I think another relevant point for this discussion is Robbie Rogers's decision not to return to Bradenton, but to keep playing PDL ball. Of course, I'm sure that playing with Jurgen Klinsman is a plus, but here's what Rogers had to say in a Top Drawer Soccer article (http://www.topdrawersoccer.com/NextStep/20030722090514/view): Seems like there's a definite trend emerging here... regular, intense competitive play is more productive than Bradenton for skill development, if not for national team unity.
I don't know if I agree with the posts that are so careful to not offend the kids. I think that here in the states, we are way too caught up in this idea of not letting children be competitive. we don't give youngsters enough credit, and we lose out on the ability to teach youngsters when they are MOST receptive to being taught. This is the rationale that has our schools basically discouraging foreign language until kids are 13 or so .......... cuz we don't want to "confuse" them with another language. no matter that in most countries in europe and africa, kids are fluent in a second and 3rd language by that time. and this is the same reason that many schools have taken dodgeball out of gym class ......... because we don't wanna promote "winning" and "losing" in schools. I know many more people who grew up sheltered from the competitive side of life as children who grew up messed up than the other way around, because when they got out on their own, they weren't ready for the realities of life.
From what I understand, this will be an emerging trend over the next few years. I have heard rumors of top players being discouraged from going to Bradenton.
I agree. The trend these days in American society and has swung way too far in the "hand-holding" direction.. Everyone is afraid of hurting someones/some groups feelings (political correctness run amok) and sheltering people from the big bad world out there.. In most arenas business, and many sports, the United States huge population lets us compensate for this "softness," and in the end, as a result of this we have quality. But overall I think it is a disturbing trend...
How much pressure should you put on kids at Brandenton? I dont know, but I am beginning to think it hasnt been enough. I dont think you want to squeeze these kids so hard that they artificially have their world squeezed down to soccer and nothing but soccer. They should definately have the otpion of exploring a range of interests. Its good for them as human beings. Brandenton really shouldnt be as intense as a professional environment, there should be more room for error and growth. But at the same time, letting them take days off and not having focus on the field... thats a problem. These kids are having a lot of money spent on them, to help them improve and if they arent taking it seriously and making the most of it, they should have their butts replaced by a kid that will. They can work on other interests all they want, but not on the field. That time should be devoted to the sport, and they should be sincere in that devotion or not be asked to show up. I guess in short, developing a sense of accountabilty and responsibility in the kids to take advantage of the opportunity Brandenton represents is good thing. Shoving soccer down there throats and making it their lives is a bad thing. And I dont think those two are mutually exclusive. Its not like there aren't subtle gray areas between a professional environment and an amateur one.
I'm not here to defend the Bradenton program; I'm one of the beleivers that the Fed could best use the millions it spends each year on this on helping fund MLS youth/reserve teams. But, as long as its in place, we have to accept it for what it is and what the limitations and realities are. One of those realities is that when a kid is sent to Bradenton he is pulled out of his school. That basically means that the Fed has to commit to at least a semester for each player so that their academics aren't that screwed up. If they don't get this commitment in advance, their folks aren't likely to let them go. So, when a kid gets to Bradenton, the only real pressure he's under is to A) play well enough to make the roster for the U17 team's upcoming games and B) play well enough to not get sent home at the end of each semester. Never does he have to worry about, say, screwing up in October because he knows he has two months to play himself back into keeping his spot. At the end of the day though, that's not the reason Bradenton isn't as successful as a pro environment. The reason it falls short is that the essence of the pro environment for kids is being part of a pyramid that starts with the pro team, goes to the reserve team and on the U19 and U17 teams and in some countries, even younger teams. In that pyramid, the older kids/adults set the examples for the younger ones to follow, they nurture, and heckle and ridicule and teach and make sure dues are paid. It's not just shining the pro players' boots, but being part of a system where those above you expect a lot out of you and will give you great hell if you don't deliver it. In Bradenton, there is no pyramid. The kids that are there for the two-year cycle come in fresh and leave when their cycle is over. It's not like Oguchi Onyewu showed Eddie Johnson the ropes and Eddie then passed that along to Memo Gonzalez who passed it along to Eric Lihaj. The younger players never had to deal with the pressures and expecations in a daily environment of the older players, they didn't see them to emulate and they didn't play against them in training or watch them play their games. And, until we have a system like that, we're kidding ourselves about being serious about player deveopment.
Younger Emulating the Older Sandon - Interesting point. It tends to work like that at the club level, too, with the team having primacy over the larger organization. By and large, each particular team at the club level is isolated from all the other teams at the club -- meaning that the kids come to practice, play only with youths of their particular age and on their particular team, and go home. If there is collective wisdom to passed on to my U11 son by his club's U12s or U13s or U16s, he will not learn it. He does not see those kids except in passing at tournaments. There are some clubs that attempt to foster more of a club atmosphere and a mixing of ages, but they are in the minority and their efforts tend to be modest.
I agree. Moving up or down a notch every few months is a common occurance. If a player can handle the reserves then he plays for the reserves. If not then they move him down to the U19-A's. If he can't handle it there then he plays for the U19-B's and so on. The kid finds the level he can play and adjusts to the pressure in his own way. When he can handle the pressure then he moves up. It's a constant change. Then one day when he is facing the pressure of playing Ronaldo (or whoever) it's just a natural extension of what he's been doing for ten years. It's just another level of pressure and he knows how to keep his head in that situation. Our U17 coach doesn't have the luxuries of a pro club coach. He has to coach to the common denominator. And I agree with JohnR that the club coach ends up being too large an influence in the sense that the little U12 (or whatever) should be learning from playing with the U14B's or U12B's or whatever other level he might be ready for at that time. Our soccer is influenced too much by the yearly (one week) tryout.
First, are players worried about being sent home after a semester? If it hasn't occured in the past I doubt its even a consideration in their minds. The point isnt to cull weak kids from the program or anything, but to make sure that the kids realize that they need to work hard. And knowing that those who dont work hard are asked to leave at the end of the semester will do that, even if it doesnt happen very often. As for screwing up in October and having two months to play out of that is fine. As long as he is told when he screws up and what he has to do. Thats the point of establishing accountability, to correct those things as they happen. But if he learns that he can screw up with no consequenses, he will do it again the next month, and the next after that. I simply dont accept that its impossible to get the kids to work hard every day on every play in an environment like Brandenton. If it hasnt been a consideration in the past, then it should be something they work to correct. Otherwise you are just cheating the kids there.
Bradenton vs Pro Development is a long process that unfortunately we provide too much structure for it. So, Bradenton is only a mirror or a found solution to the need of "creating an environment". So, basically it is a result to our system. In my opinion a player's ability to assume the "game pressure" is somewhat directly correlated to the "hunger" or the "need" that individual is experiencing. How many American kids have to worry about feeding his brothers and support his family or being the ticket out of poverty? Now, that is real pressure no matter how old you are. Perhaps we give too much to our young players. It is part of our culture to constantly check self esteems, and provide positive feedback. What really saves the US in its talent pool is the 20 million playing the sport. The larger the pool the higher success identifying those 20 who have the hunger. We have a larger youth population playing soccer than entire nation's population!!
Two different things are being compared. The academy is meant to nurture. The pros don't exist for that purpose. Yes, there is some nurturing involved but nothing close to what an academy does.
This is nothing personal, but I would doubt that you will see the word nurture in any kind of mission statement for the Bradenton Academy. The purpose for Bradenton is the same as the purpose for academies for pro teams, period. They are trying to produce the best players that can play at the highest levels of the game. Club teams may decide that they have a goal of nurturing, national youth teams have a goal of excellence. I'm not saying that things like "nurturing" don't take place (being a well adjusted person can help a kid to be a more stable and productive athlete), I'm just saying that it is real, real important for everyone involved to understand why these guys are there and why all of this money is being spent on them. Otherwise, we waste a whole lot of time and money and nobody ends up the better for it. Just my opinion.
nurturing Brandenton is not a nurturing environment. It is a highly competitive environment that least is a start towards giving some of our top youth players a taste of the environment in Europe. It has been a great place to highlight some of our up and coming talent eg, Adu, Memo, Rogers, Szelta etc. Brandenton has not doubt been a plus for all of these boys and I expect the same from future classes. All of these boys move on-but thats the natural process for those with a desire to move up at the National and International level. Brandenton surely understands and expects this and can take credit for assisting these boys in their growth.