I think part of that is necessity, but part of that is also Hayes' view of sustainability and developing players at the national team level. As a former teacher, I see a lot of what Hayes is doing as if this were a school - being able to get my students to excel as seniors meant I depended on the prior teachers having the same students excel. And that goes all the way back to kindergarten. I see Hayes looking at that in terms of U17 to U19/20 to U23 to senior team. Depending on how successful she is, it may be a model that is necessary to match with other national team programs (in other countries).
Interesting. The question I would ask is WHERE does the initial education take place BEFORE Hayes gets them @u17? That has a huge bearing on how effective they can really be. One of the reasons pace and power have been featured is based on this. P&P is the easiest route to wins in US youth soccer, and the structure in the US rewards that. The young, more technically biased players who have been able to influence their own development - Moultrie, Yohannes and a few others have really benefitted from it. Right now, the great equalizer between the more technically based systems around the world and the USA is volume. It always will be, so I wonder if there is any impetus to change the base of the USA women's soccer pyramid towards "real" academies at younger ages. Food for thought
it would be interesting for someone to ask, but the response would be coachspeak. Emma’s not going to say anything about off field stuff
It's not a perfect analogy, but as I said previously, I am specifically talking about the development at NATIONAL team level. And, as I also said previously, they have to get to the national team level. If I were to expand the analogy, it would be the student's development at home which is comparable to club development. But, again, it is not a perfect analogy. I'm looking at this in two directions. 1 - When there is a volume in competition, that always raises the bar. It doesn't matter what the area is - soccer, basketball, gymnastics, biology, chemistry, physics, teachers, programmers, etc. But the true aspect of raising the bar is access*. We can spend many years talking about that (and I have talked about that in many places). Once there is access, unencumbered as much as possible, competition arises and the best of the best will get better. I follow track and field, and Usain Bolt is definitely the best sprinter ever. But there are a new group of youngsters, notably Gout Gout out of Australia, who looks like they are going to be better than Bolt. And that is what happens. In the case of US WoSo, that means there is an advancement of players. Keep in mind this is not perfect and I'm naming players off the top of my head while doing other things, but for midfield there is Michelle Akers, Pino, Lavelle (to get current), and who ever is the future, the likes of Moultrie and Yohannes, and then who ever is in the U10 grouping. I would argue that players like Lavelle and Yohannes currently are better than Akers only because they have 40 years on her (give or take) and have the benefit both her Akers' experience but also greater competition via numbers. 2 - The development of players goes way down and is very broad. We are talking dedicated clubs, or AYSO, or rec leagues, and more. That moves on to high school, but doesn't eliminate those others. The rise of professionalism of the players is lowering by age (the Thompson sisters became Nike sponsored while still in high school, as an example), and how that effects development also varies. Moultrie, as an example, was home schooled so she could focus on soccer. Other players do take different routes. What I think an academy system will do in this aspect is make recruiting of players to a club somewhat easier. Not sure of the current cost-benefit right now, but long term it makes sense financially, both in terms of bringing in players, but also club loyalty (both players and fans). One thing academies will do, somewhere down the line, is be able to reach players that otherwise would be excluded due to some kind of money issue. Right now, the volume (and lack of other sporting options at the same level) is so great that is not something being missed. But it will be, and that is a place where NWSL teams can step in. * - How one defines access varies and takes into account many different aspects that range from money to encouragement to policy and many more parts.
That is the question asked by every national team and every major club that scouts for players. If you have the answer, they'd all pay you handsomely.
The top six have currently better NWSL stats than the regular starters but don’t know Hayes complicated schemes & never played together as an unit before, so it be probably half of Saturday’s starters More like corporate/private equity piranhas spending access money on soccer for an tax right off, or scam more out of parents lol
Missed this earlier. The ???? will be Girma, otherwise there is no captain. Yeah, maybe PJT by age, but not really a captain, and since this is Japan, I think Hayes will want somebody captain-experienced to lead the team. Hayes did say that for the first match, she was playing the experienced team, and inferred the second match would be much different. For example, we know Smith will not be starting. And I think it would be a surprise to see G Thompson starting. More like corporate/private equity piranhas spending access money on soccer for an tax right off, or scam more out of parents lol[/QUOTE]
Respectfully, this is not the case on the mens side. Professional Academies are the accepted development pathways from a very young age 8 and even younger. If you mean women, the issue continues to be that no one is willing to pay for development on a meaningful scale other than parents in the USA.
Please, I was trying NOT to be cynical ....LOL. I am confident in saying that the US College system is the largest single driver of women's soccer development in the World. These elite leagues and teams are all about winning. It is how you attract parents. A load of competitive games and unnecessary travel to showcase your talent to a wide variety of coaches looking for different levels. On the boys' side, US College soccer is largely irrelevant. Elite pay to play Clubs also. The only reason to be playing in College is, not yet good enough for better and/or have accepted you never will be. The women's game cannot support a large network of professional academies, especially in a large country like the USA. I am not sure it needs it, but the DNA of the team will reflect it. Bad example maybe, but if you look at the different DNA of European basketball players vs USA ones it is a similar story.
No, I mean it on the mens side as well. Yes, they are professional, but their all different as compared with their national teams. Also, in the US, mens 'professional acadamies' don't begin until U-13. I understand what you are saying with the women. I can give you chapter and verse of the development/ career path of one of the starters for the US tonight. Professional Academies were not yet an option. It seems slowly we are getting there, though I doubt it will ever fully professional. Also, this conversation should be in a different thread.
Staring lineup I was wrong. I did not expect Hutton to be captain v. Japan. Lots of faith and recognition Hayes has in her.
In terms of the field players, this lineup is close to the second Portugal game with two changes: Sears in place of A Thompson and Sams for Bugg. That was a fun game to watch.
Will say, in the first 15 Japan has looked crisper overall. Hutton is also looking good. Also, if we can release players like just happened with Patterson, we will get a goal or 3 out that.
Conditions apart, TJ doesn't look as calm/comfortable as Dickey did. I mean with the ball at her feet.
Not playing as high pressure defense as we did on Saturday. Japan has too many touches on the ball and too many easy looks.