Why the US Men Will Never Win a World Cup by Beau Dure

Every sport in the USA has a high-level, high-travel component. It falls on parents and national sporting organizations to pick up that tab.

For example, in figure skating, if you're a top Russian skater, you can easily afford rink time with a coach, especially if you're in a big city, because the Russian government invested/invests heavily in skating. Costs almost nothing, and the Russians pump out top skaters every year.

Meanwhile, if you're in the USA, it costs several hundred dollars for ice time and a coach... every hour. Multiply that expense by the hundreds of hours required to reach the pinnacle of the sport, and you've got a recipe where the top skaters are only the kids who have parents that can afford $40,000/year in figure skating expenses.

IMO, the money is only half the equation. In every sport, there's a ton of travel. Top tournaments are usually held in the largest urban areas, which nigh on guarantees that some of the kids are going to be racking up thousands of miles of travel every year. Do that for a few years, and you can see how kids get burnt out, even if their parents can afford it.

Heck, MLS players from overseas frequently mention how draining domestic travel is. Now imagine doing that without being a paid professional? Maybe it's fun for a little bit, but I'm sure the novelty wears off.

Money's one thing, which we're not going to solve unless the government or professional organizations pick up the tab. The travel is IMO an even more intractable problem. You can't shrink the country.

 

It's a symptom of the issue: none of us (Americans) really know what we're talking about when it comes to football. I lump myself in so it doesn't feel like I'm targeting anyone in the thread -- but also because I acknowledge I have lots to learn. It's clear from the folks I talk to, usually from soccer cultures, who've probably watched thousands more matches than I have in their lifetime. It's nothing to be ashamed of, but it's what I mean when I say culturally we're still very behind. Most Americans cannot have in-depth conversations about soccer matches, let alone really understand the culture of the sport (i.e. legendary players and teams, historic tournaments etc.) the way they could with say basketball.

It's why you're getting so much push back on the Dutch contributions to football; most American simply don't have a context for appreciating that country's history.

Coming back to this, I'm skeptical that we have these talents in the US to begin with. I can believe this about Germany because if the DFB did nothing, Germany has a rich enough football culture and history plus a strong sports legacy in general that many kids would individually put in the effort to be the next Muller, Klinsmann, Beckenbauer etc. The US is not close to that point for the reasons I listed above.

 

I don't know the answer. Note that in my assessment, I said the national team coaches pick the most athletic and most effective players. An example of a player who is effective, but not athletic, was Juan Riquelme. Not big, not strong, not fast, but extremely skillful and creative. You need both types of players.

 

Just like any other country, it's free in the USA to go to an alley or park and kick a soccer ball around. And if you're good enough at doing that, you can usually get sponsored to play for academies that do charge fees (there's lots of free ones now). An enterprising talent will find some way to get himself on the radar, which is why I'm skeptical of hidden great players missing out constantly escaping the notice of scouts.

The money-driven environment again goes back to culture. Besides their parents, who wants to pay to watch a bunch of 12 year olds play soccer? Americans have just gotten used to paying to watch grown men play soccer -- and some markets are still figuring that out. USSF subsidizes the development league, but it's pretty unique in US sports -- it's a substitute for what the high school / NCAA systems do in other sports for the US, except for the community aspect, which is important. Unlike high school or NCAA sports, academy games aren't meaningful to those not involved.

 

That's a fantasy. For one, Riquelme was extremely rare even for Argentina and he struggled with managers all thru his career. We don't have a Riquelme or Iniesta or Busquets just hanging out getting passed over for "big, strong" guys. We fetishize small, creative types but really we're more likely to produce a player like Marcus Rashford (Pulisic is sorta in that mold) which isn't bad at all. Mbappe, Rashford, Sancho, Sterling, Lingard, Salah, Sane etc -- if you look at modern forwards they are very athletic. That's the way the game is going.

 

It is apparently getting worse.

 

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/uneven...lass-and-poor-kids-are-ditching-youth-sports/

• Youth sports in the U.S. are diverging according to income -- more middle- and lower-income students quitting athletics while participation among wealthier children is rising.
• The typical family with kids who play sports spends about $700 a year on fees, equipment and more, but some spend up to $35,000.
• More public schools are also charging "pay-to-play" fees, pricing out some families.
• Wealthier families often spend more on kids' sports in hopes of securing college admissions for their children.

 

And apparently to have them all move to Chicago.

 

I didn't say that the US team had a Riquelme. That was just an example. Of course we don't have any player like that. I just wanted to make clear that athleticism should not be the only path to the national team. A good example of that for the USA was Benny Feilhaber -- not fast, not strong, but skillful and quick and intelligent.

 

Just finished it and really enjoyed it.
Well researched, well written and, at times humorous. Great synopsis of the games history in US.
I’m not sure you answered - or tried to answer - your central question, but I can live with that.

 

You deserve credit for moving the conversation forward. Issues with the confederation and tactics may be valid, but it's putting the cart before the horse.

I generally agree with your post that there isn't an abundance of talent falling through the cracks. Soccer probably more than any other sport, especially compared to the four major American sports, rewards hard work over talent and there simply aren't shortcuts to the top of the sport. There's virtually no advantage for those with size, good genetics, access to better equipment., or even performance-enhancing drugs. That's why a country like Uruguay, with 3.5M people, a total of 10 Olympic medals, and a sliver of the GDP of the USA, consistently has better teams and results than the US. Where I tend to disagree is the level at which a kid can get better just by playing on his own. This downplays the impact of soccer culture and social validation as reasons why Americans typically don't reach the top tier of international soccer. I'll use the Christian Pulisic blueprint to highlight these values and how his background was very different from virtually every other American soccer player.
First, how many American players grow up with a professional soccer coach or around professional players? From the Blueprint:

But let's start in Detroit, where Pulisic moved when he was eight years old so that his father, Mark, could coach the Detroit Ignition of the Major Indoor Soccer League. Hanging out with his father's players, many of them Brazilian, young Christian was shown moves and tricks, like a creative way to lift the ball when starting to juggle. He would then escape to the grassy backyard at the family's home and repeat the move until he had it mastered.​

This seems to support the idea that his technique got better by practicing on his own, but really it reinforces the idea of social validation. He pushed himself because he wanted to emulate the players he was consistently around and his father's profession also supported his development while the soccer background of both parents ensured his commitment to the sport. He didn't have parents that shuttled him to games and practices while binge watching football and basketball on the weekends. He was probably at his father's practices after school rather than playing video games or flag football with his friends.
Second, how many American soccer players spent a year or more of their formative years in a country with a dominant soccer culture? From the Blueprint:

When Christian was seven and entering second grade, the family moved to England so Kelley could work abroad on a teaching exchange. That was a pivotal year in Christian's development. He experienced the grip soccer has on that country, and it validated his own interest. He played in the youth ranks for Brackley Town, a semi-professional team currently in the fifth tier of English soccer. Most impactful was the time after school when Christian would escape to a field or hard court and play pickup soccer with local children.​

The lack of a soccer culture in the US makes it near impossible for kids to create this type of informal, organic soccer atmosphere where kids begin to learn movement, spacing, tactics, creativity, and start to build confidence in their abilities without the pressure that formal leagues and games bring. Playing on your own can't replicate the awareness that playing with others builds. It also develops a love of the sport through friendship in much the same way that pickup basketball games influence American kids. This is probably why so many young soccer athletes quit by the time they enter high school. It simply was never fun for them and as they get older they make a conscious decision to leave the sport for other pursuits that are more popular with their peer groups.

 

Insightful post, I agree with every bit.

I should clarify; when I meant "own their own" I meant self-guided practice or play, as opposed to "in an academy" or "as directed by a coach". If you notice in this discussion and others among US soccer fans there's a lot of fetishism about youth academies and hand-wringing because MLS academies haven't produced American Messi (or even the next Donovan) yet. Americans want a quick fix, so the idea that we could build world class academies and just cycle kids through like machine parts on an assembly line is really appealing.

The point I was trying to make -- which you did much better -- is that that kind of learning happens socially; kids deciding themselves to go out and practice for hours for the fun of it, not because they're being drilled in an academy. (Another example you could use is another top American prospect, Efrain Alvarez, who also comes from a family of pro footballers).

 

I think it's necesary to mention two distinctive different things that migh gotten confused in the "soccer culture" aspects mentioned before.

Technical ability and the ability to put the first one into practice in a team operated environment.
For technical ability you donot need a club/academy/etc.
All that is needed is a ball, a spot to play with it and kids to compete with/practice with the tricks you saw stars exhibited.
Youtube is overflowing with kids that do amazing tricks.
When not embedded into a play concept it remains a circus act.
I've seen Maradona do things with a ball while casually strolling I thought that's not possible. He however put his outlandish ball control into productive actions on the pitch, which 99.9% of the youtube artist can't.
Maradona, as was the case with Cruijff to name a few blessed outliers, didnot need developmental coaches to steer talents into tactical usefulness. Most however do need that.
That's the second "phase" where most need to be taught to put talent and ball skills as tools for the team result on the pitch.
While skills need constant honing to get beyond the street acts (you donot learn shot precision on the street) at club level as an extention to the street practice, the insights of the tactical sides of the game you learn in the structures setting of club academies.

For the first thing you donot need a soccer culture. Just kids daring each other with "I can do this, can you?"
You donot need a tree climbing culture for kids to dare each other with "I can do this, can you?" when going up a tree.

For the second aspect it does, as that defines being/becoming successful.

 

If there was no hidden talent, that would imply that we have a great scouting ability/network and tons of great coaches. I dont think anyone would claim that.

While your view isnt as narrow as the one Arena used in 2006 "I dont think there are people playing in parks that could just step on the field of an international game", but still isnt seeing the full picture.

I'd bet there are a lot of players that get left aside at every level. I'd think there are kids under 13 that dont have access to games, coaching, etc that would enable them to play at the next levels. I think that happens at the 13 to 15 year age and also at 15+.

How is it that the LA Galaxy had no homegrown players of note and then all of a sudden within a few birth years there is Mendez, Llainez, Araujo, Alvarez, Hernadez-Foster, etc. It looks like they had a great coach starting from around 12 to. Was that raw talent not around before then? Do you really think Kleiban found all the best kids in the LA area. Were there another kids outside of LA that had a similar amount of raw talent but didnt have a coach of a similar ability?

The only thing that can rival what Kleiban was able to achieve, basically by himself, is what has gone on at FCD. There are a couple of clubs behind them like NYRB and RSL, but not much after that. Maybe a couple of other teams but that leaves a large portion of the country.

It isnt just the sport being more popular, but having many more people who played a reasonable level having kids.

 

Dutch righ back Hatenboer leads Italian CL playing club to a ruthless victory over Valencia the Dutch way. In Italy. In an Italian CL club.

AtalantaxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxValencia CF
4 - 1
Hans Hateboer 16' 62'xxxxxxxDenis Cheryshev 66'
Josip Ilicic 42'
Remo Freuler 57'

 

Dutch righ back Hatenboer leads Italian CL playing club to a ruthless victory over Valencia the Dutch way. In Italy. In an Italian CL club.

AtalantaxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxValencia CF
4 - 1
Hans Hateboer 16' 62'xxxxxxxDenis Cheryshev 66'
Josip Ilicic 42'
Remo Freuler 57'

 

In that Atalanta team also Dutch midfielder de Roon and at Dutch club Heracles developed bi national Dutch/German defender Gosens played. Gosens is on the radar of both the Orange and the German team.

 

Llanez and Alvarez were from the Chivas USA Academy with Kleiban. The Galaxy directly benefitted from the shuttering of Chivas USA, who had one of the top youth setups in the US. Couple that, and LAFC's slow build to their youth setup (i.e. the Galaxy had less competition for a short while) and the Galaxy picked up kids that were previously going to their rival.

Denis Te Klosse is now the Sporting Director for the Galaxy. Any idea where he came from? Oh, as it turns out he was the director at Chivas Guadalajara Chivas USA. He happened to oversee their youth setup, before moving to El Tri. It's not a surprise that since the Galaxy hired him, they've renewed their commitment to their youth setup, and playing younger players.

Kleiban was the Galaxy's U19 coach, he wasn't the head of their academy. Unfortunately for him his brother inadvertently cost him his job with the Galaxy.

This can't be repped enough. when you drive through urban areas and by suburban parks you will very often see kids playing pickup basketball, or American football. During recess school children often play basketball, American football, kickball, dodgeball, and baseball/softball. Where I grew up it's not uncommon to see kids also playing street hockey, or in some cases ice hockey on a homemade rink. You rarely see kids playing pickup games of soccer.

There are still huge swaths of our country where soccer is viewed in a negative light. Hell, ESPN's flagship highlight/news show Sportscenter still has anchors poking fun at soccer highlights. This happens despite ESPN's commitment to the game (MLS, Bundesliga, Serie A, Liga MX, ESPN FC, etc.).

Don't get me wrong, out nation has come a very long way since the Early 90's. We still have a long way to go. There's no microwaving our way to the promise land either. It's going to take time. The NFL and Premier League did not start out as Global juggernaughts, it took them decades to get to where they are today.

Just something to remember: 2010.

16 MLS teams, and the league was still very much fledgling at this point. The quality of play in the league at that point was very subpar.

12 USSF Division 2 teams. If you thought the quality of MLS play was bad......oof. Oh, and half of those teams no longer exist today.

6 USL Division 2 teams.

In other words, in 10 years our country has gone from the above to what we have today. Bleak/Fledgling to stable and growing. We're also starting to see a shift from a largely National Team Centric Fan focus to one of club over country.

 

We prefer dual-national as the other wording has more than one meaning and is none of our business

 

Good points but I do believe travel time is "relatively" fixable with time. The issue that creates a need for excessive travel is a lack of high level competition locally. As the soccer density increases (like it already exists in every soccer playing country), the need for ftravel will decrease. There may still be end of the season tournaments that require travel but it won't be on a weekly basis as it is now. The exception to this is the areas that have a low population density....no getting around that unless we restrict birth control to those areas and even then it may not work.

Imagine if we had the same level of "soccer density" in Los Angeles (or New York or....) that exists in Holland, England, Mexico etc.....

 

Probably need to examine what Brazil does as they are the only great soccer power with a size comparable to ours.

 

Yeah... we dont look anything like that.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brazilian_football_league_system

There are two simultaneous and independent pyramids in the Brazilian football, the national pyramid, and the state pyramid.

While the national competitions are organized by CBF, the state championships are organized by the respective football federations of each state (for example, the Campeonato Pernambucano is organized by the Pernambuco Football Federation).

In the national pyramid, there are four leagues, the Série A, Série B, the Série C and the Série D. The Série A, Série B and Série C currently consist of 20 teams each. Série D was contested by 40 teams, expanded to 68 in 2016. Série A and Série B are contested in a double-round-robin format by all clubs; Série C and Série D have regional groups. Before 2009 there was no Série D and the Série C had 64 teams in regionalized groups. Each year, the four worst placed clubs in the Série A are relegated to the Série B and the four top placed clubs in the Série B are promoted to Série A. This relation of four promoted and four relegated is the same for the other levels.

The clubs competing in the Série D are the best placed state championship clubs of the same season which are not competing in the Série A, B or C. Clubs that are successful in their state leagues can rise higher in the pyramid, being promoted to the Série D, and eventually to higher levels. Some state federations organize special competitions with the purpose of qualifying teams to the Série D.

As a result of the rules detailed above, it is possible (and not unheard of) for a minor state championship club to rise to the Série A, and become successful in the competition. To achieve this, a club must qualify in the state championship and, later, qualify in Séries D, C and B.

 

I'm curious whether most of their players come out of the big cities or are more spread out. Rio and Sao Paolo have a level of density even the NYC area doesn't approach (the state Sao Paolo is in has the population of California in half the area; Rio has 16M people is a very small area).

Population-wise, Brazil seems a little more concentrated than the US, but I could be reading that wrong. More I'm just curious if they actually effectively reach the more rural states or if most of the upside is out of the bigger cities.

 

Agreed. Can't fix population density (particularly because cities that attract people tend to attract more and MORE people, including from other cities, so that it basically becomes a Pareto distribution where a handful of MSA's have 90 percent of the urban population), but you can make it so that LA, Dallas, Chicago, NYC, Atlanta, and the other top urban markets are "just as good" as say, the Netherlands, at scouting and developing talent.

But we have talked about this issue before. It's a multi-faceted problem (too expensive for most parents, poor coaching, little to no unfocused or individual playtime, MLS territory rules, etc), with the result being that our urban areas MASSIVELY underproduce talent relative to their size and soccer interest levels. Doesn't really matter that the Bay Area has 9 million people and lots of soccer interest if you don't find and nurture the best players.*

*Funnily enough, despite what I just said, a disproportionate number of the Quakes' top prospects (e.g Fuentes) have come from smaller cities/towns in the Central Valley/boonies of Northern California, rather than SF/SJ/OAK.

 

I some (maybe many) years ago suggested the USA should form state FA's, or in some cases an FA covering a few states. Could make for some fierce rivalries like rednecks vs NY libs. ( if I wrote something inappropriate, sorry for that).