MLS Continues Steps Into Youth Development

well at least from the article, the coaches quoted said they welcomed the development

i think MLS is slowly developing a master plan. Garber has been widely quoted as wanting to expand to 20 teams in the next 10-15 years, and i think this is forming the basis for reserve teams and/or developing players - aside from the U-17 and U-20 programs - for the pro ranks. they may not have ironed out all the details yet, but they're on the way.

excellent point.

 

of course, i don't actually know what i'm talking about.

 

Every MLS coach or GM I've spoken with says they eventually hope to have youth academies and to be able to develop their own players A few teams have actually taken baby steps toward this, most have done nothing.

Greg Andrulis notes that the youth or S-form concept in Europe where a player might sign with a team at age 15 or 16 will probably never be the norm in our country because of the high value placed on college education.

 

that is the way it should be. dont have the players pay the team to be on the team, instead pay for player at their expense. that is the way every club should do it, but in new york it's kind of different because of the good amateur league in new york.

here's the link for the league that the metrostars black(reserve team) play in:

http://www.championsleaguesoccer.com/american.htm

 

thanks a lot for posting that article. id heard a bunch of refferences to the Metros reserve and youth teams but never really seen it explained in any depth before. I think it's absolutely great that they're doing that. it seems like they have a good structure and this is the type of thing that all teams in the league should be doing, especially if they're already drafting 17,18,19 year old kids. obviously it seems there'd be a bit of a gap there in training a bunch of kids but having no real league controled minor league structure or reserve teams to go to, but it'd infinately more affordable to start this way than it is to develope a farm league outright. congrats to the metros for being ahead of the curve.

 

The training is what we're after--signing can come later. And if the sport grows, I can see 17-18 year olds getting 50-75K contracts within 7 years and beyond that, much more.

College soccer can save itself by going the way of the PDL, or lengthening the season and using FIFA rules.

 

MLS teams should be allowed to offer 15-16 year old players a higher education bonus package as a recruitment tool. The U.S. Miltary uses this method quite effectively. They can offer a one for one package. For every year they play for the club, the club pays for one year of books, tuition, and room and board.

 

along similar lines - SJ Earthquakes

http://www.sjearthquakes.com/press_box/042403release.htm

 

Looks Good

Glad to see the Metros pushing forward.

Assuming the MLS remains viable, you've gotta think that MLS-sponsored youth teams will eventually become serious items. If nothing else, the marketing brand behind wearing a "Metros" jersey for an officially Metros sponsored team should bring out the good kids.

But there's hype and reality. One and a half years into things, the Chicago Fire program remains a myth, at least at the younger ages. Because the Fire will take Helen Keller's lame stepson if he pays the bill, the quality is low, so the top players don't want to participate.

It's a PC world, you know -- don't separate between the good and bad 11 year olds, it's too young of an age. Fine. You won't separate the talent. But the kids will -- they'll be damned if they're going to ruin an evening going a practice where the kid they are passing to can't control the ball.

 

FYI, there is a Youth Soccer forum which may be more appropriate for this type of thread, since it's about the Super Y League and not directly related to the national teams. I don't have the power to move it from this forum, but just for future reference.

 

Re: Looks Good

Of course, one has to look at the purpose of these efforts.

Peter Wilt is one of the great GMs in American sports, but these activities have as one of their objectives the promotion of the club with its fan base.

IF you're going to develop youth players in the true European model, then it's purpose needs to be distinct and clear. Manchester United doesn't have a youth program to sell tickets -- it has a program to develop a couple of players every couple of years for the senior team.

It's a professional entity with a professional objective.

Right now, MLS doesn't need youth teams because players are being developed by other means -- elite clubs, college, Bradenton. There's more than enough supply. Now the supply may be wanting to one degree or another, but it's there. To use a culinary analogy, the USA may be cooking up Olive Garden, while France is rustling up Lutece-like fare, but guess what?? There's still some nutrition.

I have said this elsewhere, it boils down to economics. For ManU it is extremely cost effective to run a youth program because it's cheaper to build a David Beckham than it is to buy him. If I spend $1 million a year on my youth scheme, but which every three years spits out two players who are worth $2-3 million each, well, that is a nice little enterprise I've got going. To use financial terms, that's giving me an internal rate of return well north of 50%.

But what financial incentive does, say, an LA Galaxy have to build a Memo Gonzalez? Why bother?? Someone else will supply him, and it won't cost me a cent.

 

Karl - the argument may be that not enough players of a high enough quality are being developed presently. That is why MLS should get involved.

The numbers you use are realistic, and would mean that in time the youth development program would fund itself. This is the way some lower level clubs survive in other countries.

 

I certainly wouldn't dispute that quality is an issue -- my Olive Garden vs. Lutece metaphor -- yet economics is almost always going to trump that.

That fact is that a professional 1st division soccer player in the United States (whether foreign or domestic) viewed purely in market terms, is simply not worth as much as a English, German, Dutch or an Italian 1st division player.

That could change, and in fact might change.

Every professional franchise is faced with what I would call "talent acquisition costs." To extend the culinary metaphor, for ManU its cheaper to cook at home and eat in (thought they CAN go out for a really FABULOUS meal if they want to). For the LA Galaxy, eating out, it happens, is extremely cheap because it just doesn't need the kind of fare ManU does.

 

Re: Re: Looks Good

You're right but i have a 'if you build it they will come' kind of attitude. The metros i would assume are acting ahead of the curve in terms of starting a type of developmental system in the hopes that league rules would change so that they'd have first dibs on these players. However, if these teams are cheap to run, which they should be, why not get some kids out there running around in your jerseys to help build a fan base. it's good public relations. moreover, they'd have a leg up on scouting these kids at a young age. just because they don't have the rights to a player based on league rules doesn't mean in the future a player wouldn't want to play specifically for that team that they had a connection to when they were young. I think that's something we're seeing potentially with the Freddy Adu situation. Granted with is extremely young age consideration would be given in terms of him maybe playing for DC, but these types of youth teams only serve to start developing loyalty, whether it's from a future fan's perspective or a future player's.

 

Re: Re: Re: Looks Good

Don't get me wrong...as Dan Roudeboush knows too well, I am all for a pros-developing-pros approach.

And more power to the MetroStars...though assembling a U17 team for competition at SuperY is different than having a full age-tier integrated program.

The reason that a ManU or a Liverpool or a BL are so successful with their youth programs is they can create a professonal environment for these kids at a very young age.

By that I mean a 4 -5 day a week training regimen more or less year round, starting at U12, along with 35-40 games a year, or more. That's what it takes to develop a professional polayer.

PR is nice, and I am all for it, but the environment I describe above is a completely different than "kids running around in jerseys."

Meanwhile, most US youth clubs practice twice a week, and maybe play 25-30 games per years.

The closest thing to a professional youth club environment are the elite clubs. Some do get their players 40 games a year; but even the best clubs usually just practice twice a week. Moreover, the ultimate objective of many of these top youth clubs is not to prepare kids for professional careers, but rather for college soccer.

I honestly believe that MLS will field youth academies when the economics are right; when (a) they can own a player and benefit economically from that and (b) when the cost of building is far below the cost of buying/acquiring, and youth programs provide a positive ROI as a result.

From the point of view of creating and training QUALITY players, it is the best way to go. But if the economics don't make sense, it won't happen.

 

Economic Motive

Yeah, same old stuff.

MLS teams don't get to keep the players they develop, and keep the money from selling them, then there isn't much incentive to develop. So they become marketing programs instead.

Just another pat 'em on the head, thanks for bringing your suburban kids by, please put "Chicago Fire" on your checks experience.

They have these kinds of programs in Europe, too -- which, like the Fire's, are done for community relations purposes and to sell tickets -- but they differentiate between them and true development programs, which are done to create good players.

 

the article was also tied the the Metros reserve club and mentioned that they envisioned an acaedmy where players would then be compensated for costs of living and things like that. without getting into another MLS Youth Academy and Reserve team conversation, does anyone know more about their so called reserve team?

p.s. from a marketing and a development process its certainly better to fill full team(s) of these kids than to have them attend a 2 week soccer camp.

 

Final Note

Just see what Karl wrote.

Our MLS youth programs are not in any way, shape, or form equivalent to professional youth soccer programs that exist in Europe, South, or Central America (or Africa and Asia, for all I know).

They're either glorified camps or All-Star teams assembled of players who were trained elsewhere. They are designed for the dilettante attitude that pervades the mainstream U.S. youth suburban soccer climate -- the notion of "don't ask too much of the kids, you risk burnout."

Call me when somebody gets serious on the matter. Then either tell my kid that you found a bunch of better kids, or take him into the program and demand excellence.

Until then, bah humbug.

 

Thing are getting better by the day AMIGO.......

Nice to read something like that, remember couple of years ago I used to B#$CH about every aspect of the USA soccer life, well we have our X striker and many other kids making a difference on MLS, now MLS reserve teams?? dang I love this, very soon I will change my name to the KISS.....

 

What is it????

This forum is about youth soccer players and about the dream of every kid that love soccer: MLS reserve teams, exesive police on the forum is totally anoying on soccer males... be aware of the situation.

 

While branding and support of the Fire are indeed intended benefits of our new Chicago Fire Juniors youth club, there should be no mistake that player development is the real motivation behind it. We are risking significant backlash from the leadership of other clubs who will not support our development goals.

For more information see this site -

http://www.chicagofirejuniors.com/ -

and a detailed power point here:

http://www.chicagofirejuniors.com/Chicago Fire Jr_files/frame.htm

peter