But of course everyone’s formula on what it takes to have a winning team is different. And that’s where true quality coaching stands out compared to the mediocre or clueless ones. The formula consists of many variables ranging from proper training to what players are on the field (where the syndrome may rear it’s ugly head). Their decisions / formulas are limited by their understanding.

So no, I don’t think it’s based on deliberate discrimination, but rather a lack of understanding of the game and player quality. In general, the idea of discrimination for this or that reason is created and spread primarily by parents (who might be misinformed by their kids), as an excuse as to why little Johnny or Susie does not play.

Words of wisdom? If you’re serious about soccer, the emphasis should not be High School. The level of play is abysmal. The coaching … you might have an English teacher, baseball or football coach at the helm (it’s extremely rare to get a high level club coach). College recruiting does not exist (don’t let anybody fool you).

In our experience, when players come back from highschool, we find them as having taken a HUGE step backwards in their development!

Obviously another US soccer problem, but this is the world we live in. So just play for the experience, have some fun with your friends, get a letterman jacket, etc.

On another note, how about public high school soccer, since money is not an issue there, wouldn’t coaches want to have winning programs? What is their motivation in picking certain players over others? Is it true that some kids are discriminated against because they haven’t played club soccer to the point that they don’t even get looked at? I keep hearing that but as a former coach, I can’t believe that to be true. What coach would not even look at a player for a minute? It doesn’t take long to figure out if a player has it or not regardless of what he has done in the past. Don’t you think so? Do you have any words of wisdom from your experience around high school soccer?

My conclusion / explanation for this apparent discrepancy is that when it comes to football, basketball, or baseball, this country knows what it’s doing! The coaches, fans, players, and the media at large are very well versed in the sport. This is not the case with soccer.

Case in point: Look at the hype that was behind Lebron James while in high school … they certainly knew what they were talking about. By contrast, remember the hype around Freddy Adu (he was going to be the next Pele). What happened there? Freddy isn’t even a mediocre player. He rarely gets playing time on his teams. We just don’t know what a quality soccer player is!

In addition, these other sports have huge monetary investments in play. This places tremendous pressure on the coaches to perform – otherwise they are fired. With this incentive, there is no doubt that the coaches do their homework and don’t care whether this or that guy is a freshman. If he’s better, he plays, end of story.

Soccer coaches have no incentive whatsoever. Did you know that a college coach won’t get fired for lowly team performance? Why? Because soccer has no monetary value to the school. These coaches are only fired if the academics of their athletes are below some threshold.

College football (and basketball for that matter) seems almost entirely based on merit and I would hope college soccer would be too. As for High school, who the $#%$^ knows what those coaches’ motivations are. I have heard many stories from parents of players about the “injustices” they claim high school coaches have bestowed on their kids and their families. My son isn’t quite there yet so I will find out how much of it is true or not soon.

I don’t understand how a competitive coach can think about anything but merit in making his/her decisions for the good of the team. Anything other than merit is bizzare to me. But that’s just my two cents!! What do I know?