Unfortunately I'm limited in what I can do. On an individual basis I've told several parents that have extremely young children (2-3) about Tom Byer's Soccer Starts at Home. One mom told me that her two year old son is really jazzed about dribbling the ball, and it probably helps that she played club soccer. By no means is this the end all of what's needed. But the likelihood of kids liking soccer and staying with it later on is increased if the child has some comfort with the ball.
Yep. That's great. I'm sure there's a lot USSF can do, and a lot of other organizations. For example, CFG (NYCFC) just pledged to open 50 (or 100?) new courts in NYC. That'll help, too. I just think this is going to take a lot of time.
Tom Byer had approached the USSF about implementing his program but they said no. I think they wanted data that proved his program would translate to more skillful players. Meanwhile the Houston Dynamo and Dash has gone all in with his program. It's really interesting how they've brought the program to school districts in and around Houston and have leveraged the program with many youth clubs. It will take time for the results to be seen, but I won't be surprised to see a strong increase in quality youth players coming from the Dynamo in the next 5-10 years.
Yeah, to be clear, I am sure USSF, as a Federation, makes lots of mistakes. I have no idea if signing on or not with Byer is one of those. In a lot of ways, it's actually better that there's some federalism here so differing methods can play out. I'm just having this conversation in two places ... and I really don't think a loss to Brazil in this situation means anything systematic or massive. Nor do I think (as the other conversation is going) that the US should be dominating via population and money and this is all easy with just a few simple choices.
We can't snap our fingers and magically implement a nationwide soccer culture akin to what is found in all the great footballing nations. But what we can do is invest in programs in local areas along the lines of what the Dynamo are starting to do. If similar programs are implemented elsewhere and we see more kids staying in the sport and more skillful players reaching club teams the word will travel.
This needs to be the message: “Don’t go slave away to make money for the NCAA…make some cash in MLS.”
Tom Byer did his thing in Japan for over a decade, prior to them hosting the 2002 World Cup, right? So is Japan one of "the great footballing nations" now? Or have they consistently been ranked around 28 over the last few years? Japan was ranked as high as 14 in 1997. But they have actually spent far more time ranked in the 40s and 50s than they have ranked in the teens since WC2002, before now settling into the high 20s... The Houston Dynamo will likely have a much better academy in 5-10 years, but they did also go from one of the cheapest owners in MLS to one that's looking to spend lots of money. And on the academy front Houston is starting from almost zero, so there's nowhere to go but up. The Houston Dynamo are no different from say the Chicago Fire who also now have a much more ambitious owner, let's see if they can similarly improve their academy over 5-10 years, despite not working with Tom Byer... If he was so transformative for soccer in Japan, why is he being rejected by US Soccer and working with the Houston Dynamo? Why isn't he being fought over by Germany and Spain, or Bayern Munich and Man City? Since he did such a great job with Japan why hasn't Qatar been working with him for the last decade in preparation for their own World Cup? Has he heard from the Saudis now that they own Newcastle United? Why are so many top soccer minds with massive amounts of money, similarly to crappy incompetent USSF, unable to recognize his effectiveness and his genius?
Because the Brazil senior team or French senior team is good, does not mean the youth teams are dominant. To make that connection is specious. As an example, the US U20s have beaten Brazil and France in the U20 World Cup. Things are much more even at the youth level and have been for some time. The other night wasn't Brazil being orders of magnitude better. It was a team that was organized versus a team that was not only not organized but set up in a very strange way. I really don't understand how you take a coaching job at the last minute, but then try to Galaxy Brain to such a degree you look like an idiot. Wouldn't you sort of play it conservative until you got a good idea of the players? It seems perfectly reasonable to you know, play the players in their club positions. The only top prospects playing in their position were Aaronson and Sealy. Surprise! They looked the best. Brazil completely took their foot off the gas after scoring the 4th. Some players looked good in that period, but hard to tell. The result really doesn't matter and what can we learn from watching McGlynn as a DM or Clark as a 9? Nothing. It was a waste of time. The next game should be more of a tune up and then I'm most interested to see the team versus Mexico.
i rewatched that first half and for his 45 minutes paxten aaronson was the best player on the field for either side. much different game if sealy offsides is rightfully called a penalty and caden clark doesnt have a shocker
You just kind of answered your own question there. This Brazil team has had multiple extended camps already. This was the first camp for our US U20 group with a coach that had only been named a few days ago. These players probably needed name tags when they arrived, because they didn't have a U17 cycle together. The team is also missing a lot of its most talented players. Ricardo Pepi, for instance. Not only that, this wasn't the coach's squad selection. Varas was only named coach days before the event. Who picked this squad? I don't know, but not the coach. [The USSF was supposedly trying to get Luchi Gonzalez, who turned down the opportunity.] I don't ever worry about sheer youth results. Youth results are a means to an end, not an end unto themselves. A great result at a youth level is kids getting smacked in the face and getting a reality check. Failure at this youth level is a great learning tool. We're 20 months from the U20WC. We're still in a "casting a wide net" phase with this group. If we learn that some of these players aren't up to this level, then that's a good result too. Then the coach looks at new guys in the next window.
Yes hello, I'm here for the conversation about the 2023 U.S. U23 cycle, player pool, coaching and match analysis -- Yes sir, right this way, the discussion of how many futsal courts U.S. Soccer should build and which U5 training programs teach the best fundamentals is already under way Haha, sorry I was unclear. I was looking for the -- I SAID RIGHT THIS WAY SIR
Because he kind of comes off as an insufferable douche I think his ideas are actually very logical and probably work very well. But most people don’t want to take their kids from infants and try to force them to be soccer stars. And most Americans don’t have anything close to the free time to be able to make that work. It’s a great idea, but would only ever work for a small percentage of the soccer population because of those two factors alone
I don't many people who think Tom Byer is a douche, but everyone is entitled to his opinion. The program described in Soccer Starts at Home has the young child maneuver a small ball with the encouragement of the parent. While the obvious goal is to have child gain comfort with the ball in preparation for youth soccer later on there are positive cognitive effects that dovetail to better learning in general. Don't take my word for it. It's all in the book. And finally, I know several parents who've begun have their children follow the program and they all have positive things to say. Oh wait...Tom Byer is a douche, right?
I mean I think his stuff works but there also isn't any kind of catch all that we can do that will on its own fix everything. It's one of those things that is necessary but not all sufficient all on its own. I also think its good for someone like Houston to try and see if it works and then if it does we can scale it up on a larger scale. It's good to have lots of different academies taking different approaches so we can figure out which ones work best.
I don't think the NCAA is the issue any more. How many kids on this roster played college soccer? On the senior team, outside of the GKs, very few of the players Berhalter has used in WCQ have played college soccer and they did so for only a season or two. (Yedlin, Roldan, McKenzie, M. Robinson, Zimmerman). EDIT: Forgot about Tim Ream but hopefully he's being phased out.
Bingo. There's always this idea that there's a very easy 1-2-3 blueprint to follow and everything will work. And we haven't because someone is incompetent or corrupt. There's a blueprint, alright, both in terms of structure and in terms of individual instruction. More than one of each, of course. But the structural one is highly dependent on a strong soccer culture and massive amount of investment. There's no blueprint out there for constructing a culture or altering a culture in a short time period to mimic what other cultures have developed over a hundred years. Or rather there is, but it's like Great Leap Forward stuff. You don't want to do that period, but no one does it to be good at soccer. And it's highly dependent on having a functional professional system to fund it. Federations don't fund development; pro teams do. The English soccer culture grew up over 150 years and when it was 25 years old, it was facing 1900 construction costs, 1900 labor rates, 1900 levels of competition -- all local, not internet, no tv, no foreign leagues, nothing. As the years went on, soccer -- the lower class sport -- went pro, while rugby and polo stayed amateur. Somewhat the opposite happened in the US. And it determined a LOT. So you're trying to build that ... except baseball, football, basketball have massive head starts. Your domestic league is paying labor rates 100 years ahead of it, and faces competition from easily accessed foreign leagues. You could have rickety bleachers and charge back then; now a $100M is the price of credibility to a consumer. Oh, and your competition is now the EPL, Liga MX, the NBA, the NFL, UFC, netflix, minecraft, tiktok. Oh, and we're a massive country where everyone lives in the suburbs and has completely killed free play or kids just being in the neighborhood. Shit's not impossible, and improvement doesn't require us being Brazil or Germany, but we need to acknowledge that while there may be some end state blueprints, there's absolutely no blueprint to GET there, and that shit is hard.
This is such a good post. You have nailed it on nearly every item discussed. I am sure there are many people that feel the same as I do and place a lot of this on the federation. While it may be harsh, I think it is completely fair. When you start behind someone or something, the only way to catch up is to do more or to have your competition do less. We all know the latter isn't happening. This is the approach USSF should have, but instead we get the version of the federation that thinks we can get there by doing less. If the goal is to compete on the biggest stage, we have lost time, lack of culture and many other things to make up for. We are an extremely wealthy nation that should be able to afford the extra resources it takes to attempt to close the current gap. What are some of the things our federation should be looking at? Lets start by employing a full time staff that is hired on merit and not where they are or are not willing to move. How about adding 3/4 extra camps per year for the YNTs that don't have to worry about players being released and International windows. Let's expand our scouting network and get more eyes on players every weekend. Let's create off WC cycle age groups and get them into camps and playing friendlies numerous times per year. Futsal courts, toddler programs and other good ideas will mean nothing if we don't have a federation that is willing to try and be one of the best. The bottom line is we need our potential MNT players playing together as often as possible from the ages of 15 - 20. In the end, it won't make a difference as to the players that make it and those that don't, but if it is too difficult to organically develop a culture across the entire country, lets at least try and develop one within our YNT programming.
We're doing better than any other NT that arrived late to the game, or had a long hiatus away from the game, long enough to have to start from nearly zero again. There is a limit to what can be done. Clubs develop youth, not the NT: clubs have the resources, local knowledge, and family support. There are two kinds of clubs: a) privately owned, by a company that tries to make money out of it; b) owned by the public, as a mass of fans, with an elected board. Both require for a pre-existing soccer culture because a) needs eyes watching and paying for seats, following the team, buying stuff; and b) needs for the associates to invest in the club, get involved, and know what they're doing. That a country is wealthy as a whole doesn't mean big companies are going to waste money in a sport where the returns are limited, when there are better options out there.
I should have specified…that was a call for our people to come out of the Egypt of NCAA Division 1 football, baseball, and basketball to the promised land of MLS (yeah, its all we’ve got but they’ll at least pay you to play and let you own your own name!).
There's no doubt that USSF started behind, and then while they did heroic, underfunded work for years, the Gulati regime was like a startup whose founder couldn't scale the business. He wanted to be in on every call, and he wanted it small. I think the Federation has made strides recently in terms of trying to build an organization, which I think is a vital step. They've separated soccer decision powers to soccer people; no longer is the business side or Gulati weighing in. This is a good thing, and starting to build out processes, headcount, etc., always takes longer than you think. I actually think the co-location decision is a good one. One way to accelerate is to build an organization, and way too many national team coaches want the job because they simply want to call in and coach the team and make it a solo gig. That's not going to help the US now -- they need to build the organization, and so they can't have a coach somewhere else who wants full autonomy, doesn't want to help with the youth teams, doesn't want to help with organization building. A lot of national team coaches are kings in their fiefdom and don't want to hear from anyone unless it is to fire them or give them a contract; that is not the right route for us right now. This is planning for the future, and trying to catch up with other nations. Other nations have this infrastructure; we don't. We had random people running youth education reporting into a marketing guy. As for the youth camps ... I have a hard time being too hard on them. I have no idea the budgetary choices. Is it USSF being lazy? Or is it a real budget crunch where you simply have to make hard choices. People lost jobs here; I just doubt it was like "we'll get to it later." But hey, perhaps I am wrong -- I don't mean that saracastically. Because USSF has been utterly incompetent at stuff in the past. I just don't know ENOUGH to be critical. It would be nice to have youth camps. But yeah, there's plenty to pile on short and long term. I'd be investing in much more youth coaching education for example. And I wouldn't have hired Jason Kreis or Anthony Hudson. And I'd reach out to the Latino community more. But I also just don't understand the constraints.