2020-21 Academy Season

I’m at the Crew/Cinci academy games currently and just saw the u19’s and here are some thoughts.

Elton Chifamba: Elton is seriously declining as a prospect. His ability to read and react to the game is still elite but his ability to execute the simple plays is not where it should be. As a 6 he isn’t able to consistently hit the 30 yard diagonal balls that should be instinctive for him by now. He is starting to become very turnover prone and unreliable in the final third. This is very concerning because he doesn’t have the size and strength to be an elite defensive 6 and he doesn’t have the distribution to be a registra 8 so he needs to be an 8 who can create in attack and plain and simple he isn’t able to do that currently. I’ve watched every crew u19 game this season and Elton has been consistently underwhelming in each game

Sam Sarver: Sam is an interesting player because when forced to rely on instinct playing in tight spaces he is very good but when given time and space he is a turnover machine. Sam’s IQ and ability on the ball are not up to YNT or HG level. He is bailed out in academy games by being very fast but at higher levels will be ineffective unless he seriously cleans up his touches. Right now his big weapon is that he is faster then everyone else but that is really it. He needs some time at Indiana to work on his game

Noah Hall: this kid is a pro. He could be more aggressive in wanting to overlap on the touch line but I really don’t have any gripes about Noah’s game. He needs to be signed by Columbus in the off season before he leaves for Europe

 

Are we interested in discussing the Seattle Sounders lack of faith in their homegrown players? In a season of condensed games and teams giving plenty of minutes to the kids, Seattle stands out for their lack of first team minutes. It wasn’t that long ago that their U-17 team won the Generation Adidas Cup over international competition. Is it a curse to sign a homegrown contract in Seattle?

Homegrown minutes in MLS in 2020:

Danny Leyva 56
Alfonso Ocampo-Chavez 0
Josh Atencio 10
Ethan Dobbelaere 0
Trey Muse 0
Shandon Hopeau 69


They did just trade Handwalla Bwana who had 178 minutes. Of course the most famous homegrown Jordan Morris plays all the time, but in a year when guys like 2004 Christian Torres has 129 minutes and a goal for LAFC, 2003 Cade Cowell has 362 minutes and a goal for San Jose, Seattle looks like they just don’t believe in the kids.

 

We can go back to Schmetzer's comments earlier this year when he said something like, "Upper management wants me to use more academy players, I guess" in a way that really didn't inspire confidence.

But another question that should be asked: are young players with Tacoma Defiance improving?

 

Its the real challenge right? Talk is talk. Other organizations talk.
When push comes to shove, Seattle's goal is MLS Cup. They're currently in first place in the West.
Clubs like FCD, Philly, NYRB, RSL, etc. that have focused on youth development, haven't won MLS Cup. I'm rooting hard for Philly to get it down this year.

Anyway, its impossible to find academy results right now so I'm posting Buzz's FCD results when I see them.

#FCDallas Acad vs Sporting KC in Tulsa.
19s W 1-0
17s L 2-1
15s W 1-0
14s W 3-2
13s W 2-0

15 to 20 mph winds I hear. Tough conditions. #DTID

— 3rd Degree (@3rdDegreeNet) October 18, 2020

 

AOC and Dobbelaere don’t add anything to the game and are not technically proficient enough to keep up in MLS. Both were incredibly overrated. Danny Leyva is good enough for MLS but you lose a lot of defensive prowess in the midfield because he is too damn slow. Atencio isn’t ready for MLS, I thought he needed another USL season before stepping up. Hopeau isn’t good enough.

Seattle have a lot of okay talents in their academy and to play in MLS you need to be a good talent. Reed Baker-Whiting is the first one who I think is a big enough talent to consistently crack their first team.

We can’t completely ignore the deficiencies of the players and bitch about why they aren’t getting minutes. This isn’t the DA where you can still excel despite being an unfinished product. If you have a major hole in your game that makes you a liability on the field then why should the team give you minutes? So you can lose them the game? If you can’t displace the man in front of you then you don’t deserve to play. Minutes are not handed out

 

If we had a normal year with international callups, etc. I suspect these players would have been in the rotation. At forward Jordan Morris and Raul Ruidiaz would both have missed significant time. The next forwards on the depth chart are Will Bruin and AOC.

I think a lot of organizations go thru this, right?
They sign a first crop of homegrown players because they want to.
But they really don't have a first team plan or the players they signed aren't deemed to be good enough. FCD had a whole host of these types of players in their early academy signings. We used to criticize them for not playing Bryan Leyva and Ruben Luna enough. But when they did play, they showed significant shortcomings. They had many better options than those two in the squad.

 

Interesting. What was your take on Alex and Anthony? Also, did you have a chance to see the 17s game? If so, what are your thoughts?

 

If we had a normal year with international callups, etc. I suspect these players would have been in the rotation. At forward Jordan Morris and Raul Ruidiaz would both have missed significant time. So the only other forwards left are Will Bruin and AOC. Seattle didn't go out and sign a mediocre Colombian to be a backup forward. Hence, why I was hopeful that AOC was set up for minutes.

I think a lot of organizations go thru this, right?
They sign a first crop of homegrown players because they want to.
But they really don't have a first team plan or the players they signed aren't deemed to be good enough. FCD had a whole host of these types of players in their early academy signings. We can also point to the Zach Pfeffer/Cristhian Hernandez era at Philadelphia. Who was that kid that disappeared, then reappeared with Cincinnati in the USL, then moved to MLS with them but never plays? [Edit: Jimmy McLaughlin.]

 

I'm not here to defend Seattle
But bottom line..........................and we can tell this from the comments from their head coach.......................their only goal is MLS Cup. They are not focused on youth development as a primary component of their plan to get there.

I think we can come up with other examples of this in MLS. A coach not aligned with a youth initiative. If its important to the organization, then a change is needed.

Schellas Hyndman at FCD seemed only partially on board with playing the youngsters (although he did). Oscar Pareja (who is a god) was next and jumped it up a level, but also never seemed to fully embrace the Cannon, Pomykal, Ferreira generation. Then they went to Luchi Gonzalez, and he did a great job last year. But then the GM went out and bought a bunch of foreign players and MLS vets. So is the Brazilian GM on board?

Seattle isn't going to reach their potential until the ownership, front office, and coaching staff all align. That seems to be what's happened in places like Philly.

If you're a current star in the Seattle academy, are you more or less likely to sign a homegrown contract based on how the first team is operating? Obviously, less likely. Does Tanner Tessman go to FC Dallas in the first place if not for seeing first team opportunities for other players? Does Caden Clark sign a HG deal with NYRB if not for seeing the path that Tyler Adams took?

 

I guess I don't understand what the debate is about. Some clubs are youth driven and some clubs are not. MLS isn't any different that other leagues around the world in this regard. Some clubs have youth woven into the fabric of the club (if you can have that after only 25 years) and some are there to win trophies.

The model can be a mixture of both, but if it is, you can sometimes get significant gaps between youth player production. It is not always a steady stream.

It should be the owners decision how to best run his/her club. Where MLS fails compared to the rest of the world is the youth players that come through Academy's that are part of a club that isn't youth driven, seem to be stuck due to the unfair MLS contract restrictions.

In other parts of the world, clubs seem to make a decision on a player by 18/19 years of age as to whether or not they will become a first team player for that club. Sure, some are kept a bit longer than that, but these clubs aren't afraid to come to a decision. If they don't see the player ever being part of their first team set up, they are free to find a home elsewhere. Some come good and achieve a level their original club didn't think possible, some fizzle out and some carve out a great career at a lower level.

We don't have those lower level opportunities for players as most aren't interested in earning 40k until they retire. We've discussed this topic a lot and its a big hole MLS needs to pay attention to.

 

Good points, but Seattle has won many “recruiting wars” on the premise that their residency academy is the best place for young players to develop their talent. If you are an up and coming young stud in a neutral area, do you pick Seattle or Philly now? Choice looks clear to me.

It’s a very big deal for a teenager to leave his family to pursue his dream. Leyva left Las Vegas. AOC left Merced. Muse left Louisville. Got to be frustrating watching guys you competed against (and beat) get playing time while you ride the pine.

 

Your point is well taken, but a great place to develop isn't the same as a great place to get first team football. You can be a fantastic Academy and develop great players, while still not using many of them in the first team. Manchester CIty's Academy is full of amazing youth talent, yet very few of their Academy players ever see the field for the first team. Southampton has brought through a ton of great youth talent and their model is to move many of them on to bigger clubs.

There is a reason most Euro leagues have a maximum 2 year contract for younger players. MLS must look into doing something similar.

 

Regarding Seattle, I think there's a confluence of factors:

• They are very focused on winning MLS Cup and have a renewed focus on the Shield, since I don't think they've ever won that
• They originally intended to play the kids this year with CCL and international play pulling players from the squad. With that missing, and with difficulty shuttling players to USL because of COVID, I think that died.
• I don't think their prospects are as good as some of the other young players on contenders (like Philly).

I don't think all of that means Seattle is really committed and it's just a black swan that caused them to make the choices they. I think it's pretty clear Seattle wants to develop players as part of their long term strategy, but it's also pretty clear that the title is primary goal.

They are still a high revenue MLS team, and they are in a clear Championship window that just might go away soon: Lodeiro is 31; Svenson is 33; Morris may want to go to Europe at some point here; they already are on a new iteration of supporting cast with Ruidiaz and Paolo, who are 30 and 29 already. They are already a house of cards at CB.

In a year or two, they could very well be completely reloading so they need to take their shots while they have them.

Now why that means that they can't have AOC on the roster as a third striker or Leyva getting some minutes in the regular season is a legit gripe. The above doesn't really excuse that, though I can see the argument for more time at Tacoma being more valuable.

But I think it's more that they are simply all in for the title. If one of their prospects was an actual asset there, like Aaronson in Philly, they'd play. But they aren't all that interested in the Christian Torres development time (who may not be getting time if Vela weren't hurt and multiple guys weren't in quarantine from international play.

 

I tend to think that if you want to give young players time.................you can find it. Its just not a priority for Seattle. Simple as that.

You have to give them an opportunity to show that they're ready for the level. NYRB rolled right away with Caden Clark. FCD rolled right away with Tanner Tessman.

These kids at Seattle we're talking about were on the U17WC team. We're not talking about fringe academy players here. There's no reason to think FCD can find time for Pepi and Seattle can't find time for AOC.

And as I said, when you don't find opportunities for youngsters in your first team...............that hurts your whole academy program. Eventually it hurts recruiting.

 

Completely agree with this. My son is 13 and just entered Sounders Academy playing with the U15's. Prior to that we were with SJ Earthquakes but we moved to Seattle for work and thus did a short stint w/ Crossfire in-between. @ Quakes he was one of the leading goal scorers and they even did an article on him that was posted on their MLS website. Lastly, he's been fortunate enough trained at top clubs in La Liga, Eredivies, Brazil and Argentina. I'll say we are VERY happy with the quality of training at Sounders...closer to what we've seen in Europe. Right now our focus is the best development environment, but at some point if he continues to develop then you start looking at the professional options and development. Being in the program, it seems like Sounders are going through a transition. 1st team is on a championship run with Sr players and those contracts and that run is being played out. They've talked about the challenge between USL to MLS this year due to covid. In USL. if you look at the goal difference this year vs. last year Defiance which is mostly the 02-04 academy players w/ a couple 05 were competitive. I suspect you see a very competitive environment of old players and new academy players in the coming years. The 1st team trains on same facilities and academy and we see this every day (academy players training w/ first team.

 

Is it really finger pointing at each team that is necessary? I am in lock step with you wanting to see youth players get a chance, but in professional football some managers only job is to win trophies. If they can do that with youth players, they will play. If they feel they can't reach that objective, they won't play. Full stop.

If it's necessary to point a finger (and I agree that it is), that finger has to be pointed at MLS and not necessarily each individual team. Only in MLS could Danny Leyva sign at 16, not play for two years and potentially have another 3 years to go on his original deal. Anywhere else, Leyva and his camp would be making a decision on whether to stay or go after this season.

The players and their agents have to start understanding this. A HG deal is a great moment in a players life and the first time their agent gets paid for that player. However, it can also be a career killer if they continue to let MLS bully them into 3+2 deals.

We need more players like Gomez, Carrera, Mendez, etc to not give in to MLS. I think we will start to see more and more kids turn down these deals. At some point, MLS will have to take note and realize they are the reason.

 

I would say also that we're criticizing Seattle here because they have talked the talk. We're not criticizing Portland here, because we know they just don't care. But Seattle signed a bunch of U17WC caliber kids out of their academy to first team contracts.................and then didn't seem to have a plan.

What's interesting is indeed that most of these Seattle youngsters came from outside homegrown territories. So they could have signed anywhere. We can't say "Leyva's only option was to play for Seattle, and they're impeding his career. Screw MLS rules!!!" He's from Nevada. Going to Seattle was his choice. He was essentially a free agent. AOC could have gone anywhere. Muse could have gone anywhere.

 

A few scattered thoughts on Seattle:

• Lagerwey talks a big game about youth development in interviews, but we have yet to see much in the way of first-team results. The two biggest Sounders HGP success are Yedlin and Morris, who were barely academy products anyway, and who came into the organization at an older age after a few years of college

• Giving young players opportunities is a mindset. Unless you have a uber-prospect wunderkind on your hand, you'll always be able to find a reason to not play a kid if you're looking for one. Curtin, Pareja, and Luchi have all spoken in various ways about how at some point you just have to trust kids. For me, Schmetzer either isn't good at and/or isn't interested in prepping the kids to play and trusting them. He wouldn't have had to go much out of his way to give Atencio a smattering of low-stakes minutes at he end of games, for example.

• I'm sympathetic to the idea that some/many of Seattle's young players aren't quite there yet. But then questions have to be asked: why aren't they improving? why were the signed in the first place? what is the plan for their development?

While it's true that some clubs aren't developmentally focused, I don't think that should shield Seattle from criticism. They are putting in the work to recruit players and develop them up from the academy to USL. That none are progressing well to MLS means that they are doing something wrong and/or there is a cultural disconnect between the FO+academy and the first team staff.

The reason why we are picking the Sounders apart here is because they obviously put a deal of effort into their situation, but are failing to reap any benefits. No one is talking about Minnesota's poor academy situation because they clearly aren't trying.

 

the crew are also very ambitious and looking to win trophies and also are, perhaps in acknowledgement of fixture congestion, fitting in a lot of academy kids into the rotation. definitely reinforces idea this looks like a matter of a disconnect between what the manager wants and development.