We agree Crossfire got screwed just as so many youth clubs(Sockers) have been screwed and it’s all driven from MLS via USSF. But tell me PA Classics again. Who forced them not to take it and how were they able to force it if there is no validity to the labor law theory? Sincerely asking. The reality (one might think) is PA Classics is a business that a. Could have a fee based soccer program (parents) and b. another revenue stream where they receive solidarity payments for the gems they help develop. Just another revenue stream. Of course it’s bad business to combine A & B because in a true, unhindered competitive market (that US Soccer is in no way shape or form) then you would do what the most profitable academies do in Europe - namely cast the net as far and wide as possible (100% free including education, food etc etc etc) to increase ones chances of getting more and more diamonds in the rough that you can then mold and sell on. Revenue that absolutely dwarfs pay to play fees even with all the very high costs of running such an enterprise. In short it makes no sense to me why PA Classics would bow to pressure nor, to my knowledge, why no youth non mls program hasn’t received a red cent in such a scenario. I believe 100% MLS runs roughshod here and uses USSF as their tool to do it...but how do they make it stick?
Cause Garber and Wasserman control enough of the Professional USSF votes and the athletic council vote to do whatever they want.
I understand how they control the federation. What I don’t fully understand is how they can legally stop youth clubs from accepting solidarity payments.
I'm not so sure this statement is without any merit. Yes, as far as press releases go this one is pretty half-assed. But the message, and the USYS/MLS release you also posted yesterday, at least acknowledge the possibility that these organizations are failing to identify talent, and they see the need to cast a wider net, even if the steps to do so aren't made very clear in these announcements. The DA and GDA ultimately failed because their mission to identify world class talent was hampered by the reality of running massive pay to play leagues for wealthy and upper-middle class athletes where 98% of the paying customers were just looking to improve their kid's chances of getting into college. (Maybe the % of kids looking beyond college was a bit higher for boys, I'm not sure.) Anything USSF can do at this point to just get back to the mission of identifying the best talent out there, regardless of whether the kid comes from a family that can afford the $5k-ish a year entry fee, is a step in the right direction.
Doesn’t TC and solidarity money flow through the Federation via player passports which are kept at the Federation level.
Found out is the issue is the Federation does not have SP and TC policies that outline payment schedules.
Not entirely sure what you’re saying. Can you elaborate a bit more? There has to be some reason this holds legally. And I just don’t get why unless it’s some Byzantine labor law from the turn to f the centrist (as others have cited) that prevents these payments. If PA classics was indeed offered that money it goes against everything in our capitalistic society for them not to receive it.
Here is an article on this around the Sockers case. Take this and how MLS is now all for it. Now USSF won’t enforce it which allows MLS to do what it wants. https://socceresq.com/2018/07/07/wh...fifa-solidarity-training-compensation-system/ btw, Miki is a great follow for all US Soccer legal issue
Wish I could comment directly on the nepotism. I'll just say the 04 pool placements are finally fair and pretty accurate, and coaches fairly evaluating.
What age group? Boys or girls? When were you last active there? I think it's time to separate the timelines when us active members are seeing actual changes and moves to fix issues.
Just saw the top high school American football player is transferring to Florida because of uncertainty of fall sports due to Covid 19. I wonder if any soccer players will relocate offer concerns about not being able to play and be scouted
Maybe someone with experience can explain... I'm noticing as players get to h.s.age the lack of athleticism of defenders really becomes obvious. In a "hypothetical" pool deep in forwards, there are 2 or 3 forwards who play mostly pa2, with a bit of time defending... they are arguably better than pa1 defenders but dont ger chance to play there (pa1). I've seen this same thing at another club as well. Seems like at h.s. age groups, In a big 3 club, the best roster possible should be made. Maybe not all the time, but in my example coaches could easily be moving these players between squads. Again, reason I ask is it seems the top squad gets best players from the "defenders", not the players that can best defend. If you say it's not about winning all the time, and I can agree with that, then i'd say then why create the separation with the forwards? With this pool you could put probably the first 8 in a bag and shake...any 3 or 4 you get would be fine in any pa1 prem 1 game .. Thoughts?
I think most clubs put out the best 7,9,11 kids on the field depending on age group. Let’s be honest - most (successful) clubs have to win to keep a pipeline full and this is why they do it. It’s been my experience that Sockers doesn’t roll like that... I’ve noticed killer 8,10’s etc on 2nd teams (who are behind exceptional 8,10’s on first teams) when those killer 8/10’s could easily be the best center back and way ahead of the first team kid in that position. Personally I think it’s far better for those 8/10’s etc to play on team 2 in a position they are clearly suited for than have them play a position they’re not really suited for but will help a team win. And it’s not like these kids during the season don’t play other positions. They do -again in my experience. I know one coach who has defenders play forward and forwards play defense during the winter term while other coaches shift players around in different positions from time to time as well. I think they believe that a player (many players) fit a certain profile and they are trying to develop them to their strengths. This makes sense and again don’t think they’re being pigeon holed. Far from it but certainly being guided towards positions of strength or areas of potential. Not sure that makes sense.
I agree with Ryan7852 statement. you don’t want a player to be pigeonholed into a position like forward , there are only 1-2 true forward positions on the field the rest are really some form of midfield. Odds of getting on the field in HS or college as a midfielder are higher than forward/striker. Even the two outside defenders in a flat 4 backline are usually converted ex-wingers that push-up & fly up & down the side line. If all you can do is defend & not have offensive skills then the only spot is central defense. IMO before HS age a kid should play multiple positions to get well rounded out.
DeVos, you're in my head! Thx for the insight. This is the crux, we have outside backs that might come up to midfield... A few forwards (including my son get it, pushing upfield overlapping, putting in crosses. Very fun to watch and the way it should be played, no? Also as forwards they're cocky, they dont want to get beat! Sorry, bragging... Now I'm missing soccer!
When I did some rec coaching a few years back I always tried to instill in the players to play the position dont let the position play you. Which is exactly what Evos is saying.
A few other opinions: 1. #9 is one of the most difficult positions to play for most. Not easy to interchange that position. Many kids get lost and it oftentimes (in older age groups) is a very lonely position. 2. Someone referred to this earlier but 7/11’s and 2/3’s are the most interchangeable positions imo. 3. Midfielders (6/8/10) are usually the most skilled and oftentimes have the best vision/IQ which naturally allows them to play many positions. But central defense (and fullback) are a waste of their time, skill and development imo. No need to make them well rounded in a 4/5 position. Or 2/3 either. But put them up top so they can learn to be more offensive and direct from time to time seems to make a lot of sense to me.
Great points Ryan7852, Some of my thoughts to add to your analysis #9 is not easily interchanged because it’s a different style body type & mindset. A great #9 is usually a larger player who does not get pushed off the ball to easily but fast enough to run past defenders. has to know when to hold the ball & wait for reinforcements to arrive vs going forward on their own. A great 4/5 is a hard to find & develop. Most everyone thinks they are a forward or CAM. But if you can find a tall/big kid who loves playing defense, you have yourself a gem. But he/she has to be a leader & talker because 4/5 sees the entire field & has to “quarterback” the midfielders in front of him/her while making sure the defensive line is nice & straight to keep the offside line intact. If the the 2 or 3 push-up then the 4 or 5 need to recognize that quickly & fill that space. Most importantly you don’t want them to just boot the ball down the field every time, but start the offense from the back & that is where even 4/5 need to be well rounded & have some offensive skills too.
No midfielder should be turning around quarterbacking the defense. That's the goalkeepers job. It's a hard job to do, most goalkeepers never leave their box, you can only yell so far. Modern football, your goalkeeper plays sweeper first he/she NEEDS to be out of the box. We watched our keeper collect a long ball, nobody challenged him be cause he shouldn't have been there and proceed to dribble past the other teams entire front 3 before passing it out to a midfield sitting on the line. A good goalie can make or break your defense more than a defensive mid. Imho