Definetly more interesting that the usual game recaps and serra mist player of the game reports I am used to reading. I liked it too.
I see what Paul is trying to say. We have been a force in CONCACAF only recently. I dont think he is talking Mexico, but more South American style of soccer player. We have many players of this type of caliber in this country in the inner city youth system. South American style soccer has r dominated the world soccer scene, not to mention the African continents vast improvement in soccer skills the last decade. It isnt only Europe anymore. I love European style soccer dont get me wrong, specfically Eastern and Central European soccer. Countries like the Checzh Republic Croatia, Serbia Montenegro and Bulgaria. We always could use the Nowaks and Stoitchkovs in MLS. We also need the Ronaldos the Maradonas and the Peles. Those type of talents are avaliable in this country via children of immigrants of the USA. These children grew up practicing and playing soccer with their dads with this type of style in their blood. Here in Chicago and in other major US cities, inner city talent like this exsists and MLS has failed to tap into these players. Why? Mainly because it requires more investment than in suburban soccer settings where the infrastructure is already in place and minimal investment by MLS is required other than to sign a deal with an exsisting soccer team. Paul is pointing out the fact that MLS isnt tapping into these players. This could in turn be alienating so many potential fans of MLS by not going into innner cities of the USA and scouting poorer inner city leagues and going after these players. The Amercan inner city version of Landon Donovan is out there, just more flair To defend MLS the United States is a huge country and this type of combo over of all leagues in the country would require millions upon milliions of dollars of investment. Maybe with this new Addidas deal MLS can use some of that cash to go out and find these players. Makes sense to me.
Points that matter : 1. Right on What do you think of the single entity structure? Gardener : "It doesn't matter what I think of it or for that matter what you think of it. The fact of the matter is there would not be a league without single entity or something very similar to it. " 2. he was always anti Euro play and pro latin, no surprise here , but i think he is way to the left on this issue and he has been hammering at it from the first day i read his column. What type of soccer is that? ( played in MLS) Gardner :" It's too European. The US is not a European country. If you listen to the soccer people and talk to the people that run soccer in this country, if you look at the list of people that run soccer in this country, if you look at the staffing of the US Soccer Federation, if you look at their coaches, the coaches of the National Teams, the coaches of MLS, they are all European born or pro-European in their attitudes. This is a ridiculous state of affairs for this country. " 3. here i agree with him about the talent we have in this country at the youth levels, but he is not suggesting how we can turn this kids into pro athletes, its easy to talk, but he has a good point Gardner : "We are sitting on an absolute gold mine of talent in this country. We have more talent at the youth level than any European country and I'm not saying that as something that just came off the tope of my head. Most of the talent at the moment is Latin American because that is where the big waves of immigration are coming from. By and large that talent is being ignored. We have a blinkered coaching system. Too many blinkered coaches who do not want to look at it and do not want to exploit it. Now I'm hoping the Chivas arrival in MLS will alter that"
Gardner does have an arguable point. English friends of mine bemoan the fact that from a young age English players are taught a regimented style and do not develop the individual intiative and creativity that is seen in more "Latin" style soccer. They blame it on a coaching mindset - the desire to win even at the club level rather than a desire to develop individuals. But, something makes me wonder how much of this is reality and how much is myth. We are caught, to some extent, in the mythology of the Brazilian kid learning skills on the beach, the poor kid in the Barrio with the homemade ball, etc. etc. Very romantic, that's for sure. Lets see how many of these overlooked gems CD Chivas USA finds in their nation-wide talent hunt. If they can't find anybody who makes the big club roster who was previously unknown and overlooked, that at least raises some question about the "great overlooked talent pool" that Gardner is on about all the time. And if that talent pool is NOT there, Gardner's whole argument comes tumbling down. It is another myth to suggest that our national teams are getting by on pure athleticism and are not skillful. Peolpe who say that are caught up in the "courageous college kids" image of 1990 and prior. Its a powerful image, and in its own way attractive ("You may be better but we will out-work you and beat you.") but it discounts the skills that are right before our eyes if we look. And lastly, hypothetically, if the US team did win a World Cup, would Gardenr still be bashing the style because its not "Latin" enough to suit his tastes?
We flat out can't provide an example. That's exactly the problem; nobody "in the system" knows who these kids are because they don't bother to try out. If we could name a specific player, you're right - somebody would snatch the kid up and give him an opportunity to play. In my mind, it's not a problem of "blinkered", biased, or even potentially racist coaches. It's a systemic flaw in the system. Clearly, based on raw percentages, there is (should be) talent out there in the hispanic community that is being overlooked for some reason or another. I'm not saying we should start hiring more hispanic players to make up the numbers, but that we need to identify *why* there are so few top-level hispanic players on MLS rosters and the US team, and figure out how we can get these kids before they give up the sport. Looking at the numbers and growth of the hispanic portion of the population, common sense tells you that the proportion of hispanic domestic players in MLS and on the US should be similar, and it's not. This is why I like Chivas being in LA - maybe they can help bridge the gap between the primarily white, suburban USSF and the hispanic urban community.
Well, I think they deserve a little bit of time. MLS players were absolutely god-awful at first, outside the already established players. I think it may take a few seasons for "the Chivas effect" to be evaluated.
This is all quite true, and I think it explains more of the issues we face than Gardner's more simplistic (and less accurate) "coaches don't want Latin players" line. I'd be interested in hearing Gardner's solution to youth soccer's problems. Heck, I'd be interested in hearing <i>anyone's</i> solutions. But that's another thread. Or forum.
You make good points, but this isn't quite true ... Paulo Wanchope is an example. He attended high school in the LA area, where he quickly turned into a basketball star, attracting the interests of schools like Michigan State and UNLV. In the end, though, he decided to go home to Costa Rica to become a soccer player.
Until the hispanic community is culturally accepted in this country, instead of largely being portrayed as nusiance, young hispanic talent is always going to drift back to its origins. However, Chivas has the potential to really make a difference in this regard.
In my own limited experience, we had a few kids who made it through club tryouts with ease, plus a benefactor to make the costs affordable. What we couldn't find was a way to get the kids from their housing project to the near suburbs. The big sticking point was transportation. Urban facilities, urban soccer programs like the one in Houston. US soccer is sitting on enough cash to make more of these happen.
Nice try. Last i saw Chivas practiced actual exclusion (No Mexicans Allowed!). And the people in US Soccer do not. Show me some actual exclusion beofre we put anyone in Chivas's boat? No one stops latinos from going to the stadiums. Lets not turn this into a another Chivas thread.
Not at all. This may not be "the only thing" but it could be a major thing, if we are to get the job done. I would ask Galaxy13** if he has heard of East LA kids being developed by local "Uncles" with connections to Mexican teams -- with ELA teams playing exclusively within the community in order to develop the talent. I read an article on this in the NT Times (I believe) a bit over a year ago. Only occassionally do these teams play the 'gringo caballos' teams -- mainly for the excercise. Losing doesn't matter, since the Yank team is not playing the futbol they respect or expect to play in Mexico. Many of the kids hoped to play in college here, but feel they owe gratitude -- and a percentage -- to the Uncle grooming them for the pro leagues across the border.
Americans are practically all children of immigrants of one generation or another. However we didn't all grow up practicing and playing soccer with our dads. And if "this type of style" is in my blood, I haven't seen any evidence of it yet. I think it is more likely that one would compete against a brother, like Claudio Reyna did. But the key might be playing or practicing every day. That doesn't happen in youth rec leagues, and it doesn't even happen in youth select leagues. Is that because of the fancy uniforms? I can't believe private leagues are actually making a lot of money from sign-up fees. In addition to the sign-up fees you have transportation and driver needs. Suppose MLS awarded a hundred $2,000 scholarships to talented high school kids in each MLS city who otherwise would not be willing to pay their own way to play on local select teams. Would this help solve the problem? The kids would now be considered "professional" and would not be allowed to play on high school or college soccer teams. However, this would not be a great loss for high school players and if college is not already in a players plans, this would not be great loss either. MLS could also have a "scholarship" program which would allow a limited number of those high school scholarship graduates, say 10, to play on MLS reserve sides. MLS would pay stipends say $10,000 year for these players, and reserve sides would train at night or on weekends only so that they could hold jobs or go to college during the day. These MLS reserve sides would compete against the nearest A-league or indoor teams in free or closed-to-the-public games. This would cost each MLS team $300,000/yr plus reserve team training costs. What would the training costs be? $500,000? Could each MLS team crank out a player or sum of players worth $800,000 every year via this system? It seems doubtful. But I suppose its worth consideration. How would MLS teams identify pre-highschoolers to award scholarships to? Lengthy summer tryouts. The numbers given would are approximate. MLS could adjust actual targets in each MLS city based on the size of the local population and the ability of local talent. Players in this system eventually enter MLS and be assigned to clubs via the traditional methods. All this discussion is predicated on the assumption that getting kids currently unwilling or able to pay for participation on select teams is the answer. I'm not sure that is the answer, but would bet select teams do present the best training environment currently available to most kids.
Agree'd. I was just saying people argue it from both sides. US Soccer from what I see doesnt exclude anyone. But I am just an outside observer, so who knows.
Its reality. Young soccer players and parents in this country treat the game like a hobby. "I am taking jimmy to soccer practice!" Subsititue the word soccer for ballet/piano/band/whatever and that is the way the game is approached by too many in this country. Its an after school activity. These kids in places like brazil play the game for year before they ever get in front of the yese of any coach. They end up playing selfish football where they only concentrate on their skills nothing else. It is fundamentally different from the way the game is played by kids in places like England and the US. I hear Adu talk about how they train at Bradenton and it kills me. He talks about how they practice with the coaches for about six hours a day. They don't need to do that. They need to play by themselves for however long they want to and then be brought in for a couple of hours a week for instructions about smart ways to play the game. What I want to know is if Chivas discovers these kids will they be able to keep them or will they have to follow the rules like any one else and let them go through the draft?
Sorry if my post made it sound like I meant RIGHT NOW. I agree with you and did not mean it to be sounding like an ultimatum. But, over time, I am still curious as to whether Chivas or any other outreach program will find players that are otherwise unknown. Paolo Wanchope is a great example, but that is ONE person, not a hidden gold mine of talent as Gardner believes exists. You know, a lot of very intelligent people actually believed in El Dorado at the time. It never existed. I keep wondering if this is the same dream recycled. As to the rules - yes there is a problem. With single entity and the draft rules, its not clear that Chivas automatically gets dibbies on any nuggets they do turn up through the "New Blood" program. I assume they could just keep their mouths shut about a kid until after the draft and then sign him as a "discovery" player. (Insert joke here about Vergara keeping his mouth shut). BTW: Since Chivas was charging guys a fee to come out to the try-outs, weren't they setting up an economic barrier also?
Coaching immigrant kids, you definitely encounter some of this attitude. (Imagine how you'd feel if an Englishman were teaching your child basketball.) At the same time, it's like what racists do with all stereotypes ... they blow them out of proportion. By and large, kids are less concerned with skin color and more concerned with having fun. I like the way you're thinking about this, but it's worth pointing out something else ... if these kids are hispanic, they see lots and lots of soccer on Spanish-language television. I think they are well aware of what's out there, but they also perceive that the doors aren't open.
Rommul wrote "They don't need to do that. They need to play by themselves for however long" I think we all agree with this statement. There isn't a coach in Europe, for instance, that doesn't seem to bemoan the downfall of 'street soccer.' Cruyff was talking about this 10 years ago, maybe more. But practically, where is this going to happen? What safe empty lots or fields are there that these kids can play on? As a parent of a five year old (who plays soccer all the time), my first concern is my kids' safety. It goes back to the fields question, and coaching, nicely raised earlier. Kids, especially younger ones, need touches, need to learn how to dribble and juggle and be comfortable on the ball, ie have fun. Not tactics or positions. Let's give the USSF and CYSA (for instance), some credit in going to 3v3 games for younger kids. I coach an U-6 team here in the East Bay. I've got a team that mirrors the diversity of the Bay Area (ie, AA, Asian, Hispanic, Cauc), but I agree with Northside, the money starts to be a factor at a young age. Great thread. Tony
ughh.. here's my 2 cents. kids who grow up in brazil are likely going to be better than kids growing up here, be it brazilian, american, whatever. when children grow up living, eating and breathing one sport, they are likely better then ones who play soccer in the fall, baseball in the spring, etc... blaming it on the coaches, etc, not giving the latinos a fair share is crap. there's a lot more to it that admittedly, i probably have no idea about. our national team, U-20, etc. teams are much better overall then they were 2 world cups ago. that's something positive. in fact, its very positive. leave it to gardner to point out the negative in everything or find a problem. when eddie gaven was 8, MLS started. He grew up wanting to play for the metrostars. and he does. I'd take him over any young mexican player. things are changing, just too slowly for gardner. wait til you kids are taking their kids to MLS games. then you can over analyze the make up of our national team. for now, lets just be happy we have depth and great players. if you gave paul gardner a night with a victoria secrets model, he'll likely come back and complain that her kneecaps were too small. we have a pretty healthy league with SSS on the horizon. 4 more teams in the next 2-3 years. so yeah, lets complain that everyone's a racist.
And there is some Mexican-American kid who is 8 now who is going to grow up dreaming of playing for Chivas USA, and maybe even the US. And perhaps now he'll start to believe it's actually possible. We have to be patient, but I think Chivas USA will in the long run be a positive influence on US soccer. Well, I don't agree so much with Gardner about style, etc. I just recognize that there are some players out there who will help the US. If the end result is only 5 more international-caliber hispanic players in the US nats pool, that's five more international-caliber players than we have now. And that should translate to a larger number of quality players for MLS. These players have to be out there. There is just no way the reason the proportion of hispanic players in MLS is so low is just because enough quality young hispanic players don't exist in the US. They are there, we just need to find them, and maybe Chivas USA will help them want to find us.
We're in complete agreement here. Geography is one of the central problems we face. We're not developing kids from the cities, regardless of their ethnicity. So we're mssing possibly talented white players, black players, hispanic players, asian players, everyone. People who live in large cities generally are not nearly as mobile as suburbanites, even when you compare groups of people in the same income range. Being able to regularly travel significant distances is an expense, but it's a necessary expense in the suburbs and an unnecessary one in the cities. We need more top clubs in the cities.