why no youth teams or youth academies?

Could someone explain to me how youth systems work in the "rest of the world"? What would the advantages be to going to this system over instituting a full minor league system like Baseball and Hockey?

 

1) Boy, now HERE'S a new, novel topic for discussion. I wonder why nobody ever thought to bring this up before?

2) If you're really "wondering" about this, the short answer is "Because our league is still losing money hand over fist and they don't have an inclination to go into the hole another million bucks or so per team right now"

3) This whole argument presupposes that there's a bunch of top-level talent which is being somehow retarded or blocked from reaching their full potential as players due to the current system (or lack thereof). It implies that, were we to only change our ways, great cornucopias of young soccer talent would spew forth accross the breadth and depth of our nation.

Fact is that the biggest problem is not developing the talent we have but getting that talent in the first place. Give us a fair cut of the top young male athletes, the 1%, the elite, who are out there today honing their skills as point guards and shortstops and defensive backs and THEN we'll need a systemic overhaul.

But until soccer gets it's hands on more than a smattering of the best athletic talent in the US, you can see the next generation of American soccer greats at the NCAA tournament in March, playing the point.

It's not the system - it's the raw material.

 

The best players at the ages of 18 and 19 come out of college and play professionally. However, many European teams abandon players if they aren't making it by the age of 20.

If players peak in their late 20's, where they have experience and their bodies haven't been harmed by the aging process, then what harm is it doing to some players by playing players of the same age. We should not forget that the youth academy system often fails young players and hangs them out to dry with a mediocre education and nothing in the way of college education.

There are a number of players who get sold from big clubs and end up back in the same division as those clubs. Matt Holland (formerly of West Ham, Bournemouth and Ipswich, now of Charlton) went to the Second Division and played his way back into the top division after a transfer to Ipswich. Ian Wright played in the non-league for Dulwich Hamlet (a team who play 3 divisions outside the football league) and wasn't spotted until he was in his 20s.

The way they do things in Europe is not the be-all and end-all in football. However, it would be wise to see what always works for player development and integrate it into the current system.

 

MLS teams often train with the best young local products, like Chicago with Ned Grabavoy and Mike Magee or Dallas with Ramon Nunez and Kenny Cooper. It's just that it is not yet cost effective. Maybe when MLS has 20+ teams they can have youth teams or a few regional academies. Look at the current young talent they have not had to pay a cent to develop. When they start actually making money from selling these good young players then youth teams can be made.

O.T. did the metros loose money with the Howard transfer? And if they did how will they ever make money if 4.09 million dollars in new revenue just pops up and they are still in the red.

 

Let's expand upon Bill's "lack of funds" statement.

1- American clubs don't make enough money to pay for other American clubs' talent.

2- Europe isn't buying mass quantities of Americans (you make the choice about whether or not to include the word "yet").

If the system could be shown to pay for itself, it would be implemented by now. Between the above and the tendency for Americans to push their kids towards college, we ain't going to get anything better than the current system for a long time.

 

I believe that money goes to MLS not directly to the Metro. And the losses are far more than $4 million.

Sachin

 

Money........???

I do not have the facts at first hand but few question come to my mind:

Are MLS teams able to tie a contract to a U-15 soccer player to train an develop him and cash on a future sale or transfer???

Does MLS have an active mechanism to search, interview and sign soccer players with potential without any kind of commitment from the league ?

Money seems to be the problem but sometimes the lack of imagination, experience and excesive education could present a challenge too...

 

Pardon me, but doesn't the Howard deal prove that the current "system" works just fine? Howard has talent, he rose through the age groups and MLS and ended up in the best league in the world.

I just don't see how you point to a huge success story like Timmy and say: "See?? This proves the system doesn't work". In his case it seems to work just fine.

I'd like to say again that the question presupposes that there's all this great soccer talent that's not getting a chance because of our "system". It's an interesting theory, but that's all it is.

In fact, you could argue the opposite: in the US, there are a lot more kids playing upper caliber "Elite" soccer than there are elsewhere. In some countries, if you don't catch on with one of the sponsored youth sides, there's noplace else to play. SO you're done at 13 or 14.

And there are way too many kids who don't blossom until later than that. In the US, you can keep playing club, keep working on your game, keep developing. If you didn't make ODP as a U15, stay with your club, work hard and come back and try out next year.

I think that, in some ways, our "system" has some advantages. But the bottom line is that ANY "system" can only develop players to the limit of thier talents. And the fact is that, if Freddy Adu had been born in Virginia he'd likely be playing wideout and Centerfield right now.

You guys are focusing on the wrong stuff here: it's the raw material that dictates the end result. Coaching has very little to do wtih it.

 

Until every team has it own independant owner, not one guy that owns 5 teams, then MLS will be under a SEM (single entity management) structure. Under this structure players' contracts are negotiated and owned by the league itself and not the individual clubs. Players don't sign with clubs, they sign with the league to be allocated or drafted. This being so, clubs currently have no reason to spend $$$ to develop young players simply to see them drafted or allocated to their competition. What MLS should do, or could do, is to create regional MLS academies, where top notch classroom education and professional on the field instruction is the focus. Maybe they can't afford to open one for each team, but perhaps 6 regionally placed academies could be feasible in around 5 years. These kids would be prime fodder for the youth NT's, college scouts, and the P40 program. 6 academies could probably field a total of 12 teams per age group, that could compete against each other. Parents could subsidize, to an extent, the cost, as they do today with travelling select teams.

 

Also, many European clubs view it as saving them money so they don't have to buy players, rather than making them money from selling players. As players aren't bought by MLS, this where I can see the idea would come that somebody needs to be paid for their investment.

 

Ohio, maybe. Virginia, never. That's an old argument. It may have a smattering of validity. However, if Adu was born in Virginia, he would much more likely play striker than centerfield. NOBODY plays baseball in Virginia.

 

yeah i know the metro stars do but i'm not sure about any other teams
http://www.metrostars.com/metronews/submissions/2004/january/01132004v2.shtml

 

Hy, i'm new in this board. My name is "krayzie" and i'm french, i live in Paris.
I'm an old player who failed his career.
So i know very well how works the youth academy in Europe.
First of all i think the European system is very good.
Every club has its own "youth academy".
This academy products young players and take care of their studies.
In Europe many clubs recruts new players in their own academy.
Look at Manchester United, Beckham is a "product" of the youth academy of Manchester.

This system has many advantages. Poor clubs don't have to pay millions to buy a new player...

 

We have a youth academy (just one, in Florida). Otherwise, players play on elite regional traveling club teams, then go to college.

There's also this cultural difference- we don't really go for the vocational/trade school model at the high school level, which is what the European style acadamies really are, IMHO.

 

Here's a pretty good discussion of the ins and outs of the situation. Also, the link in the first post (link to Top Drawer Soccer) is very much worth reading:

https://www.bigsoccer.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&threadid=74444