Yes, and if it was entirely unreasonable MLS would reject the request the player be signed. Lets not forget the checks and balances here.
In your previous post, you knocked the NCAA by stating that players coming out of the college ranks are not quite up to speed. I disagree! I played four years of DI soccer, and I can tell you it's up to speed in terms of technique. Yes, it takes some adjustments to acclimate to the pro game, but players skill-set is not far different than the pros. Mwanga's success should not be minimized b/c he plays for an expansion team. His coach is giving him well deserved time on the pitch. The same thing could be said of Blair Gavin and Ben Zemanski of the Goats. Again, the list goes on ... This NCAA class is doing very well, and fans and coaches alike need to pay attention to it. These youngsters are coming better prepared to transition to the pro game In other pro leagues around the world, there is no such thing as a rookie, young, hungry players are given chances on a regular basis. I know that many of the posters on this site played in college. It still surprises me when posters miimize the talent that comes through the NCAA by stating who is ready and who isn't.
To me we need to compare our 21-23 year old players with the rest of the world's 21-23 year old players. We are still considerably behind there. Chris Pontius had a good rookie year, but he's also 23. Ghana had 10-11 players on their World Cup roster younger than him.
Cesc Fabregas and Lionel Messi spring to mind both still 23. Romario and Michael Owen playing internationally at 16. Rooney for Everton. Theo Walcott. Aaron Ramsey. Giggs. Del Pierro. Dani. Fat Ronaldo. There are a endless list of names of teenage sensations produced around the world and we poached Freddy Adu from the back end of ... Ghana. NCAA clearly isn't producing stars.
Jozy Altidore (20) did ok at the World Cup, he didn't attend College did he? MLS is crying out for a well established and well funded reserve league and youth systems. It's not rocket science.
off the top of my head, the top player I can think of that was a college player is Charlie Davies http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5jdKhlqYk5vAAVsClrdn_2oFhP09w quality coach looking for a job now
I thought he did a decent job turning around a Mexican side that didnt look like they were going to qualify. I thought Mexico had a decent cup and they played a cleaner game than normal.
Dempsey and slew of other quality players. Remember, when the league started it needed players. Many of the teenagers such as, Beasley, albright and scores of others could have benefited from at least two years of college ball. Instead, the MLS opted for project 40.
Disagree, getting into the pro environment benifited those players much more than a year or two of college would. I don't see how playing against kids who now are working in the real world would have benifited them. Especially Beasley who while other guys his age were preparing for another college season he was in Japan/Korea for the World Cup. That wouldn't have happened if he'd gone to a year or two of college.
Someone else asked this question earlier, and I'm re-stating it because I've not seen the response. Who did you play for? When one asserts an argument from authority, it comes off as less fallacious if one actually has the experience and the credentials to make such an argument. So as you argue that players from the NCAA ranks are to a man ready to contribute and need no time to get up to speed, you either have evidence (i.e. you can prove that you've played at both the NCAA and MLS level) or you're tendering a logically fallacious argument. For every Charlie Davies, there's a Steve Shak. More, actually..
A quick fix would be to rewrite the regulations around high school sports. Longer seasons, more time allowed with the coaches. If you could have 9-10 months of high school soccer, instead of 3 months of soccer, 3 months of basketball, and 3 months of track... that would be a start. We have the "club" teams that allow more or less year round play, but that is cost prohibitive to many, possibly most people. High schools are available to everybody. The NBA is full of guys that grew up super poor and basketball "kept them out of prison" or whatever the stereotype is... We need to get the "street" soccer players discovered.
The thing is that club basketball is huge as well. How does that work being that many basketball players come from poor backgrounds. Basketball in the US is kind of like soccer in other areas of the world. It is the sport that the working class can move up in. Here, it is the rich suburban kids that move up in soccer because play on high level tournament teams cost shit loads of money.
local, regional, and national sponsors is how a lot of it works with some volunteers hoping to find a diamond in the rough and latch on well enough to make some money. It really is a disgustingly crooked and selfish system, not much unlike many football stories i've heard through the years in Africa and some in Europe and South America.
The problem with that is most public school districts require coaches to be employed by the district in another role to be a coach. You don't always get coaches for high school soccer that are that great of coaches. Plus it's the same argument as the NCAA, they are student-athletes, students first...
Thats what I am saying, we have to level the playing field. Take away the advantage of being able to afford the tournament club teams. It has been discussed about the 10,000 hour rule theory for mastery. We need to get more people from more demographics to 10,000 hours faster. I grew up less than 10 minutes away from Scott Vermillion, and my high school didn't even have a soccer team. I didn't know enough about the tournament team availability, but would not have been able to afford it... I had physical gifts, and talent. I'm way behind the 10,000 hour curve. Playing rec leagues off and on over the years. Now at 33 with a bum knee playing in an adult league against current college guys, and former D1 guys... I'm still faster than just about anybody I have ever seen. I feel that if I had been afforded the opportunities I could have done something special. As it is I'm just a guy in his 30s whose game is very rough that can cover a whole lot of ground very fast. Heck, if the internet had existed in its current form back in the late 80s early 90s it would have helped me... So I'm fairly passionate about kids getting the opportunities I feel that I would have benefited from... It also hurts that the US is weak at LB and that was the position I played growing up. What if I had the coaching a player needs to develop?? Its a big what if to live with.
But that's a huge change in philosophy for not just the US Soccer structure, but for the education structure with your school idea. And I just can't see that happening.
It shouldn't effect the education. It is just a change from playing 3 sports a school year to playing just 1. Other sports like basketball would benefit from this as well. US soccer tosses in some money to improve the coaching. We'd have a functional youth development system without too much change to what we already have in this country. It is far more likely to work than hoping 18-20 MLS teams can build youth academies and luck into finding the talented kids. It is a big country, we need something that is everywhere. The public school system is everywhere. Since public schools are hurting in the budget, and money is the only thing US soccer seems to do right... there is room for a win-win outcome.
A little offtopic but I highly suggest picking up Outliers by Malcolm Gladwell where that 10K hour theory came from. It is a really good book that talks about how being great at something isnt necessarily about talent but other factors such as opportunity and chance. Anyway, I agree with everything you said.
It will be nice if MLS can get to the point where every MLS team has a fully functioning academy where kids can come and go to school and play soccer. I've never really studied how the European clubs operate their systems but am coming more interested in it. Does anyone know any reading material that talks about their development systems?
That's one of the things I struggle to see happen. It's not like the US Soccer Federation is rolling in money that it could spend on these things.
US Soccer would benefit better to help pay tuition for private schools and funnel players together than casting the wide net of public schools. It would benefit MLS clubs to invest in the private schools soccer programs as well.
I really don't feel the need to state where i played. You 're just going to have to accept or reject the fact that i played college ball. I enjoy most post that i read on this blog,but when i see certain post that i disagree with then i will give my opinion. The college dynamic has changed. Many top DI schools are now recruiting in foreign countries, that means the talent is getting better every year. In addition, the top American recruits are coming from the ODP program or directly from the U17 teams. At one time, the NCAA required that a player needed to be 21 or under to be offered a full-ride. Now b/c of the influx of foreign players, the requirement has been tweaked. If there was to be an argument against the the college game, I would say the coaching needs to be more visionary. Some coaches are starting to get it. Akron's coach (Porter) talked in-depth about how he was in-awe with how Barca played, and he adopted their style and training methods. As fans of the beautiful game, we should not fall asleep on what we have in our own backyard. The NCAA has talent. Hopefully, MLS coaches can get on board with the Caleb Porter's of the world.