Are we selling ourselves short when it comes to these kids? 1. It's cheap when compared to football and baseball. 2. Basketball is king. Football is popular as well but lacks the "play anywhere" quality of soccer. And baseball? They could care less about baseball, they like to wear the caps but that is to be stylish not becasue they love the game. 3. Soccer courts can be built just as easily as basketball courts. 4. Soccer allows for self-expression just like Basketball. Both involve fancy dribbling.
It lacks the 'shaking your tushy in tight pants while holding a firm stick' factor that has made baseball so great in the US though.
Seriously though, soccer and basketball both allow for self expression. I see no reason why soccer at the very least can't pull ahead of baseball when it comes to mind share among urban youth.
I think the problem is one of exposure. Look at the play grounds, everyone wants to be Jordan/Kobe, etc because that's who they've grown up watching on TV- they are people that are easy to want to emulate. They can look up at a guy like Jamal Mashburn and say "Wow, that guy played on this playground too", etc. (not that everyone wants to be Mash, but he grew up on NYC playgrounds). What soccer player are they looking up to? Davids? Beasley? I agree that soccer is the sport of the poor kids in countries outside the US (like in brazil, where they kick milk cartons at doorframes to play, etc), but this isn't Brazil. I think it will get more popular in inner cities as time goes on, but that is still many years away. In latino urban areas of LA, SD, Houston- sure. But among black kids in NYC, DC, Detroit, Chicago...I don't see that happening quickly if at all.
"Urban" does not equal "Black" despite the euphemism television marketing executives like to use. There's more white kids living in major cities in this country than there are black or hispanic kids. Not all of the cities, mind you, but in aggregate this is the case. US Soccer currently develops very few of them of any skin color.
Glad to see I am not the only one who thinks this can be a major attraction for some of our best athletes. Individualism.
i really think street soccer/outdoor futsal courts should be pushed a lot more than soccer itself. they require less space, are cheaper to build, MUCH easier to maintain, and the style allows that individualism someone mentioned. i used to ref basketball and as much as i dont like it, kids everywhere care more about looking good than being good now and that is the idea kind of in street ball/street soccer.
These are good points and I agree, but I think this is all putting the cart before the horse. In my opinion, it's a waste of time trying to get more city kids to play soccer, when at the moment we have a fair number of city kids already playing soccer and there is little in place to facilitate their ascension into the upper levels of soccer in this country. When youth soccer starts to get serious at around 11 or 12, the city kids find themselves at disadvantage financially and geographically as all of the best competition and coaching is out in the suburbs at a cost of $1,000 a year to the kids parents. Yes there are ways city kids can overcome this, but it is a pretty serious handicap, and most kids wind up staying where they're at and being passed by, or even if they manage to develop in that environment are way off the radar and tend to move on to other things. If you're from Chicago, go down to Wells Park, or Portage Park or Logan Square on a weekend and watch the 9 and 10 year olds play, and then realize that none of those kids will likely ever have a chance at a pro soccer future regardless of their potential unless certain fundamental changes occur in the system. Let's start to tap the existing soccer talent in our cities first, and then we'll be in a better position to take advantage of any increase in the number of city kids playing that might occur.
Good point. As long as high end soccer development takes place through the 'Select / Travel' system currently in place in this country, it will remain a suburban phenomenon. We have several outstanding players on our recreational team who wouldn't think of dropping several thousand dollars to participate in that system. That leaves volunteer dads-as-coaches (like me), High School, and college to develop these players (I am making the broad assumption that some of these players are talented enough to make a college team). That doesn't get us any closer to winning the WC. But they at least have a place to play...
Shame about the whole select team thing. I know they can play more games and all that than High Schools, but if High School teams kept hold of the good players and we got a competitive High School structure, it would provide a chance for a much, much larger pool of players. If a city kid can stick around after school to practice and get a free uniform and transportation to games, he may play. If he has to pay to play and travel all the way out to the suburbs, where he is facing as large of a social gap as he is a financial one and a literal distance one, it's not gonna happen.
how do you explain all the aau teams in the inner-cities then? if street soccer became big it would become like and1 and the sports companies would probably all want in and sponsor travel teams.
Interesting story in today's SF Chronicle about an inner-city high school soccer coach: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/chronicle/archive/2004/06/02/SPGIU6V1JC13.DTL
The problem with development of youth soccer in this country is much more significant than just the lack of city kids playing. Here in Michigan, the top two clubs in the state are within a few miles of each other. Unless you live in the Detroit suburbs, youre not likely to be going to go anywhere in the highly political ODP system without having a top tier club on your resume. THere's talent in other parts of the state, but much of it cant go places unless the kid's parents are willling to put up the time comittment to drive them across the state to practices for Wolves or Vardar. I live across the street from the newest goalkeeper to enter residency in Bradenton for the u17 national team. He would have to have his parents drive over an hour with traffic to practices for Vardar, one of the state's top two teams. Unfortunately, there are going to be many cases where parents are unwilling or unable to do this. Too much talent goes to waste when top quality coaching is polarized in one geographical area. Also, remember that futsal courts can be built everwhere. development of players will be help immensely if more suburban programs teach the game. If you can get kids playing just on street hockey courts, thier touch will improve immensely. (of course knowing most suburban soccer parents they wont want thier kids playing on hard surfases and the whole plan goes down in smoke).
AAU is different in that for one, many of the programs are located in inner cities, making the transportation irrelevant. Additionally, the fees for players are very low in comparison and often paid by sponsors as are travelling expenses. In addition, AAU does not take players away from high school teams, as is sometimes the case with soccer, but serves as a supplement. Really, all I'm saying is that high school sports in the US is the easiest most easily accessible path to large numbers of players in all areas and encompassing all socio-economic levels. Failure to tap into HS sports as a key means of developing and identifying players overlooks this basic fact.
So in the end it comes down to money (sponsors) still because while there are multiple AAU Hoops squads in NY which makes playing each other conveinent they travel all over the place in the summer months and the better HS teams travel as well during the season. I Live in Hoboken NJ and while the local HS had a good season (urban kids) when they played in the "states" they got killed by the surburban kids