Girls DA Going Away?

I was never a fan of the GDA. It wasn't needed. It was always a question of "why" for me. The ECNL already was consolidating the talent and the advent of the GDA only confused things and split up the talent. The ECNL did it better than the GDA did anyway and with many of the top clubs leaving the GDA to go back to the ECNL, the GDA is dead, IMHO. Now is a good time to dissolve the GDA. COVID-19 has forced a hold on everything so dissolving the league now will allow clubs time to join a new league and, more importantly, allow players to get with new clubs.

That said, the boys should continue. If it doesn't continue, a suitable replacement should be in the works. As strong as the ECNL is for the girls, I'm not totally sold on the boys ECNL. A majority of the top men's collegiate programs are still getting their domestic talent from the DA.

 

My hope is they just let the chips fall where they may, and not sell a new league to the GDA clubs. I heard rumblings of some type of NWSL youth league being kicked around. I would rather those kids seek out ECNL or National league options. The quality of ECNL goes without saying, but many of the GDA clubs have top level National League teams that offer very good options as well. That level of play will only improve with those DA players rejoining their former NL teammates.

 

You make good points, Sledhead, but the ECNL will not need to "sell" the league to many of the GDA clubs because a lot of those clubs were previously in the ECNL.

Prior to the GDA the USYSA National League was very competitive and had many good clubs and teams. With the advent of the GDA most of those clubs that became a part of the GDA put their top teams in the GDA and some of those clubs also became ECNL clubs. The NL lost some of its prestige and the level of play decreased. Don't get me wrong - there were still plenty of good players and teams playing in the USYSA NL. The USYSA regional leagues, MRL, RPL3, etc, also had some very good players and teams. It seemed to me, though, that after the GDA was formed that there was more dilution of talent. The ECNL was already doing a decent job of pulling the top talent and advancing the game. As I mentioned above, the GDA really was not needed. Some of the formation of the GDA seemed to be politically motivated.

That said, one of the aspects that I don't particularly care for with the ECNL is the politics. In many ways it seems to be a "good ol' boys" club. Many clubs that were worthy of inclusion in the ECNL were left out of it for what I suspect to be political reasons. The ECNL also seems to be getting too large and there are some clubs that really should not be included. The same can be said for the GDA, though. When that happens the level of play suffers somewhat and leagues become not so "elite" anymore.

Another big mistake of US Soccer when starting the GDA is misjudging the popularity of high school soccer in some parts of the country. For many the high school soccer season is needed as a change of pace and scenery. In a lot of the Midwest there are high school teams that are filled with players that play on high-level club teams. Many people bag on the quality of high school soccer but many of those teams with a lot of good club players are, in fact, very good. many of those teams also play in high school leagues that have good teams. I am not trying to equate the quality of high school soccer with the quality of high-level club soccer but the for many the experience of playing soccer with friends is very appealing and the GDA underestimated that.

Here is an interesting opinion piece from Soccer Wire that many here may have already read - https://www.soccerwire.com/resource...-u-s-soccer-to-shut-down-development-academy/

The writer makes the point that I touched on in my previous post:

"If U.S. Soccer is indeed planning this shutdown at any time in the next few years, it makes complete sense to jump at this “opportunity” to do so when the rest of the playing season is already unlikely to be possible. Announcing a shutdown now would give clubs and players five months to get all their teams, rosters and memberships in new leagues squared away without the annual free-for-all in players and team movement each May and June."

This COVID ordeal is going to have long-term effects on many youth sports. In the future it will not surprise me at all if we don't see the extent of travel that we now see. Regional games, as it once was, will become more common and there very well may not be as many national events. If the GDA is going to continue, it will also need to rethink the amount of travel that is often needed to play a single game. There are clubs that will travel 5 to 6 hours each way for a single game. That is ridiculous, IMHO.

 

The only reason my daughter didn't opt for the GDA route is because she wanted to play HS. Clubs tried to sell the "quality of soccer" comparison between the two, but missed the entire point of the social aspect that HS brings with it. Tough to put a value on a freshman being a leader on a varsity team that makes a deep run in the state tournament. Memories she will cherish for a lifetime. I hope whatever league replaces GDA keeps that in mind.

 

I don't want to turn this into a debate about the merits of high school soccer vs club soccer because there is already a lot of debating elsewhere about all of that. You're exactly right, though.

I've seen players that are middling on their club teams that take a break for high school soccer and then come back to the club season as better players due to confidence gained during high school play. Additionally, the experience for freshmen and sophomores playing against juniors and seniors sometimes can't be replicated during club soccer.

 

From @socceramerica

U.S. Soccer's role in youth soccer will change dramatically. For better or worse?by Mike Woitalla @MikeWoitalla, 66 minutes ago

The future of the Girls Development Academy was already in doubt, pre-coronavirus, because of the defections of major clubs to the ECNL. Now the Boys DA is on very shaky ground.
As of Tuesday, April 14, U.S. Soccer had yet to cancel the remainder of the 2019-20 Development Academy season. The pandemic may have created too much uncertainty to expect U.S. Soccer to promptly detail its long-term plans, but the vacuum of communication from U.S. Soccer led club directors to speculate that the Federation could be pulling the plug on both the Girls and Boys Development Academy programs.

Club directors on the boys side -- not including MLS clubs -- started extensive discussions among themselves aimed at coming up with alternatives to a USSF-operated DA. For some, the Boys ECNL presented the best option. Unclear for all is how U.S. Soccer envisions its future involvement in youth soccer, which increased significantly on the boys side with the DA's launch in 2007, and with the Girls DA launch in 2017.

The coronavirus interruption had already guaranteed that youth soccer would change in the USA and that the Development Academy could not continue in its current form.

U.S. Soccer budgeted $9.4 million for the DA but it will take an economic blow forcing it to reassess that expenditure and all others. Families, if it's even an option for them within the new economic realities, will reconsider spending thousands of dollars on their children's soccer. Even within the more optimistic predictions of when we can be mobile again, will parents sign up their children for teams that require frequent air travel?

Youth soccer will be different, but it could also be better. With this crisis comes the opportunity to reboot American youth soccer, and a chance for U.S. Soccer to regain the trust of its disillusioned membership. The path would include:

1. U.S. Soccer retreats from DA

As I wrote in January, U.S. Soccer started the Boys DA in 2007 with good intentions but the time had come for the USSF to retreat to focusing on its youth national team program and expanding its scouting network -- rather than micromanaging how the nation's elite clubs run their soccer. As the years went on after the 2007 launch, U.S. Soccer ramped up its regulations and restrictions. The one-size-fits-all approach is ill-suited for a nation as geographically and demographically diverse as the USA. And there's been enough improvement in American soccer that the Federation should trust the clubs, leagues and coaches. By leaving the DA, U.S. Soccer would remove itself from the youth turf war and take a first step toward repairing its relationship with the other parts of its membership that represent the vast majority of America's youth players.

2. Support and aid in the transition

For some clubs, the dissolving of the DA may come as a relief, for others it could be a tough blow. U.S. Soccer needs to get all of the youth soccer governing bodies and MLS and USL representation into the same room (or Zoom) to start working together on navigating the new era in youth soccer. Instead of telling clubs and membership how it's going to be, ask them how they think it should be. Even if there's not a consensus, by no longer running the DA, U.S. Soccer can start facilitating instead of dictating.

3. Look for solutions from within

I would never be against looking abroad for ideas, whether it's soccer or anything else. But we've gone too far in trying to imitate countries with which we have so little in common -- while ignoring our own strengths. We have in the USA accomplished, intelligent and dedicated soccer people who have not been asked by U.S. Soccer for their advice or insight. I also have a long list of DOCs of DA clubs with an impressive history of success who haven't been asked for input in U.S. Soccer decision-making. There may be imperfections in the history of American soccer's rise, but to ignore those who made it happen is to waste important resources.

4. Connect with college soccer

American soccer's major leap forward in the 1990s came thanks much to coaches from the college ranks. Now, it'd be difficult to find a college coach who believes U.S. Soccer has any respect for the college game. Whether or not college soccer can produce national team players is not the point. College soccer continues to have a major influence on the youth game. Its ranks include some of the USA's most experienced coaches with a history of guiding various generations of young American players. That the pandemic will have a profound impact on the college game is all the more reason for U.S. Soccer to include college coaches in the process of navigating the future course. It would be mutually beneficial for U.S. Soccer to reconnect with college soccer.

5. Apologize to high school soccer and embrace it

One of the stupidest, most disrespectful and nonsensical moves U.S. Soccer ever made was demonizing high school soccer as a player development detriment. The Federation can make no plausible defense of its attitude toward the high school soccer because it cannot point to any significant progress that the American game has made thanks to in 2012 banning Boys DA players from high school ball -- instead of leaving that decision to the players and clubs. The likes of Christian Pulisic choose not to play high school soccer because a different pathway is obvious to them. Thousands of other players didn't play high school soccer because U.S. Soccer forced their hand and they were denied of a great experience. And isn't it a development truism that playing with and against older players is beneficial? So way deny a DA freshman that chance?

Common for lower-income kids who can't afford club soccer, such as in the Latino community, is to play high school soccer and adult Latin league ball, neither of which U.S. Soccer regularly scouts. A post COVID-19 era would allow mainstream soccer's best to play high school, which could help the marginalized players get the attention of college and even national team scouts. While everybody lamented pay-to-play youth soccer, the Federation disparaged the biggest cost-free youth soccer we have instead of helping it improve. Now U.S. Soccer has a chance to change its attitude when it's more important that ever.

6. Embrace United Soccer Coaches

The United Soccer Coaches (previously known as the NSCAA) -- the world's largest coaching organization -- continues to be the most unifying soccer organization in the USA. Anyone attending its convention can attest to that. How has it been treated by U.S. Soccer? It stopped recognizing United Soccer Coaches' diplomas, yet when U.S. Soccer couldn't staff its own coaching courses it asked for the United Soccer Coaches' help. The increased travel that U.S. Soccer's higher-level license courses require is even more problematic now. U.S. Soccer should collaborate with the coaching education of United Soccer Coaches, US Youth Soccer, U.S. Club Soccer and AYSO. Last time I checked, they're all decent, similar and none have a magic formula that set it above another.

7. Regionalize youth soccer

Thanks to the DA rules, we have in the USA clubs that travel hundreds of miles to play teams that aren't as competitive as a neighboring team that plays with a different badge. In fact, the original plan for the DA wasn't to create a national league, but to help clubs around the country improve their training environment. We need to go back to that.

U.S. Soccer should aid clubs without dictating to them, and encourage localized soccer. If you have an incredibly talented U-12 team that can't find competitive U-12 games, play in a U-14 league. If your U-18s are so good they win every game, enter them in an adult league if a good one is available. To its credit, U.S. Soccer never went as far as U.S. Youth Soccer or the ECNL on youth national championships for the younger age groups -- but it does create significant travel expenses with showcases that require cross-country flights. And the DA has long-distance travel for regular-season games combined with a sub limit that sends kids on costly trips for limited minutes of action.

The cost-saving by regionalizing play is more important than ever as clubs and parents face the economic fall-out from the pandemic. However it unfolds, decreasing national championships and national showcases for so many age groups at all levels of youth soccer, not just the DA, will be a silver lining to the crisis.

8. Let the pros take the lead

U.S. Soccer's attempt to appease MLS clubs unhappy with the DA only led to discontent from all quarters. In the new era, MLS and USL clubs can take the lead by creating one competition, at U-16 or U-17. That's the age at which they need to make a decision on signing young players. Their older youth players (pros or still on academy contracts) should be playing with reserve teams. MLS needs to finally abolish territorial rights and MLS clubs can scour the nation for the players they feel confident in investing in. The Boys DA had already reached a point at which the amateur DA clubs were ready to forge a path without U.S. Soccer trying to balance their needs with MLS's. For all the other age groups, MLS clubs can work with local clubs -- regardless of what organization the players are registered with. Farther down the road, U.S. Soccer can consider hosting regional championships that invite the best clubs no matter who they're affiliated with. More importantly, U.S. Soccer should redirect resources to expanding talent ID centers around the nation and scouting players regardless of affiliation.

 

Our HS team had 9 girls ECNL players on it (1 out with ACL during club). Lost in regional final of state playoffs. And the top teams in our area probably had 5-10 each. The state title team had the best player in state who decided to leave her DA team to play HS.

Conversely we have had 3-5 boys DA players in our HS school each year. Another school in our district has had benefit of a few boys leaving DA each year and hence has made several state championship games over last 5 years, whereas our boys have hard time making it more than a couple games in state playoffs. A few top level bodies raises the bar immensely.

 

I am not a fan of the way youth soccer works for girls period. GDA or ECNL The incentives are very different between boys and girls. The ECNL did a good job of consolidating the top Clubs and providing showcases and clearly there is power in numbers. That said, its the Clubs and often within a club, its the individual coaches that really matter. The ECNL itself did very little to regulate the quality of coaches or maintain standards of facilities or practices. The founding members denied access to other Clubs solely on the basis of how it impacted them territorially. Individual DoCs started to be able to control things like YNT call ups by being the only conduit to them. GO look at teh FC Stars 2000 group. So many YNT caps among them. How many are still involved? Is it possible that the DoC did that bad a job of identifying talent or did he use his access as a marketing tool for the benefit of his own club?


GDA was an attempt to reduce the power that the top ECNL Clubs had. To create standards and some level of enforcement. It was also an attempt to allow the USSF to have real oversight over what was being done and by who.

The problem was implementation and the fact that the most powerful Clubs had no real incentive to participate. It was going to cost more $$ and reduce the control they had. And for what? potentially "better" player development. It was only a matter of time before they went back to the game they controlled. in fact they were able to Trojan horse it by having access to the GDA while also running ECNL teams. they were allowed to bad mouth the GDA while also participating. to destabilize from within.

The ECNL is not going to just let Clubs in. Im pretty sure they are close to full. ECNL rosters may expand, but that means there will be kids on ECNL teams now displaced.

There is no fully funded vehicle for the truly elite female player that is based on talent. There should be. However with a 9 team NWSL that is still in survival mode, its unfair to expect the Clubs to build that. Especially when they dont have first option on players they develop. Maybe the solution is for them to get a "fee" if another club drafts them. Who knows, im spit balling, but the problem on the girls side is that no one has any incentive to focus on player development before College. It falls on the parents to manage that process and whether you are GDA or ECNL its the same.

 

That may well apply to your daughter and that is fine. I dont think applies to every player. here are several extremely talented players who would rather use HS time to get better. HS soccer means different things to different people. When it was ECNL only, I know several players who chose to skip HS and work with coaches and trainers on specific individual things they need to improve. Is that for everyone? of course not, but the notion that they are somehow missing out on something is ludicrous to me.

 

As far as Woitellas take. I disagree with a lot of it.

1. The Clubs are mostly interested in $$. that has a huge impact on player development.

3. Its not one way. ECNL as a private entity has no incentive to talk to USSF. There were some very competent people working under the USSF guideline at the clubs. The notion that the solution to soccer rests with people who were ignored is a huge oversimplification

4. Most of the College coaches I know dont believe this. Having said that, there are going to be philosophical disagreements between coaches. Im sure Mark Krikorian respects Anson Dorrance, but im not sure he would want to play the way UNC does. They see the game thru different lenses.Nothing wrong with that. The USSF seek the opinion of the top coaches often.

5. Ive made my opinion known on HS soccer. i dont think it was disrespectful. I think it was a rule. Either you followed it or you joined a club that allowed it. Why join a DA club and then try and change the rules? To throw a blanket over HS soccer and pretend its the same experience for all is crazy. it isnt

8. Pros should take the lead, but on the girls side, how?

 

Any thoughts on potential effects on college recruiting? I know coaches want their recruits to play against the highest level of competition and ECNL can't absorb everyone.

 

In theory, the "better" players are going to displace the weaker ones. Player in the midst of recruiting are going to be impacted by the virus more than they are the GDA disappearing.

As far as your competition comment, yes they do, but that has not been the case for some time. It didn't stop them from recruiting players.

 

I disagree about ECNL and player development: You have to develop players for two reasons, IMO: First, if you don't develop good players and good teams, you wlll lose games, which makes everybody unhappy and will make your club unappealing to the parents of new, prospective players--and then the club/business suffers. Second, you have to develop players so that they will be offered college scholarships--and that is THE marketing tool for all these clubs, yes? That is what most of the parents at most of the clubs have as their goal, it seems to me. I don't have any direct experience with ECNL, but it's pretty clear that the college scholly is the big carrot. That is why most of the club tout their players who've signed NLI's. And If players on your teams are not getting scholarship offers, then, again, I should think that prospective parents--those with 12-14-year-olds, say, will notice and be less willing to shell out money for your club.

Beyond that, there are a lot of pretty strong ECNL teams around the country in most of the age groups. And a lot of good players. Are they getting the kind of development that teens in Europe are getting--those who are with pro-club-affiliated programs in England, Spain and the Netherlands? No, definitely not--but as you say, we don't have that on the girls' side. (Do we with the boys, via MLS?) And the DA couldn't really differentiate itself from ECNL to succeed. It simply created a lot of confusion.

One thing about high-school soccer. From what I've observed, a fair number of the talented girls who play high-school soccer are at schools with historically strong programs that are often competing for state titles. There is tradition to uphold, and that is a draw for some of them, I'm sure. Are some/most of them sacrificing some development potential in exchange for the possibility of winning a state title with their longtime friends and teammates? Yes, probably--but it's a choice they make. And one reason they may make that choice is that playing professional soccer isn't really a goal for most teenage female soccer players--even the good ones. Getting a college scholarship /is/ the primary goal for most, unless you've been on some of our youth national teams and are truly elite, and not many kids are in that category. Professional women's soccer is still too new; there are too few truly professional teams; the money is still crappy unless you are on a national team or play for one of the clubs associated with big European clubs--and there aren't more than 10 of those, if that.

 

The rumor is no longer a rumor.....

https://www.soccerwire.com/news/report-u-s-soccer-to-permanently-close-entire-development-academy/

 

So much truth in Number007's observations!

 

Good riddance. Can't say I'm sorry to see the DA go. Was haphazardly put together with very little collaboration with other coaches and people within an existing infrastructure at the time in a country that already was competing at the highest level. Was not impressed with April Heinrichs' plans and rollout of the DA at all. Just seemed like it was an exercise to tinker with the soccer landscape and make people feel more important than they needed to be. ECNL has a good structure in place and this will also help strengthen the structure of USYS and National League for clubs in smaller markets.

 

Read your post 3x and really dont see where you disagree. Winning games =/= development. The fastest route to winning games is recruiting the best players from your local rivals. In my area, thats what the leading Clubs do. If you look closer, do they send a larger percentage of their teams to "better" soccer schools? Not in my experience.

I see very little individual development going on during Club or HS time. The focus, as you imply, is winning games. at the stronger deeper clubs and HS, there is very little challenge in winning most of the games. The opponent is usually overmatched.

The route to a College scholarship is all about being as good as you can be. Many posters imply that ECNL is scholarships and GDA was all about YNTs. Guess what, the YNT level kids are mostly getting full rides at some of the best soccer/academic combo schools out there. The two things are not mutually exclusive. ECNL is a very succesful enterprise that is run by the big Clubs. The incentive for them is to make money. full stop

 

Collaboration with other coaches - I think this is more nuanced. Several of the DoCs that you would expect to have been consulted were already ECNL founders. They had an agenda as well. To protect the ECNL. Collaborating with them was a job for a master negotiator/people person. April Heinrichs was not that person.

Lets also address the elephant in the room. Many, is not all, of the ECNL DoCs are/were men. At the time GDA was rolled out the USSF was all about giving the control of the womens game back to women. Male influence was not really wanted or sought out.

As ive said above, the ECNL structure is good enough for say 95 percent of the players, but is not good for the elite player.It just isnt. Can players still get to College etc, of course. T9 creates continuous demand. Thats the subtlety in this. ECNL is fine for most and that majority is clearly more vocal, but if the USSF really wanted to try and develop players, they had to go year round and stop HS. The problem occurs when you then make the league so big that you have to add players of lower calibre to fill out.

If i were in charge i would have had ONE team per club. No age restrictions. Purely based on talent. roster of say max 20. and totally free. I would have sat that on top of the ECNL as the best of the best. Players try out every year to be selected. If they dont make it, they can play for the regular ECNL or NPL team. Any club who meets a certain standard can apply yo have a USSF/GDA team. Obviously I would need to flesh it out more, but you get the idea. SOme Clubs would decline simply because they would not want to offer it free. USSF could donate a lump sum to every Club that runs a team and make sure that $$ is sepnt on that team.

Until you remove parents from the equation of elite players, it hard to see anything change. The path they take is designed to appeal to the masses, not the truly driven kid who wants to be a star at Stanford

 

My gosh. There has to be at least one age group out there that
1. In 2015-2016 had their team break up because US soccer changed all the age groups (some kid went to bed a u14 player and woke up u16 the next day)
2. In 2016-2017 had their team break up because US soccer instituted the the girls DA
3. Now will have to go through it all again because US soccer disbanded the DA

Obviously club soccer teams are by nature not stable entities, but that is a lot of major changes instituted in a short period of time from the organization that is supposed to be providing consistency.(and I hear they want to change the age groups back)

 

If you seek stability, focus on the actual coaches, not the badge they happen to be wearing at any given time. The smoke and mirrors of club soccer for girls is the myths built up around certain badges - league or club. There are good and bad coaches at every club. There are good and poor teams as well. The key is to try to surround your child with a positive environment for her and stick with it for as long as she seem like she wants to put in the work.

That is the stability.

to the extent that things appear to change a lot, thats by design. The people selling you are alwyas trying to distract you from how simple it really is. They are all about selling the latest and greatest idea because for most people, improving at soccer is not really the goal. HS soccer is a classic example. I would love to have someone explain to me how playing HS soccer improves a player RELATIVE to playing any other form of soccer during the same time period. Improving at the game is an assumed byproduct of all the other tangential stuff they are selling - access to college coaches, showcases, games that are only meaningful because so many have traveled so far, a group of readymade "friends", a lifestyle etc.

Strip all that away and ask yourself how much of it really improves your child. I know that im every sport i ever played, the actual game was the tip of the iceberg. we practiced al lot to get to the game and then practicesd more. All these entities do is control the game schedules. ECNL has never really looked at the quality of coaching, field arrangements, facilities etc. USSF tried to but in a heavy handed way given that several clubs had been doing it that way for a while.

Anyway, I digress. Just stay focused on your childs goals and it gets less confusing. Avoid the snake oil.

 

Of course our development programs could be improved; of course there are mediocre coaches and high-school isn't the greatest path to brilliant soccer. But let's not be too cynical. All in all, it seems to me, the U.S. girls system is working pretty well as is. Our women's national team is the best in the world, and has been the best in the world, generally, for a long time--and 90 percent of its players came through our club/youth and then college system. All are outstanding players AND they've got a college degree, which is more than can be said for most of their counterparts in Europe or South America. That's pretty enviable. I'd also contend that because of that college experience/degree, they are more well-rounded than a lot of the men who played nearly full time from a young age and do not have a college education. There's a lot to be said, in my mind, for having both. Maybe a separate program for the "elite" would be helpful, sure, but it can't be said that the current system hasn't been working: Lots of ECNL players get scholarship offers from /lots/ of colleges; many go to strong college programs, and they in turn funnel talent to the national team, and the national team is preeminent. It may not be ideal, but I for one rather like our women's system.

 

The key point is

90 percent of its players came through our club/youth and then college system

The system really is College. Whatever feeder that got them there is what it is. My cynicism is well founded around the people who try to exploit parents with bad information and outright lies be they GDA, ECNL or anyone else.

I put it to you that whatever feeder was in place, we would be in a similar position. College is the key. Irks me to see so many of the aggregators trying to take credit. The credit goes to the good coaches from Club, HS , College, Private wherever. When the alphabet boys try and take credit - USSF,ECNL, GDA, NPL USYS or whatever - it is just not true.

PS Lots of GDA players got scholarships as well. Lots of good coaches worked in both the ECNL and GDA they were not good in one league and bad in the other

 

Forgot to ask you what you think our womens system actually is?

 

3 thoughts.
Sad to see all of the turmoil.
I really have mixed feelings about it all.
007 really seems to have analyzed the situation pretty well.

From my back ground in youth soccer in the late 1980s into the1990s I was sad then to see the model of parent run youth clubs be eclipsed by the rush to professionalize the clubs. This was mostly pushed by the formation of US Club Soccer who came across as power driven and in opposition to the long established USYSA structure.

USYSA was sticking to a 30 year old model which was ripe for challenge, but I and many I knew felt that that there was parts of that culture which were very good for the players and families. (And I was very impressed with what AYSO was doing.) It appeared to me that US Club Soccer was the antithesis of what true development could be. The emphasis was on tournaments, winning, and paying coaches at professionalized clubs. The hype was on for consolidating the best players and pitching to ego driven parents. And then the ECNL was invented. for girls with a recruiting "platform" of showcase tournaments that would appeal to college coaches... all for the apparent purpose of advancing the goals of achieving wealthy prestigious clubs run by professionals. A national league no less! ...and the business plan worked... forcing the USYSA to respond to try to keep its players and families. It;s not that there were new top flight coaches coming in, the best coaches with USYSA teams were primary targets too. A very sour taste. Of course, change is always disruptive, but there are better or worse ways of doing it.

I agree with those who have said that US Soccer's notion was to actually try to organize a development organization and put money into coach training and best practices, etc. But the clubs had the upper hand and of course resented the intrusion into their money machine. US Club soccer has proved to understand how to achieve "success". -That being by marketing an attractive package to parents' egos and wallets of national scope games, showcase tournaments for recruiting, all the while calling it "developmental". And all this continued to happen while the numbers of youth soccer players started to drop off about 4 or 5 years ago.

And so it has been, and now there will undoubtedly be a wild scramble to see who takes the most spoils.... which may or not be related to the development of youth soccer players.