NY had one kid go pro in a top flight league before they changed the rules. Gabe Ferrari, he went to Serie A in 2007. There is a rather massive problem with these MLS rules though. How do you convince a kid to take a first team deal at a dev conract rate over college? Also, if you have an uber talent, how can you keep them from europe where the cash is? I hate dev deals, the Players Assoc. really needs to hold strong against it when the CBA comes up again in 2009. Just set max and min roster sizes and allow clubs to pay each player what they feel they are worth with a league min salary of around 35K. Cause as it stands now unless you give a youth call up a senior roster spot (and we only get 18) you have no choice but to offer a dev deal, it is all you can offer...12K a year...below the poverty level in this country, and extremely impoverished in large cities where cost of living is through the roof. Then we hear Ivan Gazidas and Garber going on about how they think the dev system is really fair. They have to be posturing for impending CBA discusions because no reasonable person could ever say that and actually believe it.
He is still in the set up. We have 3 quality prospects this year in Matt Kassel, Walter Hines, and Johnny Exantus. Not sure who will come up this year if any. Kassel has a scholorship offer from Maryland but is considered our best prosect, Hines still has another year left in high school i think, and Exantus is now on the U-20 side and could come up possibily. All depends on how the coach feels about them and whether they are willing to go pro now.
Baby steps. This is a new system. One guy - ONE GUY! - playing in one of these programs went overseas before the system could be implemented. They are working toward a better system. What is the freaking problem with letting it actually play itself out a little bit before trashing it. Besides, the developmental roster is not below the federal guidelines for the poverty level. Yes, the salary (actually the number of senior roster spots is more important in my eyes) should be raised, but I just like pointing out when people throw out pejorative statements that can be proven false with one quick Google search. Alls I'm saying is let's see the system in action before we start saying how much it sucks. But, then again, Big Soccer would grind to a halt if we actually discussed things honestly.
Don't forget that a developmental salary does not mean that is total pay. These players have a lot of opportunity to earn extra money through appearances, coaching and second jobs. How much do baseball players make in the minors or players in the rest of the world make in reserve systems? If a players is good it is only temperary. If not they end up doing what the rest of us do.
I don't speak Spanish, so maybe that's why. I remember asking around if anybody knew Matamoros had a soccer club or not, and what was their name. And finally someone told me it was Guerreros de Matamoros. One day I walked many blocks south of the bridge to a public square in Matamoros to hear a free concert with a symphony orchestra, and there were a lot of people, but I must have been the only American there. I saw a lot of people gathering and finding their places to sit, and I thought, wow, I may as well stick around, something is going to happen later. Without worry about schedules, or things like that, I had license for one night to do nothing but sit down and watch people. It was one of the most pleasant evenings I ever had in my life. But as far as the English-speaking media ignoring soccer, it makes sense. I think they're afraid of it, and the demographics that they associate with it (it's not the "American way" or "Texas way"), even though 85% of the English-speaking population is Mexican-American to begin with. I think there's some resentment between long-established Mexican-Americans and newer immigrants.
The Galaxy faced some major hurdles in SoCal when they announced the Galaxy Rios. The Coast Soccer League president started posturing saying they wouldn't let the Galaxy Rios play in CSL if they started poaching players from the big clubs because it would hurt the coaches and clubs and so on. In reality, when you have CSL coaches pulling in $100k/yr, they cried foul to the higher ups because now they had a huge problem in getting the best talent. Chivas has done it better by trying to bypass the BS of the CSL and find the hispanic areas that aren't deeply rooted in the cash grab that is club soccer in SoCal. Hence, they are farther along and have a better setup at this point. I would expect the Crew to benefit the most short term with the opening of the PSA. They have the first access to a true academy for a club in the country. But let's face it, this country needs a major shakeup in the youth development format. The current pay to play mentality has to go away as much as possible so the wealthy kids aren't the only ones rising to the top. Right now it's based on talent, the only issue is that talent pool is filtered by those kids who are talented and fit specific income groups.
As far as soccer in Matamoros is concerned there aren't any high level teams. Never heard of the team you mentioned. Matamoros does not have any teams in any of the national professional or amateur leagues. They do have a city wide Liga Mayor and I'm sure they have a team or two in a Tamaulipas state league. The closest pro team is Tigres B (2nd division) of Reynosa. It's an hour away from Matamoros, and probably my least favorite city in Mexico. The area you found in Matamoros is probably the Mercado Juarez. I'm suprised you were the only American. The market is a popular place for day trippers. You're also right about the resentment between the English speak Mexican-American population and the recent immigrants. Most of the immigrants are considered "nacos" by the Chicanos. It's sad how many 1st generation Mexican-American kids hate speaking Spanish.
I have seen this a lot through my life here in Northern Cali, but I got to admit its getting better. I think a lot of 1st or 2nd generation Mexican kids are starting to find pride in being Mexican and want to learn how to speak spanish now.
Chivas USA has Jorge Flores and it's rumored that Chris Cortez is coming up in 08. From the rumblings I've been reading and hearing Cortez is phenomenal.
So Houston is complaining the system is geared to college kids and they'd like to bring in more players. Onionsack is pointing out the contracts are very low value compared to other alternatives. I believe both points are valid. If you are going to run a single A type minor league baseball system with low wages designed to attract more marginal talent, then you need have a large number of players because few will really pan out. On the other hand if you want to limit yourself to just one really talented player, then you are going to need more than development wages as there are continuing to be better and better options for really good younger players. These are couple of examples why the current concept is very much a half baked scheme and probably helps explain why so few of the teams are really even trying. From a player development standpoint I'd agree with there decision to wait. But from a grass roots standpoint I think it's a mistake. I think team that have real programs will start to develop deep community roots as people will begin to get connected to the team when one of their friends of friends makes it to the first team. Success draws followers and this case the success is a kid from the community making to the first team.
I agree and disagree. I agree Sparks was an issue, but if it was just Sparks, then why did they drop out of the Academy which in theory circumvents CSL? Personnaly I think the Galaxy completely blew it. They could have taken Houston's approach and worked with CSL. Not only that they could have helped completely kill the current brain dead "Academy" league in its tracks. Instead of traveling to tournaments etc. etc. kids could have focused playing well in their league games where real professional scouts could have seen them. The best players could have received additional training and the true elite as picked by the professional teams could have played select tournaments. In contrast Chivas runs rings around them. They are working all over LA to build roots in the community. They are working hard to find kids that really want to play. But this is surprising because Chivas is focused on building soccer while the Galaxy is focused on marketing and making money. Until they figure out how to get rights for sale of players or the ability to keep a greater number of players I think the teams that will benefit the most are those that connect to the community in a meaningful way. Right now I think that is Chivas, Houston, Red Bull and DC. I agree and the USSF Academy isn't the solutions. Its too expensive and there is no funding in place. So rather than an elite system based on ability to play, it is actually more of an elite system based on the ability to pay.
Funny, I wasn't too crazy about Reynosa either. About the plaza I found in Matamoros, it wasn't the Mercado Juarez, yes, there's lots of American tourists there--it was the plaza several more blocks to the south, beyond the Teatro de la Reforma, the open area with the large church flanking the east end, and a gazebo in the middle I think. And I think the city hall is on the west side, if I'm not mistaken. Americans don't often walk that far south.
Not necessarily. DCU and RBNY have clubs in both the USL Super Y-League and and the Development Academy. The USSF has only U-16 and U-18 clubs, and the Super Y has U-13, U-14, U-15, U-16, U-17 and U-20. I'm sure there are enough talented U-16's to support squads in two different leagues. It's just a different way to train the players.
the problem with that is it is great for the east coast. Not so great for the rest of the country. their is a big gap in geography. If they want to do this they are going to have to make more regions and bring in more teams. They are skipping over quite a bit of area there. It looks like the do a decent job until they hit the Mississippi.
The only people that seem to have a real problem with the USSF program is SoCal and Texas to a lesser extent. I think the wrinkles can be ironed out in the future few years, but for the most part this is a good step for the rest of the country. Once it gets some momentum, I don't see it staying as under-funded as it currently is. I think the pay-to-play system will slowly start being phased out in the next few years.
and the pacific northwest, and MO, OK, NE, IA, KS. Why should a player in omaha have to drive to St. Louis to play on one of these teams?
They don't have to, but if you're going to be an elite player in any sport, you're gonna have to hit the bricks to stretch yourself. And maybe, just maybe, if people give the system a chance before condemning it, things might work to the point where kids don't have to travel as much. But it's much more fun pointing out the potential flaws before something even gains steam than it is letting the kinks work themselves out over a period of time.
I was hoping to focus on MLS development rather than the "Acadamy League" which most of the MLS clubs west of the Mississippi have avoided. Among the many problems is that most people that got in, did so for ego, fear of being left out or dreams of making a buck. There is no real plan. No mechanism to get rid of weak programs. Side deals everywhere. There is no funding in place. And the second there is even a sniff of real funding, the girls will demand it for "gender equity" reasons. Its just another reason to add more staff to the USSF so guys like Hackworth have something to do.
Where is the money going to come from? When are the girls going to get their program? Who is going to fund that? Why are so many MLS teams not part of the program? In 2-5 years it will collapse in many areas from financial pressure. The other thing you can count on is that the USSF will come up with a new "plan" to keep their folks employed.
The completely unnecessary travel will just keep kids like Jorge Flores away. Sure its not so bad for the North East - its structured around their seasons. Their leagues were a mess anyway, plus it circumvents that meddling state associations. But for areas that had their act together, it's a step back and it will only be a matter of time before their is a major reorganization. In the mean time kids in the rest of the country have their leagues disrupted and are left out of the cold for some mediocre players that participate.
I've noticed that the only people who are really whining about the new plan are the people from South Cali. scoachd1, how is this plan worst than the old system? I've heard you bitch a ton, but what is so horrible about this system versus independent clubs that compete in super-y and the ODP system for the national team? Were poor kids better able to get noticed and move up the ranks before the jump? Sure, it's not perfect. But damn, give it a chance at least.
Hey I am not saying that this isn't going to work. I think it is a step in the right direction. These flaws aren't potential either, they are real. Add a few more regions and the net is cast further to catch the next big fish, and the 100's of medium sized fish that come with it. The point still stands that the way it is currently structured it is missing hundreds of thousands of potential players.