U.S. Director Of Coaching Education Proposes Changes To ODP By Bobby HoweU.S. Soccer Director of Coaching Education This is a preview of an article that I have just written for U.S. Soccer Magazine addressing some of the criticism that has been leveled at the Olympic Development Program. I have also provided some suggestions for improvement. My opinions are based on much experience in the program for the last 15 years at all levels from district tryouts to national youth team coaching. Undoubtedly, ODP in its present form has to change. The article is meant purely as a starting point for discussion and to assist those states that are not clear in their ODP direction. For many years ODP has served as the primary selection process for national teams in the United States. The program has served this country well. However, as soccer has grown, several cracks have developed and much criticism has been leveled at the ODP structure and operation. The program is expensive and much of the cost is borne by the parents of the players. Soccer at this elite level has become a sport for the middle and upper classes and therefore has excluded many players. As many of our most experienced coaches work full time with clubs, they do not have the time to devote to ODP. Consequently, in many states, players participating in ODP are not exposed to the highest level of coaching available. As club programs have developed to create more year-round activity, incredible scheduling problems have occurred for administrators, too much unnecessary traveling time has occurred for players and a tug-of-war for players’ loyalties has developed. ODP has become administratively driven. More time has been devoted to the rules and finances of the operation than to the well-being of the players and, hence, to the progress of the game. Soccer should provide an equal opportunity for all players to participate, regardless of ethnic heritage or financial background. The only criterion for participation at the next level must be ability, with the understanding that there is no such thing as equality: some players are naturally better than others. At this time ODP does not recognize this simple fact. Development occurs when players of similar abilities are able to compete all year. As ODP is seasonal and sporadic, too often our best players are asked to play at inferior levels. There is no easy solution or magic formula that will eliminate criticism. The following suggestions are offered in the spirit of providing simpler, more efficient development opportunities for our players. As clubs emerge and grow stronger, they must bear the responsibility for the development of our players. Club Coaches have regular access to the players and must be judged on their ability to develop players. This will create much more accountability than already exists. Players must be encouraged to try out for club teams. Players should be scouted for their state teams in league and cup competitions by the state coaching staff. Players identified should be invited to try out for the state team. District tryouts, and therefore district training, should be eliminated. Not only would this ease scheduling, but it would also eliminate the majority of criticism at state level. At this time a player’s first experience of ODP is at district level where there exists the lowest level of experience in player identification and coaching ability. In those states that have strong club programs, state team training should be eliminated to avoid scheduling conflicts. In those states that have weak club programs, the state staff should bear the responsibility of training its best players. It should be the responsibility of all states to schedule games with other competitive states throughout the year (weather permitting) to provide competition. When there are scheduling conflicts between clubs and ODP, state ODP must take priority except for state, regional or national club competitions. Regional identification/development camps must be eliminated to be replaced by sub-regional tournament play. Not only are the existing camps expensive, they serve no developmental purpose. At this time players who are selected at these camps receive no more than eight to 10 days of realistic soccer activity. Regional players should be selected at state friendlies and sub-regional tournaments. Regional training should be eliminated to avoid scheduling conflicts, but regional teams should have more games throughout the year. In regional/state/club conflicts, the region must take priority except for state, regional or national cup competitions. At state and regional levels, year-round match play is a much more important development tool than training. The ODP has served its purpose well. Like the game itself, however, it must evolve to provide more efficient, developmentally sound and less expensive playing opportunities for the elite players in the United States.
I will never understand the obsession with making sure that things are in the one and only "right" forum. That was interesting to me and I wouldn't have seen it if it weren't here.
Serie Zed, it's not as bad as people suffering through a nervous breakdown because some one revealed a score on a soccer website, for a match they probably will never see or for many have little interest in. While of some relevance to the USMNT, this post really belongs in the youth soccer thread. That said it is about time (long overdue) the USSF overhauled ODP and made it accessible for the best players regardless of their financial situation and furthermore, improved the level and consistencey of the coaching and player evaluations.
Don't tell me, let me guess. This is sarcasm, right? Are you always so anal retentive, or just when you're on the internet?
I think it's an important topic and ought to stay in the USMNT forum -- the fact that this information is presented in this forum means that the discussion should skew towards what affect Bill's article has on the future USMNT, thus providing "analysis" which is some of what we're supposed to be getting here. Whereas the same topic presented in a youth forum would lead to discussion that focuses on youth soccer and its problems. I hope you leave it here.
OMIGOD!!! SOmeone with the native intelligence to get the point!!!! Are you sure you're in the right place?
I think that you are half right I have not been in the ODP system long enough to say, but let me try to help by asking some quesitons. Is ODP even necessary in some states? Can't the clubs play enough to teach and showcase their players without throwing players onto unfamiliar teams for a few events? Although I agree that pro coaches are best, I am not ready to hand over the reins to the coaching cadre. Many are profit driven, and win driven, and there is little incentive for them to take the attitude that winning is secondary to player development. A u13 to 16 coach for Ajax has one job-produce players for Ajax. That's what he's paid to do. We don't have that yet. We have the "almighty scholarship" but that's a poor proxy-measurement for developing soccer talent. How can ODP bring about something similar in a country that does not have soccer apprentice programs? just other questions to consider. Hope they help
ODP's name just sounds good, the Olympics are something that every American knows and can see as a way to fame and fortune. There are changes that need to be made, for sure. You do only get the middle/upper class kids whose parent's can afford the fees and can take time off work to drive their kids all over for games and practice. ODP should be free or at least heavily subsidsed by USSF or some other organization.
Sure, but the thread could have a better title, like,"The End of ODP? and its possible effects on the future of the national team." I don't want the good threads to get swallowed up by junk like "Do you think X-player likes Doritos?" or $hit like that. I"m not saying this thread is like that, just that ODP is explicitly a youth development tool and effects the youth teams a lot more than the full national team since its used to scout and pick players for those teams. The full national team uses professional soccer, be it MLS or foreign leagues to scout and pick players for the team...
It appears that Bobby Howe is borrowing from Steve Sampson's work in California-South. Steve Sampson had a nightmare at the 1998 World Cup and has never accepted responsibility for his obvious blundering of the job. He simply was not anywhere near ready to be the World Cup coach and his refusal to accept responsibility for his mistakes afterward proves it. Having said that, his work in Southern California in player development was brilliant. Memo Gonzalas is where he is because of Steve Sampson. I am a strong believer in the saying, "Simplicity is genius." The approach to player development that seems so simple to us all now, is being discussed by Howe because Sampson had the vision and initiative to go out and make it happen. We will hear from Sampson again and in a big way. I just hope that he will have learned to avoid his habit of ducking responsibility for his mistakes by then.
On the surface a case can be made for removing the player development responsibilities of the State and placing them at the Club level. You could redirect the current administrative costs to a scholarship pool for the clubs to ensure that they were able to roster players regardless of ethnic heritage or financial background. However the bottom line is people work to the goals that they are measured against. The club coach measurements are wins and losses not player development. While these are not necessarily mutually exclusive it is certainly to the coaches immediate benefit to take good players with a marginal upside as opposed to poor players with a huge upside
I think it's okay here, but given the importance of this topic to youth development, I'm sending a copy of this thread there. Hopefully Bill is cool with that. https://www.bigsoccer.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&threadid=36807 BTW - people shouldn't worry about starting something here that doesn't belong -- even if it ends up being moved, it will reach a wider audience.
ODP always struck me as something that was more about adults protecting their turf than it was about development. The point about costs favoring a player from a well-to-do family supports this. It has certainly advanced some players over the years, but is it worth the cost? No way. I think USL is on the right track with the Super Y League. Get the best kids in the highest club level possible. My limited understanding of the purpose of ODP was to get the best kids some better competition than simply being the best player in a local youth league. Super Y League addresses the same thing within the club structure. Eventually MLS teams will delve deeper into youth development, but with the BEST 16-17 year olds signing with MLS, Man United, Arsenal, Metz, etc., I think ODP is running out of any usefulness.
I'm not sure Super-Y is the answer yet. A large number of Super-Y players are also ODP participants. It's expensive to play Super-Y too, and it's expensive scout so even Super-Y teams are limited in their ability to identify the best players. Many of the more successful Super-Y teams are regular elite clubs not even associated with a pro team. I've refereed about 40 Y-League games and aside from having some better subsitution rules and being a little more formal presenting the match, it isn't much different from the typical college scholarship focused program. However, a club that charges players that can afford it $3000 or more a season can provide some players with free spots on a team. USL teams bleeding money can't afford to spend large amounts on youth development. Super-Y is very competitive and it give the sorts of players already in the ODP system opportunities to play many more high-level matches, but that system has limitations too. It'll take a while for a more robust system to develop, but the league model makes more sense to me.
It would be interesting to know this (from my perspective of someone who's hasn't been involved in youth soccer for years): How would you measure the success or failure of ODP? What standard would you use for success -- for either ODP or any system that develops to take its place? How many of the current USMNT pool participated in the ODP, and how many didn't?
billf: That is very interesting insight. I do not profess to be an expert (or even mildly informed ) on youth soccer issues, but it seems to me that the framework of the Super Y league makes a lot of sense. Get these massive youth clubs to put their best players on a team that regularly plays against other clubs best. Sounds like you agree with the theory, but like everything else in soccer -- money talks. How much does USSF spend on ODP? If they eliminated that program, could the money be re-directed in another developmental direction?
ODP is run through the states via the USYSA. I guess it's funded through Adidas and fees, but I have no idea what the dollar amount is. It has vary by state. NJ has a lot more money per player than some states, so I'd imagine NJ spends more. The Y-League now has ODP status, I'm not sure what that means exactly, but they will have ODP events in the Y-League this year. USYSA has a competing league in Region I, and I guess other regions, called the Director's Premier League. A lot of the same clubs that compete in the Y-League compete there as well. The bonus is that the Region winner gets a birth at regionals even if they don't win their state cup. Basically, there's a lot of friction between the Y-League and USYSA and a new organization called US Club Soccer. I like the Y-League idea, but again, it's not there yet IMO because I don't see it as a launching pad to the pros yet. It's still the better upper middle class kids prepping for college for the most part.
Basically, at each game, a "scout" for each team will fill out a report identifying the top 5 players on the opposing team and the top two on their own team. This will get entered into a database. Means players can get identified through week-in/week-out game competition rather than tryouts. Just another avenue. Complete explanation here: http://www.superyleague.com/scripts/runisa.dll?m2:gp::15060+Mediacenter/display+E+50863+A There is a good discussion on the competition among the various organizations in the Youth Forum here: https://www.bigsoccer.com/forum/showthread.php?threadid=33274
This exact same thread is over in the Junior Teams forum, so someone needs to merge these threads and post a "moved" or "merged" link. It turns out that this article was originally posted May 1, 1999. It's nearly 4 years old. Here's a listing of news articles -- this one appears halfway down the page under archives. http://www.soccerclub.com/news/ReadPub.asp?PubCode=NE Someone in the other thread questioned it because he discovered that Howe left the director of coaching position back in 2000. I did a little more checking and found out the article itself is pretty old. Having said that -- I agree with most of it.
Who ever said "ODP is administratively driven" is exactly right. Here in Colorado ODP is a complete piece of $hit. What they are doing is what Mel Brooks called "protecting our phoney baloney jobs!" If anyone thinks ODP is developing young players they are being..umm.. optimistic.
This thread does not need to be merged to the Junior Teams forum, so long as the posts to this thread talk about ODP and its relationship to the development of the USMNT. For instance, I posted a question earlier: How many of the current USMNT player pool participated in ODP? To me, it's an interesting question, if not a defining one. Does anyone know?
At first reading it wasn't clear whether this was a "preview of an article" that you wrote, or that you were just pasting someone else's "preview". On second look I knew it was the latter. I have no idea who anybody is on here. Sachin might be Bruce Arena for all I know.