NIIIIIICEEE!! This should really help us out, and totally skip over college as a good way to spot out quality players. We are finally starting to get the picture, follow how other countries do things when it comes to soccer, all we need now is to get teh MLS in line schedule wise with the rest of the world...

interesting idea. logistically, you are right, it could be a nightmare. some potential issues I see that I sure hope they have thought of:

1: who's going to pay? most of these 'youth clubs' charge fairly high prices for participation, will the Academy teams also charge a couple of thousand bucks a year? if not, who's going to pay? USSF? and what is the incentive for these youth clubs to basically volunteer their 2,400 best players to leave their teams (and lose the associated revenue and success?)

2: if MLS teams field teams at this age level, will they get to keep player development rights? if so, are those players, in essence, turning pro at 12-13 for a pittance? (the big problem there, of course, is the loss of college eligibility for people who are never going pro, but could get a scholarship or even just play at the NCAA level?)

3: who's going to coach these teams? are there 160 coaches out there ready for this? (I guess this will come, but it needs some major oversight from USSF, not the best known oversight organization out there)

those problems aside, I like the ambition. if this is really up and running in the fall, we should see some good dividends in two-three years, especially with MLS involvelment (hey, what about places like Crystal Palace USA? can they get in the game as well? If I am a midrank European team, I want in on this, if I get to keep developmental rights)

oh, and Goff:

nice scoop! take THAT redskins insider!

For MLS teams, will they need to field only players that are eligible for the US or could foreign nationals be playing. Immigrants, children of diplomats, etc.

"But will all the elite clubs cooperate?"

With 4-5 training sessions/week, it doesn't semm as if a player can be on the club team and the academy team simultaneously. what's the incentive for a club coach (who is paid to win) to identify his best players for the academy?

If USSF kept the domain of each team sufficiently small, this could work without disrupting the lives of young children for the benefit of a sport.

I wonder if they will replicate the IMG Academy program in Bradenton? (why reinvent the wheel).

K

more info

http://www.topdrawersoccer.com/articles.aspx?article=2266

As mentioned in previous posts, this sounds like a good idea at first, but how are the clubs going to react? As I understand, They'll be selecting 60-80 clubs to choose players from. Thats 1-2 clubs per state, most likely the best club(s) in the state. So they're going to take the best players from the best clubs in each state? I know my club coach would not stand for that. And while recognition for having players selected into this program would have benefits, surely the affected teams will not show as great results in league and tournament play. This could hurt the reputations of the affected clubs.

Who cares what the clubs think? Stop worrying about them and start supporting what's best for the youth player. This attitude is why the usa is failing at player development. We worry about winning and club reputation more than developing youth players

Who are the 60 to 80 youth clubs?

"I wonder if they will replicate the IMG Academy program in Bradenton? (why reinvent the wheel)."

Since the USSF is looking at restructuring the system, it seems like they must be finding something lacking in Bradenton's residency program. Is it the relatively small number of players? Is it that Bradenton doesn't allow for many competitive matches? Is it because some number of talented players won't leave their families to move to a full-time residency program?

If any or all of those questions are true, then it's not a matter of re-inventing the wheel: it's because the wheel doesn't roll.

Great reporting and great news ... this looks like a much-needed first step.

I realize this is all you have for now, but I'll be interested to learn whether this program involves plans to widen the umbrella by expanding opportunities to kids who are outside the usual geography and/or income brackets of US youth soccer.

This does not sound like Bradenton as it is not a live-in system and no formal tie-in with a specialized high school. What it sounds like is ensuring clubs upgrade their systems to meet certain standards and eliminating charging elite players (and thus prventing the awkard situation of parents demanding/expecting playing time due to their checkbook). And it allows these clubs to primarily play games against each other. It also provides leagues for MLS teams to put their new youth sides in.

Overall this is a much needed change, but it needs to be done right. Clubs are businesses with jobs at stake. All of the elite clubs need to be included.

This will work.

Does this become something good for all, or does this become ODP ver 2.0? Where the more affluent youngsters get the chances, but talented less off kids (middle class even) fall through the gaping holes?

And who's on Sunil's list to coordinate this? Klinnsman? Wenger? Pele? Freddy Adu's mom?

Irvine Strikers in California have switched over to the Academy program for their older teams effective June 1st.

I hope this allows for more access to competitive soccer for talented youths. I remember playing rec soccer and seeing far to many good players unable to advance their skills, because their families couldn't afford the expense (and time commitment) of having them on a club team. For every Dempsey, whose family made huge sacrifices to give him a chance, there are hundreds who aren't able to get the training and competition needed to become pro-caliber.

Would this be tied to clubs sponsorships? In other words, would Nike Premier Clubs (such as PWSI or Strikers in VA) be much more likely to participate as Nike is tied is with USSF and the USMNT and Youth Nat'l Teams?

The article on TopSoccer notes it would be free of charge to players in the Academy. With daily training, coaching staff costs would not be cheap. Travel might be contained, if the teams players within regions (remember, there are 60-80 teams, they could split into 4-6 regions).

The article further notes the Academy teams would not play in tournaments. This would save loads of cash. Most teams burn most of their cash in travel/lodging/fees for tournaments, some of dubious developmental value. A great chunk of money most teams pump into tournaments goes to prop up soccer clubs, organizations and hotels (note the "exclusive" hotel requirements of so many tournaments - i.e. VA Beach).

In most clubs with Rec and Travel systems, the Rec system serves to subsidize part of the Travel program. That is part of the economic model whereby the larger club can pass along a "savings" to their travel players, offer and economy of scale of sorts, and provide a measure of cost competition. Would it me crazy to expect the same economic model to carry over to the Academy? The Rec and Travel programs would be used to subsidize the Academy program...the clubs would use the Academy as a cunning marketing ploy: "come play for us, maybe your son or daughter can make the Academy team, train for free, play in a national league that is the next generation replacement for college soccer and player development" yada, yada, yada.

If nothing else, it would lead to a surplus of players coming into the MLS player combines and camps in the next 3-5 years, which is good. However, that might create a player surplus and keep wages low, which is bad.

Another plus, those players coming out in the next 3-5 years who do not progress to professional play, will be exposed to a very high level of training that is excellent preparation for eventually becoming better coaches at younger ages that previous generations, I expect.

got to be exciting for the young players our there

The current youth soccer environment seems to be all over the place with club teams in disparate leagues, State Cups & other big tournaments such as Disney, ODP teams, High School teams, then College teams, MLS & USL teams with youth programs, Bradenton, and I'm probably leaving things out.

If this is an effort to develop a cohesive solution for the very best players around the US, then it could be a great step in the right direction. If all those different options for youth players aren't taken into account it will be a major flop. Only time will tell I guess. I'd like to learn more & lets hope for the best.

I agree with Kim. Isn't this ODP except with your own club?

Does anyone at USSF really know what they are doing?

has anyone seen the memo?
I have, yes it sounds like ODP on a full time basis.

clubs will fight this

Wow... USSF is finally going to start addressing the root of the problem within the US. It's an impressive idea, to say the least. More positives than good... but we'll see what happens. It's USSF. I don't have very high expectations.

And what about the Regional Leagues that clubs participate in already?

This is already set up in a way with teams coming down from Jersey and PA to play games against Maryland and Virginia teams in the area. Usually they come down on Friday and play three games, a game a day.

I can't see the clubs in this area, like the Richmond Kickers, or Bethesda or Potomac or Baltimore Bays, all of whom have put out MLS players, laying down on this at all. But I do think that it makes sense to try and push this along. And I think that there needs to be some sort of "scholarship" set up that allows players who have the skill but not the money, to get aboard.

This is great news that the USSF is trying to catch up to the rest of the world.

Who pays for the national youth leagues in Europe?

goff: any idea when ussf will announce more details? anywhere else where we can find some more concrete details about the program now?

thanks!

Well kudos to the USSF for trying to do something.

For any reform like this to work it will have be realistic about the economic incentives at work. I don't mean just dealing with the fact that the system is designed for affluent families. More important I think are the economic realities of the clubs and the folks they employ. When you start proposing changes to how folks make their livings they will fight pretty hard.

Any guess on local clubs that may be considered? I'm thinking Braddock Road, Bethesda, Balt Bays, PWSI, SAC, Freestate (among others). I think a club would be selected based on its past success and its location in a metro area.

I can see this becoming a major conflict of interest with the MLS' proposed youth academies.
Aside from any perceived logistical problems, the thing that concerns me the most is the cost. If kids are being charged to be part of an academy it's totally worthless. We will never get a full taste of the talent out there if kids have to pay to play academy level soccer.

I coach high school and club - for over twenty years. Yes, the US needs this, and no, it does not sound like IMG - but it does sound like ODP - unless it is low/no cost and not run by club coaches who choose their own players. I believe we need regional facilities like the Home Depot Center in the northeast, Florida, Texas, the mid-west and northeast...and we need a clear feeder system connecting club-odp-usy d1-mls and the national team. Four Four Two just published a great article on brazilian boys and how everyone is given a shot so no one is overlooked...they have many soccer players and little money...if they can do it why can't we?

This program is a necessary part of the evolution of player development for US Soccer. We are launching an identical academy here in South Florida to cater to the needs of these competitive players. Our academy develops better soccer players, better students and will help all of the clubs in our area. It is great to see that US Soccer has identified the same need and will be supporting academies like ours with this new league!

I love the idea, and the ensuing discussions as we search for a better model. The resources absolutely have to be in place to minimize (in a big way) what participants pay, if anything. It does sound like full time ODP to me however, and how on earth can you pick one to two clubs per state to select players from. In Cal South alone there are 20/30 very good clubs. This has to be an initiative outside of local clubs, and identification has to be at the state level. I can't think of any club out there willing to participate.

The academy only will works if the players don't need to pay fees. The USSF and the MLS teams will sponse the coaches salaries.We will follow the way they do in South America and Europe where the players get sponsorship from the professional teams.

Sincerely,

Mani Santos
Travel Coach MSC Predators U-15

I love soccer, I just got into it once MLS started. I enjoyed and was ecstatic that MLS will be sponsoring Academies for the development of our youth. I am also living in the suburbs and living there blinds one to issues outside of the enclaves of the suburb. The cost alone for select clubs is too much for even middle class parents with two incomes coming in. I hope that the USSF bothered to ask for assistance or guidance from other youth soccer environments that have been successful. Just recently MLS confided in the Bundesliga for technical assistance. We seriously need to consider how cost is going to expand the player pool, because the suburb kids alone are just a small minority of youth that is truly capable of making this country a true Soccer Nation.

What is best for the youth player? What is in their long term best interest? Is it soccer? Is it school? In S America, players are kept in feeder systems, poorly educated by clubs whose goal is to train 500 and hopefully sell 1 and make a profit. They don't care about those that fall to the side.

If the USSF hasn't been able cull the u17 age group down to 50 or 100 potential national team candidates there is something seriously wrong.

At 17 most European and S American future stars are identified and contracted to elite clubs. In N America what is the players future? The EU makes it extremely difficult for US players to play in Europe. And what of the women's side?

The real opportunity for the average elite U17 player is not professional soccer, but a great US education. We are not Europe or S America, their system will not work here. This is a sign that the USSF has no real clue how to identify quality players and is risking making chaos out odf a tried a true system of shcolarship identification system.

What is best for the youth player? What is in their long term best interest? Is it soccer? Is it school? In S America, players are kept in feeder systems, poorly educated by clubs whose goal is to train 500 and hopefully sell 1 and make a profit. They don't care about those that fall to the side.

If the USSF hasn't been able cull the u17 age group down to 50 or 100 potential national team candidates there is something seriously wrong.

At 17 most European and S American future stars are identified and contracted to elite clubs. In N America what is the players future? The EU makes it extremely difficult for US players to play in Europe. And what of the women's side?

The real opportunity for the average elite U17 player is not professional soccer, but a great US education. We are not Europe or S America, their system will not work here. This is a sign that the USSF has no real clue how to identify quality players and is risking making chaos out odf a tried a true system of shcolarship identification system.

At a quick scan of the comments, I don't see anyone wondering how this relates to the USL's Y-League. Granted, the Y-League plays a summer schedule with somewhere around 1/3 the proposed games, but this seems like a direct competition to the Y-League. The best way to go about this, it seems to me, is to incorporate all the hard work the USL has done, use it as a starting point. Many of the top youth teams already participate in the Y-League. I'm just spouting a quick burst, haven't had a chance to really peruse everything.

My first impression when I saw this was that it just doesn't sound feasible, and it almost smacks of a political/control thing.

First off, anyone who says that this would mean the US would be "catching up" with the rest of the world doesn't understand how this world works. In the rest of the world, it's the clubs that do the development, it's not the federation who gets into the building of feeder systems. I believe that England tried creating a Bradenton type set up at Lilleshall (sp?), with just a single team in an age group, and they scrapped it because it just didn't work (my memory of it could be a little off). Usually, the clubs pay for their own systems, and this would be the only way you'd be assured of getting the best players, not just the best of the players who can afford it.

Second, anyone who says who cares what the clubs think, or thinks that clubs who aren't part of the chosen few wouldn't fight this, doesn't understand how the system actually works (as opposed to how it should work). Youth clubs on the whole are looking for what's best for the club, not what's best for the "good of the game". Not being one of the chosen clubs would a blow to all the other clubs in the area who also see themselves as being elite, and trouble would certainly ensue.

Finally, as I said, who would control this? Is this a play by the Federation to have greater control youth development, rather than let the Super-Y League and/or MLS development clubs grow on their own? As I said, if it's a pay for play scheme, or even a mostly pay for play, with a few scholarships thrown in, you're not going to get all the best players. Plus, if it's ODP, where players have to make their own way to tryouts, and where teams are coached by people who are already part of the local club scene, and therefore might have biases for certain players and/or youth clubs, then you're also not necessarily going to get the best for player development.

That's just my 2 cents