to our '03 Pogba. That obviously means the 2030 World Cup is already locked up.
I would say its more similar to this Fabinho-Thiago Ndombele Chifamba-Leyva Nyeman I've already mentioned that I said I think the 2021 U-20 cycle is going to be weaker, but if the best 03's are allowed to play in their own age group, the 2023 cycle is looking like the best team we've ever had, and maybe by far. It's still early, so that could certainly change, but '03 is looking like the best age group we've produced. To have that midfield, a pair of great fullbacks (Cuevas and Gomez), a great goal scoring CF (Pepi), electric wingers (Sarver, Garcia, Freeman), I can't imagine there are even a handful of countries right now with a better U-16 NT. Goalie looks a little weak, but aside from that, every position looks good/really good/great. You could probably combine the prior two years of talent, and '03 would still beat those years in pure talent being produced. They might be able to already beat the U-17's ('02) or U-18's ('01) in a game.
I'm seeing a lot of people complain that the best teams in the DA decided to form their own super divisions. Some said that this was the MLS academies way of creating their own league, but there are 14 teams in the top tier of the U-19 DA for next season that aren't MLS teams. Why should the players at FC Dallas or LA Galaxy face worse competition? The majority of the good players are going to come from the best academies. There are some good players in the lesser academies, but they are allowed to move to the bigger academies, and if they are good enough, they should be able to achieve good results for their team, and get them promoted to the top tier. There is more than enough opportunity for the non-MLS DA teams. What the new divisions does is include the best ones in the top tier, and stop the games where FC Dallas beats Vardar 7-0. Who does that benefit?
There are ways to get better competition without adding tens of thousands of dollars in travel expenses to every club. The changes to the league, while possibly (we will have to wait and see) making for a few better games, was a death blow to clubs that were producing pros way before the MLS Academies.
getting back to this, the issues is MLS will own the rights of the kidsif he is in the DA (via Training Compensation) or if the kid signs a HG the MLS will own the kids rights. In either situation, it will make it just a little more difficult for the kid to move overseas. If the kid just plays DA it won't be that bad as training compensation is not much for a euro team to sign that kid. But maybe fewer flyers on questionable prospects. If a kid signs a HG, he is significantly placing his future in the hands of other people. Take for example Aaron Long. Hasn't his club now decided his value is 15 million in transfer although they are only paying him 600K a year. Give me a break. Its hoped the MLS clubs would allow their HG with interest overseas to go if wanted but you never know.
this is the point. You took an already rich kid sport and made it more expensive. The clubs that are pay to play will have a harder time retaining kids and convincing 17 and 18 year old to give us HS to pay more money, travel more and be considered second tier. (lets be clear, the goal for most of these kids is a college opportunity and DA is getting less and less attractive to provide that opportunity) The MLS clubs and anyone fully funded should form their own league. Let the clubs pay for the all the travel and not the player. If the MLS clubs find themselves looking on the field and notice their pay to play competitors only have 11 players and no subs any given week, they shouldn't be surprised.
The setup of the DA for this upcoming season is an intermediate stage to what you're talking about. Soon enough we'll see MLS break away and form their own U19 or U20 league. Independent USL teams seem to be forming their own academy league. As the years go by the gap between the financial "haves" and "have nots" is only going to increase. [Whether the gap in on the field performance is as big.............is almost irrelevant.] This will leave the DA to regional non-affiliated youth clubs. There can still be clubs "connected to" MLS teams in these leagues. Maybe even an FCD Premier Team or one of these FCD affiliates throughout Texas. FCD Central Arkansas. Whatever. We get the idea. A regional league of good quality can be constructed without FCD or the Dynamo fully funded teams. And of course clubs like FCD and Texans/Solar, etc. can still set up games against each other whenever they want.
I hate this line of thinking. Why do we always want to set up a new and better league? There are thousands of youth clubs spread out all over the United States. Why are we wanting to anoint an exclusive group of clubs that we think should be the best? Why are we not asking that they earn their place in the top tier with their results? If we had any kind of leadership within the Federation, they would work with the already existing infrastructure to organize an open system that starts locally at the younger levels and broadens to regional and national levels at the oldest age groups. What would happen? The cream would rise to the top. Players would be discovered that aren’t now. Coaches would be discovered that aren’t now. Clubs that aren’t doing it right will get punished. Clubs that do it right will get rewarded. But let’s keep ignoring what’s done everywhere else and set up an exclusive league that determines participants by an ambiguous, political, and superficial criteria. Here’s a news flash for the federation - they play a game where they keep score. There’s an easy way to figure out who the best teams are.
When you have time, you might want to look at the earlier DA threads. Here's the first one, and almost any post by the late, great @oldguyfc would be worth reading. https://www.bigsoccer.com/threads/ussf-development-academy-in-depth.675164/ Here's his first post (#9) {September 2006} "Whether or not the DA system will be effective is a jury that will be out for some time. There are new rules that have been incorporated into the system that may well turn out to be good for the game. Whether or not the USSF is making good decisions based on models that have been effectively in place in other parts of the world for a generation is yet to be seen. After all, the re-invention of the wheel has seemingly been a hallmark for the USSF for the last 15 years. Many of the teams that have joined the new system are not necessarily pleased with the progress so far, maybe that's because of their previous experiences with a federation that has made most of their decisions based on political expediency and not on an overall altruistic philosophy. That's not sarcasm, that's simply the truth, and whether Big Soccer was around or not, that would still be the truth. There's the simple matter of trust that first has to be established. The fact that there are few that benefit from any program set forth within the USSF may lead to inevitable cynicism, human nature, after all, does have it's pitfalls. There have been many roads the USSF has gone down, most have been paved with good intentions, unfortunately they are all paved by the same people; so again, one only has to look at the beneficiaries of these "paved roads" to end up at the same bitter conclusion time and time again. It's always interesting to read quotes from the same people over and over and hear the same bullet points reiterated ad infinitum. Soccer coaches in this country aren't necessarily a fraternity, there's plenty of jealousy to go around, and some out and out hatred There's no doubt that John Hackworth is excited about the new testing system, it's something concrete that he, evidently, can put his hands around, which means any abstract, creative thought, can be replaced by what appears to be empirical certainty. The problem with soccer, or any sport, for that matter, is that there are intangible elements that can be seen by some and never understood by others. So, in the end, if you fail geometry, so to speak, you can't go to the next level.....why?, because the standardized test says so. Hey, in Japan, if you don't get into the right kindergarten, you don't go to college. So because no one can agree as to what is, or isn't, a player to watch, some litmus test needs to be established to allow for across-the-board equality in the evaluation of players. It's easy to say that everyone is an idiot at the USSF, why? because we love to over-simplify everything into one category, even though everyone isn't.......in the same category, that is. There's different levels of idiocy. Okay, that's a cheap shot, but it is easy. Why hasn't the US produced any world-class players? Wasn't that a thread on Big Soccer somewhere? The first item that needs to be addressed is getting the right people involved in incubating the eggs, that is the responsibility of the USSF; and the jury is still out on that one also." ++++++++++++++++++++ Oldguy (a fellow Tim) really cared about the future of soccer in this country. I wish he were still around to offer his opinion.
Good point. Tim was critical of the status quo but also very positive in outlook. He believed we could 'get there from here.' We're not 'there' yet, obviously.
Its not about annointing an "exclusive group of clubs." You say we should do "what's done everywhere else?" Liga MX has a U20 league of its professional teams. The Bundesliga has a U19 league of professional teams.. I bet we can analyze the top 25 leagues on earth, and 98% of them have a domestic league of this sort. MLS will have a U19 or U20 league of its own very soon. This is actually IN LINE with the rest of the world. There has to be an acknowledgement that there are two distinct types of clubs in the DA. There are the non-affiliated youth clubs that in the eyes of the IRS are not-for-profits. They're the Boy Scouts or 4H club. They aren't part of the training compensations/solidarity system of world soccer because they are not professional clubs. Then there are the MLS clubs most of whom are pouring millions into their academies, are going to become increasingly powerful. They have academies to be part of their professional development system to prepare 1st team players and sell at profit. These are two very distinct entities, and from a financial point of view the gap is only going to grow. This whole situation was completely predictable. Apples versus oranges.
I haven’t done a comprehensive study, but I believe teams are promoted/relegated up and down the pyramid at the youth levels in most of the best soccer nations. U19 Bundesliga is not a stagnant group of teams that mirrors the Bundesliga table. Teams earn their admittance. You’re right that MLS clubs have more money and resources than other clubs. And if they can’t beat out some non professional clubs, then I’m not going to shed a tear. Most likely, a good chunk of teams in this hypothetical tier will be professional clubs. I just don’t see the harm in structuring a pyramid so that an ambitious club (amateur or not) with a talented age group of players has a pathway to play the best competition possible. Right now that doesn’t exist. The federation is absolutely anointing an exclusive group of clubs. How is Crossfire not in tier 1?
There doesn't need to be an acknowledgment. They are all football clubs with a job to develop players to take themselves are far as their talent will let them. That should be the stated goal, not pro, college, etc. The migration to MLS clubs should happen organically based on the specific goal of the player. Not because that is the only way to become of pro or get a look for a YNT. Just look at the Solar kids this year. Because they weren't part of an MLS club, they never got a look. That is until, the scouts realized how stupid they were and couldn't pass up a chance to bring them into camp. I guess I can't understand the disdain for the non-MLS clubs. They have been the foundation of our National Team for decades and quite honestly, we had better National Teams when MLS clubs weren't involved. I realize the tide is changing, but anyone who has knowledge of our youth system knows that there are dozens of non-MLS Academies that do a better job than some of the MLS Academies. No, this isn't true. They aren't part of TC/SP because they have been screwed over by the Federation and MLS. There are countless pay-to-play (granted, not as expensive as here) Academies around the world. They earn income from player dues AND by selling players to professional Academies. The professional Academies pay between $2500 and $10k per year for a player if they want them to join their club. There is a big club in Cologne that constantly has players move to bigger pro clubs and they are compensated fairly for it. This typically occurs between 12 and 15 years of age. This should be implemented here as well, but never will be because of the greed of USSF and MLS. Agree, but there power won't come because they have a superior product, it will come from USSF/MLS kicking the non-MLS Academies in the nuts, repeatedly. FCD's model is no different than Crossfire's model. Make money from the U6-U11 and older kids that aren't in the Academy and use those funds to pay for the Academy kids. Is that investment, sure it is, because that money could be used in other capacities. However, lets not pretend for a minute that FCD would be FCD without the 5000 kids in their system that pay-to-play. I have actually read that Crossfire funds their Academy through a foundation and doesn't take funds from their youth set up. If that is true, it is even more impressive. There have been numerous MLS clubs that have come out and clearly stated they had no desire to be in the Academy business. I would take a Crossfire, Sockers, Solar, Texans, Surf any day of the week over a Columbus, Portland, Minnesota, Orlando, Chicago Fire. My hope is the non-MLS clubs band together and create a model that is in direct competition with the MLS Academies. Start actively trying to place kids in Europe upon turning 18. Start sending kids to Europe to train at 14, 15, 16 so they can get on the radar. If this were to happen and more kids were skipping MLS, they would be forced to start some merit based league system. What we have currently is a farce. We can bitch and moan about pay-to-play, but it just isn't that big of an issue to me. Some parents spend $100k year to send their kid to Harvard and some spend $15k year for a local state school. Our pro league is a farce. Single entity is a farce. MLS/USSF relationship is a farce. Somehow this runaway train of disaster needs to be stopped.