The perception and values associated with the practice of recruiting depends on who’s doing the perceiving and the act itself – be it an organization, coach, player, parent, or whoever.
This post will take the position of what every interested party supposedly wants. Development and a meritocracy. Right?
Recruiting
If the goal is to develop players to the caliber of a quality professional … hell yeah recruiting is necessary. And not only is it necessary, it is the right thing to do.
It is your responsibility to help ensure the players with perceived highest potential have teammates and a coach of appropriately high quality that not only push them, but elevate the team to a point where they get noticed by the right people.
Actually, it’s not only to the benefit of your current best players, but it creates competition between everyone on the team to earn their place. Everyone’s level is raised.
You think serious clubs around the world don’t actively recruit? You think they don’t cut players if they are perceived to not be developing satisfactorily?
Going beyond the goal of developing professionals, this view can also be applied if the objective is to only produce college level players.
Hell, isn’t this applicable to ‘developing’ for any level higher than where one currently operates?
Not Recruiting
Now, if your stated claim is to service (implicitly meaning develop) your players only to have them move on to another higher level youth team, that’s fine. Then it’s possible you may not need to recruit, but why hate on those who do?
Far more important to consider is this:
If you think you know how to develop talent better than the next guy, aren’t you actually doing your players with highest potential a huge disservice by letting them go to a lower quality coach? Aren’t you doing this country a disservice?
Maybe your answer to that, is you want to cater to your lower potential players. Why?
Or perhaps you have some other reasons.
But are you sure you’re not rationalizing? I mean if you cared about and tried to service on the high end, that obligates you into all kinds of other time-sapping, emotionally draining work. Recruiting is not easy, keeping your current players is not easy, cutting players is not easy, and a whole new world of challenges present themselves. And all for what?
But that’s only the beginning of your worries.
That stuff is nothing compared to the huge scary monster in the room! The mother of all worries and challenges! The one you may dare not confront, or even acknowledge … is this:
Maybe you’re not as good as you think you are.
You talk and talk about what’s wrong, that you’ve got answers, that the guys coaching at “higher levels” are doing it wrong, but what do you really know?
Yes, you might be able to judge their product. But …
Maybe your product would end up being complete shit like theirs, maybe worse!
What then?
Nah, much safer to chill in the middle and claim virtue because you don’t cut players, and ‘want’ your best to leave. Right?
Something of a counter argument, thought not a complete one, is if all the best players in a league or region are on the same team then they either have to travel extensively to get appropriate competition (not good – travel=$$$ which limits opportunity) or basically destroy everyone in their region week in, week out (not good).
The other issue being – are clubs actively recruiting good coaches??? That’s more important, in my view. Good coaching = good development. Great coaching = etc etc etc….
So if a team has 259 goals for, and only 12 against, in their 30 game league season, what should be done? Should they not have recruited?
If the club/team can afford whatever money implications there are, what’s the problem?
1. Gary, c’mon, you know as well as anyone that winning week in, week out by 10-0 or 12-1 scores doesn’t do anyone any good. It teaches the kids they are better than they really are, and it doesn’t put them in a challenging environment which hinders their development. Let’s look at the changes to the reserve division in England. They’ve scrapped it. Made the reserve division a u21 (with 3 +21 aged players max) league that has allowed a limited number of youth programs into the “category 1” (3 prem lge u21 programs did not get accepted). They were seeking an environment which increases the week in, week out challenges to their players. B/C obviously they aren’t developing players the rate/way they want to.
2. I couldn’t care less if a “club/team” can “afford whatever money implications there are” I am referring to the kids with talent that can’t afford the travel. There are enough limitations for kids to enter elite soccer in this country without including raising the financial bar.
You know these things, so your last post is very confusing….
I rarely use loaded questions – I don’t like it.
But I made an exception here.
That example I gave is straight from FCB’s youth.
30 game league, 259 GF, 12 GA:
http://www.fcf.cat/pnfg/NPcd/NFG_VisClasificacion?cod_primaria=1000120&codgrupo=7002753&codcompeticion=7000041
I suppose they’re situation is horribly wrong?
I would be so bold as to say “yes, they were in the wrong league/division.” I woud be surprised if the staff didn’t agree – players need to be challenged. They weren’t in the league – even though they would have been in training of course.
This is what happens when one is the best of the best.
Not just in soccer, but in any endeavor.
That’s why it’s called ‘a league of your own’.
To say that is bad, is to say no one should strive to be the best of the best.
And in that we have another manifestation of the mentality of mediocrity – a cultural problem.
How many games is this team playing in a league season in total? Because this “hypothetical” team is playing 30 of its games with an average score of 8-0, this team should not be in this league. Better options have to be available.
“currently have alumni playing in the Pros both internationally (Germany, Argentina, Mexico) and domestically (MLS/USL)… This success has drawn attention to the club from the nation’s top coaches and officials.” I don’t know, one breezes through a tournament full of teams with wording like that on their websites, how much better options can one seek out? There’s a minimum age limit on the USOpenCup teams right 🙂 Hopefully parents start to notice and ask, “What does that team do differently?” “Why don’t our games look like that?” “Can my child come play for you?”
This is why it does make sense to move clubs! I recall GuitarJeff made this point and I agreed with him but many felt players should be loyal to clubs. Players leave clubs for better competition and better challenge, better environment to grow.
Defo kids need to be encouraged to higher level clubs. Absolutely. I see that as my purpose as a coach. Go right ahead and find a bigger, better club/team to play for. No prob.
My response above though is when a team reaches the pinnacle of its region they have so mch travel and cost to deal with – a prime example being the Vancouver Whitecaps USSDA program from u12-u18. They have to either play “older” teams (PDL, or just older/bigger youth teams) or travel far and wide to get games….not ideal. But the coaching they receive and the competition in training does balance. BUT, it works for them because the Whitecaps pay the costs. But what about a kid at….De Anza Force, for example. $$$$ I assume.
Gary- Again, good stuff… I am a recruiter by trade.. (Own a staffing Company) so I have perspective… (Retention is the key to great recruiting, ie, take care of your peeps!) See you at Surf Cup this weekend! Best, Brian-
See you there man!
Recruiting does not necessarily equal development, in some cases it may dlu in the gace of it. Development is taking what comes in to your club and making those players better to go to next level when it is age apprpriate to do so. I am speaking at the club level an under 10 or so. If you are recruiting at this age, please stop coaching immediatley, you’re an idiot! For higher level clubs, professional clubs etc… The argument is much different pf course.
Actually Mario,
I’ll go way further than that, recruiting does not equal development.
If after 2-3 years with the same team, you’re still having to do a lot of recruiting and changing players, how does that reflect on YOUR ability to identify and develop players? If you’re as good at both as your claim to be there should be very little turnover on your team, and very little reason to have to recruit.
Turnover frequency depends on a lot of things. A non-exhaustive list:
1) What level did you start at? Meaning, did you inherit a Bronze level team, or a top-flight one?
2) Your ability to retain players. We don’t live in Europe or SA where if a kid gets into a pro academy, you’re essentially locked in. As you know, in the States there’s several transfer windows throughout the year where players are free to come and go. So,
(a) player may get recruited away (you must replace)
(b) player leaves for other reason (you must replace)
3) Parents are considered a problem – maybe even cancerous – to the team (not to mention their own kid’s development). Hence chop suey.
4) The top academies in the world will tell you … at the youngest ages it’s difficult to identify what the players will ultimately become at 18. Let’s not get carried away with this one please!! You can have a decent idea of potential, just not a precise crystal ball. Now, in our country it’s even worse unless I have a residency program. Which leads me to #5 …
5) In this country we’ve got the players for 2, maybe 3 sessions per week. That limitation alone alters the development methodology, and forces more responsibility on the players themselves to develop outside the formal coaching environment. If they aren’t putting in the time, while others on another team are, their days are numbered.
Gary,
I agree with all you have written above. I was not referencing replacing 1 or 2 players every year (especailly at the younger ages) which is normal (and for which careful recruiting of new players is a must) but teams that replace 5-6 players every year. In my area, these teams cull the top players from other teams, provide very little good coaching, but still are very competitive simply because they throw together a bunch of reasonably skilled (or big and fast) players. What is ironic is that parents who bought the recruiting bs of these clubs and transferred their kids, then complain because their kid was not getting playing time or was cut the next season. Most of these clubs do not care about the longterm soccer development of their players but only winning in the moment. But because parents equate winning with development they buy into the bs. Winning does not equal player development. Of course, a program that does not win is almost surely not doing a good development either. The bottom line is, if you are developing players the way you should be, winning will take care of itself.
Well, what’s the gold standard here? For youth soccer, is this how spain, brazil, argentina, germany, etc. develop their players? Do all clubs recruit youth players, or is their some hierarchy of clubs?
Why does a youth soccer coach recruit, or maybe a better way at it is, what’s the youth soccer coach’s reason/goal in recruiting players?
The gold standard is get what you consider to be the best damn players you possibly can, and train them as best you can with the ultimate goal of having them play the highest level of professional soccer possible.
I can tell you why we recruit. The above.
Why do others recruit?
Perhaps the answer to that is a big reason why recruiting is vilified? Or maybe it’s vilified for other reasons.
that’s not how youth soccer works in spain and other top european countries (outside of the pro clubs center of excellence). That might be the gold standard in the US, but our soccer is about money. Recruiting is so a coach can win, and the coach wins so he can make more $$$.
Now, I think it’s a different story for pro clubs in europe with centers of excellence, at ages above 14 They should scout and recruit. But, if US wants to build a world class soccer team, it’s not about the recruiting. It’s about the coaching and developing our own talent. Recruiting is just a cheap shortcut.
Scotty,
You asked what the gold standard was, and I answered.
The gold standard is based on the global game. And it resides with the cream of the crop pro academies.
yup, no problem with cream of the crop pro academies recruiting. Those academy, ala Barcelona youth academy, put a number of players at the top level. Recruiting happens at all clubs and at all levels in the US, and that’s a big problem. Virtually none of those clubs put players into the top levels. At best, they put a player or two into div 1 or 2 colleges.
The gold standard is recuriting by the cream of the crop academies only, the top of pryramid, not the rank and file. The gold standard is for the rank and file to develop players and then make money when those players are sold to the top pro academy. In the US, you make money by winning state championships….
The issue at hand is trying pass your self off as a developer of talent not just a recruiter.
Many clubs recruit, improve their teams but the coaching is average yet it apears there is better development going on. Having development plan or premise doesn’t mean you are good at it. Some are good at identifying talent and recuiting it and some are good at coaching it You can fool people by making a team stronger.
Not all players leave teams and go to better coaching. They go to better recruiters and teams. You may think you run a better program but it all perception and in the end the true history will speak for itself. Having a player in your team for a year or even a tournament is not real development all though I have see a change of environment do wonders for some players
Creating a good environment by recruiting is postive and that can mean recuiting players so that all players are challenged and pushed in training and for their playing time each week.
Its a part of the business that should be accepted but saying its because another program is stronger or the coaching is better or that you are about development is many times inaccurate even with some of the best youth teams.
Show me a player that has been with you long enough to have your stamp on him. U9 and u10 or u14 and u15 would probably not prove it.
I agree with just about everything here, except maybe two things.
1) A lot can indeed be accomplished with one year of working with a ‘real developer’. A significant mark can be made.
Unfortunately, the opposite is also true: a lot can be destroyed by being under a donkey coach.
2) It is not true that “in the end the true history will speak for itself”.
We somehwat agree on your #1 thank you
1.”Having a player in your team for a year or even a tournament is not real development…. * although I have see a change of environment do wonders for some players* ”
2. people in the know, know if you made a significant impact. It is true among those in the know and that includes the player if they felt a differerence was made..That cant really be disputed.
“Many clubs recruit, improve their teams but the coaching is average yet it apears there is better development going on.”
A club director once told me they have the best teams because they play in the gold level. Funny how their teams lose all their games at gold but are considered better than surrounding clubs who play bronze level.
FUCK all you coaches who live in the Matrix.
It’s amazing how a lot of coaches con poor parents who don’t know any better over and over again. You’re right I’ve seen it happen to. Some teams don’t even have to win to fake quality coaching, if their in an area with all lower division teams they can be viewed as elite simply by signing up for the top divisions in tournaments and getting their asses kicked.
It’s “you’re” not as good as you think you are. No need to thank me.
I just got back from Italy and there they have soccer schools until about 11 or so. It’s a school and they simply teach kids the game, they don’t recruit but train the players in that town/city. The leagues above that age recruit and pick players they like and so on…. I also know that in Croatia ( was told this from a friend that lives there) they tier their kids from the age of 6, well I guess that hasn’t worked since they haven’t won a damn thing ( I can hear all the Hrvats now) I hear Germany France and Spain are similar to italy with some differences I am sure.
If you are recruiting under 10, you are looking to win and stack your team, that is not development!
Let’s take a star player for arguments sake…..CRiSTIANO RONALDO…..who developed him? His first club team as a kid, MU, real Madrid, who is taking credit for that? In Europe, every time a player is sold, a portion of the transfer fee goes to the initial club that developed the player, as a token of their work with that player…..so if you are a recruiter and would have taken Ronaldo at 12 into your “development system” with other good players and he moved on as he did….are you taking all the credit for that?
This word development has taken on a life of its own in last few years and is being misused greatly! Cherry picking players and calling it development it wrong.
Who’s saying recruiting = development?
Hello GK,
Long time reader, first time poster. Very interesting and controversial blog. I enjoy reading it because it raises a lot questions and the discussion is lively.
Regarding the question if recruiting = development, your blog post says it in the link “http://blog.3four3.com/2012/07/31/recruiting-is-good-for-soccer-player-development/”
Unfortunately, recruitment is very vital to holding on to your best players. Either you recruit the best from other teams, or they recruit your best. Just seems to me at a glance that is how it goes.
Now, to the question of whether it is or isn’t development. If we look at the Catalan Club, FC Barcelona, who’s model you fellows follow, they have scouts always on the lookout for talent to add to their academy. The NY Times did an article on the AJAX academy and how they evaluated the talent on a yearly basis. Although, Cryuff reorganization of the youth program might change things. But, I digress.
I think recruiting can also be detrimental at some point. Such a high turnover and you end up with players who no longer “luchan por la camiseta”. I see value in having players that will die for the shirt on the field. Again, FC Barcelona is a good example of players who always bring out something extra when facing the eternal rivals, Real Madrid or Espanyol.
For me, the ideal approach is to recruit players who are clearly head and shoulders above my players, which should only be that one or two special players (messi, ronaldhino, iniesta, ronaldo, ronaldo 9 el fenomeno types), and get them to buy into the program. If you are recruiting marginally better players every new season then the training methods should be evaluated and improved. And you should value how long the player has been with your club. Does Cesc Fabregas hold the same feelings for Arsenal as he does for FC Barcelona? Or Gerard Pique feel the same about Manu & Barca? I believe this passion is valued also in South America, Yes?
Welcome Juan!
So again never do I say recruiting = development.
Development involves a ton of subject matter expertise and communication that has nothing to do with recruiting.
You’re right and I agree with you on that point.
As a parent of a player that is recruited every off-season, I have no problem with it. My job as his parent is to see through the bullshit to determine what opportunity will make my kid the best player he can be. We had been rebuffing these opportunities for a number of years but recently moved our son to a new club for the following reasons…
1. Highly competitive training environment. Playing against better players every day will make him better.
2. More exposure to high level events and leagues.
3. The coaching talent was probably equal but the previous two reasons tipped the scales to the bigger new club.
I agree with 99% of what I read in 3Four3 blogs but the one exception is in catering to the elite players mentality. I believe in the US we are going to get nowhere without a large mass of enthusiastic (not necessarily elite) soccer people pushing for better quality even if they are incapable of delivering it themselves.
Anyway, I think focusing resources on the elite does not work because:
1. Our “elite” is relative. It’s a waste of resources… if we are a 3rd world nation and all we can hope for is one heralded player then ok put everything you got into him, but USA has so much more potential. Our elite is a joke. Can we agree on that?
2. There is no way to scout elite before puberty here and that is a major problem for elitism mentality. We are slow maturing people compared to the rest of the world. You can see it in homegrown guys like Michael Bradley who are still finding their potential in their mid-20s. We generally have no need to grow up fast here especially in soccer fertile suburbs.
3. …And the elephant in the room, US Women’s Soccer. If we were to truly focus on the elite then we should ignore Men’s soccer because our men are so pathetic compared to the rest of world but Women got it going on. Truly elite! Should we put all of our resources into Women’s soccer and continue to dominate the universe… sadly I think part of our culture reinforces this and our boys will languish for longer than they should.
Elitist is not how soccer is in the US for soccer and never has been. We are not a child slavery factory like many of the Dutch (or name another country) development systems are where they have “scouts” go hunting little towns for the next 5 or 6 year old boy that they can grow to sell for millions by their 18th birthday, with no mention of how much that young man actually receives from the sale contract and no mention of the other 100s of boys that have been cast away while making one truly elite.
In the US we have a vast, but limited amount of resources to put towards soccer development for boys AND girls. My feeling is that the more people you include in the development process, regardless of their playing/coaching/analyzing ability, then the larger the pool of resources will grow. When that pool of resources is large enough to maintain a good soccer experience for anyone involved then the money will start to put the pieces together to field and continuously produce an elite men’s soccer team and pipeline to support it… American style.
Recruiting is fine but before puberty… come on! You have no way of knowing what the genes are going to start to express.
No US Men in Olympics. Look at the high quality of play from all these far corners of the globe. The bar just keeps getting set higher and higher. I think it is fantastic to watch and I’m jealous. I just don’t see American relative elitism as the answer. I see love of soccer by the masses being the only answer. It is not so far fetched considering how terrific the game itself is, the sheer numbers of Americans exposed to the sport and the amount of resources available in this great nation. It’ll happen.
Keep up the good work. Just not diggin’ the top of the pyramid stuff..
Hi man,
If you are agreeing with me 99% of the time, I need to do a much better job. Meaning, I need to knock that number down to about 50%.
I’m dead serious.
I’ll start off here with some of your comments:
1) A huge problem we have in this country is precisely that we don’t cater to the high end. The reasons are many: they range from not knowing how to service them in the first place, all the way to a mentality of pandering to the middle (the pussy route).
2) The blossoming of Michael Bradley or Clint Dempsey has no validity. There is nothing notable here. They’re coming to their primes not unlike the vast majority of players across the globe.
3) Scouting before puberty is precisely what is done across the globe. Everyone tries to get the backend of their player pipeline as ‘right’ as possible. Yes, and as I stated above, you don’t know precisely how a 10 year old will turn out at 18, but you can have a good idea whether they have professional player potential.
4) The US Women and their development is absolutely horrific! Equal or worse than the men. Why they are a, if not the, powerhouse has nothing to do with excellence in soccer. It has everything to do with other nation’s lack of effort in their women’s programs coupled with culture. Our women are not fulfilling their potential. Fortunately they don’t have to, to get results.
Pandering to the middle is the surest way to have a mediocre product.
Remember, England has the love of soccer by the masses.
Gary is totally correct. I tried telling someone on a different message board exactly what Gary said in #4 and they attacked me for it. Canadian women are the same unfortunately.
As for recognizing a 10 year old’s potential. YEP! I spoke with a Man United youth coach last year who was there training Paul Scholes and that coach and the rest of the staff knew without a doubt at age 8-9 that Scholes was the future of that club. Sure Scholes is an absolutely exceptional player, but you can be sure …. pick an England “star” …. was recognized just as early. How about…..Jack Wilshere. Guaranteed he was well above his peers in technical areas of the game at 8-9 and they knew he’d move on to EPL etc.
Yes, thanks for the posts from everyone. Lots of good insight. Here’s my two cents:
I came here from Portugal 10-years ago. There is a pecking order in clubs. Local club is to get kids exposed to football. Promising kids move up through the different, better clubs as they show talent. The best get into clubs like Sporting, Benfica, and Porto. Unlike USA, players, scouts, parents all expect their best and brightest to “move up” through the club ranks. As far as I know, MLS doesn’t actively get kids until they are U16 or older. That’s a problem. There are layers of clubs at different divisions in Europe. That does not exist in USA. Youth clubs take its place. This is also part of the problem. Even 2nd and 3rd level clubs in Europe look to find, develop and sell talent to next person in development chain. I see kids at U15 (my son’s age) who play at highest level (Flight 1 of SoCal Development League), yet kids on his team and opponents who aren’t double footed, don’t understand movement to space, don’t know how to play multiple positions, can’t juggle well, poor passing, and just don’t understand how to play (tactical intelligence). A lot of kick and run and not so beautiful football. This is not the case in Portugal for kids playing at top level clubs or even at 2nd and 3rd level clubs. The system is a ruthless in this manner, but that is why countries like Portugal develop top talent. I will get too long, but other things I see in USA:
1. College Is not best route to develop elite level players on world stage
2. Kids don’t practice / play enough compared to European players of same age. Players in Portugal practice 5 times a week and watch many games at local club by U14.
3. There are not enough options to play when kids turn 18, other than college
4. I am still amazed at how big US kids can grow. Even 12 and 13 year old are big. The top players I see at U15 are smaller, but I see the larger player going to ODP yet they lack skill and tactics. This is English system and a problem. This is a controversy, but generally speaking smaller kids are better technical, movement, and creativity. Something Europe does is consider a players mobility, flexibility, balance, control. If a player does not have this, he will not go far. This is partly how scouts select young players. In USA, I see large players who are clumsy and untechnical but they are looked at by ODP and national team.
I am shocked at how bad the quality of soccer is in Southern California for girls. I recently watched some Gold teams play and I was amazed at how much “kick and chase” was allowed. These teams are very aggressive and “first to the ball”, but have little technical skill and VERY little tactical understanding. It’s as if the don’t know HOW the game is suppose to be played.
There aren’t many young girls that enjoy watching soccer on TV and I think this is a HUGE reason why our country continues to produce mediocre players. When you don’t watch the best in the world play, how are you suppose to know what it should look like? Coaches can try and explain and show players til they are blue in the face, but kids need to SEE the best in action in order to fully grasp HOW the game should be played.
If kids in this country were more passionate about the sport and watched teams like Barcelona play, you would start to see US soccer take off. They would know what the game SHOULD look like and would try to emualate their heroes. But until then, they will continue to go to practice 2x per week, not look at a soccer ball in between practices, not watch it on TV and continue to be mediocre.
If all you know is “kick and chase”, that’s all you will ever produce.
“I am shocked at how bad the quality of soccer is in Southern California for girls”
Shocked? Really! Where have you been?
Poor quality exists at every level in the US rec/comp youth, high school, college, semi-pro, college, MLS, MNT, WNT.
I said I was shocked at HOW bad girls soccer is. Meaning…..I knew it was bad, but it is REALLY bad!
Great post Armando!
It seems Europe v. US differ in their incentives for coaches (if I understand you correctly). That is, in Europe, coaches and clubs develop players and then get paid when those players move on to bigger/better clubs. If that is accurate, it seems the youth system is more focused on developing top talent than winning at all costs (how much does winning matter?).
In US, a coach wins a state championship by recruiting best players from other clubs, and frequently those players are the biggest and most athletic. Why, because those players can more easily win state championships and winning state championships makes the coach/club money (because parents move kids to clubs that win the most). And, it’s much easier to recruit your way to the top then build a team that plays beautiful soccer.
US youth soccer needs a revolution and it starts by changing the incentives and willingness of coaches to develop players for the greater good.
In Portugal and rest of Europe, coachs and clubs build reputation by how many players get to first team at professional and how many get recruited by bigger clubs. If they identify and develop a player that a bigger club wants, they are proud. I forgot to mention above quick feet. Coaches look for that. It is those and things like balance, control, coordination, movement, game understanding that they look for in young players. They are good indicators of playing on first team. As players get older, they become stronger and learn how to possess, move, shield, pass to counter bigger players. Size is not of concern. To be honest, I am disappointed at so many big players here who do not have skill, tactics, vision but are considered top players. I am still learning but do not understand why size and strength are so loved in USA football.
Armondo…..”size and strength are so loved in the US” because that wins at the early ages. The bigger stronger kids dominate at the Ulittles. The problem is, most people don’t grasp the concept that SKILL and SMARTS will win out at the professional level. They think, “Well, Big Jonny was SOOOOO good when he was 12 he will just continue to be great when he is 18.”. Wrong!!! Big Jonny was good because he had already gone through puberty and was “a man playing amongst boys”. When the rest of the “boys” became men, the playing field was even and Jonny was just like the others. He had never developed any skill along the way and just was physically superior at a younger age. Now all of them were just mediocre……..
Well said Coach J. I believe it still comes down to $ in the US, get the big, athletic kids and you win. And, winning makes the coach and club money. So, coaches go out and recruit those players. OTOH, look at Barcelona and how many small players they have and how many have come up through their youth system. You need coaches from the bottom up focused on improving players, not winning.
Funny, you will hear coaches talk about winning state championships in the US but not how many players they have coached that are in the MLS, EPL, Liga, etc. We need a system that focuses on players, not coaches and recruiting.
Totally agree Scotty……it’s all about the $. I’ll give you the perfect example. My nephew plays on a U10 team that has been winning a ton of tournaments so I decided to go watch them play. They complete ZERO passes and play “kick ball” up to their BIG Forward who “out-muscles” all the other boys for the ball and scores. They win tournament after tournament and their Club keeps charging more and more because of their “success”.
Coming from a small population area, I have a different perspective on recruiting and the reason to start recruiting below U10. While recruiting occurs between local clubs, it is necessary to recruit young talent with skills so you don’t lose them to basketball, baseball, lacrosse or football. Getting the best yound kids on one team allows quick development and makes it tough for fathers that love another sport to pull their kid when they are being successful and love the game. Recruiting young players is about the parents and whether the kid is coachable.
So my U10 boys win most tournaments and dominate local squads and the president of my former club this past Spring says, “Your team is too good and your best players should go to another club so your team won’t dominate league play in the fall at U11.” I said, why force these kids to leave their friends because the team is too good? So I took my team to another club that will allow them to play together but also offer additional opportunities for development. So new league rules are being put into place to ensure that team movement never happens again. Egos are a bigger issue than recruiting.
Love the forum.
Just letting you know that your president of your former club is in line with the FCB Escola for the 6-12 year olds. If they find that one team is overly dominant they switch teams around at the end of the month. (The difference is that they do all interclub games on weekends and don’t play clubs from outside so that does make it a lot easier for them). But just wanted to throw it out there.
Hmmm, trying to figure out whose ego is too big in that scenario….
Sorry Howie, just doesn’t make sense. I have a hard time believing kids under u10 (were talking 8 and 9 year olds) care about playing with the best young kids. They all just want to play, dribble and score. They are happy to be a star and would most likely want to play with their friends. Now, maybe the parents care about how their little superstar needs to be with other superstars, but the kids could care less.
And, btw, this happens all the time in youth soccer. A team dominates at an age level. Most leagues would just move the team up a year to play more appropriate competition. But, that almost always is only needed for a year or two as the older teams will become too much physically for the younger team. And, the other teams will catch up.
Good luck.
but along with recruiting shouldn’t we be promoting the emphasis on the coaching for all kids up to U12.
Not only should the best coaches FOR THIS AGE GROUP, some coaches are not good with young kids, be coaching but coaches egos should not stop their best players moving up to U10 from U9 if the player needs the next challenge. There are very few clubs if any that adhere to a club first policy regarding player movement. Up to about U12/U13 if a players abilities allow players should be encouraged to play up, for either the “A” team or older age group, BEFORE a player decides to leave for what they think are greener pastures. Clubs keep their best players and players get the needed training for development. Also a club/coach needs to inform all the parents how the system works,
Clubs should focus more on a curriculum focused on technic at the youngest ages so that when players get to that U12/U13 age group and players go through puberty they have skill set already that will be needed to become an elite player. Recruiting has its place but a Clubs setup and philosophy is the 2nd part. Even in a money driven club soccer environment like we have this is possible and coaches/clubs can still continue to make their money while providing a better product.
Clubs do not encourage kids to play up, because they are so focused on winning at the each age level. If a kid plays up, his team at age will not be as good. Because winning makes money in the US, clubs do not encourage it. The problem is the incentives, clubs in Europe make money by selling playes to top academies. So, they are looking to develop pro level players.
The problem with coaching all below u12 (or pick your age), is some coaches think they know who has potential and who does not. I’m sure the coach at River Plate who passed up Messi felt the same way. hah.
Congrats Gary and to your teams and club, unprecedented resutls at Surf Cup! 3 champions BU10, BU11 and BU12. That is absolutely incredible results, once again shows your way is the right way forward for US Youth Soccer. Way to go!
Thanks Scotty!
I’ll be publishing some video and thoughts about the Surf Cup performances.
Well Gary, your phone must be ringing off the hook as Barcelona USA is blowing up the top soccer area in the US! I have a number of friends at surf with a team in the BU12 group and they saw your U12s play. They totally do not get it, their team is big, athletic, yet they were amazed by your team’s success despite lack of superior size and speed. I look forward to the post and videos, please post an entire game so I can watch it with my BU12 player. While winning surf at 3 age groups is truly exceptional, I love that your teams did it playing beautiful tik-taka soccer. Coaching, coaching, coaching….. Kudos Gary!
http://rankings.gotsport.com/rankings/team.aspx?TeamID=345010
Gary/Brian, did you hit the lotto? Like those clean numbers!!!
Develop a system where clubs are rewarded monetarily for developing players and you will start seeing the “winning” culture start to erode, just like Europe as someone else was referring to. As of now, the reward is winning, just ask a youth coach the following question, ” how was your season last year.” I guarantee that 99% of coaches will answer with their record as an indicator of whether their season was a success….this is the mentality that needs to go!
Mario, I totally agree with you. It is exactly the same damn way basketball players here that don’t give 2 phucks about the their AAU team winning any tournament as long as they’re getting better at the game and are getting noticed for rides and or NBA scouting. Winning is just icing on the cake, a bonus. This talking ages of 13-16. There is a direct reason why HS BB has died to AAU ball and you’ve seen the rise of “Handlers” AKA street agents for prospects. The cash money from colleges is flowing through their Handlers to the players then also to the AAU coaches/clubs for developing the kid and pushing him to XXX school. It is pretty much common knowledge.
However there are many roadblocks for soccer here I don’t even want to touch that.
TMul, up here in Canada, our college/university system is not as ingrained into our sports as the states. There are ads/disads to both I am sure. I dont know how you change a continent’s culture of thinking that winning is developing, physicality over techincal/intellligence….we need a paradigm shift and it starts in coaching with kids at 5 yrs. old.
A great example is yesterday’s Women’s semi-final. If you watched the France/Japan game, you saw techincal ability, balance, thoughtfulness etc… if you watched the Can/US game, you basically saw a war, sheer determination of guts and glory, much more direct play, and that desire to get the ball in the offensive third asap. That is not only a difference in football tactic, but it is culture…..what to do?
Do you have any idea how much $$$$$$$$$$ is really pumped into the women’s game here in the US? It is fucking ridiculous the amount of money that is available in the circuits, to parents that pump in money to the literal $100s of millions of dollar for full athletic college rides they get. The USA should dominate EVERYONE when looking at that factor alone. Then the population discrepancy……………………… I’d venture to say that the woman in USA, Canada don’t watch soccer either like the woman in France/Brazil/UK/Japan do all the time. It’s that simple to me. The game is highlighted AD nauseum in those countries. However I honestly don’t give 2 shits about the woman’s game for the amount of opportunity they have.
It is very simple to me, you said it, I know it, everyone knows it but don’t want to say, if there was money to be made developing players by selling them to MLS clubs youth academies/…… that’s what would be going on. Winning would fall to second. Then clubs would be pining on about how many players they’ve sold and or pumped to this MLS academy/players turned pro/college ride and that would really get parent’s/players attention moreso then winning.
Would venture to say if all the MLS clubs had academies similar to just a regular one in SA/Europe the youth winning bit would be very much lower on the pole.
Gary,
Can you and your brother stage a coup at ODP and USSF? We could use a revolution. Sometimes I just want to stick my head out the window and scream!
We need to scream all together! If countries like Spain, Germany, brazil can change their methods and development systems, why can’t we?
Spain many years ago, 70’s and 80’s was not very good, they were a rumbuxious group,caught up in politics and no real identity. But they made a paradigm shift many years ago and now you see the fruits of that change, BUT, the key is that the whole nation was on board. Germany did the same thing in 2000, and look at the players they have produced in 12 years!
The problem in starting a revolution is that there are too many competing camps of people and levels, and no one is willing to work with each other for the person that matters most…the player! Everyone has their own agenda but there is not a common motive for the good of the game. We actually have instances where coaches are holding back players from going to the next level because they do not want to lose the player and keep on winning….absolutely criminal but it happens.
Congratulations to the women’s national team on winning the gold medal. Although I thought Canada and Japan outplayed you!
A lot of things are very wrong when foreigners trained and educated outside our country are in charge of coaching the MNT and WNT. USSF needs to step back and let the kids compete for dominance.
The only way I know of starting a revolution is at the grassroots level. Every coach that wants something better for their team must quit their club and pull their team from organized leagues.
All these exiled teams can wreak havoc on US youth soccer and form their own playing league where the focus is possession play, low-cost and affordable to all players.
Mario,
What you describe is common. Our situation is no worse than any other country experienced. Germany and Mexico did it more from a national level while tiki-taka started at Barcelona and spread across Spain. Samba style represents Brazilian culture. Don’t think that none of these countries don’t have lingering internal problems — they do! Tribalism, selfish motives, politics and so on is a way of life in any big organization. IMHO, the key is someone has to step up. Gulatti ain’t doing it. He’s a talking suit. Klinsmann is too softspoken and isn’t publically doing anthing. Colleges care about revenue. ODP has its head up it ass thinking basketball power forwards can play winger. And DoCs of most large clubs are old school from three or four generations past . . . dinosaurs who don’t get modern game.